The Sun. — London, England, 1806-06-13 00:00:00

Mr. Thomas Buckley, another Clerk, proved the entry in - the Bank hook. The entry was - a Ilinrk 7 note toool. K 7212, -.A. C. 7th B e ing s hewn 'titc 'Note, he said'it corres politLd i,i funnber,-value,'fincklate, b l ot would not Say it 'was 4he Note !ram which. the .entry . a.as made. M. Thomas Ripnen was •again - called,.who proved that , two 'Not es or the same nuniber, date, and sum were never in iotrculatiOn-at the same • • FRI DAT, MAY 2..-.AFOURTH PAY. • M'r.l'lionras Oliver, a Clerk in the house of Drummond 'and Co. in 1782, _produced the Ledger fur that year, and read the following E-xtreds from Mr. Dundas's account " Augusta la, I7Bz, by Cash received of A. Douglas, Esq. 4°ool. , Odober-4, 1782, ditto, tool. ca. 2 d. Decembt: 19,•Reeeived of A. Douglas, Esq. tosoi. • Othereatzies from the Ledger of the subsequent year were "' , March ti, 1733, Cash received of A. Douglas toool. •" April 7, Received soot." • hir. W.. Heald was' called again to read the following Ex 'trazts from the Waste.book ot Drummond's house : " Zyth Nov. 5784 Received ofthe Might Hon, 1-1. Dundas noool " 7th March, i 783, Received of A.-Dough.s, Esq. a Bank note of 8,31, and a bank note of fool. fir which I give credit. •to ii. DundaS in ieool. - • • ' 4 7th April, t 783, Receixed of Hon. H. Dundas soot. in a 13ank-note.", - -The Managers then pia in an Account signed byl,Ord Mel- • aril le, which was as follows l)r. !miles Newbigging to the Right Hon. the Lord Maria; -cam, Creditor. - Nov. t 6, i782,.T0 ditto, Sir W. Forbes for my bill on Lord Advocate, tOOOL Mr George Scott, a Clerk in the house ,of, Moffatt and ; Kensington, stated, froth an entry in their goldsmith's book, that a Banknote for 10001. No. 12, 24th Oel. came into their douse in , Nov. 1782, and was received for a bill upon my Lord Advocate of Scotland. - • - Mr,. Whitbread then proposed to give evidence of a decla- , ration of Lord Melville, which he heard on the ft th of. June, ass, in which he declaied, `' that during the Paymastership of Mr. Douglas he tiecaine possessed of public money to the amount of 10,0°01. ; and he: farther declared that he would not reveal the application of that money, being impel led so to •act from motives of public duty, private honour, and personal convenience.." -On cross-examination, the Hon. Manager said, that certainly the Mohl'e Lord's speech went tOdeclare that he had nut applied it to the purposes of private gen. Ser3eant Praed; one of the Commissioners of Naval Inquiry, was examined as to the mode in which he examined 'the persons called before the. Commissioners. He stated that the, questions were first read over to them, then the questions and • answers were read, and they had an opportunity of correcting anything they wished. The witness then produced the ori ginal examination of Lord Melvillebeforathe Cofilmissioners, which was teat!. In this examination his Lordship gives the , following answers., . Q. 1 t appearing by - accounts laid befOre us, thdt the sums standing in your name 'as Treasurer of the Navy, at the 'lank,- at the following periods, were' less than sums with which you stand charged, exclusive of the money advanced to your : Sub2accountants, to what cause are such deficiencies to be attributed ? —A. A I I hough I take it for grantedthe sums are stated by the question accurately. I could not, on memory, state that they are So. I desired Mr. Trotter, - so tar as I was concerned, to give you -every information he could ; and it was only in-consequence of a conversation with him, imme diately'after the receipt of )4ur letter to me of the date 26th Tune, that I learnt, from the 'manner in which he kept his private accounts, it was iniposstble for him to give me the accnratp intormatiou required. The same reasons render it impossible for me to give you an answer to the question you prtt ; I am aware that 1 am not hound to answer - it, under the prnvision of the Ad establishing this Commission ; but should not have dwelt on. that objection if there had been no thing but personal consideiations - to operate against My doing so ; but, the the reasons I hinted to you in•my letter to you of the 30th Jime last, as 1 am not bound, so would not' 1 feel inyt:eir warranted to give die explanations which your question points at. , Q. Upon what ground does your . Lordship decline an swering that question ? —A.' Upon the ground that •1 have already stated, under the sth clause of the Ad .13d Geo. I 1 I.' c. 16. Q. Was any part of such sums in your hands ? — A. They certainly, came into my hands, but they did not remain, there. n Q. Did Mr. Alexander Trotter, 'while Paymaster of thei Navy , ," lay out or apply, or cause to be laid out or applied, any of the money issued for carrying on the current service of the Natty since the ist lan. 1786, tor your benefit or advan tag.: ? —A.. Frogs the manner in which Mr., Trotter kep t my accounts, it is imposslble for me. to answer that question ; and I objed to answer this question upon the ground 1 have stated in answer to the first question. . - Q. Did you direct or authorise him to do so ?-4. To :the best of my recollection I never did. Q Did yoki, between ist l:,t-i; 4786, and 31st Mtly, iBOO, derive any _profit or advantage - from the use or employmentot money'isstred for carrying on the current service'of the Navy', under toe Act 25th Geo. 111 cap. 3t ?—A. The same rea sons which induced me to make the answer 1 have to the, first question, must induce mee, to repeat the saine answer to this. Q. Does your Lordship object to answer this question un der the provisions of the sth Seca of the , Act 43d Geo.ll I. cap. 16-? —A. I do : and upon the grounds stated in the an- Over to my first question. Q During the time you acted as TreaSurer of the Navy, between ist lan. t 786, and 31st May,lBoo was of any the mo ney applicable toNaval Services advanced by,you, or by your diredion, for any other public service than that of the Navy ? A. 1 decline to answer that question. under the ?envisions of the eth'Sec. of the Act 43 d Geo. M. cap. 16. Mr. Dodd, a Clerk in .MotEnt's house, proved that a bill on the d,nnl Auvocate of Scutlatut for toool, was paid on the 22d N0v.1782; and Mr. Scott was called in again to prove from another entry, that it was paid by the Bank-note K. No. 12, beeel. 24th Oelober. Mr. Geo. Fennel produced the Certificate books from the Navy Pay-office, and Stated that the balance in the 'T'reasu rer's hands, on the 3 Dtit April, 1783, Was 42,2011. 7s. led. under the head of Navy—Pay or Wages 37,8561. and Valuat ing 935 iI. 4s. 4d. Total 89,4081: 525. 3d. Read the following entries train the Banking-book ; 1783, ,April 29, By Ballince to new accOunt,• 66,4081. 12S. 3d. -' June 2ith, Bank-note roo , l. Mr. Henry Callendar proved a draft as follows " Messrs. Smith, rayne; and Smith, pay to the Lord Advocate or bearer Five Thousand Pounds, For N 11; k E and Co. JOHN DICKSON. John Hayne, a Clerk of Smith, Payne, and Smith, paid the above draft, but the entry of the notes in which it was paid was not of his hand-writing ; , and•could not lie read. Read the following entry from the Banking-book : " Oki account, Right lion. H. •Dundas, Bank 178 z. - 1783. July 2. Bank Note - (Clifford), '5OOOl. A witness proved that the - entry was made by Clitiord,whois since dead. July 12, 1733.-=Ditto Clifford, t 4 01. July t, (1. e. Bank Notes), 60001." Mr. H. Callendar then proved another draft for 60701. dated 1 ith Julys, drawn by . More and Atkinson on Smith. Payne., and Smith, in favour of the,l-ton. EI. Oundas ; and Mr. Daniel Dyke Edgar, a Clerk in the house, proved, that he paid it i; . ; Bank Notes, four of which, for wool. each, he could speak to, viz. 13. z6t ; B. 26z; ,B. 263 ; B. 264. There was no 265 ; and B. 267, by mistake was entered B. 276. - • Mr. H. Callendar %Ill§ then called again, and- proved ano ther draft, dated 31St July, 1783, drawn On Smith, Payne, and Smith, by Dixon, for More and Co. in favour of "r. Dundas for zoool. Mr. John George Payne, a Clerk of Smith and Co. stated, that looking,at the wastebook - of the house, it appeared, that this draft tor zoool. was on only of a sum of 40001. He then stated the;Bank•Notes whieh he paid for-both drafts ; but he could not say which Notes were for each specific draft. Being shewri some Notes, lie said, thq corresponded in number and sum with the entry of the Notes paid on that day for the aggregate 40001. He had no recollection of the trans _a6tion but front the books. SATUOAY, MAY PAY. Edgar, .a Clerk of Smith, Payne, and Smith, proved, that 60001. in Bank Notes, No. z 6:, 2,3, 4,6, 7, for roost. each, was paid to More and Cer. • A variety of draft,; upon the House of More and Atkinson were then put in and read. The rest of the day was occupied in the examination of a variety of bopks, to prove the balances in the Treasurerqbands at different periods while he was in office. • MC:NDAY, MAY S.—STXTH DAY. Continued Evidence . upon the State of the Balances. Mr Whitbread then declared, he again begged leave toile.. -pdse upon oath, that he lie.ird.Lord Melville say, with legard to =other sum of ;00)001. he - would not reveal the applica tina if it, being restrained by motivp of puhlic / Outy, prtv4tr honour, vad per6onal c6nveuietke. , - On cross-examination by Lord I‘l2. l .ville's Counsel, -he stated the same as on Saturday. A Pdwer of Attorney from Lord Melville to Mr. Alexander Trotter, was put inquid read. The mutual release between Lord Melville and Mr. Trot ter,• in Nvilich was a clause for destroyitig all vouchers, was put iti - and read, dated 18th and 23d Feb. tBo3. '.L\lll,. TROTTER'S EVIDECE.—Mt. Alexander Trot -. ter was then called in.—He stated, that he entered the Navy Pay Office iu the year 177 . 6, Tas a.Clerk, upon a salary of 501. a year, and continued a Clerk until the year 1784. He 'wag appointed nirmaster by Lord Melville, at a salary originally of 5001. per anuutn, .subje& 'to deduelions. He then recei‘edf the Books ; and the balances, he was told, were at the Bank, and in the hands -of Sub-accountants, except 10,0001,. due from Lord Melville, which sum his Lordship said he §hould account fig. He did not say how it was employed; but he stated fur the Pub lie, and on which probably ; some los'S ,might The Money was in the Bank of - England until' he' persuaded .Lord. Melville to let him remove part of - the balances to a private Banker (Cou'tts and Co.). He drew all his drafts, as he believed, according to the form"ofthe Ad of Parliatnent. • Q. I-lad you at the same time money so drawn in the hands of other persOns besides Messrs.Coutts?— .A. I had,: Q. Had you any with Mr. Sprott ?—A. I had. Q. With Mr. Montague Lind ?—A. Mr. Lind, as a friend, used to assist tue in negociating bitiness: Q. Had you any in the hands Of any House of 'credit and repute in Edinburgh I had. Q. Had you ever Governitnent Security ; such as Vietualling, 'Navy, and,Tramport Bills, purchased with such money I—A. I had. Q. And Exchequer BiliS I—Ai Yes, I had. Q. Did you ever discount the. Bills of private in dividuals with such money 1-•- 7 -A. I do not recolle& having transaaled such business myself,hut my friend Liud, and other's whom I have'employed, hare. He added, that he had. also employed Agents to discount the Bills - of individuals with the Public Mo ney; and Mr. Thomas Wilson, of the Pay Office, had his instructions to employ the Public Money in the same manner when he was absent. Q: Did you a&ually make profit of 'the Public. Money , so placed in varions , hands in the manner you have now stated F—A. I did ; I never meant to conceal • Mr. Trotter went on to state, that though not for mally appointed as private Agent to Lord Melville, yet he at :led as such, and received his pay as Trea surer of the Navy, the rents of his estates in Scot land, and other sums. He kept an account between himself and Lord Melville in a small book, of which Lord Melville was frequently furnished with a copy. The first item of debit In that account, according to the best of his recolleaion, was a sum of 40001. fur- . niched his Lordship in the year 1782. For that sum be took 'A bond, 'but not interest. The fund which furnished this 40001. was the..public tnoney in the witness's hands which he knew was not likely to be soon called for. The title of the account where this was entered was, g‘ Account current. - In this ac count he also gave Lord. Melville credit for all the sums he received on his,account. In the year 1792 dire&ed a purchase of 20001. India Stock to be made for Lord Melville. He' paid for this Stock with money which he had in Coutts's hands, iind which he had previously drawn from the Bank. The divi dends of this Stock, he believed, were carried to the credit of Lord Melville. About the 1797, 10,0001. Lhyalty Loan was sub scribed for in the name of, Lord Melvilie—the pay- . meats were made by Coutts's house, and he repaid Coutts from his mixed fund of public and private money. • The dividends of that Loan were carried to the. credit of Lord• Melville's account. 'fie' algo di retied 70001. 3 per cents to be purchased .for Lord Melville, and the dividends were carried to the cre dit of his account. He never 'charged interest, nor did he give it to Lord Melville when the balance was in his favour. He had frequently paid sums to in-, dividuals for Lord Melville ; and papers being put into Jhis hand to refresh his Memory, he gave the following instances : July 18, 1787, fOOOl. to the account of Mr. Wm. Forbps, and Co. Edinburgh 37741. to Mansfield, Ramsay, and Co.—The general account current was brought to a settlement in. May, 1800: Besides the Aiccount current the .Witness said he kept another account with Lord Melville, called the " Chest account ;" the first- item of which account was the 10,0001. which Lord• Melville said he would account for; at the witness's first coming into office. The 10,0001. Loyalty Loan was 'afterwards trans ferred to this Chest account; Th 9 account was de- . livered- to Lord 'Melville I.oith a charge. upon the Chest account; but he never said any thing about it fa& he did not know that his , Lordship ever looked into it. This Chest account, as Well as the other, was settled when Lord Melville left office, and all the balances dtie, both to him individually and to the Public, were paid off. Q. Did you give direCtions in or about the year 1789 or 1790 tbr the purchaSe of another sum of East India Stock for the benefit of Lord Melville ? —A. I will state the transaction as far as my -meal- . leClion enables ine - : It. was in eotisequence Of . it conversation I had with his Lordship, in which he stated the probable, rise of EaSt India Stock, and I observed to his Lordship that if be was impressed with so good an opinion of that Stock, I thought, in consideration -of his own interest, he ought to invest a sum of Money' . in it. His Lordship's ob servation seemed to throw it aside, by saying be had no Money to invest-in Stock. I had mentioned to his Lordship that there were considerable "balanceS lying at all times in my hands that were not called for, and I advised his Lordship to give me leave to lay out so much as would purchase 13,0001. or 14,0001. Eactindia Stock ; but his Lordship refused in the most positive manner, insomuch that I feared I had incurred his Lordship's displeasure in propos ing it. Bui it occurred to me, at the same' time, that it. won't be possible to borrow a sum of money upon" the seiurity of that Stock, and I proposed to his Lordshipthff I should endeavour to do so, and lay out that noney in the purchase of East India Stock ;' to Yhich his Lordship readily assented ; I mentioned tilt .1 then lived with a relation of my own, who ws a man of considerable importance in the City, and that he would he enabled to raise this stun for me. In short I made it an,easy matter t 9 his Lordship But when I applied to Mr. Lind, the Gentlema to whom I alluded; I . found that r Was deceived' and that it was not an easy matter to raise money- 'ion , that security. But I was unwil ' ling to dir.ppiot his Lordship in *hat I had told; him I i;ould effea, and I never . acquainted hi - s Lord ship with, the difliculty that had arisen; bUt I asSist -ed'Mr, Lind ,by advances. from the public Money whiCh I had the management of. • I never had oc casion afterwards to mention the circumstance to 'Lord Mel Ville until April last year, and he was per fedly unacquainted with my having, made use o f the public money in that transaaion, and I chargd his Lordship ,a regular interest fbr the whole Of the money which I advanced, from the first day it was _advanced until the final settlement of our 'accounts, The sum thus advanced the witness stated to be about 23,0001. which was reduced by a payment Of 30001. and at their final settlement 20,0001. was to pay off the remainder of the purchase money, and 80001. 'increased value went in diminution of his Account current with the Defendant. The witness added, that he was under no - restriaion in . the' amount of his drawing from the Bank, but that the :whole of the public money was in his management. He continued in . office two years after Lord Melville retired. Mr. Bathurst, who , shortly after succeeded, put an end - tO the keeping the money at a private Banker.. The book in which he kept the Chest ac count and the Account current,,he stated to be de stroyed, lA4OI all other books and vouchers relatiVe to the transactions between the witness and Lord-Mel ,ville. Judging from the books of Coutts and CO: he apprehended that it was throUgh their medium that the 2 0 ,00 01 . India Stock was purchased, as well, as the 70001.3 per cent. BeduCed, and he be - • lieved that Mr. Philip Antrobns, was the broker Con cemed for that house. Caoss'-EN.ANnNED-Q.. Whether Lord Melvipe ,did not in the cohversafion abOut the 10,000 . 1. which he was debtor, say that it was not applied to any use or emolument of his own, but for a public purpose;. on which there might be a loSs•? . ----.A.. I do not, re collea it so much as to say he'direetly stated it was , for publicipurposes ; but it isu very distant period, and it is not impossible he did. Q. Have you' the least recolleaion that Lord Mel ville acknowledged he applied 'it to any purposes of private benefit-to himself ?—A, None. The witness •again stated, that the whole management of the Pay- • master's Office was always left to the PaYrnaster, and the whole management of the Public Money was • left to the witness while he was. Paymaster. ' A. You stated that permission was given by Lord Melville to draw money from the Bank of Engla i nd to Contt'S Bank, wlp-Sther the only reason repre-, sented - by Val to Lord Melville for that measure was not to facilitate official convenience ?—A. Entirely so ; ',always stated so. , —the convenience that would arise, and the greater security of the money. The witness then stated the - greater security and conveni ence—the Navy Office was about that time removed from Broad;street to Somerset House, and, they were obliged to send common Messengers to bring large sums of money froth. /the - Bank. No other reason Was ever mentioned to Lord Melville. With respect to Lord Melville's private accounts, although he gave .him copies yet he was Siire Lord Melville never looked into them, for he could never draw him to a consideration of his Own private accounts. That, he never took any voucher or document when he paid iYione ( y, nor required tiny when he was told that money had been paid upon his :iccounf. , But with respea to public accounts, he always attended, to any representation upon that subjea. With re sped to the bond for 40001. he 'had lie recolleakin whether on the face Of it it purported to be:without interest. Q..l2he first purchase you , Speak to. was 40001, . East India Stoc ) k whether, after the documents you have seen, you have now any memory or recollec tion upon the subjed ?-=--A. 1, recoiled tienerally. that Lord Melville n 4144, cited to be possessed of a fur ther qUalification cit ;',East India Stock, / and begged - me to procure it for' hien 1 but whether he told me he would immediately repay rue the money I do not immediately recoiled; , Q. Whether ,upon that oceasiop, or any other, Lord Melville ever direded You`to lay out any part of the PUblie Money for the use and benefit of Lord Melville He never did, under' the specitic . name of PUblic Money, or. any money bearing that, description. , ,Q. Is there any instance in which, prior to the purchase of'any Stock, it was mentioned- to Lord . Melville, by you, that it was intended to be purchased out of the Public ,Money, except in the instance' - of. the purchase of East India'Stvek,?—A. Never,: to . the best of my recoll4dion. Q. Are you to be understood.to state, that in the only instance when the proposal was mad 6, it was indignantly rejected ?---A. I mean so to be under stood, with respea to the instalments . upon the Loy alty Loan, that he satisfied them without consulting Lord Melville, and that he had securities of Lord Melville sufficientto cover the advances, With re-, sped to the purchase of - the 70001. 3 per cent; reduced, the witness stated that he made it in the general management of Lord Melville's atThirs. He believed a sum of money had come to his hand at ',that time for his Lordship, and he thought it vas, proper to invest it in some manner to prodUce inte rest to his Lordship. No precise coamikinication Was ever Made his—Lordship, but the witness probably mentioned It when he presented the ac count,to him. As to whether in the transaaionof the purchase of the Lastt-India Stuck, he mentioned his relation's name? He said be mentioned Mr. Mon tague Lind, and . Lord Melville never kneW that any other person had advanced the Money. For some years Lord Melville was a loser, as the interest of the'pnrehase money exceeded the dividends. Lord Melville bad no reason Whatever to know that it was purchased with the Public Money. The witness could only speak to the advances to Forbes and Co. and Mansfield and Co. frOrn the entries in his Banker's 'book, and not from any recolleCtion, Q. You have said as to the use of the Public Mo ney removed from the Bank-to Messrs. Coutts, that - it was for your own benefit Certainly, I made use- of that part which I found was not likely to be , claimed !Or my own ptofits. Q, In what mode was -that made -Te of Generally by lending it at interest ;'at other times by . investing i,t in Navy and Exchequer Bills, or other . Government Securities. Q. Were the whole profit and emolument derived from that nodc.., of laying out money which you have described.eptirely your own ?—.IL Entirely. • Q. Was anyintimation or knoWledge ever corn, municated to Lord Melville of the Public Money lidving.been-so used ?--A. I never mi - fde any such communication to Lord Melville. 'The witness, in subevett answers~, stated, tia4t, dutin,. the hub , Lord Meh i4e , was-, in Ofice,, r2O pnsed turough his hands, :while these -transailions were going on, and that the Public Service never. suffered the least loss, `disadvantage, - or interruption,' in On.. sequence of these tt'ansaetiorts ; and that nothing occurred which. might lead ihe , attention of Lord 11/./eiville to these natters. The release, he stated, was prepared and executed by him in Loni.lon, The clause - for destroying vouchers was suggested by him self, and not by Lord Mel Ville. That the mode of Mixing ptiblic an4rivate money in - his accounts was without the knowledge of Lord Melville, as was also all his dealings with Mr: Mark Sprott. The amount .of the balances - 'did not depe n d either tipod Lord Melville or himself, as the money was issued At the ENchequer in consequence of memorials from the Board,_.which balance in the Prisoner's hands was stated every fortnight in an aaount transmitted to-the .Board. , TUESDAY, MAY'6-.-SzvE'uYit DAY. Mr. Tao rz ER, reexamined.—lie stated that Lord Me'. ville never attended . to ordinary business of receipt and pay ments It was all done by the Paymaster. For ...a extra ordinary ease the witness reported to Lord Melville, who al ways attended to such cases. H e did not to: piled ever hav e Mg paid any sums or money . personally except small - sums of - tot. except once he paid' him his safa.. ry. The bond which he stated yesterday as given for tho 4,G001. in the early part of the transactions between the wit.. ness and Lord Melville, was afterwards cancelled. He'll/. • ceived Money on account of 'Lord Melville to more t':ian that amount, and therefore 'he did not think it right. to keep the .bond. When . Lord Mel vile dire-der! the ;fitness to - pay money - for him; • he did not s p ec if y out of what fund the Money . tvas - to be taken, When Lord Melville. wanted .money he would probably enter into an eXplaliation of rho:... ,nies which he expected to receive, an d request the witn ess t o accommodate'lltini winch-he did, and pl a c e d i t • to hi s account current!! The Ntinagers examined as to'whortior vine had not specifically•directed.somoadv-ances to he placed to the Chest account; but the witness declared he never re ceived any such specific directions. The advance of for the purchase of 2,0e01a F.at India Stock,, was placed - to the account current, and-Was paid by the receipts on the other -side at the - account. No specific suns, as he recuileeted, being appropriated tor th it particular payment - .. The pUbhCllll.l.. hey he considered sate in the hands of Contra as its tia.l hands of the Bank,..pf Giit taunt, Q. What was your fortune, independently of your salary, • at tile time you wereappuilued Paymaster P—A. N ot large.-, nut perhaps exceeding• one or two thousand poniu4s. Have you had any great accumulation of fortune by any • event indepnidently of your situation as Paymaster j .- ‘A. I have had c'Aisulerableacquisitiosis—considerable in pro. portion to my fortune, though nut so perhaps in the eyes of some people. I suppose somewhere betwixt six and seven - thousand pounds. I also had an acquisition by marriv; of about three thousand pounds. Q. Are ycitt in possession of landed property ?—A. I ant. Q. Was. Lord. Melville acquained that you had became 3 tri.m of landed property in Scotland I presume he was 7 -for though it'ts.not a great purchase, it is not s nrsigniti. cant as to escapt,his Lordship's notice. Q. What do you conceive to be the.amount of your pro. • perry at tins monicnt I had occasion about a year agel to make a statement of my property : at that time I valued it. ar about Si or 52.0031. but it waS so invested as not to pro. duce me an income of inure than ',loot per annum. Q. Whether drafts upon the Bahl: 'Of England are as valuable in your estimation as drafts upon Coutts's house?-... A. It depends upon who makes the drafts, I take it, He said he held a quantity of , Navy bills when they fell to a discOuni, and he burrowed money to pay official demands. as he conceived it' immaterial out of what pocket,he them. He again ru-stated, that when Lord Melville wem.ol4' of ollice all the iralances due upon the- account f'.urrentand upon the Chest account were The manger of pay.. ment lie Stated as follows : -Having a power of attorney to sell and dkp,se of all his Lordship's - stuck,' be directed then. to be sold, eind they•were either sold, or the amount of the price current of the day - allowed tothe cred:t 'ot his account atCatt:;'s ; Zo,oool. was p. , id into'Couttes by Spiott t either or Mei vale Another • sir: l l - of ' 30, was paid either into his hands or to In* c.te.iit of Lord.. Melville, by Mr., Sprott. This sum was the prod ~02 of the, sale of the East India stock tie' mentioned yesterd.iy, by which 20,00 d, ors paid, the debt existing - upon th a t stock, and the remainder went to the credit OT Lord Meiviiiees 'account current with tire witness ; and stunner sum ivas paid some other way of:about 13,00 e I. He said that he had lost a:l recollection of the payment to the House Lit Ramsay and cu..; but from the document snewn hiitn yesterday ne had no doubt: he made it, and certainly it was nut withoUt the directions of Lord Melville. , Q. Whether Lord Nlelville did not know that payments .weie made out of the public money ? --Question ikjected to by Defendant's . Coun'sel and over-ruled. . Q. Whether you received Iny directions from. Lord Mel. vilte, 'which/ led 'you to know that Lord Nlelville meant the public money' ? ' That - Lord Melville knew it wa, ttio rublie money .whielt was so to iae paid I—A. I cannot swear sd. ' „ it is asked as to the Chost account ?—A . I certainly cannot swear so. . • Q. Did 'Lord Melville, when he eithetrequested or requir. ed moneyto be advanced by you to him, ever ask , you in ally one instance whether your own private funds would suppiy that source ?—A. I do not recalled that his Lordship ever dio, As to inquiring into the state of my own private funds, I do nut think Lord Melville ever did, Q. Did he ever in-quire of you,, whether, in making suelt advances, you were ttenclung_upon public balances --A. tint ever did. • Were any objeetions ever made by Lorci•Melvilie in de,. livering'the 'Chek account to him Lord Melville I.evvr examined toy account§ in my presence so . Minutely as to en. able him to make any ohjeetion, • Documents were rhea put into the witness'shands, frOirs which he stated the balances in his hands at the diffeleht periods during his rayntastership. With respect to , the application of money drawn and car , tied to the Chest account; the witness was. tot illy ignorant, • except as to the sum of +3,6001, Which,hetuad since leartaed was advanced to the hoitse of Boyd and Dehlietd: 'As to rho othersurns, he had no knowledge whatever of the application of them. The Loyalty Loan - money was carried to the Chest account, but the produce of the dividends was carried to turn credit of Lord Melville's account current: EXAMINED VI THE LORDS.--The witness ktated, that . although the accounts Were always signed by Lord When he presented' them, yet his lordship never examined any of the items, or scarce lo ;ked at t hem '; it he had it would have appeared upon the ce or them, that the Loyalty money was advanced' from the. Chest account (i. money): hut he could never prevail on the Defendant W., dive any attention to his private account: '; Tire Chest sc... count he described as a mere name for an account . which .ho found it necessary - mense with. Lord Melville. J t was rho „account of such adVances the application of which he knew *nothing of. The first item of fi, as he had before stated, wept the io,obol. which on his coming into office Lord Melville told him, he should account for. There were other itemt irs this account before the Loyalty Loan money', was tranferra to it, but not many. He was again examined as to the put.. chase of the 14,0001, East India Stock, and gave the'sirtria account of the transaction, namely, that having proposed to. Lord Melville to raise the money on the credit of the Stock tct be purchased, and finding that not to be done, he advanced public money for that purpose to Mr. Lind, without the knowledge of Lord Melville but led him to believe that the purchase monay'was furnished by Mr. Lind, in whose name the Stock stood. Being examined as to the Release ceourine ing a clause for the destruetion of all vouchers and accounts, he stated as follows.: The necessity originated in my wish to have all my affairs settled with Lord Melville, as I alwayt apprehended, aed I hum! May be allowed to say so, th i n hit Lordship was not careful in preSerVing his papers or account§ so as to be satisfactory to his heirs or successors ; and thes there might be no difficulty or argument about shewing th it a final settlement had been' made, either to his Lordship't heirs or nay own, I was anxious that a release sh,:uld, pass, by which it only became necessary that one voucher ,shot l l4 be preserved.- I had proposed it some, time before it wa4 carried into execution, and my mind became every cloy still. more impres/ed , wit.' the necessity of bovine this executed and in some conversation with his L'ordship I may have pro posed it again, and 10d hint I would forward releases for his :Lordship, tope signedin St:01011 1 I, it jie wO F I4 gi v g m e leave, But this l state more from knowing what must have 'oeelt the case, than fromany actual recolleetiohof the time or pla t =e 1, herr sucb c.;'.e , ,e , sation passed. I then applied 1 0 mi Solicitor in London, to draw out 4 release for that purpose and as he was my intimate friend and counsellor as welt a§ Solicitor, he rot:ceded very. much from his own Itnotv.P44 of iny.situation and connexion with Lord Melville indrawin4 itN that rat e, The 4r4s; 19 pc ? .i 1 qmo