The Statesman.
London, England, 1810-03-31 00:00:00

man then read tire resolution of a Gallant Officer on
the, present subject, and observed, that if the
Mouse fairly, judged, it would justify the coquet
of Ministers, by agreeing with it. One thing
had fallen its the course of the debate which was
not correetg namely, that which considered the
Expedition to Copenhagen as a disgrace; but for
that measure the enemy would have had not only
Danish sailors, but a Danish fleet. He was much
pressed en the subject of the retention of the
island of Walcheren ; it cannot be supposed that
in the mind of the Gentlemen opposite there
exists a stronger feeling of compassion than
that in the breasts of those who are accused
as the aathors of this calamity. • No ; this was
a feeling uninfluenced by party opposition; it'
was general, it was sincere. With this, how.
ever, Ministers were nut to be blamed. The
Noble Lord had charged them with not having
evacuated the Island when convinced of the im-
eraeticability of success in the ultimate object of
the Expedition; but it was the failure of that,
and the other 'objects, which enforced the ne-
cessity of a return. If Antwerp had been destroy-
ed, then retreat was secure; but when that
point was unguarded, no value could be attached
to a longer retention of the Island ; the chief con-
sider-Awn then was safety. One is a bad judge in
his own cause; perhaps then his opinions might be
erroneous. The possession of such a naval situa-
tion was itnportatoritot only in a military, but in
a commercial view : the revenues of Antwerp in 1806
produced one-third more than arose from all the
revenues of France in the preceding year, the
former amounting to eighteen millions, the latter
to twelve ; that alone was an object ; for it should
not be consider& what the extent of treasure,
but what the extent of trade was which could
be destroyed by such a loss. We already have hail
occasion to consider its naval importance; the
strength, as a fortress, of Walcheren was thought
so great, that in the year 1798 it was in contem-
plation of Mr. Pitt, of Lord Sidinoutlt in 1802,
and again of Mr. Pitt -in 1805; the reason of
their plans not being executed was, the want of
a sufficient force to execute them. He would
Confidently ask, was it not their opinion that
it would he an impregnable fortress in the Mouth
of the Scheldt ; and this was farther strength.
cned by the opinions of Lords Nelson and St.
Vincent. When in possession he thought it his
duty to abandon it under the circumstances whish
attended the calamities of s disease. Lord Chat-
ham never objected to its indefensibility ; but it
may be asked,'lf it was an object of such fen-
psrtance, why was it abandoned ? Not on the
Bret, but on the second opinion of Sir Richard
Strachau ; even his letter of the 13th of Sept.
!stated that it might be maintained. He would ask
the House if he had given up possession within the
time he did, would he not think the opposite side
justifiable in bringing forward their accusation? In
October it was Sir R. Strachau's opinion that the
Island might be maintained with a force proper.
tionable to that which would be likely to attack
it, together with a squadron alwafs in readiness
to protect the Scheldt. It had beets represented that
the sickness was expected all the time; he denied
that ; it was but a natural consequence, ou account
of the unwholesome vapour which generated after
heavy rains: the troops, besides, were badly ac-
commodeted in a town which had suffered so
much from bombardment. These fatal effects would
not have happened if the weather had been dry.
Not one of those seamen, or those a Ito were
allot suffered from the sickness; could nut then
floating barracks have been instituted ; might not
by this means every ill effect be avoided ; and,
lastly, could nut the garrison of Flushing be
gait-Need on the coat of Kent within 24 hours
sail of their pest ; but the expedienty of this mea-
sure at least might have been taken into considera-
tion. The Rigbt lion. Member wished to know
whether for the consideration of exposure to dis-
ease, the maintenance of so important a situation
should be precluded. On this principle we should '
deliver tip our possessions in the West ladies ;
we should no longer estimate the value of St.
Lucia, and St. D-nningo. Is it because many in-
dividuals were, front sickness, there consigned to
untimely graves, we should resign the protection
of
our acquisitions there ? The same consideration
presents itself on the coast of Africa ; is it to be
maintained that iu noticing lesser objects we
are to give up the notice of the greater ? Let the
House but fairly judge the matter, and surely, in
• point of importance, they will not compare St.
Lucia or Domingo to Walcheren. [Hear, hear!]
The operation of the evacuation of Walcheren
*as not the work'of 'day; the sick were first
'Conveyed away, every accommodation was af-
forded them; and the transports, before they were '
suffered to return for more, were carefully fumi-
gated. It the swath of November, the disease •
Ceased ; in the mouth of October, the sit k
were carried, away. t will be found that they
Could not be removed' during the sickly season,
though the period of the abatement was in view.
%Vhilo there was reason to suppose Austria conti-
nued in the sense position, Walcheren was de.
fended ; but whets Austria had made peace, its
possession bee:Mien° longer advisable ; the last act
of the Expedition willhe demolition of the works
of Flushing. Walciteren should have been main-
tallied while it was possible with safety, but whoa
that ceased, it was the duty of Ministers to relin-
quish it. Ho trusted that, on a just, Impartial
view by the House, the whole case would be un-
derstood by the country [Load cheering], and
that too blame would be attached to' Ministers for
'their conduct. He concluded by apologizing for
having detained the attention of the Utilise, and
sat down amidst the loudest cheering. • • •
Mr. It. DUNDAS. rose amidst cries •f Ques.
lion! Question ! lie tithing! the Howie he Would
trouble them only fur a feei raotnenls. Ho
posi-
tively denied that the retention of Walcheren had
been the effect of the intrig•ues of Ministers. The
island could not be evacuated sooner': •' The nem.
eery steps for that purpose could not have been
taked tuouer---and this he conside'red wasieemplete
ansirei fdthe objections on that point. He thentid-
Serial to another topic--the answer to theAddresti of
the City of London'." The' pu Tared thetas', that
o inquiry war Considered Deemer: into tilt coact u

.

t

r