The National Register. — London, England, 1809-12-24 00:00:00

$2O My Lord, Mr. Wright has in his answer, sworn, in these words. 66 That the greatest part but not all of the household, " and other furniture of and belonging to the said house, in Westbourne-place, was supplied and sent in, by this De " Pendant, during the said mouth of December 1808, or in the " early part of the month of January following, and the re " mainder some Niue afterwards ; but the particular days when " every article of furniture was so supplied, and sent in, this 66 Defendant cannot state as to his belief or otherwise, save " and except, that the first delivery of any goods, by this De " fendant, at the said house, was made on the 10th day of " November, 1808 ; and the last, on the 20th of Nay follow " ing." In this, Mr. Wright, my Lord, had an object; for had he stated the dates of the delivery, and orders, it would have ap peared, that almost the whole of the furniture was ordered, if not delivered, before my acquaintance with Mrs. Clarke coin mowed. Upholsterers, my Lord, throughout the trade, do keep their books (and so does Mr. Wright) in such a manner, that not the date of the delivery of every article can be set forth, but the name of the porter making the delivery. This, Lord, I was prepared to prove, but I understood such evidence is not aiiinissible in a Court of Justice. I t&a...rxe, your Lard..hip, upon the motion for anew trial, to have said—" I feel great difficulty in granting this motion thus applied for, on behalf of the DePodant ; at the saint . " time Mrs. Clarke IS NOW MIXT MOk E, FROM THE 8E ,6 GINNING TO THE END, WITH Wright, THE PI.4.INTIFF, " than she appeared to be at the time of the trial ; his reproen " falions rtspc, !ing her, are, in swore reprel , , IMpORTANT: " and Ihere seem to be matiers NOW DISi LOSED. ii.siiie'tptSct: iheM ROTH under other rirromstaaces than I/vise undo- zchicu " they tv-re pre.ented t.) the Jury, at the time of the trial." Your Lordship has sinee altered )our opinion; and I undet stand yon now think " the little matter,: of taking the house it " Hollev-street, and the transaction s ith Curt, to be but trifles • 6 in the rause." Excuse we, any Lord, if I adopt your first impression, and reject the latter. It was in evidence that no bill was delivered tome, until the FIRST OF JUN C, when it came, inclosed in the following note. set forth in the answer of Francis Wright : " F. Wright's respectful compliments to Colonel Wardle : " has taken the liberty to inclose his bill; and as the articles '• were to be charged for ready mope), having !oet a mos; ous disappointment, will thank him to settle the lyilance :• for •` that purpose, will call utpon him to-morrow morning, eleven •' o'clock." Now, my Lord, I never yet heard, that tradesmen were io habits Of KEEPING COPIES of such sort of notes, I believe it to be unprecedented ; Mr. Wright had a motive for preserving a Copy of this Letter. The action, my Lord, as brought against Ole on the 2d of' Jt: Nr, THE BAY A FrEn. 'THE Ell • VERY OF THE BILL, and tried nu the 3d of .1 uN—why all this hurry ? What purpose was to he answered by it ? 1 have not yet heard from any quarter, the shadow of a reason attempted to be assigned for this haste. I do not lay stress upon thes* matters, as decisively sheaving a preconcerted scheme, fix me with the payment of an unjust debt ; but I am reasoning on the ettoBABILITIES of the case, as they appeared in evidence Let ow, whilst I am upon this part of the case, bring to your Lordship's recollection Mrs. Clarke's letter to me, of the Llth of MAY ; wherein she demands of Major Dodd and m SELF A JOINT BOND for 10,0031. and the REMAINDER OF Wright's BILL. TO DE PAID BY vs. Why, my Lord, if I WAS DEBTOR to Mr. Wright, should Major Dodd he thus applied to ? if I bad, in the language of Mr. Wright. given orders to his brother to furnish the house, and taken upon myself to pay Win ; " honourably and honestly," why, I appeal to your Lordship, should Mrs. Clarke on the I.ITH OF MAY, demand of Major Dodd and myself, not only 10,0001. but the remainder OF Wright's BILL to be paid, and that, BEFORE it had been delivered TO ME I What reason had Mrs. Clarke to doubt, Altai, if liable, I should pm it ; or, did she think, that Mr. 'Wright had neither the means, nor the inclination to compel me? And recollect, my Lord, she swore that the first she &viol of my refusal to pay the bill, was from Mr. Wright, a fortnight or three weeks before the trial. 31IF. Clarke, my Lord, and Mr. Francis Wright, were ma terially contradicted by Mr. Illingworth, upon whom nu impn tatiou was attempted to be cast; yet it does seem, in weighting the probabilities of the case, his evidence was deemed unworthy of coasidericioa. THE NATIONAL REGISTER. Sir Richard Phillips's evidence your Lot &hip also passed un noticed, and yet, ineweighing the probabilities of the case, it did, and does strike me, that his evidence is important ; for he proves distinctly, a dedreation of Mrs. Clarke, subsequent to the inves tigation, that she was indebted to Mr. right for the furniture in question, and was pressed for paginent. It was said by Your Lordship that the evidence given on my behalf, ought to be looked at with caution : Surely, my Lord, where testimony is contradictory, caution is equally necessary on both sides, and more especially so, when the situations of some of the Defendants are considered !, Your Lordship seems at a loss to guess, what could induce Mrs. Clarke to make the discovery which she did, and undergo, for a length of time, the examitiation of the House of Commons, unless she was led to hope for a pecuniary recompence at my hauls. The answer, my Lord is not of difficulty; is it not probable that Mrs. Clarke might look forward to a public investigation, as a means of ind:teing the Duke of York to comply 2vith the c;ainzs she had upon him ? and has not TILE RESvLT evinced, oot only, that such claims have been attended to, but that a far greater slim than was originally demanded by Mrs. Clarke, has oeen paid to her ?—One point in your Lordship's charge only re mains for me now to observe upon, and it is this : Your Lordship asked why Mr. Corfield was not called to give evidence, as to the note I had written to him, urging the exami cation of the witnesses at the first trial ; to which I anse er, that Mr. Corfield was in Court, apparently aiding and assisCeg the eause of the Defendants. What I stated, in this respect. needed ;10 confirmation.-1 have the original Address to the ‘• " of the United Kingdom" in mg possession, in lb-. Cur ft'ic''s I:ald writing ; and, expecting from the conduct of the Attoroey leiteral, that Mr. Corfield might be called as atl itnes4 [het s.trt of the Defenda!ls, 1 subperna-d Mr. Serjennt best, far I; . e_t purpose of proviog, if Nil . . shawl have been put onto the oox, what had passed at ate interview between the Se:jet/0, Mr. rnifiad, and Mr. ; ;fiat that the seniiments of Mr. Serjeant Best, as to the conduct and character of Mr. Cwfield, might. in such ease, have been stated to the .lury I have now, my Lord, travelled through the case ; on which have, honest' , candidly, and temperately submitted to your liorthltip, such observations its have uncured to me; and, in so doing, I hope and trust that I have not been unmindful of the respect due to that exalted situa• :ion which your Lordship tills. I have the honour to remain, Your Lordship's most obedient Servant, GM. LL. WARDLE. James-street, 'Buckingham-gate, 16th Dec. 1809. The following- copy of a leiter from Mrs. CLARKE to Mr. WAtermy IS Sill/it/hied to the above letter to Lord ELLENEOROUGII May 14, ,1809.: D E.l ft Sin—When I sent for you the other day, and you came, accompanied by Major Dodd, to inquire of you how far )ou intended to carry into execution your promises towards me, you seemed unwilling to admit that these promises had heed made, hut conditionally, in the event of the Duke of Kent suc ceeding the man whom t teas to give evidence enough against to turn out ; this I deny, it was without that condition. The man ner that 111ajor Dodd and yourself evinced, led me to believe that you both felt yourself under promises that you were unequal or unwilling to perform ; and you thought to avail yourselves of ft;- titre promises, as futile as evasive, neither of which ought or can prevail. I will here put you in mind, once more, of those prowl-es, and of my expectations, which, if von value your selves and characters, as men of honour, you cannot but accede to, nor can vou think I require any thing but what I am most fully entitled to. As you say nothinc , is in your power at this present moment, will lay down my ;lan ;—that yourself and Major Dodd enter into a joint bond (as you did in promises) to give me, within the space of two years, the sum of ten thousand pounds, and till that time to allow me five hundred a year, commencing from last March, and to pay the remainder of Mr. Wright's bill. This is not half, in value, of the promises given, as I will here specify. That as my son would lose the protection of the Duke of York as soon ns I began to work on his ruin (which I had pledged myself to complete), he was to huve the same protection from the Duke of Kent ; in consequence I took my boy from the Duke of York, and I have him now on my hands. Capt. Thomson Kas to have a situation competent to keep him io his DEC. 24.