The Sun.
London, England, 1805-06-13 00:00:00

to tale..., thii- step. In lE.i nething, in the.
proceeding • that had already been adopted, by the
House could operate as a bar ageinst any further
proceedings that:Might be judged necessary. Does
that Noble Lord mean to say; that any punishment
was too great ?..or that hadany very heinous,trans-
Idiom been
.discnvered by the Sere& Connifittee, the
House would have been precluded from instituting a ,
criminal prosecution against the perpetrators ? The
proceedings of the House. had been hitherto confined
to the subjed of Lord Melville's .all wing the
law -tia be violated by his Agent: Why not' on •
that part of the stlbjed yet untouched, the participa-
tion of Lord Melville -in .illicit profits, institute 4a,
criminal prosecution.? What-could beurged against
'such a step ? It could scarcely be maintained .that
other parts of the transaction were subject to crimi,
nal prosecution, but that this was ,sacred.—The
'question then arose, whether or not L'Ord'
had enjoyed Such particiixition ? This the Noble
Lord did not affed entirely to deny. , He :contended
indeed that the participation was not so extensive as
it was asserted to be.by Lord Melville's accusers; but
he Admitted that from such participation he might..
derive an income, of •7501..-a. year.' If so much
were admitted, the House might easily c6njeCture
what was the fad. The Noble Lord expressed
his opinion,'- that the drawing .Of money from the •
Bank for the purpose of ficilitating the' details
of the 'Navy. °dice, was a violation rather .of the
letter than of. the spirit of. • the A& of Parliament.
If it were, really and. Lana, fide for the puipose of
discharging ,these small sums, it would be so ; and
neither Ae, tier. leis Honourable Friend; nor 'emy
man in the House Would, he was convinced, be so
vindiEtive as to pursue such an infeingement of the'
A& to punishment, . But•was..this the charge ?
No ; the charge- was. that Lord Melville under this
specious pretext did authorize Trotter to 'withdraWr
immense .liisms Of money from .the Bank, to. be afe
terwards applied, purposes of private emo-
Inn-lent., The Inquiry Would resolve itself into two
'heads: Was this _done with. the concurrence' of
Lord" Melville end if so; did participate in the
einokiment of it ?,----into the diseie,Sion bf these
pointS Ga,ny entered at *considerable length?
and brought a variety of circumstances Prom the
Tenth Report, anti I'-em the Report of the Sele&
to c staff,. a them:. By the A& founded`
on the Report of. the Commissioners of Public Ac-
counts in 1'785, Lord,Melville must have been ,
aware that no' additional perquisite or gratuity was
to be allowed (to the., salarr_alletted by that Ad)
to the Paymaster of the Nag, 'The operation of
that .A& with regard to the transfer of balances'
from the hand of the Paymaster into the custody
of the. Rank was deferred by the sole authority of
.Lord
:Melville from 'July 1785, when it ought to.
I ave. taken place, to January 1786, when It adually
did takk, place. On same of these balances_ post- •
five proof existed.
.of profit having been made by
. Lord 'Melville ; in two
9f these. Balances particu-
larly, amotnating in 'all to 50001. -of which the
Country, had never received a shilling. To con-
.coal the false accounts of transfers,. the.doctunents,
Memorandums, tic. bad been cautiously destr6y.,
ed. The Noble Lord assericxl, that the pradice, of
lodging. money in the bands' of private Bankers Was
attended •yvith much ..convenience, and ,th!lt that.
coliVenience had been proved by the evidence of
Trotter ; but since he had left the Office a ties ae-
rangement had, taken place, without any recourse
to this expedient, which had been found. perfeetly
.compatible with comenienee. . However painftil to
him, he must say, that he could not possibly give
..credit to the assertinn male ' by Lord ‘Alt,dville
in the House, that in 1797 he ,did not know
money to to large amount had :been' drawn from
the Bank by Trotter. Lord Melville had bt`:en
accomniod'ated by Trotter Ni-ith -large sums of
mriney,
,not bearing interest, and he must know
that Trotter had no Means ,of raising this supply
but by withdrawing
,it from. the Bank. Was
he '.not. aware that - the, 22,00'01. advanced to
Tweedy; had not been drawn ' from the Blnk,
Merely for Abe details of Public Service ?—lt was
impossible that he ojoula ittit be so. When there-
fore wefindhim assuring the CIT%-acir.r.oa of .the
ExcHLouzi that •• any reports of such pioce4dings
were unfounded rumours, this was an additional cir-
cunett,ance to prove the necessity of a Criminat,Pro-.
seeution. Had any return been mace to the precept
Of the Committee .of tque, stating the profits made
by Mr, .Trotter?. No. What then was the fair' con-
clusion ? Then comes the famous tranSildion of the
release, cOntaining, a positive.engagement to destroy
notonly the Vouchers and Meanorandums, but even
the Boo:: of „AA:Counts. The tune alt which this
;e)-reetnent was entered into` was enough to prove
'trio real cause. of it. As to registretien, it was nu
publicity. In his Letter to the Commissioners of
Naval Inquiry, whydid net Lord Melville state that
the. burn mg of his Papers i1,"4 iii COnSegli::nce of that
release ? The Articles "by which Lord Melville was
suspected of Making profit, he.deniek.i seletrately, but
:the Charge was not on particulars, but that he had.
generally ktiown.of, mid 1-4krticitted in the specu-
lations of Trotter. The sums advanced by Trotter.
to Ldrd Melville, increasing _gradually from 8001. to
10;0001, could not proceed' frond any but public
funds.. Of the 10,0001. in the lends of Lord Mel-
ville previous to the‘ Payntastership of Trotter .We
should neVer have heard but. for the Committee.-7.
This., therefore, is a new circumstance, and a most
materi4 one: Itwas contrary to law that hi. should
be in possession of that sum ; and when he comes
and tells. you he will never disclose.the application of
it to any man, heaffords.tine strongest presumption;
that the application was` as illegal its the. possession:
If tarliarrient pasts over such A declaration as this
unpunished, 'blare is an end of all, responsibility in
the Public Offices. Or what use, are all the Ads
restraining such kr:inset:liens ? Of what use are the
rtlellations respelling Scent Service' Money, if a
Trea.§urersof the Navy, or a Paymaster, or a Lord
'pf the Treasury, can divert tlie Public Money to any
purpose ho pleases, and Alien boldly say, he will not
only refuse to account to the House for the .applica-
tien Of such Money;but that he will refue to coin:-
nein:tette it to those who ought to be completely M.
his centidt.'nCe, in all public mosnreti. A licence'
woulddntlius be is to melversation. The Noble
Lord .say 3, punishment i t only for the sake efesant-
pie, and that exiimple has already been tendered stn..-
' ticiently htriking to deter any imitators. This is cer-
tainly the principal, but not the on end of punish-
ment. ' Punishment lads tometenes ettlided ibr flint
purpose of reforming the offend4l., tonletiint.:z to re