CONDUCT OF THE DUKE OF YORK.

HC Deb 10 February 1809 vol 12 cc505-57

The house, on the motion of Mr. Wardle, resolved itself into a Committee to inquire further into the Conduct of the Duke of York. Mr. Wharton in the Chair.

Mr. Wardle

thought it necessary, before the Committee proceeded to examine evidence, to offer a few observations, in consequence of something in the evidence of Mr. Donovan last night, stating that a Letter written by Mrs. Clarke to him about a capt. Tucker was framed by Mr. Finnerty. Upon a former day he had stated every thing he knew about Mr. Finner- ty; that lie never saw him until about the time major Hogan's pamphlet was published, and only once more in the lobby of the house, when he had said something to him about Dr. Thynne. Mr. Finnerty might possibly have mentioned to him Mr. Tucker's name; but he solemnly declared he never received from Mr. Finnerty, any information whatever, about Mr. Tucker. Having, therefore, put the Committee in possession of all he knew about Mr. Finnerty, and of all the information, or rather non-information, he had given him (for, in fact, he had told him nothing), he should feel much gratification if the house would comply with the petition presented by a right lion. gent. last night from Mr. Finnerty, and permit him to be examined at the bar, which would put an end to every insinuation respecting his acquaintance with Mr. Finnerty. His right hon. friend, for so he would call him, (Mr. Sheridan), had thought fit on a former night to make an extraordinary attack upon him, respecting his alledged acquaintance with a set of men who were called Foul Conspirators, and that he had derived his information from persons with whom it was disgraceful to hold any communication. He knew of no set of men of the description mentioned by the right hon. gent. If he knew of such men, he would be the first to give them up. He declared to God he neither knew nor could guess what his right hon. friend alluded to; and wished his right hon. friend had chosen rather to give some explanation who the persons were to whom he alluded, than by an imputation so mysterious to expose his conduct to the comments and misrepresentations of the ministerial prints of the day. If his right hon. friend would be so good as to name any character of such a description as he had stated, and from whom he might have derived unfounded information upon this subject, he would declare all he knew, and do all he could to bring such persons to justice. The next point to which he felt it necessary to call the attention of the Committee was, the evidence given last night by Miss Taylor. It was a duty he owed to that lady to state what he was now about to submit. He understood that that lady had two brothers in the army, and one in the navy; and when he had told her of his intention to have her examined at the bar of the house, she expressed great unwillingness to come forward; but when he urged the necessity for her examination, her answer was, that if she was forced to come forward o speak the truth, she must do it at the risk of ruin to her nearest and dearest relations.

Mr. Sheridan

coincided with his hon. friend, in the wish that Mr. Finnerty might be examined, and said, that so far from having intended to make any attack upon his hon. friend, as he was pleased to term it, on a former night, he merely cautioned him as to the sources of his information, and had sent to hint a message upon the subject by a mutual friend.

Mr. Wardle

said, he never had received that message, and observed that his right hon. friend, on the former night, had pretty strongly insinuated that his information was derived from persons of the description of conspirators, with whom it was disgraceful to hold any communication, but without naming the persons to whom he alluded.

Mr. Sheridan

said, he had used no such phrase as conspirators or conspiracy; and it was hardly to be expected he should be so indiscreet as to name persons who were yet to give their testimony before the house, and thus to excite prejudice against them. He had no objection, however, to allude now to one of those persons named Donovan, who had yesterday given his evidence at the bar, and whose gross prevarication evinced the kind of reliance that could be placed on any information derived from him. There were also, two others whom he had no objection now to name; for instance, M'Callum and Cockayne, who, he did not scruple to say, were persons to whose information no credit was to be attached; and he had cautioned his hon. friend against placing much reliance upon such men: but he called the house to witness, whether, instead of making any attack upon his hon. friend, he did not vindicate his conduct and intentions, and deprecate the attempt of any set of men disposed to make a run against an individual member, who had the firmness and independence to rise in his place, and do that which he conceived to be his public duty. For his own part, he was determined his conduct should be guided by neither favour nor affection, nor any regard to rank or station.

Sir A. Wellesley

bore high testimony to the military conduct of col. Tucker. He had served under both sir David Baird and sir Samuel Auchmuty in South America, with the highest recommendation from both, as an officer highly deserving his majesty's favour and he felt it his duty to state, that having witnessed his conduct in the expedition to Portugal, and his gallant services upon two particular occasions, he felt it due to his character, and to the consolation of his family, on this occasion to bear testimony to his merits.

Mr. Wardle

declared he never meant the most distant imputation upon the conduct of that gallant officer, nor had he any personal knowledge of him whatever; he had only mentioned his name as connected with one of the transactions which were the subject of inquiry. Mr. Wardle next adverted to some letters in his possession which were alluded to on the evidence of Mr. Donovan last night, to the reading of which he had no objection, and which he was ready to produce if the committee desired it.

This produced a conversation of some length between the honourable member, lord Folkestone, the Attorney-General, Mr. Perceval, Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Whit-bread, Mr. Yorke, and Mr. Bragge Bathurst, after which it was agreed that the Letters should be read.

GWYLLYM LLOYD WARDLE, Esq. a Member of the House, attending in his place, was examined as follows:

Are those the letters Mrs. C. alludes to in, her letter to Mr. Donovan, in which she says, "I must be candid and tell you, that in order to facilitate some negotiation, I have given him a few of your letters?" Those are part of the letters I had from Mrs. C.

Are those the letters to which this letter of Mrs. C. alludes? It is impossible I can answer that.

Are those all the Letters of Mr. Donovan's you received from Mrs. C.? To the best of my recollection, all, except some letters of Mr. Donovan's that apply to the commissions that I examined about last night, to be backed by a member of parliament.

Did you obtain the letters of Mr. Donovan all at once from Mrs. C, or at different times? At different times; the letters I have now given in, I obtained in the way I before stated to the house.

These are part of those which you took away without her consent? That I took away, as I before stated.

Was it with her consent or against her consent, that you took away those letters? I have before stated how I took them, I took them from her table; she said I must not take them, or must not use them, or something to that effect.

MR. JEREMIAH DONOVAN was called in, and examined.

State whether those letters, in the hands of the clerk, are your hand-writing? They are

[The witness was directed to withdraw.]

[Letters read, dated the 8th October, 1808, the 20th October, 1808, 16th November, 1808, 14th December, 1808, and the 23d December, 1808.]

"Charles-street, St. James's-square,

"October 8th, 1808.

"Dear Madam; The deanery of Hereford is vacant, and in the sole gift of the duke of Portland; can you procure it for the rev. G. H. Glasse? I would myself, unknown to him, give 1,000l. for it. It must be tilled up by next Saturday, at least so a gentleman, who 1ms just given me the information, said. Mr. G. is my most particular friend, and I would make great sacrifices to serve him; he is not in town at present. I can, with confidence assure you he is a very good scholar, a man of good fortune, and an extraordinary kind friend, of excellent connections, well known to the Dukes of Cumberland and Cambridge. He is rector of Hanwell, Middlesex. His town house, No. 10, Sackville-strect.—The money will be de posited on Wednesday next, for the landing waiter's place.—An Inspector of the Customs, whose duty is rowing a boat about the river, visiting and placing officers on board different ships, is about to be superannuated; the salary is 400l. per annum; I am applied to for the appointment, on the resignation taking place; 1,000l. offered for it. Your's very truly, J. DONOVAN."

"Mrs. Clarke."

"Charles-street, St. James's-square, October 20th, 1808.

"Dear Madam; Some friends of the rev. T. Baseley, M. A. are extremely desirous of procuring for him promotion in the Church; and it appears to them a very favourable opportunity, the vacancy of the deanery of Salisbury, to make appllication to the duke of Portland; and in order to secure an interest without his knowledge, a party of ladies, at the head of whom is lady Cardigan, have subscribed a sum of money, 8,000 guineas, which is ready to be deposited, to carry into execution their intended plan.—Mr. Baseley is well known to his grace, and was particularly recommended to her majesty by lady Cardigan, on the publication of his pamphlet, 'The Claims of the Roman '(Catholics constitutionally considered, &c. '&c.' This chaplain to the duke of Gloucester, and the bishop of Lincoln, went with his grace upon some occasion to serve the marquis of Titchfield; would be very strongly recommended by many persons of fashion, the bishops of Nor-wich and Salisbury. I have a letter from each to Mr. Baseley in my possession, which would shew the estimation in which he is held by them. The ladies are very anxious, and, at the same time, desirous that he should not know through what channel the money is raised, much less the application, nor do they wish to know any thing further than that he shall succeed, and then so agreeably surprise him; or rather that his grace, without any preface, should have the whole merit of having selected so worthy a man to fill the vacancy. Your answer will oblige, Your's, very truly, J. DONOVAN."

"Lord M. and Mrs. J. are in town."

"Charles-street, St. James's-square, "November 16, 1808.

"Dear Madam; The place of Inspector of the Customs is now vacant by the death of Mr. Booty, and I learn that the Queen and the duke of Dorset are about to apply for it. I hope yon will procure it for Mr. Henry Tobin, the gentleman you were so good to say you would serve when an opportunity offered. I will do myself the pleasure of waiting on you whenever you will appoint on the subject. Can you procure the pay mastership to a second battalion for 500l.? Your's very truly, Mrs. Clarke." J. DONOVAN."

"Dec. 14, 1808.

"Dear Madam; I regret much that I had not the pleasure to see you on Saturday evening. It was the only time I had been out since Tuesday, and I have suffered considerably in consequence, from my wound. —I am daily applied to for the particulars of the appointment at Savannah la Mar. Is it a surveyor of customs and landing waiter? Is the salary 1,000l. per annum, or how much is the salary, and from what do the perquisites arise? Is the 1,800l. sterling, or Jamaica currency? What is the duty? Can you procure the landing waiter's place in January next? The paymaster second battalion? Relative to the letters, I am in part ready, and wish to consult with you relative to them. I shall be at home this evening, and, if able to bear the motion of a carriage, dine in your neighbourhood to-morrow. I remain, Dear Madam, Your's very truly, "Mrs. Clarke." J. DONOVAN."

"Charles-street, St. James's-square, "Dec. 23d, 1808.

"Dear Madam; I am daily plagued about the Savannah la Mar appointment; also respecting the landing waiter's, the 2d battalion paymastership, and the com-missaryship. Pray let me hear from, or see you, on the subject of the Savannah business particularly.—Mrs. Howes requested me to thank you, in her name, for your kindness, and have got into disgrace for not having done so sooner, and for not letting her know when you called last. Your's very truly, J. DONOVAN."

"Mrs. H. sends her compts."

"Mrs. Clarke."

Mr. C. Bradshaw

observed, that if his recollection did not completely fail him, Mr. Donovan had been guilty of the most gross prevarication. It was not his intention to offer a single observation, directly or indirectly, until the close of the examination. But if it should prove as he strongly suspected, he should unquestionably move for the committal of Mr. Donovan.—He was proceeding to comment on the doctrine laid down by an hon. gent, under the gallery, when he was called to order by Mr. Croker.

The Attorney General

stated, that he bad just received a letter from general Clavering, which he read to the house, and which stated, That having understood that Mrs. Clarke had introduced his name in her last examination, he was desirous of being examined at the bar of the house that night, and more especially touching his having called at Mrs. C.'s house, as his replies would go directly to impeach that lady's veracity.

Mr. W. Smith

observed, that if it were intended to commit Mr. Donovan, for hiving uttered gross falsehoods, the same proceeding must certainly take place with any other witnesses, who, by their conduct, placed themselves in the same predicament. If it could be proved, that Mrs. C. had been guilty of such gross breaches of veracity, as Mr. Donovan seemed to have been, he was at a loss to know where any person could be found who would oppose her commitment. If the assertion of general Clavering were to be weighed against the assertion of Mrs. C. no one could doubt which must kick the beam in the estimation of the committee; but still the committee would perceive, that there was a difference between convicting a person of probable falsehood by producing the testimony of another, and convicting a person of absolute falsehood by the production of his own testimony.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

stated the inconvenience which must result from the indulgence of hon. gentlemen in general observation. The remarks of the hon. gent. were by no means called for by what had been stated by his learned friend.

Mr. Adam

recommended a dispassionate conduct on the part of the committee. It was natural, that in a popular assembly a great diversity of opinions should exist, and that those opinions should be maintained with a heat not always decorous or dignified. It was most desirable that this ardour should be repressed on the present important question, and that the patient examination of the subject, which he was anxious that the committee should pursue, might terminate as it ought, in an impartial discussion, and in that fair and dispassionate manner which became a judicial proceeding of such extreme importance.

DAVID PEIRSON was called in and examined.

(By Mr. Wardle.)

[The evidence given by the witness on the 7th instant, being read,]

Is there any part of that evidence, on which you wish to make any observation or alteration, or any addition? No alteration. On the night that the D. of Y. went to Weymouth, about eleven o'clock at night, I was sent out to get a bill changed; I went out, and got it changed, and brought it in, and returned it to Mrs. C.; she looked it over, and said it was all right. The D. of Y. was present when I gave the bill to Mrs. C. and received it from Mrs. C.

(By Mr. Yorke.)

With whom have you had any conversation, respecting the evidence you gave when you were here last? Not any body.

(By Mr. Slurges Bourne.)

Have yon spoken with nobody about it? With nobody; I have not spoken to any one about it.

Have you seen Mrs. C. since you gave your evidence here last? No, I have not.

Did you see Mrs. C. when you retired from the bar on the former day? I saw her, but I did not speak to her.

Did she speak to you? She just bowed her head, and said, "Peirson;" I said, "I have been examined, Ma'am."

Did she say any thing else to you? Not any thing.

Are you positive that no other person has spoken to you on the subject of the evidence you gave here, or you to them? I met Ludowick in the park, and he asked me; he said that I might be mistaken; yet he could not recollect any thing about it.

Was that all that passed between you and Ludowick? It was all that passed between him and me, except he said, that I must make a mistake; that there was a bill brought down one morning, in his presence, of 10l. by Mrs. Favourite, and given to a girl to go out and get change; and he thought I must have made a mistake about that bill.

(By General Loftus.)

Did not you make a communication to Mr. Wardle, or speak to him, to say you wished to alter your evidence? I called upon Mr. Wardle, and told Mr. Wardle about the bill that I received from Mrs. C. and went and got change for, and returned that night, in the presence of the D. of Y.; I told Mr. Wardle that I had done that.

What was the amount of the bill you got change for? I think 100l. but I am not certain.

Do you adhere to your former statement, that you had spoken to no person on this subject since you were examined in this house? I have not spoken to any person since I was examined.

Where did you get that bill changed? I got it changed at Mr. Byfield's and Air. Bridge-man's; Mr. Bridgeman and his wife changed it for me, confectioners in Vere-street.

Are By field and Bridgeman partners? I believe they are.

Did you try to get that bill changed at any other place? Yes; I went to Mr. Stevens's in Bond-street, and tried there, but they could not do it for me; they sent out, but could not do it for me.

How long have you left Mrs. C.'s service? It is three years ego now.

Have you seen her frequently since you quitted her service? I never saw her before I saw her at. this house.

Did not you see Mrs. C. in her chariot a day or two before you gave your evidence at this bar, or on the very day in which you gave your former evidence? The day before she sent for me into Baker-street, where she was in her carriage, to ask me, whether ever I had changed any bill, or knew any bill changed; I said, I recollected Mrs. Favorite giving a bill to Ludowick, and his going and getting the bill changed, and bringing it back again; and how I had taken a bill from her the night the D. of Y. went to Weymouth, and got her change, and brought it back again; she asked me the amount of it, and I could not tell her; and she said she recollected that very well.

Have you made any communication to Mrs. C. since that period, or do you know how it was communicated to her that you meant to alter your evidence? I have not seen or made any inquiry or any thing to Mrs. C.

(By Lord Folkestone.)

How do you account for the circumstance, that at your last examination you did not recollect the particulars which you have now related to the committee? I had a very bad head-ach, and when I have the head-ach it affects my memory, that I am very forgetful, and I did not think of it; and at the same time, when I was asked about the Duke's servant, I thought I must not answer, as I was Mrs. C.'s servant, or I had thoughts of it then, but as I w as not asked, I wished rather to withdraw.

Are you labouring under that suffering at the present moment? Not now.

(By the Chancellor of the Exchequer.)

Then it was not merely from the defect of memory occasioned by your head-ach that you did not state the circumstance on your former examination? Yes, it was from that that I did not recollect it; being a stranger, and never at the bar before, I did not know what to say.

Did you recollect at the time that you were here before, what you have stated? I had some recollection, but I could not tell the sum of the hill, or any thing; but I have since recollected, that I believe the bill I changed that night at 11 o'clock, was 100l. or thereabouts.

Did you know before you came to the bar this evening, that you were to be re-examined upon this point? No, I did not.

Do you recollect what time of the night it was that the D. of Y. set off to Weymouth, on the night this was changed? Near one o'clock in the morning.

(By Mr. Fuller.)

Did you not know when you were the last time at this bar, that you were to tell the truth? I have told the truth, to the best of my knowledge.

(By Mr. Barham.)

How could you state that you had spoken with nobody on the subject of the evidence you have given before, when you immediately afterwards declared you had spoken both with Mr. Wardle and Ludowick? I did not think what I said then.

(By Colonel Vereker.)

How do you reconcile your memory, being so perfect in every other part of the transaction, and not so perfect as to the amount of the note you got changed? I am not certain of the amount of the note, no further than I think, to the best of my recollection, it was 100l.

(By Mr. Smith.)

Do you know a Miss Taylor? I have seen her at Mrs. C.'s.

Was she frequently at Mrs. C.'s? She was frequently at Mrs. C.'s.

Was she ever there when the D. of Y. was there, and in his company? I believe not, I do not recollect to have seen her in his company; she might have been in the house.

Was she usually part of the society when the D. of Y. was there? I never saw her in company with the D. Of Y.

Was she very intimate with Mrs. C.? I believe very intimate.

(By Mr. Giddy.)

Are your head-achs of such a nature as to require medical aid? No.

(By Mr. Lushington.)

What did you understand to be the real profession of Miss Taylor? I am quite a stranger to it.

Do you ever recollect Miss Taylor dining in company with Mrs. C. at Gloucester-place? Yes, I do.

Did the Duke ever dine there at the same time? No.

[The Witness was directed to withdraw.]

Brigadier General CLAVERING having staled to a Member of the House, that he was desirous of being examined, he was called in, and examined.

(By the Attorney Central.)

Have you sent a letter to me this evening? I did so.

Desiring that you might be examined? I did so.

When did yon first know Mrs. C? I believe it was about six years ago; I am not exactly precise as to the date.

For what purpose did yon call at Mrs. C. 's house recently r It was in consequence of a report that I heard, that every person in town with whom Mrs. C. had ever had any conversation, was to he called before this honourable house for the purpose of pledging to her veracity, and I. heard among others that my name was introduced; I accordingly addressed a letter to an honourable member of this house, col. Wardle, a copy of which letter I have in my pocket, if it is necessary to produce it.

[General Clavering read the letter.]

"8th Feb."

"Sir; It has been intimated to me, that a letter has been addressed to you by Mrs. C. which is to be brought forward before the house of commons, wherein my name is introduced as being capable, among others, of speaking to her veracity. Should this be the case, I am most urgently to request that my name may be expunged from the said letter. My testimony, moreover, would mar the very point which she is desirous of supporting, since she told me very lately that she was living with Mr. Mellish; since, being a family man, the world would be inclined to attribute improper motives for my acquaintance with a lady in her situation. Being particularly anxious in this business, I wish to have the honour of seeing you upon it; and presuming that 12 to-morrow will not be an inconvenient hour, will wait on you at that time."

I accordingly, at 12 yesterday, did call upon Mr. Wardle, and I stated to him the purport of the letter which I have had the honour of reading to you; and I further stated, that if it was Mrs. C. 's intention to summon me before the house, my testimony must certainly go to impeach her veracity, because it is not above a month since that she absolutely Stated to me that she was living with a Mr. Mellish. On my return, after leaving col. Wardle's house, it lay in my way to pass by Mrs. C.'s door, and it occurred to me that probably it might be a service also to state the same circumstance to her; I called there, and she denied herself, and said that she was extremely ill in bed, but that if I would call in two hours, she would see me; I replied, that it would not be in my power to cal at that time; she then sent me word she was to be seen at home at five o'clock, if I called at that time; I accordingly did call about a quarter after five, and did not see her: the purport of it was to inform her, that if she did call me, I should be under the necessity of stating what I have now had the honour of stating.

Is there any thing else which you wish to State to the house? If I may judge from the accuracy of what I have heard, I understand my name was further brought forward last night, as having attempted to influence the vote of an hon. member of this house. I declare, upon my honour, to the best of my recollection, I never spoke to that honourable person upon the question, and it was perfectly unnecessary for me so to have done, because the hon. gent, always did vote upon the side on which he then gave his vote.

Did you ever represent, that you had influenced that person to give his vote upon that occasion? Never.

(By Mr. Sheridan).

Did you exert yourself to bring up lord John Campbell from Scotland, to vote upon the Defence Bill, towards the latter end of 1805, or the beginning of 1806? To the best of my belief and recollection, I never wrote to him nor spoke to him upon the subject.

Did you at any time during your acquaintance with Mrs. C., promise to send her recommendations of any officers? Never; but it will be necessary to explain the answer that I gave there more fully. About six weeks ago I received a letter from Mrs. C, stating her inclination to see me; I called upon her, when she informed me she was extremely anxious to promote a young man who was a lieutenant in the 20th regiment, and that h. r. h. the D. of Y. was also anxious he should be promoted, and that Mr. Greenwood was also anxious he should be promoted. I was just then returned from abroad. She informed me a regulation had been lately entered into, that any member of parliament or a general officer writing a letter I to col. Cordon, that recommendation would be taken into consideration immediately; I informed her I was not aware of any such regulation, and that previous to my taking tiny step of that kind, as it was totally unknown to me, I must know that that person was a deserving character. She accordingly, about two days afterwards, inclosed me a Inter signed by lieut. col. Ross, of the 20th regiment, stating that lieut. Sumner, the officer in question, was a very deserving character. In Order to be satisfied that this letter was written by lieut. col. Ross, I went to the house of Messrs. Greenwood and Cox, and shewed the letter to the head clerk, who informed me that if was the signature of col. Ross; I afterwards informed her that it would be absolutely necessary that; a proper letter should be written to me upon the subject, and as she had told me this lieut. Sumner was a nephew to Mr. Sumner, an hon. member of this house, I desired that this letter should be written by him to me. Accordingly a few days afterwards I received a letter, which was absurd in the extreme, dated from the Temple, and dated something sooner; the letter was so extremely absurd, that I returned it to Mrs. C, stating in my letter, that if she meant it as a joke, it was an extremely had joke, and that if I sent it to the War-Omce, it would he very badly received; and I concluded, that I was her humble servant. A few days afterwards, she sent me another letter, signed by this same Mr. Simmer, which letter i nave in my pocket, hut which second letter I took no notice of, in consequence of the extreme absurdity of the former.

[The letter was delivered in and read].

"Sir; my brother, lieut. Sumner of the 20th foot, being desirous of purchasing a company in the 79th regiment, and having served in the above-mentioned corps with the entire approbation of his commanding officer, (if not in that, in any other old regiment of the line,) I take the liberty of requesting, that you will adopt the necessary steps for promoting his wishes by such recommendation of him, to the D. of Y., as his conduct appears to merit; and you will confer a very great favour on your, &c. CHA. C. SUMNER."

"Temple, Jan. 17, 1809.

"Brig. Gen. Clavering."

Did Mrs. Clarke represent to you who this Mr. Sumner was, from whom the letter came? She informed me upon my first interview with her, that he was n nephew of Mr. Sumner, the member for Surrey.

Were you informed who the Mr. Sumner was, who was supposed to have written that letter? I never was informed who the Mr. Sumner was, who wrote that letter, but I have been informed this evening, that there is no such person in existence.

(By Sir T. Turton).

At either of the times you railed upon Mrs. C. yesterday, did you leave any and what message, and with whom? If I mistake not, I stated that to the hon. house before; I left no other message than that I should call at about a quarter after live, as she had appointed that time for being at home.

Did the gentleman who was with you, leave any message in your hearing? There was no person with me.

At either of the times? On the second time, I certainly said it was extremely extraordinary that she had gone out, when she had appointed hat lime for seeing me.

Did you leave any message purporting what was the nature of your visit to her? I left no message whatever, but that which I have had the honour of stating.

I understood yon to say, that you impend the credibility of the testimony of Mrs. C. upon the ground that she represented herself to be Mr. with a Mr. Mellish; did she represent herself to you as living with Mr. Mellis the nember for Middlesex? She did not say that lie was the member for Mid-dieses.

Have you any, and what reason to suppose that she did not live under the protection of a Mr. Mellish? That which passed in this hon. house a few evenings past; it was proved that she did not live with Mr. Mellish.

Then I understand you to say, that you have no other reason for impeaching the credibility of the testimony of Mrs. C, but the statement that she lived under the protection of a Mr. Mellish? Not any, that I am at present aware of.

Have you any reason, independent of any circumstances that you have read or heard of, to impeach her testimony, or to consider her not worthy of belief? I certainly do not conceive her worthy of belief, from having imposed upon me in the manner she had, and from the variety of contrary evidence it dots appear she has delivered before this hon. house.

How has she imposed upon you? By having informed me that she was under the protection of Mr. Mellish, which I understand not to be the case.

How do you understand that not to be the case? From its appearing to have been proved to the contrary before this hon. house.

Have you any other reasons whatever, than those you have stated, to believe that she has imposed upon you? None, that I am at present aware of.

(By Mr. Charles Dundas.)

Have you not staled in evidence to this committee, that she has imposed upon you by stating that there was a false letter written to you in the name of Sumner? If I am correct in my recollection, I did not state this evening that she bad imposed upon me on that account.

Have you not stated, that in the case of the Defence Bill your name had been used, which you denied to be true? I stated, that I had heard so, but not from herself.

(By Mr. Wardle.)

Are you acquainted with Miss Taylor? If it is the Miss Taylor who has been examined before this house, I certainly have seen her at Mrs. Clarke's.

Have you frequently seen her at Mrs. C.'s in Gloucester-place? I may have seen her probably twice or three times there.

Was she there as the friend and companion; of Mrs. C, when you saw her there? I certainly believe not, because Mrs. C. informed me, that she kept a boarding-school at Chelsea.

When she was in Gloucester-place, was she not upon a visit to Mrs. C, and associating with her, living with her for the day?. That is more than lean reply to, not recollecting having ever been in Gloucester-place more than twice.

(By Mr. Ruse.)

Did you not state that Mrs. C. had informed you that a regulation existed, by which a letter of recommendation of an officer, requesting promotion, forwarded by a member of parliament or a general officer, would obtain consideration; and have you ascertained whether such a regulation does exist? I certainly have informed myself, that any application from an hon. member of parliament or from any general officer, will always meet with attention at the office of h. r. h. the Commander in Chief.

Is the sense in which you understand attention will be bestowed upon a letter so sent, the sense in which you understood the communication you received from Mrs. C.? I really do not understand the question.

Do you understand the regulation, as you suppose it to exist, to be the same as she described it to you? Certainly not, because she have me reason to understand, that, during the time I was absent abroad on foreign service, a regulation had been issued, and no regulation had been issued upon the subject; I cannot say that she absolutely in those direct words said so, but she gave me to understand it, and I did so understand it.

In what respect dots the representation she gave of this regulation, and what you understand to be the practice of the Commander in Chief, differ? They differ most widely, in consequence of no such regulation as she informed me of having ever been issued; but it was always understood, that a recommendation from a member of this house would be attended to, provided the object so recommended, on further inquiry, was found worthy of promotion.

(By Mr. Western.)

You have stated, that you called at Mrs. C.'s twice recently, to request that you might not be called upon to speak to her veracity; had you any other communication with Mrs. C. relative to the subject now undergoing the consideration of this Committee? I certainly had another object in view besides, that I did not wish my name to be brought forward in a case of this kind, because the world might naturally imagine, that, having had any communication with a lady of that description, it might have been a communication of a criminal nature, which, upon my honour, never did exist.

Had you no other reason for requesting that you might not be called upon? None but what I have had the honour of stating to this Committee.

(By Mr. Herbert.)

You have stated, that you impeach the credibility of the evidence of Mrs. C., because she told you that she lived under the protection of a Mr. Mellish, which you think contradicted by the evidence that came before this Committee; what reason did she give you, or what reasons induced you to suppose that the Mr. Mellish she alluded to must be the member for Middlesex? If I am correct, I did not say that it was Mr. Mellish, the member for Middlesex.

(By Mr. Quin.)

Having stated that you called twice upon Mrs. C, to request that your name should not be mentioned, or that you should not be called upon to give any testimony against her; what motive has induced you to come now to give this evidence? Because my name having appeared in the public papers, I was desirous of wiping away the imputation which I have already referred to.

(By Mr. Lamb.)

Are you acquainted with Mr. Dowler? I never heard of him, excepting through the medium of the public prints.

Do you recollect having had any conversation with Mrs. C. upon political transactions, at the period of 1804 and 1805? I have no recollection of any conversation of the kind; I am certain that none of that nature then took place.

No conversation on the subject of the debates that were taking place in this house, and who was likely to vote on one side, and who on the other?. I have no recollection of any circumstance of the kind, and I am almost positive that no conversation of that nature ever did take place, as it was a business in which L did in no way whatever concern myself.

(By Mr. J. Smith.)

Had you any communication whatever on the subject of Army Promotions with Mrs. C.? I never proposed any conversation of that kind, nor do I recollect any having ever existed, excepting at the period I before alluded to, when she requested I would recommend to the consideration of the D. of Y., lieut. Sumner, of the 20th regiment.

I understand you then to say, you had never at any time any communication or conversation whatever with Mrs. C, on the subject of Army Promotions, except in the case of lieut. Sumner? Certainly not, as being the subject of conversation.

Had you any incidental conversation with Mrs. C. upon that subject? A period of so many years having elapsed since that time, it is impossible to speak positively and accurately to a question so close as that, but to the best of my belief I do not think I had.

(By Mr. Wardle.)

Do you of your own knowledge know that Mrs. C. used her influence in favour of any person whatever in the Army with the Commander in Chief? I do not.

Do you of your own knowledge know of my person that asked her to use her influxes with the Commander in Chief upon that Subject? I am not acquainted with any person that ever did; I have heared report of that nature, but I cannot bring to my recollection any person positively.

Then you state positively that you do not know of any transaction of that ture? None, to my certain knowledge.

Give a direct and positive answer to that question? I do net know of any transaction of that nature.

[The Witness was directed to withdraw.

The Marquis of Titchfield

rose and observed, that the story some nights since mentioned to the house, respecting an Office in the City, in which the name or a noble relation of his (the duke of Portland) was implicated, appeared to him, as it must to the house and the public, so completely ridiculous, that he thought it unworthy of any attention on his part; but he now understood that there was a letter on the table, referring to a particular transaction, with regard to which he wished to submit some explanations to the house. The Mr. Beazley, mentioned in the letter alluded to, called at his noble relation's house—

Mr. Whitbread

wished to know whether the noble marquis was offering his statement as evidence? It appeared to him that it ought to be entered in the minutes. In consequence of a circumstance, which incidentally came out last night in evidence, a Committee had this day been appointed to investigate some concerns connected with the East. India Company, and possibly a Committee might become necessary, with regard to the affairs of the Treasury also.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

observed, that the only difference was as to the expediency of entering the noble lord's statement in the Minutes. In his judgment, that did not appear necessary, particularly as it referred to a point not properly relevant to the professed object of the inquiry.

Mr. Whitbread

suggested, whether, as the point deemed irrelevant by the right hon. gent, was already in the Minutes, it would not be better, that the noble lord's explanation of it should be inserted there also.

Mr. Rose

thought it not material to press the question, whether the noble lord's explanation should be inserted in the Minutes or not, although certainly wide of the original object for which the Committee was appointed; but this was but one of many instances, in which the Committee had gone astray.

Mr. Wilberforce

wished the noble lord's statement to be inserted in the Minutes.

Mr. Sheridan

thought the proposed statement should be inserted among the evidence, to enable the house to judge of the ease. If it appeared, that Mrs. C. had made an improper use of the name of the D. of Y., the inference would be pretty strong, that she had made an equally improper use of the name of the duke of Portland.

The MARQUIS OF TITCHFIELD, a Member of the House, attending in his place, was then examined.

(By Mr. Sheridan.)

Will your lordship state every thing you are acquainted with as to an application from the rev. Mr. Baseley to the duke of Portland? Mr. Baseley called upon the duke of Portland, on the 3d of Jan., not being able to see him, left this Letter, which the servant gave to my noble relation; it is dated No 9, Norfolk-street, Grosvenor-square. [The Marquis read the Letter.]

"Norfolk-street, Grosvenor-square.

"My Lord Duke; I wished particularly to see your grace upon the most private business. I cannot be fully open by Letter. The object is, to solicit your grace's remendation to the Deanery of Salisbury, or some other Deanery, for which the most ample pecuniary remuneration I will instantly give a draft to your grace. For Salisbury, three thousand pounds.

"——L hope your grace will pardon this, and instantly commit these lines to the flames.—I am now writing for the benefit of Administration, a most interesting pamphlet. Excuse this openness; and I remain your grace's Most obedient and obliged Servant,

"T. BASELY."

"P. S. I will attend your grace whenever you may appoint, but sincerely beg your grace's secrecy."

Indorsed:

"Delivered by the Writer himself to my Servant, on Tuesday 3 Jan. 1809, at Bn. House, P."

This Letter was delivered by the Writer himself, and is indorsed by the duke of Portland, the 3d of Jan. in the present year. Upon receiving this Letter, my noble relation, finding that the Writer of it was gone, gave particular orders that Mr. Baseley never should be admitted into his house, and the same day wrote a Letter to the Bishop of London, of" which I have a copy in my hand, inclosing the Note which I have just delivered in at the Table. [The Marquis read the Letter.]

"Burlington House, "Tuesday 3 Jan. 4809."

"My Lord; The person by whom the Note inclosed was left at my house this morning being possessed, as I understand, of one if not of two Chapels in your lordship's diocese, I consider it to be incumbent upon me, from the sense I have of the duty I owe to the public, as well as from my respect for your lordship, not to suffer you to remain uninformed of it; and I accordingly take the liberty of laying it before you.—I have reason to believe that the Note is written by the person whose name is subscribed to it, as I have heretofore received Notes or Letters from him, the writing of which, to the best of my recollection, very much, if not exactly, resembles that of the Note enclosed; and one if not more of which was written at my house in conscfluence of my declining to see him. The Note inclosed, however, he brought with him; and on my desiring to be excused seeing him, he gave it to my servant, and immediately left my house. As I have no copy of the Note, I must desire your lordship to return it to inc.

Indorsed:

"To the Lord Bishop of London, 3d Jan. 1039."

I do not know whether it is necessary I should read the letter which my noble relation received from the bishop of London in consequence. [The Marquis read the Letter.]

"Fulham house, Jan. 5, 1809.

"My Lord,

It is impossible for me to express the astonishment and indignation which were excited in my mind, by the perusal of the Letter which your grace has done me the honour of enclosing; a mark of your attention for which I must beg you to accept my best thanks.—It is too true that this wretched creature Basely has one if not two Chapels in my Diocese. I have long known him to be a very weak man, but till this insufferable insult upon your grace, I did not know he was so completely wicked, and so totally void of all principle: And as your grace is in possession of the most incontestible proofs of his guilt, you will, I trust, inflict upon him the disgrace and the punishment he so richly deserves. I have the honour to be, &c.

"B. LONDON."

Indorsed:

"The bishop of London."

That is the whole of the transaction.

Mr. THOMAS PARKER was called in, and examined.

(By Mr. Wardle.)

Are you furnished with your Books of Accounts? I have no more than I had yesterday, nor I do not understand that there is any more: I was not acquainted that I was to attend at the house this evening till I had the summons, but I sent to desire them to let me have all the Books and Papers that had Mrs. C.'s name upon them. [The witness was directed to withdraw.]

Mr. WILLIAM TYSON was called in and Examined.

(By Mr. Wardle.)

Have you got any account of checks of h. r. h. the I), of Y., that were sent into your house by the late Messrs. Birkett of Princes-street r Not any.

Have you any notes of hand, or bills? Not any.

Have you any memorandum in your books of any such bills having passed through your house? Not to my knowledge.

Have you the late Messrs. Birkett's accounts at your house? Yes, we have.

Have you examined those accounts before you came here this evening? Yes, I have.

Was not the order that you received, to bring those accounts with you? It was.

Why did you not comply with that order? I have brought a statement of Birkett's checks.

Had any body spoken to you upon this Subject before you were served with a summons this day? No one.

Do you take upon you to say that nobody to your knowledge has been at your house upon this subject, within these last ten days? Not to my knowledge,

Are you a partner in the house? I am not.

Why was it you did not comply with the Order of the house? (The Order was delivered in and read.]

You have slated, that you have a list of checks with you, what is that list? In 1803, Oct.7, Parker and Birketts draft payable to Clarke or bearer for 120l.; in 1804, April 26, payable to Clarke or bearer 50l. August 11, payable to Clarke or bearer 70l.; Sept. 15, payable to Clarke or bearer 50l.; in 1805, March 13, payable to Clarke or bearer 364l. That was the whole I saw payable in the name of Clarke.

Whose checks are those; by whom are they drawn? The first four I believe were drawn by Parker and Birketts; the remaining one by Birketts and Dockery.

You have stated that you have examined Messrs. Birketts account, and find in that account no checks whatever by the D. of Y., at having passed through your hands? My instructions were to see what checks were drawn by Birketts and Dockery in favour of Mrs. C, which I have done.

Do you happen to know that any bills were ever left at the banking-house of Marsh and company by Messrs. Birketts, in which Mrs. C.'s name appears to have been the drawer or the acceptor? I have no knowledge of any. [The witness was directed to withdraw.]

Colonel LORAINE was called in, and examined.

(By the Chancellor of the Exchequer.)

Did you hold any situation in the Commander in Chief's office, at the time when col. French's levy was firet instituted? I did.

What, situation did you hold at that time? Assistant Military Secretary.

State what you know respecting col. French's application to be permitted to raise a levy of men at that time;—It came in the usual course of office and passed regularly though the office, and was examined as all things of that kind are, and every pains taken to ascertain whether it was a levy that would answer the purpose or not.

Did the application of col. French come to the office in writing, in the first instance? It did.

Can you produce that writing? These are the terms which were produced in the first instance. [The terms were read.]

What was done upon this proposal? It appeared to have lain by for some time, and col. French wrote another letter. [Note was read, dated March 5th 1804.]

What situation did col. Clinton hold at that time? Military Secretary to the Commander in Chief.

Was any answer sent to that note by col, Clinton? To the best of my recollection when this note came to the office it was sent to me, and I was desired to examine the terms that were offered by col. French. At that time I was in the habit of consulting and communicating with gen. Hewitt, who was then inspector general of the recruiting service, and I shewed the terms to him, and he desired that col. French might be referred to him; in consequence of that, a reference was made, which I believe will appear by the correspondence. [A letter read, dated Horse Guards, 7 March 1804.]

Do you recollect what was the next step taken upon this proposal? As far as I recollect col. French applied to gem Hewitt, as directed; and gen. Hewitt of course examined the terms that he proposed, and modelled them as he thought fit for the Commander in Chief's consideration; and after it had gone through the whole of the regular course in the office, the letter of service was issued by the Secretary at. War, which is usual in those cases.

Is there any letter of March 20th? Yes, there is; col. French made various representations with regard to his levy, before it was finally settled.

Can you, by referring to those papers, give any account of those different applications? There is one representation of the 20th March, which I hold in my hand.

Is there one of the 18th or 20th of April? There is a copy of a letter from col. Clinton of the 18th of April, returning the proposals, with the Commander in Chief's remarks thereupon. [The letter was read.]

The Proposals in short, after having been referred to gen. Hewitt, were accepted with certain alterations, which appeared in red ink in the margin of that paper? They were.

Are you aware of any other alterations that took place in the course of the levy, and how were they introduced, if any? To the best of my recollection, the bounty was raised at two different times during that levy, because the bounties to the regiments of the line had keen increased.

Are there any letters among those papers which give an account of that circumstance? Unless I had time to look over the whole papers, I do not know that I could speak to it.

Is the course of office, after the levy is approved, to send it to the secretary at war? It must necessarily go to the secretary at war, because it is by him that the letter of service it issued.

Were you in office in April 1805? I was.

Will you see whether there is any letter of the I was April 1805, from the Commander in Chief to the secretary at war? There is. [The letter was read.]

Subsequent to that letter, do you recollect any application from Messrs. French and San-don, proposing some alterations in this levy? Yes, I have a proposal of the 50th April.

What is the effect of that proposal? They proposed that a certain number of officers should be employed in the levy, of a different description from what they had before; that appears to be the drift of it, and also a changs with regard to the non-commissioned officers.

Was there any answer to that letter? There was, of the 25th April 1805, a letter from col. Gordon. [The letter was read.]

(By Lord Folkestone.)

What situation do you now fill? I am one of the commissioners for the affairs of barracks.

What situation did you hold before? I was lieut. col. of the 01st regiment, and assistant military secretary to the Commander in Chief.

How long were yon assistant military secretary to the Commander in Chief? About 7 years.

What was your rank in the army when you first became assistant military secretary? Major of the 9th regiment of foot.

Did you purchase the lieut. colonelcy? I did not.

Did you ever join your regiment as lieut. col.? Never; when my regiment was ordered on service, I twice offered to join my regiment, and the Commander in Chief did not accept either of my offers, saying, I must remain in my present situation, meaning at the Horse Guards; after this, I did not think that it would be becoming in me to offer again, because it might appear that I was volunteering my services, when I knew my services would not be accepted; and I beg leave to add, that before I came to the Horse Guards, I had been 22 years in the service, and constantly with my regiment; and therefore I did not think that I was so peculiarly called upon, as perhaps a young man who had never seen any service.

(By the Chancellor of the Exchequer.)

Are you now in the army? In consequence of having served 29 years, when I accepted of a civil situation in the barrack department, his majesty was graciously pleased to allow me to retain the rank I now hold, but that rank is not to he progressive.

Did you sell your lieut. colonelcy? I did.

At what price? I know of no other price but the regulated price allowed by his majesty.

Where have you served? I served four campaigns (luring the American war, in America; I have served between five and six years in the West Indies; during that period I served with the late lord Grey at the capture of the French West India islands; and I have served on the continent of Europe.

Did col. French's levy go through all the ordinary stag* s in the office; was there any thing irregular or out of the way in the manner in which it was1 proposed or adopted? It went through the regular course of office, and if I may be allowed to say it, I think it was more hardly dealt with than any other levy at that time going on, and for this reason, that gen. Hewitt, who was inspector general of the recruiting service, had a great prejudice against any officer that he considered a recruiter.

Were the different applications referred to gen. Hewitt before they were accepted? I invariably laid every thing of the kind before gen. Hewitt that came into my hands; as I had constant communications with him, it was impossible to find any opinion so good as his upon that subject.

Were the suggestions of gen. Hewitt in the alterations that lie proposed, adopted by the Commander in Chief? To the best of my recollection, almost, always in those cases.

Do you remember in the course of those proceedings, any alterations proposed by gen. Hewitt that were not adopted? I cannot exactly recollect that, but the whole of the proposals were modelled as far as possible according to his wishes and opinions.

Is gen. Hewitt now in the kingdom? He is not; he is Commander in Chief in the East Indies.

Do the papers in your hands contain every written communication which has passed upon the subject of col. French's levy in the Commander in Chief's office? It is impossible for me to answer that question, not being now in the office, and having had no interference or hand tit all in looking over these papers.

Then you are not able to state that these are the whole of the communications upon this subject? No.

[The Witness was directed to withdraw.]

Mr. JEREMIAH DONOVAN was called in, and examined.

(By Mr. Wardle.)

Did you know major Tonyn, of the 31st regiment? I did,

Relate what you know respecting major Tonyn's promotion from the 48th regiment to the majority of the 31st.—I believe it was about the month of March 1804, that capt. Sandon called upon me, and told me that he bad an op- portunity of promoting a gentleman to a majority; if I knew of any gentleman who had claims that would entitle him to it, he could forward the promotion. I mentioned this circumstance to capt. Tonyn, who was a very old officer, I believe he had served about 23 years. The terms upon which he was to obtain that promotion, as far as I can recollect, was 500/. Capt. Tonyn waited for some time, and he became impatient. I believe about the month. of May, or June, he said, as there were a number of field officers to be promoted, he considered, as he had not obtained that promotion through capt. Sandon, in the mean time, he should withdraw his name from capt. Sandon, and take his chance in the regular line of promotion; in consequence of which I immediately waited on capt. Sandon, and apprized him of it. Capt. Sandon requested that lie might be introduced to capt. Tonyn; he was. Capt. Sandon argued with him. and told him that it was in consequence of his recommendation that he would be gazetted. Capt. Tonyn, on the contrary, said, that his father, gen. Tonyn, had recommended him for a majority; and that, as he understood a vast number of captains were to be promoted to majorities on the augmentation, he certainly should be promoted without the interest of capt. Sandon; however, they agreed upon some terms; what they were I do not know, I had nothing to do further with the pecuniary transaction, nor did I know till the May twelvemonth following, the year 1805, how it was that major Tonyn obtained that promotion.

What did you know in 1805, to which that refers? I knew that major Tonyn was promoted.

Is that all you know? But major Tonyn's promotion came out in the general promotions of augmented field officers.

Is that all you know? That was all I knew till the year 1805. Major Tonyn, I believe, was gazetted in August 1804, and then, to my astonishment, I was informed by Mrs. C. that she was the person who had obtained that promotion.

Do you know whether the 500l. was lodged upon the first agreement in the hands of any particular person? The money, I believe, was not lodged in the hands of any person in the first agreement.

Do you know whether any money was lodged prior to the gazetting of major Tonyn? I did not know that any money was lodged prior to the gazetting of major Tonyn.

Do you know whether any money upon that communication was lodged at all or not? I do not know that any money was lodged previous to that period.

I do not ask previous to any particular period, but do you know that any sum of money was lodged with any body on that account? There was no sum of money lodged on that account; but, I believe, a gentleman had undertaken to pay capt. Sandon the sum of money which I understand was paid to capt. Sandon but I do not know it.

Do you know who that gentleman was? I do.

State who lie was.—Mr. Gilpin.

Who was Mr. Gilpin? An army clothier, and agent to the 48th regiment.

Do you know at what period this sum was lodged with Mr. Gilpin? I do not know that any sum was lodged with Mr. Gilpin; Air. Gilpin, I believe, undertook to pay the money.

Do you know that Mr. Gilpin did pay the money? I do not, further than having been told so.

Do you know of your own knowledge who did pay that money? I do not, nor when it was paid, nor how it was paid.

Who told you? Mrs. Clarke.

What did Mrs. C. tell you? She told me that she had received a sum of money for the promotion of capt. Tonyn to a majority in the 31st regiment.

Did Mrs. C. tell you what sum of money it was? I do not exactly recollect what sum it was.

Are you positive that you cannot recollect what sum it was? I am.

Did Mrs. C. tell you from whom she had received that sum? She told me she had received that sum, whatever it was, from capt. Sandon.

You have stated, that capt. Huxley Sandon told you that he had the power of getting promotion? He did.

State what passed upon that subject, as nearly as you can recollect, between capt. Sandon and yourself.—Capt. Sandon told me that he had the power of obtaining promotion through some gentleman, a friend of his: but he never told me who the person was through whom lie did obtain the promotion, until I met him, and conversed with him upon this subject, in the room where the witnesses had been waiting near this house.

Stale who that person was, whom capt. Sandon named this night.—Mrs. Clarke.

State whether capt. Sandon has ever stated to you his power of promoting officers, independent of this one circumstance of capt. Tonyn.—At the same time he mentioned to me, that he could promote lieutenants to companies; I think captains to majorities; majorities to lieutenant colonels; and, in the first instance, he told me, it was in consequence of the new levies that were to be raised, or some augmentation to the army.

Did capt. Sandon ever speak to you about other promotions, unconnected with those new levies? He never spoke to me as to any other promotions than those I have mentioned now; I was imposed upon by the supposition, that it was new levies, or au augmentation to the army.

You do not of your own knowledge know of any other transaction of the nature in which Capt. Sandou was concerned? I believe that a major Shaw applied, and that I left his papers in the hands of capt. Sandon; but he could not obtain the promotion for major Shaw. What was the promotion major Shaw want- ed? Permission to purchase a lieutenant-colonelcy, or to get a lieutenant-colonelcy without purchase, by paying a sum of money for it.

And major Shaw did not establish that wish? (Tot through that channel.

Through what other channel did he establish it? Major Shaw's papers were delivered back to me, and returned to major Shaw. I believe they were brought to me by a Mr. Macdougall, as I recollect, and I believe they were returned to Mr. Macdougall. Some time afterwards, Mr. Macdougall asked me, if I could procure that promotion for col. Shaw. A lady had called upon me, and said, that she had an opportunity of promoting major Shaw's wishes.

Who was that lady? Mrs. Hovenden.

Where does Mrs. Hovenden reside at present? In Villiers-street, York-buildings.

At what number? At No. 39.

Was that lady at the house with you the other night? She was.

Is major Shaw now at the Cape of Good Hope? I really do not know, but I understood he got the promotion, and went to the Cape of Good Hope.

State whether, through the medium of this lady you have named, any other promotions have been effected in the army? Not to my knowledge; it may he necessary to explain the business of major Shaw, because it was not through that introduction at that period that major Shaw obtained that.

Was this the only circumstance of the sort that was carried through the medium of that lady? I know not of any that was carried, not even of that.

Do you know of any that through her medium was attempted? I have heard her say that some were attempted, but I cannot say what they were.

You do not know that any money was lodged, upon capt. Tonyn's attempt at promotion? I do not: I have already explained that Mr. Gilpin, I understood, undertook to pay it, but that no money was lodged.

(By Lord Folkestone.)

You have stated, that capt. Sandon informed you that he had the means of promoting lieute-tenants to companies, captains to majorities, and majors to lieutenant-colonelcies; in consequence of that information, did you negociate such promotion? I did not negociate any promotion through capt. Sandon, except that of major Tonyn, by introduction.

Were you to receive any remuneration for that introduction? I was.

What were you to receive? 25l.

Did you receive it? I did.

Have you, since you were last examined, recollected any negociation which you carried on for promotions in the army, besides those which you mentioned in your last examination? I have never thought of any.

Are you now certain that those were the only ones in which you ever engaged? I am not certain.

You have stated, that you learnt from Mrs. C, iu 1805, that she had received 500l.? No, I do not know the sum exactly.

That she had received a sum of money in consequence of major Tonyn's promotion at what time of the year did you receive that information? It was in the mouth of Way, 1805; major Tonyn hud been gazetted in August, 1804.

Where was it yon received that information from Mrs. C? At Mrs. C's house in Gloucester-place.

On what occasion were you at Mrs. C.' s house at Gloucester-place? I was there in consequence of a report which had been circulated, that I was the author of some scurrilous paragraphs against h. r. h. the D. of Y. I had traced my information to Mrs. C., and from her I traced it to capt. Sutton, but not the first time I saw her, and that was the reason I waited on Mrs. C.; I had no other introduction but that.

Did you receive that information at your first visit or your second visit, or your third visit? At my second visit, as near as I can recollect.

Do you recollect any other conversation that passed between you and Mrs. C at that second visit? I do not recollect the conversation; it was not of any consequence.

Did any conversation pass respecting promotions in the army? I do not recollect that any conversation passed relative to promotions in the army at that lime; it might be so.

Do you recollect that any such conversation passed at any other time? I believe on the third visit.

What was that conversation? That Mrs. C. had been the means of promoting major Tonyn.

You have stated, that you received that information at your second visit? I am not certain whether it was at the second or the third; I do not say it was absolutely the second, but I believe it was; I had no expectation of being called upon, and therefore I made no minutes or memorandum of it.

Are you certain any conversation took place respecting major Tonyn at the third visit? I am not certain whether it did or not; I know it did not on both meetings.

You have stated, that in your second visit to Mrs. C, no conversation took place about military promotions, except that of major Tonyn; did any such conversation take place at any other time? I believe it did, relative to major Shaw.

Never as to any case hut that of major Tonyn and major Shaw? Not in which I was concerned.

Are you sure you were never concerned in any other? I am not sure.

(By Sir Robert Williams.)

Did Mrs. C. at any time inform you whether the D. of Y. knew any thing of the transaction of major Tonyn's promotion? Mrs. C. never informed me of h. r. h.'s having known any thing of it, till November last.

What did she state to you in Nov. last? She mentioned, amongst a number of other things, that she had been extremely hi used by h. r. h. the D. of Y.; that in consequence of that, unless h. r. h. did that which was right tow arils her, she would publish the whole of the transactions which had passed relative to promotions during the time she lived with h. r. h.

But not relative to major Tonyn's? Not particularly to major Tonyn's;

Did Mrs. C. ever inform you that she had mentioned to the D. of Y., that she had received a sum of money on account of major Tonyn's promotion? Never till then, the month of Nov. last; on the contrary, when I visited her in Gloucester-place, in the first instance, she, so far from mentioning h. r. h. being privy to it, was so alarmed at my name being announced as a friend of major Shaw, or any other person, that major Shaw got his papers back immediately, gave Mrs. Hovenden 10l. for them, and said he would have done with Mrs. C, for that my name had prevented his promotion taking place; and, in consequence of that, I had no more to do with major Tonyn in his promotion, which I understood took place about 12 months afterwards, nor did I ever see him but once since, on Ludgute-hill.

What did Mrs. C. say, in Nov. last, on the subject of major Tonyn? I have mentioned what she said of major Tonyn, that she had received a sum of money, which she should publish, among a number of other circumstances, unless h. r. b. did that by Ilex which she thought he ought to do.

What sum? The sum which she had received for major Tonyn's promotion.

And that she had informed the D. of Y. of it? No, never.

(By General Norton.)

You have said, that gen. Tonyn recommended his son for promotion? I have said, that major Tonyn informed me that gen. Tonyn had recommended him.

Do you know how long captain Tonyn had had the rank of captain in the army? I believe nine or ten years.

Can you tell, in the course of your business, whether you do not know that that is a very long period lor an officer to remain in the rank of Captain before he gets to the rank of major? I understand, that a captain of ten years standing is entitled, and generally receives, the brevet of a major.

Are you certain that it was not by brevet he got his rank? I believe it was by augmentation, and not by brevet, for be was appointed to the 31st regiment; had it been by brevet, he would have continued in the 48th.

(By Sir Thomas Turton.)

Have you not stated, that in your interview with Mrs. C. in Nov. last, she informed you h. r. h. was acquainted with the circumstance of money given for captain Tonyn's promotion? She said that she should publish it, but she did not tell me that h. r. h. was acquainted with it.

Was that in Gloucester-place that you saw Mrs. C. in Nov. last r No, it was in Bedford-place.

[The following Question and Answer were read over to the Witness:]

"Q. Did Mrs. C. ever inform you, that she had mentioned to h. r. h. the D. of Y., that she had received a sum of money on account of major Tonya's promotion? A. Never till then, the month of Nov. last."

Mr. Donovan. That is not what I mean to say.

Chairman, State how you wish that answer to be taken down.—No; In Nov. last Mrs. C. told me, that if h. r. h. (lid not do that which was right by her, she would publish the case of major Tonyn, with many others.

Did she, in Nov. last, communicate to you, that she had informed h. r. h. of her having taken a sum from major Tonyn? She did not; she only threatened to publish that, with many other cases.

I understand you to have said, she was extremely anxious that it should not come to the ears of the D. of V., when you saw Mrs. C. in Gloucester-place; is that so? It is.

What reason did she give for that anxiety? She said, that if h. r. h. should know of her having received any money for military promotions, that she should he disgraced, and the officer would lose his commission.

You are sure, upon your recollection, that that was the reason which was assigned? I am.

(By Mr. Wallace.)

When capt. Sandon stated to you, that he had the means of obtaining promotions through almost all the gradations of the Army, did he state to you any particular terms upon which those promotions were to be had? I recollect that he said, for a majority 500 guineas; but I do not recollect that he stated the particulars of every commission.

Had you any reason, either at the time or afterwards, to consider capt. Sandon, in that business, as the agent of Mrs. C.? Never, till Mrs. C. herself told me so.

Did you visit Mrs. C, in Nov. last, by her own solicitation? It was by her own solicitation.

You have stated, that she used certain threats, unless conditions were agreed to; what terms did she state to be the terms of her forbearance? The payment, of her debts, and the settlement of an annuity.

Did she apply to you, to participate in carrying those threats into execution? She did.

To what extent? I am afraid I should be obliged to implicate many persons, with whom she took very great liberties, in mentioning their names, as persons who were in fact instigating her to these acts.

State what Mrs. C. said to you, to induce you to participate in that business? Mrs. C. said that the D. of Y., unless he came to these terms, muse be ousted from his command; that he would then retire to Oatlands, where he would soon cut his throat; that was her expression.

Was that all that passed? I endeavoured to prevail upon her to inform me who were her associates in the plot: her answer was, that if I would go with the tide, she would provide for me and my friends very handsomely, for in that case she would have a carte blanche, that would enable her to do more business than she ever had done: that was her expression.

(By General Loftus.)

Did she state to you who were her associates in this plot, as you term it? She said that she was bound to secrecy, though she longed to inform me; that was her expression.

Then how could you implicate others, if she did not inform you who they were? There was one or two persons whose names she mentioned as having offered her money for some papers.

Who were they? One was sir Francis Burden; she said that sir F. Burdett, about 18 months before, had offered her 4,000l. for the papers, but that she would not then take less than 10,000l. I did not believe her.

Who were the others? I do not wish to mention. [The Chairman directed the Witness to answer the question. There was but one more; I do not chuse to mention the other person. The Chairman informed the Witness, it was the sense of the Committee he must answer the question.] It was capt. Dodd that she mentioned as the other person who wished to get the papers from her.

How was this to be carried into execution? She did not inform me.

You have stated, that if you gave names you must implicate a number of people: bow much further do you mean to go with the names, to make out a number of people? I do not mean to go any further.

[The following words of the Witness, in a preceding part of the Examination, were read:]

"I am afraid I should be obliged to implicate many persons with whom she took very great liberties in mentioning their names, as persons who were in fact instigating her to these acts."

Do you mean that two constitute the many you spoke of? [The Witness referred to a paper.]

(By the Chairman.)

What is that paper to which you tire referring? Memorandums.

Do you mean that two constitute the many you spoke of? Two cannot constitute many.

Then name the others? I am in au error in that, in mentioning many.

What terms, or what consideration did she inform you capt. Dodd had offered for the papers? She did not mention what he had offered for the papers, hut that he had wished to possess the papers.

Do you know what situation capt. Dodd is in? I do not.

Does he hold any official situation, that you know of? I believe he does.

What is it? I do not know what it is that he holds, but I believe he holds some official situation under h, r. h. the Duke of Kent.

Do you, of your knowledge, know of any other persons concerned in this transaction? I do not; I do not know that they are, further than the report of Mrs. C.; nor do I believe it.

You referred to some Memorandums; why-did you refer to them, and what do they contain? They contained some notes taken at different periods; I believe the best way will be to read the whole.

[The Witness was directed to withdraw.

Captain HUXLEY SANDOX was called in, and examined.

(By Mr. Wardle.)

Did you know major Tonyn? Yes, I did.

State what you know respecting his promotion from the 48th to the majority of the 31st regiment.—In an interview with Mrs. C, she asked me if I had any military friends that wished for interest; if they had money, she thought she could get them promoted. At that period, I did not know any body; but meeting with Mr. Donovan the next day, I asked him if he had any friends, he said yes, there was a gentleman in town that he thought would give a sum of money for a step; I asked him what sum he would give; he said he thought lie would give 500 guineas. I spoke to Mrs. C. upon the subject, and she said, by all means dose with him. When I saw Mr. D., I told him that I thought I could procure his friend the step that he wished for; upon which he produced a memorandum, signed by a Mr. Gilpin of the Strand, for the sum I have mentioned, whenever he should appear in the London Gazette, gazetted as a Major. I believe it was near upon two months or ten weeks, I suppose it might be two months, when capt. Tonyn, for I never had the honour of seeing capt. Tonyn before that period, got tired that his promotion did not appear; he desired Mr. D. to call upon me, to say, that if I could not get the business finished, I had better return him his memorandum. T waiter! upon Airs. C, and told her what Mr. D. bad said. She said he was a shabby fellow, that he was very much in haste, but that if he would wait quietly, she dare say it would be done, and desired me to say that he had better wait a little. However, the next day I met Mr. D., and I told him the interest that, we had to procure the Majority; had informed me that they had better wait a little. Mr. D. said, I am instructed by capt. Tonyn to say, you must give up your security immediately, for we are pretty clear, or at least I am pretty clear, you cannot get him gazetted; and another thing, gen. Tonyn has spokeu to the Commander in Chief,and he has promised him the first majority that is vacant. I then begged to see capt. Tonyn; Mr. D. introduced me to him; he then told me the same, Sir, this business has been a long while upon the carpet, I do not think you can effect what you say you can do, and I desire you will give me up the security I gave you, for gen. Tonyn, my father, has procured a promise from the Commander in Chief, to give me a majority.' I observed to him, that he had better wait a few days, for that I thought in all probability he would be gazetted. However, after arguing the point for a little time, he said, for two or three gazettes it does not signify, let the business go on, and if I find I am gazetted in a week or ten days, the business shall be as it originally was. However, to make short of the story, I believe it was the Wednesday when we were speaking, and on the Saturday or Tuesday following he was in the gazette as major—the consequence was, I received the 500 guineas, 500l. I gave to Mrs. C, and 25l. to Mr. Donovan.

(By Sir Thomas Turton.)

Do you of your own knowledge know that the promotion of major Tonyn was owing to the interference of Mrs. C.? No, I cannot say any thing upon the subject.

Have you any and what reason to believe it was owing to the interference of Mrs. C. I have no reason at all to believe it was owing to the interference of Mrs. Clarke.

Did Mrs. C. ever inform you that she had procured the appointment of major Tonyn from h. r. h. the D. of Y.? She certainly informed me she had got him gazetted.

Do yon mean by that, that she informed you that she had got him gazetted by means of her application to the D. of York? She always told me she would get him gazetted, and of course it was through that interest, I imagine.

Did she state that it was through the D. of Y. that siie obtained it? She told me yes, that it was through her interest; but whether it was or not I cannot say.

Do you believe that this was obtained through Mrs. C.'s application to the D. of Y.? I doubt it exceedingly.

Had you yourself no emolument from this transaction? I received 500 guineas; 500l. I gave to Mrs. C, and 25l. I gave to Mr. Donovan, which I believe makes the 500 guineas. I had no emolument.

Did Mrs. C. send you a Gazette, announcing the promotion? I really do not know, I gave her the money the moment I saw it in the Gazette; she had no occasion, for I watched the Gazette, and the moment I saw him gazetted I took her the money.

You have stated, that you do net believe this appointment was effected by the interference of Mrs. C.; for what did you pay Mrs. C. the 500l.? Because we had promised upon his appearing in the Gazette as a major, for that was the way in which the note ran, that we were to receive the 500 guineas, whether it was by her interest or gen. Tonyn's did not signify, tiie note ran "on my appearing in the London Gazette: gazetted as a major."

Did you apply to Mrs. C. for this appointment to be in the Gazette, and on seeing the appointment in the Gazette, she was to receive 500l.? Yes.

General Tonyn was promised the first majority that became vacant for his son? So capt. Tonyn told me.

Did you receive as a remuneration to yourself any part of the 500l.? No.

You have stated, that you delivered the 500l. to Mrs. C, and the 25l. to Mr. Donovan; what advantage had you? Nothing at all.

[The witness was directed to withdraw.

GEORGE HOLME SUMNER, Esq. a member of the house, attending in his place, made the following statement:

I have only to confirm the statement made by gen. Clavering, that I have no nephew of the name of Sumner, and that I believe there is no such person living in the Temple.

Mrs. MARY ANN CLARKE was called in and examined.

(By Mr. Wardle.)

Do you recollect recommending capt. Tonyn of the 48th regiment, for a majority to h. r. h. the Commander in Chief? I do.

Do you recollect who introduced capt. Tonyn to you for your recommendation? Either Mr. Donovan or capt. Sandon.

Do you recollect whether you were to receive any sum of money, provided capt. Tonyn was gazetted? I do not recollect the stipulated sum, but I received 500/. when it was gazetted.

Did you make it known when you recommended capt. Tonyn to the Commander in Chief, that you were to receive any pecuniary consideration for his promotion? Yes.

(By Mr. Dickenson.)

How did you come by the Gazette you sent to Dr. Thynne? I suppose by the newspaper man.

(By Mr. Croker.)

Did you ever apply to gen. Clavering for a recommendation in favour of lieut. Sumner? Yes.

Are you acquainted with lieut. Sumner? No.

Who recommended lieut. Sumner to you? Mr. Donovan.

Do you recollect, whether you represented lieut. Sumner to gen. Clavering as being allied or connected with any particular person? Yes, with his relations.

What relations? His uncle.

Who was his uncle? Dr. Sumner.

Was that the only relation you mentioned to gen. Clavering? No, Mr. Sunnier the member also.

By whom was lieut. Sumner represented to you, as the nephew of Mr. Sumner the member? He was nephew of the Doctor.

What relationship was he represented as bearing to Mr. Sumner the member? I cannot exactly recollect, but it was cousin, or sonic-thing in that way; that he was a relation.

Have you ever represented yourself as being under the protection of a Mr. Mtllish? Neither him, nor any man.

Have you not represented yourself as being at one time, under the protection of h. r. h. the D. of Y.? I really think that gentleman is more mad than the person that was committed last night. [The Chairman informed the witness she must answer the questions, and not make irrelevant observations.] The whole of the gentlemen know that already, by the representation which has been given before.

Have you not represented yourself as being at one time, under the protection of h. r. h. the D. of Y.? I do not know that I ever did represent myself so; people knew it, without my telling it.

What do you mean by saying, it was very well known already by what had happened? I do not recollect the name of any person that I ever represented myself to as living under the protection of the Duke of York.

Will you positively say you do not recollect ever to have stated, that you lived under the protection of the D. of Y.? Yes, I will positively say, that I do not recollect that I did, to any particular person.

Will you say, that you never represented yourself as being under the protection of any gentleman of the name of Mellish? No, I never did, nor any other.

You are positive of that? Quite so.

Did you ever make any representation to that effect? Never.

Did you never make any such representation to gen. Clavering? No, never; I will repeat what was said in my parlour; gen. Clavering was mentioning to me, one morning when he called, that Turf Mellish was just setting off with gen. Ferguson; I said, yes, I have been told so, that he had taken leave of the Prince the night before: he said that I was in a very good house, and some-thing, that Contractors and Beef went on very well: that was all that passed: I made no answer to that: I have many times heard the report, both of him and many others.

Do you recollect having conversation with Mr. Donovan, in Nov. last, relative to the proceedings that are now taking place? No.

Do you recollect stating, in a conversation to Mr. Donovan, that if h. r. h. the D. of Y. would not come into your terms, you would publish all the transactions which had passed between you during the time you had lived together? No.

Did any thing to that effect pass between you and Mr. Donovan? No.

Did you ever try to induce Mr. D. to assist you in any purpose of exposing the D. of Y. or publishing those transactions? No; but I will repeat what he said to me in the Secretary's room the other night; he said if he had been aware of what col. Wardle intended to have done, and he had called upon him and stated his intentions and behaved in a handsome manner, he would have put him into the way of proceeding, but as it was, he should go entirely against the whole of it; that he might have given him many and many cases.

Is that conversation which took place the other evening in the witnesses room, the only one you have ever had with Mr. D. concerning this business? The only one, except what I wrote.

Was any body present when this conversation took place between you and Mr. D. in the witnesses' room? It was full of persons, but he spoke to me privately apart.

Did you ever mention sir F. Burdett's name to Mr. Donovan in any way connected with this subject? No.

Do you know sir F. Burdett? In what way, as an acquaintance or personally only?

Are you acquainted with him? I have seen him a few times.

Have you ever spoken to him or be to you? I told him I had been a little acquainted with him, very slightly.

Has sir P. Burdett ever written to you or sent you a message? No, he has not, not that I can recollect.

Did sir F. Burdett ever apply to you to procure from you any papers relative to the subject now under inquiry? Never once; nor have I had any sort of communication, nor heard or known any thing of sir F. Burdett since May last, and that was merely accidental.

Have you ever told Mr. Donovan, or any body else, that sir K. Burdett offered you money for some papers in your possession, or any thing to that effect? No.

Do you know capt. Dodd? Yes, I do, slightly.

How long have you known capt. Dodd? Since my living in his neighbourhood.

Do you often see capt. Dodd? What is meant by often?

More times than once, or how often? Yes, more times than once, if that is often.

When did you see capt. Dodd last? I do not recollect; but I have no view in screening it at all; I am not ashamed of capt. Dodd, nor I dare say capt. Dodd of me, only perhaps just at this time.

Did capt. Dodd by any means demand or ask of you any papers in your possession relative to this transaction? Never; we have never talked about it.

Did you ever represent to Mr. Donovan, or any other person, that capt. Dodd had tried to procure from you some papers relative to this transaction? Never to any one.

Did you ever express any wish to Mr. Donovan, that he would join with you or assist you in prosecuting this inquiry? Never.

Or on any subject connected with the transactions now under inquiry? Never.

Do you know col. M'Mahon? Yes.

Did you ever write an anonymous letter to h. r. h. the prince of Wales? To shew col. M'Mahon in his proper colours, I will produce his notes here to-morrow evening.

Did you ever write an anonymous letter to h. r. h. the prince of Wales? I wrote a few lines to the prince of Wales, stating that a person wished to see him, and col. M'Mahon called.

Did you sign any name to this anonymous Letter? (A loud laugh.)

Well, then, did you sign your own name, or any name, to those few lines which you sent to the prince of Wales? It was only a few lines without any name, and col. M'Mahon called in consequence, and when the servant opened the door, he asked, who kept the house? Mrs. Farquhar, that was my mother. When he came up stairs into the drawing-room, he said, Mrs. Farquhar, how do you do? what is the business? I told him, that I wished to see the prince of Wales, and after a few minutes conversation, col. M'Mahon found that I was Mrs. C.; he then promised to communicate the message to the prince, and the next day brought me a very civil message from h. r. h. stating, that he was extremely sorry he was obliged to go out of town to Brighton, which he did do that morning, that it was impossible for him to interfere, that he had a very great respect for me, was sorry for the manner in which I had been treated, and that col. M'Mahon might use his influence with the D. of Y. to be the hearer of any message that might he the means of making peace; but that it was a very delicate matter for h. r. h. to interfere with his brother. Several notes passed between col. M'Mahon and me, and several interviews. He mentioned to me that he had seen h. r. h. the D. of Y. at one time, I think in July, that the D. of Y. asked him, ill was not very much exasperated against him, and if I did not use very strong language, and abuse him. Col. M'Mahon said, Quite the contrary, Sir, I assure you; Mrs. C. is very mild towards you, and she lays the whole of the' blame op Mr. Adam; he said, She is very right, I will see into her affairs. That was the end of the first message. I think the last message that col. M'Mahon brought me was, that he could not. bring h. r. h. to any terms at all, to any sort of meaning concerning the Debts, and although I had behaved so very handsome towards h. r. h. and had exacted nothing but his own promises to be put in execution, or even to take the sum that was due to me upon the annuity and pay the tradesmen, and then I would let h. r. h. off of the debts, as that perhaps would satisfy them; that he considered it as very fair, and very honourable, and very liberal, or he would not have been the bearer of those messages; and he said, be esteemed me very much, from the character I bore among my female acquaintances that he was intimate with, I mean women of character, and for the service? I had done to many poor young men within his knowledge. I will bring some of his Notes, or give them to col. Wardle, to be read here to-morrow, to corroborate what I have stated.

Did you in Nov. or Dec. last, represent yourself to any persons as still having the power of procuring military promotions, or any other offices? No; but I recommended some that wanted promotion to a person.

Who was the person to whom you recommended them? I will mention his name; and I intend to have him here; but it cannot happen immediately, from some circumstances. I must beg to be excused naming him now. [The Chairman informed the witness that she must answer the question.] If I answer the question, it will be impossible for mc to produce him here; he will get out of the way; he will not come here. [The Chairman informed the witness that she must answer the question.] Mr. Maltby, of Fishmongers' Hall.

Is Mr. Maltby the only person to whom you have made any recommendations since Nov. or Dec. last? Yes; except the letters I sent to gen. Clavering.

Have you represented yourself at any time, since the close of 1806, as having it m your power to procure army promotions, or other offices? No; except through Mr. Maltby, which he can speak to, if they lay hold of him. Have you had any communication with any other person than Mr. Maltby, relative to the procuring army promotions or offices? No; except what I have just spoken to.

What situations did you endeavour to procure through Mr. Maltby, and for whom? As I thought Mr. Maltby ought to be exposed in the whole of his conduct, I have not thought much about it; but I have letters at home I Can bring forward, when I am called upon.

What situations did you endeavour to procure through Mr. Maltby, and for Whom? I forget.

Do you not recollect any one of them? Not one.

Of the situations you endeavoured to procure so lately as Nov. or Dec. last? I am so little interested in it now, I cannot recollect.

Do you even recollect how many situations you endeavoured to procure? No.

Can you recollect whether they were army promotions, or civil situations? The letters I have at home can distinguish between them, but I cannot at present; besides, I wanted them for friends.

Who were the friends for whom you wanted these appointments? When they give me the liberty of using their names, I will communicate them. [The Chairman informed the witness she must give a direct answer to the questions, unless she objected to them, and appeal- ed to the chair.] I certainly must object to them. [The Chairman informed the witness, that it was the opinion of the Committee that she should name the persons.] I have already named Mr. Maltby; if he is brought forward perhaps he will name the persons. [The Chairman again informed the witness, that it was the opinion of the Committee that she should name the persons.] One is Mr. Lawson; I cannot recollect the other.

Recollect yourself, and state to the Committee those persons whom you so represented as your friends, whose names you would communicate when you had their permission.—That it one of them.

Who were the others? I do not recollect.

Why did you speak of friends, instead of speaking of a single friend? If you try to serve a person you call them your friends, if you interest yourself for them.

Do you stake the veracity of your testimony upon that last answer, that you recollect but one of those persons? I think that I ought to appeal to the Chair now. [The Chairman directed the witness to state the objection she had, and the Committee would decide upon it.] He is a very respectable man, and he has been already very ill used, and I am afraid of committing him and his family. [The Chairman directed the witness to name the person whom she alluded to as a respectable person.] That is giving his name at once; really I cannot pronounce his name rightly, though I know how to spell it, and I must be excused.

Do you not know how to pronounce the name of your particular friend, whom you represented as a hardly used man? [The Chairman admonished the witness that her present conduct was very disrespectful to the Committee.] I mean to behave very respectfully, and I am very sorry if I do not; but I do not know but the gentleman may lose the money he has already lodged, if I mention his name.

[The Witness was directed to withdraw]

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

wished the witness to be told, that with whatever forbearance the committee had hitherto treated the witness, it could not long endure this trifling on her part with the questions which the committee chose to ask; but that she must, if she did not alter her behaviour, suffer the punishment with which the committee of the house of commons, out of a regard to its own dignity, must visit an obstinate perseverance in a want of proper respect.

Mr. Windham

said, that there seemed to be a mistake on this point. The witness, he understood, had not positively refused to answer, nor done any thing with respect to this question which necessarily implied a disrespect to the house. She had, before answering directly, stated an additional reason why she should not answer, for the consideration of the committee; and that reason was, that the individual, if named, would be subject to great inconvenience and suffering. It did not necessarily follow that the witness was blamable for submitting that reason before she answered.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

would be sorry if an impression prevailed any where that he had interfered too soon; and if there were any gentlemen, who did not perceive, in the last half hour, in the witness's conduct, an attempt to evade, to trifle and shuffle, (a loud cry of No, No, No! from several members) He meant to state that no other witness in any other cause than this could, upon displaying such improper behaviour as this witness had done within the last half hour, escape being committed. (No, No, No!) The hon. gentlemen did not agree with him in that; but it was certainly his opinion. He did not, however, impute blame in any quarter for suffering the witness to proceed in this sort of behaviour thus long; but at the same time, in support of the dignity of the committee, it was necessary to assert the respect due to it, after long and manifest abuse of indulgence.

General Matthew

said, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was wrong in talking of inflicting punishment on the witness. This mode of treating evidence, was a violation of the liberty of the subject. This was a point, which ought to be always kept in view, and he would pay no attention to what was said from the government side of the house.

Mr. Croker

insisted upon the importance of having an answer to the question. She had stated that the party would suffer the loss of the money that was pledged—it was for the reason which she urged as an objection, that he wished the question to be answered, because it afforded a hope of getting to the bottom of the transaction.

[The witness was again called in, and informed by the Chairman, that the Committee had considered her reason for declining to answer the question put to her. and was of opinion that she must answer the question.]

What is the name of the person you alluded to? Mr. Ludowick or Lodowick.

Has that gentleman any other name hut Ludowick? I do not know his other name.

Who is Mr. Ludowick? He is a gentleman, I believe he lives in Essex; that is all I know of him.

Whereabouts in Essex does he live? I do not know.

Who introduced Mr. Ludowick to you? I never was introduced at all.

How did you become acquainted with Mr. Ludowick? Through different friends.

Name the friends that recommended Mr. Ludowick to you.—I cannot exactly name which it was in particular, but Mr. Maltby can tell, if he is had before the house.

Name the friends that recommended Mr. Ludowick to you.—I cannot name any one in particular; Mr. Maltby knows more of him. himself than I do.

Is Mr. Ludowick the person whom you stated as having suffered enough already, whose name you were unwilling to tell? Yes.

In what has he suffered already? In lodging his money, and being a long while out of the appointment, meeting with frequent disappointments from day to day. At a future time, or after Mr. Maltby has been examined, I will mention the general officer's name that he has made free with, I do not know whether correctly or incorrectly.

That who has made free with, Ludowick or Maltby? Maltby.

What disappointments has Mr. Ludowick suffered, to which you allude? I have already stated them.

What appointment has Mr. Ludowick been disappointed of? I believe two or three; first one was mentioned, then another; I cannot speak to one particularly.

Try to recollect any one of them, or all of them.—I really cannot; when Mr. Maltby comes forward, he will be able.

Do you mean to state, that you cannot recollect any one of the appointments, Mr. Ludowick has been disappointed of? One I can; but there have been three or four since offered to him, neither of which he has been able to procure.

Name that one? Assistant Commissary, I think.

Where has Mr. Ludowick lodged the money which you speak of, or with whom? As to that I cannot tell, but I can when I look over my papers at home.

Do you say positively, that, without looking over your papers at Rome, you cannot say where this money is lodged? Yes, I do.

How much money has Mr. Ludowick lodged? From 800l. to 1,000l.

Who was the general officer whose name Mr. Maltby represented himself as having made use of? Is that a fair question? [The Chairman informed the witness that she must answer the question.]

Sir Arthur Wellesley; and one of the excuses for one of the appointments not taking place, was, sir Arthur being so very deeply en-gated in the investication at Chelsea. If this is not true, I'm doing sir Arthur a great service by bringing it forward.

What appointment was it that was so delayed, by sir Arthur being so much engaged? I believe it was this first, that of assistant commissary, but I am not sure.

For whose use is the money lodged? I do not know, but I can tell by looking at my papers.

You have certain papers at home, which will enable you to state to the committee for whose benefit the sum of money in question is now lodged, and where it is lodged? Yes.

How came you to he in possession of those papers? They will shew for themselves when I produce them, better than I can explain it.

How came you in possession of those papers? From Mr. Maltby.

Was it Mr. Maltby that introduced Mr. Ludowick to you, or you Mr. L. to Mr. M.? I do not think they have ever seen each other, not that I know of.

Did you first mention Mr. Ludowick's name to Mr. Maltby, or did Mr. Maltby mention it first to you? I to Mr. Maltby; I believe he has been in the habit of acting as agent for these ten or a dozen years in this sort of way.

Has Mr. Maltby made use of the name of any other person besides sir A. Wellesley? He has written very pointedly to that to me, and spoken besides.

Has Mr. Maltby made use of the name of any other person besides sir A. Wellesley? I cannot recollect at present; but I shall, at a future time, if I am here, and will state it.

Where did you form your friendship for Mr. Ludovvick? I have already said, that any man that I interested myself for, I considered as a friend; I am not intimate with him.

How came you to interest yourself in Mr. Ludowick? From a friend of my own.

Who was that friend? Mr. Barber.

Where does Mr. Barber live? In Broad-street, in the city.

How lout; have you known Mr. Ludowick? I do not know him, but by means of his family.

Do you mean to say you have never seen Mr. Ludowick? No, I did not mean to say that.

Where have you seen him, and when? I have already said, I do not know him; I might have seen him, and not have known him.

Have you ever seen Mr. Ludowick, or not? I cannot tell, as not knowing his person.

About what time was it that this commissariat appointment began to be hi negociation? I cannot remember, but the papers will date it exactly.

What year? Last year.

Can you recollect what part of last year? No, I cannot.

What kind of papers are those you allude to; are they letters? I do not know what they are.

Do yon mean to say, that you do not know at all what kind of papers they are? They are papers written on.

Are they letters, or securities? They shew what they are; I cannot exactly speak to them; I will give them to Mr. Wardle tomorrow.

You have said, that those papers will inform the committee of all the particulars of I his transaction; how can you say that, if you do not know what those papers are? Because I do not know how to describe them exactly.

Do you recollect their contents? No, I do not; but I know there are a great many letters from Mr. Maltby, and something about the bankers; enough to shew the whole of the transaction.

(By Sir R. Williams.)

Do you recollect to have stated to cant. Donovan, that if h. r. h. the D. of Y. was informed of your ever having received any money, it would be your ruin? Never to any person whatever.

(By Mr. Sheridan.)

Through what channel, or by whose influence, did you propose to Mr. Ludowick, or the agent employed by Mr. Ludowick, to procure the situation that he required? Mr. Barber will recollect that; and he is a very honourable man, and will speak to the truth, and I believe he knows the parties.

Who was the person whom yon held out yourself as having such influence over, as that by that influence you could procure the situation desired by Mr. Ludowick? I do not think that anyone was held out, I fancy they guessed the D. of Y., but. no one was held out; and I think it is very likely that Mr. Donovan supposed the duke of Portland; but I mean here to say, that he is not at all connected. And the office that Mr. Wardle mentioned in the city I know nothing at all about; I was very sorry to see that Mr. Wardle had mentioned such a thing, because every one who knows the Lord Chancellor, must know that, besides being one of the highest, he is one of the most honourable men in England; and if there are. any insinuations about the duke of Portland;, Mr. Maitby is the duke of Portland.—He is my duke of Portland: I mean entirely to clear myself from holding out any insinuations agent the duke's character. Mr. Wardle accused me once of going into the duke of Portland's5, and that he had watched me in; I told him I was not in the habit of going in there, and f laughed at him; and afterwards somebody told him it was Mrs. Gibbs; more likely. Mrs. Gibbs than me. I wish to do away the two stories of Mr. Mellish and the duke of Portland before the hon. gentlemen.

Am I to understand you, you never did give out to any person, that you had access to or influence with the duke of Portland? No, I did not; I fancy that once I laughed very much about some sort of birds, with Mr. Donovan; but I mean to say, I never did use his name.

How long have you known Mr. Lawson? About 4 or 5 months.

(By the Attorney General.)

Who introduced Mr. Lawson to you? He is a piano-fiite maker.

What office has he been soliciting? I do not recollect, I cannot tell what; it is something that Mr. Donovan has been concerned in as well; something at Savannah la Mar.

What appointment did you solicit for Mr. Lawson? One of those places; there are a number of them; but Mr. Maltby can speak to it; I fancy he has been lodging money lately, within this very short time, within this fortnight, perhaps.

Where? I do not know, but Mr. Maltby knows; it is some concern of his.

What makes yon think that he has deposited a sum of money within this last fortnight? Because he told me he was going to do it.

When did he tell you so? About a fortnight since.

Where did you see him when he told you so? At my own house.

With whom did he say he was going to deposit it? He did not say with whom; but Mr. Maltby had some more of these men, who had to be concerned in it, and he was to lodge it with his bankers.

With whose bankers? Mr. Maltby's, I suppose.

How long have you known Mr. Sandon? Ever since col. French's levy.

Was that the first knowledge you had of him? If he did not come about col. French's levy, he came about sonic other appointments; I should rather think he brought me a list of officers for appointments, instead of the levy first.

Did he come to you voluntarily, or did you send for him? I could not send for him, for he gave Mr. Corn 200l. for an introduction, him and col. French.

Was that before capt. Tonyn's recommendation? Yes.

How much had Mr. Sandon out of the money paid by capt. Tonyn? I never inquired.

He had no part of the 500 guineas, had he? No; I should not wonder but what he had eight or nine from capt. Tonyn, it was something more than the five, or else Mr. Donovan had.

He got more than you did by that transaction then? No, not that; I state it at eight or nine, and he gave me five; but I do not know that he had that.

What makes you think that he had it? I think he must have had something, or he would not have troubled himself in the business.

What do you suppose he had about col. French's Levy? Col. French told me, that he stole half.

(By Sir Mark Wood.)

You stated in your examination yesterday, that you were at the Opera with a lord Lenox and some other gentleman; how long have you known lord Lenox? I never knew him at all.

I understood you to have stated in your examination yesterday, that you were at the play or the Opera with lord Lenox and sir Robert Peat? I said I was along with sir Robert Peat, and an old gentleman came in with this Mr. Williams, and they said that was lord Lenox and Mr. Williams. Sir Robert Peat said that.

You mean to say you did not know this lord Lenox before you saw him at the play that night? No; I had seen him driving about town, and knew it was the man they called lord Lenox, but never spoke to him before.

Are you positive you never spoke to him before? Quite.

The witness was directed to withdraw.

G. L. WARDLE, esq. attending in his place, was examined:

(By the Chancellor of the Exchequer.)

Did you ever reproach the last witness with going to the duke of Portland? I had heard that she had been there; and I wondered what she could be doing there; so far I did reproach her.

Who told yon that she had been at the duke of Portland's? I heard it at the office I mentioned in the City; a person described her person, and they said there was a Tidewaiter's place to be sold, they believed; but they were not certain; it depended on an application then making by a lady to the duke of Portland; I went again in a few days; they described a, person excessively like Mrs. C. and when I saw her I questioned her about it, and said if it was so, she was doing very wrong.

Do you know Mr. Maltby? I have seen him once, I think, at Mrs. Clarke's.

Did you ever endeavour to trace the transactions carrying on by Mr. Maltby? I did in some measure; but I could not at all succeed: he would not commit himself at all to me; I endeavoured to catch him upon one point, but he would not open to me at all.

Were you aware that the Witness was employing Mr. Maltby, in these transactions? I merely understood from her that he was employed in one business, which I endeavoured to find out, but I endeavoured in vain; I could not get him to open at all.

Did she state to you that it was a business in which she was concerned? No, she did not; she merely mentioned that he was about business, I forget the name now, I was excessively anxious to find it out.

Did she ever mention to you the business respecting Mr. Ludowick? I do not know that ever she did; I do not. know the name at all, but I really think she said that he was in the habits of doing it for a number of persons; one case she mentioned, and I endeavoured to sift it to the bottom.

Did she ever shew you these papers she has referred to? No, she did not; I think I saw i one or two notes to her about the thing I en-I deavoured to find out, but it has escaped me what it was; it is several weeks ago, and I have had so much upon my mind, that after an attempt or two, it is impossible to recal it.

Colonel GORDON was called in, and examined

(By the. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)

Have you brought with you the official do- cuments respecting the appointment of major Tonyn? Yes, I have.

State to the Committee what you know upon that, subject. I hold in my hand the first recommendation upon the subject of captain Tonyn—major Tonyn: with the permission of the Committee, I will read it.

[Colonel Cordon read a Letter, signed Patrick Tonyn, dated the 27th of Jane 1803.]

"May it please your royal highness;

"Sir; In the present period of extension of his majesty's forces, I beg leave to recommend the 48th regiment to your royal highness's consideration.—I hope it will not he thought I presume too far to say, capt. Tonyn for some time past has commanded the 48th at Malta; and with great submission, I likewise venture to mention lieutenant Tonyn: and I most humbly petition your royal highness, graciously to condescend to grant my sons your royal protection.—With most profound and dutiful respect, I have, the honour to remain with all submission, &c. PAT. TONYN.—118 Parkstreet, 27th June 1803."

"Indorsed:

"London, 27 June 1803.—Gen. Tonyn."

"Promoted to a Majority in the 31st Regiment, upon the formation of a second Battalion, in Aug. 04.—Without purchase."

(Inclosure.)

"H. r. h. will be glad to consider the General's two sons on favourable opportunities for promoting them."

General Tonyn was an old officer? One of the oldest officers, I believe, at that time in the Army. The answer to that Letter is dated the 29th of June, 1803.

[Colonel Gordon read it.]

"Horse-Guards, 29th June 1803.

"Sir; I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 27th instant, recommending to me your sons captain Tonyn and lieut. Tonyn of the 48th regiment; and I request you will be assured, that I shall have much pleasure at a favourable opportunity, to pay every attention in my power to your wishes in their favour. I am, &c. (Signed) FREDERICK,

"Com, in Chief."

"General Tonyn, &c. &c. &c."

"Indorsed:

"Copy of a Letter from H. r. h. the Com. in Chief to Gen. Tonyn, 29th June 1803.

The next document upon this subject appears to be a Memorial from captain Tonyn himself.—[Colonel Gordon read it.]

"To his Royal Highness the Duke of York and Albany, Commander in Chief of His Majesty's Forces.

"The MEMORIAL of GEORGE AUGUST. TONYS, Captain in his Majesty's 48th Regiment of Foot; "Humbly Sheweth; That your memorialist has been near twenty-four years an officer; fourteen of these on active service with the 48th regiment, on all its various stations, in the West Indies and the Meditorranean.—That your memorialist, being the senior captain present with the regiment most humbly implores your royal highness's protection; and that your royal highness will be pleased to recommend him to his majesty's royal favour; that his majesty may be graciously pleased to grant him promotion to the rank of major, in such manner as your royal highness may think fit.—And your memorialist, as in duty bound, will ever pray."

"Indorsed:

"Memorial.—George Augustus Tonyn, captain 48th regiment.—March—1804.

(Inclosure.)

"C. L."

"Captain Tonyn to be noted for promotion, and acquainted that h. r. h. will be glad to consider him on a favourable opportunity.—J. G."

This Memorial is without date, but it was received in March 1804. The Answer to that Memorial I hold in my hand.—[Colonel Gordon read it.]

"Horse-Guards, 15th March 1804. Sir: I have the honour, by the Commander in Chief's commands, to acknowledge the receipt of your Memorial without a date, and to acquaint you in reply, that your name has been noted for promotion; and his royal highness will be glad to consider you on a favourable opportunity.—I have, &c. (Signed) W. H. CLINTON."

"Capt. Tonyn, 48 Foot, 118, Park-street."

Indorsed:

"Copy of Lt. Col. Clinton's Letter to Capt. "Tonyn, of the 15th March 1804."

The document I hold in my hand relates to the promotion of lieut. Tonyn, alluded to in the first letter of general Tonyn: it remains with the Committee to decide whether that is to be read.

(By Mr. Wilberforce.)

Was not gen. Tonyn colonel of the regiment at the time he made the application in favour of his sons? Yes, he was. These are all the documents that I have, with respect to major Tonyn. It appears, that in the month of August 1804, a very large augmentation was made to the army, consisting of no less than fifty battalions; m the formation of those battalions I received the orders of the Commander in Chief to prepare a list of the senior officers of the army, generally, of each rank, and to take their names from the book of recommendations, where they had been noted. In consequence of this command, I did prepare a list, and submitted it to the Commander in Chief; and, in that list, in the same list with major Tonyn's name, there were 53 officers appointed to majorities; namely, 11 majors removed from other corps, or from the half-pay; 18 brevet majors; 29 captains. Of those captains seven were captains of the year 1794, nine were captains pf the year 1795, amongst them was capt. Tonyn, five were captains of the year 1796, seven of 1797, and one of 1799. I have mentioned that Cant. Tonyn was a captain of 1795, there were only six captains in that year senior to him in the service; That is all I know on the subject of captain Tonyn's promotion.

(By the Chancellor of the Exchequer.)

It appears that in the letter of general Tonyn he recommends two of his sons; can you state any thing with reference to the other son? On the 30th of May 1804, general Tonyn writes again: [Colonel Gordon read the letter.]

"Sir; I have the honour to transmit a letter from captain Long of the 48th, requesting his royal highness the Commader in Chiefs permission to sell his company, having purchased. I humbly beg leave to recommend lieut. Charles Wm. Tonyn lo h. r. It. the duke of York's favourable representation to his majesty; humbly praying', that he may be graciously pleased to grant him leave to purchase capt. Long's company, the money being lodged with the agent for the same; as all the officers standing before him in the corps have declined the purchase.—Give me leave, Sir, to beg the favour of your good offices in behalf of my son, whose declaration I have the honour herewith to inclose, and that you will have the goodness to implore for him h. r. h.'s gracious protection. I have the honour to remain, with all respect, &c.

"PAT. TONYN."

"118, Park-street, 30th May 1804.

Indorsed:

48th Foot.—Lt. Tonyn, Mem. 2d June 1804.'

(Inclosure 1.)

"Mallow, 15th May 1804."

"Sir; Circumstances of a peculiar nature having lately occurred, that oblige me? to retire from the service, I have sent in a niemorial to the Commander in Chief, to be allowed to sell my commission at I the regulated price. I take the liberty of informing you, as eariy as possible, of my intention;, as I have been given to understand your son would succeed to the promotion by purchase. Should that be the case, if you will have the goodness to lodge the money in the hands of Mr. Gilpin the agent, and give me the earliest information, in order that the business may be forwarded with as little delay as possible, you will ever oblige, Sir, &c. E. S. LONG, capt. 48th Regt.' Gen. Tonyn, 118, Park-street, near Hyde-Park, London".

Indorsed:

"Capt. Long.—48th regiment 15th May 1804, Rd. 23d May."

"All officers concerned have declined purchasing."

(Inclosure 2.)

"Sir; I beg you will be pleased to obtain for me, his majesty's permission to purchase capt. Long's company in the 48th regiment of foot.—In case his majesty shall be graciously pleased to permit Die to purchase the same, I do declare and certify, upon the word and honour of an officer and a gentleman, that I will not, now, or at any future lime, give by any means or in any shape whatever, directly or in-directly, any more than the sum of 1,500l. being the lull value of the said commission as the same is limited and fixed by his majesty's regulation. I have the honour to be, &c. "E. W. TONYN,

"Lt. 48th Regt."

"To the Colonel or Commanding

"Officer of 48th Regiment."

"I beg leave to recommend the above; and I verily believe the established regulation, in regard to price, is intended to be strictly complied with; and that no clandestine bargain subsists between the parties concerned.—PAT. TONYN,

"General and Colonel.

"30th May 1801."

The Inclosure is the Letter from the young man himself.

Did all the officers who were promoted at the time major Tonyn was promoted; receive their promotion into the new corps without purchase? Into the new corps, most certainly.

All the new captains those that were promoted into the augmentation of the army? Yes.

Did many of (hem appear in the same Gazette with major Tonyn? I have stated, that there were 53 held officers in the same Gazette, and I should imagine, without counting them, there could not he less than 300 officers altogether; the paper is now in my hand.

(By Mr. Yorke.)

At the time this great augmentation took place, and lists of officers were preparing in the office of the Commander in Chief; were those lists a secret, or was it in any one's power on referring to the clerks, to see those lists? I endeavour to keep those things as secret as I possibly can, but in so large a promotion, it is impossible for me to say the secret was exactly kept.

Previous to the gazetting of those commissions which have been alluded to, when the list was completed, or nearly completed, was it possible to keep the secret so far, as to prevent the contents of those lists being more or less known? I do not think it was.

(By Lord Folkestone.)

Give the Committee some account of the purchase and sales of commissions in the army, the Manner in which that business is transacted, and in whose hands the purchase money is lodged.—I have already stated to the house, and it is in evidence before the Committee, that the same rules apply to the promotion of officers by purchase, as without; but in order to ensure the greatest possible regularity, every regiment in the service is ordered to transmit a return quarterly, of the number of officers in each regiment disposed to purchase, and to mention in such return where the purchase money is to be had; those returns are entered in a book in the Commander in Chief's office, and in the event of a vacancy those returns are invariably referred to, and the officer senior upon the list, if in all respects eligible, is invariably recommended, provided it does not interfere with other officers of greater pretensions.

In whose hands is the purchase money deposited or lodged? Before a recommendation is submitted to his majesty for purchase, it is necessary that a paper should be sent to the Commander in Chief's office from the agent, stating that he is satisfied that (he money will be forthcoming when the commission is gazetted. It is not necessary, and it is so gone forth to the army, as is stated in a pane r upon the table of this Committee, that the officers are not called upon to lodge the money in the agents hands, but they are only called upon to notify to them, that it will be forthcoming on the promotion being gazetted.

Does any part of the money relating to the sale of commissions pass through the hands of the Commander in Chief, or has the Commander in Chief any controul over that money? None whatever.

Can you state from your knowledge of the business of the office, what is the average amount of the purchase and sale of commissions in the course of a year? The average amount, for the last three years, annually exceeds considerably 400,000l.

(By Sir Arthur Wellesley.)

Give the Committee some account of the origin of purchases and sales of commissions in the army, and the effect that they have upon the army? I believe that the origin of the purchase and sale of commissions arises pretty much as follows; In every other service in Europe it is understood that the head of the army has the power of granting pensions to the officers of the army, in proportion to their rank and services; no such power exists in the head of the army in this country; therefore, when an officer is arrived at the command of a regiment, and is, from long service, infirmity, or wounds, totally incapable of proceeding with that regiment upon service, it becomes necessary to place a more efficient officer in his stead. It is not possible for his majesty to increase the establishment of the army at his pleasure, by appointing two lieutenant-colonels where one only is fixed upon the establishment; nor is it consistent with justice to place an old officer upon the half-pay, or deprive him altogether of his commission; there is therefore, no alternative, but to allow him to retire, receiving a certain compensation for his former services; what that compensation should be, has been awarded upon due consideration, by a Board of General Officers, that sat, I think 40 or 50 years ago, somewhere about 1762 or 1763; they taking into consideration the rank, and the pay of each rank, awarded a certain sum that each officer, who was allowed to retire, should receive upon retiring: that sum is called "the regulation price of commissions." The bearing that this has upon the army, is a very extensive question, hut there can be no doubt that it is extremely advantageous for those office who cannot purchase. I cannot better illustrate it to the Committee, than by staling all example: We will suppose, of the first regiment the third captain cannot purchase; the first and second can: if those two officers could not purchase, it is very evident that the third captain would remain much longer third captain than if they were removed out of his way, by purchase in the great body of the army; and if no officer can he allowed to purchase, unless he is duly qualified for promotion without purchase, there cannot possibly be any objection to such regulation, nor can it be said that any un-experienced officer is appointed by purchase over the heads of others better qualified than himself, no officer being allowed to purchase, but Such as is duly qualified by ins majesty's regulations.

Upon the whole, you consider the present mode in which pin chases and sales of commissions is limited, as advantageous to the service? As a matter of opinion I certainly do.

(By Mr. Whilbread.)

You have stated upon the former examination?, the manner in which the business is transacted at the D. of Y.'s office; in the course of your transacting business with the D.of Y., in regard to forming lists of commissions for the approbation of his majesty, do you ever remember the D. of Y. taking a paper-memorandum, or a list of officers out of his pocket, and putting it into your hand, with an intimation that that list was to be considered out of the usual course? I never recollect any such instance: I take this opportunity of stating, that since I have had the honour of serving h. r. h. the D. of Y., I have stated it often before, I never recollect any one solitary instance, in which the Commander in Chief has ever taken any paper out of his pocket and put into my hands, saying, this man must be an ensign, this a lieutenant, and this a captain;' but all recommendations have come regularly through their proper channel, and I do that think there is any one instance to the contrary.

(By Mr. Huskisson.)

In the first document you gave in, the former night, with respect to capt. Maling, there is marked in the printed paper, in italics, the initials C. L. with the words "agreed to;" what is the meaning of those letters C. L.? MY first assistant is col. Loraine, C. L. are the initials of his name, and "agreed to," is put, and it then passes into his hands, and is acted upon.

Is the entry marked with the initials C. L. the definitive entry with respect to any recommendation that comes before you? No, it is not.

If any alteration takes place afterwards, in what way is that noted? It is commonly noted in the same manner upon the same paper.

With the same initials? When the initials are once put, there is no occasion to put them again, the paper invariably passes through the same channel.

Is it usual when a recommendation is delayed in the office for want of sufficient information, but not definitely stopped, to mark that in the same way with these initials, C. L.? I commonly put a memorandum upon every paper that passes under n y hands.

How would you mark a recommendation in that predicament? If the paper was to be considered, I should say so; "to be considered."

If further inquiries were to be made, what would you say? I should probably say "to be considered," or very probably, "cannot be acceded to." It is almost impossible for me to state the precise terms: I should adopt them according to circumstances.

Would you state "not to be acceded to," when it was not determined that the recommendation should not be acceded to, but only delayed, while further inquiries were making? If the paper was not to be acceded to, I should say, "not to be acceded to;" but it does not follow that though it was not acceded to then, it might not be in a month afterwards, or three weeks afterwards.

If the only reason for not acceding to the recommendation at that time, was the want of information, and that inquiries were making to obtain that information, would you mark "not acceded to?" I really might or might not; it seems to me, as I conceive it, a matter of perfect indifference.

How are the first commissions in the army commonly disposed of; the first commission that an officer receives? Invariably without purchase, unless for some special purpose.

Are those first commissions in the patronage of the Commander in Chief? Yes, they are, exclusively.

You have stated that officers purchased according to their seniority, unless there were superior pretensions; do you mean in junior officers; will you explain what you mean by that? Suppose there was a vacant company in a regiment, and a lieutenant in that regiment was willing to purchase, it does not quite follow that the Commander in Chief would permit that lieutenant to purchase, although he might be very eligible, because there might be other officers still more deserving than him in the army.

Do those circumstances in point of fact frequently happen? Continually.

Within these late years have not a vast number of commissions been given to the officers of the militia, both in Great Britain and Ireland? Yes; to a very considerable extent.

What is the practice of the Commander in Chief's office, when an application is made, by any gentleman either in Great Britain or Ireland, by memorial or otherwise, for a commission for his son or relation? It is the practice in the Commander in Chief's office to answer every paper that comes in, without exception. When any officer, or any gentleman makes an application for an ensigncy, that application is invariably answered, and the common answer is, that the name of the applicant is noted, and will be Considered as favourable opportunities offer;' the name is then put down in a book, and the letter is put by.

Is it the practice ill the Commander in Chief's office, particularly when applications come from Ireland, to refer those applications to the general officer commanding in the district from which they may have come? The applications from Ireland are not considered regular, unless they come through the officer commanding the forces there, or through the civil channel of the secretary of state.

Amongst the documents that you have given in, with respect to major Tonyn, is there a document similar to that just alluded to, indorsed C. L. "agreed to," or any thing of that kind?

[Col. Gordon referred to the document.]

"C. L."

"State Captain Long's Services.

Ens. Liverpool Reg. 2d Oct. 1795 Origl.

Lieut 65th 9th Jan. 1796 by P.

Liet. 18th Drag. 31st Jan. 1799 by Exc

Capt. 9th Mar. 1803 by P.

Capt.48th. 10th Sept. 1803 by Ex"

It amounts to the same thing; it is a slip of paper. This was the mode of transacting business by my predecessor: I generally do it upon the corner of the letter; I think it better, because this is liable to be loss, that should not.

Do you mean that commissions in new-raised regiments are always given away, or that ensigncies are always given away? The answer that I gave to the former question, I mean to stand exactly as it does; and I beg to explain, that there is no such thing as original commissions purchased; there are many ensigns commissions for sale, but they are private property, arising out of the explanation that I gave to a former question: for example, a captain sells his commission, that is, he sells his company; a lieutenant buys that company; an ensign buys that lieutenancy; both of which are the captain's property; the ensigncy then becomes vacant of course, by purchase.

In point of fact, was the application of general Tonyn, in regard to his second son, successful? I think it will be found on reference to the document, that the services of the second son of general Tonyn were not so long as those of the eldest son; and the general recommended the second son for purchase; and that he actually was promoted, I believe it will be found on reference to the dates, before the eldest son.

You have stated, that when this large promotion took place, in consequence of the augmentation of the army, you were directed by h. r. h. to lay before him a list of officers to be promoted into this augmentation, to be taken from the oldest officers of their respective ranks in the army; are you quite sure that the name of capt. Tonyn was included by yon in the list you laid before the Commands r in Chief, or was his name suggested as addition and alteration in that list by the Commander in Chief? I recollect perfectly well the circumstances of that lew; it was at a period of the Additional Force Act; and the names, upon the list which I submitted to the Commander in Chief, I really believe, were written, almost without exception, with my own hand. I had one assist- t ant to assist me in making out the list; but I really believe, that the rough paper was actually written with my own hand.

Do you answer, that you are certain you included c,ipt. Tonyn's name in the list you submitted to the Commander in Chief, as being one of the oldest officers in the army in that class for promotion? As certain ns I can be of a thing that I could not possibly take my oath of.

To the best of your recollection? O, certainly.

If the name of capt. Tonyn had been introduced by the Commander in Chief, having been omitted by yourself, would not you have recollected that circumstance? Yes, I think I should; it is in evidence before the committee, on my first examination, I believe.

Do you not put a mark upon all papers, upon which any thing is done or to be done? It is my constant practice to make a mark upon every paper, without exception, that comes into that office: I mean to say that generally; many papers may escape me, but that is my general practice.

According to what is done, or to be done? What is to be done.

State whether the Commander in Chief has not been in the habit of attending to recommendations by colonels of regiments for ensigncies in their particular regiments, provided the gentlemen recommended were certified to be eligible and fit for service, and ready to join their regiments? Yes, certainly; but in giving my evidence before this house, I think it my duty to state, that the Commander in Chief does not consider that the patronage of the regiments in any manner whatever devolves upon the colonel. [The witness was directed to withdraw.

[The Chairman was directed to report progress, and ask leave to sit again.]