your evidence before the Commissioners of Naval Enquiry, to have been advanced by you occasionally to Lord Melville, to the sums mentioned by you in your evidence before this committee to have been advanced to Lord Melville through the hands of Mr. Tweedy, Messrs. Drummond, and others, or to any other sums? A. I allude to the sums which I had occasionally advanced to Lord Melville, as stated in the Tenth Report; but some of those occasional advances may have been made through the hands of Mr. Tweedy, Messrs. Drummond, or others.-Q. Are the committee still to understand that you mean the advances of from 10 to 20,000l. as mentioned in the Tenth Report, to be distinct and different from the advances of 23,000l. made by you in the whole, as stated by you in evidence before this committce? A. They are still to understand so.- -Q. Did these different advances all pass through your account current with Lord Melville? A. They did not. -Q. Distinguish which did and which did not? A. I cannot do it from memory. Q. Have you any documents to refer to? A. I have already stated that I have none, and my regret for that circumstance.- -Q. Why was some of the advances placed in the account current, and others not? A. I only placed the sams in the account current of which I knew of the appropriation; of the appropriation of the other sums I was ignorant.Q: Do you mean by appropriation, that you had the payment of such sums on behalf of Lord Melville? A. With regard to the account current, I do.-Q. You have stated to the committee, in a former part of your evidence, that you did receive interest on some advances made to Lord Melville, on others none; you have to day stated, that in the account current you had neither charged interest to Lord Melville, when the balance in that account appeared in your favour, nor paid it when it appeared in favour of his lordship; on what advances then did you charge interest? A. I alluded to a sum of money which his lordship directed me to borrow, and for which his lordship paid a regular interest of 51. per agent for the whole of Lord Melville's income arising from private sources in England? A. As far as I know I was so.Q. Were you in the receipt of the whole or any part of Lord Melville's income, arising from private sources in Scotland? A. His lordship has made me frequent remittances from Scotland; but I do not know from what sources they arose.Q. You were not then regularly in the receipt of Lord Melville's income arising from private sources in Scotland? A. I was not -Q. Do you know of any instance between August, 1796 and January, 1798, of any Navy Bill or Victualling Bill becoming due and presented for payment, not having been paid when presented, owing to the want of effects for the payment of such Navy and Victualling Bill? A. That certainly is not within my knowledge.Q: Must you have known it from your situation in the Navy Pay Office, if such an event had actually happened? A. I think I must unquestionably have known it.-Q. During that period, in a former part of your evidence you have stated that your were in Scotland, had such a circumstance happened during your absence in Scotland, would it have been communicated to you officially, either by Mr. Wilson or Mr. Swaffield, Cashier of the Victualling Bills? A. Undoubtedly, a circumstance so singular would have been communicated to me by one or other of those gentlemen, especially as I do not believe or recollect that any such circumstance had occurred during the whole time I acted as Paymaster of the Navy.Q. What is the longest period at any one time of your absence from London, during the time that you was paymaster, during which period Mr. Wilson was drawing money from the Bank with blank chrecks' signed by you? A. I was absent from the Pay Office, I believe, between three and four months in the year 1797, upon the occasion of my marriage in Scotland; but I have very seldom been absent from the office for any period of time nearly approaching to is. [Mr. Trotter produced reese better him and Lord Melville-Release read, The passage peculiar to this release, was in the following words.] દ 1 "Whereas for several years past there -? "have been sundry accounts, reckonings, " and money transactions depending be "tween us, the account of which have late *ly been examined; adjusted, and agreed upon between us; and upon such exami nation, settlement, and adjustment, there "remained a balance due from the said "Alexander Trotter to the aforesaid Lord "Viscount Melville, of one thousand five 66. "hundred and eighty pounds, eleven shil lings and one penny sterling money; "with which final exainination, statement, and adjustment, both parties declare them "selves perfectly satisfied, and do hereby << approve of and ratify the same. And they "have either mutually delivered up to each "other, or resolved and agreed mutually to "cancel and destroy all the vouchers or other “memorandums and writings, that at any "time heretofore may have existed, passed, or been interchanged between them rela"tive to the said accounts, and the different "items and articles of which the said accounts are composed of or consist; and they "have further resolved and agreed, mutual 66 ly to release and discharge each other up to the day of the date of these presents, "for now and ever: therefore, &c. &c. &c." you, did- -Q. Were the funds received by y 27th May.Q. You have stated, that you were in the habit of applying sures of money, on Lord Melville's account, under general instructions previously given to you for the management of his private affairs; do you recollect whether you applied, under such general instructions, any part of the 22 or 23,0001. on which you have stated no interest was charged? A. I do not recollert having applied any part of that money under general instructions, as these were the sums which Lord Melville never gave me any information upon.-Q. Was Mr.Tweedy employed in the management of issues on Lord Melville's account, out of any other fund than the above-mentioned fund of 22 or 23,0001.? A. I was in the habit of em Q. Who drew the release between you and Lord Melville? 4. Mr. Spottiswoode, of Sackville-street, my solicitor.- -Q. Is he dead? A. Yes.-Q. Who settled it? A. I do not know if any one. -Q. Who gave the instructions for it? 4. It proceeded from an advice of Mr. Spottiswoode him-. self, who brought me the deed ready pre-ploying Mr. Tweedy in almost all my money pared, without any particular instructions from any one.-Q. Was any particular instruction given, or did any order or conversation take place upon the particular part of the deed which relates to the giving up or destruction of vouchers or other documents? A. None that I remember, excepting Mr. Spottiswoode's general observation, that it would be no longer necessary to preserve any vouchers relating to accounts between Lord Melville and myself. [Here follows Trotter's evidence relative to the affair of Jellico, which evidence is omitted here as belonging to a subject to be considered separately.] 23d May.- Q. You have stated, that at various times you advanced various sums of money on account of Lord Melville to Mr. Tweedy, Messrs. Drummond, Mr. Alves the private secretary, and other members of Lord Melville's family; do you mean to state, that all the persons above enumerated received payments out of the sum of 22 or 23,000l. advanced by you at various times to Lord Melville, for which no interest was paid, or do you mean to describe them as the parties to whom payments had generally been made by you on Lord Melville's account, out of other as well as the fund abovementioned? A. I mean it of the latter description.-Q. Did you ever make any payment out of the above fund of 22 or 23,000 1. to any member of Lord Melville's family? A. I do not remember that I ever transactions, with Lord Melville as well as with others.- -Q. Was any part of that sum of 22 or 23,0001., paid to Mr. Tweedy, without an antecedent order of Lord Melville? A. I do not recollect any.-Q. In the account of receipts and payments between the 1st and 31st of January, 1798, there appears an entry of a transfer to the victualling branch, to repay the like sum transferred from thence to "tages" in March, 1797; have you any recollection of the circumstances of that transfer and repayment? A. None whatever.—Q. Have you any recollection of any transfer and repayment of the like nature? A. Not of any of the like nature, but I have frequently from the navy branch to the pay branch, and vice versa. Examination of CHARLES LONG (late a Secretary of the Treasury, `since made one of the King's MOST HONOURABLE Pring Council, and now a Lord of the Treasury), on the 6th of May and 7th of May. 6th May- -Q. State to the committee in what instances you have any knowledge of monies issued for navy services having been applied to purposes not naval? A. I know only of one instance; it is that which is referred to in the Tenth Report. where Mr. Trotter says, he had received from me a sum of money which he had before placed in the hands of Lord Melville. If the committee will give me leave, I will state to them all the circumstances of the transaction to which this refers, as far as they are within my recollection at this distance of time: In the autumn 1796, I received a note from Lord Melville, requesting I would call upon him early the next morning at his office in Parliament-street; in a conversation I there held with him, he noticed the great difficulty in which all commercial men found themselves at that particular period, the alarm and distrust which prevailed, and the difficulty which they found of raising money upon the best securities; he said, that this embarrassinent was particularly felt by the house of Messrs. Boyd and Company, who were contractors for the loan; that the bank had refused to make their payments on the loan as usual, or to discount their bills; and that, with ample securities in their hands, they were not enabled to raise money to pay the next instalment, which was then just becoming due. That under these circumstances he thought it a public object to support the house; that if the house failed it would involve many others in its ruin, and give a great blow to commercial credit, already very much shaken. He said they required the sum of 40,0001. to enable them to make good their engagement to government; that he had found the means of adaucing that sum, and which he could do without inconvenience, provided undoubted security was given for the repayment of that sum within a very short period; that with this view of the subject he would place the sum of 40,0001. in my hands, desiring I would deliver it to Mr. Boyd, upon his giving such security as he had described, and that Mr. Boyd would call upon me at the Treasury the same day with such security. I do not affect to state this conversation with precise accuracy at this period, but as well as I recollect, the above is the substance of it. Upon going to the Treasury I found Mr. Boyd there, and delivered to him the sum of 40,000 1., and received the security, amounting to something more than 40,0001.; Iput these securities into a paper, which I sealed up, and transmitted them immediately to Lord Melville.-Q. Did you know from what source Lord Melville supplied the money? 4. I certainly did not at the time, but I have not the least doubt that if I had known the source from whence it came, my conduct would have been precisely the same; I should have given credit to Lord Melville that he would not have diverted the public money for the shortest period from the service to which it was appropriated, to any other service, unless he could do so without inconvenience to that service, without risk, and under an extreme public exigency; and under that persuasion, I have no doubt I should have acted precisely as I did had I known the source from whence it came.Q. What was the nature of the security given by Mr. Boyd?. A. It consisted chiefly if not entirely, of bills drawn upon and accepted by the East India Company, the greatest part certainly of this kind; if there was any other it was government security,Q. Do you recollect to about what amount the securities were? A. As far as I recollect, to near 41,000 1.— 41,0001.-Q. Were the repayments of this money made, or any part of them made, through your hands? A. The latter payments were made through my hands, amounting to above 11,0001.; Lord Melville, I think, in the Spring in 1797, transmitted to me two of the bills drawn upon and accepted by the East India Company, amounting to this sum, desiring that I would pay the sum of 11,000l. to Mr. Wilson, which was all that remained due of the 40,0001. and that I would pay the balance by which the security exceeded 40,000 1., to Mr. Boyd; this I did, as the securities were paid.-Q. By whom were the bills on the East India Company drawn? A..I have no recollection. Can you say whether they were drawn by Mr. Boyd himself, or of any of the firm of that house? 4. They were certainly not drawn by any of the firm of that house.-Q. Were they of the uature of such securities belonging to the East India Company, as are commonly in the market? A. I really do not know the nature of the securities of the East India Company, that are usually in the market.-Q. Do you know who were the acceptors? A. No, I do not.-Q. Can you state the precise date of the repayment of the balance of 11,0001.? A. 4,0001. in August, 1797; 1,000l., I think, in October, 1797; and 6,0001. early in January, 1798.-Q. Into whose hands were these sums paid? 4. The first and second into the hands of Mr, Wilson, and the third into the hands of Mr. Trotter: as these sums were paid, Lord Melville was made acquaint-ed with it, and I think the receipts of the parties were transmitted to him.- -Q. From whom did you receive the money upon the securities as they became due? A. They were paid into Messrs. Drunumonds, who are my bankers, and were received by them in the ordinary course of business; these were of course paid by the East India Company, upon whom they were drawn.-Q. Do you know any thing of the repayment of that part of the sum of 40,0001., which was not repaid by you?. I do not; I under stood that it had been repaid a considerable time before the sum that passed through my hands, and I have a general recollection that most of the securities had but a very short time to run.-Q. Do you know of any other transaction of the same description, or of any description, in which money issued for naval services may have been applied for purposes not naval? A. I certainly do not. furnish this accommodation to Mr. Boyd through you, rather than directly from himself? 4. He did not; but I conceive it was furnished through me, because he sup posed that he was giving assistance to the public in a manner in which he thought the Treasury particularly interested, and he explained to me, that he wished the transaction to be secret, as otherwise it might tend to injure the house of Messrs. Boyd.—Q. Did you make any immediate communication to the Chancellor of the Exchequer? A. I certainly did not; I acted under the impres Q. Dia was acquainted with the transaction; it is -Q. Do you recollect, in point of fact, what was the amount of loans raised for the year 1796? A. There was a loan made in November or December, 1795, amounting to 18,000,0001., and there was another loansion that the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the course of the year 1796 to the amount of seven millions and a half; Mr. Boyd was the contractor for both these loans.-Q. From the then state of the market, in case Mr. Boyd had been prevented from fulfilling his contract, do you conceive the public would have had the means of obtaining a new loan upon terms equally advantageous? A. I should think certainly not, it was a period of very great and peculiar embarrassment; it will be recollected that there was a very general run upon commercial houses, which was followed by a great pressure on the bank, and which led, early in the succeeding year, to the restriction of cash payments at the bank.- -Q. Had the bank felt itself under the necessity, at that period, of narrowing materially its accommodation to government and to the public? A. To the best of my recollection it had; but that may be ascertained with much more precision than I can state it.-Q. Do you recollect what our relation with the Continent were at that moment, with respect to subsidies? A. I believe subsidies were in the course of remittance, but I cannot state precisely to what amount.- -Q. When was the first loan raised for the service of the Emperor of Germany? 4. I rather think 4. I rather think in 1795.-Q. Supposing the contracts for the loans at the house of Messrs. Boyd had been dissolved by their failure of making instalments in the then state of the market, would it have been easy to make another loan in lieu thereof? A. I should think it would have been extremely difficult; but I suppose it might have been done, though upon terms certainly very disadvantageous to the public.Q. Whether you explained to Mr. Boyd how the money was furnished which was transmitted to him by you? A. There was no necessity for any such explanation, as Mr. Boyd knew perfectly well that I had received it from Lord Melville, and was sent by Lord Melville to the Treasury to receive it from me.-Q. Did Lord Melville explain to you why he wished to loans? A. I know of no instance at all similar to this, but in all public loans to merchants, interest, I believe, has always been paid.- -Q. Whether Mr. Boyd had ever made any application to the treasury for as sistance, to enable him to make good his payments on the loan, prior to the time when you conversed with Lord Melville on the subject? A. To the best of my recollection he never had.- -Q. Did he ever make any subsequent application? 4. I believe not; I have no knowledge of any such application.-Q. Was the second loan for the service of the year 1796 a publie loan, or was it given to Messrs. Boyd without any bidding, in consequence of his having contracted for the former loan? A. I rather think it was a public loan by bidding-Q. Do you recollect the date of the contract for the second loan for 1796? A. I think it was in April, 1796.—Q. Were both loans made before this transaction? 4. They certainly were.-Q. Were the instalments of both loans in a course of payment at the time that this transaction took place? . They were.--Q. When did you become acquainted with the source from which Lord Melville took the money advanced to Messrs. Boyd? A. I certainly at first thought that Lord Melville had obtained this accommodation for Mr. Boyd either from Messrs. Drummonds, or from some of his private connexions, Mr. -Boyd not having been able, from the extraerdinary circumstances of the time to which I have before referred, to raise upon discount the whole sum which was necessary; but in the course of the transaction I certainly did believe that the money had been advanced from the balance in the hands of the Treasurer of the Navy; at what period this idea came into my mind I cannot at present state.-Q. Were you aware that in making such advance, the Treasurer of the Navy was acting illegally as well as irregularly? A. I probably had not the act of parliament very precisely in my recollection; and it does not occur to me now, that at the time I was satisfied he had acted illegally.-Q. Did Lord Melville tell you he had communicated with Mr. Pitt, and had his concurrence in the transaction? A. If I had recollected that he had made any such communication to me, the communication would probably have been made in the conversation which I have before described, and I should have ruentioned it as part of that conversation; I have no recollection that he did make such a communication, but I think it very possible that he may have made it, and I certainly acted under the idea that the transaction was known to Lord Melville and Mr. Pitt, and to no other person.-Q. Was it usual with you to transact any business of great importance, or of an extraordinary nature, without direct communication with the First Lord of the Treasury, and taking his instructions personally or by letter? A. Certainly not.-Q. How came you then to omit the precaution in this instance? A. I have not said that I omitted the precaution in this instance, but I certainly have no accurate recollection of taking his instructions upon this subject; but I have before observed, that I acted under the impression of his knowledge of the transaction. I wish to add here, that the receipt of the money from Lord Melville, the payment of it to Mr. Boyd, and the transmission of the securities, took place within so short a space of time, that it is very probable I had no opportunity of receiving particular instructions within that period from Mr. Pitt; the whole business I understood to be of great urgency, and that it was necessary the assistance should be afforded to Mr. Boyd without any delay.Q. Dɔ you recollect whether Mr. Pitt first mentioned the subject to you, or you to him? A. I do not.- -Q. Had you at any time previous to the late enquiry before the Naval Commissioners, any reason to suppose or believe that any other transaction of an irregular nature, other than the advance to Messrs. Boyd, had taken place in the conduct of the Pay Office of the Navy? A. I certainly had not.- -Q. Had you at any time previous to the said period any knowledge of, or reason to suppose that profits had been made by any individual connected with that department, of the public money issued for service of the Navy? 4. I had not.—Q. Did the payment of that 40,000). to Mr. Boyd answer the intended purpose of saving the house from failure, and enable them to pay the subsequent instalments? A. The subsequent instalments upon both the loans of Mr. Boyd were paid, and the house did not fail; how far the 40,0001. contributed to the support of the house, it is impossible for me to state.Q. Do you know whether Mr. Boyd is alive, and within the realm? A. I do not know; I heard of his being at Paris some time ago.- -Q. How long since did you hear he was at Paris? A. I cannot answer that question with any sort of precision.-Q. At what period of time was it from the advances that were made to Messrs. Boyd and Benfield," that the transaction took place in which an extent was issued against their property on behalf of the crown? A. I believe, between two and three years; the extent, I believe, issued in the course of the year 1799. Examination of WILLIAM PITT (First Lord of the Treasury, Chancellor of the Exchequer, and one of the King's MOST HO NOURABLE Privy Council), taken on the 6th, 7th, 8th, and 17th of May. Q. Do you know of any instance of mo |