Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1815-02-18


y The following is the conclusion of the
Prince Regents Speech, omitted in our last
- drgus.
Gentlemen of The House of Con,n19ns.
regret the necessity of the large expen-
diture vhich we must be prepared to meet
IN the Course of the ensuing year but the
circumstances under which the long and
arduors contest in Europe has been carried
on and concluded. have unavoidably led to
arge arrears, for which you will see the
necessity OF providing and the war still
suosisting with America, renders the con.
tinuance OF great exertions Indispensable.
His Royal Higiness having finished the
reading OF the Speech, and retired, the Earl
OF Abingdon, after a variety of obserya-
tons, concluded by moving the Address,
which, as is usual, was mere echo Of the
Z gents Speech
Lord D1rhley could not approve of the
terms used in The Speech, with respect to
America. He conceived that the Naval
Administration of the country mad oeen
badly conducted. and gave notice that he
should feel i. his duty to bring the subject
forward as early as possible.
Lord Melville replied.
The d Ike nf Norfolk reDrobateI the
glowing terms in which the American war
was sooken OF in The Regent's Speech, which
war ne considered as truly disastrous.
Lord Grenvil!e. in speech of considera-
nie lenB:h, oppo. cd the Address, and con-
dennei the measures pursued in America.
lie said. the war with that country had as
sun2d a new character. and described the
burning OF the civil buildings at Washing
ton as an act Of barbarous warfare, incon.
Sistent with European manners.
Lord Liverpool replied to Lord g. and
the Address was carried without amend
meat
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
In the debate on the Address to the Re
gent, MIR. w riteoread said
IL might not be useless to ask, whag
was the grouad of difference between the
% countries--for what England was fight
ing with American Before they were cal
lied on to pay the price of the battle he
thought 1t would be wisdom to ascertain
for what the battle was to be fought. Was
it respecting boundary-the principle gov.
ernns the impre5sment of seamen or the
general question OF maritime rights? If
they were lighting for the maritime rights
OF England-maritime rights, which, no
doubt would be defined by the Congress at
VIenna-it ought to be ascertained wheth.
er they did not wish TO exact more from
America than they dssired from any other
power. the effects resulting from the at
tack on Washington were very different
from what it had been attempted to make
this country believe as it had enabled Mr..
Madison to obtain those miIitias which was
before withheld. and conciiated those par.
ties which had been hos;i e 10 the war and
the government. they heard nothing now
of the separation of the States of the in.
creased spread of the spirit of disuniou
for, since the attack on Washington, all had
united to revenge the com mon wrong. The
destruction which took place at Washing
ton, the capital of rising empire-con.
ducg so unlike that of the Goths before the
walls of Rone-whether or not there was
any ground for retaliation, was quite un>
worthy of great, dignihed and powerful
nation.
Fhe Chancellor of the Exchequer in re"
ply, and in Justification of the burning at
Washington, said, "What did the Ameri.
cans at York, the Capital of Upper Cana
da Why, they not only burnt the house of
the Governor, but also every house belong>
ing to the meanest individual, even to a
she'll, aud left the popuace in the most
wretched condition IN gr0ss faLsebood.