Q. Is there any thing else you wish to state to the house? [This mode of answering was A. 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 honourable 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 honourable gentleman always did vote upon the side on which he then gave his vote. Q. Did you ever represent, that you had influenced that person to give his vote upon that occasion ? A. Never. (By MR. SHERIDAN.) Q. 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 ? A. To the best of my belief and recollection, I never wrote to him nor spoke to him upon the subject. Q. Did you at any time during your acquaintance with Mrs. Clarke, promise to send her recommendations of any officers ? A. 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. Clarke, 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 His Royal High ness the Duke of York was also anxious he should be promoted, and that Mr. Greenwood was also anxions he should be pronioted. I was just then returned from abroad. She A. If I may trust to the accuracy of the morning papers. objected to by the Chairman.] informed me a regulation had been lately entered into, that any member of parliament or a general officer writing a letter to Colonel Gordon, 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 any 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 letter signed by Lieutenant-Colonel Ross, of the 20th regiment, stating that Lieutenant Sumner, the officer in question, was a very deserving character. In order to be satisfied that this letter was written by LieutenantColonel Ross, I went to the house of Messrs. Greenwood and Cox, and shewed the letter to the head clerk, who informed me that it was the sig nature of Colouel 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 Lieutenant Summer was a nephew to Mr. Summer, an honourable 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. Clarke, stating in my letter, that if she meant it as a joke, it was an extremely bad joke, and that if I sent it to the War-Office, it would be very badly received; and I concluded that I was her humble servant. A few days afterwards, she sent me another letter, signed by by this same Mr. Sumner, which Jetter I have in my pocket, but which second letter I took no notice « SIR, of, in consequence of the extreme absurdity of the former: [The letter was delivered in and read.] "My brother, Lieutenant 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 Duke of York, as his conduct appears to merit; and you will confer a very great favour on "Temple, Jan. 17, 1809." Brig-Gen, Clavering." 66 Your most obedient humble servant, CHAS. C. SUMNER." Q. At either of the times? A. On the second time, I cer tainly said it was extremely extraor dinary that she had gone out, when she had appointed that time for see▾ ing me. Q. Did you leave any message purporting what was the nature of your visit to her? A. I left no message whatever, but that which I have had the honour of stating. Q. I understood you to say, that you impeach the credibility of the testimony of Mrs. Clarke, upon the ground that she represented herself to be living with a Mr. Mellish; did she represent herself to you as living with Mr. Mellish, the member for Middlesex ? Q. She did not say that he was the member for Middlesex. Q. Have you any, and what reason to suppose that she did not live under the protection of a Mr. Mellish? A. That which passed in this bonourable house a few evenings past; it was proved that she did not live with Mr. Mellish. Q. Then I understand you to say, that you have no other reason for impeaching Thave taken by J.Grifth G.L.WARDLE, ESQ, MP. "Tnless Corruption be attacked: and attacked strongly too. Published as the act directs March. 81800. mes dundee, or ProsLondon impeaching the credibility of the testimony of Mrs. Clarke, but the statement that she lived under the protection of a Mr. Mellish? A. Not any that I am at present aware of. Q. Have you any reason, independent of any circumstances that you have read or heard of, to im . peach her testimony, or to consider her not worthy of belief? A. 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 does appear she has delivered before this honourable house. Upon the suggestion of MR. ADAM, the witness was ordered to withdraw, and he stated as his opinion, that the last answer could not stand as part of the evidence on the minutes. SIR THOMAS TURTON said, he certainly thought very differently from the hon. gentleman. When a witness called upon the House to interrogate him, not only in support of his own character, but to impeach the testimony of another witness, it was certainly proper to lay open the sources of his information and his motives. He should have been unwilling to put the question, had he had reason to think the witness would have given such an answer; but since it had been given, the House and the public had a right to know on what grounds he impeached the credibility of a witness. He therefore thought the matter should remain as stated in the minutes. MR. ADAM observed, that his only motive was, that no person called to the bar should advert to what passed in this House; for although it is stated sub silentio, yet it can be no authority proper to be repeated in that House. He had, however, no objection to its remaining as entered. The witness was then recalled, and farther interrogated by SIR THOMAS TURTON, and the former question repeated and answered as before. [The witness was again called in.] Q. How has she imposed upon you? A. By having informed me that she was under the protection of Mr. Mellish, which I understand not to be the case. Q. How do you understand that not to be the case? A. From its appearing to have been proved to the contrary before this honourable House. (Murmurs.) Q. Have you any other reasons whatever, than those you have stated, to believe that she has imposed upon you? A. None, that I am at present aware of. has imposed upon you by stating that there was a false letter written to you in the name of Sumner? A. If I am correct in my recollection, I did not state this evening that she had imposed upon me on that account. Q. Have you not stated, that in the case of the Defence Bill, your name had been used, which you denied to be true? A. I stated that I had heard so, but not from herself. (By MR: WARDLE.) Q. Are you acquainted with Miss Taylor ? A. If it is the Miss Taylor who' has been examined before this ho ise, I certainly have seen her at Mrs. Clarke's. Q. Have you frequently seen h at |