The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1809-02-04 00:00:00

reser yet adverted to, loudly celled upon the hu manity sod justice of the liovernment to attend to, which was the protection which ought to be af forded to the orphan ,, of marine officers. if some thing were not done by Government. he should feel it his duty to cell the attention of the House to the subject on a future day: Ile received no answer front the opposite side of the House. The bums or 10,300,0001. and 1400,0001. were nisi vated in the Committee, in discharge of out sounding Exchequer Bills. The Committee reported propss, and asked leave to sit again. Mr. Drelett, upon the suggestion of Mr. Can:- Vt.y, of the busincui of this night lasting a coma ileruble time, postponed his motion for the appoint. meat of au Lest ladle Committee, to '1 uesday twat. Nir. Witerent to pre notice, ilea he would. on !Monday swot, move, That the office of Chief eristary its Ireland is an efficieet place, and that tut. salary thereof should not he p,.id to city peruse not disehar{ling the duties t;stret.f." The Bill for reverting the Ti' ii' it of the Lords' Art to persons ennfitied wider krores , of Courts of Equity. was read a second tinte.eild ordered to be CUM milted on Mciuday uext. Lord Hay POTTY. in consequence of Popers nit being printed. poiepiried i e letive to . 'he Convention its Portugal: to that he next. ut Mr. Meer gyre notice, the he smolt, more to refer the Third Helene of the Cosumittee of Fivalice to a eninntittee of *he House, fur the purpose of feasisding Resolution thereon. T1111:01111E oP Tan. Mr. WARDLE. resumed his motion of last night, relative t the proluction of books from the Of. See of his fee:ael Highness the Duke of York. which, ottli the eeoeptioli of the latter part, was weed tn. fhe House - thee resn'ee I itself into a Commit tee of the whole Howie, Mr. Witearoe io the Chair. Mr. WARDLE then observed, that in answer to a question put to him the other day, ae to whether or mint hr was at Mrs. Clarke*s upint the Tuesday morning s he huml said, that he . waited for a. eunsiderahle time at her house. without secins her. Urns recollection he found that it was on Sloadep ntorning. he went and waited, and oss Tuesday, beith moumorning nut} erecting, he saw her. r ning was had to the miuittee of the Armee • erwectionr tied answers, timid the fellowing questions and simmers were recorded in rectification thereof : (lfr.Watteset was intcrra;:psted by Mr.PERCEVAI..) Q. Were you at Mrs. Clarke's On morning.?—A. Yes, 1 was, mid saw her ellen she was up stairs. Q. lime lons. might pen have been sit house before you saw her I do out thiak a long time. Q. How long (IA you stiy there ?—.l. I cannot say correctly, as I have lumen in the habit of going there so continually its my carriage, flint it is not pe,.. i el e to reeo li ee t h a w long I staid on that Oe.. Ca 11011. Q. At what line• of the morning did von first cell *upon her I cannot exactly eve ; but 1 think the first time 1 saw her on Tuesday was ; early in the morning. and 1 remember going with her, in her carriage, on the King's - road ; I should think it was between eleven and twelve o'clock. Q. Did you walk or ride at the time you called in the morning ?-e-A. !think walked. (.e. Hoe long did you stay the time you walked there ?--A. To the best of my recollection, there were a parcel of workmen putting up a looking glass, and I conceive I wre there hut a short time ; and I rather think, to the best of soy recollection, that her carriage. was at the door. (,),. How far - did you go omit with her in her este rise. tow.A. 1 went as far as the bars in the King's- , re eel. Q. Did twin call on her that day in roar carri age ?.-esk. ; 1 -lid. Q. At whet tinte I really cannot say ex attly. I think it might hare been three e' :look. Q. Del you then we her ?-emet. Yes ; I slid. Q. Was she at home ee-A. I think she was ap stairs. Q Do you reesellect how holt you staid the second time fe-A. 1 do not think long ; I think about hide-an-hear, hut culinot speak positively. Q. Did you see her a third time in the even tete I s a w here vier? short time, at iiimeht, iu her drawing-runty, with cotnpuy, as I formerly stated. Q. Was Mrs. Clarke at home when you called nn Moi.- - lay irrun.ing No; she eas tiot at Q. Did you sea her at ellen Montiay ? A. As I P was eunti.ig away. after waiting two hours, I s aw bee 'when she came in, ultra driving about the town. Q. Did roes stay any time after she returned ?_ A. No—l did not. Q. Hod you unv conversiition on the Tuesday urn• the subject of these vital -T..: A. I d o slo t posi!ivi:y :•ecullect that I ha•i-1 do not think we had any put6•ular cousersation. Q. Did Mi s. Chrike first mention the subject of these clwrges Invrinst his Royer Highness to you, tin on to her 1 fancy, in the first instance, 1 lied her questions respecting them. Q. on yon recollect from whoin you derived uur first information on the subject ?—A. It would he impo•sildr to say from whom. I could nut with propriety state several of the ram►^. Q. Did you receive any information fun Mr. Finnerty?--A. I never reerivril any intarmation from Niue iu lily life upon that subject. ‘Vithin these few days he spoke to nil.. but iist on these clirrges.--He spoke to me only in regard to Dr. Thysine. I did not know Mr: Finnerty ; but he spoke to me, I !relieve, the very day Dr. Thynne vi 44 to be examisied. IVltei Mater fi9goties pairs phiet was published, and strenii at represented therein, that any information reputed on the emir-• jett thereof was to be given to an{ Nleinlorr of Par liament applying for it. I e rote a Ictt'•r to the Major, and in ennseipitnce 1 had all I.lfriWil•W tvil /I Mr. Finnerty, from a hieli I had reason t• think he had nu information whatever to give on t .e subject, Q. 1 ur.derstnod you to say, that the first time you saw Finnerty wawa few days ago ?—A. 1 only meant to sip, that I never had any information front that person relating to *he charges I have made; and that the first time I saw hiia on any matter connected with this subject, was a few days ago. as to Dr. Thynne. (IS', Mr. Vowac.) Q. It appears to me there is ass entire contradic tion in some of the last question% and answers. — The Witiiess first says he hail no asiquimennee, nor ever sae Mr. Finuerg till the very day Dr. Thysine war remotion!, mid afterwards he says that he had a communication wills that man, in come quelice of a letter he wrote to Major Hogan, but got no information from 'sins of this subject. 1 ish to k n ow which of these statements is correct ? —A. I only mean to declare, that I never to toy knowledge saw Finnerty in my life until he came to me in consequence of my letter to slajorllogass. Q. When wits it you 630' Finnerty, in cosine quesice of 'Lour letter to Major llngen ? Wits it before or after the coninsussivatioii respecting Dr. 'rhyline ?—A. The communication as to Dr. Tit:seine occurred in the lobby. 1 believe the very ni ;4 11., or at farthest the night before the Dr. gave Iris evidence. It wits some months ago that I had the other tommunicatiOth It was soot' after the pub!isataiss of Major I looser pamphlet. (By .11r. S. Ilotaar.) Q. Was the day you saw Mrs. Clarke three times. the day before her examination I have before stated that I was led to believe what occurred on Tuesday, happened on the. Alonclay.. As SOOll as I got home from this House, 1 made some inqui ries, which set one right on that subject ; and I took the earliest opportunity. yestertluy, sir inform isig thin House of my mistake, its to the Chancellor of the Exchequer mud the Speaker. Q. Was it on Tuesday last?—.t. Yes, it was. Mr. Beacsioes was about to put a qnestion. when an Hun. Member on the opposite si.le observed, that in his opinion the present was not a proper time for ezaininiug the Tlon. Colonel ; more espe cially as other wituesses had been ordered to ascend. Mr. Beesseoas replied. that as the liononrable Colonel himself had nsen to correct the statement he made on a former night, it was upon that point lie would wish to ask him some questions that grew out of the preceding ones. He then asked, what communieatiou did Finnerty make to you as to Or. Thynne Lord Four/Tows said, this had nothing to do with eby of the charges. Dr. Thy rue had called ps a Witness at the Isar. and therefore he should think such a queatiow totally irrelevant. Mr. PERCE.YAL wished to set himself right with the House on this subject. The view lie had in putting those questions ors this • the manner in njoh the Hon. Colonel bad answered question; 04 former night.. *hewed that be had. to it certain degrec cootradicteal Mrs. Clarlse's teatimony as she ha d stated ber not having seen that Gentieume on Tuesday, she not having been sit home that day. That Hon. Gentleman had then said, he had seen her in the eyeshot; which contrudichel her; and now he has' copie s with a greater recollection, and slated, that Its he al seems itcr once to the ttttt rssiog, he haring toadies mistake in confoiturlitig Tuesday with Monday. file. helmet, thought soloagh of evidence was produced ea that point. and the most correct Mode would now be to proceed farther in the investigation of the bus:mess, by exattiinitig other witrodat S. The ATTortNrir-GrNERA I. ;inquired of Mr. Adam, if he could slow produce the two letters which ;.ad beets required of him by Mrs. Clarke ? Mr. AD 4\l—' s I have a letter written on a Sun day n.s...rrning. without ethos-, but ostlorsed, in my hand-writing, June 19, l'sda; anti aim , another. dated Saturday morning, without any day of the month, which I have indorsed. When thetie were the subject of discussion, on a former evening, I slid not think it would have been it, ins power to Fro duce them, but I now find myself aisle, as evidence in this in verri g ation.” The letters were a ccordingly produced and read by the Clerk. The one, dated Sunday morning, was addressed 4. Wm. Adam, Esq. Bloosorbury-square;' signed M. A Clarke; and was. its sulotence its follows :-- ~ Sir—Upon the math May, titl6, yen waited on me by desire otitis Royal Highness the Duke of York, to state his inteutioa of allowing me au s mutty of soot. lies Royal Dighaess, by this permits, is now indebted to m s in an sr- . rear of 54,14. I have written to him, but to no avail ; his Illeouess's conduct has been so devoid of juke:Opts and bailout., I have come to the dcterinination of ,making any townie's known to v on, as the Solicitor of ha Royal H least's. I have begged him to pay my arrears immediate ly, as my necessities are priming If be still refuse this , _ I Lave so ether resource than to publish cony thing winch has come to iay knowledge during our intimacy, together with toe letters that have passed, amounting to sointilikii Sr. thins. He is more within my power than he linnint s • %et I hope he will tusks my deanknd good, for I afield feel for IMO. woe I wider the neevssity of making toiiMaa pu:ilic. I w nil send lett) thing to his friends, for their consideration, lietore I publish them to the workl. As to the protection he has Aferalcl my child, I hope he will stool hint to the Choo ser-Donee School, for it is riot accuivitable fur nay conduct. I beg you will state this to the Duke of link, and seal me a statement of his iatentioes by letter. His Royal Uighur's must feel that be has deserved this." The other letter, 'latest Saturday roaming, from the aoine to the r 41111•, was in sulostanaWas follow.: "Sit*l beg toionnire whether or notilis Royal Highness thinks proper Co make g ood my request ? If nut, I think you ~Garage him in it, said I have to inform you, I base tom. mated ever" thing to piper, as I formerly stated. The fifty or sixty letters from his Royal Highness e ill give weight to the whole. ("pus Tuesday I have promised to g• • them sap, and it will be impossible to neat them. It will be to g entlemen they will he gives previous to their tieing vahlish eft ; and those gentlemen, to., asst as obstinate a. It is n% at Ilighness. They are acquaintances of yours, and the pur pose is to relieve my mlts. Reneermbet, he has tt all au his own poucr, sad so may art as he 'knees." (Bye the Arrows mr-GICII ERA L., to Mr. Ao sq.) Q. Were there the two letters that Mrs. Clarke alluded to in her emu tt itt atisin ?—A. 'I hey inert have been so, as I sin confident I never had um letters Iron, her but these two, and a short note of too lines. which !lave not preiwrvsal. Q. Did Isis Ito? al Highness ever betray sin ap prehrusiou to you as to any tithe,: Mrs. Clarke could communicate?—.l. Never. at any tuns. fil„ Dill you communicate these letters to his Rot al Highness's I did. Q. Detl von shrew the letters themselves, or did you state their contents ?—A. I sliewell the letters themselves, and hi* Royal nighties , ' perused them in soy presence. Q. After you had communicated them to bins, did his Hoye! Highness Letray the smallest appre- hensinn of any thing Mr.f. Clarke could communi cate in regard to him ?—A. Not the slightest. (UJ auolAer Member.) Q. Did his Royal Highness deny that there was any thing which could be against him ? —A. I cannot be IJECCIStt Al% to the words lie might have used; but his meaning was, lie had not the leatt apprehesision. Mr. rutua began to put a quesii )))) , in hi. usual trimmer, to the Hon. Colonel, whom he was pleased sarcastically to style '6 the accuser " in this bltSillf SS ; hut the House would tot hear him. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then built, he was gametic) call Mellingli, as a witness, for the purpose of disereditiug the testimony Mrs. Clurke, elm hull said, on the former night, that she had never represented herself to any tradesmen as a willow. Mr. liettesrouo—" This Lady, Mrs. Clarke, went through a very long exuntitiation ; and it would certainly he no difficult mutter to discredit her testimony, Mal to chew that this woman was to tally unworthy of belief. I never felt more pain than in hearing, in the House e.t Cuutteotis, a ma ntes of t h at character essmatiell, end that too upon the subject of the Royal Family, iibicll must ever Le one most unpleasant to all. There is, 1 think, an Maims. way of volatile?, to the discredit of what else stated as tests. The evidence of Mr. Knight wus so directly la contriediction to her, that I hope no Gent's:mai' would wish to be a melded with further inquiries as to the private etuours of his Rosa! highness. I believe every n u n mina al ready think her unworthy of belief, 414 it resold be but a disagreeable thing to .linve such) a intittia farther iequired into. 1 appeal to the flutists, it' such an investigatioss its this is tot degracliee to the Heine of Commons? and submit to them wleelier it be necessary to go into the history of this iata mons woman, for so I must call her r" Mr. Auest--.• I could not have been aware of the circumstance *hicks has readied me since I an swered the question put to me this evening, viz. that any person could suppose that the passage in the first letter read, related to any child of the Duke ; I beg leave,' therefore, to explain the passage to which I allude, and to state, that this boy is not a child of the Duke, but a child that lied long been under the protection of his Roy al Highness." Mr. FELLER—" I do wish that the examination phould be completely gone into. Whatever parti culars may tranepire, the Illustrious Character coarerivel, delies tt all; and I therefore think it should be probed to the buttons. It eppears to be-the foulest conspiracy that ever was stinted at the eon of the Crown." Mr. Bettesrono---“ I was only pointing nut, that tie line of evidence now proposed it uniseeessary." Ms. Fcssea---" Let tie go set; it is the safest way." PeeciOas--" I do not wonder that the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Beresford) should have so expressed himself, as it must undoubtedly be a most unpleasant discussion; but i apprehend it is a most import's'st duty we have to dieeharge, mid that we UtUstUClt shrink because it is grating to our feelings. 111 were called upon to give at uniuieu, as far as the evidevice has dime, I should thialt that the testimony of this lVelliaD, contradicted as it al ready is, is not such evidence a,: we could safely rely upon; hut can we be sure the same impres sion has taken place iis the mind of has Royal Highness ? Can we behete Mrs. Choice, when she represented herself as a widow, anti had no sooner got credit, than she turned round on her creditor, and declared herselfa married woman? Is this noteri. dealer proper to be brought to the bar! I understand there is another 'important fact ; she stated she was married to a Gentleman, who never curried nit any business, bat we can brine a Witness to Arta, that she did live with Clarke whilst lie was carrying on the business of a meson, and had three childlreu by him. I maintain that such a piece of evidence should lie given for the eitisfactioa of the House, and therefore the inquiry should take its full coulee. There is no doubt that the whole corpus dilecti rests on Mrs. Clarke ; but whether his Royal Highness was acquainted with the circum stance that money was given in the meatier she described, is the question which the House lens to determine. This being so, then I must say, that the elide case would be. defective, were we riot to sheet that the credit of that motuuti ought not to be relied on in the least degree." The ATTORNEY-GCNERAL gave his opinion at considerable leneth, concurring entirely with what Mr. Percevid hail stated. Sir Faesete Reanerr•-" The Hon. Gentle man opposite seems to suppose that the minds of all this House are mask up on this business. I can assure the House, that I feel it to be as unpleamint a subject as ever was brought iieward, but I unite still do my duty to the public. Ido not think that it was relevant or proper to call witnesses to con tradict etiothor in this early stage of the trinities', and before we hail time to rend the testimony al ready adduced ; it is therefore proper, that the Hon. Gentlemen who made this chase should be allowed, in the first place, to conclude his prose cution." Mr. PEReEVAL—" Probably the lion. Baronet was not present at the eluter of the former Melte* proceedings, otherwise lie would have known that the (lon. Colonel had closed the whole of his evi dence on this particular charge, and that we had exatnitied Colonel Gordon, Mr. Adam, mud the Prosecutor himself, to refute the evidence in sup port of it ; we are, therefore, dosing a defeuce of that charge." The ArrORNF.Y-GSNERAIL then desired Mr. Pose h, the Wailes' lie had alluded to,to he tidied ; but he was not found in attendance. He stated that he supposed this to originate from that Wit. mess not linvitsa been summoned for this day. It was probable :dr. Pugh won'd yet come, Out io the mean time he would proceed with the exami nation of entailer IVitness. 1.1.3)0V1C1C ALNIORA.N. Pret Sous to this W ituess being rsumiued, the ATTORM,Y-GENEttAL Elided the, purport at lee ethicist's?. Mr. Clarke, in her testimony, bail stated, that the note or lintel she had received from Mr. Knight were seen by his Hoye: High twee leseanse she sent his ectrant, who was in the house in Gliwice ter-place, for the purpose of get lug dinner ; now it would tie shewn by this it it 'less, that there was but one *errata at that house belostging to his It te el Ilighuess, and that :la 'sever * 'At did go out for change. The Witness was then interrogated by the Learoed fjentleinan. Q. bi whose service are you ?—A. In that of his Royal Highness the Duke of York. Q. How long have you been in his Royal High- Hess's service ?—A. Eighteen years next Septem ber. Q. Have yon been constantly in his service dur ing that period ?—A. Yes. Q. Uo you remember when his Royal Highness Wird to visit ,Nlrs. Clarke in Woucester-place : A. N es. Q. Did any of his Royal Highness's servants ever attend him there ?—A. one but WySt Q. lee what capacity do you serve his Royal Highness ?—A. As his footnisin. Q. At what time of the day were you accustomed to go to his Royal Highness :—A. Sometimes at eight iii the morning. Q. Fur what purpose did you go to hint ?—A. To take his clothes. Q. Did you ever see Airs. Choke there?--A. Once. Q. During hasty long a time were you in the ha bit of going to his Royal Highuecss in Cloucester place i—A. From the year I§o4 to Ibuti. O. Are you sure no other of his High ness's servants went to him but ycuisell :--A. I sin. Q. Were ‘ou'very frequently there during that time t—A. 1 ,+as. (4. What wus the occasion on which y(u tors WI. Carke It was iti t otemtirsixe of a p/(1111p1 Illet , !tige i r:Teited to tat ia favourite tit g of li, Royal tligisueirti fur Mrs. CLitke to see. Q. %% vs Isis It oyal Iligbur.aws there ut Oust tittle -A. No. • Q. Are you itire you never erica Mrs. Clarke at tiloneehter.plate, any other tine?—A. I never .nn her there at any time.. but the one 1 hate men tioned: _ . Q. — Were you ever directed br Mrs. Clarke or his 'loyal Highness to carry out a bank note to be (*twinged i—A. No, Sir. l i t. Dul pati ever curry oat a hank note, ffeiu (elouirester-lilmer, to be changed'—A. Ne, Q. Are you quite certain that you never dist 1— A. l as certain. (Beta& Waept.t.) Q. You have said that uo other scriunt the Duke but yourself ever went to Glontester-pkier ; I wish to khow on obit ground it is Yea ins.ke this tisiertinit Because I had an order Irian his RI Ira Highness to bring Inn Ins letters and other things he ueeded there, and ho other sort gat dated du it. _ Q. I wish to know if you assert, on your own knowledge. that tio other servant belonging to the Duke of York ever went Lb 6mm:ter-place 1— A. Yes, Sir. • Q. Can yon speak, of your own kuowlctlas, that no other servant of the Nuke, but yourat-lf, ever took a letter to Mrs. Clarke, at Uloutester-placei —A. None but niyself. Q. How many wore servants were there in Glon cester-place %—A. 1 elo not know. Q. Speak as nearly as you can guess Soup:times two—l never saw any wore than two livery servants, and one out of livery, who was the butler. • _ . Q. Was there a man cook ?—A. I do not know that ever there was. Q. How often were you in the habit of carrying letters to Glonceater-place ?--A. Very seldom. Q. Did you carry uny letter. from the Horse Guards to the Duke a t Gl euee ster.. l ,l ac e Yes, Sir ; sometimes I did. Q. To whom did c OU deliver those letters ?—A. Mostly to the housekeeper. Q. Vl'liat was her name ?—A. Perron. Q. Whet was the butler's name's—A. I do not know, but I believe it with Peirce. (By Sir rr.,:is ButDiTT.) Q. Did you ever Lee Mr**. Clarke any *bete else ?-e.A. Yes, twice. Q. Where ?—A. In the street, on the opposite side of Somerset House. Q. Have you only seen her three times in your life ?—A. Only three times. Q. Has the winless had interviews with any per sons, previous to his coming to this bar, respecting the evidence be has given this night 2—A. Ills Royal Highnips asked me if I ever did receive a note (rots him or from Mrs. Clarke? Q. Had you any interview with any other per son 2—A. I was asked this tonne question by Mr. Adam, Mr. Wilkinson, a n d Mr. Lowten. Q. Did you cuuverse with any other persons ? A. %o, Sir. (Be.the ATTOROIEV-013IFItii 1..) • Q. Were the servants 30h spoke of ut Glou rester-Om; Mn.. Clarke's servants?—A. To the bested' my knowledge they were. They was nut bis Royal Hiehriese's servants. Q. Were the directions from the Dulte of York to tho witness that no one but he should go to.hit Royal Highness at Gloucester-plum ?-L-A. I lied instructicei that if letters casne no one should go to Gloucester-place but myself. Q. When His Royal Highness asked you if you had ever carried a Dank note from Gleueeet:r- Place, what answer did you giveliro ?-e-A. I told him I did not recollect ever carrying any note hutever to be changed. . • Q. Can you take upon yourself to ay you re eollret you never (lid Yes, I ctn. Q. Did you give the same answer to the other persons who asked ?—A. I did. • (By W•anba.. Q. I wish to know whether the Duke of York ever went in his carriage to Gloucester-place i—A. lie certainly never did. Q. Nor on horseback ?—A. As far as I know lie never did. Q. I wish the witness to repeat, as yearly as he Cali, every dia l ; that parsed between Mr. Mows Nil.. I Jet ten, Mr. Wilkinson. and himself.'—A. They questioned me as to whether or not I had ever enrried ft note from Mrs. Clarke or his R o yal t (Omens to lie changed ? I answered that I had denied letters, but never received unott trent tithe: of Ilium. Q. Did ever any Valet•dy-Chamkre go 1 0 Glum:ester-osec, either at night or in the morn ing ?—A. To the best a( my recollection no Valet ever went to Clonceeter-place. Mr. W cants wished to still +mother evidence n: two el l en) mutters growir.g cut ut t h e present esa- t ellno pat 01'0 pern arns the:, ~, } r a 1 1