Star.
London, England, 1809-03-16 00:00:00

• .., •
• ,
fegit;tiimeil.fierd-a; thetuireisiTork, dos dal: • I
eman appeared to have kept d ttgnified dittithe
such as.became his just and-honourable mind. Brit
he should make the observation's he intended
rpoO, several of the CliiC9, he.begged -to say fa*
Vtords upon one feet, and an important OM tots,
*May' the very different circumstances in -4thkli
*ha were prosecuting, and thtrie Who w r
iVfencling these- charges, were placed. It had Well
,Been stated..ist it very able speech by the Noble '
Lord, (Lord Felkstofte) that the defence-had been
Conducted and supported-by all the legal etithoritits
of the Government, by persons avl.o posses'sed tfie
Means to find out, and the power to compel the 4-
tendence cf any witnesses whom it might be neces-
sary to.examine; and it had ban assisted throughout
by the influence and weight of wealth, rankiand Tiro:
p_erty, The inference that resulted fromaltthiteic us,
that if an tutfavnurable impreision existed against
' t4e.pipie ofitteli, it wigs ncit because all.the witness
Ses had not been called, whose testimony might have
been necessary for'hit defence, oreffecttml for hisjus •
tification. -All the witnesses that could .have been bf
any service to that purpose had been examined and
•if no more had been Called, it was only becaase those
wino conducted the defence ,emitted to do se, lest
they elintrid injure their atm cause.—(Hear, 'hear !)
—Before he should go inuean ex.itniriation of the se-
parate charges- he begged the House first to consider
what was their nature, and -how they were to be
.proved. The charges must be :proved by the Duke
l'of York, by Mrs. Clarke, or by the agents in the trait-
sactions—for there were no others who could give in- .
formation, as it was not to
.be expected that. the par- •
ties.would tell what so intimately concerned them- •
selves. The tact then was, that with regaid to all
`,these •sources of information they had ample proof, as
well in the letters of his Royal Highness as in the evi-
deuce of Mrs. Clarke, confirmed by the unexception-
able cprroberetion ofletters, which she never thought
could hare been. produced, at the time of giving her
.evidence, and by the agents in the tranracuons, whe-
'eller they were so be considered the confidants, or
_rather the dupes of Mrs. Clarke. And here he most
eibserve, respecting the evi,tence of Mrs. Clarke, and
-site Corroboration of it by these letters, that her main •
testimony Was fully confirmed, notwithstanding all
:het had been said, as. to her having contradicted her-
self, and being contradicted by others. His Right
)ion. and -Learned Friend had, in speaking of the
synth of the evidettee -given at -the i3ar, expressed h itn.
self as he woUldelfespplying his observatiens to them-
selv.ese vie:. that there would be no difference in the
evidence stated* * Der, and the evidence given
open oath. , 'UnquestiOnably t/eere ought not to be
.uty,.differeace. as teeth ought in either case to be
Tokenpawl-he hoped that gore would not be any
difference of that in paws of any
chi-
er in life.,
.. Plane beginning, however, he
had his, clouhte;tut to the model of, proposed
to .be adopied and lsafli. even antic' treed the con-
etlaFarees, bad resaked, —Whin) it was stated
that:Ola-Y.9144.0w et.diftereace, between. the tes-
6-mony .of 1941. Clarke at the Bar and upon oath.
-But he Would. ask whether Mrs. Clarke had not
;beep .receivetl. diffetmuly, I whether the manner in
which eltehadbeentexamined at thebardead not pro-
ducedetgreat deal of thOpertneasand flippancy inthe
answers, which had been w . much commented upon ?
Thiatighlte4vas confident that Mrs. Clarke was not a
velenees, to whom he should give any great degree \ef
credit, yet when corroborated asshe bed been, incases
ahich appeared the most romantic on their being first
mention:d, hesOuld not withhold his credit from her
'teithlicteele . T e. raise of O'Meara, for instance. ap-
peared-It-first to have been only the creature of her
imagination ; so also had it appeared impossible to
believe her-stetunent respecting General Clavering,
anti yet both hadbeen afterwards confirmed in a most
extraordinary mineer. 171,e mentioned these small
metzcvs, because it was not,possible to put them out
if the question, and because it w s often from such
circumstances that the most correct opinion Was to
be formed of any traneaction: When Mrs. Clarke
had been asked bow she had made her request to ae-
cemplish the exchaege for Calonsl Knight, she an,
sweied that she had given to the Duke of York the
names of the parties upon a slip of paper, which she
had received fn in De. Thynne. It appeared from
the evidence, that unknown to her at-that time, Dr.
'llynne had also. stated that he had given to Mrs.
'Clarke a slip. of paper containing the names of the
parties. These coincidences in small-I-natters often
amounted to more cogent proof -than resulted from
more important parts of oviclerce. It had likewise
been said by Mrs. Clarke, that, whenever the Duke
of York.was with her, she never -suffereda livery ser-
vant to attend.. it appeared the Sasouti,Carter did
attend his. Koial Highness, bat it oiteirwards.carne
out; that' he never wore a liCery. Fut -the greatest
thing of all...that confirmed. the testimony of Mrs.
,Clarke was the productien of the Dake of York's
letters to her, as well as the production of the letters,
of which he.had no idea that they existed, and the
note which had been so much disputed. He was
ready to give every credit fur their candour and im-
partiality to those, who, in commenting upon the
evidenCe, did not appear to have sufficiently attended
M ;hese tl-scuments but Gentlemen -should reesollect.
'that When they were
_acting as judges, they should
not have forgotten to have summed up all the evi-
dence. (Hear. heart hear !) That mysterious note,
which has been so often spoken of, is important, be-
ca,use it was impossible that MrseClarke could have
opposite na-
any idea that ihe timid support her evidence by means
of it. Did not these Learned Gentlemen
n that
a Iles
or were-produced,
nf.
aparr
dofdvr
oeurmcsei
odn,
discrediting s andtip
o ynettht
then
turaly sttppose, that ail these letters would be vainable
evicien:e to disprove Mrs-Chi-Ice's testimony? For that
esatrovdeuuouthdptemath
ertuetiFesst e mess
theyLl
testimony, they afforded some very strong f proo sindeee
'of. some of the most material charges that were (-w
t ntld be brought forward. I cannot believe what
Mr,. Clarke told us about the Duke saying zo her,
Chit if she were a clever woman, she need not want
money. '!'here is siametisi,ng improbable in that, al-
. thougla..it might not be possible that lie himself might
pot le,tlisFos:td to watch over his expences with that
_Care whfeh a:person of less income, or in distressee
.circutnstanoes, nuliht deem proper and necessary. As
t case, 3 think its importance arises horn i•.•
shelvieg commissions were to be obtained ley
Isac 4 corrupt means as therein suited. And can ai.e
thttlg tie:more injurious to thor general chssster
the Ainty, than a notion prevailing that preferment