Star.
London, England, 1806-06-26 00:00:00

°VD& CHARGS.

Sir W. YOUNG gave notice, that orders an Honourable Gen.
tleman b ought forward a motion for decidin; on the Oude
Charge be Worinerday neat, he was authorized to f..y. that n.s ,
Nob'e Friend (Lord 'rempie) would propure a mo.ion to that pur-
pore on that day.
Mr. PAULL replied, that be had not the molt Main Idea of
doing Co then t and he thought it impalltle that the Houle could
be prepared for coming to a deciSon fo form.
On the motion of the LORD ADVOCATE of Scotland, there
was ordered to be laid before the Houle an Accous.t of ail
with their Tonnaze, entering inwards and clearing outwards from
the North and EaR coats of Scotland, and from the town of Bee•
wick, for the three left years.
Mr. ALEXANDER brought ep the Report of the Committee
of the whole Houle rerpedUng Greenwich Horpital, and the Naval
Chat, and Rills were ordered to be brought in purfuant to the two
Refolutlons.
On the motion of Lord HOWICK. the }route then re(olved
it (elf Into a Committee, when his Lordlhip prepaid, that the rum
of ii. r3s. ed. prr cent. be granted out of the Praccols of all
Prizes taken from the enemy, or deftroyed, for the benefit of
Greenwich Hofpital ; sn.l adly, that the funs of 31. 611.8 d per cent
be granted out of the Proceeds of the laid Prizes, for the Basalt
of the Chen. —Report to be received to morrow.

PtINTINO OF THE MST ARTICLE OT IMFEACHMEHT,
OE WHAT IS CALLED THE MONET CHARGE
AGAINST staactyis w LLLLL LEY.
Mr. PAULL then moved, that the flea Charge
be printed. He cnnceived, that no objeflion
would be made to the motion, as the evidence on
which the Charge was founded, was now before the
Houle.

Sir A. WELLESLEY oppoted the motion, and '
Rated what the Houfe had already done on the tub-
jefl. The firft refolution of the Houfe for printing
it had been refcinded next day. The reatona were
that no evidence was then before the Houfe, and alto
that a charge of fuels a nature thould not be
citculated through the country, before the Houfe
could take it into confideration. It did not appear
that the Houfe would be able to enter into this
charge refpefting money tranfaetions in Oude during
the prefent Seffion, but would be obliged to confine
Well to that rcfpefling the affair cf the Nabob of
Oude. He could hot, therefore, fee any benefit
thatlwould arife from printing it, while the cha-
ratter of his Noble Relative rnOtt, in the mean
time, receive effential injury ; and he therefore trail-
ed, that the Houle would adhere to its former deter-
mination.
Lord A. HAMILTON fopported the motion,
and contended, that the Houfe was now in a differ-
ent fituation from what it had been formerly in,'
when it refolved that the charge Ilsonld not be print-
ed. It teemed then to be agreed, that the proper time
for printing it would be when the evidence was before
' the Houfe ; and now that the principal papers were
before them, it was proper that they thottld be fully
enabled to compare the evidence with the charge.
' Mr. ROSE was of opinion, that the Houfe would
derive ista advantage from printing the charge at
prefent, while the charafter of the Noble Lord might
receive no trifling injury from its circulation during
the recef. of+arliatnent.

Lord DOUGLAS fupported the motion, and took
that opportunity of declaring, that he raw nothing in
the charge but what was fupported by the papers be.
fore the Houfe ; betides, the Noble Marquis's
friends had 'repeatedly declared, that his Lordfhip
courted an enquiry into his condua. Why did they
now &rink from the printing of the charge ?
Mr. WINDHAM Aced what was the reafon fot
printing papers at all ? Was it not for the ufe of the
Members ? And the more numerous and compli-
cated there papers were, it became the more impor-
tant that the charg- which they were produced to
fupport, fhould alto be printed, that the Houfe migl:t
be fully Lble to compare the one with the other. It
had been Paid, that falfe imprefEons would be pro.
duced ; but he did not fee much danger of that. A
great deal of evidence had already been produced in
defence of the Noble Lord, and more was un the point
of being to : the danger of exparte reprefentations
would therefore be much diminifhed. 'I he fooner the

Houle had the charge in their hands, and the longer
it was in their poffellion, the better able would they
be to come to a proper decifion upon it. He did not
like the principle of deferring the printing of the
charge till all the evidence in defence was before the
Houle. That evidence might be Ilaved off till the
day of trial,*and thus prevent the charge itfelf from
being fully weifhed.
Lord CATILEREAGH thought that no prac-
tical benefit could arife from printing the charge,
till they were in poffeflion of the evidence on the part
of the defence' as well as of that on the fide of the
profecutior.. lie (hook, therefore appeal to the can-
dour of the Houle, whether, in jullice to the Noble
Lord, it could be done during the psefent Seffion ?
He had no hefitation io laying, from what he had
fecn of the evidence, that the charge itfclf would not
fall heavily on the bh•ble Marquis. He thought the
Honourable Gentleman premature in his motion, and
that the firli moment when the charge &mild be
printed, was when the evidence on both fides was be-
fore the Houfe.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
conceived,that the proper time for priming theeharge
was, when the evidence brought to fupport it was be-
fore the Houle, and when a fair comparifon of the
two could be made: With regard to its affeling the
charader of the Noble Lord, he would aficr why was
the evidence in fupport of the charge ordered to be
printed ; fince it silo might produce a partial opi-
ion in the minds of thole who perufed it ?
air A. WELLESLEY explained, and Elated, that
not a tingle paper of defence had yet been produced.
Mr. BAN KS °braved, that charges of fuck a na-
ture could not be ecnfined to the Houfe, but would
he circulated all over the country. Was it decent
kilat 04 &Quid lake tog Wore she Houk haki

it in their power to come to a decifion ? No peffible
advantage could refult from printing the charge,
while great prejudice might be done to the Noble
Lord; every principle apace, therefore, mull com-
pel the Houle to withhold in affent to the motion.—
The evidence was printed from the very necellity of
the cafe, but no fuch neceflity required that the charge
lhould he printed.
Mr. GRANT was for printing the charge, efpc.
cially as he undertlood that the defence to the charge
had been printed and circulated very generally amting
the Members of that and of the other Houft of Par-
liament.
Mr. It. MARTIN did not conceive that there
could be any ferious objeedons to the printing. For
his part, if any Gentleman Ibould prnpofe that copies
of ir, written in a fine text hand, fhould be made exclu-
lively for the Members, he had no objeetion (a laugh)
—hut while it was allowed that every Member had a
right to take a copy of the charge, he faw no means
of keeping it altogether from the public, or prevent-
ing them from forming fume opinion upon it. The
final judgment upon the charge would be with that
Houle, and he did not perceive that it could be of any
conlequence what opinion was haftily adopted elfa.
where upon the cubic&
Mr. ALEXANDER thought it would be unfair
that the charge Ibould be printed before the evidence
' was alto printed on which it was founded. It was
ant only in this country that it might be injurious to
the charafter of the Noble Marquis, but the printed
charge would olio find its way to India, and might
there produce an unfavourable impreflion.
Dr. LAWRENCE obferved, that in the cafe of
Mr. Hailing% printed charges had been in the hands
If Members IS months before the trial, and yet he
I never then heard it complained of, that that was
likely to produce any improper effect. It certainly
did not produce any improper effeft upon his Judger,
as he afterwards went to his trial, and was acquitted
of all the charges. He did not think the Houle
fbould permit the friends, relations, and avowed (up-
porters of the Noble Marquis, to regulate every
thing refpetting this charge. Such a compliance
would be like that of a very polite Attorney Gen,.
sal to Dr. Henfley, who bad been convifted of High
Treafon. The Attorney General left it to the Doc-
tor to appoint the day it would be moll convenient
for him to be brought up for judgment ; the Doftor
never found a time convenient, but put it affront one
time to another, and judgment was newer pronounced.
He fh"uld with to know, whether a printed defence
of the Marquis had not been generally circulated in
that Houle, and through the country, by his friends?
—(No, no! from Mr. Wellelley Pole.)—He was glad
to hear that this was denied, but perfevered in his
opinion, that the Charge ought to be printed.
Mr. WEL LESLEY-POLE role, merely to pledge
himfelf to this faft, that not a word upon the Cub-
jeft of this Charge had been written or printed bt
the Noble Marquis, or, to the bell of his belief, by
any of his friends.
Mr. SHERIDAN agreed yrith thole Hopourable
Gentlemen who thought the Charge ought not to be
printed until the evidence on Vdsh fides were printed
alfo. He hoped, however, that that would not take
up much time, as he conceived that all the written
documents which were defired on either fide had al-
ready been moved for and obtained. As the Vote-
Office was kept open during the Prorogation, he
thought there would be abundant time for giving
Members the fullefl information on the fubjea Ware
next Seffinn.
Mr. PAULL laid, he hardly knew how to csprefs
himfclf on the fubjea, as he never could irave con-
ceived any objeAion would be advanced to printing
the Charge. The Court of Direftors had already
circulated io,ooo copies of the allegat; ag non
Marquis Wellefley, which were now in the t..cdc of
the people of England. In this printed parer they
had accufed him with difobedience of order-, breach

of the law, illegal appointments, and A probe ex-
penditute of the public money. When the pt•blic
were in poffeGon of thole allegation,, how could
it be Paid there would be any danger in voting the
Charge? Upon thefe allegation, the Court of Pro-
prietors expreind their opinion, when, at a ballot,
960 agreed to refolutions condemning the policy of
the Noble Marquis, and only tBo oppored them,
amon which number he himfill voted, as conceiving
it unfair to prejudge the cafe.
Mr. JOHNSTONE hoped the linde would not
divide upon a quefiion of In little m tment. If the
Charge and the evidence were printed Ingcher, he
believed it would appear, upon comparilon, that the
Charge was not fupported by proofs. At the fame time
it was his opinion,that the Nabob of Oucl« had tuffered
confiderable hardtbip and cruelty. When he moved
the Refolutions in the Court of Proprietors for re-
turning thanks to the Court of Direftors, for their
firmnefs and decifinn, he exprefsly Rated, that the
intention of thnfe Refolutions was by no means to
implicate the Noble Marquis; and, therefore, the
perfons who voted for them could not be Paid to have
declared any opinion upon the (übje&
Mr. HOLT LEIGH conceived, that delicacy to
fuch an illuftrious chat-atter as the Noble Marquis
required that the Charge fhould not be printed with.
out the evidence. _ _ .

Lord FOLKESTONE was for printing it.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
raid, that, as there appeared little doubt but that the
evidence would be loon printed, and as the only ob-
jedion to printing the ChArge was, that it ought not
to be printed before the evidence, he conceived the
bell way would be to poilpone the motion for the pre-
fent. He, therefore, moved the previous quedion.
This motion was acquiefced in by Mr. PAULL
and Sir A. WELLESLEY, and agreed to without
a divifion.