Downie, and the Spanish officers and soldiers in general, have conducted themselves in a manner to excite my warmest approbation.-To Lieut.-Col. Rooke, Assistant-Adjutant-General, and Lieut. Col. Offney, Assistant-Quarter-Master-General, for the able manner in which they have conducted their departments; and also for the valuable assistance and advice which I have at all times received from them; to the officers of the Adjutant and Quarter-Master-General's departments; to Captain Squire, of the Royal Engineers, for his intelligence and indefatigable exertions during the whole operation; and to Captain Currie and my personal Staff, my warmest thanks are due. This dispatch will be delivered to your Lordship by Captain Hill, my First Aidede-camp, to whom 1 beg to refer your Lordship for all farther particulars.-I have the honour to be, &c. R. HILL, Lieut.-General. To General Viscount Wellington. P. S. Since writing the above report, a good many more prisoners have been made; and I doubt not but the whole will amount to 13 or 1,400.-Brigadier General Morillo has just returned from the pursuit of the dispersed, whom he followed for eight leagues. He reports, that besides those killed in the plain, upwards of 600 dead were found in the woods and mountains.-General Girard escaped in the direction of Serena, with 2 or 300 men, mostly without arms, and is stated by his own aide-de-camp to be wounded. Return of Killed, Wounded, and Missing of a Corps of the Army, under the command of General Viscount Wellington, K. B. Commander of the Forces, under the immediate orders of Lieut.-Gen. R. Hill, engaged with the French near Arroyo del Molino, on the 28th of October, 1811. Total British loss.-7 rank and file, 5 horses, killed, 1 Lieut.-Colonel, 2 Majors, 4 Captains, 4 Serjeants, 47 rank and file, 11 horses, wounded: 1 General Staff missing. Total Portuguese loss-6 rank and file wounded. AMERICAN STATES.-Correspondence between Mr. Foster and Mr. Monroe, and also between Mr. Monroe and Mr. Serurier, laid before Congress in January, 1812. Mr. Foster to Mr. Monroe, Dec. 17, 1811. SIR-I did not mean to have written to you at this moment on the subject of our late correspondence, but that I have had the mortification to perceive statements, circulated from highly respectable sources, which give a view of the pretensions of Great Britain relative to the United States not warranted by any of the letters which I had the honour to address to you, and which at a time when discussions are continuing so important to the two countries, fect highly to be lamented by both the might, if left unrectified, produce an efAmerican and British Governments, inasmuch as by creating unnecessary irritation, they might throw obstacles in the way of a restoration of a friendly understanding between them.-I find it asserted in the statement referred to, that I have, in the name of my government, demanded that the United States government should pass a law for the introduction of British goods into the American ports, and also that the United States should undertake to force France to receive into her har. bours, British manufactures.-I beg permission, Sir, to declare that neither of these demands have been made by me, and that my meaning must not have been understood, if such was conceived to have been its import. I could not have deLegion-manded the passage of such a law as above stated, because my government does not pretend to interfere with the internal Names of Officers wounded and missing on the retaliation on the French Decrees is directly one between England and France. In consequence of the extraordinary blockade of England, we have in our defence been obliged to blockade France, and prohibit all trade in French articles in return for the prohibition by France, of all trade in English articles. This measure of retaliation, it is wished, should operate on France alone, but from the trade carried on with France by America, it unavoidably operates also on her: it is a measure to destroy the French trade in return for the similar measure of France on which it is retaliatory, and its acting on neutrals is an incidental effect of it, consequent upon the submission of neutrals to the original measures of the enemy against Great Britain. It is indeed melancholy, that the unnatural situation of Europe should produce such a result, but I cannot see how this can be considered as a war on American commerce, when all other American trade but that which is carried on with our enemy's ports in defiance of a blockade authorised by the law of retaliation, is unaffected by it.We complain that America does not resist the regulation of the Berlin and Milan, Decrees, an object to permitting the French to trade with her during the con Government of a friendly power, nor did I mean to demand that America should force France to receive our manufactures. All I meant to say was, that the admission of French commerce while that of England has been excluded from the United States ports, was regarded by Great Britain as highly unfriendly in America, and that a continuation of such policy would be retaliated upon by Great Britain with similar restrictions on her part, which was so far merely an offering of like for like. But while the American non-importation act excludes British trade from the United States ports, it must be recollected that it goes still farther, and excludes also British armed ships from American ports, while it admits those of the enemies of Great Britain. A neutral nation is responsible for the equality of its rules of conduct towards the belligerent powers (to use the words of an American Secretary of State in the year 1796,) and therefore the part of the law which establishes an inequality was justly an object of more serious complaint on the part of Great Britain. You are aware, Sir, of the advantages which his Majesty's enemies have derived from this state of inequality, which enables them, though possessing no port in this hemisphere, continually to prey on the trade of his Majesty's sub-tinuance against the commerce of Engjects, secure of a refuge for their cruizers and prizes. The prohibition of entry to his Majesty's ships under these circumstances might perhaps justify Great Britain in asserting that whatever reason she may have for repealing or modifying her Orders in Council, so as to lessen or entirely remove the pressure now unavoidably laid on the trade of America as a neutral nation, she might yet refuse to enter into any discussion on that subject with the United States, until either by the revocation of the prohibition above stated, or the placing all the belligerents under the same prohibition, America should cease to violate the duties of a neutral nation. With respect, however, to the supposed demand that America should force the entry of British manufactures into France, it is most particularly necessary that I should explain myself, as a total misconception appears to have taken place upon this point. The question of land, but this is not exacting as has been, represented, that America should force British manufactures into France: it is pursuing only a just course of retaliation on our enemy. If America wishes to trade with France, if French commerce is of importance to her, we expect she shouldexact of France to trade with her as she has a right to demand in her quality of neutral; but if she does choose to exercise this right, all we ask is, that she should abstain from lending her assistance to the trade of France, and not allow her commerce to be a medium of undermining the resources of Great Britain.—I have thought it necessary thus to endeavour to set these two points in their true light; the repeal of the law was asked, as being an unfriendly measure, partial in its operation against Great Britain, and a prospect of retaliation was held out on its commercial operation if continued. (To be continued.) Published by R. BAGSHAW, Brydges-Street, Covent Garden. VOL. XXI. No. 10.] LONDON, SATURDAY, MARCH 7, 1812. 289] SUMMARY OF POLITICS. [Price 18. [290 comes another letter to Mr. ORD from a person of the name of COCKSEDGE, who developes the whole history of the annuity in a very ample way. This is sufficient in the way of preface. I shall now insert the letters. The first is from the Rev. Dr. Ord to the Editor of the Bury Paper; the second from Lord Moira to Dr. Ord; and the third from Mr. Cocksedge to Dr. Ord. " DR. ORD TO THE EDITOR OF THE BURY LIBERTY OF THE PRESS. Upon seeing this named, the reader will, of course, anticipate some fresh account of the workings of Informations Ex-Officio; he will anticipate a peep into some jail or other, to which the exercise of this liberty has conveyed some unfortunate man. How agreeably will he be disappointed, then, when he finds, that, for once, the use of this liberty has paved the way to riches and honours!The following letters were published in the Times news-paper "SIR-AS Mr. Benjafield has been a few days ago, as extracted from a news- pleased to publish a part of one of the paper, published at Bury St. Edmunds in" two letters which, under the directions Suffolk. It appears, that a Mr. Benja-" of my brother Magistrates, I read to field, who is now A MAGISTRATE in" them at our last Quarter Sessions, I conSuffolk, was once a part proprietor and ceive it to be incumbent upon me to resole editor of that famous news-paper, the "quest you to insert in your next paper MORNING POST; that, during the last" the whole of both those letters; of which, year, having previously quitted the trade" by the permission of Lord Moira and of paragraph-grinding, and being resident" Captain Cocksedge, and at Mr. Benjain Suffolk, he found it necessary to obtain field's express desire, I sent him authenfrom Lord Moira a letter stating that he," ticated copies. Benjafield, did not enjoy any annuity from the Prince of Wales. Why he should ask for such a letter the reader will see byand-by, but, he got the letter; and, he "London, Jan. 16, 1812. appears to have shown it to the people in "A disagreeable circumstance lays me his neighbourhood, or, at least, the con- " under the necessity of soliciting pertents of Lord Moira's letter became public." mission to trespass upon you with this Fournham, Feb. 21. J. ORD." LORD MOIRA TO DR. ORD. The date of that letter is not men-" letter.-Some time ago Mr. Benjafield tioned; but, on the 16th of January last," (then perfectly unknown to me) applied Lord Moira, finding that he had been de-" to me, to ascertain the point whether or ceived when he wrote the former letter," not he received an annuity from the recalled that former letter, in a public man- "Prince of Wales. He said he had been ner, by addressing another letter to a Mr." charged with having extorted an annuity J. ORD, a Clergyman, who, it seems, is "from his Royal Highness for the supChairman of the Sessions at Bury St. Ed- pression of attacks which he was about munds, though it does appear strange that" to bring forward; an imputation which a person charged with the cure of souls" he negatived with the most earnest proshould be able to devote so much of his fessions, advancing in proof of his denial time to matters relating wholly to this" the assertion, that he never had any an world. To this Mr. ORD, however, his Lordship addresses a letter, in which he states, that he has now found out, that Mr. Benjafield had, and still has, AN ANNU-" ITY FROM THE PRINCE OF WALES, granted to him in consideration of his giving up his share in the Morning Post !Very well. So far so good; but then "nuity from the Prince. I considered investigation of this matter to be in"volved in that engagement of anomalous services, which I, with others of the "Council of his Royal Highness, had spontaneously entered into, when, to "prevent the expence to the public of any "establishment for the Prince Regent durL 66 " "cated. I am entitled to say, that Mr. "Rev. Dr. Ord, MR. COCKSEDGE TO DR. Ord. " Bury St. Edmunds, 20th Jan. 1812. "Rev. Sir,-Having received informa"tion that Lord Moira has addressed a "letter to you, in your official capacity as "Chairman of the Sessions, for the pur"pose of recalling through a public chan"nel a letter from Mr. Benjafield, which "order to rebut the assertion which I "have made in the proceedings in a "ing the year of restrictions, we desired "that we might officiate as his State Household. I made due inquiry accordingly; but, as the transaction to "which this referred, was of a date earlier "than that at which I began to have any "knowledge of the Prince's affairs, there "was nothing to lead me to any other "question than, whether Mr. Benjafield "had at any time received an allowance or annuity from the Prince? The an"swer was, that no record or trace of such "allowance or annuity appeared. I was "naturally satisfied with this statement, "because it was what I had expected, "both from Mr. Benjafield's assertion to "me, and from my having always sup"posed WELTJE the purchaser of the "shares in THE MORNING POST on a speculation of his own. On this ground I "confidently furnished Mr. Benjafield" he had obtained from his Lordship, in "with my testimony against the accusa"tion under which he laboured. Subsequent informations have guided me to Chancery suit, with respect to the an"proof, that Mr. Benjafield has been re- "nuity which he enjoys being derived "ceiving (and is still in the receipt of) an from an High Personage, and with the annuity, which is essentially, though" privity of Mr. Benjafield.-I feel it be"not in absolute form, what he has been "comes me to state to yourself and the charged with having obtained. He re- "Bench, that in consequence of Mr. Ben"ceives from Mr. Tattersall an annuity, jafield's having obtained and shewn this "which is paid to the latter by the Com- "letter to this town and the neighbour"missioners for liquidating the Prince's debts."hood, as exculpating him from the "I have, therefore, written to Mr. Benja-" charge, I held myself called upon more "field to say that I must have back a tes"timonial, by which I unwittingly vouch "for what is in substance not true; but "as he told me that his object was to ex- quiry by resorting to the executors of "hibit that testimonial to his BROTHER "the late Mr. Tattersall, and their solici "MAGISTRATES, and as I have reason "tor (a channel to which Mr. Benjafield to believe he has shewn it widely, it is "did not direct his Lordship, and yet ap"incumbent on me, by this explanation, "parently the most likely to decide the "to prevent my name's contributing fur-" fact, of the annuity being merely the "ther to a misunderstanding of the case."That Mr. Benjafield's name was not on any schedule or list as a creditor of the "Prince, is indisputable. It is equally "certain that the Prince did not know of "any pecuniary transaction with Mr. Ben"jafield, the business with WELTJE having clearly been managed at the "time by persons indiscreetly officious," "though at the Prince's expence. From "these facts candour exacts the construc"tion, that Mr. Benjafield has acted upon the presumption that the persons ostenIsibly bound to him were those with "whom the transaction really rested. "While I admit this, I cannot withhold "my censure upon the manner in which "I have become so unpleasantly impli "minutely to investigate and collect the "evidence upon which I considered the "circumstance to rest.-I began the en "debt of Tattersall only, or of some other "and higher personage), and from thence "I carried it to those who were imme. diately concerned in the conduct of the "transaction. In the course of this in quiry it resulted that in consequence of "the paragraphs in The Morning Post, "relative to a High Personage and a certain untuled Lady, Mr. Benjafield, who "had the sole conduct of the paper, was "threatened to be PROSECUTED; that finding he was not to be alarmed, it be "came necessary TO BUY HIM OUT; "that he was accordingly BOUGHT "OUT; and that Mr. Benjafield knew it "was a transaction with a High Per sonage; and the terms having been con"sidered as grossly exorbitant, such High "Personage was particularly spoken to on * the subject, but desired that they should be "acceded to―That Mr. Benjafield has "been lately negociating for the exchange of his annuity for A PLACE UNDER * GOVERNMENT, with the gentlemen "who, on the part of such High Personage, gave a bond in the penalty of 10,000l. * to Tattersall, to indemnify him; that "places had been offered to him, but not ac"cepted; this fact alone carries conviction "with it. It was also ascertained from "one of the Executors of the late Mr. Tattersall, and from his solicitor, "that upon being informed that, as exe"cutors, they must deduct the property tax, he said he should complain to a " higher power. The above is the general "result of the inquiry which I have insti"tated; I will not trouble you with a “ farther detail at the moment, but I re*serve to myself the adoption of such far"ther publication of the affair, or of such "measures respecting it, as circumstances may require.-I remain, Rev. Sir, your "most obedient and humble servant, « M. T. CocKSEDGE. "To the Rev. Dr. Ord, Chairman of the ، General Quarter Session for the Division | of Bury St. Edmunds.” Upon these letters it is not necessary to make many observations. They speak so plain a language; they make so complete an exposure; they put this prostituted press in so strong and so true a light: the threatened prosecution on one hand, and the pecuniary reward on the other: it is all so plain, so authentic, so convincing, that nothing can be added to it, especially as we have here a flat declaration, that a negociation has been going on for paying off the annuity by giving the annuitant a place under government in lieu of it! This makes the thing quite complete. There is nothing wanting; and, we have only to bear in mind, that this Morning Post news-paper is famed for what is cailed loyalty; that it is this print, which has dealt forth its infamous abuse on Sir Francis Burdett, and, indeed, on every one whom it has had reason to regard as hostile to the present system of rule. This is the print, which, about a year ago, accused Buonaparté and his ministers of being guilty of the horrid crime for which some wretches had just then stood in the pillory; this is that print, which I have fong marked out as an object of public execration; but, which, I must say, is | very little worse than many others in this country. Who WELTJE is, we are not told; but, he must, one would think by the nanie, be some German. Lord Moira appears to be familiar with his name. This seems to have been the dealer with Benjafield. What a state must men have arrived at before they could even talk to one another upon the subject! How conid Weltje have opened the matter to Benjafield? What could Benjafield have said in answer? What must be the state of things; what a pass must men have come to before such a negociation could be opened at all ! This fact alone ; or, rather, the facts now come to light through these letters, are quite sufficient to characterize the press of this country; and, by these facts foreigners will judge of it.- -The Morning Post is merely a specimen of the far greater part of the rest of the press. Nor do I confine myself to news-papers; no, nor to magazines and reviews and annual registers; the prostitution extends itself to all sorts of publications, which, in any way whatever, relate to politics or government, either in church or state. No matter what the subject; army, navy, church, law, history, biography, finance, agriculture ; in all alike corruption tries its hand; and, my real belief is, that not one book out of ten, upon any of these subjects, comes forth from the press without having undergone more or less of corrupt influence. The works of science are few, those of genius fewer. In short, a more despicable thing than the English press, generally speaking, is not to be found on the face of the earth.As to the consent of the Prince to this bargain, it is to be looked upon as extorted by a reluctance to see a woman exposed; but what must that man be, who could deliberately set about the gaining of an income by such means? HON. B. WALSH, M. P. -This Hon. Gentleman, who was, some weeks ago, CONVICTED OF FELONY, at the Old Bailey, and, accordingly, confined in Newgate, was discharged on the 20th of February, in virtue of a pardon, of which the following is a copy. "BENJAMIN WALSH-FREE PARDON. "In the Name and on the Behalf of his "MAJESTY. "GEORGE P. R. "Whereas Benjamin Walsh was, at a "Session holden at the Old Bailey in Jan. “ last, tried and convicted of Felony, but |