The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1805-04-09 00:00:00

* •
upon the occasion in queition, Ott the clerks of the
Nary Office were called to another, and, conse-
quently, obliged to leave their awn immediate busi-
ness undone. He agreed with the Commissioners,
that it was a poor and pitiful °economy, Hitt, upon
this part of the subjeet, lie must corre in rotor mto
which those Gentlemen had fallen, who looked upon
the Treasurer of the Navy, as a person invested
with despotic power. So far from that bring the
case,. he could not encrease the number of clerks,
nor augment the salaries of those in the office ; hut
this crime of poor and pitiful economy was not
even imputable to Lord Melville ; for that Noble
Lord, as well as himself, had applied for an aug-
mentation of the clerks' salaries. There was
another detached point, upon which great stress
was laid, and seemed to be considered a ma-
tetial feature in the case. He meant the circum-
stance of Mr. Trotter having drawn 1,000,0001. in
one day from the Bank, and lodged it in the house
of Messrs. Coutts. His Rt. Hon. Friend (Mr. l'itt)
had said, that much doubt lay upon this transaction,
and that it might admit of explanation. Now he
should go farther. lie would undertake to explain
it satisfaifforily. The loft then was, that this million
was not the whole sum drawn that day. He begged
the House not to be startled when he stated how
the case was. The fart was, it was part of a slim
of two millions and a half drawn upon the same
day, viz. the 10th of April. Of this due intimation
was given by the Commissioners of the Navy and
Vielualling Office, stating, that the Treasurer of the
Navy had that day received money for the services
of these departments for six months, and giving the
creditors an option of money or bills, as they should
think proper. The next day, the 1 lth, these two
millions and a half were offered to the persons hav-
ing any demands against these several deplatments,
and therefore there was nothing secret or clandes-
tine in the transaetion. Tha next detached charge
particularly concerned himself. It had been insi-
nuated nut of doors, in consequence of something
contained in tbr Report, that he (Mr. Canning),
as TreasUrer of the Navy, had thrown ohstroltions
in the way of enquiry. The Right Hon. Member
here entered into a justification of his own conduet.
He said he had been called upon by the Commis-
sioners to furnish four several Usu., but, on consider-
ation, he found he co !Id not furnish more than
three, and even there not in the precise form re-
quired. These three, however, he did furnish in
the most complete form in his power, from the do-
cutnents which his Office afinrded ; and for any fur-
ther information upon the subji.alt he referred the
Conunissioners to the books of his department. The
Report, how over, in noticn,g this transadion, and
his first answer, goes on to say, " his accounts were
afterwards made nut," implying, as he conceived,
that they were at first refused. Having said thus
much, however, he hoped he will not be suspeftcd
of having Oa men any impediment in the way of an
aft which, w:tile he 'nighly approved, he should re-
gret the more ono el tor in carrying it into execution.
TI N h.:ja• explained.
Mr. G. PONSONBY roses and, in a very argu-
mentative and impreoice speech, which command-
ed great attention, and was frequently interrupted
with decisive marks or approbation, spoke to the
following effea--*, Sir, I am satisfied that the Right
Hun. Gentleman who spoke last, thinks, as he
speaks, that there is matter in this holiness, highly
deserving of the nnist serious consideration of this
I loose. lam sure he thinks it a question highly de-
serving of a Committee, for the purpase of proving
the innocence and purity of Mr. Trotter; for, from
all I have heard of his charaeter, I am certain, if
he did net think Mr. 'Oratter pure and innocent, he
would not continue him in office. I think it right,
Sir, to quote the Right lion. Gentleman's conduct,
in proof of hi, sincerity ; for, I am sure he would
not vote for farther delay, if not from a conscious-
ness that It was necessary to the exculpation of Mr.
Tooter. He solely would not continue him in of-
fice, or act in any way, merely for the purpose of
ssreening an accusad person from justice. But,
while I give the Right lion. Gentle Man credit for all
this candour and regard for truth, there is one cir-
cumstance which strikes me as somewhat extraor-
dinary. The Right Hon. Gentleman, through the
whole of his speech, uses the phrase, this charge, as
if it were limited to one. Now, this as an error ; for
there are several distind and separate charges com-
prised in the offence. For example, one of the
heads of accusation is, that Lord Melville, the very
man who proposed the law in question, and after-
wards Treasurer of the Navy, did violate the pro-
visions of that law, by conniving at the conduet of
his Paymaster, taking the public money from the
Rank, and applying it to his own private profit and
emolument. Is not this a single, distinet, and sub-
stantive charge ? Has that any thing to do, in the
remotest degree, with accommodation afforded to
another office ? or with the charge of a participation
of gain with Lord Melville ? Is not this, then, a
disonet and separate ascusntion ? and, if so, how
does it become necessary to its ascertainment, to en-
quire whet office received the loan ? sir tetther Mr.
Trotter divided the profits with Lord is vile? The
Right Hon. Gentleman. pursuing this error, says,
as a reason few farther time and enquiry, it is diffi-
cult to decide upon complex and intricate accounts,
meaning thereby the accounts of Mr. Trotter. Sir,
these accounts having nothing to do with the c
which I have stated: I ask the House, will tit=
after ten years of consideration and examination,
enable you to say, that Lord Melville did not con-
tain at Mr. Trotter, his paymaster, taking money
out of the Bank, and applying it fo the purposes of
private emolument ? You know they will not ; and
therefore, as to this charge, no delay is necessary.
But it has been said, that the accounts are not
corm& ; as it will appear that the sums transferred
to the Bank of Messrs. Courts were only seven mil-
lions,
aad not fifteen millions, as therein stated.
Bus how will this, admitting the foe to be so, ac-
quit that Noble personage of corrupt connivance at
the breach of the law ? Is he innocent, because he
only connived at the misapplication of seven mil-
lions of the public money ? The neat objection urged
is, that the charge against the Noble Load and Mr.
Trotter is supported only by ex parte evidence. Why,
this is indeed a curious objeition. The Gentlemen
chum favourite terms for themselves, and then they
quarrel with their own pb ra se. his indeed a)art* evi-
dence, but of what party 1 is it of the accuser ? No.
It is the evidence of the par y accused stating !every
thing he thinks psoper iu his own defence and jus-
tification. But it has been said, that these patties