which she has alluded this night. That letter, I believe, still is in the custody of the geutleman who conducted the examination. Indeed, I endorsed the date and transmitted it to Mr. Wilkinson immediately after I received it. The knowledge I have of Mr. Wilkinson I have stated to the Committee; of the other person, Taylor, mentioned by Mrs. Clarke as an acquaintance of the duke of York's, I have no knowledge whatever. I hope I have explained myself satisfactorily to the Committee If I have not spoken quite intelligibly, I shall be ready to give any further explanation in my power by answering any question that may be put to me. I think it proper to add that the

threat of an action for crim. con, was made in 1805, that the inquiry immediately followed, and that the separation took place in 1806.He did not know whether the annuity promised Mrs Clarke had been paid her or not, as pensions or matters of that sort formed no part of the financial concerns of the duke of York which were under his administration. Those

concerns to which he had to attend related to certain claims, for the discharge of which his royal highness had appropriated a proportion of his annual revenue, to manage which Mr. Coutts and he were appointed trustees. This proportion was originally but 12,000!. but it was now raised to between 26 and 30,000l. a year, out of which £.4000 were annually applied to the liquidation of debt due by his royal highness to the public, on account of the loan advanced to him under Mr. Pitt's administration. To discharge this and other claims, his royal highness had, highly to his honour, set apart as much of his income as, consistently with necessary expenditure, could be possibly spared.

Colonel Gordon, who is the public military Secretary of the Duke of York, says, in substance, this: that it is his duty to make to the Duke a report upon all applications for promotions, or exchanges; that he has no doubt that he made an enquiry upon the case of Knight and Brooke ; that he fully believes, that the grant of the exchange was made in consequence of his report; that he kept no minute of the enquiry or report, and was not in the habit of doing so; that the delay in question took place on account of some doubts of the eligibility of Col. Brooke, and not on account of any objection to Col. Knight's request; that he has not the smallest reason to suspect that any influence other than that of the general rules of the service produced the grant of leave to exchange; that the Duke's approbation was given on the 23rd of July, 1805, that the King's signature was affixed to it on the 24th, and that the exchange was gazetted on the 30th.

Ludovick Armor, a footman of the Duke of York, said that he was a foreigner;

that he had lived 18 years with the Duke; that no other of the Duke's servants ever went to Mrs. Clarke's; that he used to go there at eight o'clock in the morning to take the Duke's clothes; that he never saw Mrs. Clarke at her house but once, when he went to take a favourite dog for her to see; that the Duke was not then there ; that he is quite certain that he never was sent by any one, from her house, to get any note changed. In his cross-examination, he repeated these assertions; he said, that no other servant of the Duke was permitted to go to Mrs. Clarke's; he asserted of his own knowledge, that no other of the Duke's servants ever went there. He said he had been asked (previous to his coming to the House of Commons) the same question about the note, by the Duke, by Mr. Adam, by Mr. Lowten, and by Mr. Wilkinson, and that he had given

them the same answer.

I leave the Evidence of Mr. Adam and Col. Gordon, as I find it. The character which Mr. Adam gives of the lady is very bad indeed; but, one cannot help regretting that he should have been the instrument of offering to such a person an annuity of £.400 a year, on the part of the Duke, while the latter was accommodated with so large a loan out of the public money.If what Ludovick Armor says be true; namely, that no other servant of the Duke ever went to Mrs. Clarke's, and that he never took a note to change from that house, what Mrs. Clarke says about sending the note to change must be false. That is quite clear. But, bare justice to the fair annuitant compels us to observe, that this falshood, if we set it down for one, must have been a mere freak of fancy; for, it would, I think, be impossible to assign, or conceive, any reason for her stating it. Of itself there was nothing in it, either good or bad. Το have said, that she merely shered the Duke the money would have answered full as well for all the purposes of accusation and of crimination. It is quite impossible to guess at any end she could have in view by telling such a falshood, except that of bringing forth Ludovick Armor; or of affording a chance of being exposed as a false witness. If, therefore, she be a false witness, a fabricator of false accusations, we must, I think, allow her to be as aukward an one as ever appeared at any bar in the world.

After the examination of Ludovick Armor, Mr. Wardle examined Mr. Adam, which examination led to a very novel

scene, namely, the reading of an anonymous letter in the House.Mr. Wardle asked Mr. Adam whether he had a son, and was answered in the affirmative, adding, that he was Lieut.-Colonel of the 21st regt. of foot. Being asked at what age he was made a Lieut.-Colonel,

Mr. Adam said, that he would answer that question; but the House, he hoped, would allow him to make some previous observations. General sir Charles Stuart, the friend of his early life, asked him, whether any of his five sons had an inclination for the army. There was one of them 14 or 15 years of age, who he thought had a strong tendency that way. The general said, that by the rules of the service he was permitted to appoint him to an ensigncy. He was accordingly made ensign. His regiment was in Canada, and as he was so young he did not join immediately, but was first se t to Woolwich for education. As this question had been asked him, he hoped it would not be considered as unbecoming in him to say of so near a relation, that he distinguished himself extremely. A second commission was given him by gen. Stuart, in a manner equally gratuitous. When the great Abercrombie, likewise the friend of my early life, was sent to the Helder, he went under him at the age of sixteen, as a volunteer. The House would pardon him, as it was impossible for him not to feel strongly, he must state his merits. He landed in a hot fire, and conducted himself so as to command the applause and thanks of all who surrounded him. He was present in every active engagement during that expedition. He commanded a body of men of the number generally committed to a lieutenant. They were from the Supplemental Militia, and required a great deal of management, and it was universally allowed that he conducted them well. When he returned, he was, without any solicitation of his (Mr. Adam), so help him God, appointed to the Coldstream Guards. There he remained till he went to Egypt again under Abercrombie. accompanied by his friend, who had made the same progress as himself, (the son of sir John Warren) who was killed by his side. He landed at the head of the guards, at the famous landing in Egypt, and distinguished himself equally well on that oc casion. On his return the duke again appointed him to the rank of major, and at the age of twenty-one he rose to the situation of lieutenant-colonel of the second battalion of the 21st, and afterwards of the first battalion, he (Mr. Adam) having merely stated a circumstance in his favour, which he left entirely to the Duke's consideration; and this regiment

was as well commanded as any in toe service:

he might call upon the officers who were acquainted with the service to confirm his words; and sir John Moore, if he had been alive, would have spoken of him.-Mr. Adam said, that he now would read a letter which he had received, and which appeared to have some reference to this question.

He then read a Letter, which he had received, and of which the following is the report, as given in the Courier news-paper of the 4th of February:

"Sir, your character was once respected; "that is now over. Your shifting in the "House of Commons, and your interference "in the duke of York's letchery concerns, would "have dubbed any other man a pimp. This "subserviency to royalty has made your son a "Colonel at twenty years, and given your "other boy a ship."--(I wish, exclaimed the hon. gentleman, turning to Mr. Wardie, you would ask me a question respecting this son too, that I might have an opportunity of telling by what means he got his ship)." Bravo! "Go on! Try if you can say you act for no profit when you get your sons thus provided "for. Decide as you please, that the man "who is paid for his services out of the public purse, because he is the second man in the kingdom, as you say, and a prince, forsooth, "should not show a good example. Let the "Commons decide as they will, the public will "judge for themselves; and it is not a decision "of the Bear Garden that will convince bur"dened millions that black is white. This ru "brick" (it was written in red ink)" is typical "of my feelings. I blush for you, and wish

There will be much for observation upon these matters hereafter; but, I cannot refrain from observing, that this audacious letter appeared to kindle somewhat of wrath in the breasts of the honourable House. Mr. ELLISON said it was unworthy of the character of an individual to pay attention to anonymous letters. Mr. ADAM said, that the letter was written to deter him from doing his duty, and to libel the House of Commons, both of which were beyond the power of any such attempts; that he had to protect his own and his family's honour, and that he would do it without minding the opinion of any one.

Mr. FULLER defended the reading of the letter, and said the House ought to be whipped, if they did not ofler £.500 or £.1000 for discovering the author. “If

you are such poor creatures," said he; but was stopped by a loud and general cry of, order.The public are much obliged to Mr. Adam for reading this letter, and to Mr. Wardle for taking care to have it inserted in the Evidence. Yet, strange to say, the Morning Chronicle has suppressed it. That print states, that there was a very abusive and vulgar letter

read; but, it does not insert it.

This is not dealing fairly either with Mr. Adam, the honourable House, or the Public.

Now, in the account which I have given of the Evidence, as well as of the debates, or that I shall give of either, I am, of course, to be understood merely as re-stating what has been before stated in the news-papers, which original statements may, for ought I know, be incorrect; but, as I said before, if I find them to have been so, I will lose no time in correcting them, and communicating the correction to the public. Publicity, and even speedy publicity, is what Mr. Canning stated to be desirable, and for that reason he preferred an examination at the bar of the House, in preference to an examination before a committee, upon oath. To assist, as far as my little sheet is capable, in this work of publicity, is my object, and shall be my constant endeavour, until the whole of the business is closed. My wish is, that the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, should be known to, and believed by, every soul in the kingdom; and, if this be the case, great good must arise from this inquiry, while it is impossible that any harm can arise from it. If there be any one, who, from report, has imbibed prejudices against the Duke of York, this is the time for him to dismiss those prejudices from his mind. He should resolve upon doing that; and by no means give way to the very prevalent and dangerous propensity of hailing open accusation as proof of guilt, merely because such accusations correspond with his pre-conceived 'opinions. Nothing is more common than to hear men exclaim, when an open accusation takes place, "Ah! I always said so, or I always thought so." In this state of their minds, the accused stands but a poor chance. They wish him to be guilty; and it is but too true, that, what we wish, we frequently believe, with or without sufli cient reason. Against the whisperings of this spirit of injustice I wish to guard the reader. I hope that all prejudices will be dismissed from the mind of the public; that we shall all look upon the Duke of York as being now accused for the first time; that we shall consider him as a person exposed to much ill-will and obloquy from the nature of his situation; and that we shall not condemn him without such proof as would be sufficient to produce the condemnation of any one of ourselves.But, on the other hand, justice to ourselves, justice to our country and to the army, requires that we should not be carried away

a

from rational and fair conclusions by any assertions, or insinuations, against the authors of the accusation or against any of the witnesses; by any out-cry about a Jacobin Cmspiracy, and the licentiousness of the press, and a design against the House of Brunswick. These, I trust, we shall regard as empty sounds. The utmost extent, to which the press has gone, upon this subject, is, to have published, that Major Hogan told the Duke of York, that promotions were to be purchased of women at reduced prices; that the Major offered to prove this to the Duke, and that the Duke made no answer, and never called for the proof. This is the utmost extent of the "licentiousness of the press." The statement may be false;. Major Hogan did, perhaps, never say this to the Duke; but, observe, the major does not accuse the Duke of receiving, either directly or indirectly, any part of the money; nor does he accuse him of knowing that any other person got money in such a way. Well, then, how has the press sinned? What has it done, in this case, to be so severely censured? What has it done to excite " doubt whether the benefits of its freedom be not overbalanced by its licentiousness?" It has now been proved before the parliament itself, that, at the rcommendation of the physician of Mrs. Clarke, money was offered to her to obtain from the Duke of York the grant of an exchange in the army; it has been proved, that the exchange soon afterwards took place; and it has been proved, that the money was paid to her according to the terms of the bargain. Must not the parties to this transaction have believed that Mrs. Clarke was the cause of the exchange? Must not they have believed this? Were they not liable to talk of it? If such like transactions were frequent, must not the knowledge of them have spread? And, if any public writer came to the knowledge of them, was it not his bounden duty to state them to the public? If not for such purposes, I should be glad to know for what purpose there is, or ever was, any thing, called "the freedom of the press." -Mr. Sheridan told the House, that he had besought Mr. Wardle not to proceed with this busi ness, a fact of which I have not the smallest doubt; but he added, that his "honourable friend" (for so he called him) had lent himself to the designs of "a foul conspiracy." Foul conspiracy as long as he pleases; but that will not remove the effect of the evidence of Dr. Thynne, Mr. Knight, and Mr. Adam; the word conspiracy will have no weight against the proofs

225]

DUKE OF YORK.
(Continued from page 224.)

TO THE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND. THE attention of every person in this country is now, with more or less eagerness, directed towards what is going on in the House of Commons. By a sort of involuntary motion, all eyes have been turned that way. There is no man that now seems to think it of any consequence what is done in the way of war, or of negociation. All of us seem to feel, that, until this affair be settled, it would be absurd to waste our thoughts upon any question connected with our interests, or our honour, as a nation.So far the state of the public mind is what it ought to be. But, while all are exclaiming against the infamous corruptions, plunderings and robberies; the insulting profligacy, that have now been proved to exist; while all mouths are open upon these topics, there has appeared no attempt to draw the attention of the people to the effect which these abominations have upon them, in their individual and family capacity.Be this my task, by way of introduction to such other matters and remarks as it appears to me necessary, at this time, to submit to those, who bear the burdens, which arise from the corruptions that have now been proved to exist. To persons, not accustomed to go beneath the surface of things, it may possibly appear, that it makes little difference to the people, whether commissions and offices be sold or not, because, in whatever manner they be disposed of, the expence of them must still be the same. But, it requires but little very reflection to perceive, that this proposition is opposed to the truth; for, in the first place, it is evident, that the person who purchases a post, will seek for reimbursement, either in the positive profits of the post, or in a deduction from the time or the services, which ought to be spent or rendered in that post. In the case of DoWLER, for instance, who paid, it appears,

-[226

to Mrs. Clarke, large sums of money for his appointment as a Commissary, is it not clear that he would not fail, during the execution of his office, to keep in view the money which he had paid for that office? And is it not equally clear, that he would miss no opportunity of reimbursement? Indeed, it is impossible to believe, that a person, who has obtained his office by the means of a bribe, whatever the nature of that bribe may be, whether consisting of money or of a vote, will ever refrain from plundering, from any other motive than that of the fear of detection. In such a case, all the effects of morality, all the influence of sentiments of honour, are completely lost to the public. That which is "conceived in sin "and brought forth in corruption," must naturally be productive of wicked and mischievous deeds.Now, then, the money which DoWLER paid to Mrs. Clarke we must consider as coming, through the exercise of his office, out of our pockets, whence it has first been taken by the taxgatherer. To this we must add the probable further sums, which a man who had obtained his office by a bribe would be likely to appropriate to himself; and, when we see to what extent this system of bribery has prevailed, we shall not be surprised at the immense amount of the sums which we are annually called upon to pay on account of the Commissaries department.- -In the case of offices, which are merely military, the mode of our suffering is different; but, it is not less real than in cases more imme. diately connected with money transac tions. If the office be obtained by money, when no money ought to be paid, then there will be, by leaves of absence, or other means, a deduction of services due to the public; and, if money ought to be paid to the public, which is paid to a kept mistress, then the public clearly loses the ' amount, which ought to go to its credit. But, the chief evil here is, that unworthy and base persons are preferred before perH