You have stated that being in the habit of seeing twenty, thirty, or more different officers every day, you take a proper opportunity of collecting from them the character and conduct of those whom you see occasion to inquire into; is it your habit to make minutes of the result of those inquiries? There scarcely a day passes over my head that I have not occasion to obtain information of that nature; but to make a minute of it would be absolutely impossible, I mean to any extent: I could not carry on the business.

Between the first of July, when the application was made on behalf of Colonel Brooke, and the 23d, when it received the sanction of the Commander in Chief, did any conversation pass between yourself and the Commander in Chief, otherwise than that which originated in your addressing yourself to the Duke upon the subject in the ordinary course of office? To the best of my recollection, certainly not; 1 speak more decidedly upon this point, because I am in the habit of laying numbers of papers before the Commander in Chief, and of confining my conversation strictly and exclusively to the matter before

us.

If his Majesty's approbation was received on Wednesday, why was it not notified in the Saturday's Gazette? I think I have said before, that if the papers were returned from his majesty in time, it would have been gazetted on the next day; I take for granted, therefore, that they were not returned in time.

What space of time was there between your making your report of the inquiries made by you respecting Colonel Brooke, and the Duke of York's directing you to make out the necessary papers for the King's inspection? I think I have stated, that I received the expression of the Commander in Chief's pleasure on the 23d; the papers were made out for his Majesty on the 24th.

What time elapsed between your making the report of the inquiries respecting Colonel Brooke to the Commander in Chief, and the Commander in Chief giving his consent? A reference to the paper on the table will explain the dates.

Did you make your report on the same morning that the Commander in Chief gave his consent, and directed you to make out the necessary papers? I beg pardon, but I do not comprehend that question.

When did you state the result of your inquiries respecting, Colonel Brooke? I have already stated, that I made my report to the Commander in Chief on the 23d, and received his pleasure upon it. • Upon casting your eye over the Tuesday's Gazette, can you tell whether there are any promotions or exchanges in the Tuesday's Gazette which received his Majesty's approbation at the same time as the exchange in question? I beg to state, that I firmly believe it is the usual practice, at least, that every exchange, and promotion and ap pointment, went in the same paper before the King.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer now proposed that the committee should adjourn till Friday next, giving the honourable member (Mr. Wardle) an opportunity to colJect his other witnesses; for the remainder of the evidence on behalf of his Royal Highness was very short. The

right honourable Chancellor was convinced that the hon ourable member would not consume a day more of the time of the house than was necessary, and as he had several more charges to prove, the right honourable Chancellor would take the liberty of asking upon which he would next enter.

Mr. Wardle replied that this must depend upon the arrival of Captain Huxley Sandon with the royal waggons at Portsmouth, and of General French from the West Indies.

Mr. Adam said, that the present was one of the most cruel and severe cases that he had seen for a length of time. His Royal Highness the Duke of York was charged with matters of the most criminal kind; and notice was given of this charge at the earliest period of the session, when military men were absent on duty, or had fallen by the sword, and when those inquiries could not be made, which the honourable and learned gentleman had no doubt would prove that the promotions of those men were equally honourable to those who had fallen, and to those who had made them. Under these hardships, the honourable and learned gentleman thought that the house bad a right to ask whether the honourable member had not some witnesses ready to be called on Friday; and espe cially as the committee had now taken the trouble to go through a tedious examination of six or eight long hours. The honourable member would recollect, that there were other charges which he had to establish; and if the committee were told of the non-arrivals of Captain Huxley Sandon and General French, they would have no reason to think, but that there was more of charge without founda tion in the honourable member's inquiry, than of proof altogether. The honourable member therefore, should be required to select some one charge upon which the committee might immediately resume their proceedings If the honourable gentleman had taken the advice of any other member upon his present inquiry, he would not have been so rapid in giving his notice, and in saying things that remained upon persons without immediate confirmation or refutation. Many of the persons mentioned in the opening of the honourable member's charge were known to be in London; and therefore his Royal Highness was not to be placed in the cruel situation of suspense. If ever it was at all desirable that justice should be administered

quickly, it was so in a case where the honour of the second subject in the realm was impeached.

Mr. Wardle said, that there was one charge (that respecting Captain Maling) upon which he was prepared to go at once.

The house was then resumed, and it was ordered that the present committee should sit again on Friday next.

February 2, 1809.

Mr. Wardle expressed a hope that he should be permitted to-morrow to examine some further evidence upon the points under consideration of the committee yesterday. He asked leave at the same time to correct an answer he had given yesterday to the question of an honourable member through mere error of memory. He had stated that he saw Mrs. Clarke but once on the evening of Tuesday last, forgetting at the same time that he had seen her also on the morning of that day for about two minutes.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said it was competent for the honourable gentleman to explain the circumstance in his place.

Mr. Wardle moved that a proper person from the office of the secretary to his Royal Highness the Commander in Chief, do attend this house to-morrow, with the books containing all applications made by subaltern officers to purchase promotions, within the period that three commissions were given to Captain Maling.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer had no objection to the attendance of any person from the office of the Commander in Chief; but he thought the house ought not to be too prompt in making orders for the production of such books, without knowing whether such were in existence.

SECOND DAY:

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 3,

List of Witnesses examined.

G. L. WARDLE, Esq. (a Member.)
WILLIAM ADAM, Esq. (a Member.)
MR. LUDOWICK ORRAMIR.
COLONEL GORDON.

Mr. WHARTON in the Chair.

Mr. Wardle, previous to going into the committee of inquiry into the conduct of his Royal Highness the Duke of York, wished to correct the error to which he had alluded yesterday, in his former evidence.

The Speaker informed the honourable member, that the time for offering any thing relevant to his former evidence, would be, when the house should have resolved itself into a committee. The matter then immediately before the house, was the notice the honourable gentleman had yesterday given, of a motion for certain papers or books, from the office of the commander in chief.

After a short conversation, which led to the omission of a part of Mr. Wardle's original motion, the following motion was agreed to:-"That the proper officer from the office of the commander-in-chief do attend the committee of the whole house, appointed to inquire into the conduct of his Royal Highness the Duke of York, with the book containing the applications for purchase by subaltern officers, within the period in which Captain Maling had his three commissions given to him."

The house having then resolved itself into the committee, Mr. Wharton in the chair,

Mr. Wharton observed, that perhaps it might be for the convenience of the committee, that he should state, that any gentleman who might have questions to put to any of the witnesses, should mention to him when he closed his examination, in order that no interruption should be experienced from any other gentleman putting questions, which could not otherwise be prevented by the chair.

Mr. Wardle begged to call the attention of the commit'ee to the correction he had to make of his former evidence. He had on the former night stated that he had not seen Mrs. Clarke on Tuesday morning, though he had waited a considerable time in her drawing-room for the purpose of seeing her. On recollection, however, he found that it was on Monday he had waited a long time in the drawing-room, and that on the morning of Tuesday he had seen Mrs. Clarke for a few minutes, as well as in the evening, as he had before stated.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer observed, that in the explanation of the honourable member, there was some ambiguity, in as much as the words "as I before stated" might be construed to the correction of the former evidence now first given, as well as to the former statement of the honourable gentleman.

as

Mr. Wardle declared, that he meant the words (6 I before stated" to apply solely to the interview which he had with Mrs. Clarke, for a few minutes in her drawing-room, on Tuesday evening, and which he had stated in his former examination.

On the suggestion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the questions and answers relative to Mr. Wardle's in terviews with Mrs. Clarke on Tuesday, were read from the notes of the short-hand writer, from which it appeared, that in his former examination Mr. Wardle had fallen into an error, which he had in this instance corrected, namely, by stating that he bad not seen Mrs. Clarke at all on Tuesday morning. The admission therefore, that the honourable member had seen Mrs. Clarke on the morning of that day, was added to his evidence, but in order to avoid ambiguity, the words " as I stated before" were expunged.