Star.
London, England, 1805-04-09 00:00:00

N

I Lord Melville to alk Mr. Mark Sprott whether h.: f,
had tiled the ten thoufands, and the twenty thou-
fends for their own benefit or emolument ?—if Mr.
Trotter himfelf had aiked the quellion, Mr. Mark
Sprott loon would have ceafed to be the broker for
either. From the cvidence in the Report, this Gen-
t tleman had Rated, that from the nature of keeping
Ithe accounts, he could not tell whether or not he de-
rived any emolument. If all were futrered to give this ,
fort of account, all the Brokers in London would
( follow the example. If any part of Lord Melville's I
evidence, or the extraordinary letter which he wrote,
t after hearing all the arguments of both friends and,
i enemies, if the latter could be called enemies, who
.0 were only enemies tb illegality ; if :le could find any
i fpecific affertioa, pofitively denying that he had re-
,• ceived or derived any emolument of a pirate
nature ? his Lordthip declared, he would at once
I vote for a Selea Committee—but he called on any
Gentleman to Rate a cafe of the nature of the pre-
ffent : if Co, he would pronounce him innocent ; but
he could not help remarking with Pifo, " who is
more criminal than he who cannot either (peak or
write himfelf guilty ?" Such was the Noble Lori
, il queßion, who could be the &IL to make an a‘c.t
I and violate k himfelf. If the motion of the Right
i Hon. Gentleman took place, it was a vain toil, a
1 fruitlefs labour, to follow up the queßion farther;
in that cafe, not only would the Treaforer of the
Navy be found to be violating an ad for upwards of
fourteen years, but alfo would be found a Houk of
Commons who would Puffer thole charges to lie on
their table, only anxious how they might avoid loch
an inveßigation, and, after all this trouble, a'power
&gild Rep in between the criminal and 'the law.—
His Lordfhip nulled that this night, although there
might be a difference between the Houfe in other
refpees, yet when the queflion came before them,
whether the law had been violated, or the public
finances properly adminiftered or not, there would
be that promptitude found amongft them, which was
ever the fupport of the honour and dignity of that
Houfe; with thefe liniments his Lorcifhip Paid he
would vote for the Refolutions of his Hon. Friend,

and would afterwards agree to a Selea Committee.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL.—" The Noble

Lord has certainly fpoken with great power and abi
' lity, but appears to me rather to have direeted his
appeal to the paffions than to the judgment. There
•• had been no idea propofed this night which can at
lall prevent the Houfe from exercifing the fulleß judg-
ment on every part of the cafe before them. It is
only that they may be the better enabled Co to do,
rt ti lattt
ci t h
to aesx ba eme
in pn
e rtohpe ofed
whole
la
eo
cafe,ey and
toe a Se Ie
nt
de
every
rypaa Co m-
part of
it.m-
There are many parts of it evidently too complicated
to be capable of being decided to-night, or in the
,
; Houfe, or in a Committee of the whole Houfe. It
was evident then that there was no way left but a Se-
left Committee. As to the difobedience of a pofitive
law, and the application of the money, it would be
neceffary to underftand the nature of the cafe, and
the circumflances under which the money was fo ap-
plied. The queltion was not now what fort of judg-
ment the Houfe would pafs, but whether it would
not be right that they fhould have the fulleß infor-
mation before they progounced their judgment ? If
a cenfure was to be pall, it would- be of little conk-
quence indeed, whether it was pall this day or this
day le'nnight, but it would be of ferious confequence
that the decifion of the Houle should be founded on
the bell information that it was poffi‘ile to lay bet., ,TC
them. The Noble Lord has confeffed, that the whole of
the cafe cannot now be detei mined by the Hoof:, and
that it will be neceffiry to appoint a Selel Committee.
Why then fhould this report, to confider which it . as
receffary to appoint a Committee, be now IPlit into
different parts? Would it not be better thit the de-
cifion fhould not be on any partial ground, but upon
the whole taken together ? Upon there grounds it ap
pears to me that it would be no prejudice to public
jullice, to pollpone the decifion, until we have the in-
formation that is now fought for. I (hall therefore
fupport the previous queftion, with a view of having
a Seleel Committee app.:lined to examine farther the
' various eircumllances Rated in the Report.
Mr. TIERNEY.—I agree very much with what
has fallen from the Noble Lord, whom I am proud
to call my friend. I think that it is necefft. y that a
Sete° Committee fhould be appointed for the purpofe
of invelligating all that relates to the accounts ; and
particularly for inveftigating that which relates to
Monies of the Navy being diverted to the fervicc of
other departments of the Government. The Com
miner fo to be appointed might prevent a fupplemen-
tal report on this fubjed. There are many things,
however, which I have heard to-Right with regret and
fhame : Why are we to put off our decifion on thole
points which are perfatly clear ? Does Lord Melville
come to us and fay, Grant me a little farther delay
and I fhall be able to produce evidence to prove that
I am not guilty ? Does Mr. Trotter afk for delay in
order to prove his innocence ? No : no fuggeltion of
this fort has come from either of thofe perfons. Why
fhould we then go out of our way, and by delaying to
pronounce our verdift,difappoint and baulk the expec-
tations which have been entertained by our conflitu-
cuts ? How long is it since the idea of a Seles9 Com•
mince entered into the head of the Right Honourable
Gentleman ? A week ago the motion was put off, not
on the fuggellion of the neceffity of a Committee, but
in order to confider a letter written by Lord Melville.
This letter however left things as they were before,
and explained nothing. Will any Gentleman lay his
hand upon his heart and fay that he expells any tef-
simony will be given before this Committee which will
explain thofe things better than that letter, or that can
dis Prove that money was drawn out of theßank for the
purpofes of private emolument? Will Mr. Sprott deny
that he brought the money of the Navy to the Stock
Exchange ? It now appears to tome Gentlemen that
the Report of the Commifboners ought not to be
coneluhve, but that thole parties fhould be now al-
lowed to go into further evidence and explanations:
It would be remembered that a very different argu-
ment was held with rape& to the cafe of the untor-
vitiate Sheriffs of Middlefex. In their cafe no farther
evidence in their jollification would be admitted,
and 1 cannot fee that there is any diflimilatity be-
tween their cafe and the prefent. If we now refer
the whole matter of the Report to a Committee, we
can by no means expel the Report of that Committee
in a week, (as fuggelted by the Attorney General), or
hardly in two months. In the mean time, Lord
Melville is held up to the public in fuch a light as
no Firft Lord of the Admiralty was before. His
bsft and warrneft friends don't venture to meet the

queftion at once, and dare not fay " not guilty npon
my honour." It was ftrange then that a perfon
who for fetch a length of time ha,: been committing
abufes in an inferior Department of the Navy,
fhould be the very petrol) felioFted to fuperintend the
whole, and be made the Fiat Lord of the Admi-
ralty. When I defire them to have the extent of
thefe offences afcertained by a Stleet Committee, it
is not fo much for the purl:role of criminating as re-
funding. When I charge Lord Melville with parti-
I cipation in the unfair gams that were derived from
1 the Speculations in the Stock Exchange, and in dil-
lcounting hills, I do not mean to fay that there was
actually an account kept between Lord Melville and
1 Mr. Trotter for the porpofe, bin it is in my mind
fullicient evidence of this participation, that Lord
Melville as foots as he had made him Paymaller, and
given him the command of public money, then,
and not before, he found that he was the properell
perfon to make his private agent ; and although he
mull have known that he had no money till he got
the public money into his hands, yet did not hefitate
to draw upon him immediately after to an enormous
amount, feldom for lefs than ten or twenty thoufand
pounds at a time.—The Honourable Gentleman con-
cluded by Itrongly lupporting the original motion,
and the immediate decision of the quellion.
Mr. CANNIYG.—o If it was on any other fob-
jeer I fhould with the greatell pleafure have given
way to my Honourable and Learned Friend (the
Mailer of the Rolls), but after the fpeech I have jolt
heard from the high authority of the Hon. Gentle
man (Mr. Tierney) whom I have fucceeded in the
office I now hold, and conlidering that the ptefent
queftion relates peculiarly to that department of Ad-
ministration which I am molt intimately connected
with, I feel particularly anxious to deliver my senti-
ments on this occasion. He obferved that the Howe,
in its ufual love,ofjullice, would give an opportunity
to inquire, whether the whole of the charge now ex•
hibited againit the Noble Lord might not be done
away, or was capable of being done away ? and if
they thought Co they could not pollihly vote for the
motion propofed by the Honourable Gentleman. But
what was the alternative ? That the Houle should
come to a final determination on the fubjea, by
which all poffilsility of explanation would be ex-
cluded. Now upon that fubjeet he could not help
faying that the mode propofed by his Right Honour
able Friend was the true way to anfwer the purpofes
of justice, by indituting an inquiry, with all the cir-
cumftances of the cafe on both fides, which hitherto
had not been done. But the Right Honourable Gen-
tleman who (poke lad had dated to the Houle, that
the mode propofed by the original motion was re-
commended by a late precedent in the proceedings of
the Houte on the fubjea of the Middlefex Elation—
in that cafe the Home had decided that it would not
proceed in the examination of evidence at the Bar,
but took up the cafe on the Report of a Committee,
and adopted its flatement upon the ground that the
evidence which was adduced before the Committee
was upon oath, and that which was to be heard at
the Bar mull be without oath : that the cafe was the
fame here, for that the evidence before the Com-
mittee of Naval Inquiry was upon oath, but it the
Houle heard any further evidence upon that fubjeet,
they mull take it without that fanetion. Now,
begging pardon of that Honourable Gentleman, the
two cafes had no common nature, or indeed any re-
femblance to each other. The decifion on the late
cafe of the Middlefex Eleflion, in which the Houfe
had adopted the Report of the Committee, and con-
cluded upon it without hearing further evidence, did
not turn on the point of difference between evidence
upon oath and that which was taken without that
tatietion ; but upon the principle that the parties
charged with milconduet had been fully heard, had
been allowed all the forms, and what was much bet-
ter than all forms, the fulaftance of a fair vial ; they
were called upon to anfwer; they knew the charge,
had heard all the evidence in fupport of it, had ac-
tually crofs-examined that evidence, and were heard
by Counfcl as to the effeil of that evidence, and it ap-
osted upon full invelligatimi of the cafe, that the
party had nothing to lay in anfwer to the charge—
they were found guilty, becaufe their guilt was fully
fubftantiated, after they had been fully hoard. But the
prefent was the reverie of that cafe, for here the party
had not been heard, and all that was now aiked was a
ft:int:tong ; and here he would put it to the Houle,
and indeed to the gentlemen oppofite him, whether
it was fair to call on the Houfe to convia the party
without a hearing, which had not yet been had ?
and what would bring the point more diliinaly before
the minds of thole whom he had now the honour of
addrelling was this, that no pats of the cafe now be-
fore the Houfe on this Report was matter originally
intended by the cool& of examination taken by the
Committee, but it came out incidentally, and it was
no part of the objet of the Committee to try the
Noble Lord who was the objea of the prefent mo-
tion, for any thing ; and therefore it was, from the
nature of things, abfolutely impollible that he fhould
have had a fair trial, fine he had indeed hitherto
had no trial. But the Right Hon. Gentleman who
fpokc haft had obferved, that in former times a COOO
mittee, on the model of which this was formed, had
made many w ife regulations, and that the aft which
was now the fubjea of the confederation of the Houfe
of Commons palled without further inveftigation,
than that of a perufal of the Report of the Committee
on which it was founded. This might be, but he be-
lieved the Right Hon. Gentleman could not Phew
him any regulation of Parliament by which any in-
dividual had been condemned, without having had
an opportunity of defending himfelf. And here the
cafe was molt fingularly hard, for it was the cafe
of an individual knowing for the firft time from
the Report, now laid to be conclufive what was
the nature of the charge which was exhibited againfu
him—He was (peaking now of Lord Melville, for
he under-Rood that the Noble Lord was the only
perfon naiad whom Gentlemen on the other fide of
the Horde were preffing. From thcfe complicated
accounts, thus brought without notice to his
Lordship, before the Committee, the guilt of that
Noble Lord was to be inferred—and he viols (aid
to have had a fair trial—and the Houfe was called
upon to confirm that affertion, without its hav-
ing at all investigated the cafe. This application
to the Houfe was repugnant to the principles of juf-
tice. But then the Right Honourable Gentleman
dated, that an At of Parliament had in this cafe
been violated by the application of public money to
j other ufes than thole fpecified by the Alt. Now he
ventured to fay the violation of the At of radio-

men,t was a point by no means to clear as Come Gen•
tlemen affeded to Rate it ; hut on the contrary he be-
lieved that doubts might be very reafnnably enter.
tained upon that fubjed. Here he wifhed to guard
againft being mifunderflond. When he laid that the
aft was not fo clear upon this point as it feemed
to be conceived by tome Gentlemen, he was net there-
by to be regarded as the champion of illegal defiance
to the roles of law, or an imitator of fuch a praftice.
He knew that laws, even if unwife, mutt be obeyed,
while they were in full force. But the wiettion
here was, whether the party here laid to be guilty of
a breach of the law, knew that he was really cauling
to be applied the public money to the private ufe of
individuals? Now, confidering the law as attentively
as he was able, that either the letter, or the fpirit of
it, prohibited the drawing of money out of the
Bank in the manner contended for by Gentlemen on
the other fide of the Houle (he was not now touching
the cafe of public money drawn nut of the Bank for
the purpofe of private advantage to individuals, for
that he left out of the ale) ; but he was contidering
the letter and the fpirit of the Statute as applicable to
any cafe of money drawn out of the Bank and put
into the hands of a private individual, before it was
paid out or itfued for the fcr vie.: of the public.—lf the
Aft prohibited this in all poffible cafes, and that no
money could ever be drawn out of the Bank, but
when it was on the intlant of its being fo drawn out, to
be applied to the payment of the demand of a public
claimant.—He was confident that the fpirit of the Ad
could not be Co, becaufe it could never have been
the intention of any law to throw infurmountable
obßacles in the way of public bufinefs ; and he
contended that the find letter of thl Aft could not
be fo conitrued ; for, in many cafes,' a compliance
with an Aft, in conttrued, would be phyficaliy impof-
lible. In the comic of twenty•fis days the amount
of the fums to be paid to claimants on the Navy was
6,4001. ; 3,5001. of which was made up of fums under
aol. A great multitude of the items were from Bs. 61.
to 11. Bs. He willed Gentlemen to turn this in their
minds ; whether all thefe fums could be paid by charts
immediately given to the Claimants to receive the
money at the Bank ? And if this were fo, he walled
Gentlemen, who maintained the affirmative of that
propolition, to thew him the Claufe in the Al by
which it was hipported ; and when they had done
fo, they would have proved that every perlbn who
held the Office of Paymaller of the Navy fince the
tJalliag of the Ad had been guilty of an infraftion
of it. After all, if the law was Co, the breach
of it was of courfe not tol be juttitied : but then
came the quellion of the degree of impropriety of
the condnd of the individual, and much of that
depended upon the queltion of—Whether he did it,
knowingly and unnecelfarily ? To purfiye the idea of
convenience in tranfading public bulinefs of this kind
a little farther, he would obferve, there were now
many Chips books for payment, and in the courfe of
the IA three weeks, payment had been made upon
40 (hips books, and they abounded with items of 14s.
2s. and ifs. and qd. Now he would afk, Whether
it was to be contended by any Gentleman in that
Honfe, with any regard to practicability in the
difpatch of bufinefs, that every one of thefe hems
lhould be paid by a diftind Qecilic drift upon the
Bank given to the Claimant ? If not, then there
was an end of the argument upon the dry point of
the illegality of drawing money out of the Bank for
any but a fpecified purpofe for the nee of the Navy—
Thus the argument upon the illegality of the prac-
tice fell to the ground. Then the quetlion of Wie-
ners of law being at an end, the relt was a queftion
of degree, or extent to which the pr slice had been
cartied, and that, like every other, mull be governed
by that which was reafonable ; for be did not ray
that it might ith impunity be carried to a blame.
able extent, or to be endlefsly followed up. It
would be always 'pl to mark it with cenfure when
ever it was done unneceflarily. But he laid it was
not a quellion of mere law, as Gentlemen on the
other lade of the Houle took it, but a quellion of
degree. This was to he determined upon the cir-
cumilances, and the Houfe timid judge, or rather a
Committee (hould judge, how far it was necelfary
or unnecelfar7, and which the notice poffelled the
power of deciding, after a proper enqaii y had been
had into all the circumllances of the cafe ; but no
fuch proceeding had hitherto taken [lace. The di-
vertion of the public money, which was another
topic brought forward, was very fit for inquiry. As
to the charge, or rather an imputation, founded upon
an inference, againft the Noble Loyd, that he had
lime participation of the benefit ariiiiz from the tile
of the public money while employed for the advan•
tage of private individuals, that was a fubjed fit tOr
inquiry, but to decide which, the Houfe, at prefent,
had no materials ; and upon the quellion of the ex-
tent to which the public money had been drawn out
from the Bank ; and here he mutt advert to a part
of the report of the Committee 011782, whichhad ef-
coped the notice ofthe Hon.Genttleman who brought
forward the motion, which was to the follow ism ef
fed :—We confider that this excels is not money for
which the Treafurer is accountable to the public, but
belonging to the proprietors of thefe bills, and remain-
ing in his hands at their rid:, until they apply to him
for payment." Now,he Paid, if this do trine he corr eft,
the whole money in the hands of the Treafurer was not
that for which he was refponfible to the public, but to
the individual to which there fums belonged, and if
theyhad received their money upon application, there
had been no breach of the At of Parliament, and the
Houle would find, upon enquiry, that what he had
Rated hypothetically was the fait. He maintained
that the deficienCy Rated in page 128 of the Report
was incorrectly Rated as to the amount of it. He
did not fay that the mode dated on the ether fide
was the proper mode of keeping the money of the
public ; but what he contended was, that the tale
was not that cafe of aggravation which was contend-
ed for on the other fide. It was, however, a matter
which he did not ails Gentlemen to take on his late-
ment, but leave it for inquiry ; for that he believed it
would turn out that the violation of the Aft of Par-
liament in this refpect, fo much infißed upon,was in a
great meafure imaginary. He now came to the great
point, which was, the imputation to the Noble Lord
that he had participated in the ufe of the public
money. This was not made as a dittind charge, olyn
it was thrown out, or inlinuated as a matter of in-
ference. Now, lie would put it to the confcience of
the Hon. Gentleman, who brought forward this mo-
tion, and to ufe language already altered in the
cootie of this debate, to lay his hand upon his heart
a4d to ark whether he coul4 believe that

nut of the monies which had been drawn out of tht
Bank, the Noble Lord had really any partic;parinr.
in the profits of ufing for private purpoles ? And
whether he believed that a vote, carried to the er.
tent of that now propofed, in deference, as that H
nourable Gentleman might think, to the puh!ic
opinion, would not be to confirm fuch opinion to its
full extent ? He would a& whether that was fair
Whether the carrying the motion now before the
Houfe, would not be to imprefs firm the minds
of the public an idea that Lord Melville had
been found Guilty by the Houfe of Commons
of foul and corrupt malverfations—(Hear I hear! hear!
from the oppofitc fide.) If Gentlemen really thought
fo, they were right in preffing the motion ; but he
really was at a lots to find out upon what foundation
fuch a conclution could be drawn from thc premifes
before the Houle; for the cafe could not, even nu the
face of the Report, before the other fide was beard,
amount to any thing more than a cafe of furpicicL.
—He would then afk the Honourable Genticsnat.
what he would think of the hardlhip of the cafe,
if hereafter it flould appear, and he believed it
would, that the fulpicion was without foundation.
He then proceeded to obferve on that part of the
Report of the Commilliuners, by which they difap-
proved of the manner in which the Accountants'
branch, confining of a principal and eight Clerks
having been eflablifned by order in Coutt:il in Au.
gull 1786, for the exprefs purpofe of bringing up
the old, and keeping up the new accounts ; and they
were furprifed this had not been &me, but that the
Clerks had been employed in the current bufinefs of
the Pay-office; and on which the Committee laid this was a falfe
economy. He admitted that no economy was more pitiful than
that of Rarving the public fervice by a paucity of clerks in public
offices; but there was an erroneous conception on this foiled. It
was generally considered that the power of the Treafurer of The
Navy, was much greater than it was, he was confidered as a kind
ef depot in the office, when in truth he. could neither add to thc
number of the clerks nor to their salary. This ecitomy, pitiful
as it might be, was not the ccon'uny of Lord Melville, for he ap-
plied for more clerks, but his offer was rejected. Ile, Mr. CAW.
ning, made the fame application with femur fuceefs. This was the
reafon why the clerks had been taken off front the parpofe for
which they were appointed. He then took notice of that part of the
Report which related to the fum of one million being Hilted out of
the bank in one day and transferred to Marrs. Coutts. This was an
adtofenormousfufpicion,h;:t tbelprodudion of the book s of the Of-
fice would explain the whole of this meter to the pet fed fatisfae-
don of all who perufed it, by which it would appear that the whole
was perfedtly corredi; for the whole fum, on the very day after ie
was drawn out of the Bank, was paid for Navy and Vidnalling
Dills, and bad been drawn out at the requcß of the Officers of the
Nary and Victualling Offices for that purpofe. Ile then proceed-
ed to do away an impreflion which bad been made by the Report,
as if there had been a (LIT to effiftrudt the courfe of information,
by producing impeded accounts. The truth was, the accounts
here alluded to were in his office, andebry were of four pans, three
of which could, and the fourth could not be made oat, and upon
that head there was a (mall inaccuracy, which he braid gave to
corredt by a recital of his own evidence Nefore the Committee,
which he net and which was confirmatory al hie Ratement.
tie added, that he withed tu and vel in the eq lnion I).the Hon
and of the Public ; and concluded by cbUrvi, g tt •t it he that ght
this motion well founded, that a cab- was made out mita
the Noble Lord, lie Darold sot lift up his voice againft loch a
motion; but he thought he did not afk too much, when he anted
the Houle not to (Offer itfelf by prejudiCe within. or by intimida-
tion from clamour without, to take upon itfelf to decide that which
it had not adequate means to decide ; witheut full and tannpiteut
information upon the quell= now before them.'
Mr. TI ERN Ey

Leonlll:ring this Debate too important to be given in a mu-
tilated form, we find it imrordble, this day, to give the Speeches of
the other Members that took part in it, namely, Mr. Ponfonby,
the Matter of the Rolls, Mr. Fox, Lord Caftlereagh, Lord Ando-
ver, Mr. Wilberforce, Sir C Price, Mr. Wallace, and Lord Arch-
bald 1-7.:.milton, v. hole Speeches mall be laid before our Readers
to morrow.;

A divition then follov,!rd en :lie Previous Qleition, tbe
ottatherg (boil tints

For the Pre% tow* quettion, th—Againft it 2t6.

The SrEA it 1 R then, ac ufual in a parity of votes, gave his eafti ng
voice, in favour of Oppofition, confequently againft the Previous
°tuition, which made 2,17 for the Original queltion.
l'he other Motions were then put fc,latim,and carried in the
affirm.dive, without intenyption, till they came to the I Ith, con•
taiuing the r vinre on Lord Melville.

Mr 7 I'UTT it re moved ..n Amendment to leave om the latt
words, " grofs violation of the law, and a high breach of duty,'
and to infert the wsrdss--" contrary to the intention of the law."
On this a ilvinte tool; place, Mr. GREY fait:, that it would be
a fcandalous del-diction of their own duty, not to fay, that the
connivance of Lord Melville in the coniludt of Mr. Trotter, wan
not a grofs violation of law, and a high hr‘ach olduty.
Mr. I'ITT he would withdraw that amendment, and only
move to infrrt nits the words " for the pt..rpotes of private interer;
or emolument," the words •••• to Mr. Treats.," liccatifc he fand
there was no proof or confellion that he connived at the drawing
out of the monev for his own intactt or ca;luawnt. Nay, he had
in his !Etter deoli d it

Sir N'Al. PU I. V laid, he thought this would he reafon-
ahle, provided the words " as acknowledged by Lord Melville,,
were inferred.

Mr. W I lITIVA fdid, he had no particular ohjedlion to OIL;
ans..ndment. The word, in Li- motion had been left general, he-
cad,: it was confer:C:l that the /Mr.: were drawn out for private In -
t ere and emolument, but net f- titled dircesly whether for Le.rd
Melville a: well as Mr. Trotter.

In this way the Motion was read by the Chair. It diets (tonsil
thus :--

That the Right Honourable Lord Vircount Melville having
been privy to and connived at the withdrawing from the Bank o 4
England (is .I.4ool,ledged iy Lord MAUL-) for the purpofes of pre•
tate intcrat or emolument. to Mr. Trotter, rums iffued,
Mr. WINDHAM contended that after the clear elucidation of
the cafe that the Treafurer of the. Navy could anfwer whether he
had not derived advantage from the public money, the wotd.; in
the Refolution ought to be left ambiguous.
Mr. FOX faid that the attempt to fc;een Lord Melville front
the refult of the previous refolutions by to trifling an amendment.
would do the Noble lord no good, but would put that Houfc in
a very aukward poiut of view.
Mr. WILBERFORCE laid, that not to brand the tranfadlion by
the epithets of grols violation cf the law, and a high breach of
duty, after the confeffion of Lord Melville, would be iznoulinlaus
to the Houfe.

Mr. SHMIDAN raid, that the amendment m4e the motion
almolt nonfinite. To fay, in the 4rlt inltance, that Lerd
connived for flatten years, and then to fritter away thr
was a molt extraordinary way of acquitting his coileagil •
Mr. BASTARD Paid it was impotale for any Genti:m.:..
fupport fuch an amendmem.
Mr. T. GRENVILLE fpoke to the fame tired.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQEER perfillling l••
declaration that he would take the fenfc of the Hinge, tht G le
was cleared; hut on the queition bring put on the Tn.,tion
of iginally flood, the Speaker declared that tie Ayes bad i:, and 1;1:-.
Pitt did not cheek to divide.
The other two motions were then put and carried.
Mr. WHITBREAD laid, be had of cantle a motion cc:entity
to make in ennfequence of the Rvrehrii us of the HoLle that Jay,
boric was then tea late.

Mr. Purr moved that the Hou fe Otould adjourn to Wednesday.

Mr. FOX fubmitted to the good fettle of the Houfe whether in
fo critical a moment they Mould adjourn over a tingle dAy. They
would recoiled that the country was now in the ban& of a dq:
graced Mint fry.
Mr. Pit 1. pleaded for an adjournment, and hinted tint it might
be neceffary in :he prefect elreumflanees.
The }Janice accordingly adjourned (at Six o'clock this morning,
Tuefday) till Wedocklay (to-morrow).

LQNDON : Printed and Publilbed by LEVEL KEN I' roiCm.-
terbuty-place, Lambeth), at the STAR 0: VICE, No. I. •
ftract. PubW7l44 alfo at ZIIC STAR Oa LCZI TCCIpi•2