Star.
London, England, 1811-02-07 00:00:00

the Mastraey be implicated, when Sir Charles Prim
and the Recorder refused to pass the Accounts ?—•
He would ask the Magistrates who crowded around
them, if they would have passed the Accounts ?
But if so much stress is laid on character, why is the
Committee ,to be vilified ? Why had Members of that
Committee been vilified I,r a period of more than ten
years Groundless calumnies he had ever despi, 4 ;
they flew harmless by as the idle winds. But he would
tell Gentlemen that they had their character ia E,._ tr
own keeping. Were the Committee to sit still and
look on these enormities without endeavouring to er_
pose them ? With respect to the utility of the regi.
ments, that was a subject deserving cif deep reflecti, )11;
and, perhaps, required the consideration of men of
more skill in military affairs than the Committee ;
but whatever be the duty, they world not shrii,ic Worn
it. He meant, therefore, to move—
" That the Court should agree to the Report, except that p.m
which recommends snapplcation to Parliament to repeal the
Militia Acts." And nein—

" That it should be recommended to the Committee to viva-
der of the possibility of the adoption of measures fur the altera-
tion and improvement of the state of the Militia, and the moasurel •
that should be falleb oo to procure the enforcement of any A.ts
that Infest be passed on the subject."
Mr. JACKS could not agree to the Report. He con.
tended, that it did not follow that the Colonel was
implicated in abuse, because he refused to answer the
.Committee. He had examined his accounts, and
-could declare upon his honour, that they were made
op more like a tradesman or merchant's accounts •
than any he had seen. The amount of she rock•
purse was some hundreds less than £lOOO, and h td
never been £2OOO, by some hundreds. It was nis
then just nor fair to drag an individual before the
'public in the manner this Report had done. H.
should, therefore, protest against adopting the first
motion, because it would implicate the Court in the
mis•statements, and errors, and libels by implication,
contained in the Report.
Mr. SAMUEL Dixon was glad that the Gentleman
who brought forward the motion did not go the length
of recommending what he set out with, to disband the
two regiments ; that Gentleman now proposed to omit
I that part of his motion, but to leave in the Report
all the attacks it contained upon the characters of in.
dividuals. He hoped, therefore, that the Court would
I meet the whale of the report, with a view, if true, t
sanction it, and if false to reject it. If that Gentle.
man was actuated by a sincere wish to render the
two regiments more effective, he should fairly Coda
forward with a proposition to that effect. The Re-
port, he contended, was full of libels : it contained
" envy, hatred, malice, and all uncharitableness."—.
It should never be said that the Court had given its
sanction to such a proceeding. The Gentleman who
made this motion had done justice to Mr. Smith;
hut the Report contained charges against him,
which the Court should not countenance. Mr. Dixon
then contended that it would be much more candid
in the Gentlemen on the other side to bring forwari
Ilthe question as to the extension of the services of the
iCity regiments upon its own grounds ; and concluded
by saying, that the Court.should never, with his
ap-
probation, give its sanction to such a Report.
Mr. WHeeLe made some observations in favour of
the Report, and stated that when the Militia Acts
were passed, the City Members were asked in the
Firm if they had been approved of, and they :di
roundly 'asserted that they had. 'rhie(said Mr. Whe-
ble) in the language of Shakespeare, I deny ; its as
" A lie—an odious, damn'd lie."
These worthy Aldermen, however, did not Ile for
nothing ; they all came to be Col,.nels of thee.erniitia
regirdents in their turns. The worthy Commoner
made some further remarks on the inutility of these
regiments generally. •
Mr. Alderman C. Swim opposed the report in a
few words.
Mr. Qum, in a speech of considerable length, ad.
vanced many powerful and ingenious arguments its
support of the report.
Sir W. Curds acknowledged that there had been
some improper things in those regiments, but he
thought the Committee was by nn means warranted
in bringing forward a Report so violent and so rash.
By the Report, any one would' be led to suppose that
Sir John Earner had retained several thousands of
pounds belonging to the stock.purse.in his own pri.
vote coffers. Now, he would take upon himself, as a
man of business, and a person conversant with ac-
counts, to say, that the balance, as against Sir John
Earner, never amounted to ,5100, which was not a
sum of that consequence to justify the Committee in
attacking his reputation with such severity.
I Mr. MAWSIAN spoke against the report.
Alderman GOODISEHERIC defended the report. He
thought that those Gentlemen who entered so warmly
rinto the feelings and reputation of an individual,
should have also considered the honour and feeling;
of the City of London, who had to support these re•
giments.
A lore s and desultory conversation then took place,
Mr. WAITIIMAN then shortly replied to the olmer. '
rations which had been made, and defended the ac.
curacy of the Report. He thought that it was der,-
gators' to the honour of the City, and most unsatif.•..
factory to every person who wished to maintain its
' interests, to find that even up to this day they were
unable to procure the proper accounts of the expendi-
ture of the Trophy-tax, which was so considerable a
burden on the Citizens of London.
Mr. Oleos: said, that he was astonished at the
Gentleman (Mr. Waithmsn) persevering in his cllt-
fence of the Report, after the many errors that hat
been detected in it. As to many of the points which
he had brought forward, he must know, in his con.
science, and did know, that they were not proper to
be brought forward there.;
Mr. WAITISMAWVOSe with some warmth, and won-
dered thlitnny Man should dare impute it to him, that
his conduct eras at all different from that, w..ich his
couscien:e recommended.
The question was then loudly celled for, and the
Amendment " excepting such parts of the Report us
went to recommend the, discontinuance of the Lon.
don regiments," was carried without a division.
The Court hen divided on the original question so
amended : For agreeing to the Report,
Aldermen .Aralest It, Ald,rmen 8
Commas 58 Commons 41
• . Tellers 2-69 Tenors 2-51
• .
Iv:slot:kg for agreeing to the report 19..
It was then referred to the same committee to con
sider and report what should be subsituted in the pleat
of the recommendation • for the immediate diseout
nuance of the regiments.
•