Star.
London, England, 1829-08-14 00:00:00

PROTECTION OF THE FLAG.

TO THE COMMITTER OF LLOYD'S.
GENT Learatr,—The affair of the Lonach having been
revived in the Times of yesterday, by the publication of
the letter of their respectable correspondent Ns tyrtc us,
together with the Editor's remarks thereon, explaining
the motives that had induced these parties to bring the
matter before the public, I cannot also refrain from
addressing you again on the subject.
I allow to those Gentlemen the full measure of praise
dee for the indignation excited in them at the outrageous
detention of that vessel, and the daring insult committed
on the flag of the nation ; --but, while I equally give to
them the same credit that I claim for myself, viz. that
no personality of any kind whatever towards either the
Owner or Commander of that vessel had any share in
the discussions that took place in this respect, and that
the investigation of the truth was the only object sought
for by them, I cannot come to the same conclusion that
they do, viz. that here the matter ought to rest :—quite
the contrary, for now we have certain data to proceed
upon, and I only wish to speak of Mr. D iscou's
conduct, as he himself has now submitted it for the con-
sideration of the public.
My object in fiat addressing you on this subject was
the same that it continues to be—viz. not to complain of
the owner or commander of the Lonach, but to seek re-
dress for the grievance suffered as well individually by
them, as publicly by the nation at large. The prosperity
of England depends on the respect due to its flag on the
ocean ; and the honour of the nation, and its best inte-
rests, forbid that well-authenticated insults and interrup-
tions given to it on the high seas should be passed over
without due satisfaction being obtained.
I beg, therefore, to call your attention to the last letter
of Mr. Datscou., in which he shows that the celebrated
letter that was forwarded by the agents of Don MIGUEL
to the Earl of ABERDEEN as a satisfaction or denial of
the outrage to which he had unwarily been induced or
seduced to affix his signature, was not intended to con-
tradict any part of Capt. Nomczs's statement of the
affair—that it was not meant for use in this country,
but was signed for the purpose of being sent to Lisbon to
shield the Portuguese officers end men from the " wrath
of Don Mioust.." Mr. DutscoLt. further says, that
he did not receive £3OO, but that a Mr. Jolts sox had
promised to give him a pipe of port wine, free of duty-,
when Don MIGUEL should be recognised King of Por-
tugal. A queer sort of an engagement this—a strange
kettle of fish—and a very pretty diplomatic mess for my
Lord ABERDEEN. But what have we, Gentlemen, to do
with Don MIGUEL'S political recognition ? or what has
this to do with the outrage committed by his ships ? for
if they are permitted to be at sea, they must be taught
to respect the laws of nations, or brought into this coun-
try and made to suffer for their lawless deeds.
It is quite clear also, that this extraordinary Pipe of
Wine was not given nor promised as a satisfaction for the
detention of the Lonach, as Mr. JOHNSON in his letter
says, that the pleasure excited in him from the manner
in which the affair of the Lonach had terminated, in-
duced him to offer this Pipe of Port ; and it is therefore
clear that it formed no part of the bargain for recom-
pense previously concluded : and as Mr. Daiscou.
says he did not receive 3001., it is but fair that hishould
declare what sum of money he did receive—for it is ad-
mitted that he claimed 3001. and refused 501. ; and if
he received no money at all, then neither compensation
has as yet been obtained for the detention of the vessel,
nor satisfaction for the insult to the flag. This cannot
he allowed to remain so.

MERCATOR.