4S ANNUAL RE (a ST ER, 1810. 



most advisable or constitutional 

 way, to ascertain wliat portion of 

 nii?coii('uct fell to each. No in- 

 quiry before ilie House, or anj' se- 

 lection from it, could embrace the 

 misconduct, supposing any imput- 

 able to them, of the commanders 

 of the expedition. The case, how- 

 ever, was dift'erent with regard to 

 the share that ministers had in the 

 transaction ; and he put in his 

 claim to a full share of the respon- 

 sibility, which the ministry, that 

 setitforward, mighthave incurred. 

 He would give his vole against the 

 motion of the noble lord, but not 

 in the hope of defeating inquiry, 

 which could not be avoided. Se- 

 veral other members spoke on the 

 opposites sides of the question. 

 But the main arguments, ^ro and 

 con, have been already, perhaps, 

 too often stated. Mr. Tierney ex- 

 cited a laugh at the chancellor of 

 the Exchequer. It had been fre- 

 quently asserted, he said, that the 

 object of the motion was to 

 turn out ministers. And it was 

 whimsical enough, that the prime 

 minister himself had stated that as 

 an objection to the motion. Mr. 

 Eyre, a very honourable gentle- 

 man, raised a laugh against him- 

 self. He said, that on the pre- 

 sent occasion, he would not vote on 

 the side of administration. But as 

 to their general conduct, he was 

 convinced that they possessed 

 great merit, though the nature of 

 that merit was not sufficiently 

 understood by the country. 



On a division of the House 

 there appeared for 



Lord Porchester's motion 195. 

 ■ Against it 186. 



A committee of the whole 

 House, to enquire into the causes 

 of the failure of the expedition to 



the Scheldt, was then fixed for 

 Friday next. 



House of Commons, February 2. 

 Lord Forchester, before he moved 

 the order of the day, rose to give 

 notice, that on Monday lie should 

 move for certain papers relating to 

 the late expedition to the Scheldt, 

 which, he iliought, were necessary 

 to render those already before the 

 House complete. In the papers 

 before them, two or three objects 

 were named, as those of the expe- 

 dition ; while one part of the force 

 was to be stationed as a garrison, 

 the other was to proceed to ac- 

 complish such of the ulterior ob- 

 jects of the expedition, as might 

 appear practicable. From the pa- 

 pers before them, it appeared, that 

 a very few days after every obsta- 

 cle, to the accomplishment of the 

 ulterior objects had been re- 

 moved (as stated by lord C.) by 

 the seasonable fall of Flushing, 

 the whole of those objects were 

 abandoned. Could it be thought, 

 that the general had received no 

 instructions in the interval to di- 

 rect his conduct. He was of opi- 

 nion, that such communications 

 must have existed. And, as they 

 were not produced, he must con- 

 sider the papers that had beert 

 laid by ministersbefore the House, 

 as incomplete and defective. Pur- 

 suant to this notice, lord Porches- 

 ter, 



House of Commons, February 5. 

 moved, that an humble address be 

 presented to his majesty, that he 

 would be graciously pleased to 

 give orders, «' that there be laid 

 before the House copies of all the 

 instructions given to lord Chat- 

 ham, and sir Richard Strachan, 

 and the officers employed in the 

 expedition to the Scheldt," agreed 



