Major Shaw's favour, or for complying with his other request, when it was to secure Mrs. Clarke so large an annuity. Consider also the extreme absurdity of a suppo sition that the Commander-in-chief should be weak enough to reduce Major Shaw to half pay, contrary to the rule of the service, by way of punishment for not paying the whole of his promised bribe, when by so doing he could not fail to exasperate that gentleman, and hazard his resenting it by exposing such baseness to the public eye, In my view of every part of this charge, whatever corrupt motives may have existed in others, no man alive was a greater stranger to them than the Commander-in-chief.

The only remaining charge is that of Samuel Carter: and I confess it to have been my hope that the honourable member would have yielded upon this point to the entreaties even of Mrs. Clarke. If he had, he would not have been endeavouring to prop a falling case by adduc. ing an instance highly honourable in my mind to the Duke of York, and one that I should think could not be pressed into the service by any person of sentiment or feeling. Was the condition of this unfortunate orphan that of a mere outcast of society? Or was he not the real or adopted son of a meritorious officer who had lost a limb in his majesty's service? When and by whom was he first recommended? Was it by Mrs. Clarke, or through any other corrupt influence? No, Sir; it was by the same gallant officer, Captain Sutton of the artillery, and in the year 1801; long before the connexion between Mrs. Clarke and the Duke of York. The application was not only made, but he was actually then noted for consideration on a proper opportunity. It is urged, however, that the commission must have been given in consequence of Mrs. Clarke's subsequent recommendation. Why so? Why should a promise once made require to be followed up by another recommendation? Why is it not enough that the party himself, who certainly had the opportunity, might avail himself of it to remind his Royal Highness of his original promise? But his servitude is objected. It is true that, being a boy, he went once or twice behind the carriage when the footman was out of the way; bat whether by night or by day is not ascertained. He also assisted the servants in some of the menial occupations. If this was permitted by Mrs. Clarke, I cannot commend her; but how does it appear that any thing of this sort

was known to the Duke of York, who was not likely to see him, except waiting at dinner, where no servant in livery made his appearance: and we know, that pages and others of superior rank wait upon princes of the blood, and I believe that some claim it even as a privilege. He wore no livery, he received no wages, and what was bis principal occupation? It was going to school. It was. proved in truth that, prior to this, Captain Sutton had. himself bestowed much pains on his education; and let me appeal to his letters on the table, whether he appears to have been bred up as a servant, or whether they do not bear the genuine marks of a person educated to higher hopes and expectations? When the Duke saw the appearance of this youth, that he wanted neither education nor merit, and was worthy his protection, why was he not to be placed in the army? And I am not afraid to ask gen-, tlemen, of that honourable profession, whether many a one of less apparent worth has not been received into the service, and has not afterwards ranked among its greatest ornaments? God forbid that this House should so far forget its duty as to censure the appointment of such a person to a commission in the army, or that it should carry an address to the throne against the Duke of York for an act proceeding from the purest motives, the dictates of humanity.

I beg pardon for having been longer than I intended upon these charges: but to dismiss them, and to pass by cases which do not seem to lie within the proper limits of our inquiry, I resort now to a few observations arising out of the probabilities of the case in general.

Notwithstanding the want of a scintilla of evidence against the Duke of York, yet it is presumed that he was conusant of the corrupt proceedings, because by such alone Mrs. Clarke could have been enabled to carry on her expensive establishment. But surely it must be well known to many that persons of high birth, and not in the habits of comparing income with expenditure, find it mest difficult to render the one conformable to the other, or indeed to form any judgment upon these matters. It happens in fact that I remember to have been told near 40 years ago, by one of the preceptors of the Duke of York and his royal brother, that though they were quick at learning, though it was easy to teach them Latin, or Greek, or arithmetic, they could not teach them the value of

money. So impossible is it to inculcate this knowledge without the daily and ordinary means of practical expe rience. Besides this, undoubtedly very large sums were supplied by the Duke of York; upwards of 50007. in notes and in payments to tradesmen for wine, furniture, and a variety of articles, to the amount in the whole of between 16 and 17,000!. and all within the space of little more than two years, Consider likewise the extent of Mrs. Clarke's debts. If you once suppose the existence of the conspiracy, and that the Duke was a party to it, how is it probable that there should have been any distress for money, when there was a mill for making it constantly at work? There, were then in the army as many as 10, or 11,000 officers. Numerous changes were going on every day in the year; and such is always the eagerness for promotion, that there never could exist a deficiency of persons ready to give ample premiums above the regulated price. Where then would have been the difficulty, through the management of such a woman as Mrs. Clarke, with her subordinate agents, to gratify her vanity and extravagance to the utmost, and to relieve her from the pressure of her pecuniary embarrassments?

Another presumption in favour of the Duke fairly arises out of the manner in which he entered into the investigation of Mrs. Clarke's conduct. For this purpose he employed Mr. Lowten, a gentleman of well known character for professional abilities: and though the result of his inquiry seems to have related only to credit which Mrs. Clarke had obtained from tradesmen by an improper use of the Duke's name, yet can it be supposed that if the Duke was really conscious of any foul practices which might naturally come to light in the course of this investigation, he would not have stifled the inquiry at the outset, rather than commit it to a person of so much acuteness and assiduity, and expose himself thereby to immediate detection. Above all, if so conscious, would he have ventured to discard Mrs. Clarke, to withdraw ber annuity, to irritate her to the utmost, and to set all her threats at defiance?

It is another, and an obvious ground of presumption, that if the Commander-in-chief had been any way disposed to corrupt practices, he would himself have been surrounded by corrupt agents: but had he not, on the contrary, fenced himself round as it were against the acts of

designing men by such characters as General Brownrigg, Colonel Lorraine, and the rest of his staff, too well known to need enumeration? Let gentlemen reflect upon the high honour and integrity of Colonel Gordon, and the intimate confidence reposed in him by his Royal Highness, and let mé entreat them to remark the particular time when this gentleman, the avowed enemy of army-brokers, was ap pointed his secretary, and chosen, I may say, to be his bosom friend and the observer of all his actions. It was in the middle of the year 1804, shortly after the very pe riod at which the Duke is charged with having com menced his nefarious traffic. Let me ask then whether this is reconcileable to any principle of human conduct? And whether if the Duke's views had been dishonourable, or had required concealment, he would ever have selected such an adviser, or would, particularly at that moment, have placed this upright and watchful guard so near his person?

I fear that I have omitted several points, but my endeavour has been to investigate this case without favour or affection, exactly as I would have done that of the meanest individual brought before me in my own court. It may perhaps be imputed to me that I have some wish to conciliate the favour of the crown against such im putations I can only say that if gentlemen will consider my years, and my peculiar circumstances, I believe they will find very few who have so little to hope, and so little to fear on this side of the grave. It is indeed beyond it that I have been looking. It is to that tribunal before which we must all account for our actions here; and with that awful scene in contemplation, I am prepared to pro nounce my sincere opinion, that there is no ground for any of the charges.

Allow me to add a very few words upon the address which has been just moved. It appears to me to be cruel. and unjust, and inconsistent with the dignity of parlia ment. The address states (if I caught it correctly) that many corrupt practices have been proved, but without ascribing to the Duke of York, positively and with certainty, any participation in these practices, or any know ledge of them; yet the deduction it seems to draw is, that he ought to be removed from his office and still the House seems to decide nothing, but rather to leave it to the consideration of his majesty. Now it appears to me

to be cruel and unjust, forasmuch as it leaves the person accused in needless suspense; and, besides being unsupported by the evidence, it does not even profess to ascertain the nature, or, the degree of guilt imputable to him; nor if a majority should agree to the address, how many may do so for one reason, and how many for another, quite different, and nearly the reverse. In my mind it is also inconsistent with the dignity of parliament, because it throws upon his majesty the hard task of deciding for himself what ought to be done, instead of pursuing the inquiry to its proper determination: and it thereby acknowledges that this House is either unable or unwilling to fulfil one of its most important duties. Disapproving, however, of this address as much as I do, I am by no means inclined to assert that the immoral connexion, which has led to so many unhappy consequences, ought to pass wholly unnoticed: on the contrary, the occasion seems to require some expression of regret that the Commander-in-chief should have deviated so widely from those habits of domestic virtue, of which his royal parent has furnished, to the blessing of this country, so bright an example.

Mr. Curwen moved, that the question might be read, which being done, he said it appeared, that it was sug gested the Duke of York was privy to the transactions. He then proceeded to observe, that the honourable and learned gentleman who had just sat down, had thought it necessary, both at the beginning and conclusion of his ar gument, to make professions of the purity of his motives. For his own part, he should make no professions of the kind, but leave his conduct to answer for itself. This question was, in his opinion, one of the highest importance that had ever been submitted to the consideration of the House. In speaking of and investigating the characters of the ministers of the day, every gentleman found it an easy matter to form his opinion, and to express his sentiments; but in the question now before them it was very different, and required them to be much more explicit in their reasons. In the present case, it did not seem to him to be necessary to prove that the money went directly into the pockets of his Royal Highness. It was sufficient that he was at all privy to the transactions which gave occasion to this corruption. If he would be so imprudent as to commit himself to the guidance or incite