the publication of "Cobbett's Parlia mentary Debates" commenced. The Subscribers to the above working, that the Thanks of this Meeting be Resolved unanimously, on the motion of Mr. J. Fowle, seconded by Mr. Robt. Curl presented to G. L. Wardle, esq., member of parliament for Oakhampton, for having brought forward in the honourable House of Commons an Enquiry into the Conduct of his Royal Highness the late Commander in Chief, for his firm and unremitting perseverance in establishing the Charges, and for his strenuous endeavours to check the further progress of improper influence and corruption.-That we think it our duty on this occasion to express ourselves firm in our loyalty and attachment to our King and Constitution. Resolved unanimously, That the Thanks of this Meeting be given to the Mayor, for his readiness in calling the Meeting, and his impartiality in the Chair-Ordered that the above Resolutions be inserted in the Courier and Canterbury Papers.→→ By Order of the Meeting.-GEO. GARRETT, Clerk. BURGH OF ANNAN. are respectfully informed, that the Fifth Volume will be delivered on Monday next, the 1st of May. It embraces the period from the Revolution in the year 1688, to the Accession of QUEEN ANNE, in the year 1702. For this period, the materials, as well for the Proceedings as the Debates, have been, for the most part, collected from the following Works: 1. The Journals of the House of Lords; 2. The Journals of the House of Commons; 3. The Debates of the House of Commons, from 1658 to 1694, collected by the Honourable Anchitell Grey, who was forty years member for the town of Derby; 4. The Debate between the Lords and the Commons, at a Free Conference, held in the Painted Chamber, in the Session of the Convention, in 1688, relating to the words, “Ablicated," and "the Vacancy of "the Throne," used in the Vote of the Commons; 5. A Collection of the Debates and Proceedings in Parliament, in 1694 and 1695, upon the Inquiry into the late At a Meeting of the Burgesses and other Briberies and corrupt Practices, printed Inhabitants of the Burgh of Annan, held in the year 1695; 6. Proceedings in the the 11th of April, 1809, for the purpose of House of Commons against Sir John Fen- expressing their sentiments on the late Inwick, printed in the year 1698; 7. Tim-vestigation into the Conduct of his Royal berland's History and Proceedings of the Highness the Duke of York as ComHouse of Lords; and 8. Chandler's His- mander in Chief of the Army of this countory and Proceedings of the House of Com- try; Mr. James Scott, one of the Bailies of mons. Here again, as in former Volumes, the said Burgh, in the Chair: recourse has been had to the best historians and contemporary writers; and, amongst others, to Burnet, Echard, Kennet, Oldmixon, Ralph, Tindal, Boyer, and Somerville. The Hardwicke Papers have also been consulted; as also the State Tracts, and the Harleian Collection.-There is subjoined, by way of Appendix, a Collection of very scarce and valuable Parliamentary Tracts, taken from those of Lord Sommers, the Harleian Miscellany, and the Collection of State Tracts published during the reign of William the Third. PROCEEDINGS In COUNTIES, CITIES, BOROUGHS, &c. relative to the recent INQUIRY in the House of Commons, respecting the Conduct of the DUKE OF YORK. (Continued from p.6.40.) TOWN AND PORT OF SANDWICH. At a General Meeting of the Freemen and Inhabitants of the Town and Port of Sandwich, in the county of Kent, held in the Guildhall in the said Town and Port, on Friday, the 7th day of April, 1809. J. HARRISON, esq. Mayor, in the Chair. 1. Resolved unanimously, That the Thanks of this Meeting be given to G. L. Wardle, esq., M. P. for his able and intrepid exertions, in detecting and draging into public view, the flagrant system of corruption, which for some years has prevailed in the disposal of military promotions. (To be continued.) EAST INDIA COMPANY. The Select Committee, appointed to in- fore them; and their Proceedings, from, Mr. Emperor J. A. Woodford, who sold time to time, to the House, Began their investigation by examining into a Case brought before them by Geo. Woodford Thellusson, esq. a member of this house, in which his patronage and confidence appear to have been grossly abused. The whole Evidence being given at length in the Appendix, your Committee content themselves with inserting in this place, a short abstract only of this, and every other transaction; giving the names of the persons appointed, of those by whom they were recommended, and by whom their nominations were signed, together with the names of the intermediate agents in any of the negotiations where money was paid or received. Those appointments which have been completed in consequence of any such bargains, and upon which satisfactory evidence has been produced, will be placed first; a second class will be found of nominations which appear to have taken effect, but with regard to which, from the death of some of the parties, or from deficiency of proof in other particulars, your Committee are unable to ascertain the names of the persons who were sent out to India. It is a satisfaction to your Committee, throughout the whole evidence, to remark nothing which traces any one of these corrupt or improper bargains to any Director, or induces a reasonable suspicion that it was done with the privity or connivance of any member of that court. Several negotiations which never took effect, will be found alluded to, or detailed in parts of the evidence; which it was thought proper not to reject under the comprehensive directions "that your "Committee should inquire into any agree"ment, negotiation, or bargain, direct or "indirect, for the sale of such nomination;" and when such information was received, they deemed it inexpedient to withhold it from this house, though they are fully aware that their desire of opening every channel of inquiry has led to an extent of examination, and to a mass of evidence, from which much might be retrenched without detriment, if it had been easy to establish a satisfactory principle of omission, or abridgment, which might have left nothing wholly irrelevant or trifling, while it comprehended whatever might be interesting either to this house, or to the East India Company. WRITERS.-Mr. Ed. Js. Smith was nominated a Writer to Bengal in the season 1806-7, by Mr. G. W. Thellusson; the appointment was given to his first cousin, the appointment for 3,500l. through the agency of Mr. Tahourdin, solicitor, who received 100l. out of that sum. The other persons concerned in this negotiation were Mr. Wimbourn and Mr. Laing. Mr. Fry Magniac was nominated Writer to Bengal in the year 1807-8, by Mr. G. W. Thellusson; this appointment was also given to the same Mr. Woodford, and sold through the agency of Mr. Tahourdin. Mr. Beale was the purchaser, and the sum paid by him was 3,500 guineas, of which Mr. Woodford received 3,000l. Mr. Tahourdin 150l.; the remainder was divided between Mr. Donovan and Mr. Garrat. Mr. Henry Gardiner was nominated a Writer to Madras by Mr. G. W. Thellusson, in the season 1807-8. This appointment was likewise given to Mr. Woodford, and 3,000l. was received for it from Mrs. Gardiner, by Mr. Tahourdin for his own use, but upon an undertaking that he is to procure the next presentation of a living of the value of 300l. per annum for a friend of Mr. Woodford's. Mr. Boase, a partner in the house of Messrs. Ransom and Co. was privy to the bargain between Mr. Tahourdin and Mrs. Gardiner. Mr. Greenslade received an appointment for Ceylon in the way of exchange for this writership, which is the occasion of his name appearing in the transaction. CADETS. Mr. Henry Stoughton was appointed a Cadet to Madras, Jan. 1808, by George Abercrombie Robinson, esq. by the recommendation of Mr. Morland, who gave the appointment to Mr. Jones for a relation of his. Mr. Jones, through the agency of John Annesley Shee, sold it to Mr. Stoughton, father to the person appointed, from whom Shee received 500 guineas he paid 180l. to Mr. Jones, and received of him an undertaking to pay 3201. upon his procuring for Mr. Jones a Woolwich Cadetship. This appointment has been vacated by the Court of Directors, in consequence of their having discovered the means through which it was obtained. Mr. Thomas Kelly was appointed a Cadet to Bombay in April 1808, by sir Theophilus Metcalfe, bart. at the recommendation of Mrs. Scott. It was afterwards exchanged with Mr. Cotton, at his request, for a Madras Cadetship. Wm. Scott, tailor, the husband of Mrs. Scott, sold this appointment to Mr. Kelly, through the agency of David Brown, who received for it 150l.: Brown was paid 301. or 401. and a Mr. Southcomb, who introduced some of the parties to each other, received 10 guineas. Mr. George Barker was appointed Cadet for the Bengal Infantry in Dec. 1808, by Robert Thornton, esq. at the recommendation of Mr. Mee. Mr. Mee sold this appointment for 200 guineas, through the agency of John Annesley Shee, who received 601. Mr. George Teulon was appointed to an Infantry Cadetship to Bengal in 1808, by Edward Parry, esq. in exchange for a Madras appointment given to capt. Sealy by Jacob Bosanquet, esq. Capt. Matthew sold this appointment for 120l. to captain Holmes for a friend of his; Annesley M Kercher Shee was employed as agent for captain Matthew, who paid him 301. and capt. Holmes paid him 10.. Mr. J. S. Williams was appointed to a Bengal Cadetship by Mr. Cotton in 1808, in exchange for a Madras Cadetship of Mr. Manship's. This appointment was procured by Mr. Abercrombie, who was assisted with the loan of a sum of money by capt. Williams, the Cadet's father. Mrs. Ehz. Morrison and A. MK. Shee were the agents employed. Mr. Benj. Pratt was appointed a Cadet to Madras 7th Feb. 1800, by Sweney Toove, esq. at the recommendation of capt. hard Smith, who exchanged it with C. Plowden, esq. for a nomination of the next season. Mr. B. Pratt was recommended to Mr. Plowden by sir Nicholas Nugent. Tisappointment was purchased by Mr. H. Foster, through sir Nich. Nugent, for the sum of 150%. A. MK. Shee acud as agent for Mr. Foster, and received 30l. or 404. The original appointment was to Bengal, and it was exchanged for Madras. Mr. John Power was appointed a Cadet to Madras in 1804 or 1805 by lord viscount Castlereagh, at the recommendation of lord Longueville, through the earl of Westmoreland. Mr. Power paid 2001. for this appointment to M. S. Salt. A. M'K. Shee was the agent for both parties, and received 50/. from Mr. Power. Mr. Brathwaite Christie was appointed a Cadet to Madras 15th July 1807, by James Reid, esq. at the recoinmendation of h. r. h. the d. of Clarence. Mr. Page, navy agent in Great Russell-street, paid the sum of 2001. for this appointment to A. M'K. Shee, who paid 150%. to the rev. Mr. Lloyd, chaplain to h. r. h. the d. of Clarence, for procuring the same. Mr. Thomas Maw was appointed a Cadet to Bengal in July 1807, by Robert Thornton, esq. at the recommendation of the rev. Nicholas Corsellis for Miss Eliz. Spinluff. Miss Spinluff sold this appointment to Mr. Hewitt, a relation of Mr. Maw, through the agency of Mrs. Morrison and A. M'K. Shee, and received 701. for it. Mrs. Morrison thinks the sum paid was 150l. or 180l. A. M.K. Shee received 30l. Mr. Arthur Denny was appointed a Cadet to Madras on the 18th Feb. 1806, by G. W. Thellusson, esq. at the recommendation of the countess dowager of Westinoreland and Mr. George. This appointment was sold by Mr. George. Mr. Anth. Stoughton, uncle of the person appointed, paid to J. A. Shee, whom he employed to procure it, the sum of 250 guineas. David Brown was agent for Mr. George. Mr. Henry Keating was appointed a Cadet to Madras on the 5th of June 1805, by John Manship, esq. at the recommendation of G. W. Thellusson, esq. in return for a Bombay nomination of the season of 1804 given to Mr. Manship. The uncle of Mr. Henry Keating purchased this appointment of Mr. J.Henderson, ship-broker, for 2501. or guineas. J. A. Shee received of Mr. Henderson about 451. for his agency. Mr. George Boys was appointed a Cadet to Madras on the 26th March 1806 (of the season 1805) by Charles Mills, esq. at the recommendation of Mr. (now sir W.) Fraser. This appointment was given by sir W. Fraser to Mr. Tho. Cusac, who sold it to Messrs. Barber & Sons, Cowper'scourt, Cornhill, and received of them the sum of 150l. They were employed as agents for Mr. Boys's father, who paid for it the sum of 300 guineas. 100l. was divided between Mr. Barber and Mr. John Henderson. J. A. Shee was agent for Mr. Cusac. Mr. W. Collett was appointed a Cadet for the Bombay Infantry by the India Board, on the 3d of July 1805. This appointment was in the nomination of lord Castlereagh, who, at the recommendation. of the right hon. John Sulivan, gave it to Richard Codman Etches, for a relation of his, on account of services performed by Mr. Etches for the government. Mr. Etches sold it to Mr. Chaplin, an attorney, for the sum of 2501. J. A. Shee was agent for Mr. Pasmore, an attorney, who received the money for Mr. Etches. Mr. John Manson was appointed Cadet for Bengal the 26th Feb. 1808, by the India Board, at the recommendation of Edw. Cooke, esq. Mr. C. Etches procured this appointment through Mr. Cooke, for a relation of his, on account of services performed by Mr. Etches for the government. Thomas Watson was employed as agent to sell the same, as mentioned in the next appointment. Mr. Robert Manson was appointed Cadet for Bengal, Feb. 1808, by G. W. Thellusson, esq. at the recommendation of Mr. Herbert. Tho. Watson sold this appointment, and received the sum of 500 guineas of Messrs. Anderson, of PhilpotJane, for this and Mr. John Manson's appointment, who purchased the two for a friend of theirs for his two nephews. A. MK. Shee received 351. of Watson; and lady Leigh received from Watson about 2001. for the latter appointment. Mr. Thomas Casey was appointed a Cadet by W. Devaynes, esq. on the 9th July 1800, at the recommendation of Mr. Herbert, now abroad as purser of the Euphrates extra ship. Mr. Herbert sold this appointment to Messrs. Henry Houghton & Co. of King's Arms Yard, correspondents of Mr. Casey's relations, who lived in Ireland, for the sum of 250 guineas; Mr. John Henderson was agent for Mr. Herbert, and received 50 guineas. Mr. Thomas Locke was appointed a Cadet for Madras on the 3d Feb. 1807, by John Bebb, esq. at the recommendation of James Pattison, esq. in exchange for one of Mr. Pattison's Bombay nominations. This appointment was purchased by the rev. Dr. Locke of Farnham, for his nephew, of Thomas Watson, who sold it for lady Lumm, and paid her 2001. Mr. Samuel Lewis was appointed a Cadet in 1800, by Sweney Toone, esq. at the recommendation of Mr. Evans. This appointment was passed from Mr. Evans to Mr. Sanderson: A. MK. Shee seems to have procured it of Mr. Wright, and received 300 guineas from the Cadet's father. Mr. Sam. Lewis being a Mulatto, and thereby disqualified, procured a young man of the name of Phillips to personate himself and pass the prevsous examinations, for which he paid him 20 guineas. A Cadetship for Madras appears to have been purchased for a person of the name of Brown, in 1804 or 1805, which was sold by Mr. Herbert for 250 guineas; but your Committee could receive no satisfactory information by whom the party was nominated, nor his Christian name. Henderson and Shee were employed as agents, and received part of the above sum. A Cadetship in the nomination of J. Manship, esq. given by him to Mrs. Welch, appears to have been sold; but the parties to that transaction, who have been examined, state, that they are unable to recollect the name of the person appointed. The name of Mrs. Welch does not appear as recommending to any of Mr. Manship's Cadetships in 1805 or 6. Another, in the nomination of sir Lionel Darell, appears to have been given to and sold by the rev. Thomas Lloyd ;· but Mr. Lloyd's name does not appear as recommending any of the Cadets nominated by sir L. Darell in 1801 and the following year. nominations of this description have been It appears in evidence, that some other purchased but Committee have not your been able to discover and bring before them some of the persons who appear to have been parties to these transactions; particularly sir Nich. Nugent, Mr. W. Lewen Tugwell Robins, Mr. Jos. Home, cap. Matthew and cap. Holmes. A further examination into some other bargains, is precluded by the death of lady Lumm, lady Leigh, and cap. Sealy. The attention both of the Legislature and of the East India Company has been attracted at various periods to Abuses, which were supposed to exist in the dispo sal of their Patronage; in consequence of which, at the time when their charter was renewed, an oath was framed, to be taken by each Director within ten days after his election, containing, among other engage ments, the following: "I do swear, That I will not directly nor indirectly accept or take any perquisite, emolument, fee, present or reward, upon any account whatsoever, or any promise or engagement for any perquisite, emolument, fee, present or reward whatsoever, for or in respect of the appointment or nomination of any person or persons to any place or office in the gift or appointment of the said Company, or of me as a Director thereof, or for or on account of stationing or appointing the voyage or voyages of any ship or ships in the said Company's employ, or for or on account of or any ways relating to any other business or affairs of the said Company.' 33 Geo. 3. c. 52. s. 160.—In the By-laws of the East India Company, c. 6. sect. 5. a penalty is imposed upon every Director taking any reward on account of any appointment, in double the amount of such reward, two-thirds of which to the Company and one-third to the Informer; and such Director is rendered ipso facto incapable of holding any place whatever under the Company.-The form of Declaration on every writer's Petition, is, "I recommended this Petition, and do most solemnly declare that I have given this nomination to and that I neither have received myself, nor am to receive, nor has any other person, to the best of my knowledge or be lief, received, nor is to receive, any pecuniary consideration, nor any thing convertible in any mode into a pecuniary benefit on this account." The form of Certificate required to be signed by the nearest of kin to each Cadet, contains the following declaration : “I do further declare, that I received the said appointment for my son gratuitously, and that no money or other valuable consideration has been or is to be paid, either directly or indirectly, for the same; and that I will not pay or cause to be paid, either by myself, by my son, or by the hands of any other person, any pecuniary or valuable consideration whatsoever, to any person or persons who have interested themselves in procuring the said nomination for my son from the Director above-mentioned." "The printed preparatory Instructions, which are circulated by the East India Company for the use of those who may be nominated Cadets, begin with the following Resolution: "That any person who shall in future be nominated to a situation, either civil or military, in the service of this Company, and who shall have obtained such nomination either directly or indirectly by purchase, or agreement to purchase through the medium of an agent or other person, shall be rejected; and the person so nominated shall be rendered incapable of holding any situation whatsoever in the Company's service: and in the event of any person having obtained an appointment in the manner before stated, and proceeded to India previous to its being discovered, such person shall be dismissed the Company's service and ordered back to England, and shall also be rendered incapable of holding any situation whatsoever in the Company's service." It is to be observed, that abuses in the disposal of Cadetships are better guarded against than in that of Writerships, since the present form of Certificate has been applied to them; for in the Writerships the Director himself only declares, that to the best of his knowledge or belief no pecuniary consideration has been or is to be received; but with regard to every Cadet, the parent or next of kin makes a similar declaration for himself. The cases which are exhibited in this report demonstrate that such declarations are not of sufficient force to prevent a very extensive traffic in those nominations, which are apparently the best secured by a positive denial of all undue practices. An enquiry was set on foot by the Court of Directors in 1798 upon the allegation and suspicion of abuses in the nominations of Writers; the origin, progress and failure of which it may be proper to give in some detail. 25 Åpril 1798: A Committee of the Directors was appointed to investigate into the truth of the alleged practice of the sale of Patronage, and to consider of such means as may appear likely to prevent the same in future, if such practices have occurred. 9th July: Each Director's nomination of Writers was laid before the Committee, who resolved that each Member of the Committee should state in writing the names of the parties to whom he has given the nomination, together with the reasons which induced him to give the same: and that the several parties who have received such nominations for their sons, &c. be required to produce satisfactory information. to the Committee upon oath, or in such manner as the Committee shall deem most expedient, that neither they nor any person on their account, or with their pri vity or knowledge, have given or promised to give any consideration on account of such nomination, either to the Director from whom they obtained the same, or to any person on his behalf: and it was agreed to recommend to the Court to direct each individual Member of the Court to do the same. 1st August 1798: The Court approved this Report; and (15th August) each Director in office, as well as those out of by rotation (except Mr. De vaynes) gave explanations in writing.28th Feb. 1799 It was resolved, That every appointment made. in consequence of corrupt practices be null and void, unless the parties to whom the appointment is given shall, upon examination before the Committee, make a fair and candid disclosure of all the circumstances attending the same. It was likewise resolved, that each Director should in future, on the Petition of the Writer whom he nominates, "de"clare upon his honour to whom he has 66 given the appointment, and that he nei"ther has received himself, nor is he to "reccive, nor has any other person to the |