Page images
PDF
EPUB

address of congratulation and condolement was to be presented(a loud laugh.) Gentlemen might laugh, and he knew well with what suspicion every thing which came from one of his country was received, but here he would -contend he was right; the address was one of congratu lation that the Duke was not guilty of corruption, and of condolement, that any cause whatever should have given speciousness to such a charge (Hear, hear!) He would vote for the resolutions also, because the House might give its opinion on them serialim--they might know what road they were taking, and select a proper carriage; surely, it would be very preposterous for a party who had agreed to go to Greenwich by water, to take a coach for their Conveyance-(a laugh;) and yet such was the absurdity to which the amendment reduced, members. It went to attach guilt, and yet could not tell why. The number of questions now before the House were simplified by the resolutions, and so perplexed and multifarious were, the questions, that he would not be surprized if they confounded even the characteristic acuteness of the learned member who filled the chair. The only question now was, whether they would vote for the resolutions or the address, and he would adopt the resolutions, if it was only to avoid confusion-if they were to die, he, like Ajax, would exclaim, " let us die in the light." The adoption of the address, instead of the resolutions, would go to demolish all the land-marks by which their opinion was to be guided. Let the country look to their decision; he would not be ashamed or afraid that they should view his ; they should see in him no ambiguity, no compromise; and when he returned to his constituents, he should not shrink from their criticism on his parliame tary conduct. He would then vote on each of the resolutions, one by one; first, was the Duke of York corrupt, or not?. Next, did he connive, or not? Next, should he be dismissed, or not. [Hear, hear, hear!] Thus the country would have, a clear list made out for them-the red and the black-the patriot and the courtier-liable to no obscu rity, no misrepresentation. This was the plain and proper method, to stand in open sunshine before the coun Iry, and not cast a mist before the eyes of their constituents to delude them..

Sir E. Burdett thought it necessary to advert to part of

the honourable member's speech in which he stated, on the anthority of Donovan's evidence, that Mrs. Clarke had inade mention of his name as that of one of the persons disposed to purchase the papers she was in possession of: relating to the Duke of York. Ile assured the House that no such proposal was ever made by him.

Mr. H. Martin was surprized to hear from the honourable gentleman, that the evidence before the House was not of that nature to sanction the address. Parliament, he maintained, was not to be bound by the rules received in courts of law. On this, as well as on every such occasion, he wished that they should adhere to the rules of their ancestors. How could the address or the amend ment of the honourable gentleman below him be described as a sentence of condemnation. It was the high privilege of that House to take cognizance at all times of the conduct of great public officers; and if any one doubted the fact, he would refer him to periods when the principles of the constitution were at least as well understood as they were at this day. This was the case upon the celebrated examination relating to the partition treaty, when documents and evidence were heard at the bar, and the House voted an address to his Majesty to remove Lord Somers, and two other Lords from his presence and councils. The House did what was their duty in censuring public functionaries, who had disgraced themselves. They went further, and voted an impeachment. [Hear, hear! from the ministerial benches. A learned gentleman had stated, that they might as well stab the Duke of York to the heart, as pass a vote to remove his Royal Highness from the command of the army. But what was there to distinguish the case of the Duke from that of any other person convicted of similar misconduct? Had Lord Somers no feelings upon that occasion? Was not that great man entitled to as much deference and indulgence as his Royal Ilighness? He recognized no distinction between the Duke of York and any other subject whose conduct might fall under their investigation. It was not only the right but the bounden duty of the House to act as they had done. They were not to sacrifice their privileges out of respect for this or that person. But it was said, if the. Duke of York be guilty, why not impeach him at once? . Where the punishment was commensurable to the offence

(though he could not consider it in this instance as a pu nishment, but a precaution), he did not think it necessary to have recourse to the severer punishment. With respect to the inconsistencies imputed to Mrs. Clarke, in her evidence, he could discover no greater improbabilities in her statement, respecting the Duke of York than what her letters proved. It was upon her testimony, corroborated by that of two other persons, that induced him to give the vote he should. These two persons were Miss Taylor and Mr. Dowler. The evidence of the former was so unimpeachable, that he should not take up the time of the House in making any comments on it. The evidence of Dowler also appeared to him to be incontrovertible.. It was objected to him that he had not spoke out fairly on the subject of his interviews with Mrs. Clarke; that he had concealed the fact of his having passed the night with her. But was the question ever asked him? and if it. were not, was it to be expected that he would be so lost to 'all sense of decency, as to come to that bar and make a yoluntary avowal that he came there reeking from the arms of a harlot? But the case of this gentleman was one of the strongest which had been brought forward against the Duke of York. It afforded irrefragable proofs of the influence which Mrs. Clarke exercised over him. It *proved that that influence not only extended to his particular patronage, but that it was strong enough to send him foraging to other offices. A great deal had been said of a popular cry. It was strange that objections should be taken by gentlemen at this moment to an instrument of which they had lately made so dexterous, and he feared fatal, use. The last popular cry originated within these walls. Did the persons who reasoned thus, mean to assert, that it was only under that roof that the voice of the people was to be heard, and that no attention was to be paid to any cry that was raised out of doors? As to the charges of industrious misrepresentation, and popular delusion, he knew of none.. They were controverted by the fact. It was only as the examination proceeded that circumstances came out which turned the current of public opinion against the Duke. The evidence that was produced was sufficient to support the charges brought for ward by his honourable friend, and therefore he would vote for the address proposed by him.

Mr. Rose observed in answer to a learned member (Mr. Martin) that the precedent upon which he seemed to rely so much occurred in the reign of Charles the Second, But what was the result of that proceeding? Why, after the Commons bad voted that certain persons should be removed from his majesty's councils and presence, the Lords took up the subject, passed a quite contrary vote, and decided that they should not be removed. Looking to the usage of parliament and to the laws of the land, it would be seen that it was against both to punish any person before trial. In every case on their records previous to a motion of censure, there had always been some examination taken under the sanction of an oath. This was the practice in the case of Lord Somers, the Duke of Marlborough, Lord Wharton, and in an instance which had lately occurred. The right honourable member explained the nature of recommendations to offices in the gift of the treasury. When the recommendation was political, it I was entered in a book; when otherwise, it was not. It was within his own knowledge at the time Dowler was ap pointed, there was a great want of proper persons to fill the deputy commissariats; and as no recommendation ap peared in his favour, he concluded that he had been res commended by the commissary-general.

[ocr errors]

Mr. Manners Sutton said that it was much to be re gretted that the public mind should be so led astray as it was, with respect to the Duke of York. It was owing to the garbled manner in which the evidence heard at that bar, was sent forth, and to the inflammatory comments with which it was accompanied, that the Duke of York was generally believed to be guilty. He did not find fault with the popular clamour on this subject. At a time when the country called for extraordinary exertion, he was not sorry to see the people jealous of their own character, and jealous of the honour and character of their princes. He trusted, therefore, that they would come to a positive decision on this subject, and not send the person accused forth with a stain on his reputation. To him it appeared that the Duke of York was not only not guilty, but there was strong evidence that they had all been imposed on. The case of Shaw was the clue that led through the whole of the labyrinth of lies in which they appeared to be inextricably involved. This was among the number

of applications which Mrs. Clarke said 'she made to the Duke of York, and which were absolutely rejected by him. The evidence of Miss Taylor he considered as of no weight whatever. She did not venture to speak positively with respect to the conversation between the Duke of York and Mrs. Clarke on the subject of French's levy. She only went the length of saying, that she thought his Royal Highness made use of such expressions, and this some years after that conversation was supposed to have taken place. This was not that kind of testimony upon which any conscientious man could say his Royal Highness was guilty of corruption. Would the Duke have voluntarily broke with a woman, in whose power he was so much, according to her account? If he did, he must be the most inconsiderate man alive. But the very circumstance of his exposing himself to her vengeance, shews that he was not conscious of having in any way committed himself. The Duke of York wishes to be put upon his trial. The second amendment was almost the same in substance as the address. It did not affirm any thing. He agreed with an honourable member on the opposite side, that it was advisable their judgment on this occasion should be free from political prejudices. But it was very possi ble for these prejudices to exist as well on one side of the House as on the other. He could well suppose that men of a certain cast of mind might take wrong views of things; that they might conceive that the government was cor rupt or negligent in the discharge of its duty. But this was an argument that might be easily reforted. He could easily conceive that in running the course of ambition, candidates would sometimes be found who could not be very punctilious as to the means by which they reached the goal. He would think favourably of the motives of gentlemen on the opposite side, and he trusted that his would meet a construction equally charitable. He was convinced, that whatever the feelings of the country might be at present, they would ultimately acquiesce in the decision of parliament.

Sir Francis Burdett denied that he ever stated that Mrs. Clarke's evidence alone was sufficient to condemn any man; but being corroborated by two other witnesses, and not in consistent in itself, it was sufficient to satisfy him.

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »