of the House, he moved that General Clavering had prevaricated in his evidence. General Montague Matthew called upon Mr Wynn not to press a motion which went to affect the honour and feelings of a gallant and deserving officer. He had listened attentively to the evidence, and could not say there was any prevarication. Sir Matthew White Ridley also defended the general. Mr Perceval said, he was not zealous to cover him; but though there existed contradictions between his letters and his verbal testimony, he still did not think it could be proved that he had prevaricated. Mr Yorke observed, that General Clavering had come to the bar to explain his former evidence: it was not therefore a trifling variation that was to be considered prevarication. He thought it would be better to put off the consideration of such points, except in cases of gross and wilful falsehood, till the inquiry was concluded. The day of reckoning would come, when the House ought to take up the consideration of the various acts of corruption, imposition, and swindling which had come out in the progress of this business. Sir T. Turton also, and the secretary at war spoke in favour of the general. Upon this Mr Wynn exposed in a perspicuous manner the contradictions involved in General Clavering's testimony, and warned the committee what the public would think, if they saw that delinquents of a higher rank were suffered to escape, while men in humbler life were punished for the same offence. Mr Wilberforce reasoned to the same effect, but advised Mr Wynn to adjourn the discussion. This Mr Perceval advised also, till the inquiry was concluded; and Mr Wynn, yielding to that ad vice, withdrew his motion for the present. On the last evening of the inquiry, Miss Taylor Feb. 22. solicitor-general asked her if her fawas again called in. The ther did not go by the name of Chance. Mr W. Smith objected to this mode of examination, the fact being of little consequence; and Mr Whitbread, observing that the present questions pressed upon the witness were very severe, maintained that any temporary change in her father's name, arising from embarrassment, fect her credit. The question, howor other circumstances, could not afed, that she had never heard him callever, was insisted on, and she answered by any other name than Taylor.But, said Mr Cavendish Bradshaw, might he not, to avoid his creditors, have taken the name of Chance, or any other name, without your knowledge?-Then how should I know it, she replied.-Mr Perceval now took up the examination. alive?-He is. Has your mother Is your father been in custody for debt within a short time?-I cannot answer that. Do not you know that your mo And here he expressed his regret that ther has been in execution for debt? her feelings, for she burst into tears, he should be thus compelled to hurt and replied, My mother has nothing to do with the present subject.-The question, however, was repeated, and she was informed that she must anI must appeal to the indulgence of swer it. Still she hesitated, saying, The chairman said, it was his duty to the chairman: I cannot answer it. call upon her for an answer; and up. know that your mother is in custody on its being again asked, Do you for debt? she acknowledged, in tears, that it was so. How long? She replied, still weeping, nearly two years. Then she was directed to withdraw, and Mr Perceval said, the gentlemen on the opposite side of the House, when ready to condemn his mode of examination, appeared to forget that this witness had represented herself, on a former night, as the legitimate daughter of married parents; though it was now proved, by the imprison ment of her mother, that her parents were never married. Mr W. Smith replied, he did condemn his mode of examination. First, it had been attempted to cast imputations upon the character of the witness herself, and when that had failed, her veracity was to be questioned, because she had the misfortune to be the offspring of an illicit connection. In his opinion, her delicacy in endeavouring to conceal that circumstance, instead of weakening, strengthened her yet unshaken claims to credit. The same opinion was maintained by Mr Whitbread. The question for the decision of the committee was not, he said, whether Miss Taylor's birth was respectable, but whether her testimony was creditable. Besides, he believed the chancellor of the exchequer had assumed more than the evidence would justify, when he asserted that she had represented herself as the daughter of married parents. Her former evidence was then read, and it was found that she had made no such statement. She had been asked, what are your parents, and her answer was, my father was a gentle man; an answer which Sir John Sebright declared, impressed him at the time with an opinion that she was an illegitimate child. Mr Barham cried out against this attempt to discredit a correct witness, not upon her own testimony, but upon the errors of her parents; and Mr Williams Wynn said, it was not to be endured, if, because her explanation was not made at once, without regard to decorum or natural feeling, that therefore a suspicion was to be cast upon her veracity. The feeling of the House and of the country were most decidedly with Mr Wynn upon this subject; and the prejudice which prevailed against the duke was materially heightened by the indignation which was felt against the means that had been used to defend him. Before the committee concluded its inquiry, Mr Yorke questioned the general officers in the House as to the improvements which the Duke of York had made in the army. General Chapple Norton affirmed, that he had done more service to the army than all his predecessors, the commanders-in-chief. He was the instrument, through that House, of giving bread to the soldier, when he had little or nothing to eat. He first got an allowance of bread to the soldiers, and afterwards of beer, and then their pay increased, upon which they are very comfortable. Before that time they had a very scanty pittance to subsist on in this country; so scanty, indeed, that when the 33d regiment was about to return home from a fo reign station, and the commanding officer, according to the articles of war, made known to the men, that any one who wished to remain behind upon that station was at liberty to do so; the men informed him that it was their intention all to remain behind, and continue abroad, because where they were they had sufficient to eat, and if they came to England, they should not have a dinner. This evil his royal highness had remedied. The York hospital also had been instituted in the duke's time, and, he took it for granted, very much by his means; and men, when they were discharged now, were not left to perish. Mr Yorke asked, whether, in his opinion, the discipline of the army was improved since his royal highness took the command? General Norton answered, I am one of those, unfortunately, who think there was a very good system of discipline in the army before his royal highness came to the head of it. Not satisfied with this, Mr Yorke asked if the state of the army was not improved since Lord Amherst's time; but the general replied, there was a very good system then, or our regiments would not have gained the advantages which they did. General Fitzpatrick, however, declared, that the army had derived very great improvement, in every respect, from his royal highness's management. Sir James Pulteney was certain that its discipline in the field had improved to a very great degree. He recollected when it was a matter of difficulty to place five or six regiments upon the ground, so as to be enabled to act a gainst an enemy: that operation was now performed with as much ease as that of placing a company. When five or six regiments were so placed, it was once a matter of great difficulty to make them move in an uniform line: this, also, was now done with the utmost precision and facility. Unquestionably he thought the discipline of the army, and their power of action, had been very considerably improved by the system of the Duke of York, and to that system great part of our military glory was owing. Sir Arthur Wellesley's testimony was more full and comprehensive. "I can say, from my own knowledge," he said, "as having been a lieutenant-colonel in the army when his royal highness was appointed to command it, and having a very intimate knowledge of it since, that it is materially improved in every respect; that the discipline of the soldiers is improved; that owing to the establishments formed under the directions of his royal highness, the officers are improved in knowledge; that the staff of the army is much better, and much more complete than it was; that the cavalry is improved; that the officers of cavalry are better than they were; that the army is more complete in officers; that the system of subordi nation among the officers is better than it was; and that the whole system of the management of the clothing, the interior economy of the regiments, and every thing that relates to the military discipline of the soldier, and the military efficiency of the army, has been greatly improved since his royal highness was appointed commander-in-chief." "Do you," said Mr Yorke, " consider the improvements you have specified to be owing to the personal superintendance and personal exertions of his royal highness?" Sir Arthur replied, "the improvements to which I have adverted have been owing to the regulations of his royal highness, and to his personal superintendance, and his personal exertions over the general officers and others who were to see those regulations carried into execution." General Grosvenor rose last, to testify his high sense of the advantages the army had deri ved from the zeal, attention, and care of his royal highness; and this evidence in favour of the duke's general merit as commander-in-chief having been entered in the minutes of the investiga- Feb. 22. tion, the committee concluded their sittings. CHAP. VII. Duke of York's Letter to the Speaker. Mr Williams Wynn's Motion against General Clavering. Debates upon the Evidence. Motions of Colonel Wardle, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr Bragge Bathurst, Mr Bankes, and Sir Thomas Turton. Final Acquittal and Resignation of the Duke. WHEN the House assemFeb. 23. bled on the following evening, the Speaker received a letter in these words from the Duke of York: “SIR,-I have waited with the greatest anxiety until the committee appointed by the House of Commons to inquire into my conduct as commander-in-chief of his Majesty's army had closed its examinations, and I now hope that it will not be deemed improper to address this letter through you to the House of Commons. "I observe, with the deepest concern, that, in the course of this inquiry, my name has been coupled with transactions the most criminal and disgraceful; and I must ever regret and lament that a connexion should ever have existed which has thus exposed my character and honour to public animadversion. "With respect to any alleged offences connected with the discharge of my official duties, I do, in the most solemn manner, upon my honour as a prince, distinctly assert my innocence, not only by denying all cor rupt participation in any of the infamous transactions which have appeared in evidence at the bar of the House of Commons, or any connivance at their existence, but also the slightest knowledge or suspicion that they existed at all. "My consciousness of innocence leads me confidently to hope that the House of Commons will not, upon such evidence as they have heard, adopt any proceeding prejudicial to my honour and character; but if, upon such testimony as has been adduced against me, the House of Commons can think my innocence questionable, I claim of their justice that I shall not be condemned without trial, or be deprived of the benefit and protection which is afforded to every British subject, by those sanctions under which alone evidence is received in the ordinary administration of the law," When the Speaker had read this to the House, he suggested, that, instead of the usual course of ordering the letter to lie on the table, it should immediately be copied inte the votes and journals, that no delay might occur in placing it in the possession of every individual member. On the following evening, Mr Whitbread said, that "though he had not objected to the order that this letter should lie on the table, a few minutes reflection had convinced him that the true mode of proceeding would have been to have adjourned the debate. The letter in question affected the privileges of that House more deeply than any thing which had ever occurred since he had the honour of a seat in it. It struck at the privileges of the Commons, by stating, that they had examined evidence which they ought not to have done. His royal highness was as competent to have written to the House in the first instance, that it ought not to institute and carry on any inquiry on such evidence as would be produced before it. If it was the intention of any one of those who had advised his royal highness to write this letter hereafter to make any motion on the subject, the House would then be enabled to judge what line of conduct ought to be adopted respecting it. Till he received some answer on that head, he should content himself with repeating, that he deemed the letter to be a gross violation of the privileges of the House." Mr Perceval replied, "all he understood by the letter was this:-his royal highness supposing himself to be attacked in such a manner as to make it necessary to go into an inquiry, in order that the whole truth might be elicited in the most open mode, and finding that the evidence was closed, intended to lay before the House an allegation of his innocence; and if the House should, after that allegation, be inclined to doubt his innocence, he stated, that he hoped the House would not enter upon any proceeding which might have the effect of condemning him before he could have a trial, in which he would have the advantage of evidence under all the sanction and solemnity of the law. His royal highness, he was certain, had not the smallest intention to attack the privileges of the House; and how the letter could be thought an attack upon them, he could not conceive. For his own part, he had no intention of moving any thing on the subject, nor did he understand that any one else had. The letter was now become a document on the table, and, like any other paper or petition which was ordered to lie there, might be referred to by every member of the House; and any individual who referred to it might make what remarks he pleased, or adopt any proceedings relative to it which he thought necessary." Lord Henry Petty then observed, that "the letter was not objected to as containing an allegation of innocence, but as going beyond that allegation. It was subject to the obvious mean. ing, that no declaration could be come to by the House on the evidence laid before it, but such as would carry it out of the province of the House; and that the House ought not to determine on the evidence laid before it, which was the only evi dence that it could receive." A few days afterwards, Mr Feb. 28. Williams Wynn, premising that this was a business upon which the opinion of Parliament ought to be taken, gave notice of his intention to move a resolution, " that it was consistent with the duty and privi. leges of that House to come to a determination on evidence examined at that bar, without submitting the case to any other tribunal. |