Star.
London, England, 1809-03-18 00:00:00

.46 bid enough in the beginning,:not a man on the.
%%•-
ide almout denied he had an thin to do
o,rosites
Th
%tig-di it. ey allst stb hi aid bend until they sawg the po-
!amour excited, and then they came forward.
Pl!'ar
ow ca •
ts gor d ) I tell you it is a fact. Why
one man to whom I at first said it was a bad case,
1°.,-,r-T
near knocked me down. (Loud laughter.)—
Zounds,
Sir, said he, what !do you think I have
au y thing to do with it ? lam of opinion we ought
to acquit the Duke of York. He is a great military
character : he has carried our arms into all the rest
of die world, and under him the army has flourithed.
Will von then hunt him inm the World with an har-
poon stuck in his back ?" (Much laughter.) An Ho-
;warble Baronet opposite has talked of " dissolution."
hope he hdid not mean a dissolution of Parliament.
Indeed I'm inclined to think he meant another kind
of dissolution, from an Honourable Member whom
he seemed to have in. his eye. But, Sir, if he did
mean a dissolution of Parliament, I trust in Con I
shall be returned (loud laughing) for doing my duty.
(Ito, hear.) I have said, Sir, I have been annoyed
uc utters—it ought to be made a misdemeanor. He
,:ho does not like England, d—n him let him die.—
(on this hut expression much confusion took place in the
gag, and it was followed by loud cries of Order, Order,
Chair, Cksir.)
Mr. FULLER said he h.l heard the expression
given as a toast, and did not think it was disorderly;
at all events, he did not mean it to be so.—(Hear,
ioar!) He voted apinst the Amendment.
Lord A. HAMILTON, Slr,W. MILNER, and Sir G..
WARRENDEIh spoke against the question.
Lord MORPETH gave a decided negative to the
Amendment, as be was of opinion that the charge of
irruption had not been made out.
A Member -( whose name we could not learn) de-
clared it as his firm opinion, that 'nothing short of the
total removal of the Duke of York Would satisfy ei-
therthe House or the ,CoikaWyer,(Mier, Near !)
Mr. TRACEY expressed his _sew ,bat soy mis-
represention had gone abroad, that this enquiry was
not levelled against the Duke of York, but the Fa-
mily on the Throne. He thought the Honourable
Mover of it deserved the thanks both of the House
and the country.—(Hear, Heat- I)—From the letters
which had appeared, and from the information
which Colonel Gordon had, given to the Duke of
York, he must have known that Mrs. Clarke did not
act as she did gratuitously. ,He would, therefore,
vote the Duke guilty of these corrupt practices, as
alledged in the Amendment. •
Mr. BANKES assured the Holum, that he 'would
trespass but shortly. upon Its patience, and if he had.'
sot felt that the proposition of din Idon.:Baronet bad
placed the House in a sitiatien of grast embarrass
Trent, he should have fuieborantq .oter hintself on
tl:e present occasion to its attentiOn. The worthy
ILirop,:i, instead of proceeding to give a direct ne-.
•4 ative t the Resolution of the Chancejjor, of the E.x-
thclocr, -consistently with the tenor of his arr.
meats, lia:1 on the contrary pursued a course which
precluded those who agreed in a part of the original
!tem q u ion, and differed from-, part of it, front vot-
iw.; riling to their conviction. He had to com-
plain, theldore, that the Amendment of the worthy
Baronet had placed Gentlemen who thought as
he did, in a situation of such difficulty- and dis.
tress, that they knew not how to vote. (i/ laugh).
There was nothing ridiculous in the observation. The
Hiiisonrable Baronet disapproving of the Resolution,
ullielt stated that there was do ground to charge cor-
ruption upon the Duke of York, ought, to be con-
sistent with himself, to have given it a negative ; but
instead of that, he proposed as an Afnendment the
direct contrary Resolution. Let the House' but re-
' tiect, in what a situation it would be placed by this
proceeding. If they should negative the Amend-
nent of the worthy Baronet, they would be necessarily.
cliliged to affirm the original Resolution. (Nei, Rs,
r7i) He insisted, that such would be the case; and
to c:lew, that: he had not made the assertion lightly,
appealed to the Chair, Iwhether on mentioning his
to the Speaker, he had not his authority for the
,atement be had made. The Amendment of the
vorthy Baronet went to fix the Duke of York with
both corruptionand connivance ; and considering the
different opinions which were entertained on this sub-
ject,he must say the inconvenience of such an Amend-
ment was extreme.- He had clearly understood his
Right Hon. Friend to mean by:his statement this
night, but still more clearly by what he had said on
a former night, that nothing hthher was to be done
judicially or criminally by the House. But though
the House was not to adopt any further judicial mea-
sures, nor to follow up the businets criminally, by
bringing the party to a trill, did, it follow that no
other proceeding wasto.be udored ? For himself, he
could not go the length °Uniting, that some sort of
soanivance or at st a violent suspicion of the.
practices Which were going on, was not chargeable
on the Duke of York.. The main objection which
had been. urged against his proposition on a former
night was, that it was complex and ambiguous, at a
tine when it was argued by his Right Hon. Friend,
that the House was bound to come to a simple de-
cision. His Right Honourable' Friend, however,
had in his Resolution that night transgressed his
own rule, and offered to the House a complex pro-
position. In the first part of that proposition he con-
curred, but he differed as to `the second. He had
heard his Right Hon. Friend gate, that he considered
t!le smallest degree of connivance at corrupt practices
;:nd corruption to he the same. If so then, why had
re made use if two words, which, inbis apprehension,
meant the same thing ?—(lisar, Heir, Near 0...-01
c.zruption, and corrupt participation,he was ready to
acquit the Duke of York ; and it had been his inten-
tion, if not precluded by the course pursued by the
Hun. Baronet, to move an Amendment to his Right
Hon. Friend's Resolution, to (ark the word conni-
rnce, for the purpose of proposing afterwardi ano-
ther Resolution, stating, that His Royal 'Highness
vac guilty of that stet of connivance Which the evi-
dence established. • It was necessary -that the House
should know what vote it was to come to. There
rote two distinct parts in the resolution of his Right
Ilan. Friend, according to coMmon'sense and. sound
4Fic. It must be obvious that there was a great dif-
rt%:nee between tonnivance and a participation In
c: imp:ion. Connivance was defined by a
be grerd:t-
,. orl:y to concealed or dissembled know
could not be the same as corruption, and con.
"•,mently both were confounded in the kesatution.7—
lit: believed his Right Hon. Friend to have been sin-
z. re, when he declared that the lowest species of con-
4.7.inte was as high an offence as any degree of per.