the offer of it for change, were considered, there was good reason to pay attention to the fact. The next point to be considered was, the statement of Mrs. Clarke, that only three days intervened between the application and the exchange appearing in the gazette. But, upon this point, she was certain only as to the time of the year; she thought it was no more than three days, but could not be certain. Dr. Thynne, however, and Mr. Knight, had positively stated, that the interval was a fortnight or three weeks. Mr. Knight had been three times to the gazette-office in that interval. Nothing could be stronger than this. Neither Mrs. Clarke, Dr. Thynne, nor Mr. Knight, could have any motive for making an untrue statement. There could be no doubt, therefore, that Mrs. Clarke had made the application to the Commander-in-chief; that the exchange which had before met with delays, had been expedited in consequence; that she received the 2 Ol. for this dispatch, the 2001. being her object, and the dispatch that of the parties; and that therefore her influence must have procured the dispatch, as, unless it had, they would not have paid her the money.

The next point to be considered, was the variance be tween Mrs. Clarke and Mr. Knight as to the injunctions to secrecy. Mr. Knight stated that she had desired him to conceal the transaction from the Duke of York. If she had made this injunction, it would be to tell him that she had swindled him out of 2001. If she had used her influence, the Duke of York must have known it; and that she had used her influence with his Royal Highness was proved by the evidence of Mr. Corri and Captain Sandon. It was also obvious, from the letter of the Duke of York to Mrs. Clarke, respecting General Clavering, that the Duke wished to be kept in the back ground. In that letter, the Duke says, "Clavering is mistaken; there are no new battalions to be raised, and you had better tell him so; and that you are sure it would be of no use to apply." Was it not evident from this that the Duke wished his name to be kept secret; and after such a letter, could any gentleman suppose Mrs. Clarke in her se ses if she did not wish to keep the transaction secret. He believed it would not be necessary for him to advert further to the evidence. He should next proceed to examine the written documents on the table, which he was convinced

would as strongly bear out the case, as the minutes of the evidence on which he had commented.

The first of the written documents to which he should refer, was the statement sent in from the office of Messrs. Cox and Greenwood, relative to Colonel Brooke's services. Upon that statement there appeared, in pencil marks, C. L. cannot be acceded to; his Royal Highness does not approve of the exchange proposed." This statement was dated on the 1st of July; but in a short time after, that is, on the 23d of July, another pencilled mark was made on the statement: "July 23, 1805: his Royal Highness does not approve of this exchange.' Colonel Gordon in his evidence stated, that the words "not acceded to" meant nothing more than not acceded to till the necessary inquiries should be made; and that if the paper was to be considered, he should probably have said so; and if further inquiries should be necessary, might note "to be considered, or probably cannot be acceded to. Such a construction of language might be intelligible at the horse guards, but the House would understand the words as they were understood all over the kingdom. The first pencilled note had first not acceded to; and then his Royal Highness does not approve; but would his Royal Highness approve or disapprove of any application till the necessary inquiries had been made. In common life, the answer not acceded to, would be considered a direct refusal. The next point was, that the exchange was said to have been acceded to in consequence of the inquiry; and on the ground that Lieutenant-colonel Brooke's services could not but be favourably received. But these services had been precisely the same when the exchange was not ac ceded to, and when it was said that the services could not be favourably considered. These services were, that Co lonel Brooke had been twelve years in the army; four months of which he had been a cornet of dragoons, and seven years upon half pay. Colonel Gordon had stated, that the exchange had been stopped, in consequence of Colonel Brooke being on the half pay, in order to make inquiry into his services. Yet Colonel Gordon could not recollect any particular information that was the conse quence of that inquiry, nor any individual from whom such information had been derived. When it was recol. lected what admirable testimony Colonel Gordon had

given on other points, and the correctness with which he had detailed the minutiae of the business of his office, it would appear rather extraordinary that when an exchange had been effected, as he had stated, upon inquiries made by him in his official capacity, he could not recollect one word of the result of these inquiries, nor the person from whom the information had been received. The command of a regiment required considerable military experience; and to be fit to command a regiment, an officer should have more than usual qualifications, and a competent ac quaintance with the cavalry service. By a regulation of his Royal Highness, for which he deserved great credit, no officer can become a field-officer upon less than six years' service, in order that no officer should be placed in a situation in which he might have to command a regiment, unless he was perfectly acquainted with his duty. The regulation was essential to the discipline of the army. But it was material to observe, that if the seven years, during which this officer had been on the half pay, were deducted from the twelve, the whole of his services, there would remain but five; and to select an officer of five years' actual service, only four months of which he had served in the cavalry, for the command of a regiment of cavalry, was an infringement of the excellent regulation of the Commander-in-chief. Colonel Gordon had farther asserted, that the result of the inquiry had been to shew, that Colonel Brooke was worthy of the situation. That he did not deny. It was nothing to the question. The papers on the table shewed, that upon no principle ought Colonel Gordon to have recommended an officer, with only such qualifications, to the Duke of York, for the situation. He only adverted to this circumstance to shew its bearing upon the case, as it went to shew that the exchange must have been effected through the influence of Mrs. Clarke. It appeared to him fully, clearly, and strongly to corroborate that fact; and when the whole of the case should be considered, he thought it impossible that any gentleman in the House could be of any other opinion. That was his impression, and he did not think it necessary to trespass further upon the time of the House respecting that case, but should proceed directly to

his other statements.

The next case to which he had to call the attention of the House, was that of Captain Maling. In this case he

was convinced his majesty's service was as much inte rested as in any other. It had been stated in evidence, by Colonel Gordon, that, when he had been appointed to his company without purchase, there had been several subalterns in the army senior to him, who were anxious to get promotion by purchase; and several other subalterns, senior to him, who were desirous of promotion. All that Colonel Gordon had stated as the qualification of that gentleman for promotion was, that he was unexceptionable and assiduous. It was upon military services alone that claims for promotion ought to be founded; and an officer, who had not been ever out of England, nor could plead Jength of services, ought not to have been preferred to those who had served as ensigns and lieutenants on all stations, and in every climate. Now it appeared in the progress of the inquiry into that case, that there had been another Mr. Maling in the office of the Commanderin-chief, who had been promoted without any service, and with no recommendation; that several others in the same office had not. That gentleman was brother to Captain Maling, respecting whom he had instituted the inquiry. Colonel Gordon had stated that he had recommended that this gentleman should be placed upon half pay; but be had already been placed upon full pay over many officers who had served in all climates. He understood that there was an act, which prohibited any officer from being placed upon balf pay without having previously joined his regi ment. If this act had not been repealed, to place this gentleman upon the half pay would be an illegal proceed ing. He agreed that the Commander-in-chief ought to have the power to reward merit; but then that power should be defined. If it were not, it would be found that such a power, enjoyed without any limit, would be productive of abuses.

Upon this head he would beg leave to call the attention of the House to the case of Colonel Gordon himself, in order to shew the length to which the power of the Commander-in-chief might be carried. Colonel Gordon had stated his services to the House, and he was ready to ad m't that for them the country owed to Colonel Gordon an adequate reward; but he was not prepared to go the length of saying that such reward should extend to the grant of a regiment to him, over the heads of a long list of major generals and colonels, and above one hundred and fifty

Hieutenant-colonels, who were senior to him, many of whom were distinguished for the most eminent military services. It would therefore appear upon reflection, that in an office where such a transaction could take place, the Commander-in-chief was vested with a power without limit, which no commander-in-chief ought to possess.

The next case with which he had to trouble the House, and it was one of considerable importance, was Colonel French's levy. The witness, Captain Huxley Sandon, had stated, that he had been interested with Colonel French in obtaining that levy; that five hundred guineas had been paid to Mrs. Clarke on account of it; that she was to have had two thousand pounds if the levy succeeded:→ and that he called upon Mrs. Clarke respecting the levy, but that no money was advanced till the letters of service had been issued. Mr. Corri, the agent of Mrs. Clarke, stated, that he had two hundred guineas for introducing Colonel French to Mrs. Clarke; he also told Sandon that Mrs. Clarke said that she could recommend only proper persons, who could apply through the war-otice; and that Mrs. Clarke had desired him to destroy all the papers.

Mr. Dowler had stated that he had seen Colonel French and Captain Sandon with Mrs. Clarke at Gloucester-place, and seen them pay her five hundred guineas. Mr. Grant, the agent for the levy, and who was connected with Colonel French in it, had stated, that he always understood that the levy had been obtained through Mrs. Clarke; that the five hundred guineas had been paid to her; and that an advance of five thousand pounds was to be made to the Duke of York, by way of loan, if the arrears due by government should be paid. Miss Taylor had stated that she had heard the Duke of York say at Gloucesterplace, that he was worried to death by the applications of Colonel French, and that he would cut up him and his levy too if he did not behave well to Mrs. Clarke. Now, it would appear from the evidence of all these witnesses, that Mrs. Clarke had received a considerable sun for using her influence to obtain this levy. This point was fully established. The next point to be inquired into was, whether she possessed that influence, and whether she hid used it for a pecuniary consideration with the knowledge of the Duke of York? Mr. Grant stated, that she had applied: Mr. Dowler, that he was present when she received five hundred guincas for it: Captain Sandon, that he had been