92 INTRODUCTION. 
This, Sir, is uncourtly language, unfit for the ear of high authority.— 
Moreover, they urge that they have had no pay, whilst their fellow 
labourers, the soldiers, have had two-thirds of their wages ; that they 
are starved, or living on stinking charqui, whilst the troops are 
fully fed on beef and mutton; that they have had no grog, whilst 
the others have had money and opportunity to obtain that beloved 
beverage, and all else they desired. Such, Sir, are the rough grounds 
on which an English seaman founds his opinion, and rests his rude 
argument. He expects an equivalent for the fulfilment of his contract, 
and when, on his parts it is performed with fidelity, he is boisterous 
as the element on which he lives, if pay-day is past, and his rights 
are withheld. It is of no use, therefore, for you to make up an 
account upon the correctness of which I can make no remark. 
You seem, in the next paragraph of your letter, to express surprise 
that when twenty days only have elapsed, we should again require 
provisions ; but all wonder will cease if you refer to my letters, and to 
your own order, to supply twenty-days’ provisions thirty-days ago. 
As to your assertion regarding the gratuitous supply of Pisco, I have 
to inform you that the charge for it was 1900 dollars, as appears by 
my account, supported by receipts and vouchers received at Pisco, 
and delivered to me by Captain Cobbet of the Valdivia, whose 
veracity and integrity I will pledge against that of any of the most 
honourable of your informants. In the meantime, on the delicacy of 
your contradiction of my assertion, I shall abstain from remark, and 
institute an enquiry, in order that whosoever has falsified the fact, 
may be publicly exposed to the merited contempt of mankind. 
You tell me, Sir, that it is in vain to refer to my letters, stating 
the situation of the squadron to save my responsibility, because 
these letters have been answered (and in fair words too you might 
have added) ; but did I not warn you, that words were of no avail 
against the brute force of disappointed men clamouring for their 
rights? Did I not ask you in person to speak to these seamen, 
saying that I would co-operate with you as far as I could, and did 
you not neglect to perform this duty? How then can you assert 
that I refused to acquiesce in the views of government ? 
