EXPEDITION TO THE SCHELDT.

ART. 25. Thoughts on the Refolutions to be moved this Day, Monday, March 26, in the House of Commons, by Lord Porchefter. 8vo. 26 pp. 1s. 6d. Becket and Porter. 1810.

The Refolutions to which the title-page of this pamphlet al ludes having been negatived in the Houfe of Commons, after a debate continued during feveral fittings, it would now be fuper. fluous to enter at large into the merits or errors of the Expedition to the Scheldt, on which thofe Refolutions conveyed a fevere cenfare. The meafure in queftion is juftified by the author before us chiefly on the ground of its having operated as a diverfion in favour of Auftria. We believe this object, though certainly avowed in the debate, was admitted, by the defenders of Admi niftration, to be fecondary to that of deftroying the fhips and arfenal at Antwerp, the very great importance of which war. ranted, it was infifted, a confiderable hazard in the attempt.

The retention of Walcheren fo long after the ulterior objects of this Expedition had been abandoned, is deemed by this author a meafure of "found and liberal policy," in order that our ally (the Emperor of Auftria) might reap the full benefit of the fuccefsful efforts we had made in his favour by obtaining better "terms from France. This confideration alfo was, we believe, urged in the debate. Yet the more obvious motive feems to have been the opinion of refpectable naval officers, that the poffeffion of Flushing would afford our fleet a moft convenient station for blocking up the harbour of Antwerp. When, however, the dif ficulty of defending it against the formidable attacks of the enemy was correctly afcertained, together with the amount of the force neceffary to its defence, and confequently liable annually to confiderable lofs by disease, the refolution was taken to relin. quith it.

The author of this defence feems to be a well-intentioned advocate of the exifting Government; though in the affertion, that had it not been for unfavourable weather the fleet might bave proceeded up the Weft Scheldt in time to effect the most important objects of the Expedition, he feems to be fupported by evidence,

ART. 26. Brief Remarks upon the public Letter of Sir Richard Strachan, and the Narrative of the Earl of Chatham. 8vo. 36 pp. 25. Becket and Porter. 1810.

After the full difcuffion which took place in the Houfe of Commons on the fubject of the Walcheren Expedition, and the refolution paffed, acquitting both the Army and Navy of all mifconduct on that occafion, we cannot approve of

pam

pamphlets, in behalf of either Commander in Chief, imputing blame to the other. We shall not therefore enter into the particulars of the tract before us, further than to ftate, that the author complains vehemently of the conduct of Sir R. Strachan in fending a letter to the Admiralty, impliedly at least, reflecting on the Commander of the land forces. He also throws fome blame on the Admiralty for publishing thofe reflections, more especially as an extract of a letter, which feemed to imply that other reflections equally ftrong had been omitted. With that public Letter to the Admiralty, a private Letter to the Earl of Chat. ham, of the fame date, is contrafted; in which last the Admiral feems to coincide in the opinion that nothing further could then be done. He is alfo accufed of having inaccurately flated, in a letter of the 11th of August, that part of the fleet had paffed through the Sloc-paffage into the Wett Scheldt above Flufhing; an inaccuracy, however, which this author admits was afterwards corrected.

Many oblique reflections are thrown out upon the profeffional character, and the conduct, upon that occafion, of Sir Home Popham; and it is infinuated, that, although nominally only the Captain of a man of war, on that Expedition, he was, by a manoeuvre, made, in effect, Captain of the Fleet. Indeed almoft every thing which the author blames in the conduct of Sir R. Strachan is imputed to this (fuppofed) fecret adviser.

With regard to Lord Chatham, this author (though manifeftly his partizan) does not go into an exprefs defence of his conduct, deeming it would be indecorous at prefent; yet as the Commanders by fea and land appear to have been unanimoufly acquitted by a vote of the Houfe of Commons, it does not appear that any mili tary enquiry is likely to take place; but he attempts (ineffectually we think) to justify the delivery of his Narrative to the King, without the knowledge of any other member of Administration, and his request of fecrefy. On this fubject alfo there has been a parliamentary decifion, from which (were it decent in us to can. vas it) we do not feel difpofed to diffent.

1810.

ART. 27. A Notice of the Evidence given in the Committee of the House of Commons during the Inquiry into the Conduct and Policy of the late Expedition to the River Scheldt. With Obfervations. gvo. 52 PP: 2s. 6d. Becket and Porter. After the long difcuffions in the Houfe of Commons on the Policy of the Expedition to the Scheldt, and the voluminous evidence on that fubject published from time to time in the Newf papers, the opinions of most men on that tranfaction must, we conceive, be made up; and few, if any, new arguments can be produced on either fide of the queftion. Yet a judicious and impartial fummary of the evidence might still have its ufe. Such a fummary is not, however, contained in the work before us, which only adverts occafionally to the evidence, and confifts

chicfly

chiefly of remarks tending to vindicate this measure of Adminiftration.

The general policy of an Expedition for the fupport or aid of our allies is confidered by the author as univerfally admitted. On his part, he admits that a descent in the north of Germany was pointed out by the Cabinet of Vienna as the most efficacious mode of affifting its views. The author, however, contends, that this fuggeftion (which it feems went only to the employment of 10,000 infantry, with fome cavalry and artillery) was made under the impreffion that we could fpare no larger force than that re quired, and that if the extent of our refources had been known, the diverfion which they might make in another quarter would have been deemed important, though at a greater distance from the scene of action. It is alfo alleged, that this requifition was made on the expectation of a movement on the part of Pruflia, on the probability of which Minifters were bound to exercife their own judgment, and regulate their conduct by the refult.

It is alledged, upon the evidence of Mr. Hufkiffon, that the ftate of the exchange upon the Continent (being at a discount of not less than 20s. per centum) was fuch as rendered the employment of a large force in Germany fcarcely practicable (or at all events attended with a ruinous expence) from the confequent difficulty of obtaining foreign coin. The fame objection the author deems applicable to the employment of a larger force in Spain; more efpecially as, by the exertions which we did make in the peninfula, the object of a diverfion in that quarter was already attained

The author next proceeds to defend the measure adopted; which, he contends, combined a diverfion in favour of Auftria with an important British object, namely, the destruction of a confider. able portion of Buonaparte's marine. This Expedition, he infifts, ftill operated as a diverfion, notwithstanding the armistice. at Znaim, which might not have terminated in a peace; or if it did, the terms of that peace might, by fuch an exertion on our part, be rendered more favourable to the Auftrian Emperor.

The progrefs of our preparations for this Expedition is next diftinctly stated, in order to prove that no time was unneceffarily loft.

It is then confidered whether (as to the objects in view) we had a reasonable profpect of fuccefs. Of thefe the capture of Walcheren is juftly confidered as morally certain with the force employed against it; and thus the author deems that capture a great advantage, whether it should be determined to retain or (after demolishing the arfenal and bafin) abandon it. We fufpect, bowever, that this last measure was not originally in the contempla tion of Government.

In the fequel of this work the writer relies much on the probability that appeared of the armament's arriving in three or four days from the Downs at Sandvliet, the intended place of debarka tion for the attack on Antwerp, and afcribes therefore the failure

of

of that part of the plan to the unfavourable weather that oc curred. He states alfo the evidence which was produced of the weak and unprepared ftate of that city and its garrifon. The retention of Walcheren, after its evacuation had been determined upon, is juftified by the request of the Auftrian Cabinet that we would retain a footing in Zealand as long as poffible, and the advantage thence derived to Austria in the negotiations for peace. Upon the whole, a fpecious and in fome refpects juft defence of the Scheldt Expedition is made by this author; but fome of his affertions are, in our opinion, too ftrong, fuch as that the con queft of Walcheren, though not retained, was a greater object than the deftruction of the fleet, dock, and arsenal at Antwerp.

MEDICAL.

ART. 28. The Phyfician's Vade-mecum containing Symptoms, Caufes, Diagnofis, Prognofis, and Treatment of Dijenfes. Ac companied by a felect Collection of Formule, and a Gloffary of Terms. By Robert Hooper, M. D. Licentiate in Phyfic of the University of Oxford, and of the Royal College of Physicians of London; Phyfician to the St. Mary-le-bone Infirmary; and Lecturer on Medicine in London. 12mo. 280 pp. 6s. Murray. 1809.

On the medical treatment recommended in a work like this, or any general work, there will, of courfe, be various opinions; but that the arrangement of the book is luminous, and the plan extremely judicious, is by no means liable to a doubt. The author has arranged his matter in the following manner. He gives, 1. The characteristic symptoms by which difeafes are known. 2. The caufes from which they most frequently have their origin.

3. The circumftances that more especially point out the differences between difeafes which refemble one another.

4. The figns which influence the judgment in forming a prog nofis of their event.

5. That mode of treatment, which, in the prefent improved ftate of medicine, is deemed moft appropriate, and which expe rience has fanctioned.

These remarks, with the formule and gloffary, form a very complete book of reference. Dr. Hooper has before diftinguished himself by ufeful and medical works. See our General Index. The difcafes are arranged after the Cullenian nofology, the fymp toms are, in our opinion, neatly, accurately, and concifely narrated; and the formulæ fubjoined in general elegant, and fuch as experience and found judgment would fanction.

DIVINITY.

ART. 29. A Charge delivered to the Clergy of the Archdeaconry of St. Alban's, at the Vifitation helden, May 24, A. D. 1809,

conne&cd

connected with a former on Religious Education. By Joseph Holden Pott, A. M. Prebendary of Lincoln, and Archdeacon of St. Alban's. 4to. 39 PP. 2s. 6d. Rivingtons. 1809.

The charge referred to in the title was reviewed by us in our 3zd volume, p. 304, and commended, as it deferved, for foundness of reafon and candour of enquiry. The object of the prefent is to confirm the opinion, that the fcheme of the gofpel for improving the mind of man is the only one that is confonant to nature and reafon. It is to be wished that the learned Archdeacon had drawn his illustrations of this truth from fomething more connected with the bufinefs and opinions of the prefent times, than the errors of the Socratic or the Stoic fchools; or even a pofition of Swift's, not likely at this day to feduce many readers. Nor is the tranfition very happy to the defponding idea of fome perfons that death is more defirable than life. Through the whole we fee the good intentions and right mindednefs of the Archdeacon of St. Alban's, but not equally the ufual clearness or practical utility of his difcourfes. He concludes by an eulogy on the late venerable diocefan, which would certainly be wel comed by his hearers, and confidered as in no degree exaggerated, or carried beyond what truth as well as gratitude demanded.

ART. 30. A Sermon preached in the Cathedral Church of St. Paul, London; on Thursday, June 1, 1809. Being the Time of the Yearly Meeting of the Children educated in the Charity Schools, in or about the Cities of London and Westminster. By the Rev. Charles Daubeny, LL.B. Archdeacon of Sarum. Published at the Request of the Society for Promoting Chriftian Knowledge, and the Trustees of the feveral Schools. To which is annexed an Account of the Society for Promoting Chriftian Knowledge. 4to. 36 pp. Rivingtons. 1809.

A more appropriate topic, than that which is principally handled in this difcourfe, could not have been felected. The meeting of the Charity Schools preffes upon the mind the subject of education, and the Archdeacon particularly employs himself in confidering the new plan of teaching the poor, as practifed by Mr. Lancaster. It has become very important that this plan, as managed by that individual, fhould be publicly confidered. The plan itfelf is undoubtedly good, as to all its leading and most characteristic features; which are now known to have been tried originally by Dr. Bell at Madras. To the plan, as invented by Dr. Bell, and practifed under his influence and direction, we do not conceive that any very material objection exifts. But Mr. L. is a Diffenter; and though he is in himself apparently very moderate, and, by the interference of fome venerable, learned, and very judicious friends of the established Church, has been. induced in London even to employ parts of our authorized Liturgy E e

BRIT. CRIT. VOL. XXXV. APRIL, 1810.

as