Star. — London, England, 1809-03-15 00:00:00

pect to the attachment of artille ry -mine regiments, he would not "ay but the consequence of ist be to increase the marine forte ipect to the promotion, he believed • to the survivors ; and if promo- Field Officers was not equally marine service as in the artillery ise seniorities. from survivorship ose in the latter than in the former. Admiral, however, would give the Admiralty credit far not only ad of Field Officers on the Marine •reasing the pay of the officers ge l)ad not been deemed necessary to have so great a number of field officers in the marine service as in the aitillerv, it was because the Marines were generally drafted in small divisions an board dif ferent ships, and . hardly ever commanded by Field- Officers. cAr.r. t ip TIIE HOUSE. Lord FOLKSTONE moved, that the Order of the Day be now read for calling over the House. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER expressed a wish, that the Noble Lord would not now press the Order of the Day upon this head, until the House should come to some understanding, whether it would be most advisable to come to some decision first upoti tte Address, proposed by the Hon. Gen tleman, who opened the last evening's debate, or to e-ntinue the discussion upon the resolution. If the former, it would .in his mind be desirable that the House should dispose of it this night, with a view to give Members some rest, by adjourning, as he had proposed yesterday, the farther discussion till Thurs day, and an opportunity of recruiting in some degree their strength, exbousted as it must be, and as he for one felt, by continued debates, for five nights in every week, and until four - or five o'clock in the morning, wit'llout a day's intermission. For his own part, with his attention for so many whole nights to the course of debate; and his mind ardently bent upon the im portant topic before the House, and his indispensable attentions in the course of the mornings to other offi cial business, be could not boast of personal strength . adequate to the continuance of such exertion, without some intermission ' and he believed the Right Hon. Gentleman in the Ch l itir,.ittaY'or whom he felt more than on his own account, mutt be pretty much in the same predicament. He therefore hoped the Noble Lord would not press anything on the subject of the Call of the House, until a more advanced hour of the evening, when the sense of the House should be known. • Lord FOLKSTO,NE professed his consideration for the inconvenience stared by the Right Hon. Gen tleman, as well for himself as t he the Right Hon. Gentleman in the Chair; and added, that those were subjects paramount to all other considerations in re gulating his own conduct this night. He, however, should deem it necessary to press the last moment of the present discussion.' Lord TEMPLE was against any adjournment of the discussion upon any account. He reminded the House that the eye of public expectation was di: rected anxiously to the result of their proceedings; the character of the illustrious personage, whose eon: duct was under discussion, was hourly suffering in the public estimation until the issue should be determined;! and he should not, therefore, consent to any adjourn ment, except from day to day, until the business was disposed of, except upon more important grounds than he had heard stated. The SPEAKER expressed his thanks for the con sideration the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Gen-, tleman was pleased to express on his account. Fatigue and indisposition he certainly felt, in common, he be lieved, with many Honourable Members ; but cer tainly in no degree that could prevent him from pay ing every attention to the proceedings of the House. ' Mr. H. SMITH wished, before the House pro-, ceeded to resume the debate, to call its attention ro a matter concerning its own privileges. It was a mis— represen-ation in a Morning Paper of this day, of 'I what he had said last night, by stating that he spoke in favour of the motion of the Chancellor of the Ex chequer, whereas what he had said was the very re-I verse. He had said that from the weight of evidence • it appeared to him the Duke of York ought to be put upon his trial, in order to enable him to reclec:n his honour which he had pledged to the House upon his innocence ; and that it he was found guilty, he ought to be punished. He was sure that while he was speaking, the House evinced considerable impatience, and might have thus rendered what he did say not distinctly audible : on this account, be was ready to make allowance for the erroneous report. He did act, therttOre, wish to urge the matter farther on his cwn account, than merely to set the Matter right by this explanation. THE DUKE OF YORK. The Order of the Day being moved for tile resump ti:).l of the adjourned debate, on the conduct of the Duke of York, Mr. WILLIAMS WYNNE began by comment in:‘; on the state of the question, and said, that to call it the bounden duty of the House to take one course more than 'another, was to narrow the privi ;-?yes of the House. The Honourable Member ad verted to the case of the Duke of Lauderdale % in which the House thought it sufficient to address his Majesty that the fluke might be removed from Majesty's Councils ; and to the old course of Parr - inent, in which the simple misconduct of Ministers was a cognizable matter. In the present instance, if corruption was not distinctly proved, yet there was evidently a degree of inattention which called for re dress. In the present practice of Parliament, every distinct charge had been considered as liable to a ver dict of Guilty or not Guilty : and the Honourable Member could conceive, that many" Gentlemen might believe that Samuel Carter's case was a single in stance, and that no verdict could be entered upon that case, but a verd:ct.of acquittal. But supposing there were fifty such cases, according to the present! proceeiings, there was no possibility of impeach- • ment ; lin- each was a separate charge. The cage which pressed the heaviest on the Duke Of York was Due which could not 1)2 made the object of a charge, that of Kennet. If that case were admitted to its fullest extent, it would undoubtedly prove the charge . of corruption in the Duke of York ; for nobody could - believe that the Duke would have interested himself merely because a letter was produced from one indi ♦idua, stating that he should be happy w serve arta ther. Mts,Greerrood hits elf did not in this light; an if this evidence was noticed on the Minutes, it would one who wanted preferment had nothin) come in the shape of a loan to the DT Without trusting to the evidence of though the Honourable Member had ing opinion 'of - it - Which some Gentlemen . ed, there remained to prove the charge of corruption in the Duke of York,. she evidence of Miss Taylor, whose character had 'been adinitted to be perfectly credible, in one of` the ablest sPeeches that had been delivered on that side of the House (the speech of Sir S. Romilly ;) for it did not'affect her credibility that her father was confined for debt; or that he was in distressed circumstances. but independently of the evidence of Mrs. Clarke and Miss Taylor, and put ting out of questionp the case of Cialonel Shaw, and the exchange.ef Colonels lCniglat and Brooke, because they only rested upon Mrs. Clarke's testimony, it was proved that - the -Commander! in Chief had in six in stances allowed Mrs. Clarke to interfere in the dispen sation of his Office—had allowed a woman to make application to him upon subjects of such high mo-• ment. The Duke had not said. to Mrs. Clarke, is you had better tell your applicant that you are an impro per channel;" but, , 4 there is no opportunity of ap plying for what you ask." Upon the evidence of ' the Duke's hand-writing, the Honourable Member referred to the practice of the Right Hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) when Attorney.; General, in the trial of Judge Johnston, where the, evidence depended solely upon comparison of hand,.; writing, and where • so many persons did not believe the imputed hand-writing genuine. So many per sons having been unable to say that this was not, the hand-writing of the Duke of York, the Honour able Member thought that, putting Mrs. Clarke's evidence out of the question, in this instance she was allowed to interfere. The Honourable Member next adverted to the case of Samuel Carter. Of such promotion as his he had heard in romance, but then it was generally through some merit in the hero, and not solely through the influence of another. The Honourable Member first looked at the degraded situation of the boy behind the carriage of such i woman as Mrs. Clarke, and :then saw him sitting down to table as an equal with the Duke of York, simply because he was connected with that woman. His letter, the Hon. Member said, did honour to both his gratitude and Mrs. Clarke's generosity,. who, it ap peared, had paid his outfits ; hut his commission con stituted one of the heaiiest charges against the Duke of York, because it proved that there was no check to the influence of Mrs. Claike. The natural feel ing of the buke's - mind one would suppoSe to have been, .a / can use iiiY influence for'the boy in any - tither war,' but consider your situation and his ; what will the anny'say if they know this ?" Nothing but .the greatest influence upon the Duke's mind could hive 'gOt over this. The Honourable Member next 'adverted to the evidence of Mr. Dowler, the credibi rhty or . Which he defended, and thought his' desire to toomeal what passed at Reid's Hotel pardonable. He thought too that Mr. Alderman Combe might, on horseback as he was, have been mistaken as to his conversation with him. What would be the effect, the Honourable Gentleman asked, if the Duke re mained in his situation ? If ever another woman should be in Mrs. Clarke's situation, she would think herself entitled to the same influence ' • and if ever this should be the case, the Honourable Member conten ded, that she had better sell that influence than give it; for a deserving Officer might be tempted to give her a sum of money, and have done with her ; but he could not be very worthy of the situation, who was intimate enough with such a woman to obtain his promotion gratuitously. Upon the whole, the Hon. Member was of opinion, that there were sufficient grounds to address his Majesty for the removal of the Duke of York : the cases of influence which had been proved were sufficient, and the general notoriety that by means rn infamous promotion might be obtained, was a sufficient ground. There was but one way of proceeding, ,and that was the retirement of the Duke of York. • The Address originally proposed, the Honourable Member thought, stated more deci dedly than was proved, the Duke's knowledge of the pecuniary advantage which bad been derived through Mrs. Clarke's influence; but there were so many grounds, upon which the notoriety of that influence was apparent, that he should not hesitate to vote for the Hon. Member's (Mr.Bankes)AMendment. Mr. CROA KE R rose, and at some length combated the arguments of Sir F. Burdett, particularly as to the points of the incompetency of Lawyers, whom he could nut help considering as equal to decisioh even as any Candidate who had figured on the hustings either of Brentford or Covent Garden. The testi-1 mony of Mrs. Clarke, however, he thought highly impeachable indeed. And here the Hon. Gentleman ' proceeded to make comments on it in support of his opinion. He went through a variety of cases, in which he particularly marked not only the places in which she had been contradicted by others, but where she had contradicted herself. For instance, she had said, that from one thousand a year, she " could barely pay the wages of six men servants, and keep them in liveries. Now he would even ask the Noble Lord himself (Lord Folkstone), economist as hc ; badeonfessed himself to be, whether this was possi was Ve really ashamed, and ought to apolo ze to the House when he attempted so to under value the testimony of Colonel Gordon, s to con trast- it with that of Mrs. Clarke. ke could not, however, help remarking the bias, the prejudice, the absolute taint which some of the Members opposite seem to have imbibed. He was absolutely shocked to hear her panegyriced as an irreproachable witness. ' She, who in her attempts to prove the Duke of York the most contaminated of mankind, had only shewed herself to be the most flagitious of women !—she, a fiendlike creature, an harpy, the vilest of her sex, who deserved to have every vengeance poured on her as much as he was prepared to let it fall. Here the Honourable Member analysed the different evidences, chiefly with a view to invalidate that of Mrs. Clarke. He considered her testimony as car rying with it every thing combining malignity and falsehood, tending even to prove her tra ffi c of places up to this day, when her influence over the Duke, ac cording to her own account, must have ceased—and tending to shew, that even when she represented that influence at the very highest, she was, afraid to apply to him for a trifling leave of abience for her own bro ther, and acknowledged she h a d s ought it through Captain Sanden..- Yee, even for Cap she would not ask the Duke of York leave of absence, but begged of he could possibly obtain it through aeral's Office (Hear, hear.) From her evidence, he would acquit the ~icipation or corrupt connivance ; but __ indeed to say, he could not give hisn , ini unqualified acquittal ; he could not give him such a triumphant vote as he would have wished, when he considered that he deignedven to answer so vile and profligate a woman, with respect to the advance ment of General Clavering ; he could not help con sidering such conduct as in some degree culpable, though, at the sum' e time, he could never think this circumstance ought to weigh with him to pro nounce an unqualified condemnation. When he said this he spoke with as fair an intention as any man in the House, he would preserve a proper conscious ness of the importance of character, and scorn ed to dishonour his life, as he would do if influ enced in the vote which he would give by any undue consideratioe. He hoped then, though he was a lawyer, the purity of his intentions would pass unques tioned, as he was certainly very far from doubting the sincerity of those on the opposite side of the House, who differs a from him in opinion. When he said this, he with pain observed that the Resolution of his Right Hon. Friend did not go to attach sufficient blame to the accused ; but with respect to the resolution of the Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Bankes) he should have little hesitation in his choice—he should certain ly prefer the Address of his 'Right Hon. Friend (the • Chancellor of the Exchequer), because he wished to go boldly up to the Throne, and pronounce his opi nion, and shew that he . dared 7 . to do so, and not basely compromise his feelings. Xf the Duke of York ought to be removed, surely the House would not be • afraid to say so—(Hear, Hear ! ) The middle way, howeier, which the Hon. Gentleman proposed, in his mind, was not fit for the House to adopt. He did not expectit from the pompous opening of the Hen. Gentleman—it was, indeed, Parturient monks, et nasci tur ridiculers mus—" the mountains labour, and a mouse is born !" What, after their long examination, and their daily and nightly discussions (for indeed they had blended day and night,) were they at last to end by hesitation, or supposition, or doubt ? Yet such was the mode which the Hon. Gentleman's Amend ment went to adopt. (Hear, Hear.) What did this Address do ? Why it merely went to shew what no r body wanted to know—that the King had the power of dismikaing his Commander in Chief. If, indeed, the question was, which would be preferred, the Ad dress of the Hon. Mover, or the Amendment of the Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Bankes) he would, vote for the Address, because he thought it went strait forward, without any ambiguous alternative. — The two Gentlemen, however, professed a kind of agreement, and yet even in that they differed. What end was the House to expect to it ? " Who can de cide when Doctors disagree ?" He would vote for the Resolutions, because they stood as a foundation whereon to build an Address ; and this should be the case where as Address of congratulation and condole ment was to be presented !—(u loud laugh.)—Gentle men might laugh, and he knew well with what sus picion every thing . that came from one of his country was received, but here he would contend he was right — r the Addiess was one of congratulation that the Duke was not guilty of corruption ; and of condole -mem, that any cause whatever should have given spe ciousness to such a charge—( Hear, hear.)—Hewould vote for the Resolution's also, because the House might give its opinion on them seriatim—they might know what road they were taking, and select a proper carriage ; surely, it would be very preposterous for a party who had agreed to go to Greenwich by water, to take a coach fur their conveyance—(a laugh)—and yet such was the absurdity to which the Amendment reduced Members. It went to attach guilt, and yet could not tell why. The number of questions now before the House were sinipli tied by the Resolutions, and so perplexed and multifarious were the questions, that he would not be surprised if they confounded I even the characteristic acuteness of the Learned Mimi- I ber who filled the Chair. The only question now was, whether they would vote for the Resolutions or the Address ? and he would adopt the Resolutions, if it was only to avoid confusion—if they welt to die, he, like Ajax, would exclaim " let us die in the light." The adoption of the Address, instead of the Resolu tions, would go to demolish all the land-marks by which their opinion was to be guided. Let the country look to their decision :—he would not be ashamed or afraid that they should view his ; they should see in him no ambiguity—no compromise— and, when he returned to his constituents, he should not shrink from their criticism on his l'ai liamentary conduct. He would then vote on each of the Reso. lutions, one by one—first, was the Duke of York: cor rupt, or not ? Next, did he connive, or not ? Next, should he be dismissed or not ? (Hear, hear, hear.)— Tlgits the country would have a clear list made out I for them—the red and the black—the Patriot and the Courtier—liable to tut- obscurity, no misrepresenta tion. This was the plain and proper method, to stand in open sunshine beforethe country, and not cast a mist before the eyes of their conitituents to delude them. Sir F. BURDETT thought it necessary to advert to part of the Honourable Member's speech in which he stated, on the authority of Donovan's evi dence, that Mrs. Clarke had made mention of his name as that of one of the persons disposed to pur chase the papers she was in possession of relating to . the Duke of York.. He assured the House that no such proposal was ever made by him. Mr. CROAKER said, that the assertion of the Hon. Baronet was perfectly satisfactory. He was per. suaded that no such proposal had ever come from him. I Mr. H. MARTIN was surprised to hear from the Honourable Gentleman that the evidence before the House was not of that nature to sanction the Ad dress. Parliainent, he maintained, was not to be bound. by the rules received in Courts of Law. On this, as well as on every such occasion, he wished that they should adhere to the rules of their ances tors. How c6uld the Address or the Amendment cf the • Honourable Gentleman beloW him be described as a sentence of condemnation. It was the high pri vilege of that House to take cognizance at all times of the conduct of great public officers ; and if any one doubted the fact, he would refer him to periods \ when the.principles of the Constitution were at least 4044 understood as they wore at this (ley. This Neff the case upon the. celebrated, eicamittatiot relat. forces. With respec companies to the mai it was not right in pi such a measure must altogether: with resr that that fell usually tions to the rank of numerous in the rn corps, it was becau! more frequently aros The Honourable Ad present Board of A ding to the number I service, but for increl nerally ; and if it ha ,-.110100 not ussiptitandit Olt astifes of Ca l as to *win ea, toOtT4aidippapn, si imply, ti wt arky.f *Arne fdrtnight's ling to•tightsg4o 'other to tee it he Duke of Yoika— r Adjutant-Gene Mrs. Clarke, ati- 4 atiew even of lit d not that sweep- Duke of all partie men had express- I he was sorry incite .. - ;IT to the Partition 'Fleury, Whin documents a o evidence were heard at the Bar, and the H ouse to ted an Address to his Majesty to remove Lord fi; meg and two other Lords from his presence ; al councils. The House did what was their duty censuring public functionaries who had disgr:oa themselves—they went farther and voted itn ii noe ,o rent—(Hear, /rear, from the Ministerial Benche , ,),_. A Leatned Gentleman had toted, that they nri o l ; as well stab the Duke of York to the heart as pass vote to remove his Royal flightless horn the c o a mind of the army. But .that was there to distil guish the case of the Duke from any other person, convicted of similar misconduct? Had Lord S omo no feelings upon that occasion ? Was not that gre; man entitled to as much deference and indulgence his Royal Highness ? lie recognized no distinctii between the Duke of York and any other sub:l,: whose conduct might fall under their investigari a It was not only the right, but the bounden duty of i' Howse to act as they had done. They were net sacrifice their privileges out of respect to this or tb person. But it was said, if the Duke of \riot: guilty, why not impeach him at once? 'Where tl; punishment was commensurable to the offence Oh he could not consider it in this in - stance as a patio. ment, but a precaution) he did not think it nc:tc 'sary to have recourse to the severer punishment. With respect to the.inconsistencies imputed to M; Clarke, in her evidence, he could discover no great improbabilities in her statement respecting the Du, of York than what her letters proved. It was upoi her testimony, corroborated by that of two other pr sons, that induced him to give the vote he should.. These two persons were Miss Taylor and Mr. Doi ler. The evidence of the former was so unimpem able, that he should not take up the time of the Hot in making any comments upon it. The evid ence Dowlcr also appeared to him to be uncon:rovertibi It was objected to him, that he had not spoke fairly on the subject' of his interviews with M! Clarke ; that he had concealed the fact of his havi passed the night with her. But was the question e' asked him ? And if not, was it to be expected that would be so lost to all sense of decency, as to cm to that Bar and make a voluntary avowal that , came there reeking from the arms of a harlot? ft the case ';f this Gentleman was one of the stronger which had been brought fcirward against the 1): of York. It afforded irrefragable proofs of the ini ence which Mrs. Clarke exercised over. him. It pi vett that that influence not only extended to particular patronage, but that it was strong met to send him foraging to other offices. A great di had been said of a popular cry. It was strange' objections should be taken by Gentlemen at moment to an instrument of which they had lad made so dexterous, and he feared fatal use. last popular cry originated within these walls. the persons (who reasoned thus mean to assert that was only under that roof that the voice of the per was to be heard, and that no attention was to paid to any cry that was raised out of _doors ! A! the charges of industrious misrepresentation, and • pular delusion, he knew of none. They. were cons verted by the fact. It was only as the examinat proceeded that circumstances came out which turn; (the current of public opinion 'against the. Duke. evidence that was produced was sufficient to supi the charges( brought forward by his Hon. Fri( and thetefore he would vote for the Address pro! sed by him. . The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, in explana stated, that he never did say that they might as • stab the Duke of York to the heart as remove from the command of the army ; but he did say to fit upon him a charge of gross corruption, upon such evidence, would be tantamount to stab/ him to the heart. Mr. ROSE ohs:treed in answer to a Learned Mt bee (Mr. Martin) that the precedent upon which seemed to (rely so much occurred in the reign Charles the Second. But ssithat was the result of ' proceeding ? Why, after the Commons had vi that certain persons should be removed from his i jesty's councils and presence, the Lords took up subject, passed a quite contrary vote, and dec' that they should not be non wed. • • Looking to usage of Parliament and to the laws of the Lou would be seen that it was against both to pimilt person before trial. In every case on their too previous to a motion or censure, there had al , been some examination taken under the sanctio an oath. This was the practice in the case of la Somers, the Duke of Marlborough, Lord What'' and in an instance which had lately occurred: Right Honourable Member explained the natun recommendations to dikes in the gift of the To ry. \Vhen the recommendation was political, it entered in a book ; when otherwise, it was not. was within his own'knowledge at the time Do. was appointed,. there was a great want of proper sons to till the Deputy-Commissariats ; and as ni commendation appeared in his favour, he coach that he had been recommended by the Gonaniso General. . Mr. SUTTON was aware that considerable im pressions had gone forth to the Public from the . .7arbt ledoiceteutts. of the proceedings of the House, tabicit were published from time to time ; pending the ir.r (patio and believed the generalitytof the people "of lingland felt a conviction of the guilt or his •Royat ' Highness founded on those accounts. lie truster.. however,- the House would not be guided Oath.- , verdict by popular clamour, but would weigh v i.:: impartiality the evidence brought forward, from which it appeared to film, that the Duke of Ycrk wo not only not . guilty, but totally innocent of any know ledge of, or connivance at the guilt. The Honouet i bte Gentleman then entered intcoodetoil of the eva deuce, more especially of that part relatiai to the case of Colonel Shaw. from whiclo,lre. inferred that the ecidonce was not to be depended on, and of - s o. - futile and contradictory anature as' not to admit el . an argument in support of the. Duke . of York's goiit. and, concluded by expressing his intention to support the Motion of the Chancellor (tithe Exchequer. Sir FRANCIS BURI)ETT denied that he ever stated that Mrs. Chu ke's evidence alone was suiFcicnt to condemn any man ; but, being corroborated by two other witnesses, and not inconsistent initsell, it was sufficent to satisfy him. i Mr. LONG supported the Amendment pro" posed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and adverted to several pairts of the evidence, in which he: stated cce: l '" . bk groende•existed for the acquittal of ilis RcYa .nts auis l ince v ,,.. ord 8;). nce duty j mpe;ucli- s pass a (.:(; o distin. person's i Someab lat great ;gence istinctit,l r uitubj,!ct sty of l e C mut t‘; s or that Y(Al: he 'here the Ice (thc' t punish. itnr...ces- i to Mrs. io great:l- - Duke vas upon aher per- thould.— ilr. Dow. ;impeach- ;he House idence of overtible. ;poke out vith Mr,. us having scion ever ed that he to come Il that he lot? But strongest :he Duke F the infln. It po- led to his ig enough great deal range that en at th.o had lately use. The ;ails. Did uert that it the people was to be rs As to in, and po- ere contr..- taminaticit Lich turne,l )uke. The to support nu. Friend. ess propo- cplanatin, glut as well !move him lid say teat ption, and to stabbing Trued Mon- a which Le le reign of suit of that had voted um his; no ook up tl.;; 11 decided ing to C..: he land, it pimi , ll any cir recorifi had always sanction of se of Lori Whartm, rred: The e nature et the Treasu- ical, it was .as not. It rne Dowler propr rel- ict as no re- ! concluded onanissary. lerable rn the .taril• muse, wbich Ling tlte.' people -of his ;Royal Eie trust.. led in. a weigh yard, from of Ycrk wss f any know- IC Honoura- . of the ev.