The National Register.
London, England, 1809-03-12 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL REGISTER.

170

through Mrs. Clarke. The Honourable Gentleman then pro-
ceeded to state, that the Resolution which he shotdd propose
to the HfillE''.!, would embrace the two points to which he had
aLtuded ie the course of his speech; That in the room.
of the examination which this ;Louse has taken of the charges
submitted to them ogainst Royal Highness the Duke
of York, this House has obsel ved, with deep regret, that in
consequence of a connection 'mmoral as it was unbecoming,
an interference and correspondence in vniftary affairs had taken
place. which kns giveu colour and etlect to an influence, real or
supposed, most highly prejudicial to himself and to the Army."
:11r.NVIHTBRE AD said, there were some points, in the speech
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to which he wished to state
kis objections. The Right Himourable Gentleman had scouted
all appeOl to the people. This came with a very ill grace from
the Coascellaeof the Exchequer—the very same man who, in
tbe memory of the greater part of that House, had appealed
from the sense of Parliament to that of the people I Another
Point urged by the Right Honourable Gentleman was, that if
%ou removed the Duke of York there was no one to succeed him.
This was to establish a principle, as practically dangerous RS it
was erroneous in principle. But how was the matter of fad?
The point of fact was, that it was impossible to separate this Il-
lustrious Personage from the family to which he belonged. What
was the natural inference from this? Why, that it was wrong
in principle to put a Prince, so near the throne, into any effi-
cient and responsible station. It is in fact impossible that the
:House can treat the Duke of York like any other individual—
it is impossible, therefore, that in this and in all similar cases,
site house can have the benefit of that full responsibility which
is the hest safe-guard of the Constitution. Ile would not meddle
with the private character of his Royal Highness, we had all
faults enough—he would here pass no, and leave the Duke to his
es,v a conscience. The point before the House was, that these trans-
u,rtions of his Royal highness effectually touched the State, and
vreve of a nature told description which in all aras of modern
histor. had been the rub' of nations. This %vas a subject of too
sough itniw mince to shut our eyes upon. In the earlier part of
Eris speech, the Right lion. Gentleman had made an attack on
at: li on. Frictal of h is. That Gentleman (M r. Wardle) had conduct-
. 3 hot:-elf with equal candour and manliness; and the Country
would lung entertaio a grateful sense and a grateful memory of
the services of that Gentleman. The. Chancellor of the Ex che-
goeriliad sneered likewise at the manner in which the resolutinas
had been fronted, and had suggested, that cooler heads than the
lion. Gentleman's had been employed in drawing them up. He
could not misunderstand this allusion, which was evidently in-
tended for him. He had indeed known the Honourable
Gentleman (Mr. Wardle) in very early life, but they had been
separated by the different course of their *waiver yeats, and he
believed that, till the present Session, he had not seen him for
twenty years. fin the beginnin; of the Session, the Honourable
Gentleman had certainly informed him, that he had such charges
tit bring against the Duke of York. To this he had replied, by
advising him most earnestly to think of what lie was about, and
suggested to him, from his own experience, the heavy loss of
sine, the an iety b 3 night and by day, which must necessarily
attend on undertnkings of this nature. Ile (Mr. Whitbread)
had then pledged himself, that he would most certainly
attend in his seat en the motion, and 3,-out/i second him in
Motion. From that time to the present. he had only seen
accide!naily in the street. He had no hesitation to say, tin
it gasais decided opinion that his Royal Highness the Dui e
of York was guilty of a direct pri-ity. He did not think that
he had participated in any money, but be eras clearly of opinion
that he knew that 'ovary had hen ta!;ert, ;:ad therefore that he
was guilty of a corrupt privity. His Honourable Friend had
pursued that line of conduct from his own mind, which if he had
done him (Mr. Whitbread) the honour to consult him, he should
corrainly Lave ised him. lie had tampered justice with the
cOnsider:ition which was due to the feelings of a father.—He
;tad co!,• :•Ilt.i.rt at once what the interests of the Country required,
and what the Wow. t-,,t);: of the Accused, and the exalted
stature of his connectin seemed to suggest. Under this
impression, he certainly not be backward in his own
duty. It might give him pain, but he would discharge it to the
utmost. The House stood in on awful situation before the
conntrv, and though the Right lionaorable Gentleman opposite
f Mr. Perceval), might deem it prudent to scout the opinion of
tt.e Puhlie, he for one thatight it his duty to show some respect
for his coosti tows, tt4ave some deference for public opinion.
'lite lion. Gentleman !SU taken upon himself the task of over-
t :!rning the testiniony of the witnesses one by one, and then ob-
rects to them adallither ; aud asserts, that the evidence of Mrs.

MA RCH 12.

Clarke is not to be believed from the 'rause of her life ; if these
classes of women a ere to he discredited merely irate their up-
fortunate situation, it would be hard indeed. It is '•••, because
one has been guilty of misconduct, that therefore the whole class
is to be coudemned ; if this were to he the -Ise, w:.at would
become of the captains, after the conduct of Capta:a Huxley
Sandon ; and what would become of the generela after the
conduct of General Clavering, who certainly had done no credit
to any class of society ? The conduct of that unfortunate class
to which Mrs. Clarke was stated to helang, though sometimes
erroneous, did not disqualify them from telling the truth ;
nor is there one of them, though they had forfeited their
virtue, whose evidence would not be sufficient to co:: ict any
man of perjury in a court of justice. The Hon. Gentlenans
had also endeavoured to stigmatize the charaeter of the woman,
in stating that she was all along actuated in her conduct by ma-
lice and revenge. It was certainly not very unnatural to sttp,
pose after the treatment she had met with from the Duke of
York, who had discarded and ill-ased her, end pecu-
niary transactions did not act in a way most cred: tp.h:s; ta him-
self, that she would take the first opportunity at retaliating.
His Honourable Friend had certainly argatai vary reason-
ably on the separation. The Honourable Gent! luau hacj
stated that she had made a claim, through Mr. A ,!-La., :o the
Duke of York, for her pension, and that she said, if di i yen Ley
necessity, she mast have recourse to this which she
stated to he as unpleasant to her as to the I)uk.. of .*::ork. It
must be confessed that the provocation aas k:it, but in the
course of conversation with many persons, it wasnatural to
suppose, she would mention her grievance, and it would of"
course be retailed from month to mouth, and it would at length
he conveyed back to the ears of his tto' al Highness. And it wos
not at all improbable, that there were many persons who, on being
informed that she was in possession of some letters of the Duke of
York would have been ready to advance her I MO!. for the pur-
chase of them, and her reccasi:ies tseuld have hcea Era
lieved. It did not appear, however, that she had heen (.o de-
termined in her plan of vengeance. It was well Llama that
when she lived at Hampstead, that instead of conce• tiog any
plan of revenge, she burnt innumerable letters from the Duke to
herself, and sent down others to Nicholls, in order to light his
tire ; from this it did not appear that she had laid a very dos!)
plan of revenge. lie was ready to allow, that when she ap-
peared at the Bar of the House, she had evinced a considerable
degree of ability, of flippancy, of spirit, of elfronter).., and of
impudence; )et when she was examined for three whole
hours by the Solicitor and Attorney Generals, ;:he Wiled
them all, and gave her testimony in a clear and con-
nected style, although she was treated with a g.-cater de-
gree of roughness, and was shown less indulgence than any
other witness who had been examined. It came out that
she had had transactions with Gen. Claverin and Dr. o':,leara.
When Gen. Clavering had written a letter to the Attorney Gene-
ral, desiring to he called to the Bar as an evidence to impeach
the testimony of Mrs. Clarke, he should at least have conic with
clean hands ; hut in order to prove Mrs. Clarke's falsehood, he
ce:'erred to her own evidence with respect to himself, and denied
th.it he had ever applied to her for any military command,
Th:: t she should mention the name of Dr. O'Meara, a protestant
elergyman, as a person for whom she was to use her influence.
aas considered by the Right Hon. Gentleman as a libel not to
be credited, and as a sufficient ground for discharging, the wit-
ness from the bar as unworthy. Fortunately, however, for the
establishment of her assertion, Gen. Claveriig came to the bar,,
and those letters, uf the existence of which she knew nothing,
acre produced, and the letters which had been given by her to
Nichols to be destroyed were brought forward. Amongst them
was a letter from Gen. Clavering. in his own hand-writing,
which proved in characters, black as Erchns, the falsehood of
hisassertion and the vanity of his attempt to invalidate the testi-
mony of NI rs. Clarke. There was also a letter frop the Arch-
bishop of Tuam, recommending Dr. O'Meara to the notice of his
Royal Highness,* and requesting her to use her influence in
the furtherance of his objects ; if she had made that state-
ment in her evidence, it would not have been believed.
—The Right Honourable Gentleman stated in his speech,
that the validity of 'Airs. Clarke's evidence was impeached in
twenty-eight different instances. But by whom was the first
charge supported ? By Nicholls, who had already proved him-
self the basest character, but whose testimony was of course un-
impeachable, because it came in favour of the Duke of York.
It appeared that Mrs. Clarke applied to Nicholls several times
for her letters, which he as repeatedly refused to deliver to her,
and would nut even let her peruse them ; and afterwards, when