The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1805-06-12 00:00:00

MOOSE 01 COMMONS.
Si, W. CURTIS brought the Port of London Improvement
Its, whieb was read a first, and ordered to be read a second
t are se morrow.
Mr Wm gave ',mice, that to-morrew he should move foe
team to tineg aria Bill to: renewing the Act fur reenlating the
Loon and I weft Duties between Leland and Scotland
Sewed public accounts were pre:elite:l from different offices,
and ordered uslie on t`,e Table.
1' se Sinusitis Red Wide Duty Bill waa read a third time and
i*
Aprison from the Bank of England peasented, as moved
......day by Mr. Wh.tbread, a return of tire Navy money P-
it el from the Bank, with a list of the lames in which the like
ewe dime, together with the amount of the reyective sems.
Owiseml to lie on the Table.
The Loyalty Lean, the Sasaltens Officer:, the Militia AL
jutants and Serjeants Major, the Lepel, tile Assessed Tams.
Ciareesionere, and the Iri.h Militia Bills, went through the
Cernmittee stages, and were ordered to be relented to-morrow.
The Dublin Police Bill bent through a Commiteteae-
-o.elered ta Inc reported on this Jay three weeks, and to be
j !lewd.
efOORF. presentee a Petition tram the city of Coventry,
tangratu!aring the Howie on their proceedings respecting the
Tenth Result of the Naval Commissioners, and exhorting
aro to continue their iivorstiptions.—Ordcrul to lie mils
Trble.
Mr. ROSE brought in a Bill for the better employment et
Eames ens geed In the Coast Trade, which WU read a first,
and order ei to be read a serend time On Thursday 11.7 ft.
T 3.1 soothmt Whale nisei / 801 l was read a third time.
Ile Chan:cry Deputy Regiatees Bill was read a second tarn.,
aid committed for to-in:wring.
IMPFACHMENT OF LORD VISCOUNT MELVILLE.
The SPEAKER sai he had just received a let-
ter from Lord Viscount Melville, the contents of
*Melt he was requested to communicate to the
House. The letter was dated from Wimbledon,
the 11th of June, and stated. that his lendship
had been apprised of that House having appointed
a Committee, to take into consideration the Tenth
Report of she Cemmissioners of Naval Enquiry,
in which his condua, whileTreasnrer of the Navy,
was atraign-d—and that he had also been informed.
that some proceeding; on the literent of that Com-
mittee were to be agitated in the House that day—
ho therefore requested permission to attend them.
fur the put pose of being heard in his own just ifi.;a: i•in.
Mr. R. S. DUNDAS (son of Viscount Melville)
then rose, pursuant to itotice, and said, that, wider-
standing there would be no opposition to the mrstien
he was about to submit, he shbuld detain the House
no longer, than by moving, "That Lord Viscount
Mclviile be new admitted, and h eird ;" which b'i'g
.greed to, erne fuel. the Sr EA Kea ordered the See-
jeart to take the Mace, and acquaint Viscount Mel-
ville that he may come in. •
The Sergeant met nit Lnrdshir at the door, and
condnaed him within the bar. making the usual re-
verence to the Chair; by which 112 was informed,
that there wiu a chair on which he might repose
himself. The chair was on the left side, just with-
in the bar, on which his Lordship seated himself for
40in a minute, with his hat nn—after which, he
rese, uncovered, and addressed the House to the
follna ing effea :
" Sir, since the first agitation of this subjea,
or out of Parliament, every attempt I made to ob-
tain a fair hearing in my own vindication, has hi ther-
eo failed of producing any etre& When called be-
fore the Commissioners of Naval Inquiry. I was
perkily ignorant of the objefts of their examina-
tion. They had before them, and had been some
time in possession of the accounts between Alexander
Trotter and the house of Messrs. (butts, which I
had never any opportunity of seeing, of the nature
of which I was wholly iteinforrne..l, and not one
item of which had they at the time communicated
to me. I never indeed had any opportunity of
looking at them at all, till I saw them in the ap-
Pendia to the Commissioners' Report. Previously
to the discussion which took place in this f louse, I
applied to the Commissioners, requesting an oppor-
tunity of making fuller explanatinns. Tnis applica-
tion was suede on the 28th of March, and the an-
swer I received seas. that their Report and pro-
ceedings were now before Parliament. and that they
did net think it necessary to revise or alter what had
been already done. On the Bth of May, the ques-
tion under the discussion of this House was, whether
army previous inquiry should he instituted, before
f!s„lutions should be adopted against me? and as
it would be presumptuous to ore to attempt to anti-
t'Pnlt what line of conduit the House might think
Pro adopt, I contented myself with the hopes,
onld a Committee he appointed, I might
have an opportunity of iseing heard before them.
In this, however, I was again disappointed. from a
difficulty whiah arose in the other House of' Parlia-
ment. For
own
part,
I left no endeavour un-
tried, to inilitee their Lordships to permit my free
and unremained Appearance before the Committee
of this Herne—but, from what was, no doubt, a
upyr-771,ireroespe,rtsenhe7 of their Lordships own dignity and
thought proper to put a negative
(Pon that and refused to permit my attendance he-
urre that Committee, but under such reutidlions

soasibre of and a witness to the impression conveyed
by such a circulation, which represented me as cri-
minal in every part of the conutty. Thus circum-
stanced, Sir, if I happened to he present in any other
place or company, where such libels were:propagat-
ed, my answer would b.:. as it is now, that I must
solemnly protest these resolutions are perfeely erro-
neous. I never had any knowledge of Mr. Trot-
ter's investing any navy money in the stocks, of his
discounting bills with it, of his turning it to
cur-
poses of private advantage, and that it—any such
praeice had existence, it was altogether without my
privity or consent. I am, however, aware that my
stote.nent would be incomplete, if I did not advert '
to other rspreanuations made out of doors, which
said that I was myself a participator of those aileg-
ed emoluments. I de.iied my ever having done so,
in my letter to the Naval Commissioners, and I am
p.isitiveiy persuaded, that if the SUMS question,
fairly put, now or at any other time, to Mr. Trotter
himself. he would not hesirete to controdie arty
representations of that kind. lam fully convinc
that he would readily acqeiz me of having; derived
any benefit or profit whatever from trans.dtions of
that nature. I know not whether this charge will
again he revived or repeated, either here or else-
where; hut I do now confidently assert that the evi-
dence of the only two persons, Mr. Trotter and Nir.
Wilson, who could be supposed to be privy to
the whole, does not contain one tittle which
could lay any foundation for this charge.
Much stress has been laid bath in argument mad in
the resolutions upon the contiii.eice and intimate
connefaion between tsli. Trooer and myself, upon
which I trust I may be allowed to make a few re-
marks. When I first came into the Navy Office, I
foetid Mr. Trotter, who was introduced and re-
commended to sot by Sir Gilbert Elliott and Mr.
Coutts, with the lamer of whom he had conneeione
in the way of business. I soon distinguished him
for his uneOsilinon aeivity and diligence. He
was indefatigable in deteaing and disclosing to me
a variety of -frauds before co :mined in withholding
the pay of seamen, and different emoluments to
which they are justly entitled. I encouraged and
oipported him in the prosecution of the patties
guilty of these malpraeices. I was desirous of
going far ther, and, instead of eoisessing the protec-
tine of Government to the sailors themselves, I was
desirous of extending it also to their wives, children,
and families. In my endeavours to are this, Mr.
Trotter made himself so useful, in laying before me
the best arranged plans for producing the effee, that
I thought h m worthy of being trusted ; and for his
great and unwearied exertions, on the death of Mr.
Douglas, I promoted him to his late situation in the
office. and I am even now ready to say of him, that,
for a great length of years, no public office could have
been better condueed ; that. during the whole of
that time, there was not a single instance of any
stoppage or delay of payment to the seamen, and
that all the balances were fairly accounted for, and
transferred, without the loss of a single shilling
to the public. He received, it is true, an addition-
al salary ; but that I thought him fully entitled to,
for his additional exertions. Sir, as I have no re-
gular means of knowing the proceedings of this
House on the grounds of any motions or resolutions
proposed to it, I have been obliged to adopt the ob-
vious construeion which my judgment enables me
to form on them. It is certainly possible for me to
misunderstand some preceding ones, which I can-
not reasonably reconcile to she evidence on which
they have been professedly founded—and if I should
he erroneous in any of the future observations, I
hope the House will bear in mind, that all I can do
is, to present what is my own view of them. In the
14th resolution, I find it stated, that drawing mo-
ney from the Bank of England, or allowing it to
be so drawn and lodged at a private Banker's, was
a gross violation of the law, and a breach of public
duty. In touching upon this subjee. I feel myself
considerably embarrassed by the limitations impos-
ed upon me by the other House ; but even that, I
hope, should not prevent me from stating one posi-
tive fact, which is, that on na occasion whatever ,


did I ever once authorise Mr. Trotter to draw mo-
ney from the Bank of England, and lodge it any
where for his own private emolument. This I as-
sert in the most distinct manner, and most further
contend, that neither before the Naval Commission-
ers, nor the Committee of this House, is there a par•
cle of evidence in support of a charge of that na-
ture. It does not any where appear that all the
instruments for drawing money from the Bank fur
Naval purposes were not made out legally, and ac-
cording to the tree intent and meaning of the Act of
Parliament. When under examination myself, I
told the Commissioners no more than that I allowed
Mr. Trotter to lodge money in the hands of a pri-
vate banker, for the convenience 01 snaking paynients
during the interval that may elapse till those pay-
ments were demanded. I further stated, that I teuk
it for granted these sums were always drawn under
competent authority. I thought at the time, and
had a right to believe that they perfectly understood
me; and what appears the stranrst of all is, that
they reported the evidence, reported the examina-
tion entreaty enough to draw conclusions, in order
to found a charge, which appears to me contrail to
the evidence. However constrained I most find
-mryst-ff by the limitations of the Lords, I muss make
bold to say, that the assertions contained in the Re-
port are made in eontradiaion to truth, and the
evidence which was taken before them. There is,
Sir, one universal mistake, which seems to have per-
vaded the whole of these proceedings. The Aft of the
25th of rise King, of which I must be allowed to have
some share of knowledge, never intended, nor had in
its contempl ttien to make a regular digest of regu-
lations for the office of Treasurer of Navy. Its true
interest and objeft, as very clearly expressed, were
to restrain Treasurers or Paymasters from retiring
from office, as had frequently been done before, with
large balances unaccounted for, to remain iu their
hands for a great length of time. The whole of the
Ad is comprised in twelve short clauses, enjoining
that the Tmeastwers accounts should in future be
official, and not personal, as was the former praCtice.
During the whole of my administration, that law
was rigidly complied with, and in retiring from
office, I have not been accused of retaining any ba-
lance whatever. The House should consider
that, beyond the necessary eontrouL of the Trea-
surer, his office is quite distinct from that of the
Paymaster, and that of the Paymaster General not
very much conneßei with those of other persons em-
ployed in that department. A great deal of money
must pass through the hands of inferior officers in
different parts of the count? y, where the demands are
made. Io the month of .lanuary last, the Pay Office
was kept open for a long time, to make good small
demean; and there were six thousand eight hundred
and two payments made in different proportions of
sums, from three or four prime's se low as 4s. (rid.
and many of them even to a smaller amount, to
supply such sums as different sailors were entitled
to. It must, therefore, be obvious, that so anew,:
n such numerous classes of demands without delay,
it is necessary to have always a very large sum, ei-
ther in the iron chest of the office, or at some
convenient banker's, as it world be endless to
pay ;ham all by drafts on the Bank of England,
specifying the names of the persons in whose &your
they were drawn. The Ad of Parliament there-
' fore did not, nor was it ever intended to apply to
inserting the names of the persons in whose favour
the drafts were made ; but on the contrary, enjoined,
that from the moment assignments of demands were
made from the respective offices, the Paymaster should
bare the money ready, which he could not elle&
aith-
nut previously drawing it from the Bank. So far there-
fore was the AR from making this pradice criminal,
that it wes in fift prohibitory of any other method.
The Act of the 2eth of George lIL, so frequently
alluded to,was founded on the Report of the Finance
Committee of 1792, in which it was stated that the
Treasurer of the Navy, or the Paymaster, were not
then accountable for the sums drawn from the Bank
in consequence of assignments of demands to the
public, but only to the persons in whose favour the
assignments were snide. It complained of that
want of responsibility to the pubic which enabled
them to retain large balances in their hands until
the claims were absolutely made, and then only
personally responsible to the parties. To remedy
this was the foundation of the Act, which rendered
their accounts public, and I consider myself perfectly
right in stating this to be the trueintent and construc-
tion of the law. But, supposing me to be wrong on
this construalon. and, that the intention of the Aft
was to compel the treasurer to give separate drafts
on the Thank of England to every claimant, specify-
ing his name, and the nature of his demand ; will
any one honestly say that my misunderstanding or
misconstrutiou of the Aft was a gross violation of
the law, and a gross breach of duty ; or even eau
every positive violation of the words of an At of
Parliament is, in all possible cases, a gross breach
of public duty ? I come next, Sir, to another part
of my examination before the Commissioners. If I
then said, as I admit to have done, that I thought
some emolument might fairly arise to the Pay-
master from his placing money in the hands of
a private banker, provided it should be always
forthcoming when large demands were made, I
spoke in the general knowledge which every man
must have of business. I did not think it un-
fair that, during the interval between the lodg-
ment of such money and the demands for it,
an understanding of a mutually accommodat-
ing nature should subsist between the Banker
and the Paymaster. In all transaaions of that
kind, is there any Gentleman now present, who
does not knew, that the Bankers have always some
interest, and derive some emolument from whate-
ver money may be deposited in their hands ; and
Who is not aware, that they are in the habit of giving
some reciprocal accommodation to the persons so
depositing Liege sums of money? This pre:lice
was not peculiar to my administration of the of
of Treasurer of the Navy, as it was continued for
two years afterwards, uatil toy successor, Mr. ,