Did she state to you that this passed on the 25th of July? No, she did not, certainly. I do not think she was at all aware of the positive date. I remember, at the time of the conversation, she mentioned the circumstance of Lord Chesterfield's christening, and seemed guided by that; that his Royal Highness was going down to that christening; and, by that, she made out the period to be in July, when the trans action took place.

Upon what authority did you state, with particularity, that this took place on Thursday the 25th of July; this agreement for the 2004.? She, upon taking note of that christening, and taking note of the gazette also, was positive then in her assertion (I remember perfectly well) that the thing was proposed on the Thursday, and done on the Satur day; that was her positive assertion, from the first to the last; and that it was that led me to state it.

I understand you to have stated, that she did not state it to be on the 25th? She did not, in the first instance; the gazette was found, and the moment it was looked into, she was so positive as to the Thursday and the Saturday, that no doubt remained upon her mind.

Have you a particular recollection, that it was at last brought to the Thursday, the 25th of July? I have really no further recollection; I have no other guide.

Do you remember that it was the Thursday preceding the Saturday on which the gazette was published? I do not know how to make the matter clearer; these were the two points that guided me in my assertion; if I was wrong in my assertion, it was a blunder arising from that.

Is the committee to understand, that, while Mrs. Clarke and yourself were seeking to fix the day on which this transaction took place, the gazette was found; and, that finding the date of that, and considering the time which had preceded it, you fixed the date on which the offer was made to be on the Thursday preceding? I mean merely to assert, that, from the evidence Mrs. Clarke gave me, and from the information I got from the gazette, I fixed that it must be on the very day I mentioned; I had no other guide to go by of one description or another; and I do not see that I am to stand here, however willing I may be, after the very heavy examination which that witness has gone through, which, I believe, many gentlemen think with myself, must tire any gentleman; I do not feel myself disposed to submit to the same sort of discipline; she never did, to the best of my recollection, give me any other date than that I have mentioned, the christening of my Lord Chesterfield; and I remember her stating, that the thing was petitioned on the Thursday, and doue on the Saturday; more than that I really do not recollect on the subject. Any question which I can answer, I shall be willing to answer, but I do not know how further to answer that. I afterwards inquired, and ascertained, when that christening was; and, from that and the gazette, I mentioned the date, which I thought was correct; whether it was or not, I cannot

state.

The gazette was referred to as a medium of proof at that time? No, I referred to the gazette since.

Was that in the presence of Mrs. Clarke? No, it was not. Was that circumstance communicated to her? Not by me; I de not know that it was.

I understood you to have said, that you and Mrs. Clarke, upon re ferring to the gazette, and other circumstances which occurred to you, fixed, that the time must have been about Thursday, the 25th of July? Then I said what I did not mean; the conversation was respecting the christening; I made enquiry when the christening was, of a friend or two of my own; and I mentioned it from that: whether between that period and this I may have named the date to her, or she got it from another quarter, I cannot say; that of the three days was all the information that I obtained from her as to the date.

Is it true that you took away some papers from Mrs. Clarke against her will, and without her consent? I certainly did take some letters away from Mrs. Clarke, which I did not believe she exactly approved at the montent; I did it in that sort of way, there was no force in the business; but amongst papers, she was in the habit of giving me letters respecting the cases; and she gave me one or two of Mr. Donovan's: there were one or two of Mr. Donovan's, and one or two of light moment from another quarter on the table. I said, I will take this away; and she said, those are from a friend of mine, and he must not be touched; that made me curious about the letters; and they were certainly letters of very great moment: I have had them in my possession ever since.

Mrs. Clarke had been in the habit of communicating letters to you upon this subject before that time? One or two letters, not relative to this case; but one or two letters much about that time, just about that period, she communicated to me.

Relative to the Duke of York No, not relative to the Duke of York; that had nothing at all to do with this business.

Why was it that he was not to be touched? It was Mr. Donovan. Did Mrs. Clarke ever state to you, that she had stated to his Royal Highness the Duke of York her wishes to go into the country and that those wishes might be gratified without any expence to his ko yal Highness, as an opportunity had occurred to her of obtaining the sum of 2007.? No; she stated to me, to the best of my recollection, that she wanted to go into the country; that she told his Royal Highness that there was 2001. could be had for that exchange, and that she got it, and went in consequence. I do not recollect any thing further.

Did she inform you that she had stated this to his Royal Highness the Commander in Chief, previous to the receiving the 2001. and with a view to obtain his Royal Highness's consent so to receive it? I understood that she had stated, three days before the occurrence took place, that she should have a pecuniary consideration; that that pecuniary consideration was 2001. and that she went into the country immediately after she received it. I understood her, that she had told his Royal Highness that a pecuniary consideration was to be given for the exchange, and that that pecuniary consideration proved to be 2001.; and that was told him on the day when the application was made, which I understood from her was three days before it took place.

Three days before the person was gazetted, or three days before the 2001. was received? Three days before the person was gazetted; I understood the person was gazetted, and the money was received, on the same day, or the next day.

Did Mrs. Clarke state to you, that she had stated to his Royal Highness the Duke of York, previously to her actual acceptance of

the offer of 2001, that such an offer, in fact, had been made to her, and that the acceptance of it would enable her to go into the country, which she desired to do? I understood from her, that when she made the request to the Commander-in-Chief, she had mentioned to him that she was to receive a pecuniary consideration; as to the going out of town, that was a fixed thing before; they were both going out, as I understood; but in justice to her I will state what I this moment recollect, that a few days ago, after my motion, she stated that I had been very incorrect, if the papers stated truly what I said, and whether it was that, or what other circumstance, I will not undertake to say; but to the best of my recollection, I understood from her, that on the day she made the application, she gave the Commander-in-Chief to un derstand, that a pecuniary consideration was forth-coming for the exchange.

Did you receive any other information from any other person than those who have been examined here to-night, and Colonel Knight, as to this point, upon which you founded the statement which you made to the house? I had, as I before stated to the house, had other informa tion from other quarters; it will not become me to state to the house who those persons were; that I conceive would be very indecorous.

Did that expression which Mrs. Clarke used to a particular person, who was not to be touched, imply that there were some proceedings to be instituted concerning some other persons? I have no reason to think that she meant any more than exactly what she said, that when I get hold of those letters, she knew I was possessed of facts that would touch Mr. Donovan: I do not think she connected any other matter with it.

With respect to these letters which you carried away from Mrs. Clarke's, has Mrs Clarke since made frequent application to you for those letters? Yes, she has; and was very much enraged with me, particularly for having said what I did respecting Mr. Donovan.

Was the conversation which took place on Saturday, the conversation to which you alluded, in which you received the information upon which you proceeded? That was subsequent to my motion.

Did you see Mrs. Clarke yesterday? I was at her house late last night, about nine o'clock; I was in the drawing-room for a few moments, there was company with her.

Did you see Mrs. Clarke yesterday? Yes, as I have said before, I was in her drawing-room, when she had company last night.

She was in that drawing-room? Yes, certainly.

Is it possible that she should not have seen you in the drawing-room at that time? No, it is totally impossible.

I understand you to say, that being informed that the gazetting took place within two or three days after the original order, you provided yourself with the gazette of Saturday in which that appointment appeared, and so, calculating backwards, fixed Thursday as the day on which the proposition had been made? I understood from the first, that it was on the Thursday that the exchange had been applied for, and that the business was completed on the Saturday; that is entered in my book in the first conversation, that she understood it was gazetted on the Saturday, or in two or three days.

The gazette in which this is announced is dated on the Tuesday? Yes, I am perfectly aware of that fact: that is a blunder of her's;

E

but I never heard any one thing to make me doubt that it was so till to-night.

- Being asked whether you were not at Mrs. Clarke's yesterday, you answered that you had been there about nine o'clock in the evening; were you not at Mrs. Clarke's house at any prior hour of yesterday? I called at Mrs. Clarke's yesterday morning, she was not at home; I returned in the evening, and had a conversation with her for a few minutes.

Did you merely call at Mrs. Clarke's house; did you not go into it, and wait a very considerable time at Mrs. Clarke's house? I was up in Mrs. Clarke's drawing-room for some time in the morning, I did not see her then, but I saw her in the afternoon.

WILLIAM ADAM, Esq. was again examined in his place as follows:

Having mentioned the annuity which was conditionally promised, can you state whether that annuity was actually paid, and if so, for how long? I can state nothing respecting the payment; I had nothing at all to do with it; I never heard any thing of it from the time when I had the second and last interview.

You have stated, that the annuity was to be continued so long as Mrs. Clarke's conduct was correct; will you have the goodness to explain that term? The term I used I meant in this sense; that her conduct was to be such as not to have any reference to any pecuniary transactions, such as I stated to have been the cause of the investigation, and the subject of the subsequent communication to her by me, that the Duke of York was to have no further connection with her; and I stated in my evidence, that at that time, nor at any time till recently, had I any notion that there were any transactions of this kind in which she had been in any way concerned: Those pecuniary concerns to which I alluded, were the use of the Duke of York's name for the purpose of raising money, so as to involve his credit and character, but not by the sale of commissions.

Do you mean by getting in debt with tradesmen, and borrowing money? Any mode by which she could raise money.

Did you continue from the year 1806, to have the management of his Royal Highness's finances, and his money concerns? I had not, properly speaking, the management of any part of his Royal Highness's But I wish to mention this to the house; the Duke of York, from causes which it is unnecessary to reter to, found his circumstances embarrassed; at a very early period he applied to me to look into them, and to get matters arranged: he appropriated to that arrangement, as soon as his income was such as to enable him to afford it, a very large sum of money, annually, 12,000l. a year, that was put under the adminis *tration of Mr. Coutts and myself, as trustees for the creditors, to settle the payments. From the circumstance of the Duke of York being a mere annuitant, and from other causes, which I should be extremely glad to explain, to render my ev dence intelligible, particularly from one cause, that in the arrangement of his estates he had cast upon him the expense of a large inclosure, which by act of parliament he was bound to see executed, which took a great deal of money, and his being. under the necessity of buying tythes to a large amount, together with the property tax coming on him, we were not enabled to operate the

redemption of the debts by the payment of 12,000l. a year; it was therefore the Duke of York's wish to appropriate a larger sum; this was done, and it is still to go to a greater extent, in the hands of Mr. Coutts and myself, for the same purposes. These are the monies which come within my management, and no other. I know nothing about the Duke of York's private expenditure; I know nothing about the pension he pays to any one, but only the fund raised for the payment of debts, and also that for the reduction of the debt he owes to the public, a sum lent to him from the civil list, when Mr. Pitt was minister, and which Mr. Pitt and other ministers suspended the payment of to a certain time, and which was last year begun to be paid: a fund was vested in me for the payment of 4,000l. a year of that; this will extend to the sum of from 26 to 30,000l. a year; and when it is considered that the income tax falls upon that, as well as the whole of his other property, I believe that his Royal Highness will be found to give up as large a sum of money as his present circumstances will afford. These are the only funds which fall under my knowledge; and therefore it is impossible for me to know whether a pension is paid to this or that person, and it is not correct to suppose that I am in the administration of his affairs further than I have stated.

Did Mrs. Clarke apply to you at any time since 1806 for the payment of this pension ? It is extremely difficult for me to state positively that she did not, but I believe the two letters which she mentions are the only letters I have ever received from her. I cannot undertake to say, in the variety of transactions I have, that there were no others; the prominent letter was that of the 11th June, 1808, which I immediately indorsed, and delivered over to Mr. Wilkinson.

COLONEL GORDON.

Do you hold any office under the Commander in Chief? Yes, I do. What is it? His military or public secretary.

Does the business of exchanging commissions pass through your office? It does.

Can any transaction of that nature pass without your knowledge? It is quite impossible.

Do all the documents by which the persons, who apply to exchange, are recommended, pass through your office? They do.

Do they pass first under your examination and consideration? Generally; I might almost say always.

Do you report the result to the Commander in Chief? Most undoubtedly, without fail.

How long have you held the office that you do at present? About four years and a half.

Did you hold it in 1805? I did.

When any exchange has obtained the approbation of the Commander in Chief, is there a minute made of it? Always.

After that, are the commissions made out pursuant to that minute? After an exchange, or any commnission has obtained the approbation of the Commander in Chief, it is immediately submitted to the consideration of his majesty; after his majesty's approbation and signature has been affixed to the paper so submitted, it is sent to the Secretary at War, for the purpose of having commissions made out corresponding to the