Star.
London, England, 1810-02-24 00:00:00

Officer
hewer

every
in the
rativr

offices
official
House,

ritime

he
him:
then .
vise&

such papers ha, -; piper)
which had no character of official papers about them.,
and which, if they did exist at all, were merely com-
munitations made personally to his Majesty. Ife
thought the House would not call for the private and
personal communications which had been made to
his Majesty, and which could in no sense cr.shape be
considered as offici:tl df,cuments.

Mr. TIERNEY spoke in reply to the statements of
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and expressed his
determination to vote for the Address.
Sir HOME POPHAM.—ii I feel, Sir, that unless
the proposed Address is supported by the decision of
this House, and that the Papers alluded to are pro-
duced for its consideration and that of the country,
much wrong will accrue where gratitude is owing ; I
mean, to Sir Richard Strachan.—( Hear, hear!) I
may be asked why it is I assume that such a paper is
in existence ? My answer is, that its existence has not
been denied, and therefore my assumption is correct.
Let any one of his Majesty's confidential advisers
deny that such a paper has been delivered by the
Noble Lord, and the moment I am so informed, I
shall cease to press the necessity of this Address; but,
in the absence of that information. I call upon this
House to sympathize in the feelings of my gallant
friend—wounded. as those feelings have been, by the
production of the former paper. If, then, from that
paper so lately presented to the House the character
of Sir Richard Strachan has suffered ; how much
mot, probable is it, that, in the papers kept out el
view, he has been subjected to greater suffering, and
to a more aggravated reflection upon his character'
(Hear, hear , —Let the House review the facts :—la
the month o July an expedition was sent to the coast
of Holland. From some causes, it did not succeed to
the extent in which public expectation was warranted
to indulge. An inquiry was instituted -by the House
of Commons; numerous papers, some moved for, and
others voluntarily laid upon its table. For 14 days
04
had the House proceeded in ' s investigation, whet
we are surprised by a moti fan Honourable Ge-
neral (Loftus), the friend of- ord Chatham, calling
for an Address to his Majesty, that he would be
pleased to order_a narrative of that Noble Lurd, deli•
vcred hilt the day before, to i ~? laid before the House.
Would it not, I ask, be at least more lihcral, when
the Noble Lord had determined upon such a purse
of proceeding, to have, at all events, vresented it
previous to the inquiry ?—(Hear, hear.) Is that the
extremity of suffering to which my gallant Friend,
the Naval Commander of the late Expedition, is sub-
jected ? Have we not reason to think that other
documents, prejudicial to his high character, have
also been presented in the same secret way ? (Hear,
hear.) But we are told this is an assumption no:
tenable upon good grounds. To this I unequivo-
cally reply, if no other papers were presented to h;;
Sovereign by the Noble Lord, when the question WA's
candidly put to him, how easy was it for him, if no
such documents were delivered, to have answered
in the negative ? (Load cries of hear, hear.)—
The Right Honourable Gentleman the Chancellor of
the Exchequer has stated, that he can by no means
see in the narrative et the Noble Lord any reflection
cast upon the charac of Sir Richard Strachan, or
on that part of the naval force employed in the expe-
dition to the Scheldt. I venture to say, that such
paper has thrown upon both a great and grievous re-
flection. (Hear, hear.) So feels the gallant and
distinguished officer hipseli, and after what has been
elicited from the examination of the Noble Lord
(C tham ) last night, Sir Richard Strachan also fads
the a vated situation in which he is placed; for as
he himself says, ii How do I know, even if I repel all
the charges conveyed against me in this narrative,
that after all, a second and third document, simi-
larly. communicated, in fact edition following edition,
will not be forthcoming." (Hear, hear.) Is this a
proper state in which to leave a man who has de-
served so well of his country ? Is this the reward
which this House would bestow, for a life devoted
to the nation's service ? Deeply affected as are the
feelings of my galladt Friend, he suffers not alone
there is not an officer of his profession but sympa.
thizes with him. Through all ranks of that profession
it is the same, equally with those who have not interest
to be employed, or with those whom ether causes
have lately kept out of the actual exeric,e of proles-
' sional duties. But if this House should lend itself it
support of such conduct, it would not only affect th,
living, but animate the dead • it would arouse in
indignation even old Admiral i3enbow, and all those
who gallantly imitated him, from their graves..--
(4 laugh, and cry of hear !) This question, standing
upon its own merits, cannot be benefited, and ought
not to be injured by party feeling. It is a
quesuon
Of justice—of justice to a gallant officer, the idol of
the service, covered with the honours bestowed by a
grateful country, remunerated by the liberality of
Parliament, and invested by his Sovereign with are('
ribbon, as a mark of his Royal favour. (Hear, hear.)
—lt is for such a man, now labouring under such
charges, as this narrative so communicated conveys
that 1 appeal to the House of Commons. Can it re-
fuse to do him justice ? With what confidence, if such
should be its conduct, could its Members look in the
face of the people of England ? Could they say, who
soliciting their re-electiori, 66 Constituents, support me
iyagain,votiong one
aogfainwhst a eosecltrtain
claims t:4dres
yours preference ttehreenceeroism, drat
deprived 4 gallant and deserving officer, illustrious

r
. w . .
the naval part of the armament from co-ont.”.lt;r ..
as far as had been expected ; and in c;;:, Ilie.‘:‘
was no charge or imputation against the g:,ilat,t
Officer who commanded the fleet. He thought, 3
. tx
however, that it would be too much to call ft r 01
every paper, private as well as public, which r: a•,
in the possession of his Majesty. As to the nai ang
rative, that could be regularly produced because- it row
was in the office 9f the Secretary of State ; but he did -en 1
not see how any paper that never Was in any of the she
upon
offices of the Government, could be called for as an ought
official paper. In the narrative which was before the fellee
House,
,the Noble Lord merely stated his own case, the ll
and left the Admiral to give his account of the ma- 06°
ritime difficulties which presented themsel ves—atd rove
he believed that the Admiral could perfectly justify tie o
himself in the state of the seas and the weather. If the C
then he had seen this narrative at the time that he Itcl- selati
vise& the answer to the City of London, what, p ottilern . thethalaris
, advice could he have given?—(Hear, hear.) Could le
he have advised a Court-martial against the naval five
• Officer, when there was no charge made against him? Tact
The question was now, whether the House would, itt. . have
• the exercise of its discretion, think proper to call for
such papers as had never before been moved •
which had no character of official papers about them, boat
s and which, if they did exist at all, were merely corn-
that
,
l munitations made personally to his Majesty. He it:
did
) thought the House would not call for the private and
the
s personal communications which had been made to
tultj
r his Majesty, and which could in no sense cr.shape be
- considered as offici:tl d f'cuments.
e Mr. TIERNEY spoke in reply to the statements of Ric
2 the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and expressed his fen
t i determination to vote for the Address. ape
he
I Sir HOME POPHAM.—c, I feel. Sir, that unlp,