Star.
London, England, 1809-02-23 00:00:00

:ELLOR of the EXCHEQUtR
:ne3i was under examination it would'
do it ; but in consideration of Mrs;:
indisposition, he should make no objection

Sir T. TURTON thought there was great irrgn-,
larity and that the examination of the witness
who had just left the Bar should be proceeded. with.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
replied. that he had acknowledged there was au irre-
gularity in the proceeding, but ander the circumstan-
ces of the case, he thought that Mrs. Clarke should
be examined immediately.
A chair was ordered for Mrs. Clarke, in conse-
quence of her indisposition, and she was desired to
come to•tbe bar.
xamined by the CtIANcELLon of the EXCHEQUER.
—Q. Have you brought with you the two last notes
you have received from the Duke of York,*since your
separation from him took place ?A. Yes.—q. Did the
Duke of York say they werethelast notes ?—A. don't
know that, but these ate the notes of which you want
an inspection. I have receiveda dozen more notes from
him, besides these' have brought, andrnany of them, if
not all, were written since.—Q. Look on that note—
(a paper was handed to Mrs. Clarke)—Q. Do you re-
collect to have received a note to that effect from the
Duke of York ? A. (after looking over the letter) I
do not recollect any thing about it ; possibly I might,
possibly I might not. I have been looking over all
my notes of 'that day, but cannot find it. I suppose
I must have burnt it. I know the Duke wrote to'
me that day—the note was writtertby. Greenwood.—
Q. Was Mr. Greenwood's note to that effect ? A. It
is so long ago, I don't recollect ; it was the longest
note I ever received from Greenwood. I had a short,
note in the morning, and a long one in the evening ;.
the last was not in Greenwood's writing, but I was,
told he wrote it, and his Royal Highness copied it.—
Q. By whom were you told that Mr. Greenwood!
write it, and that the Duke 'copied it ? A. By the
Duke of York's servant. After I had seen Mr.
Adam, I called at the Duke's house in Portman-
square, and asked if his Royal Highness would dine
at Gloucester-Place. The servant told me he fancied
lie would, as he had not ordered any dinner at home.
Finding he did not come, I called again in the even-
ins;, and was informed, that Mr. Greenwood had
called on him it} his carriage, and that they had gone
out to dine together ; and I was afterwards told, that
as soon as dinner was over, Greenwood wrote that
note, and his Royal Highness copied it.—Q. When
did you burn that letter ? A. I can't say—l never
knew I had burnt it, till I could not find it among
my papers. I had several love-letters from him,
some of which I burnt, and some of which I have
still.—Q. Did you ever know Mrs. Favourite by any
other name ? A. I never knew her ; but I have
heard she has made use of my name on several occa-
sions in a very unwarrantable way, which has given
me great uneasiness. lam afraid, from what I
heard, that she has told several falsehoods respecting
Mr. Ellis and his family ; but I never knew till yes-
terday that she had actually misrepresented Mr. El
lis's situation. As soon as I knew it, I advised her to
take a hackney-coach, and tell Mr. Ellis what she
had said.—Q. When she left Mrs. Ellis's service, did
she not come back to live with you ? A. She did ;
and when she came back, she said she had been mar-
ried, which I did not believe.—Q. Did you know
the man she said she had married ? 'A. I had heard
of him, and that he was a man of bad character ; in-
deed, that he was a married man.—Q. Wereyou ever
in habits of intimacy with Mrs. Favourite, when
she lived at Mr. Ellis's ? A. No. I believe I called on
her once in a hackney-coach.--Q. Did you after-
wards turn her away because she was married ? A.
Yes, I did.—Q. How often has Mts. Favourite been
in your service ? A. Several times. I parted with
her before I went to Hampstead, and thought Mrs.
Nicholls would do better for me • but I found she was
as bad as the other, and equally abused my confi-
deuce, so I took Mrs. Favourite again.—Q. Lid ycu
know her husband ? A. Yes. As I said beft r 2, he
was generally known to be a bad character, and that
he was married. His Royal Highness knew it ; for
one day when he was at Gloucester Place, a woman
had come to her when she was at dinner, and told her
that Mrs. Favourite was no wife, but that she herself
was the real wife of the man whote wife Mrs. V. pre,
tended to be. I told her, I had heard she had married
a man who had a wife, but she was not there at that
time, for she had been discharged in consequence of
her imprudence.—Q. Then you never called on Mrs.
Favourite at Mr. Ellis's, but once in a hackney-
coach? A. No.—Q. That was the only time ? A.
Yes.
Mr. C. ADAMS.—" I desire that part of the wit-
ness's evidence may be read to her in which she
speaks of the list of names of persons intended to be
promoted being pinned to the, bed head," which was
read accordingly.
Q. (By Mr. C. ADAMS.) Do you persist in that
evidence ? A. Yes.—Q. Do you mean to say that
it was pinned there for the purpose of being read by
the Duke of York.? A. Yes, it was.—Q. Was this
list seen by any other person but yourself and his
Royal Highness ? A. I don't know ; I can't say
it was not seen by the servants ; though they might
not perhaps be able to read it ; hut no one else could
have seen it.—Q. Arc you sure his Royal Highness
ever read it ? A. Yes, lam ; for his Royal High-
ness Caine to me and made a remark on it. He said
they should all be promoted as speedily as the time
would allow.—Q. Did Mrs. Favourite see it ? A.

Q. (By the ATTORNEY GENERAL.) Did you ever
live with Mr. Ogilvie—(A general buss throughout Per
Ihuse)—The ciucstion I meant to ask of the witness
is, Are you acquainted with Mr. Ogilvie ? A. Yes.
General Clavering some years ago brought him to sec
me.—Q. How long have you been acquainted with
him ? A. I cannot exactly recollect.—Q. Is it two
years ?A. Yes, more than two years.—Q. Is it four ?
A. Yes.—Q. Six ? A. No ; I do'nt think I was
acquainted with him six years ago.—Q. You did not
know him six years ago ? A. No. I believe not.—
Q. Was it before his embarassments that you were
acquainted with him ?A. No.—Q. Was it before
he failed ? A. Yes.—Q. Was any thing owing by
Mr. Ogilvie to you at the time of his faihre ? A.
No.—Q. Were you not.examilled as a witness on Mr.
Opilvie's bankruptcy ? A. Yes.; but I was then liv-
ing' with the Duke of York, though unknown to thQ
world.

~l

• •
Q. (Br Lerd Fouterroiti.) Did yont:**greel
1 with Mr. Ogilvie ? A. r never lived wages., wee ,
Ibut the Duke. of York.
Q. (By Mr..Wtiernariii.) Have you reculeieda4
letters from 'the Duke of rark since the timeofloV-
separation ?A. Yes.—Q. Have you any note thelk
can ascertain that fact ? A. I have several, but
since I 'left him they are 'not very civil.:- Q. Have
you any with dates ? A. I believe I hate one as two.
—Q. Are • any of these netts. signer/ ? A... I believe
there is one with a name, but I, am not sure.-.-Q. Is
the note that is signed. subsequent to the. time, of the
separation ? A. No.
-Mr. WHITBREAD here 'desired the witness to
look at all the notes in her hand, and wished that she.
would put in one or two that she thought were write
ten since the separation.
Mrs. Ceanee answered that she was.willing to put
in all the notes.
Mr. WHITBREAD desired to know whether the
witness wished to put in any more notes.
A. I have several more at home, arc} will produce
them all,'if it is required.
Here the was shewn two dotes that had
been put on the taL4e.
Q. Is that his Royal Highness's writing ? A. Yes.
—Q. Was that first note now on the table written to
her subsequent .to the time of the separation ? A.
The language will shew.—Q. Have you sufficiently
examined these papers to ascertain whether they are
the Duke of York's writing ? A. I have.; I can as-
certain it.—Q. (Paper :hewn to her) Was that -note
written after the separation took place ? A. It was,
I received it with the money his Royal Highness
gave me to defray the expences of my journey into
the country. Fbelieire it was about 2001.
Mr. WHITBREAD begged she would produce
some letters or notes with dates to them. He was
sure the Committee would perceive his reason for
being so particular.
The first letter was then read by the Clerk at the
table, as follows :
• " Inclosed I send you the money you wish to have for your
journey."
The other ran thus :
" I don't know what you mean. I never authorized any one
to plague and teeze you; therefore you may be perfectly easy on
my account."
Q. (By Mr. Tirosirsose) Was it customary with
the Duke of York to mix in those you call love let-
ters any thing on the subject of military or ecclesias-
tical matters ? A. I don't know how to answer that
question.--Q .Is there any thing in any one of them
relative to military or ecclesiastical matters ? A. No.
Q. (By Mr. LOCKHART.) Was any person present
when you looked over the papers relative to the sub-
ject of the inquiry ? A. No, not of his Royal High-
ness's letters.—Q. Did.any one assist you in looking
over any other papers ? • A. No, I have never suffeT-
ed any person to look over_my letters.
Q. (By Mr. HERBERT) Did you, when in Glouces-
ter-place, pay tradesmen's bills yourself, or were they
paid by your housekeeper ? A. Sometimes by one and
sometimes by the other. I did not not often pay
them, so they were generally paid by the housekeeper.
—Q. Did Mrs. Favourite ever represent to you that
you must have money of the Duke to stop the trades-
men's mouths, for they were very clamorous for the
payment of their bills ? A. I never minded what she
said.—Q. Did she never represent to you that she
must have money to satisfy the creditors ? A. Yes.
I dare say when they teazed her, she teazed me.—Q.
Was this to a considerable amount ? A. I do-not
know.—Q. Do you not know that bills were very
often paid to a large amount on this being so repre-
sented by Mrs. Favourite ? A. I do not know. I
believe not very considerable.
Mr. WHITBREAD said there were but three or
four letters requisite to be delivered, he therefore
moved, that all the letters, except three or four, be
returned to Mrs. Clarke, which was done accordingly.
The Hon. Member then requested that Mrs. Clarke
would send two or three of his Royal Highness's let-
ters, with dates, or by the rust-mark of which it could
be ascertained that they had been written since the se-
paration took place. He was particular in this, be-
cause as be hoped the inquiry would close this eve-
ning, it would be necessary for Mrs. Clarke to attend
again, and a Messenger might go with her to bring'
back the letters.
Mrs. CLARKE answered, she would send them as
soon a, ever she got home. She was then going, •but
Sir T. TURTON desired to put a question to her.
Q. Do you recollect
.whether, in the presence of
Miss Taylor, the Duke of York and you ever talked
of military matters ? A. Upon my word I do not
know. The Duke never minded what he said befere
Miss Taylor : he was very fond of her.
Q. (By Mr. Locenan•r.) The witness says, that
several of the Duke of York's letters are in her own
possession, and in the possession of several of her
friends. I wish her to name those friends in whose
possession the letters are ?
The witness was ordered to withdraw, when .
Lord FOLKESTONE desired to know by what
right or title the Learned Gentleman was authorised
to enquire where all the letters, which Mrs. Clarke
stated herself to have received, were to be found ? -
Mr. LOCKHART observed, that the Noble Lord
seemed to forget that this was a Committee of In-
quiry, and that it was competent to demand any do-
cuments which might be necessary either to the con-
viction or acquittal of the illustrious person, against
whom the charges- under investigation had been
brought: The witness had no right, therefore, to
withhold any letters which might conduce to eluci-
date the subject of inquiry. If the Committee, how-
ever, should be c.f a different opinion, he should not
press the question, though upon the broad principle
he was convinced it was a proper one to be put.
Lord FOLKESTONE contended. that the argu-
ment of the Leaned Gentleman went too far, be-
cause it would go to the extent, that the witness was
bound to produce all her papers, in order to give the
Learned Gentleman an opportunity to look them over
and judge which were applicable to the question
under consideration. Any papers that the Committee
would be authorised to demand, ought to be defined ;
and the Learned Gentleman beneath the Learned
Member would inform him, that it was not in the
practice of any Court of Justice to order a party to
produce all his papers, with a view that the Court
should decide, on examination of them, which were
relevant to the matter in issue,
Mr. BATHURST observed, that the Noble Lord
seemed to have mistaken the object of the Learned
Gensleman'S question. They were not Mrs. ClArke's

The CH ANC
said, that as Wi"
be irregular to d
aarke'S indiSPOsi

I ,
I
1