Star.
London, England, 1809-12-12 00:00:00

•• • •
0 Major Vockl's examination vies resumed,
He stated, that on the lit of December he vas in a
coach with Colonel Warille and Mrs. Clarice; she
proposed calling at Wright's ; they tEd so, where he
aw Daniel Wright. There. Was no one else present.
He did not recollect that any thing particular pass-
ed, but Mrs. Clarke's pointing out some curtains,
which she said the Duke of York gave her in
_Glou-
cester Place.; also some chairi similar to those Wright
was to send to her house; also some cbair-covers,
painted on velvet, which she said Wright was to
match. Never heard any thing to induce him to be-
lieve that ColonelViardle was to pay for the furniture.
Did not stay above a quarter of an hour; called a second
time with Mrs. Clarke; believes she called to expedite
the furniture of the house. He assisted Colonel War-
dle in getting a loan ; knew Mr. Illingworth, who gave
Wright a bill forXsoo, and he andColonelWardle gave
Illingworth their acceptances for 2501. each. Never
heard Col Wardle undertake to pay for the furniture.
Was Private Secretary to the Duke of Kent; held
another appointment ; but with respect to that, he did
not know that he ought to say any thing, as it might,
at a future day, be the subject of discussion in that
Court.

[Lord ELLIMBOROUGII here observed, that that cir-
cumstance had been adverted to by the Coun3el in
the opening speech. Not knowing but that it might
bear on the case, he had suffered him to go on ; but
it now appeared that it must be considered as ii no-
thing -had been said about it.]
Major Dodd proceeded to state, that Mrs. Clarke,
when at Wright's, looked at several c.irpets, and ask-
ed their opinion of them but he never heard her say
that Col. Wardle was.ao pay for them, or any other
article of furniture.

Cross-examined by Mr. Gannow. He understood
from Col. 'Wardle, previous to his introduction to
Mrs. Clarke, that Col. Wardle meant to obtain all
the information be could resipecting the intended in-
veskation. He also learned from him, two or three
days before they set off on their tour, that he intend-
ed to take Mrs. Clarke with him, and that he ex-
pected to get information from her that would be
useful to him. Did not know that she was apprized
at the time of his being Secretary to the Duke of
Kent, but thinks she must during the 4 days they were
absent, from the conversations that passed during that
time ; some of them being about the disturbances at
Gibraltar, from which she could not but collect it. He
did not assist Colonel Wardle in carrying on the In-
quiry, th'ough he might have considered what he did
as such. He was never present in the House of Com-
mons but One day during the Inquiry, and then he
did not communicate with Colonel Wardle. Never
considered Mrs. Clarke as being in very poor circum-
stances; bin thought she. was a person that could pay
her way. Recollects Colonel Wardle told him she
wanted money to pay the butcher and banker, as per-
sons in very decent circumstances might. He went .
to Wright's with Colonel Wardle and Mrs. Clarke,
the day after they czme to town, where he saw maey
expensive articles which he afterwards saw at West-
bourne-place. Believed that during the inquiry Col.
Wardle thought MrS, Clarke an important witness ;
'but does not recolle;:t him to have expressed his satis-
faction at the manner she gaveherevidence ; went with
ColonelWardle to Illingworth, in consequence al Co-
lonel Wardle's telling him that Mrs. Clarke had in-
formed him she was much pressed by Wright, and
begging him, with tears in her eie's, to assist her.
Colonel Wardle said he had refused ; but asked him
it he could suggest any mode by which it could be I
done. He observed, that it was not uncommon for one'
tradesman to accommodate another with a bill, and
he went to 111ingworth for that purpose, and told him,
that if he would give his acceptance for 4500 to
Wright, as Colonel Wardle was Out little known to
'him, Colonel Wardle and himself would give their
acceptances for £250 each, as a counter-security.—
Illingworth accepted Wright's bill for £5OO, and
afterwards brought him a bill for £250, which be
accepted, and paid when it became due. He never
heard any inquiries as to promises that were made
'-Mrs. except what he saw in the account of
-the proceedings before the House of Commons. He
acknowledged it would have been equally convenient'
to him to have paid the £250 in the first instance. In
answer,to a question why he tpok this circuitous mode
and not give a direct bill to Wiight, he thought it bet-
ter Colonel Wardle's name should net be-mentioned.

Lord ELLENBOROUGII wished Major Dodd would
give some reason for this circuitousness.
He always believed that the Duke of Kent was ex.,
treinely adrerie to, and !lorry for the Inquiry, and
that he had uniformly been so. He considered Mr.
Wardle as having come forward in a patriotic cause,
and though be was Secretary to the Duke of Kent,
as hehad always-faithfully served his Royal Highness,
he thought he had a right to visit Colonel Wardle
and Mrs. Clarke, or any one he pleased.
[Some papers were here handed to him, which he
aLknowiedged to be his hand-writing.]

1:r-examined by Mr. BO a A-N
He was sitting with Mrs. Clarke one day when the
servant came and told her that Mr. Wright had sent
several chairs. She observed she wished the man
would take them back again, for Wright was never
easy except when he was sending furniture there, and
he did not care what expences he put her to.
Mr. James Glennie said, he was applied to by Mrs.
Clarke, on the Kith of December, to apply to Colonel
Wardle, to become answerable for a debt of £5OO
which she had owed upwards of three years to Mr.
Wright. l le answered, that he could not make the
application, knowing Mr. Wardle's determination not
to become bound for any of her debts. She talked of
having the lease and furniture of her house in Bedford.
place, Bloomsbury, to dispose of, which would enable
her to repay this sum, and also spoke of the sale
of a book, which she was about to publish, contain-
ing die Duke of York's letters, &c. At Mr. AVar-
dle's request, the witness afterwards went to
Wright's, apprised Ibim of Mr. Wardle's determi-
nation not to .become bound for Mi.s. Clarke's debt
to him, or any other, and added, that he could not I
do so, if otherwise well inclined to it, without defeat-!
ing the inquiry which was then going on. The wit-1
ness also expressed his surprise at Wright's having so
greatly extended his credit to Mrs. Clarke, when he I
said, that was the only chance of his being paid. On.i
one occasion, when he represented to Mrs. Clarke her,
extravagant manner of living, wished her to retrench,l
and said that was also the opinion of Mr. Wardle, she
asked, what he had to Jo with her expensive furniture?
he was Rot tear for it. On his cross.examinaLion, the

Airtoess admitted thaigau thtiotstney to the Martell.
Tqwers he had take* notes of every thing that fell front
, Mrs) Clarke as to the disposal Of Barcnietoes,,Peer4&es,
.Gpnerals of Districts; anecdotes of the Royal 1.)11y,

ore. •
. .
Lord Ett.tsnottouCit spoke in strong terms against
the indulgence of such pcgrient curiosity.
Mr. Illingworth stated the fact of his giving his ac-
ceptance to Wright for Mrs. Clarke. and his afterwards
receiving from 'Mr: Wardle and Mr. Dodd two notes
of £250 each, which were since paid He stated on his
cross-examination, that he scratched out_ part of the.
affidavit which had been sent to him to swear, but he ,
understood it had been published in the newspaper 4 in .
its original state.
Mr. Bull proved that Mr. Wright recommended
Mrs. Clarke to his house, as a repectable li•onaan of
the name of Farquhar. He took the house for a
month, stating it to be his intention to furnish a
house for her. He also paid the rent.
Miss Mumford corroborated this evidence.

Joseph Curt, Coventry-street, Haymarket, the pro-
prietor of the house in Westbourne-place, stated, thlit
being referred by Mrs. Clarke, under the nAme of
Farquhar, to Mr. Wright for a character, he requested
of him to deal towards him as one tradesman ought
to do to another. Wright then informed him thai
she was a most respectable woman, that he had had
thousands of her money, and that if he had 50 houses
she should have her choice. He understood from
Mrs. Clarke, that Wright was to furnish her house
a-new. He met him one day returning from taking
measure for fire-irons and carpets ; and Wright also
paid for her the price of the fixtures and two quarters
rent.

Evidence was then given of Wright's having been
bail for Mrs. Clarke in an action in the year 1808, in
which she set up her coverture.
Sir Richard Phillips said he had several conversa-
tions with Mrs. Clarke respecting a book she MS to
give to the Public, and also as to her debts. Among
the latter, she mentioned her furniture in Westbuurne
Place, and the obligation she lay under to pay to
Wright t2OOO on that account. This was about
the I Ith or I2.th of last March, when a Mr. Sullivan
was present.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said le believed Sir Rich-
ard had a bad memory.
Sir Richard said, he did not understand that any
imputation could be cast on him or on his memory.
He recollected that Mrs. Clarke had reasoned on the
subject in this manner, that it would be necessary for
her to get a large price for her book, else, how could
she pay for all that furniture. The evidence before
the House of Commons had by this time been con-
cluded, but a decision had not been come to; for he
recollected, that on a subsequent day, the decision of
the House of Commons was unknown to her, when
he (Sir Richard) acquainted her with it.
Lord ELLENBOROVGII said, the discovery of Mr.
Wardle having undertaken to .pay this furniture,
might not have been convenient at that tin*.
Bir Richard Phillips added, that this statement had
been repeated to him by Mrs. Clarke more circum-
stantially, on the 31st of March, after the question
had been decided in the House of Commons.

Mr. ALLEY declared this to be the case on the part
of the prosecution.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then rose on the part of,
the Defendants. He said that the complexion and
colour of the prosecution might be collected not only
horn the tumult out of doors (there had been consi-
derable huzzaing as Colonel Wardle went out of
Court), but also by the manner in which it had been
opened. It was not an unusual thing for men in dis-
tress to take the independent line, and inveigh against
corruption. In the manner, however, in which this
business was opened, most serious charges were made.
It was said that men were deprived of valuable em-
ployments under Government, as a chastisement for
having discharged their duty to the country. Major
Dodd, however, could not himself hear this state-
ment without expressing some indignation ; and the
fact was, that he hintst.lf (the Attorney-General)
had given his opinion with respect to the propriety
of his removal many months before Major Dodd
had tome before the Grand Jury. As to the con-
duct of Colonel Wardle, it as itt evidence on the
former trial, that he did perfectly know that Mrs:
Clarke ibis to bt produced as an evidence against
him, and did, in consequence, send her a threatening
letter the night before, and directed hiS Attorney
to tell her, that it;slie came forward on the trial, Ser-
jeant Best Would cut her up in cross-examination ; and
he (Mr. Wardle) would spread a report that k was
all a trick of the Ministry. If Mrs. Clarke had spoken
falsely in this respect, Mr. Corfield, the attorney, might
have been called to contradict the statement. The Jury
must observe, that in this case, the defendants were
deprived of their evidence by the manceuvri-ig of
the Prosecutors. The oldest or the most learned
man in the profession of the Law, had never met,
eithbr from his experience, or in hii reading, such a
case as the present. It was a most unusual and un-
heard-of course, and it was in vain to say that tivre
was no other remedy but an indictment of conspiracy.
It the two witnesses on the late trial, Mr. Daniel
Wright and Mrs. Clarke, had been guilty of perjury,
and that it was supposed that Mr. Francis Wright
had suborned them to commit that perjury, the natu-
ral mode of proceeding would he to indict the wit-
nesses for the perjtiry, and t• indict Mr. Francis
Wright for subornation of perjury. His Learned
Friend (Mr. Alley) was then mistaken, when he said
the course of justice would have been impeded, if
any other course bad been t iken besides that of
indicting for conspiracy. The Prosecutor now
came forward with every advantage. He shut the
mouths of the Defendants, by the manner in which
be brought the business forward, and at the same
rine he opened his own mouth. He really thought,
that if he pleased, he might now ask his Lordship,
whether there was any evidence at all of a con-
spiracy ? Unequal, however, as he might appear in
the contest for want of evidence, he did not decline the
c intest, however unequal it might appear; and if the
Jury would but favour him with their attention, he
felt no doubt but that he would not only prove to
their satisfaction, that there was no conspiracy, but
that be would ga farther and prove to their satisfac-
tion that the verdict was right. In the year 1808,
Mrs. Clarke appeared by no means poor. Upon an
old account it appeared, that she bad owed Mr.
Wright 4E2600, of which she had paid him £2OX)O.
•Her situation, however, had ranch changed of late; she

had no longer the trieins for continuing the.grcAt ex!

s