Star. — London, England, 1809-03-14 00:00:00

P. . , . f.r the r i ~" 1 1 4 i s, .6c . •Afs i *iot Vh/dt - Talled dron the case s he Onlibi tligie eAate ofjvire "' ~e tivc:Je uisorctlie ' • ikor innocence of the testirtiony. 44V;Qrop ));a4,.)sien. taken,. at, and th.tirit clution nittrned tbat Nue?' insisted on his Leitilfed rriend (Mr. b. linu°kl.-e-olf°l'ork, was . no ground brc"hai-ge , f corrupti - on Of Ir C On 2 'ton) On . a fotttler . rnit . agaiust her evidence, as that there A his Ro3jal liiuhness. To thriairiaid. 'Of ' ...._ But whit ;. - weight n accomplici. _ nuance against me^ n • • ther atnendnient hat:l-Since-bee trrie to n objection •fp njeci u ) t .1110 • --hole (4 - his Right H bie At 4tas the true . of) The consideration of her an lear , '' 3t the who: --- -.5 1 .'t_ 11 . 611 9,ur , ,-, _ _Ad's 4 haytn . g been an accornslipe, or how had she been an aro : l ilt:lent, in order to substaine fir . it ant:00;6;1W- acconip,ice 1 kw:is alledged that she had influence a re ,,, 'Living the same . objects •as`the - toinsee one, with' the Commander in Chief ; that she exercised though rio t proceeding upon the dime grounils but this influence by recommending persons for military. CrA -in. , for the removal of the Mike 'of YOrlt from promotions.; and that she was guilty of the immoral, ' • d f the arm;.:, the was the state ' of act of taking .rponey,,for such exercise of her infle- 1 t he co ' o the v estion ; 'lnd upon a _ the - .copsideration which once . What was them „na Able ,inanoraliii qCtatiqh be. cl od give the subject , . hisnyinion was, that . the conduct that could te to redderbettititl, ' - ifidlid l amendments ought to be -negatived, and th e Original in a case of the hig h est Public' ,importance, . an Con. ' A dd r e s s adopted. As to the questiOri whether they - cernirtg a - person of the very highest rank in the ought to address his Majesty. to rernove the Duke of state? . He for one believed that there were many., york from his command; he ihouldsay - that Pe' ciitild . men, who might incur a similar degree of immora net conceive a case in which'the House of ComrifOns llty, and yet would suffer any extremity rather than could address for the tentryeatora pdblieservant - bear false testimony. There was nothing in the act; from his situation, W not nit& the - evid en ce which however it wits to be condemned, to vitiate the cre they had then b efore 'them. Hevas'not able to col- dibility of the evidence of the guilty party. Here he led f r .,ni the speech: of his*Right Hon. and Learned • should beg the indulgence of the House, whilst he friend wi!o had just spelten , in what Way he meant I briefly stated the rule of evidence upon this head.— to vote n pou the -arnendnient : of his Right Hon: 1 The truth was,. that the evidence of an accomplice TYlend ; but froth the tendency of; his argument, he Would be received against a prisoner in a capital case a r u ld apprehend that he to negative it. As '; —the evidence would be left to the Jury to determine t i, e evidence had riot been fortified by those sane- ; upon the credit due to it, and the prisoner might be tinns which hit - Lettrded - Ptiend deemed so necessary; ccavicted. This was evidence, however, which decision, te r a just he supposed 'he Would be inclined ; ought seickint to be resorted to, and should always be t o a middle course, 'betvietin the' alternative 'of left to a Jury, With a strong direction and observa uilty or net guitty,.arid the resolution which - Went ! don st its Credit. The case which had been 'to acquit the - Duke of York altdgether. For himself, i onotein t ; th e Noble Lord under the gallery on a he w i s hed to state shortly the ground on which his ; former night was per f ect l y in • point. In that case vo te 1r35 found'e'd. Theentestion then before theilouse I the parties - had been convicted upon the single testi ivas no t, ivheiherhis 'Royal 'Highness was or was not mony, of an accomplice. • A similar case, reported gu ilty ? No such question had been submitted to their in 'the same bcok, occurred, the following year at the decision. 1 40 choice had been given to "the House. Old Bailey, in the.ease the ins against Durham. A The Amendment of his Right HonOttrable Friend 'conviction took place updn the evidence Of an accorn vie the opportunity only of pronouncing that his plice, and upon reference to the Tivelve Judges, the Royal Highness was not guilty. Here it would be conviction was confirmed as legal. The case in , necessary for him to say a few Words upon the prat- which the evidence of an accomplice ought and would ; urinary question, Whether the Hatise was bound in have little or no weight, was, where he was an ac this instince to (Wide Whether his Rayal Highness complice in a crime, a Conviction for which would , be guilty or not ? It had liecfi said, that as they had have rendered him an incompetent witness. (Hear,' entertained the charges, they were bOund to decide hear.) Now Mrs. Clarke was not under any such upon the guilt br irinoceitee of his Royal Highness, imputation, and consequently, though her evidence • in order that posterity tniy trio* ' when they should was not to be credited, 'unless confirmed by other see the 'charges on the journals,, siritether his It opal testimony, still she was neither an incompetent Highness had been ieleittitted or not ? But he must witness; nor to be lightly discredited. As to the remind the Hai*, that AO Cli*iges hid been for- contradictions which had been so much dwelt upon, 1 tiially fiteferted against' his Royal Highneis in wri- in the comparison • :of Mrs. Clarke's testimony I ring.. The Hortnutahle Mir:fiber with whom the in: with that of others, and with different parts of her ! iestigaticin originated had,in his opening speech, not Otm, with the exception of . that. respecting the brought foinlita charges, but stated facts ; and, upon £2OO Bank note,' and one or two others, he thought such facts being stated as Were highly diiadvantage- they were all immaterial, riot undoubtedly as to her bus to his Royal Highness, the House had. appointed credit, but as to the facts charged against the Duke 1 a Committee, norto consider specific charges, but to of York. - In courts of justice where the opportu- I investigate the conduct of his Royal Highness the nity of cross-examination gives the means of - finding COmmander in Chief, as to the facts alledged. 1:5 - pon, out and sifting all that a witness knowi k and of milk- thi* subject, the argument of the Noble Lord (Polk: Mg him contradict himself; if he meant not to give stone) under the gallery, on a former night, was un:: 'honest testimony, - if he - ihnulsi cotitridiet hi in inswerable. If charges there were, where was the circumstances not material, it !timid not set his eve-1 record of them ? It was no where to be found, and dente aside, though it *mild . impair his credit. - . But posterity would in vain lock far a trace of their exis- in such a case the witness calls'Goo to witness his tence, if the question were to rest where it then was. statement, and stakes his salvation on his veracity. But it was argued, that, as the facts had been stated In the examination, however, before that Hon*, the , to the House, they wort bound, itr justice to his declaration Was not made under the same circtin Royal- Highness, to decide upon them. Yet ific)the . stances ; nor was the immorality - the same in a con letter of Ins Royal Highness, so far from calfineiroe tradiction at their bar, and a contradiction upon oath. a decision, he deprecates a decision, and desires that Mrs. - Clarke, he was ready to admit, had given evi 1. they may refer the matter to - another. .tribunal.— dence which was exceptionable; but he contended, (Hear, hem, hear, 1)—In tkit urifortimate letter, which i that she hiffl not sheared any disregard of truth or proceeded from the very worst advice that had ever falsehood. Much had been said of her fascinations : yet been give il ttitreon in the situation of his Royal but he must confess, that her first appearance at the' Highness, there st4eralpiissages highly objec- bar had made an unfavourable impression i pre tenable, to which he should snot then snore pertmu- "him ; Which, perhaps, might i n ane arisen from his larly allude ; but there eras one part to Which he wee want of sensibility. - Her manner "df giiing her evi stations w dilect: the attention a the Hotise in con- dence *at not guarded, as it would if she came to firmation of what he had just stated:: -The letter it- give studied testimony. She gate her testimony with self he wished he had the power to expunge from the a levity And impropriety of conduct which shewed Journalsof the - House, andtoblotout friatri-fhe memory iliat she was not misrepresenting the truth. No doubt of all its Members—(Hear, hiar,'heeir!).—The part she had been encouraged in this course by the notice to which he alluded was this : .• the House tot kof her replies, by sometimes laugh ., My consciousness ofinnoeenee leads me confidently to hoPo ing . at them, which she seemed to construe as appro. that the House of Connuons will not, upon such evi knee as they ba tion. But whilst the carelessness of her manner have heard, adopt any proceedings prejudicial to my honour and . snewed the sincerity of her evidence, the knowledge: chnzeter ; but if, upon such testimony as has been adduced aping me, the House of Commons can think my innocence quea-, that if she prevaricated she would be sent to New- . iinpable, I claim of their justice that I shall not be condemned gate, a visitation of which she had been sometimes ~..;:h,,ui trial, nor be deprived of the benefit and protection which reminded, operated as a sanction to make her tell is :forded to every British subject by these sanctions, under the truth. The difference was obvious between sr;:ich alone evidence is received in the ordinary administratiOn c; rip. law "—( Harr, hear, hear!) her manner of giving evidence and that of Meisrs. Did the Hon. Gentlemen mean to insinuate by their Donovan and Sa nd en, who obviously - meant to cl , eering that his Royal Highness deprecated that de- : give such testimony as might be beneficial to their cision which they were called upon to make? A de- own interests. (Hear! Hear!) He had made these determination or declaration of ' general obser'vaticms In order to shew that the objec- as St: o 1 , 11 must Mean a :el or not guilty. But the only alternative afforded t , ‘ the House was the alternative of acquittal. If Gzatlemen meant by decision to determine whether oraot his Royal Highness - should be sent to trial, he s!:culd concur with them, though he must observe that it was a new meaning for deciding in a judicial lioi*e, to say, we shall decide whether the case . shall 5,-O to another tribunal to decide. iftlacy were to por ne the course pointed out in the letter, the first pro position for them to consider would be, whether or 10t,.UpOn all the evidence which they had before them, they could take upon themselves to, say, that there was 00 round of charge of corruption or criminal conni 'lnce. against his Royal Highness ? He could not Re why theWcias" Crinihial gad been introduced at all, unless it was with a view to the par ticular impression which exists on the initscli of some :ew Members of that House. But the real question H.ether the - Hotise could say that there was no charge against the Duke of York? It was a duty to declare his opinion; but painful as it s. he could not but add, that he could not say there • • nn gonad of. charge, or that he disbelieved all eylJonce which had been produced. He knew ''• %%Tug objections had been urged against the of the testimony ; but he had considered •!il Jiligently ; he had . endeavourd to take into "".s . ;'l l . the arguments on . both sides ; and he was then :'''Feted to state the strongest points • as they struck N the most attentive examination of the evi -1 lie was ready to admit that Mrs. Clarke, the •!1!( , pal witness, had been influenced by resentment; came to the Bar of that Horse • still enter ' that resentment; that she had been contra r vimesses of credit, and contradicted her "'r ; yet he would state some reasons why he her . testimony, • in the main, to be' be- . - sould allow that her testimony was not i ) t credited except when confirmed by dther testi- Ay, and, in order to ihew hOw fir that was the PerKea; xoesfiaed their children to her care, in fa your of. . . T4ike4ihilit,y. What had since happeued, at'bythe Nobler Lord ( Folkston) in the . re „roil of these children, Was an additional evidence to her credit, by spewing that she had been confidol in. She had no interest in giving false testimony.— .He could not imagine what interest she could have to , give i false evidence.against the Duke of York. .ties. connection by alliance with Mrs. Clarke wag' not strong enough tb induce her to such conduct. What ; interest then could influence a young person at the bar to give such false testimony, except they were to imagine she had been . bribed, and was a suborned witness ? Would.any Court of Justice say under such circumstances, that she was so hardened in guilt, and . so steeled against remorse, as to conduct herself in such a manner ? and was k to be supposed that be fore the assembled representatives of the nation she had borne false testimony against the son of the King? i It was really impo ss ibl e t h at she could have been guilty of snch enormity. If credit then was to be given; to her testimony, the House would observe what would be the consequence. Miss Taylor had stated that she heard the Duke of York ask Mrs. Clarke, at the time he remarked that Colonel French was teazing him, " how does he behave to you, darling?" If the Commander in Chief meant by that question, as his Learned Friend had argued, to ask only whether Co lonel French was teazing her as he did himself, why had lie not directed her to shut her door against his applications ? But why should the Duke of York have known at all that Colonel French saw Mrs. Clarke ? (Hear, hear, hear I) Why ask her how does he be have to you ? Could any body suppose that that ex pression had any other but one meaning ? viz. Is lie liberal to you ? Does he supply you plentifully NVNI money ? In getting the money, Mrs. Clarke might very well tell the Duke of York she wanted it for the purpose of removing the difficulties of which Flie was in -the habit of complaining to him. It had been said that Colonel French had given to Mrs. Clarke much more money than by agreement he was hound to do ; but that was nothing to the question. The payment of the money, and the pri vity of the Duke to the transaction as proved by Miss Taylor's evidence, were the principal considen tion. As to the discredit affected to be thrown on Miss Taylor's testimony to this fact, in consequence of the conversation having taken place four years ago, and the improbability of any distinct of perfect recol lection, particularly of conversation, after such a lapse of time, he need only observe, that what pas;es in the presence of superiors generally makes a deeper im pression than what passes amongst equals, and that the nature of the conversation was such as to be tena ' ciously remembered. The next point in the evidence `to which he should refer, was that about the note respecting Major Tonyn, and a most important part it was. In his mind there could be no doubt that this note had been written by the Duke of York. if he were acting as a Judge, under the same sanction of an oath as Judges do, and to de cide whether the life of a fellow -creature was to ;h e sacrificed upon such .evidence as that, he could not have the slightest hesitation in deciding.— ; Ail the Gentlemen well acquainted with the hand ; writing of the Duke of York proved it to be his , hand-writing, except General Brownrigg, who, when pressed, said only that he did not believe it to be the Duke's hand-writing; that he would not swear that it was not. (Hear, hear, Agar.) If the Duke of York himself saw the note, he was sure he would be as Much surprised at the sight of it as Mrs. Clarke had been, but would allow it to be his own hand-writing. All the Gentlemen, too, who were experienced in the distinction of hands, and had been examined atthe bar, Concurred in the same testimony. But here he must I beg of the House to reflect upon what it had done in calling upon such evidence to be examined at the bar. Never had e-. 4 .dence of this description been coun tenanced in a Court of Justice. One instance, indeed, had been stated by the Noble Lord under the gallery, (Lord FoLxsToNE) when such evidence had been in troduced into a Court of Justice, but then it was for the.purposeof proving whether a particular paper was the hand-writing of a particular person, but never to prove that' it was not. What, he would ask, would be the. consequences of such a pernicious precede/It ? A man need now, if that principle were to be acted upon, only produce a different paper of his own handwriting, to vacate an instrument of his own execution, by _calling such-Witnesses to ojt, lions to Mrs.'Clarke's testimony, though considerable, I prove the difference of th'e hand-vriting. What and were yet not of- weight sufficient to - destroy her testi- how much more . . mischief might not the prece mony entirely: The evidence . site had given was dent do in criminal cases ? He h td, when the pro.: such as he had never either heard - or read of in any j position was first made for calling these Gentlemei judicial proceeding. She hadcome to their bar, sup- to the bar, opposed. it in liminc-, and he then repented ported only by the testimony 'of Miss Taylor, and i that he had- not taken the sense of the House upon. stated cases which at first appeared incredible, not the question. If he bad pressed his opposition to a knowing of the existence of One Set of documents divu,ion, he was confident that he should have had which were afterwatds produced, and confirmed her with him On the division all that numerous class of evidence, and 'not - being allowed to inspect another Gentlemen in the House who had had a professional set of documents which she knew to be Irt existence' education. If they were to believe that Miss Taylor in the poisession•of Mt. Nichols. ' She knew, ht*. land Mrs . Clarke had been engaged in a conspiracy, ever, &at these doeiririents would fill into the hinds 'and that Mrs, Cbirke could forge the Duke of York's of Mr. Lowten, or Mr. Wi:kinsen, and Consequently hiad-v ■ ing; let them but recollect what means they . be produced, and this circumstance had given her con- i wand have possessed.. to accomplish their diabolical, fidence in her truth, and the correctness of her commu- purposes. This mite bad been sent from the Horse- . nications. It had been said, that the whole *Of her case guards, and Ludowick Orramin had said, that he had been produced at once ; but the House must recol 7 'was frequently in thehabit of carrying notes from that' lect, that there were some cases which she.did not men 1 place to Mrs, Clarke. This note was not like the letter tion • that others had resnked out of the inspection respecting General Clavering ; it was a note upon' of the papers, and one case bad been produced by ac- tlesissess and imported what had been done in conse cident. However, the contents of all the documents,,' quence Cif a note to which it was the answer. " I •as well of those found in Sanden's burea% of w'bose received your note, and Tonyn's business shall remain existence she was ignorant, as of thoiz which she ;as it is." What could be the meaning of this note, knew to be. in the possession of Mr. Nichols, cortilbo- ' unless that the Duke had stopped the promotion of 'rated her testimony. be had unquestionably felt Tonyn in consequence of Mrs. Clarke's note ? This sentment against the Duke of York, and came to the circumstance was SO strong that, giving full weight 'bar knowing that she laboured under the disadvantage I to all the objectiots that had ,been urged, he of being supposed to be influenced by it. There was could not vote -that his Royal Highness had not not, however, any thing in the evidence to she w that been guilty of corruption. or connivance at corruption. this charge had been brought forward in consequence ' —The next question was, whether the House of Com ? . i 'of that resentment. There were two points so lire- mons should. vote an Address to .his Majesty for the sistibly strong in the evidence, -as to render it im- removal of his Royal Highness from his command; possible for him to say that there was no ground of ; upon even a suspicion of what had been proved Charge against die Duke of Yr.'.-k. One of these evidence. If they were to go to an impeachment, points was the evidence of Miss Taylor ; the other that would be a tardy proceeding, and in the mean • teas die note respecting Major Tonyn. The evidence time the Minister Would remain in his situation. The of Miss Taylor had been much objected to ;. hat . , House had in, the last instance, respecting the First dining the - whole of the examination, he had norpOk- Lord of,_ the Admiralty (Lord Melville) carried up e c i v ca' thing that'cOuld his testimony. itetsi.utions to the Throne, and procured his remowl, 1. ,-- - • 514 A y? r t ibitm„. 4 iv-. Ikiry Atr.w 2 j ialu n , :; tirtiNnstlisve of hor hayrick had children intrust-i though not for any act done. in his ofics..ti Leircl 4,, f ad.. ft!, bgrice4.ro Nevin favour of her credibility. Ati the Admiralty,lsot in an office which !mimic! hol4 many Waitslit.wpa,an evidence of gocid conduct and general • years before. He would. admit, •however; rePutatign• %ad amounted to a testimony of so many i proceedings against that Noble person lista tiika iiiuuded upon depositions t4tketi o4th bieVdre .P.Arliarnentary Commistionerg.- Dllt if the fldtise . proecal addres lily Majesty Tcir die ire val of a pJhlic servant, against whom saabwiiots could be brought,.witbout -the poster of - etaxiitdrig witnesses upon oatli----:ft!ieir hiquishorfal*ritetaiie in pieviance of which they had the-imtfinfitY id n~tuire into a Int 'es in all the clepal tar ; ;lts ofthe etatl6ll4 rised Ito appoint CommitteLs fin. that pilillnSt:ib In?* `that iS now become a fiirm, should thus:berme/erect efe ig4 . tory . for want- of power, to exetteiiir'ssfitivessesnpon oath,-it was time to amend, the law , olParfament;,add ; apply to die other House to ago* in pawing atrAct to render the powers of the Console's* sufficienetotheli ob. . - ject. It had been said thatthe Deskeif Vorkoraito be .consid:red as the meanest iittlividuol in the couht,4s' ; but h.ui he been treated as the hirl, rest Peet? • •serptiose the case to have happened to any Poerof-thelairdi who might have been Commander lit Chief, - and that tl.e same factshad been proved against hini, wonkinchtli. t House have addressed that he should be removed from his command ? A Right Honourable Gentleman had ' said that we could not punish a Prince of the Blood ;if not. determined to alter the succession. Why that circumstance of the connection between the illustrious ; Sovereign on the Throne, and the object of this pro ; reeding, rendered it impossible for them to pursue the same course as in the case of any other subject. • i.• would be the last man to admit that that House should bend to public opinion without its walls. But high as their attachments were to-The Throne, he thought, that nothing should be dearer to them tha t to maintain the character of that House. if one the opinion should prevail that the of Com ! mitts had heard of corruptions existing in the state, ! and heard of it with inditierence , •=if ever such an impression should go forth, -and they should lo e the confidence of the people---if they should on apy 4 occasion appear to be inattentive to the interests of i their constituents, and the minds of the nubile 54., ld he alienated from Parliament—if ever that fatal time should arrive; no man could tell the consequences. Never had he siren 2,vote with more reluctance than i he should that night:; and it would afford him the 1 highest satisfaction, if he could conseietstioder say that no grounds of charge existed against the' i t Jt ke lof York. His Honourable and Learned Friend (Mr. Burton) bad attested the sincerity of Ms vote,•by an affecting- allusion to his infirmities and age,: and the . consequent impossibility that his vote:shot:id be in fluenced by any considerations of interest or any Views of ambition. For his own part , he - could say,' that, though he was not labouring under the same afflictic a with his Hon. and LearrA 'Friend, yet he looked • forward both for himself and Those connections to whom be was strongly and tenderly attached, for ! future prosperity, and whatever might be the result of the present question,he would have ever the heartier: satisfaction to know, that he had no advantages t i expect from the vote which he should- give that night. (Sir SAMUKL, ROMILLY'I Speech concluded ennidit the loudest clearings.) : • t Mr. He SMITH regretted that in tl s reeNreselotions there was no propositions which wottidstifivif the House to a distinct vote of A ye - 4itsd Iffe-at the accusation. He:admitted that the I-Totise /rad-full powers to proceed to the extremity of judgment; and even to inflict punishment; buthedid not eorisiifetqhat l i the sort of ex parte evidence given waS alfficieot - to in duce the House to believe there• - was that aeon' of tot. nivance in the Duke, to justify-their lbilietsAg et - I*ws cr punishment. (Mr. Smith spoke for a great ltngth of time, but was so much interrupted by cough .cg I in the House, as to be almost inaudible in 'the-gal lery.) The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, on risinetl dress the House, expressed his conviction 111 it lie would not have discharged the duty he Owed. to it, :,were he to jot - bear making some observations on a question of so peculiarly judicial a nature. His tines ti As he would reduce to three :—the Ist was;•What case was necessary to form the guilt or innocence of the Commander in Chief ? 2d, Whether he were griihy or not ? and, Bd, If he were guilty what sort 'of ad • dress should be thought most proper to cottirey` it : Which of the addresses, he would ask, would he fre• ferred ? W.ls it that which had for :ts object t a *al removal of the Duke ; or that founded on the ccarge of crimes which were eenied by evidence, Charge which could not be ascertained, and •Nehicb warned the House in fact to come to a precise deeTstlisi on his guilt ? He could not perceive any difference' he could not tween criminal participauon and connivance. Tau House possessed in itself the power of removal - in "anY case short of crimes. He could not help looking iipoi the Address . as extremely doubtful, and'engrafting clause of criminality upon the accused. He understood its object was, that of acquitting of personal corcuption the Duke of York, yet . in his mind it went a great length, it concluded the full amount of both mgr. 1 and legal guilt, and was completely a contra fiCrio.l in terms. If the Illustrious Personage stispctel Mrs. Clarke of unfair dealings, in the way of comm;ssioni and promotions, and yet proceeded to dispose of them in a manner intended by such dealings, he tvlutd onsi der it as a case < f unaggravatedcorrnpti. Hethought there was co sm.lll degree of complicatlM in ne Ad= dress. Gentlemen ought to understand on vrh it side they should give their vote before they proceeied t dispose of it. His Honourable and Learned Friend opposite had not precisely looked to the grounds on which the Address was framed. In fact, while vot ing for the original Address, he came to a conclu sion which his own arguments had defeated. He . had said he entertained doubts of the personal 'cot.- rnption of his Royal Highness. .And would hinow be prepared to vote for an address, charging hint with such corruption ? If it was sufficient to state that this • charge was groundless, he should either vote for the negative in that case, or state the affirmative to the contrary. And yet he came to a coOnehisinn merely; as witnesses were not examined — tPun'otitli. Thus, he would not allow• that the :contradictions should be taken to be verified in the same manner.— . The Learned Gentleman next proceeded to animad vert upon the evidence of Mrs. Clarke and Kiss Tay lor, between which he drew :dine very wilted: dis tinctions. Mrs. Clarke's evidence was'lstithotit any corroboration, except in one er two rierlicttlars by Miss Taylor. 144 taking it upon the whole, there was not a syllable of it which went in any measure to prove that the Duke of York was pr.vy to these corrupt r. ti a ti 1 1 ■ M I