Star. — London, England, 1806-06-13 00:00:00

• r - - 4i 4 K . LO •1 a . al yrg•th,,. 41 / • jaiit .• 11P FRIDAY, JUNE is, tgc6o. NUMBkk 5428 PkICE SIX• PENCE. IMPEACHMENT OF HENRY LORD VISCOUNT MELVILLE . THIRD DAT, THURSDAY, MAY I. _ _ Lord Melville's Letter of Attorney to Mr. Douglas was read. Is the entry to which you are called ispon to refer in your own handwriting ?—lt is. State the dat e s, th e number, and the fume of the notes you paid to Mr. Dundas on the 6 h of Novem ber ?—No. 9, 1:001. ; No. lc, moot ; No. 11, toool. ; No 2. t ocol. ; Nn. 13, (cool. ; all dated 44th 06tober 17Sz, Spool. altogether. Is the Mite you ilow hold en your hand one of the nmes you paid on (he 6th of November to Mr. I)°°- gist ?—I have no doubt but it is. Which number is it ?—No. is. Mr. Fenn:ll Ira.* dented to Cite, flora , he Public Melts Gf the Navy Pay Offie,, the balance in the 'Fteafurer'% hands on the 30th April, 1763, which h.; did AS Pillows : Under the head of Navy Pay Branch And VaZtualliug 2110/1 COURT OP JUDICATURE, HALL. L 42.1 u 7 U 37,856 o • 93ST 4 4 IFIRST DAY, TUESDAY, APRIL 29. - The Peers having entered the the Hall and taken their feats with the ceremonials and formalities which have been detailed in former papers— Mr. WMITIVEAD addreffed their Lordfhips in a (perch which occupied a confiderable time. but into which we (hall not enter, as it was merely a recapi tulation of the charges, and of the evidence to be adduced to fupport them, which we (hall detail at confiderable length. Total C• 89,4c8, 1 s 3 Then the following entry was read in the Ban king Book : " /83, April :9th, by balance to new account, 66,4081. tab. 3d." The Clerk reads " The aith June, 1783, Bank Note !cool." Look to the entry of the sad of November t7Bz, in the fame hook, and Rate whether you on that day paid any and what fum in Bank notes to Mr. Dow glas ?-0n that day we paid to Mr. Dund'as. Q4eltion by Counfel—ls that entry in your hand writing ?—lt is; we paid 30001. on the 22d of No• ember to Lord Melville. SECOND DAY, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30. The Lord Chancellor having acquainted the Ma nagers for the Commons, that they might proceed with their evidence; they began by referring to the Public Statute zo Geo. 111. c. S 4. intituled, " An Azt for appointing and enabling Commit:Goners to examine, Like, and Rate the Public Accounts of the kingdom ; and to report what balances are in the hands , f the Accountants which may be applied to the public fervice ; and what defees there are in the prefent mode of receiving, candling, iffuing, and accounting (or public money, and in what more ex pedi , ious and effeausl and lets expenfive manner Mit (aid Cervices can in future be regulated and carried on for the benefit of the public." Then " the Third Report of the CommUnnners cd lce, rid R. he ,iblic appointed to examine, take, and (late, the public ac- counts of the kingdom," was read, which has been in the hands of the public fince March 1781, and therefore is not here given. The warrant granted to Mr. Barri when Treafurer of the Navy, to increafe his falary, was then proved ; and afterwards the warrant under the King's Sign Manual app inting Henry Dundas to that Office with a clear falary of *owl per ann. was read, dated the 23c1 of 09.tber, 1782. Lord Melville reigned this fituation on the tt th of April, 1783, and was re appointed to the fame Office on the grh of January. 1784. Thil WAi admitted by hi, Lo: lthip's Cotmfel with. out the formality of evidence; after which an extra& of that part of the Eighth Report of the Commit !loners f Public Accounts was read, which re. commend, that the cuftody of Cafh applicable to the Navy fervices fisould be transferred from the Tres. rarer to the Bank of England, and the account only of the receipts and payments be kept in his Office, and the Treafurer neither receive nor pay public money himfelf. Entries in the Journals of the Commons and Lords in t 785, were then read to prove, that " Mr. Henry Dundaa prefented to the Houfe according to order, a Bill for better regulating the Office of Treafurer of hisMajcßy's Navy," which was puffed with the ufual forms. The appointment of Andrea► Douglas, Efq. to be Lord Melville's Paymaller, was then proved. Mrs. Mary Douglas being examined, declared, that a box containing all her . hufband's papers had been delivered by her to two Gentlemen htlonging to the Committee appointed to prepare the Articles of Im peachment against Lord Melville. Samuel Whitbread, F.fq. one of the two Gentle men alluded to, proved that the above papers had .ever Bore brin in his poffellion, or that of the Corn mittee, or in the hands of Mr. Winter. Mr. John Winter had carefully examined all the papers, hut could not find among them a Power of Atom ney from Lord Melville to Mr. Douglas. Rufe Haworth proved the entry by himfelf of a letter ot Attorney from Lord Melville to Mr. Douglas, in a honk called " The Letter of Attorney Book," in the month of Anna 1782. Mr. Thomas Rippen, one of the Cafhiers of the Bank, produced a Firm Book belonging to the Bank, containing the fignatures of Lord Melville, and of Mr. Douglas. figued on the Bth of Augutl, 378 z. Then Mr. Rippen was afked to Rate for what pur pofe Lord Melville and Mr. Douglas figned that book on that day ?—ln confequence of a Power of Attor ney granted from Hens y Dundas to Andrew Douglas, Hem y Dundas figncd this book in confequence /If his opening an account with the Bank. and Andrew, Douglas figned it in eonfequence of a Power of Attorney granted from Henry Dundas to him. Du you know what is become of that Power of At torney ?--I Jo not Then the following entries en the Paid Firm Book of the Baulk west read. Henry Dundas--lltb Antra sOs—jolm Clifford For account of Right Honourable Henry Dustin. Andrew Douglas-11th Augult i7lla—John fwd. _ _ Foe the Right Honourable Henry Dundee and J. Slade. Bth Augull ryBs. John Clifford. For the Right Honourable Henry DundAs and Ceo. Swart*ld. Bth Auguk 178 s. Juba Clifford. Q2eftion by a Lord.—When an account opened .t the Bank they enter their fignetures in the book, for the bank to Isr. Acquainted with their band writ ing this is the bi.olt in which loch fignatures are Always taken for the purpofe of comparing the slap as they arc drawl.. A Paper was 'hewn to Lord lacono, Melville, and the Cuunfcl admitted it to be his Lordlip's baud-writing. The Paper was read, and is as follows : tisOsl• a . 4. Lembo, loth Januar?. tssts. Then I eceised from Archibald Douglas. Aa• log Exi. to And, cur Douglas.i.fq. mylate palatal:yr, four itt.sufand tour hundred and feventy.five pounds. 4'. 9d. beiriglile dkrocouue of a b41.411C11 remaining iu its tutudb, Jue me uvo acci , unt of twelve thou..tud pounds 4lveole.o him cootie of my two Treat foterll.lo, to Fay 1.11:11CLOCT Fees, &c. pa account Igo toccivs4. fisexv DCMDAS. Mr. George Fennel, Accountant to the Treafurer of the Navy, was examined to prove what were the duties of the Paymafler and the Treafurer of the Navy, and what were the modes of payment. The following were the principal points of his evidence : Do you know whether it is the duty of the Pay ntafter of the*Treafurer of the Navy, when he re ceives money at the Exchequer. to trantinir receipts of that money to the Navy Office, or a certificate of his having received the money, to the Na►y Office? —Yes, to the Navy Board. Does the Treafurer of the Navy ever receive or pay an' money himfelf es Treafurer of the Navy ? None, to my knowledge. Were yeti not Accountant at the time Lord Mel ville paired his accounts of the firtt Treafurerfhip, and doting the whole of that period?—Thole ac counts have been but lately paired. You were Accountant then at the time thole ac counts were palled ?—Yes, I was. Did you not make up thole accounts ?--I did. I In the courfe of that invelligation, did ;t appear to you that the Treafurer of the Navy had ever piid or received any money as Treafuret cat the Navy ? It did not. Mr. William Role Haworth proved that the Pay• mal}er of the N.svy could receive no money iif led to the Treafury of the Navy from the Exchequer, u,,lefs he is exprefily autharifed by a power of attorney from the Treafury of the Navy to to do. Mr. Oj&crne &want examixed. What fituation do you hold in the N ivy Office ? Chief Clerk Cur examining the Treaftirer's Accounts. Do you know whether it is the duty of the Pay mailer of the Navy, when he receives money at the Exchequer, to tranfmit a certificate, receipt, or fome document to the Navy Office, of his having fo re ceived the money at the Exchequer ?—I conceive it to be fo, but I do not know it from authority. L. it the contant praftice of the Paymatier of the Navy fn to do; to fend a certificate of the money having been received at the Exchequer ?—it is. Where does he fend it to ?—ro the Navy Board. Is the Navy Board the Supetior Board ?—I think it is. State for what purpnfe is that certif.cate tranf mined tt% the Navy Board ?—To acknowledge the receipt of the form which the certificate contains. Does that acknowledgement enable the Nav7 Board to aft upon it, and do they act upon it ? It does. In what way do they *A upon it ?—By atligning bills out of the fusn. 'dch *re it, cived. Do you mean by aaiitGing bills upon the Treafurer of the Navy ?--I.lptin the Treafurer of the Navy. Do the Navy Board ever affign any bills for pay• . menu upon the Tre rimer of the Navy, until they have receitcd filch certificate from the Paymaller ?—No. Is the tranfmitlirn of the certificate of the receipt to the Navy Board, a rieceffary preliminary to the aflignmeuts being made ?—Certainly. Crafr-examinid. Whether in drawing for money or afligning bills, the Board are in any MCArtIIC I ifiuenced by applica tions from the Treafurer ?—They are influenced en- tirely by the Navy Board, and not by any application from the Treafurer. Does the drawing for money upon the Exchequer, in favour of the Macurer, originate with the TreA• furer or with the Boards ; the Navy and other Boards? —With the Boards. Are they, in that inflance, at all influenced by any application from the Treafurer ?—The Treafurer never makes any. Does the amount of the balance at any time in the Treafurer's hand, originate from the Aas cf the dd. ferent Boards ?—Certainly. Uninfluenced altogether by the Treafurer or the PAyrtlAile Qeltion by a Lord—ls that which you have hate U to the Hqufe, in anfwer to the quellions of the Honourable Iklanager, the invariable cow le ot office? —lt is. Do you know it to 1)e fo ?—I do. Q . t.2eftion from a Lord—Whether the anfwer you have lilt given, applies to the period previous to pairing the Aft in 1785 ? It applies to all caies be tore and lublequent. - . An entry of a certificate figned by Mr. DimitclAs as P.tymAder in hi, official capacity was read tollbew that inch certifi.:ate µ•ii tranttLitted from the Pay. di !tier to the Navy Board. _ _ . qileitioll (Toni x Lord—You are rum:ruled to have faid;thut the Treafurer of the Navy dud not receive any money at the Exchequer hinlfelf. but that it was always received by his ?Ay mriller, under a power of attorney by him ; have you faid fo ?—Yes. Is it the 'dual etturfe for the Treaturer of the Navy to receive money for the public fervice in his ollce, through the Paymaller eontlituted his agent under power of attorney ?—lt is. Mr. John Girninghans, a Clerk in the Bank of England, was called to prove that money imnrelfed to the Treafurer of the Navy, is always paid to him or to hia leprefentative, and that this was the proc tors during the - fife of Mr. Douglas, the money being entered in the Bank book. The PaytnAtier ufually takes creiie for the whole fum, but fometisnes he ddes to have a part in Bank notes. Entries made 6th and aid November, and igth December, 1782, were then proved. Did you attend as Clerk cf the Bank at the Ex cheques, on the 6th of November 178 a ?—I Did yuu pay to the Paymaster of the Navy any rum in Bank notes, as a pat' of the Cum th.4l he W 35 to motive that day at the Exchequer ?—':es, In Bank notes. State the day, the number, and the (urn 1 , 1 each note. Whet is the honk you lievt. in y.,... ? ni b is t h e hook wherein we cuter ail ...)tc , t...i etc iffued et the Esehequer, on eaconnt of the Get t... and CumpAny of the Bank ...b eak of Ent.Lni. Qeflion by a Lord.—Are you able to afceetain by the entry or otherwife, that that 3c.001. was paid to Lord Melville or was it paid to Ms. Douglas?—[ apprehend it was paid to Mr. Douglas ; I never faw his Lordhip at the (Ace. _ . . Q2eltion by Managen.—State the dates, the num ber,, and the fums of the notes, which you paid on the iad of November ?—The notes were paid on the azd November t 782. Q2ellion by CJunfel.—ls that entry your hand. writiog ?—lt is. Q2eition by Managers.—What are the dates of the notes?—The 7th (,1 November 179 z. . . 110 r t1.41 are the u.gmbers?—No. 211, zt3, an' 214, each of goocl. in •alue. Look At that note ; is that one of the notes which feu paidiu that day ?—I have no doubt but it is ; it is No. 2 tl. Crnir examined. Does it appear upon your hook, that thofe notes paid on the :ad of November were paid to Mr. Diu becaitfe you foy you apprehend In; does it ap pear from the ho•ak that it was lo N nes are written .IF in the name of Mr. nuncios, but I appre hend :hat Mr. Douglas received them. What is your reafon for laying you think yon paid it tii Mr. Douglas ?—Only becoufe Mr Dougl.rs .tttended upon tl at bulinels. you give any reafon why thole three notes of wool. each were written off in the name of Mr. Durdas, when you fay that you never Law Mr. nun cios at the Exchequer, and therefore the payments could nut be made to him .?—No particular reafon it was au ufual thing whether they were written off in the name of the Trealbrer of the Navy, or of the perfon who reprefented him ; it was fitne:imet in one way and fometimes in another. . . Q . 2eilion I mm a Lord.—Whether, under whatever name thrice emries were made, they were not at all underltood by you to have becn made on account of the Treafurer of the Navy i—Undoubtedly. Mr. Wm. Heald, a Clerk of &frail. Drummond, underwent a long examination, for the purpofe of proving, that the bank note, No. 212, had beet paid into that Finnic by Lord Melville. He could only (wear the note had been paid in on his account ; but whether by himfelf or another, could not State. FOURTH DAY—FRIDAY, MAY s. o.her Clerks belonging to Meas. Drummond's honk, proved that Lord Melville had a cafh account with the houfe in 5781, that kraal rums of moue) , were -eceived on his Lordhip's account, and fume of them from Mr. Douglas; that money was paid for drafts, figned by Lord Melville, and interell charged for overpayments. Mr. George Scott, Clerk to Meths. Moffats and Kenfington. !Wore that the note, K. No. I a, for toool. was received by their hoof* in November. 1782, in payment of a bill upon the Lord Advocate of Scot land. but could not fay from whom. Then Mr. Whitbread, one of the Managers for the Commons, Sated as follows Having brought the examination down to the 7th Apiil, 1783, and hay ing been called by the Counfel on the other fide, to dep. re upon oath as to a part of the articles in this impeachment, 1 beg to appear in the charaßer of a ssi.nefs, and upon my oath to declare, that I beard Lord Melville declare on the t sth June, tBos, that during the Paymalterlkip of Mr. Douglas be Incense pallid of the public money to the amount of 20,0001. or thereabouts ; and that he further declared th.st he would not reveal the application of that money, being impelled to do ft from motives of public duty, pro vats honour, and perfstal convenience. Qtellinn by a Lord.—Was that :infarct Cr, given by Lord Melville committed to writing ?—lt was not committed to writing ; 1 heatd my Lord 'Melville fay it; and it was Trcly to !Ave the time of the Cowl, and AI I have been ahead,' fa nrn, that 1 lwe tr it.— Many other witneffe. who beard it might be called to prove it. Examined by At Comfit. Did the I-knowable Manager make any note at the time of the words that were frken f—l Jid not commit it to writing at the tium ; but I remember the words upon my oath. Did not the Noble Defendant at the fame time ac company it with a pnfitive ..inclaration, that he bad not converted any part of it to his own profit or emolument f—l believe he did. Have you the lealt doubt that he did f ?—As to the exprefs terms I do not remember tl,em ; thole that I have fpulcco are the words that made great impieXon upon une, and which I (hall never forget : the inip..rt of the ether parts of his tp,:ech certainly WS/. that he had not applied it to any private advan tage or emolumeor. lit fubaance it was to that effe& ?—I have 14:d Ti:at C1.41`11 .1.t5 110 eQ.t:,: 1: Wits .1 . 1 1.•. —•••••• • • • . . Wiils •nt •i h .ic!;•?"'r Jr L . •••• • • " lal"."1,2 7' cc., 1-Y th.• C• • 4 • I N ;•JJ: th: Lord 1: .v• g.4ve ; exAnlina: . • i • 41:caav 1.: 11: lueJbut c A Clerk belonging to Mure and Atkinfon being eramined, read a draft on Smith, 1' tyne, and Smiths, payable to Lord Advocate of Scotland for 50001. drawn by Mitre and C. ad July, • ;83 ; and Smith and Co.',clerk proved the paymee : t ut the draft. Another draft, the fame on the fame, for 60001. of s rth july, payable to Lord Advocate, was proved is the fame manner ; and a clerk belonging to Smith and Co. wa: called to prove the Bank Notes in which it had bten paid, but an error in the entry made ano tlizr bock necelfary. A fimilar draft, of 31ft July, for wcol. was prov. ed, soil a pet lon belonging to Smith and Co.'s houfe, proved, that on that day 44761. los. :cc!. was paid for two drafts, one of which was for 2cvzol. , The en. try in the wale book was r:ad as follows : C. 171 • • C. IMO Jr- 959 10.0 • 809 - - too° H. 409 - mu" B. 77 - 400 14 - 37 - J 4 C. t 6 - so Mu. • - 6 to to More and Co. £. 4476 10 ma but the witnefa could not fsvem that the notes amen to hint were the identical notes paid. FIFTH DAY, SATURDAY, MAY 3. Evidence was fubfequently given during the exa mination to which we referred on the preceding day, Poiterior teltimony ettablifhed three payments by 'Lord Melville, to the extent of 15,4001 in recludlion of the 33,0001. which conHituted the balance we have dated agoin,t his Lordthip, on a comparifon of the ace , unts of the Treafurer's Office and the Bank, on the 3cth of April, 1783. A tittegion then arofe, whether the contents of the t > ,, o k s of the Navy Office, without any reference to the dne , irnentv from which the items of account were colleaed, were admiffible evidence ; and after a fhort tirtorgle by the Learned Counfel for the Defendanti he Loan CH am c st.Loa decided that they ought to be received. Mr. GIL.Es rata, that the balance compofed of the difference between 23,0601. and 13,4001. was 76001. which the Defendant was indebted to the Navy Ac count at the period he entered a fecund time on the office of I'reafurer. The Honourable Manager then produced the Bank books, to thew that this balance 76z01. was reduced to 16001. by the transfer of 6 col in the Btrik•books on the 13th And 3111 of .larch, the 24th and scab of April, 1784, tram the account of the new Treafureribip to the credit of thtt of his former Treafurer Chip. - _ Mi. GiLas then added, that he fhould confirm the eircumllance of this redudion of the balance againft Lead Melville, in the old account, to 16001. by a compariton cf the Office books with the Bank books. This enquiry led to a long detail of fi c ;oret, extract ed from the Office books and the Bank books, by which the Ratement of the Hon. Manager, as to the condition of the balance, was confirmed. The Winds of the day concluded with the exami nation of Mr. Standard, refpeding the authority under which Soo& was transferred front the new to the old account of the Treafurer ; skiing which he raid, that he had taken the means to inform himfelf. and that he did not find any authority for loch transfer. o, rt. 11 1 count SIXTH DAY, MONDAY, MAY s. Mr. Fennel was called upon to Hate the balancer, in the, three branches. d Navy, Pay, and Viet:oi -1 ling ; by all which, oi - st comparifon with the Bank Check Book, on the ;oda •ot September, 1785, the 'previous Ilatement wa, confirmed. that the Defen dant was debtor, as Treafiver of the Navy, on the old account, ibool. and on the new acclunt, goool. Or that day the balance in the Bank wai.lioBl. tas.3d. Mr. Drummond's Clerk was recalled, to thew the various payments into that huufe, explanatory of the ci,incidence contended for by the tlon. Managers, between the receipts from the public account,, and the payments into the private bankers of the Defen dant. Mr. Archibald Douglas again appeared, to depots to the balance which he, as ailing Executor to his Father, paid to the Treafurer (fate Navy, antoullt idg to 44:51. 41. sod. and a receipt was produced, (toed .by the Defendant, for that amount. The Watnefs laid, no farther claims were made on that account. Mr. Whitbread, one of the Manasers for the Cmit mons, then faid-1 again offer mylelt as a witnekoi your Lordthipt, and 1 (wear, that on the a tilt cf . June, t 805, I heard Litrd Melville decline, wi:h te te:cue to another Lunt of IC.OOO. than th3t &nd ing itsbich I depofeJ on the other day, that /.e a Subfetparte time to the time at which he pc:kilcd hunlelf of the &It I n , •frefs Ii;.,11..11 of ar.•:;:er fum, neArly to a 1:::• . • ; •:.•: ; .! I 13,:dcifj,c,j, ii; it.ibitait.e, ;kit ; • civet he would rot tev..tl the .:14C .411) , itWIC f: 1- CM 4: • motive. 11.1 I ;:r• C L!.g I N .~; r .' :cr u•itr.::t is ;)rc:111:1:t.' !.111:Iger, upon this ;:;.0 "..y mote ..:.11i I; L, At tha or iu vistLug vi *hat d4.} 1• • e: