Star.
London, England, 1809-03-09 00:00:00

of business, ant; cause an inquiry
*n
iter routine
• de into the conduct of an Officer ? This would
b: lea
hat's been done on the authority of an anonymous
Lea ; in the present instance, it was even worse than
sia an(iny mous letter, that the Commander in Chief
Ad, in a manner, make into
a party with suchl
ttUttus.
And the enquiry the conduct of a
lacrcine officer, which 'nest, at the time, throw
a ~lnr on his character, he thought reflected no honour
, ,
fi,ece wno caused it. After slightly alluding to
cthilecfte of Mr. Kennett, the Honourable Gentleman
: ed the. House, that as he conceived it his duty
,rorin
Ftae his sentiments without disguise, he had thrown
on into the form of an Address. He was the last
033 who would wish to injure the Illustrious Perso-
e:ige •
who .e as the Arbject of the inquiry which had
taken place ; but he considered it a sacred duty im-
d den him to act as he had done. The Hduse
of decide on the merits of the Address he was
,:hout to submit to them, and on the justice of their
tecilien he relied with confidence. The Honourable
Gentleman then concluded by moving,
That au humble Address be presented to his Majesty, bum-
f', s:nirg to his Majesty, that information has been communi-
- c.!ed to this House, an evidence produced to support it, of va-
.,,as crrupt practices and other abuses having prevailed for
:ts past in the disposal of commissions and promotions
Ir.' his Majesty's Land Forces—That his Majesty's faithful Cont-
mom, ac:erdiug to the duty by which they are bound to his Ma- 1,
and to their Constituents, have carefully examined into the
t7,ah of sundry. transactions which have been brought before
t•wiy, • p.sof of such corrupt practices and abuses; and that it is
t].e lamest concern and astanishment his Majesty's faith-
coy:roas fled thents;:ives obliged, niost humbly, to inform
that the result of their diligent inquiries into the
.-,cq:•l:vexamillazion of persons concerned, together with other
w;:,e,5.5, and a variety of documents, has been such as to satisfy
hi, r.„;!-..al Commons that the existence of such corrupt practices
and i:,es is substantially true.
1112 t his Majesty's faithful Commons are restrained by
of personal respect and attachment to his Majesty, from
,terlir into a detail of these transeetionObeing convinced that
not be stated withoot exciting the most painful sensa-
n e grief and indignation in the breast of his Majesty :
j' the proceedings of his Majesty's faithful Commons up-
ti, important subject have been public, and the evidence
broagl:t before them is recorded in the proceedings of Parliament ;
they trust his Majesty will give them credit, when
thpv ;;;nlre his Majesty, that in the execution of this painful
eat), they have proceeded with all due deliberation ; That with-
out entering into any other of the many obvious consequences
waieh rosy be expected to follow, from the belief once generally
etaKiihetl, of the prevalence of such abuses in the Military De-
railment, there is one great and essential consideration insepara.
from the present subject, which they humbly beg leave, in a
more pa%ielar tanner, to submit to his Majesty's gracious consi-
deration, namely, that if an opinion should prevail amongst his
:Majesty's Land Forces, that promotion may be obtained by other
than by merit and service—by means at once unjust to the
Army and disgraceful to the authority placed over it, the effect
of such an opinion must necessarily be to wound the feelings and
aba:e the seal all ranks and desCriptions of his Majesty's Army.
" That it is the opinion •f this House, that the abuses which
Cley have thus most humbly represented to his 1V1:4-ity, could
rat have prevailed to the extent in which they had been proved
exist, without the knowledge of the Commander in Chief;
-d that even if, upon any principal of reason or probability, it
ous!d be presumed that abuses 30 various and so long continued.
mid, in fact, have prevailed without hi, knowledge, such a pre-
c..mpti,n in his favour would not warrant the conclusion, that
cenimand of the Army could, with safety, or ought, in pro-
dcnee, to be continued in his hands.
" Ti:at on these grounds and principles his Majesty's faithful
Commens most humbly submit their opinion to his Majesty's
tracious consideration, that his Royal Highness the Duke of
:c•-!: ought to be ilep rived of the Command of the Army
The motion being seconded,
Mr. BURTON then rose, and apologised for tres-
reesing upon the attention of the House thus early:
~aering his opinions upon this subject, he had pre.
mind upon it by paying the best attention
IT could in his power to the evidence he heard, by a
e eistant attendance on the House, and a careful study
that part which he had not heard. Having done
the next consideration that presented itself to his
mind, was.to disencumber the case from the vast,
nass of extraneous matter, which was pressed- into
tins Inquiry. To consider what part of the state-
eKeits of witnesses was evidence, and what not. This •
1::•Ht; settled, the next thing was to separate the testi-
: . -iy of such witnesses as could be admissible, from
the e.,•idence of such persons as would not be credited
it. any Court of justice whatever. ( Hear, h. -ar, hear!)
The Honourable Gentleman then proceeded to oh-
!e.., that it was necessary to notice, in this case,
hat some Gentlemen may hear with surprise, no
than seventy-eight witnesses had been examined,
hr:: many of those witnesses, taking for the sake of
:...,;11:nt.,nt the facts as they appeared, were to be con-
••.,:•.e.e.i in the light of accomplices. It was scarcely
rec ear:- for him to state ro the House, that the testi-
y of such persons, unless •corroborated by full
a:1:1 r,,,pt2ctalile evidence from other quarters, must
ceeitilly fall to the ground. Mrs. Clarke was the
peec:ieil actress in this scene. She was either an ac.
con,pii:e, or she was nothing. There 44 ere many
f et the witnesses who stood in a similar predi-
He instanced Captain Huxley Sandenv
4.,r•• i:avettrite, and Miss Taylor. All those persons
11. e! ~even, in the first instance, a direct testimony,
1 ;.ey had either contradicted themselves, on cross-
. ettion, or stood contradicted by other and more,
.c.:;:ble witnesses. He then proceeded at some
I.h to enter into the que!lion of the credibility of
.: witnesses. The evidence of Captain Huxley
n, he contended, was such as would not
I,.:.ved in any Court of Justice. The testi-
reeTy of Mrs. Favourite was precisely of the same
: ;:ecription, as in her examination she had fallen
:et' .t number of gross and palpable contradictions:
had, for instance, represented the Reverend
Ellis as a common carpenter.—He held in his
netts, no less than twenty-eight assertions of Mrs.
in sonic sf which she was contradicted by
ant in all by persons of credit, respecting
1..1:,e character he might set the world at defiance.
vx,!',l, not attempt to retail all from memory, but
ce t,iaiel endeavour to submit a few to the House.
*would appear upon the minutes, that on being
as :cd whether she ever represented herself as a single
er unmarried woman, she Answered, that she had
Lever repreented herself as a widow except once on a
Court-Martial, and at another time in joke. Now it
appealed from the evidence of Mr. Few, that she had
wired credit from him by talking of her late hus-
band. (Mar, Hear!) 1f the Honourable Mem-
&l's who cried " Hear," were not disposed to re-
ceive the evidence of Mr. Few, would they reject
i,f Mr. Nicholls, to whom she represented her-
s as beinz a widow upwards of three years ?
--W (.old it. not •be recollected that she said she had
e..,•er represented herself as a married woman ; and
i.:l:ettlarly as not being married to Dowler, when
1•11^e had evidence at their Bar that she had done this
(a: various occasions. WoUld they so trifle with the
rotas C
• " of lAonest men as. not to believe four per.

C .:...t.

~~

sons speaking, to these facts ? it appeared from the
evidence of Mr. Nicholls, that on her fiOstr gent -to 1 ,
Hampstead, she represented herself as a widow—ghat i
she came for some days to towna-l-that.on -tier return
she was accompanied by Dowlet, whom she repre-
sented as her husband. It was endeavoured to ob-
viate this, by proving that there were several beds in
the house ; and that it did not appear they ever .slept,
together. But was it necessary to establish this ? Was.
not she mere proof of her having said that she was.
married sufficient to destroy the effect of her evidence
in other instances? He would refer to the evidence'
of Reid, the master of the hotel, to prove that she pas- i
sed as Mrs. Dowler. The evidence of the porter and
waiter was decisive on the same point. The latter'
stated, that she came there more than once, and that i
he announced her as Mrs. Dowler. (A laugh.) Gen-
tlemen might laugh, but they were not to laugh away,
the characters of honest men ( Hear, hear !). It was
not what he was accustomed to in the Law Courts ; \
and he hoped he should not hear it in that place. It
also appeared from the minutes, that the porter had
carried wine to Bedford-place, and Westbourn place, 1,
addressed to her as Mrs. Dowler, and that at both
places it was received under that direction. He should
not fatigue the House by endeavouring to rack his-
memory for other instances; but he would assure them,
that is 28 instances Mrs. Clarke was contradicted by
herself, and by no less than 13 witnesses. If sitting
in a con: tof justice, this person's evidence was
brought forward against the meanest person at the
bar, he should feel it his duty to leave her evidence
wholly out of the case.
The next thing for the House to consider was what
evidence existed exclusive of this. With respect to
the charge of corruption, he should not detain the
House on that part of the case. Whin it appeared from
the evidence of these people, that there was nothing so ,
foul or profligate in which they were not ready to en-
gage, he did not apprehend that any truly conscien- 1
nous person would place much reliance upon What
they might say. The great object of some of these
was to connect the culpable facts with the person of
the accused. He should not go into the minutia: of
the case, but should leave that task to perlons more
capable than himself, and not labouring under the
-misfortune that-he did. He trusted, however, that '
.the House would indulge him in a few observations
on the evidence.
The first case he would advert to was that of the
exchange between Colonels Knight and Brooke, and
the transaction of the £2OO connected with it. This •,
rested solely on the evidence of Mrs. Clarke. There
was no other testimony but her's to connect that fact
with the Illustrious Person under accusation. It was
'supported by no other evidence written or unwritten.
She, indeed, came forward, and put the connection
both with respect to that fact, and every other imp:icat-
ing the Commander in Chief, beyond all doubt, and if
her testimony was believed, that illustrious Person was
privy to her corruption. But the House would recol-
lect the evidence of Colonel Gordon, who described
the transaction as perfectly regular, and whose testi-
mony was corroborated by documents of incontro-
vertible authority. [The Hon. Member here went
over the memorials and ariswers relating to the ex-
change between these Officers, and commented upon
them.] In contradiction, therefore, to the assertion
of Mrs. Clarke, that the exchange had been effected
through her influence, they had the evidence of Co-
lonel
Gordon, a witness who might defy any one—
( Hear, hear ! ) and whose evidence would be the won-
der and envy of every one. As to the changing the
2001. note, he could not perceive. how that circum-
stance connected the fact with the Duke of York.—
That fact was attempted to be proved by Mrs. Fa-
vorite. What did her evidence amount to ? She said
that she brought down a note of 2001. to be changed,
and that she gave it to Lodowick, who has declared-,
at the Bar that he never did receive a note from, or
get one changed for her, but that one morning he saw 1
her f.;:ve a note of 101. to a girl to get exchanged. To
bolster up this evidence, they called Mr. Pierson, who
on his Erst examination, recollected nothing about
changing the note, but on his second, and after having I,
some intercourse and conversation with other persons
on the subject, stated that he perfectly remembers the ;1
circumstance, and attributes his want of memoryon his
first examination, to a dreadful head ache, to which i
he was subject. But it was not proved that the Duke 1
knew any thing of this transaction, and suppose he
was even present when Mrs. Clarke received the
change, what had that to do with the Duke ? 'Was
she never to have a 2001. note in her possession which
she did not obtain in a corrupt manner ? 'Was it not
in evidence before the House that the Duke was in
the habit of receiving notes from his bankers, and
sending them in an envelope by Lodowick to this wo-
man
? What was there to particularize this note ?
What
was there to induce the supposition of privity,
and that the note received was known to have been
the • produce and result of a corrupt bargain. But
the facility of these allegations did not rest upon the
inconsistency of Mrs. Clarke's witnesses. The
Honourable Member himself was in direct oppo-
sition to her. In his examination he stated that
in her conversation with him, she particularized
the 25th of July as the day when the first application
was made to her by that meddling physician, Dr.
Thynne. Let the House look at the documents be-
fore them, at the official documents produced by
Colonel Gordon, and they would find from these,
that the thing was done two days before the applica-,
tion was made. , It was proved by Colonel Gordon
that the exchange was recommended on the 230, and
that it received the Royal fiat on the day mentioned
by Mrs. Clarke as the time of the first application.—
This is also coi roborated by Mr. Knight, who though
having the misfortune of appearing in the light of an
accomplice, is neither contradicted by himself or
others. Mrs. Clarke says that the Duke was privy
to the corrupt transaction. Mr. Knight on the con-
trary states, that she enjoined the strictest secrecy to'
him, when questioned whether he understood her to
mean that it should be kept secret from the Duke of
York or the Public, she replied, Certainly from the
Duke of York; the public had nothing to do with
it: she wishe the circumstance.might be kept from
the knowledge of his Royal Highness, for if it should
' transpire, it might (he forgot e words) prove fatal
to her. -
The next case was that of Captain Maling., It was
so slight and unimportant, that it had nigh escaped
him. On this' stiieject he should only detain the
House foal an instant. There was no pretence for a
.charge of corruption in tbie instance. Something,
. '

hoireVer, washisinuated ahat inndne•N•eference. The
Hooevraii the best judge -whether - this charge had
not completely failed. -When it was first brought
forward, it WAS confidently stated, that this Mr. Ma-
ling was then actually a clerk at Mr. Greenwood's
desk. Novo,' it appeared that this meritorious officer,
from the first -moment of his obtaining a commission,
was m active service, and that his promotion was so-
licited, not by himself, but by his superior officers,-
'who Appreciated his talents as they deserved. When
it was found that the charge totally failed, it was en-
deavoured to be alleged as a matter of serious consi-
deration to the House, that many Officers, older in
the service, were passed over. Good Gots! to what
would it lead, if it were once esfablishrd that the
course of military promotion was to be penned up,
and directed by the deliberations of that .House ?
That, he always understood, was the prerogative of
his Majesty. What corruption would it give rise to,
if the controulssof the army, in what regarded the dis-
I posal of commissions, was vested in that House ! He
. hoped he shoals never hear that the Sovereign was
Ideprived of this part of the prerogative ; for, to use
an expression of the late Lord Chatham, 66 if you de
prive the Sovereign of the command of the army,
' you pluck the master feather from the eagle's wing."
To vest it in that House, would be to open a door
I to the grossest partiality and corruption.
The next case was thatof French's levy, and it was
much insisted on. But it appeared it was not the
first time Colonel French' had obtained a levy. He
had before successfully exerted himself on a like oc-
casion. The only material evidence touching this case
I was that of Miss Taylor. The House would recollect
what sort of a person this Miss Taylor was ; that she
was the constant comp.rnion, or rather the associate
land accomplice, of Mrs. Clarke. If Mrs. Clarke is to
be believed, it some of her witnesses are to be-believed,
she was an accomplice. She was, according to these,
!constantly admitted to the company of the Duke, who
is described by Mrs. Clarke as being very fond of her.
I And yet this woman, who was frequently in his so,
i
ciety, could only speak to one instance. But even
if this were admitted, what did it amount to ? It ap-
pears than his Royal Highness came in, according to
I Miss Taylor's account, in bad humour ; that he com-
plained df being teazed by Colonel Frencis and his
I levy, and that he turned about to Mrs Clarke, and said,
I o How does he behave to you, darling ?" to which the
latter replied, 44 Middling, not very well." Nov, what
did all this, give it full force, amount to ?. Did it imply
any thing corrupt on the part of the Duke ? He after-
wards said, 44 Master French had best take care of him-
self, or I will cut up him and his levy too." That is, he
was to put an end to that transaction from which Mrs.
Clarke, by her own acknowledgement, had derived
£2OOO, and from which, in case of its success, she was
to obtain £3OOO more. By putting an end to the levy,
did he not cut off all hopes of ptotit that might arise
from it ? He not only did this but he completely ruined
the man who was employed in raising the levy.—
Would any man of common sense be so 'absurd,
so rash, so inconsiderate, as to put himself so in
in the power of a ruined and irritated man? The very
fact of the discontinuance of the levy was sufficient
to prove that Duke never could have been privy I
to any corrupt bargain between Mrs. Clarke and Co-
lonel
French. If he had, he durst not have put an
end to it.- Eiposure and clisgraei would have been
the inevitable consequence. But it was said, and with
same speciousness, not that he put an end to the levy,
but that he continued it, notwithstanding the com-
plaints of Colonel Taylor and the Inspecting Officer
of the London District, longer than he ought, and that
the leave for a trial of two months additional was ob-
tained through the influence of Mrs. Clarke. It would
be in the recollection of the House that this levy was
}for general service, and that it was granted at a time
i when there was a great demand for recruits, particu-
-1 larly in the East Indies, whither only men recruited
1 for general service could be sent ; that it was granted
i at a time when recruiting for general sei lies was sub-
! ject to great disadvantages, in consequence of the
damp thrown upon it by two measures, the Ai my of
Reserve and the Additional Force Acts. Nothing,
therefore, was more fair and reasonable, as well as
prudent, on the part of the Commander in Chief, than
to allow this officer, who had been so successful on a
former occasion, a fartha trial for a short and limited
period. Was there any thing wrong in allowing him
two short months ?
The next case was that of Major Tonyn. The ap-
pointment of this Gentleman, it is said, would not
have taken place unless Mrs. Clarke had exerted her
influence. But the House would recollect the cir-
cumstances of the case : that he and his brother were
recommended by their lathe:, a G:neral in the army,
of long and tried service, and that in consequence of
that recommendation they were noted for promotion,
and that this was notified to them long before there
was any intention of applying to Mrs. Clarke. It ap-
peared, from the evidence of Colonel Gordon, that in
consequence of a great augmentation in the army, he
was ordered to prepare a list of the persons noted, and
'that in that list the name of MajorTonyn was included.
What did Tonyn say of his application to Mrs. Clarke ?
Why, rat it was nugatory, for that inconsequence of
his father's recommendation, he was sure of being pro-
moted ? Did it not appear from the evidence of Col.
Gordon, that 53 Majors were gazetted on the same
night,of which there were 13 junior in rank to Tonyn ?
The promotion was not carried down for the sake of
including him. There was nothing like corruption or
partiality in this case. But the deficiency of the evi-
dence was endeavoured to be bolstered up by what
may be called the mysterious note. Respecting this
there was so much doubt (loud cries of hear ! hear !
from all Harts of the House)—so much doubt, he would
repeat, that no judge or jury would condemn any
person upon the genuineness of that note. But even
supposing it genuine, what did it amount to ?---,-
64 Tonyn 's business must remain as It is. COD
bless you " If such a note had been received' by
Mrs. Clarke from the Commander in Chief, and by
her given to Sanden, is it to be supposed that her re.
collection was so bad that she should not recollect any
thing of the transaction ? It was possible it" might
have related to something. innocent. But there was
another circumstance coming out of this nest of false
witnesses, which shews it could not have related to
the corrupt transaction to which it is endeavoured to
apply it. The note was wrapped up in a cover from
Dover. What did Sanden say ? Not that he so
wrapped it up, but that he received the two, the note
and the cover, from Mrs. Clarke, to chew Tonyn I
to conviitto Mtn, hy'the front on the latter', ltalthey

were both in the hand ofthe Ornmsalder itithiet.—
Let the House examine the date on the envelope.
They would find that it bears date five days after the
promotion of Tonyn was gazetted-; not five days after
his appointment or recommendation, htitafter he was
actually gazetted: This was sufficient to slew that
this note could not have been written by the Duke,
or that it could not have been written on the occasion '
mentioned.
There was another case, that of Major Shaw ; but
it was not one upon which the Hon. Member who '
brought forward the accusation appeared much .dis-l.
posed to insist. It appears, this Gentleman solicited
one thing,' and obtained another. He applied for .
promotion in the army ; he obtained an appointment
in the Barrack department. The House knew his.'
patron, Sir H. Burrard, who, it appears, not merely'
solicited, but importuned the Commandei in Chief in
his favour. They would recollect the number of
letters which he had. written.• The complaint was
'not that this importunity procured the Barrack-Mas- '
tership, for the Duke had not the power of granting
it. It was derived through another channel than
that of the Commander in Chief, or Mrs. Clarke. •
She, however, laid claim to the bestowing of the ap-
I pointment. It was proved by Mr.. Shaw's relative,
that they had been imposed on, that they were the
dupes of Mr. Clarke's, artifice, and that they paid.
the mocy because she seemed to have an inclination
to serve him. With respect to the charge of com-
pelling Major Shaw to gb upon half-pay, that was
completely set aside by the evidence of Colonel Gor,
don. He showed that the holding of the two ap-
-1 point'-tents Ati inconsistent with cach other, and
that it was the practice to place officers so appointed
on half-pay, unless the regiment to which he was at-
t uhul should happen to be serving in the same place
where the duties of the appointment were to be
,is.
charged. This was the constant rule of the sei4zee,
with one or two ezeeptions at most.
The only remaining charge of which he had then
to take notice was that of Samuel Carter, and in Os
he could havi wished the Honourable Gentle Man
(Mr. Wardle) had acquiesced so far in the wishes of
Mts. Clarke, as nc : to have brought forward thii
charge. It was the case of an unprovided orphan',
and of what description—not that of a common or-
phan, but such a one as must have ;made an impres-
sion on any breast possessed of the smallest degree of
feeling. Samuel Carter was particularly reconi-
mended by an officer, who had always been acknow-
ledged.by those who knew him, to passess uncommon
merit, and who was beloved by all who had the ho-
nour and hap, incss of In using him, and who
was since that tiin?: dead. Th's yo mg man was sup-
posed to be his natural son ; cousl this recommenda-
tion be said to be corrupt ? It did not originate nor
come from Mrs. Clarke, but front Capt. Sutton, who,
in addition to his excellent character as an Officer in
the Artillery, had the further claim on the gratitude
of the country, and on the humanity of his Royal High-
ness, of having lost a leg in the service. This was a re-
commendation made and received in 1801, and at that
time the Duke had given his promise to provide for
him in that line, which was before his connection with
Mrs. Clarke took place. The lion. and Learned Gen-
tleman begged the House to recollect in what manner
S. Carter was received, and treated in Mrs. Clarke's fa-
' milt': It had been stated that he cleaned the knives,
and performed other services in the family. It had
been proved that he went behitid the carriage—but
how often ? Only twice, and then it was not shown
whether it was by night or by day, and there was no
proof that he ever wore a livery. What then was
really his business ? Why, to go to school. Was this
the character of a menial servant ? And if it could by
any means be allowed to be so, did the Duke of York
know this,? Did he see him clean the knives, or riding
behind the carriage ? No, his Royal Highness saw
nothing of any employment he had there,
.but that of
waiting on himself ; and he was sure that many
Gentlemen then present, or their ancestors, had never
thought it any degradation to wait on the branches cf
fie Royal Family. He verily believed, therefore, that
there were many Officers now in the army who have
been in stations of life far inferior to that possessed by
Samuel Carter, in Mrs. Clarke's family, who we.c
at this moment among the highest ornaments of the
army. This prOmise to provide for Carter had be .11
made by his Royal Highness long ago; and the
lad, by his behavioue, had frequently put the Duke
in mind of his• promise. Gon forbid, that the
House of Commons should ever vote an addrets
to the king to remove from the head of the army,
the Commander in Chief, for an act which in itself re-
flected the highest honour on his humanity and sin-
cerity. He would endeavour to detain the House as
little lonr:er as possible, and would therefore content
himself with a few observations on the comments
which had been made on the evidence by the Hon.
Gentleman. It had beeh argued that though -no
scintilla of evidence had been given that the Duke of
York was privy to, or cognizant of those transactions,
yet it must be presumed he could not but know that
Mrs. Clarke could not keep up such an establisk-
ment, and live in the extravagant manner she did,
without some fund being provided from which it
should be supported. lie thought, however, this
was a delusive and fallacious mode of argument ; for
there were, he believed, very few persons of fashion
and large fortune who fairly understood how to con-
duct themselves upon the principles of revenue and
expenditure. It was a criterion of conduct which he
believed was but little understood, and still less acted
on by persons in high life. He happened to have
been acquainted about forty years ago with those who
were the Preceptors
ic of the Prince of Wales and. Duke
t
of York, and allowed they were both very quick
at learning in general, bat they found it utterly im-
practicabk to teach them any 'thing respecting the
value of money. Though they comprehended the
most difficult part of education, they had no idea of
the value of a guinea. It had been proved, or ad-
mitted to be proved, That the Duke of York had- paid
F large sums to vintners for wines, and to other trades-
men for various articles of furniture, &c. amounting
in t' e whole to upwards of 50001. in about two years,
and in so short • a time. could it be supposed -that his
, Royal Highness was likely to have entered into the
' cool and deliberate calculations of a man who sits
down to make• a comparison between his revenue
and expenditure ? It appeared, that during the' peri<ki
' hewn then alluding to, bOth the Duke and Mrs. Clarke
hact often been in great want of money. He was press-
ed severely, and she in her turn very warmly pressed
lam. If his Royal Highness.was sovery corrupt as had

/quilt!. routine of business, ant; cause an
b: made into the conduct of an Officer ?
have been cone on the authority of an
.
present instance, it was even
in the
moos letter, that the Comman
3n0ny„......_
1,. Ad, in a manner, make himself a pari
a w0111:111.
And the enquiry in to the I
ih.savms officer, which 'rust, at the
3 sitr on his character, he thought reflects
to ta:)e
c who caused it. After slightly
the ea,c of Mr. Kennett, the Honourable
ir!Orined the. House, that as he conceive
Ftae his sentiments without disguise, hi
them into the form of an
.Address. He
0,0 who would wish to injure the thus
nat;C •
who L.: as the Aybject of the inquir
taken place ; but he considered it a sac
d en him to act as he had done.
r'e
decide on the merits of the Ad(
:;bout to submit to them, and on the jt
c!-cisica he relied with confidence. Tht
Gentlenum then concluded by moving,
That au humble Address be presented to hi,
• fly s:atirg to his hlajtnty, that information has
czed to this House, an evidence produced to %I
r"00 crrupt practices and other abuses havit
v; :es past in the disposal of commissions
Ir.-, I.lilesty's Land Forces—That his Majest.
morn, ar:erdiug to the duty by which they are 1
and to their Constituents, have carefully e:
tttath of sundry. transactions which have beet
them •p...0f of such corrupt practices and abu:
utmest conc.:rn and astanishment his
CaT.mons fled themselves obliged, ruost hu
that the result of their diligent i
fs-,e,..:l:l,eltamirazion of persons concerned, to
,nd a variety of documents, has been
Commons that the existence of such
an .a; is su'istantially true.
Th:t his Majesty's faithful Commons :
ire; :v:.: of personal respect and attaohment to I
. terlr7 into a detail of these transactionObei
not be stated withoot exciting the rt
t;.,;, sf grief and indignation in the breas
Tot the proceedings of his Majesty's faith
4,1 this important subject have been public,
broJe:t before them is recorded in the proceedi
t.i.t they trust his Majesty will give ti
thee _sure his Majesty, that in the executit
eat), they have proceeded with all due deliber
sat entering into any other of the many ob
wairh any be expected to follow, from the la
enahliihed, of the prevalence of such abuses i
Far went, there is one great and essential con
from the present subject, which they hum
more pJ,irlar tanner, to submit to his Maje.
deratco, namely, that if an opinion should
Aiajesty's Land Forces, that promotion may b
• 11101113 than by merit and service—by means a
Army and disgraceful to the authority place,
of such an opinion must necessarily be to wut
aha:..: the seal o' all ranks and desCriptions of 1
That it is the opinion •f this House, tit
eley have thus most humbly represented to
rat have prevailed to the extent in which a
m exist, without the knowledge of the Co
aid that even if, upon any principal of reasc
maid be presumed that abuses 30 various an
mild, in fact, have prevailed -.vitliout hi, km
f...mrdan in his favour would not warrant
cmamand of the Army could, with safe
dcaco, to be continued in his hands.
" .I.::at on these grounds and principles 1
Commcns most humbly submit their opin
;carious consideration, that his Royal Hi
ought to be deprived of the Command
The motion being seconded,
- Mr. BURTON then rose, and al
T.:,.islng upon the attention of the I
..:iieting his opinions upon this su
tared l.is mind upon it by paying •
•
IT could in his power to the evider
L.
r•astant attendance on the House, a
that part which he had not heal
the next consideration that pm
mind, was-to disencumber the ca
tnass of extraneous matter, which
this Inquiry. To consider what
acals of witnesses was evidence, a
1::•1:g settled, the next thing was t(
I . .iy of such witnesses as could b
ir
e,idence of such persons as wo
tat any Court of justice whatever.
The Hononrable Gentleman then
t::
12..,, that it was necessary to xi(
i - -,-I,at some Gentlemen may heat
k.), than seventy-eight witnesses h:
many of those witnesses, taki
:...,;11:rivnt the facts as they appear
"*z- in the light of accomplice
• :
for him to state Co the
•,-, ,
such
;v persons, unless •C,
a:1:1 rey,2ctalile evidence from o
c::.
.t.nnly fall to the ground. Al
actress in this scene. S
up- con,pii:e, or she was nothing.
:al. cf the witnesses who stop'
flit
a.1.7.t. He instanced Captai
i'aveltrite, and Miss Taylox
!el7- in the first instance,
1 ;..:y had either contradicted
. :ation, or stood contradict(
I.3:l.ctable witnesses. He then
tct to otter into the que!:tion
k.:' .: witnesses. The evidence
( al, he contended, was s
i:: 1, in any Court of J
• tai Mrs. Favourite was pi
as in her examina
.1 number of gross and pal
•—Y.a had, for instance, repre!
Ellis as a common carpen
' nar.,l, no less than twenty -sigh
(...1 in some Pf which she
ant in all by persons i
; character he might set
V.'ol!'.d not attempt to retail
7)1.L. :at would endeavour to submit
AC would appear upon the mil
fria. :ed whether she ever represer
t, or unmarried woman, she An
never repreented herself as a w
fief Court-Martial, and at another
i appealed from the evidence of
iic cred't from him by tall
'; band. (Hoar, Hear!) If tr
LT2.;••bCI.S who CliCd " Hear," were
Ct'ive the evidence of Mr. Fe
I,f Mr. Nicholls, to whoa
%II as being a widow upw
it not. be recollectet
reta• t er represented herself as a
crii • ai not being man
1•11-7 had evidence at their Bar
•; ("I, various occasions. Woiild
3,) :*1 1
'•' •"" of honest men as. r

~.I..ii
,1,
t -Tit,
t
1 (i.
. l'
14,..i.
'll
, ~..
. .
,
.
.tl. ,
l'
lit 4,i
1' t
1
I' r t
,
0
I ti
„ 1
I ; i
• 1 ,II ;
, 1
1
'n;i.
• . ;1,
*4'! 1

it /1151111‘aa• TT At. Iv v.& w•
. ?"!