« PreviousContinue »
cision might be had. It should be recollected, however, that every charge which had hitherto been made in that house against any part of the conduct of the duke of York, had only tended to raise his Royal Highness higher in the estimation of the public, and exhibit in a clearer view the purity of Use principles upon which he acted. With respect to the doubt which the honourable gentleman (Mr. Whitbread) seemed to entertain, of the existence of a systematic conspiracy to traduce and calumniate the duke of York and the other members of the Royal Family, he should ask who was there that read those newspapers which are daily presented to the public, and those other publications which come before them more indirectly, that could entertain a doubt of this systematic conspiracy? It was esident that the same party, who in times past endeavoured to subvert all the establishments of the country by force of arms, are now endeavouring to undermine them by calumniating whatever is exalted in rank, or distinguished in situation. That party could no' now think of carrying their object by force of arms, as they knew the atteinpt would be too desperate and dangerous in the present times, but they were unremitting in their exertions to prepare the way to the objects which they hoped to accomplish, by calumniating the members of the Royal Family, and all persons in eminent and distinguished situations. The honourable gentleman asked, what were ministers and the law officers doing, or why they did not institute prosecutions ? The fact is, they have instituted prosecutions ; but tbeir entire time would be taken up in prosecuting the libellers of the duke of York, if every libel was to be prosecuted. There was also one reason which often prevented prosccution. It was in the power of any man of moderate understanding, and wbo bad any legal knowledge or advice so to frame his calumny, that it might deeply wound the feelings of the person who was the object of it, and yet the malice of the calumny might be so disguised under the mask of fair discussion, as to make it difficult for the law to lay hold of it. There was another way in which libellers niight escape justice. When the law was going to be put in force against them, they shrunk from the laws, and quitted the country. In a very remarkable recent case (here the noble lord alluded to Major Hogan), before the promulgation of the libel itself, the author bad secured his passage to America. The house and the duke of York
were now in a new situation, and be congratulated then and the country upon it. There was much more chance of mischief from malignant misrepresentations out of that house, than from direct charges brought in a fair and mánly way in that house. As those charges had been so brought, he thought it necessary that they should undergo the most solemn, serious, and public investigation. He thought the greatest possible publicity should be given to this examination, and that every step of it should be in the face of day. He was, therefore, not for leaving it to any select committee, nor even to the twelve judges, nor to any thing short of that full and open examination, which might be bad at the bær of that house. He therefore trusted the house would adopt that course.
Mr. W bitbread said a few words in explanation.
The question was then put on the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, " that the committee should be a committee of the whole house," and was carried without a division. It was then ordered that the committee should sit on Wednesday.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer requested the honourable gentleman (Mr. Wardle) to furnish him with a list of witnesses to be summoned, and wished to know whether the honourable gentleman meant to begin with the case of Major Tonyn?
Mr. Wardle said, that he was not now prepared to say which of the cases he would begin with, as many of the witnesses were officers on their return from Spain, who had not yet arrived in England. He thought, however, by Tuesday, that he should be prepared to prove some one of the cases, and would on that day give the list of the witnesses who were to be summoned.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer thought the honourable gentleman would have done better if he abstained from bringing his charges till he had all his witnesses in England.
January 31, 1869. Mr. Wardle wished to call the attention of the house to the subject appointed for the investigation of the com, mittee, in respect to his royal highness the commander in
chief. He understood that some of the witnesses whom it would be necessary for biin to examine touching this inquiry were not now in London, particularly Major Kniglit
and Major Brooke; and as he wished to adduce such proofs as would place the truth of the statement he had made to the house beyond the possibility of doubt, he trusted the house would not expect him to go through the whole of his case without the attendance of ihose witnesses he thought necessary. He was ready, however, to go into the inquiry to-morrow or any other day the house thought more proper, with such witnesses as were in readiness to at. tend.' But he hoped the house would indulge him with some further delay in respect to those points, to establish which the necessary witnesses might not be immediately forth-coming, and permit bim to move for any additional witnesses to those he had already named, and whom he should deem requisite in the progress of the business. The witnesses, for whose attendance to-morrow he should now move, were Lieutenant-colonel Knight, of the 5th dragoon guards; Major Brooke ; Dr. Andrew Thynne, of Bernerstreet; Robert Knight, Esq. of Dean-street, Audley-square; and Mrs. Mary Anne Clarke, of Westbourne-place, Sloane-square.
Those several persons were accordingly ordered to at. tend, as were the proper persons from the office of Messrs. Cox and Biddulph, bankers, with their banking-book for July last. It was also ordered that Mr. Biddulph, a mer. ber of the house, do attend in his place to-morrow.
February 1, 1809. Mr. Wardle, in proceeding to the investigation he proposed, felt it necessary to call the attention of the com. mittee to a few preliminary observations.
Ile hoped that in the statements he had already made to the house, he had not attered a single word which could justify a suspicion that he was actuated either by party motives, or any thing like personal animosity towards the com. mander-in-chief. He trusted his conduct on the occasion had been open and candid. When first he proposed this investigation he had offered an entire list of all the wit, nesses. He had never kept any tbing a secret from the house, and God forbid he should attempt to sustain his charges by any proofs but such as it became a man of honour to offer. He felt it necessary, however, to advert to some strong remarks which had fallen from a right honourable gentleman (Mr. Yorke) on a former night,
which were not relevant to the subject before the house,
RO member of that house would be actuated by motives of partiality in this case. (Ilear, hear, hear!] He threw himself upon the honont, The.candoyr, and indulgence of the committee, and without trespassing further on their attention, would proceed to evidence.
Mr. Yorke said, as the honourable gentleman had alluded to some words which had fallen from him on a former night, he must beg leave to explain. So far from casting any censure on the honourable gentleman, or imputing to him any bostile motives towards the Duke of York, be said his Royal Highness must feel obliged to kim for putting the rumours, long industriously propagated on this subject, into a tangible sbape. Wbat he had said about jacobinism and licentiousness of the press, had no relation at ațl to the honourable gentleman, but applied to other topics, which must have been passing at the moment in every man's mind who heard him, and not to what fell from the honourable gentleman.
Mr. Wardle then read an extract froin the London Gazette, of the 30th July, 1805, announcing the promotion of Colonel Brooke, from the 56th regiuient to the 5th dragoon guards, vice Lientenant-colonel Knight, exchanged, and said he gave this as competent proof of the ex change.
The first witness called was Dr. Andrew Thynne; and he was examined upon questions suggested by Mr. Wardle. But before his examination, Mr. Wardle assured the committee, that he very reluctantiy, and against the gentleman's own wishes, called him as a wit. ness. He had no other concern in the business than merely the inadvertent delivery of a message, wbich, upon mature reflection, he most probably would have declined.