« PreviousContinue »
Do you recollect who told you so? No: public report.
[The witness was directed to withdraw.
Mr. JAMES COMRIE was called in, and examined by the comunittee,
as follows: Do you
know Mrs. Clarke! I do. Have
you been employed by her in your professional line? I have. What is your profession? A solicitor. Had you ever any conversation with the Duke of York respecting Mrs. Clarke? In consequence of Mrs. Clarke's wishing me to wait upon the Duke of York, I said that I should wish to receive a message for that purpose from his Royal Highness. I did receive such a message, 1 think in writing ; in consequence of which, I waited upou the Duke of York in Portman-square.
State what passed. The Duke of York spoke to me upon private professional business; I therefore appeal to the Chair with great submission, whether, under those circumstances, I am bound to divnlge it.
[The witness was directed to withdraw. Mr. Fuller objected to any question being put to the witness, which might lead him to disclose the secrets of his Royal Highness as his client.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, he apprehended that it appeared by the witness's own account he was sent for as the solicitor of Mrs. Clarke, and not as the solicitor of the Duke of York, and he was therefore bound to answer the question now put to him by the house. [The witness was again called in, and informed, that it was the plea
sure of the coinmittee that he should answer the last question.] His Royal Highness wished to know whether I could raise himn the sum of 10,0001. upon mortgage.
[The witness was directed to withdraw. Mr. Wardle said, it was because he knew it was impossible for Mrs. Clarke to obtain money to the extent sbe did without such aid, that he had said on a former night, that a professional man was introduced to the Duke of York for that purpose by Mrs. Clarke, and he hoped he should be allowed to prove that fact, more especially as he had been so flatly contradicted upon this point.
Mr. Adam, feeling the last remark of the honourable gentleman applied to something which had fallen from hiin on a former night, begged leave now to explain what he did say, and meant to be understood, namely, that the affairs of the Duke of York, with which he was confidentially intimate, were those with which he was charged confidentially as a trustee for liquidating the debts of his
Royal Highness. But with that part of bis Royal Highness's revenue reserved for his own private expenditure, he had had no inteferrence.
[The witness was again called in, and proceeded as follows.] I answered, that I believed I could. His Royal Highness, after some conversation, referred me to his man of business, Mr. William Adam of Bloomsbury-square. His Royal Highness asked me if I knew him? I replied, not personally, but by reputation. I mentioned that I knew him to be a man of very high character. Shortly afterwards, I called upon Mr. Adam, and saw him; I think he mentioned that his Royal Highness had told him I was to call upon him (Mr. Adam), we pro-, ceeded to discuss the business, and Mr. Adam said, that his royal Highness had occasion for that sum, I think he said to complete the purchase of some tithes in the vicinity of Oatlands; I am not quite sure as to that, but I think it was so; and he said his Royal Highness's then solicitors, Messrs. Farrer and Atkinson, would shortly send me the neces. sary abstracts, which they did. In the mean time, I had applied to a client of mine, a rich client, and he had agreed to lend his Royal Highness the money. The abstracts were laid before a conveyancer, Mr. Walker, of the Temple. We made some objections, I think, which is usual in those cases, questions to be answered; it generally happens So. The money was ready to be advanced, and the abstracts were returned to Messrs. Farrer and Atkinson, to answer those queries. I should state, that for expedition, (for it was mentioned that expedition was necessary), I had copies made of those abstracts to accelerate the business. I returned the abstracts to Messrs. Farrer and Atkinson, but those that I returned were never sent back to me, and the loan was afterwards declined, and Messrs. Farrer and Atkinson desired me to send in my bill, which I did.
Had you ever any conversation, either at that time, or any other, with the Duke of York, about Mrs. Clarke? I had. · Do you recollect tbat he ever assigned any reason that was prejudi. cial to her character, when he parted with her ? The Duke of York stated to me, that he had been served with a subpæna to appear in the Court of King's Bench; I think it was on a trial which was then pending, in which Mrs. Clarke was the defendant; which subpæna had been accompanied by a very severe letter, describing her very improper conduct in having pleared her coverture to an action brought for goods sold and delivered ; and I think, upon a bilt of exchange, one or either, I do not immediately recollect which. His Royal Highness stated that that was the reason which occasioned the separation.
Do you mean to state, that you understood, from the Duke of York, that she had done so without his knowledge? He did not state that; but he said, after such a thing as that, it was impossible but that they must separate, or words to that effect.
Did he complain of any other bad conduct in Mrs. Clarke? I do not recollect that he did. I think his Royal Highness said, that he had sent'the letter and subpoena to Mr. Adam.
Do you recollect any thing further that passed in the conversation? There was something passed about the allowance to be made Mrs. Clarke.
Do you recollect what that allowance was? His Royal Highness the Duke of York and Mr. Adam being present, it was mentioned and agreed to, that she should be allowed 4001. a year; but it was expressly mentioned that she must pay her own debts. Upon my mentioning the difficulty of that, for she had told one she was very short of money, his Royal Highness said it was not in bis power then to pay them, but that she had some furniture and valuable articles with which she could easily pay her debts:
[The witness was directed to withdraw. Here the Chancellor of the Exchequer interfered, and appealed to the house and to the honourable gentleman (Mr. Wardle), whether it was at all proper to proceed any fur. ther in a species of interrogation totally foreign from and irrelevant to the subject of enquiry, and which could throw no light whatever upon the charges of corruption preferred by the honourable gentleman. He would rather, indeed, put it to the good sense and discretion of the honourable gentleman himself whetber he thought it would at all coutribute to liis purpose, or be decorous towards the house thus to occupy its time with a species of examination so foreign to the object proposed.
Mr. Wardle acceded to what appeared to be the wish of the committee, and consequently withdrew the question; but having one or two other questions to ask, desired that the witness should be called in again.
(The witness was again called in.] Do you recollect paying a bill due to Mr. Few, for Mrs. Clarke ? There was a Mr. Few who had a demand upon Mrs. Clarke, and I paid that; I do not know the amount. You paid it on her account? I did.
[The witness was directed to withdraw. DAVID PIERSON was called in, and examined by the committee as
follows: With whom do you now live as butler? The Honourable Mr. Turner.
Did you live as butler in Gloucester-place when Mrs. Clarke was under the protection of the Commander in Chief? Yes I did.
Do you recollect in the summer of 1805, the Duke of York going to Weymouth, and Mrs. Clarke to Worthing? Yes, I do.
Do you recollect Ludowick, the servant that used to attend the Duke of York, being ordered by the Duke, on an evening about that period, to take a bank bill out, and to get it changed? I do not.
Do you recollect any servant being ordered by the Duke to get a bank note changed?I recollect the housekeeper, Mrs. Favorite, bringing down a bill in a morning, and Ludowick going out and getting it changed and coming back, and giving it to Mrs. Favorite again, and she took it up stairs.
Do you recollect any servant being ordered by the Duke to get a bank note changed? No.
Do you recollect Ludowick taking out a bank note to be changed? Yes I do, on a morning.
Did you hear him ordered to do so by any body? The housekeeper gave him the note ; I saw her give him the note, and he took it out.
Do you know the amount of the note? No, I do not.
Do you recollect what order she gave; in what words ? No, I do not in particular recollect what order she gave him; but she gave him a note, and he was to go and get it changed.
Are you positive that that note was not given on the night, and the change brought back in the morning? I am positive I saw it given.
Was his Royal Highness the Duke of York in Mrs. Clarke's house at the time this note was delivered to Ludowick to get changed? Yes, he was up stairs.
At what time in the morning was this? Near eight o'clock.
How long did you live with Mrs. Clarke in Gloucester-place? About fifteen months.
State whether any and what servants of the Duke of York came to Gloucester-place during that time? I never saw any one but Ludowick.
Can you state, as far as it came within your own knowledge, that no other servant of the Duke of York's came there? I never saw any other servant of the Duke of York's come to the house, but Ludowick.
In what year, and in what month in what year, did this transaction happen? About three years ago.
Do you know the amoant of the note? I do not.
Do you mean that this passed about the month of January, 1806 ? I mean in July or August, some time then about; it was hot weather when Mrs. Clarke went to Worthing; I do not recollect exactly the time, but it was in the summer time.
How long was it before Mrs. Clarke went to Worthing; was it the day before, or two days before, or three days before? I do not recollect exactly ; but it was a short time before she went to Worthing.
Was it more than three days? I cannot be exactly certain to the time.
Is this the only note that you ever recollect Ludowick to have changed? The only note.
Did Mrs. Clarke go to Worthing the same day that the Commander in Chief went to Weymouth ; did they both leave London the same day? I think the next day in the inorning; that his Royal Highness went away between twelve and one o'clock, and Mrs. Clarke at four or tive next inorning.
Was it the morning of the same day that his Royal Highness went to Weymouth, that Ludowick took the note out to be changed? It was some morning a little time before.
[The witness was directed to witlidraw.
Captain HUXLEY SANDON was called in, and examined by the
Committee, as follows; What interest had you in Colonel French's levy? I was concerned with him in the levy.
In what way, and to what extent? A letter of service was given to us both, Colonel French and Captain Sandon,
Do you know Mrs. Clarke. I do.
Did you or Colonel French apply to Mrs. Clarke for her influence with the Commander in Chief, in order to your having this levy? In the first instance we were informed, that it was a person who had great interest with a leading person in this kingdom; we did not know at the moment that it was Mrs. Clarke.
When you discovered it was Mrs. Clarke, state your proceedings. We did not discover it till we had the letter of service.
Wbat passed with the person whom you afterwards discovered to be Mrs. Clarke, before you knew her to be so? We proceeded upon our letter of service.
Who gave you the information that took you to Mrs. Clarke? Mr. Cockayne, who was my attorney, informed ine, that if I had any thing particular to ask for in the War Office, or at the Commander in Chief's Otrice, in all probability he could recommend me to a person who could do any thing in that way for me that I chose to request.
Did he recommend you to Mrs. Clarke? He recommended me to her agent.
Who was her agent ?. I understood a music-master of the name of Corri.
[The witness was directed to withdraw, when Sir George Hill wished the honourable gentleman to confine his course of examination to points immediately connected with the subject of the charges before the committee. This circuit through Mrs. Clarke, Mr. Cockayne, Mr. Corri, or any other third person, ought not to be ad mitted, because such a chain of evidence could not possibly lead to any direct, fair, or reasonable point.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer thought that the honourable baronet was rather premature in the observation wbich he had made on the nature and tendency of the examination pursued by the honourable gentleman. If the evidence were to be at a close, there might have been some ground for the observation ; but as the evidence was only at its commencement, and it would be necessary to trace it throagh a great number of persons, he was of opinion, that the honourable gentleman should be perniitted to proceed with the examination in his own way.
[The witness was again called in.] Through the means of Mr. Corri lad you any interview with Mrs. Clarke? I really do not know.
Had you any interview with Mrs. Clarke? It was a long time afterwards that I ever saw Mrs. Clarie.
How long afterwards? I should presume a month after the letter was granted; near mpon a month; I caunot exactly say, perhaps, to a week; it might be free weeks.
When you had an interview with Mrs. Clarke, can you recollect