but on turning the matter in my own mind, I thought it most prudent

so to do.

Then why have you stated in your letter, that this person having called upon you was the reason for not returning the letters to Mrs. Clarke? In turning it in my own mind, I thought that I might be censured by the House, understanding that I must attend this House for delivering those letters to Mrs, Clarke.

Had you, at the time of writing that letter, received an order from the House to produce these letters? No.

Did the person who came from Mr. Lowten desire you to keep back those letters, and to suppress them? He said nothing at all about them; he did not know that I had a letter, to my knowledge.

At the time you saw that person, had you received an order to attend this house? No.

What made you suppose you should be obliged to attend this House? Because the gentleman, who came, said he supposed I must attend this House.

Have you seen that person since yesterday? Yes.

Where? I saw him; he came to Hampstead to-day, and I came to town with him.

Did he go to Hampstead to fetch you? Yes.

Did he carry down the summons to attend this House? No. How came you to come to town with him? He came there after I received the summons; I did not expect he would come there. His name is not Wilkinson? No.

Do you know what his name is? I should know what his name was if I heard it: I have heard it to-day, but do not recollect it.

Is it Williams? No.

Did he say any thing to you to-day about the letters? No, he knew I had the letters to-day.

But he did not speak to you upon the subject? No; I believe his name is Wright, but I am not sure.

You stated in the former part of your examination, that you believed Mrs. Clarke was Mr. Dowler's wife; did you ever apply to Mr. Dowler for the satisfaction of your debt? Never.

Why did you not? I had not an opportunity.

Did you ever seek for an opportunity? No, I do not know that I ever did; I was not anxious about the business; I did not suppose but what I should be paid.

In what profession are you? A baker by business.
How long have you lived in Hampstead?
You are a housekeeper there? Yes.

Eight or nine years.

You have stated, that you believed Mrs. Clarke was Mr. Dowler's wife, and you have also stated that she told you when she came to Hampstead she was a widow; did you suppose the marriage with Mr. Dowler took place at Hampstead? No.

Why then did you believe that she was Mr. Dowler's wife, when she had previously told, you she was a widow? Mrs. Clarke left my house and went to town; when she returned, Mr. Dowler returned with her, or near that time; it was after that time that Mr. Dowler was in the habit of coming, that she told me she was married to Mr. Dowler.

You have stated, that you received a letter yesterday from Mrs. Clarke; what are the contents of that letter? I have it in my pocket,

[The letter was read.]

"Mrs. Clarke will esteem herself greatly obliged to Mr. Nicholls, if he will send, as he has promised, all her letters by the bearer, who she sends in compliance with the arrangement made by him two hours ago. "Monday, one o'clock.

"Mr. Nicolls, opposite New End, Hampstead."

Who was the bearer of that letter? I do not know who it was, a servant on horseback.

1

What did Mrs. Clarke mean by the arrangement? I suppose she means the conversation between Mr. Wardle and myself on the subject.

Mr. Wardle

Repeat, as nearly as you can, that conversation. called on me, to apply for those letters, and I told Mr. Wardle I was not inclined to give them up; in fact, I should not think fit to give them up without an order from the person to whom they belonged. Mr. Wardle left me, with the supposition that I should deliver the letters up when I received an order from Mrs. Clarke; but on turning it in my mind, I did not think fit to give them up even then.

When did Mrs. Clarke know that you had these letters? I do not know how she knew it; perhaps I might mention to some one that I had these things, and it might come to her knowledge by that means. MR. JOHN REID was called in, and examined by the Committee, as follows:

Where do you live? In Saint Martin's-lane.

Do you keep an hotel in Saint Martin's-lane? I do.

Do you know Mr. Dowler? I do.

How long have you known him? About two years, I believe; I cannot be exact to the time.

How long has Mr. Dowler frequented your house? About two years.

Do you recollect his coming there at any time with a person whom he represented as his wife? I do.

When? At all of the times he was in town, at some time or other. Has he been frequently at your house with a person whom he represented as his wife? Not very frequently.

Do you now know who the lady was who he so represented as his' wife? I do not.

Was it the same person that always came with him? The same person.

When was that person last at your house, that you knew her to be there? I think last Friday se'nnight, the day that Mr. Dowler came

to town.

You do not know who that lady is? I have heard, but I do not know of my own knowledge.

Has Mr. Dowler supplied any body with wine from your house? No, Mr. Dowler has had some wine from my house.

Where has that wine been sent to? I believe somewhere by Bedford-square, I think, but I do not recollect; if I had expected to be asked the question, I would have made my self sure of it.

Did the lady who came with Mr. Dowler go by the name of Mrs. Dowler? Certainly she did, or she would not have been in my house. Was the person who was with Mr. Dowler on Friday se'nnight, at

your house, the lady who used to be with him under the name of Mrs. Dowler? The same.

Did you ever hear her go by any other name but that of Mrs. Dow ler? No.

Did you ever address her yourself by the name of Mrs. Dowler? I

did.

Did she answer to that name? Most certainly.

Are you sure it was on Friday se'nnight that this lady was at your house for the last time? The last time that I saw her.

Are you sure as to the day? To the best of my recollection.
Are you sure it was the day Mr. Dowier arrived in town? I think

it was.

Are you certain of that fact? As well as my memory serves me I am.

Have you seen that lady any where in the neighbourhood of this House since you came? I have not.

She passed as Mrs. Dowler on that evening? Yes, she did.

Have you ever heard Mr. Dowler call her by the name of Mrs. Dowler? Yes, I have.

And she answered to that name? Yes.

[The witness was directed to withdraw.

GEORGE ROBINSON was called in, and examined by the Committee, as follows:

Are you the porter at Slaughter's Hotel? Yes.

Do you know Mr. Dowler? Yes.

How long have you known him? From the time that he returned from the expedition that came home from Buenos Ayres; that was the first knowledge I had of him.

Did you ever see him with any lady that he called by the name of Mrs. Dowler? Yes.

At your master's house?

Yes.

Living with him there? For a short time.

As his wife? Yes, as his wife.

Do you know who that lady is? Yes.

Who is it? She goes by the name of Mrs. Clarke, to my know ledge.

How do you know that? By the public talk I have heard that of her, nothing further.

Have you ever been to her house? Yes, in Bedford-place, leading from Bloomsbury-square to Russel-square.

Was there any name upon her door there? Not to the best of my recollection.

Did you ever carry her any thing there? Yes.

What? Wine.

From your master's? Yes.

Who ordered that wine? I received the order from my master.
Have you seen her at your master's house lately? I have not.

Have you seen her since Mr. Dowler's return from Spain? I have

not.

Have you seen Mr. Dowler there since? Yes, I have.

To whom was the wine directed to be carried? Mrs. Dowler.
To be carried to No. 14, Bedford-place? Yes.

VOL. 1.-1809.

3S

You would know the lady if you saw her? Yes, I believe I should, Have you ever seen her at any other place, or carried wine to her any where else?. Yes.

Where? At the end of the King's Road, I believe it is called Westcott-buildings, or something of that sort, leading to Sloane-square.

What naine did you carry it to there? Mrs. Dowler.

When? I might say, I believe, it was the 13th or 14th of Decem

ber last.

Who ordered that wine? I am not sure.

[The witness was directed to withdraw.

SAMUEL WELLS was called in, and examined by the
Committee, as follows:

Are you a waiter at Slaughter's Coffee-house; Iam.

Do you know Mr. Dowler? Yes.

Do you know Mrs. Dowler? By name.

Have you seen her? By the name of Mrs. Dowler I have seen lier. Have you heard her called by that name? I have.

When did you see her there last? It might be about eight days ago. Do you recollect the day of the week? I cannot.

In whose company was she? With Mr. Dowler.

How long did she stay there? One night.

Do you happen to know what the real name of that lady is now? Not till I had seen it in the paper.

Have you seen her any where else? No where else, but at our house. Did you ever deliver a letter to this lady, directed to Mrs. Dowler? No, I have not.

Was Mr. Dowler ever there with any other lady except this? Not to my knowledge.

[The witness was directed to withdraw. Mrs. Favourite was ordered to be examined, but the Sergeant at Arms stated at the bar, that she was not in attendance.-Mr. Perceval addressing himself to Mr. Wardle, wished to be informed, if the honourable gentleman had any more charges to make against his Royal Highness the Duke of York; and if he had, he wished to know if he was ready to enter upon them. Mr. Wardle said in reply, that he was not sufficiently prepared to enter on the proof of any new charge; hus information was as yet rather scanty, and if he should bring it forward, he pledg ed himself that it would be very concise, and would not occupy the attention of the Committee but a short time.

Mr. Perceval, Mr. Canning, and Mr. Beresford, severally reprobated this mode of procedure, as unfair, unjust, and cruel, towards the illustrious personage, who was the object of the prosecution.

Lord Folkstone and Mr. Whitbread supported the line of conduct pursued on this prosecution by Colonel Wardle; who gave every assurance, that he would at au carly

hour to-morrow, be enabled to inform the right honourable gentleman (Mr. Perceval) whether he would prefer any new charge or not.

Mr. Canning should only observe, that in his opinion the observation of the honourable gentleman was not alto gether regular and parliamentary.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer then moved, that the chairman do report progress, and ask leave to sit again.

The House was then resumed, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer moved, that a select Committee be appointed to take into consideration the sealed packet of letters which had been delivered in to the Committee; and he further moved, that the following members do constitute the Committee, viz. Messrs. Brand, Wardle, W. Wynne, Croker, Leech, and that three of them be a quorum. Ordered..

MILITIA VOLUNTEERING BILL.

Lord Castlereagh moved that the militia enlistment bill be read a third time, to which he had produced two new clauses; the one extending the provisions of the bill to the fencible regiments of Royal Miners belonging to the counties of Cornwall and Devonshire; and the other restraining the operation of the bill, whenever the militia estbalishment fell as low as two-fifths of the quota provided by the act of 1807. The noble lord said, that the principle upon which his bill went, was, that the militia regiments should not be weakened to less than two-fifths of their numbers, following the regulation laid down in 1:07, nor exceed three-fifths of that number.

Colonel Franklyn said it was now six or seven years since he had become acquainted with bills of this description, and it was a matter of sincere regret to him to find them thus brought forward sessions after sessions. If the noble lord had brought forward his clauses in some of the carlier stages of the bill, the house would then have had an opportunity of considering them under all their bearings. It was a strong objection in his mind to the system, that counties which had succeeded in raising their respective quotas of men, under former acts of parliament, were in no better condition than those counties which had not raised their men; and how injuriously this operated on the officers who served in militia regiments, those members who held commissions in the militia could very readily cou