imputation thrown on it by the noble lord, the learned gentleman insisted he had clearly made out what he had stated, and that he had not contradicted himself. He then proceeded to the subject in debate, and said, the real question for the consideration of the house was, whether they should address his Majesty in the first instance, or come to a resolution, or resolutions, as to the conduct of the commander in chief on the charges of corruption and connivance. It was first necessary to consider who Mrs. Clarke was, and whether her evidence was so deserving credit as to induce the house to pronounce such a person as the Duke of York guilty of corruption, or connivance, without being supported by confirmatory evidence. He then observed on the evidence of the several witnesses, which he insisted was not confirmatory, and as such, Mrs. Clarke's evidence was unsupported, and not of sufficient weight in itself to support those important charges brought forward against the commander in chief. Under these circumstances, he would prefer the resolution of guilty or not guilty; and that the house, in adopting the amendment proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, would pursue the mode of proceeding most consonant to strict and impartial justice, and to their honour and dignity. He should therefore support the resolutions of his right hon. friend.

Mr. William Smith was well aware that in the present stage of their proceedings, from the agitation of the public mind, the most severe vote which the house could pass, would be the most popular; but he could not be led by even the most popular voice, much as he might respect it, and ready as he was to admit an acquiescence in the wishes of his constituents. After briefly adverting to some of the cases, he said he should come to the main

point; and he could by no means consider the Duke of York guilty of a participation in the shameful proceedings which had come to light. He considered the defiance at which the duke had set Mrs. Clarke's threat as a proof of his innocence of the transactions under consideration! He could condemn no man on the uncorroborated testimony of Mrs. Clarke; he acknowledged her, talents, and he held her up as an instance of their perversion. He still considered the evidence as proving the disgraceful transactions alluded to. Under this impression, he would vote for the amendment proposed by the hon. gentleman on the floor (Mr. Bankes). It was for the happiness and security of the country that a censorial power should exist somewhere, to controul, the public conduct of public men. The standard of morality was most materially connected with the happiness, the well-being, and prosperity of their country, and every thing dear, to its inhabitants, more especially at a period when we saw so many thrones in Europe overturned, principally through the vices of governments. He was convinced from historical evidence, that millions of the people of this country would rather have stood up for Oliver Cromwell, even under the semblance of morality, than for the monarch who succeeded him, had they been aware of the vices of his reign; and he was confident the brother and successor of that monarch owed the loss of his crown more to the vices of his family than to any other cause. His own political opinions, he said, had been too often evinced in that house in the last twenty years, to require from him any profession now. He had frequent occasions to condemn many and disastrous political events, which had occurred in this country, in the present reign, and particularly about the period of the French revo

lution, and he was confident the monarch of this country at that eventful period, was more indebted for the security of his crown to the eminent and exemplary virtues that have through life adorned his private character, than to any other cause; for the people, under every difficulty, were satisfied to rest under the arch of the constitution, where they found the keystone sound. Having now delivered his sentiments fully on this subject, he thanked the house for their indulgence, and left them to adopt their own decision.-Adjourned till Monday.

Monday, March 13.

The adjourned debate, relative to an inquiry into the conduct of his royal highness the commander in chief, was now resumed.

The Secretary at War rose, and said, the question he considered as divided into two branches, one as to the Duke of York having corruptly participated in an irregular disposal of commissions; the other in having permitted such transactions to take place unnoticed, while he must have had a reasonable ground for suspicion; for either of which he was to be considered as unfit for the office of commander in chief, and be dislodged. As the evidence had been already so clearly remarked upon, he should not take up the time of the house by going again into it. He was fully convinced, from what had already passed on the subject of Mrs. Clarke's testimony, that her evidence was considered, by the majority of the house, as unworthy of belief. That THAT being set aside, no other ground existed for believing that his royal highness had any knowledge of corruption! Her evidence went to prove a particpation, which, if believed, would require a stronger measure. The right hon. gentleman then entered into an argument, to prove that Mrs. Clarke had not any

degree of influence over his royal highness, for she appeared ignorant of the usual course of business; she did not even know when an appoint❤ ment was to take place, or why should she be so anxious to get the gazette? As to the case of Major Tonyn, it actually proved, not only that there were no grounds for corruption, but that there was in fact proof of even want of communication with the duke, on the subject of military promotions. The case of Samuel Carter had been sufficiently observed upon; and as to Mr. Dowler, his first answer proved that he had espoused the cause of Mrs. Clarke; for, when asked how he had obtained his appointment, he replied, that he had purchased it of her; this too at a time when she had no influence with the duke; the whole of this case, therefore, went for nothing. From this view of the subject he therefore concluded, that the Duke of York knew nothing of the corruption, nor had any reason to suspect that such corruption existed. The right hon. gentleman then drew a comparison of the admirable state of discipline in which our army is at present, to that in which it was when be first took the command, stated this to be the re sult of his activity and attention, and trusted the house would not, by their vote, deprive the country of his future services.

Sir Francis Burdett stated, that' he had wished for some time to have addressed the house upon the great and important subject before them; but although much of what he had to say had been splendidly anticipa ted by some hon. gentleman who had gone before him, yet he felt a powerful stimulus to express his sentiments also; and if comments on the detail of the evidence, which had been so ably expressed, were somewhat narrowed to him, yet there was still left open for him the opportunity of delivering that which occurred to

his reflections, and to state to the world what he entertained, as the effect of the evidence given at their bar respecting the conduct of the commander in chief, as that evidence appeared to his mind. The first thing, however, which he would particularly notice, was the very extraordinary way in which the king's ministers had conducted themselves towards his hon. friend. The attorney-general, and others, the great crown lawyers, whose imperative duty should have directed them to defend the people, and range themselves in that house on their side, but who, on the contrary, are arrayed against the people, and stand up the avowed champions of the accused, they who losing sight of their representative capacity, have assumed a character unusual and unconstitutional, and, instead of maintaining the part of member of parliament, and of judge, at once presented themselves as the open advocates of the individual accused. He had to notice that they must have come down there with their minds determined to be shut against Conviction. He had a right to draw that strong conclusion from the fact of their having espoused the cause which they did in limine, before they had heard one tittle of the evidence adduced against their client. It had been said that the hon. member who brought forward these charges had embarked in a small skiff in a tempestuous sea; but however violent the tempest, or however small the size of the vessel, 'he had fixed his eye steadily on the polar star of TRUTH, and found her hallowed influence sufficient to light him through the perils of the deep; through the angry conflicts of the winds and waves, and to guide him ultimately to the haven of security and honour, They warned him of the alternative that awaited him, if he had the misfortune to fail in his attempt, and they plain

VOL. V.

ly threatened him with that alternative of infamy on him or the accused. Now he would ask, after all that they have heard, and with the proofs before them on the table, where will they fix the infamy? They must at least acknowledge that no discredit awaits his hon. friend. Then he would again demand to know if the infamy must have fallen somewhere, where was that somewhere, that they, accor ding to their own publicly avowed determination, would fix it? The hon. Secretary who brought the charge must be content to let it rest upon his own shoulders. The right hon. and learned gentleman opposite to him (Mr. Perceval,) in every way that his ability could direct him, took up the cause of the accused; but he did it in such a way, that from the course of it, as being the defence of an advocate, from the want of candour which it displayed throughout, it eventually turned out to be the most injudicious defence that ever was attempted in or out of the doors of that house. What! After all the body of evidence laid before the house, he could bring his mind to think there were no grounds to support the charge of corruption! Then he must haev to lament and declare, that this so strongly proved that he had so prejudged the case, that his opinion now can have no effect whatsoever upon the minds of that house. Yet these were the gentlemen who, in the daylight of the evidence on the one side could find nothing of guilt, and who, in the darkness of the testimony on the other side, could find nothing but innocence. It had been attempted in every way that ingenuity could point out, to destroy the effect of Mrs. Clarke's testimony: she had to stand at their bar under thousands of disadvantages, to undergo the most painful examination that ever any human being had suffered. The most trivial as well as the most

trying events, from her cradle to the moment when she appeared at their bar, were brought into view, to harass, wound, and perplex her. At first these attacks appeared to have their effect; but at length, upon the repetition of them, she manifested a superiority of mind that exceeded the possibility of belief, and the result was, that she made an impression on the house that can never be forgotten, and that too of a very different nature from that which the advocates of the royal personage expected. When Mrs. Clarke first stood at their bar, he confessed that, in common with several others, who had since changed their sentiments of her, he paid lit tle attention to her; at least he did not consider it likely that any thing important would come out on their enquiry; but in proportion as the examination continued, conviction began to shew itself, and long before It finished that conviction was most completely accomplished. What rendered it still more remarkable was, that all the lawyers, who by all their exertions and endeavours to entrap her, in the course of that evidence, were uniformly foiled. Even his Majesty's attorney-general, how of ten was his system and all his plans of cross-examining defeated! How often did he get entangled in his own toils. But it had been stated, that the whole of her testimony could be nothing but fabrication; but what could possibly be farther from system, method, or fabrication, than the testimony of Mrs. Clarke? The chief part of that testimony was that which was elicited from her by gentlemen at the other side of the house; the most part of it by the crown lawyers. Why there was not a thinking man. in that house that would not sooner have expected her to write such a tragedy as Macbeth, than to plot, form, or fabricate such a train of evidence, such damning proofs as came forth from the testimony which

she was forced to produce.-Why, Sir, repeated the hon baronet, this was not only evidence, but the best possible evidence that the nature of the case could produce. Nobody ever did or could expect that it would be proved by any one at their bar, that money was actually paid into the hands, and so entered the pockets of his royal highness the Duke of York. No; that was quite out of the question. But devoid must he be even of common sense, who, after contemplating the evidence before them, and having heard of such transactions as were there detailed to them, did not know within themselves, that at least his royal highness must have known of these foul and corrupt practices, and saying only this was putting even then the best construction upon his conduct. A learned judge (Mr. Burton) had endeavoured, in the outset of his observations upon a former evening, to scout, from the consideration of the house the testi mony of Mrs. Clarke, because the theory of the law impugned her as an accomplice; but he appealed to the house, whether there was any candour in this dogma, any more than there was justice in another sentiment of that learned person, who also contended, that, because she had in some matters contradicted herself, she was therefore not to be believed. It appeared, however, that the witnesses on the other side were much more guilty of that fault, which he universally fails to notice, than Mrs. Clarke and her friends, whom only that gentleman thinks fit to blame. Here then was another instance of the candour which the public was to expect from some gentlemen on this case. If, however, Mrs. Clarke stood alone in her testimony, he thought her entitled to belief; but corroborated as she was by incontrovertible documents, and especially by an unimpeached and irreproachable witness,

such as Miss Taylor, together with the marvellous manner in which some of the collateral and convincing proofs were brought out, he thought her evidence beyond the reach of cavil, much less of doubt. Had it been fabricated, as the learned gentleman would insinuate, the evidence of Miss Taylor, as well as that of Mrs. Clarke, would have been much more particular, it would have extended to stronger expressions to mark stronger facts than those mentioned. Besides, they must have been bold women indeed, to have attempted so daring a deed. Here the hon. baronet commented at some length upon the concurring testimony of Mrs. Clarke and Miss Taylor, arguing from thence, that their united evidence left no doubt behind of the truth of the charges contained in the case before the house, notwithstanding the efforts of the learned gentlemen by hypothesis upon hypothesis, and inference upon inference, to do it all away. For his part, he could venture to say, that, except the learned gentleman who espoused the cause of the accused, there was no man in that house could now attempt to support the proposition that Mrs. Clarke had no influence over his royal highness in military matters. If there was such influence, then he contended there was that corruption, and he must have known it. A learned judge (Mr. Burton) had stated that Mrs. C. had 28 times contradicted herself; but he had pointed out two only, and those of trifling moment. There were some mistakes about whether one servant or another had ́changed a 2001, note, and whether one tradesman or another tradesman had given the change for it, and this after a lapse of three years and more; and where he asked, except within their walls, and by those learned gentlemen, would these be called contradictions ? She certainly had endeavoured to conceal

some facts; and in reality, that, instead of impeaching her testimony, went the whole length of giving it validity, and raising it more in the estimation of all the rational and unprejudiced persons who had heard her. Then again, was it to be endured, that because Miss Taylor did not know whether her father had at any period of his life called himself Chance, that therefore also her evidence was not to be believed? Really he could not but pity the cause that had recourse to such lame and fallible subterfuges. In fact, gentlemen on the other side were so hurried away with their prejudices, that they were determined, it would appear, to believe every thing but the evidence! His Majesty's attorneygeneral had certainly established in the minds of the people a high opinion of his great legal knowledge, if they did not altogether give him credit for transcendant talents; and he confessed that when he found him interested on behalf of the royal duke he expected some luminous points, and powerful reasoning, but he as certainly found himself disappointed which he could only account for by believing to be true, an anecdote of the celebrated Mr. Dunning, who, upon being asked to whom a bad cause could be most safely committed, a good or a bad counsel, answered, "Let it be conducted by "the worst counsel you can find; "such a person will make zeal a