« PreviousContinue »
your evidence before the Commissioners of agent for the whole of Lord Melville's in-
-Q. Distinguish which did and which huve known it.Q. During that period, did not ? A. I cannot do it from memory. in a former part of your evidence you have
P. Have you any documents to refer to? stated that your were in Scotland, had such a A. I have already stated that I have none, circumstance happened during your absence and my regret for that circumstance. ---R. in Scotland, would it have been communia Why was some of the advances placed in cated to you otticially, either by Mr. Wilson the account current, and others not? A. I or Mr. Swaffield, Cashier of the Victualling only placed the sams in the account current Bils? A. Undoubtedly, a circumstance so of which I knew of the appropriation ; of sin sular would have been communicated to the appropriation of the other sums I was me in one or other of those gentlemen, ese ignorant. -Q: Do you mean by appropria- | pecially as I do not believe or rècollect that tion, that you had the payment of such any such circumstance had occurred during sums on behalf of Lord Melville ? A. With the whole iime 1 acted as Paymaster of the regard to the account current, I do. 2. | Navy.----Q. What is the longest period at You have stated to the committee, in a for any one time of your absence from London, mer part of your evidence, that you did re during the time that you was paymaster, ceive interest on some advances made to during which period Mr. Wilson was drawLord Melville, on others none ; you have ing money from the Bank with blank chrecks to day stated, that in the account current signed by you? A. I was absent -from the you had neither charged interest to Lord Pay Office, I believe, between three and four Melville, when the balance in that account months in the year 1797, upon the occasion appeared in your favour, nor paid it when it of my marriage in Scotland, but I have very appeared in favour of his lordship; on what seldom been absent from tite office for any
$ advances then did you charge interest ? A. period of time nearly approaelfig“ to eris.zau? I alluded to a sum of money which his lord [Mr. Trotter produced refeise berrier ship directed me to borrow, and for which him and Lord Melville--Releat read. his lordship paid a regular interest of 5l. per The passage peculiar to this release tváls in: centum.
the following words.] 9th May. Q. Were you the lender of the “Whereas for several years past there money borrowed for Lord Melville, and for “ have been sundry: accounts, reckonings, ** which he paid an interest ?' A. I was. “and money transactions' depending beoszi Q. What was the amount ? A. My recol "tween us, the account of which have lates lection does not enable me to state this with " ly been examined, adjusted, and agreed accuracy ; but I believe, to the best of my upon between us; and upon such 'examiknowledge, that it was a sum not exceeding “ nation, settlement, and adjustment, there from 20 to 23,0001. Q. Is that sum re "*"remained a balance due from the săid paid ? A. It is.Q: How long since? *""Alexander Trotter to the aforesaid Loid A Four or five
"Viscount Melville, of one thousand fire
hundred and eighty pounds, eleven shil did. Q. Were the funds raceived by you, “ lings and one penny sterling money, on Lord Níelville's private aceonnt, paid into ! with which final exai nirxation, statement, the mixed fund 3t Mes«rs. Courts, which " and adjustment, both parties declare them - you have stated to consist partly of public “ selves perfectly satistied, and do hereby and partly of private money? A. They approve of and ratify the same. And they
-Q. Can you precisely state the “ have either mutually delivered up to each persons to whom issues out of the above “other, or resolved and agreed mutually to fund of 22 or 23,0001. were made? A. I o cancel and destroy all the vouchers or other have not nieans of precisely stating it. ” memorandums and writings, that at any 27th May.-Q. You hare stated that
time heretofore may have existed, passed, you were in the habit of applying surrs of “ or been interchanged between them rela inoney, on Lord Melville's accouix, under “ tive to the said accounts, and the different general instructions previously given to you " items and articles of which the said ac for the management of his private affairs;
counts are composed of or consist ; and they do you recollect whether you applied, urder “ have further resolved and agreed, mutual such general instructions, any part of the 12
ly to release and discharge each other up or 23,0001. on which you have stated no iit
to the day of the date of these presents, terest was charged ? A. I do not recollert “ for now and ever : therefore, &c. &c. &c.” having applied any part of that money in
Q. Who drew the release between you der general instructions, as these were the and Lord Melville : A. Mr. Spottiswoode, sums which Lord Mek ille nerer gate me of Sackville-street, my solicitor,
auy information upon.-Q. Was Mr. Turedy he dead? 4. Yes ---Q. Who settled it?. employed in the management of issues on A. I do not know if any one.
Lord Melville's account, out of any other gave the instructions for it? A. It proceed- | find than the above-mentioned fund of 22 ed from an advice of Mr. Spottiswoode him or 23,0001.? A. I was in the habit of ernself, who brought me the deed ready pre- ploying Vr. Tweedy in alınost all my money pared, without any particular instructions transactions, with Lord Melville aš us| as from any one. -Q. Was any particular with others.- -Q. Was any part of that instruction given, or did any order or con sum of 22 or 23,0001., paid to Mr. Tweedt, versation take place upon the particular part without an antecedent order of Lod Melof the deed which relates to the giving up or ville ? A. I do not recollect any.
-Q destruction of vouchers or other documents ? In the account of receipts and payments beA. None that I remember, excepting Mr. tween the 1st and 31st of January, 1709, Spottiswoode's general observation, that it there appears an entry of a transfer to the would be no longer pecessary to preserve any victualling branch, to repay the like sum vouchers relating to accounts between Lord transferred from thence to “ tages" in Melville and myself.
March, 1797 ; have you any recolicction of [Here follows Trotter's evidence relative the circumstances of that transfer and repasto the attair of Jellico, which evidence is ment? A. None whatever.-Q. Have omitted here as belonging to a subject to be you any recollection of any transfer and reconsidered separately.]
payment of the like nature? A. Not of any 23d May.-Q. You have stated, that of the like nature; but I have frequently at various times you advanced various sums from the navy branch to the pay branch, and of money on account of Lord Melville to vice versa. Mr. Tweedy, Messrs. Drummond, Mr. Alves the private secretary, and other mem Examination of Charles Long (late a se bers of Lord Melville's family; do you mean cretary of the Trensury, since made one of to state, that all the persons above enume the King's MOST HONOURABLE Privy rated received payments out of the sum of 22 Council, and now a Lord of the Trecsury), Or 23,000 1. advanced by you at various times on the oth of May and 7th of Aloy. to Lord Melville, for which no interest was
Q. State to the commitpaid, or do you mean to describe them as tee in what instances you have any knowthe parties to whom payments had generally ledge of monies issued for navy services been made by you on Lord Melville's ac having been applied to purposes not naval? count, out of other as well as the fund above A. I know only of one instance; it is that mentioned ? A. I mean it of the latter de which is referred to in the Tenth Report, scription. -Q. Did you ever make anywhere Mr. Trotter says, he had received payment out of the above fund of 22 or from me a sum of money which he had be 22.000 1. to any member of Lord Melville's fore placed in the hands of Lord Melville. If farndy? 4. I do not remember that I ever the committee will give me leave, I will state
to them all the circumstances of the transac risk; and under an extreme public exigency ; tion to which this refers, as far as they are and under that persuasion, I have no doubt within my recollection at this distance of I should have acted precisely as I did had I timc: In the autumn 1796, I received a known the source from whence came. note from Lord Melville, requesting I would Q. What was the nature of the security given call upon him early the next morning at liis by Mr. Boyd?. A. It consisted chiefy if not office in Parliament-street; in a conversa entirely, of biils drawn upon and accepted hy tion I there held with him, he noticed the the East India Company, the greatest part great difficulty in which all commercial men certainly of this kind ; if there was any other found themselves at that particular period, it was government security.-
yo1 the alarm and distrust which prevailed, and recollect to about what amount the securities the difficulty which they found of raising were ? A. As far as I recollect, to rear money upon the best securities; he said, that | 41,0001. -Q. Were the repayments of this embarrassinent was particularly felt by this money made, or any part of them made, the house of Messrs. Boyd and Company, through your hands ? A. The latter paywho were contractors for the loan ; that the
made through my hands, bank had refused to make their payments on amounting to above 11,0001. ; Lord Melthe loan as usual, or to discount their bills; ville, I think, in the Spring in 1797, transand that, with ample securities in their mitted to me two of the bills drawn upon hands, they were not enabled to raise money and accepted by the East India Company, to
pay the next instalment, which was then amounting to this sum, desiring that I would just becoming due. That under these cir pay the sum of 11,000). to Mr. Wilson, cumstances he thought it a public object to which was all that remained due of the support the house; that if the house failed it 40,0001, and that I would pay the balance would involve many others in its ruin, and by which the security exceeded 40,000 1., to give a great blow to commercial credit, al Mr. Boyd; this I did, as the securities were rrady very much shaken. He said they re paid. -Q. By whom were the bills on the quired the sum of 40,000 1. to enable them East India Company drawn? A. I have no to make good their engagement to govern
recollection.----Q. Can you say whether ment; that he had found the means of ad they were drawn by Mr. Buya bimself, or of laucing that sum, and which he could do any of the firm of that house? 11. They without inconvenience, provided undoubted were certainly not drawn by any of the firm security was given for the repayment of that of that house. -Q. Were they of the nasuim within a very short period; that with ture of such securities belonging to the East this view of the subject he would place the India Company, as are commonly in the sum of 40,000). in my hands, desiring I market ? A. I really do not know would deliver it to Mír. Boyd, upon his the nature of the securities of the East giring such security as he had described, and India Company, that are usually in the that Mr. Boyd would call upon me at the market. -Q. Do you know who were the Treasury the saine day with such security. I acceptors?
A. No, I do notdo not affect to state this conversation with you state the precise date of the repayment precise accuracy at this period, but as well as of the balance of 11,0001. ? 1. 4,0001. in I recollect, the above is the substance of it. | August, 1797 ; 1,0001., I think, in OctoUpon going to the Tieasury I found Mr. ber, 1797; and 0,0001. early in January, Bovd there, and delivered to him the sum of 17.08.-----Q: Into whose hands were these 40,0001., and received the security, amount sums paid? 4. The tirst and second into ing to something more than 40,0001. ; I put the hands of Mr, Wilson, and the third into these securities into a paper, which I sealed the hands of Mr. Trotter: as these sums up, and transmirted them immediately to were paid, Lord Melville was made acquaintLord Melville.--. Did you know from ed with it, and I think the receipts of the what source Lord Melville supplied the mo parties were transmitted to him.- -Q. From ney?. 4. I certainly did not at the time, whom did you receive the money upon the but I have not the least doubt that if I had securities as they became due 8. They known the source from whence it came, my were paid into Messrs. Drunimonds, who conduct woud have been precisely the are my bankers, and were received by them same; I should have given credit to Lord in the ordinary course of business; these Melville that he would not have diverted the were of course paid by the East India Compublic money for the shortest period from pany, upon whom they were drawn.-Q. the service to which it was appropriated, to Do you know any thing of the repayment of any other service, unless he could do so with that part of the sum of 40,0001., which was out inconvenience to that service, without not repaid by you? *. I do not; I under+
stood that it had been repaid a considerable | furnish this accommodation to Mr. Boyd time before the sum that passed through my through youi, rather than directly from himhands, and I have a general recollection that self? A. He did not; but I eonceive it most of the securities had but a very short was furnished through me, because he sup. time to run.- Q. Do you know of any posed that he was giving assistance to the other transaction of the same description, or public in a mapner in which he thought the of any description, in which money issued Treasury particularly interested, and he exfor naval services may have been applied for plained to me, that he wished the transaction purposes not naval ? A. I certainly do not. to be secret, as otherwise it might tend to in-Q. Do you recollect, in point of fact, jure the house of Messrs. Boyd.-Q. Did what was the amount of loans raised for the you make any immediate communication to yeat 1796 ? A. There was a loan made in the Chancellor of the Exchequer? . I November or December, 1795, amounting certainly did not; I acted under the imprese to 18,000,000 1., and there was another loan sion that the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the course of the year, 1796 to the amount was acquainted with the transaction ; it is of seven millions and a half ; Mr. Boyd was probable I
may have conversed with him the contractor for both these loans. Q. upon it, but I have no distinct recollectica From the then state of the market, in case of any such conversation, except long sub Mr. Boyd had been prevented from fulfilling sequent to the transaction. I recollect kis bis contract, do you conceive the public remarking upon it, that he thought a great would have had the means bf obtaining a irregularity had been committed, but that be new loan upon terms equally advantageous ? thought a great public miselrief had been. 4. I should think certainly not, it was a pe- prevented by it. -?. Did you comaniei riod of very great and peculiar embarrass-cate with any other of the public servants on ment; it will be recollected that there was a the subjeco ? A. Certainly not, R. Da very general :run upon commercial houses, you commit to writing the whole or any which was followed by a great pressure on part of the transaction? A. I did not the bank, and which leri, early in the suc Q: Was there any document, to your kuok. ceeding year, to the restriction of cash pay- ledge, in existence, by which the public ments at the bank. Q. Had the bank could have been made acquainted with this felt itself under the necessity, at that period, transaction? 4. When I transmitted the of narrowing materially its accommodation security to Lord Melville, I wrote upon one to government and to the public? · A. To of the covers in which the securities were inthe best of my recollection it had; but that closed, the purposes for which they had been may be ascertained with much more preci- deposited ; namely, that they had been de sion than I can state it. -Q. Do you re posited for the purpose of the repay nent of collect what our relation with the Continent the sum of 10,0001., which had been adwere at that moment, with respect to subsi vanced by Lord Melville to the house of dies ? . 1. I believe subsidies were in the Messrs. Boyd. --Q. Did that paper erer course of remittance, but I cannot state pre come again into your possession ? A. No, cisely to what amount. -Q. When was never. -Q. Do you know whether it is im the first loan raised for the service of the existence? A. I do ifot , I wrote a similar Emperor of Germany? A. I rather think memorandum respecting those securities, in 1795.-Q. Supposing the contracts for which was afterwards returned to me.the loans at the house of Messrs. Boyd had Is the memorandum last referred to in existe been dissolved by their failure of making in- ence? A. I do not think it is.—-Q. Was stalments in the then state of the market, any interest paid by Messrs. Boyd for the would it have been easy to make another loan of this money during the time they loan in lieu thereof? Å. I should think it held it? 4. Not to my knowledge. would have been extremely difficult; but I Whether in all other instances, where you suppose it might have been done, though vernment have advanced to merchants ternupon terms certainly very disadvantageous to porary loans of money or exchequer bills, inthe public. R. Whether you explained terest has not always been paid for such to Mr: Boyd how the money was furnished loans ?. A. I know of no instance at all sj.
to him by you milar to this, but in all public merThere was no necessity for any such expla- chants, interest, I believe, has always been nation, as Mr. Boyd knew perfectly well paid. -Q. Whether Mr. Boyd had ever that I had received it from Lord Melville, made any application to the treasury for.15and was sent by Lord Melville to the Trea sistance, to enable him to make good his sury to receive it from me, -Q. Did Lord
payments on the loan, prior to the time Meliile explain to you why he wished to when you conversed withi Lord Melville ou
the subject?. A. To the best of
recol to omit the precaution in this instance ? A. lection he never had. -Q. Did he ever I have not said that I omitted the precaution make any subsequent application ? A. I in this instance, but I certainly have no acbelieve not; I have no knowledge of any curate recollection of taking his instructions such application.-Q. Was the second upon this subject; 'but I have before obloan for the service of the year 1796 a pub- served, that I acted under the impression of lie Joan, or was it given to Messrs. Boyd his knowledge of the transaction. I wish to without any bidding, in consequence of his add here, that the receipt of the money from having contracted for the former loan? A. Lord Melville, the payment of it to Mr. I rather think it was a public loan by bid Boyd, and the transmission of the securities, diny.Q: Do you recollect the date of took place within so short a space of time, the contract for the second loan for 1796 ? that it is very probable I had no opporlunity d. I think it was in April, 1796.---Q. of receiving particular instructions within Were' both loans made before this transac that period from Mr. Pitt; the whole busition? A. They certainly were. -Q. ness I understood to be of great urgency, and Were the instalnients of both loans in a that it was necessary the assistance should be course of payment at the time that this afforded tó Mr. Boyd without any delay transaction took place? 1. They were.-
recollect whether Mr; Pitt first Q. When did you become acquainted with mentioned the subject to you, or you to him ? the source from which Lord Melville took A. I do not. Q. Had you at any time
money advanced to Messrs. Boyd ? A. previous to the late enquiry before the NaI certainly at first thought that Lord Mel val Commissioners, any reason to suppose or ville had obtained this accommodation for believe that any other transaction of an irreMr. Boyd either from Messrs. Drummonds, | gular nature, other than the advance to or from some of his private connexions, Mr. Messrs. Boyd, had taken place in tlie conduct Boyd not having been able, from the extra of the Pay Office of the Navy? A. I cerordinary circuinstances of the time to which tainly had not. -Q. Had you at any time I have before referred, to raise upon discount previous to the said period any knowledge the whole sum which was necessary; but in of, or reason to suppose that profits had been the course of the transaction I certainly did made by any individual connected with that believe that the money had been advanced department, of the public money issued for from the balance in the hands of the Trea service of the Navy? 1. I had not.Q. surer of the Navy; at what period this Did the payment of that 40,000 ). to Mr. ilea came into my mind I cannot at present Boyd answer the intended purpose of saving state.-Q. Were you aware that in making the house from failure, and enable them to such advance, the Treasurer of the Navy was pay the subsequent instalments ? 4. The arting illegally as well as irregularly? A. 1 subsequent instalments upon both the loans probably had not the act of parliament very of Mr. Boyd were paid, and the house did precisely in my recollection, and it does not not fail; how far the 40,0001. contributed occur to me now, that at the time I was sa to the support of the house, it is impossible tisfied he had acted illegally.-Q. Did for me to state. -Q. Do you know wheLord Melvillé tell you he had communicated ther Mr, Boyd is alive, and within the with Mr. Pitt, and had his concurrence in realm? A. I do not know; I heard of the transaction ? A. If I had recollected his being at Paris some time ago. that he had made any such communication How long since did you hear he was at to me, the communication would probably Paris ? A. I cannot answer that question have been made in the conversation which I with any sort of precision. ---Q. At what have before described, and I should have period of time was it from the advances that mentioned it as part of that conversation ; I were made to Messrs. Boyd and Benfeld, Lave no recollection that he did make such that the transaction took place in which an a commiunication, but I think it very pos extent was issued against their property on sible that he may have made it, and I cer behalf of the crown ? A. I believe, between tuinly acted under the idea that the transac two and three years; the extent, I believe, istion was known to Lord Melville and Mr. sued in the course of the year 1799. Pitt, and to no other person.
-Q. Was it usual with you to transact any business of Eramination of WILLIAM Pitt (First Lord great importance, or of an extraordinary na of the Treasury, Chancellor of ttie Exture, uithout direct communication with the chequer, and one of the King's MOST HOM; First Lord of the Treasury, and taking his NOURABLE Privy Council), taken on the instructions personally or by letter?
6th, 7th, 8th, and 17th of May. Certainly not.-Q. How carne you then Q. Do you know of any instance of mo.