ceded 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?" It 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 hun 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 oppor tunities offer; the name is then put down in a book, and the letter is put by.

Is it the practice in 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?

[Colonel Gordon referred to the document.]

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 lost, that would not.

Do you mean that commissions in new-raised regiments are always given away, or the 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 his Royal Highness 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 Captain Tonyn was included by you in the list you laid before the Commander 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 levy; 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 assistant 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 Captain 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 as I can be of a thing that I could not possibly take iny oath of.

To the best of your recollection? O, certainly.

If the name of Captain 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 upou 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.]

SIXTH DAY.

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13.

List of Witnesses examined.

MR. ROWLAND MALTBY.

MRS. MARY ANN CLARKE.

MR. TIMOTHY DOCKERY.

MRS. ALICE HOVENDEN.

JOHN CLAUDIUS BERESFORD, (a Member.)
WILLIAM ADAM, Eq. (a Member.)

Mr. WHARTON in the Chair.

MR. ROWLAND MALTBY was called in, and examined by the
Committee, as follows:

Where do you live? At Fishmongers'-hall.
What is your profession? A Solicitor.

Are you acquainted with Mrs. Clarke? I am.

How long have you been acquainted with her? I think about July or August, 1806. If you will give me leave, I will state the way in which I became acquainted with her: it was through the medium of Mr. Russel Manners, who was a member of the last parliament; he married a sister of my wife's; he told me that he had been introduced to Mrs. Clarke, who had professed an interest in him, and that she would endea vour to get a place for him through the means of the Duke of York, and he wished to introduce me to her. Under those circumstances I did not know how to refuse him, and I accordingly met her at his house. I believe I saw Mrs. Clarke perhaps five or six times in the course of that year; afterwards I did not see her again till a court martial for the trial of Captain Thompson.

In the year 1806, when you saw Mrs. Clarke, what business did you transact with her; what passed between you and her on the occasion of your being introduced? No business, only a common acquaintance.

Did you hear any more on the subject of the place she was to procure for Mr. Manners? I understood that she shewed Mr. Manners a letter, stating that the Duke was inclined, or would comply with her request. I speak merely from memory, as it did not interest me.

Did you see that letter? I am not quite certain about it, whether I did or not, but I remember the contents.

Do you remember from whom that letter purported to be received? It purported, as Mr. Manners told me, for 1 am not certain whether I saw that letter, to come from the Duke of York.

At what time of the year 1806 did you hear of or see that letter? I think it was very soon after I saw her; July or August, to the best of my recollection.

Did you hear from Mrs. Clarke at what time her connection with the Duke of York broke off? No, I do not think she ever mentioned any thing on the subject to me. I was led to believe it continued, from what she said to me in conversation.

In July and August she still represented to you that her influence over the Duke of York continued? I understood from her, that the connection was not entirely broken off, that she occasionally saw the Duke.

Did you in the course of the year 1806, hear from her any thing respecting the obtaining of any places for any body? Not to my recollection.

I understand you to have said, that from the year 1806 to the year 1808, you did not see any thing more of her? To the best of my recollection, not till the court martiai in April.

Have you, since that time, had any communication with Mrs. Clarke, upon the subject of obtaining places for any one? Yes.

When I will explain: As a reason for my keeping up a connection with Mrs. Clarke, Mr. Manners had a regimental account to settle as the son of General Manners, which was likely to be procured through the medium of the Duke of York; it was necessary to have a Board of General Officers in order to settle that account; Mr. Manners was indebted to me for sums of money I had occasionally advanced him to accommodate him, and I had an assignment of this debt, which amounted to about 1,000l. or 1,200l. of Mr. Manners, for the purpose of repaying me; therefore I felt a little interested in getting the accounts settled, if I could. With respect to the question asked me, I had a communication with Mrs. Clarke respecting a Mr. Ludowick.

When? I think it was in September last; the latter end of August or September, to the best of my recollection.

What was the nature of the communication respecting Mr. Ludowick, and the circumstances of it? The circumstances were, that Mr. Ludowick wished to have some place or appointment, and Mrs. Clarke asked me, I believe, whether I knew of any such place; I said, that I would make some inquiry; and I learnt that it was possible that the place of Assistant Commissary might be obtained;-the consequence was, that money was deposited for that place, and I was led to believe that it might be effected; however it failed, and never took effect

What is become of the money that was deposited, and in whose hands was it deposited? The money was deposited in the hands of Birch and Co. in Bond-street; the money is there now.

In whose name was it deposited? Part of it was deposited in the name, I think, of a Mr. Lloyd and a Mr. Barber; another part of it was deposited in my name, and in the name of Mr. Barber.

To whom was the money te be paid, in the event of the application for the place succeeding? There was 6001. deposited in the name of Messrs. Lloyd and Barber, I believe that would go into the hands of