now 66 party accused stating every thing he thinks ly. This argument, of no loss to the public proper in his own defence and justification. from this practice, is an extraordinary excuse But it has been said, that these parties from a right hon. gent. so well versed in the have been hardly dealt with; they have financial system of the country, and the laws been taken by surprise, and have had no that particularly relate to it. Does he renotice of what was going forward. What! collect the act which prescribes the form of I thought that commission issued for the the bills, and the mode of drawing them? purpose of inquiring into abuses, with a view That act says, any man counterfeiting one to correction and amendment. Have I been of these bills, shall be guilty of a femistaken, and was it then for the purpose of lony, without benefit of clergy." Now, inquiring into the transcendant merits and suppose an expert forger, and many such virtues of the treasurer and paymaster of the there are, had forged a bill of 500,000l. but navy, and to ascertain what farther honours had the money to replace it when it became and rewards they deserved for their distin- due; and supposing this transaction to be guished services? These worthy parties, it afterwards discovered, would or could the seems, were most cruelly deceived. right hon. gent. advise his Majesty to parThey attended the commissioners, never once don that man, because the money was made dreaming that abuses could have crept into good? To excuse, therefore, a public offitheir office, which the commissioners wished cer, guilty of mal-practices, upon the ground to investigate, but fancying it was to be only of no loss, is monstrous language. It is lanan examination, to ascertain the degree of guage that puts an end to the definite protheir merits and virtues, and confidently an- visions of the law, and the constitution of ticipating a brilliant reward. Now, to come the house of commons. What! no loss? to this ex parte evidence, as it is called: lord Is then every public officer to speculate with Melville being asked, did you permit Mr. the public money for private profit, and if Trotter to draw the money from the Bank no loss ensues, is there no criminality? What of England, and place it in his private bank- is the use of your laws, if they may be thus er's hands? his lordship answers, I never dispensed with at pleasure? What becomes gave him a direct authority, but I knew he of the house and its duties? Is the house did it." Now, surely, it would have been to vote a sum of money for one particular more manly in his lordship to have said at service, and may any officer apply it to anoonce" I did," than to admit that he knew ther as he pleases, and if no loss follows, is what was going on, and did not prevent it. he to remain guiltless? The right hon. the It was skulking from his duty. It was as chancellor of the exchequer, says he knows much as saying to Mr. Trotter, make money of one sum of 40,000l. that was thus applied of your office as you can, and I will protect to a purpose different from that for which it you. And who is this Mr. Trotter, with was voted, and he adds, judiciously applied. whom lord Melville cannot be presumed to I ask, however, if any regard were paid to have any fellow-feeling? Why, the general the votes of the house, why was not that agent of lord Melville. Why, knowing him payment afterwards disclosed, and a bill of to be acting in this illegal way, did he con- | tinue him in the practice? Can any man believe it was exclusively for Mr. Trotter's sole benefit? But even though it were, lord Melville would not be the less responsible; as principal, he was as corrupt as if the act of his agent had been done personally by himself.The next argument advanced is that no loss has been sustained by the practice. This I can easily conceive, without giving the parties much credit for their innocence. Mr. Alexander Trotter is an expert calculator. He might know very well how far he might use the public money, before the demands for it should come round upon him. It was only the common science of every banker, who knows when his bills are payable, and to what amount, and regulates his issues in the mean time, accordingVOL. IV. indemnity demanded for those that made it ? X It is a were only to give the minister an increase of influence, and not of purity and virtue. I should be ashamed to walk the streets of London, if it were the general opinion that the members from Ireland were not as clear of corruption as the members of this country, and that there was any virtue in the one from which the other was shut out. Sorry should I be were the two representations to meet like two running sores, wasting the strength and vigour of the body by their confluent corruption. This is the first opportunity they have had of giving a proof of the virtue and integrity of my countrymen, and I hope they will not lose it. You are now engaged in a war alone, without an ally, with a great nation, led by the most extraordinary man the world has ever produced. You have imposed heavy taxes upon the people. This session you have followed the poor man's last luxury into his cottage; you have taxed his salt. Will it not then be wise to shew, that if you call upon him to make great sacrifices, you will take care that they shall be administered with integrity and economy? Is it not incumbent upon you to shew, that no rank, no power, no influence can screen a public malefactor? and that the man who would abuse his trust, and misapply the hard earnings of the people, cannot be screened from the justice of the country? When you have established this character, as I hope and trust you will this night, you may carry on the contest as long as you may think it necessary for your honour or your safety; but, if the amendment be adopted, you will incur a very different opinion. I put it to you, whether it will be considered as a mode to ascertain the innocence of a man, who stands convicted upon his own oath, or a stratagem to shelter him from punishment by delay? I can make great allow ance for private friendship. I am sure, however, it is the sentiment of the house that lord Melville cannot be defended; for I observe that not one gentleman has arisen this night to speak for him, but such as have been his colleague in office. I cannot find fault with that friendship; but sure I am, that if they cannot acquit him upon oath, of what he has admitted upon oath, they cannot acquit him of a corrupt breach of the law. The hon. gent. opposite (the attorney general) will feel it his duty, I am sure, to ascertain the fact, and punish these libellers; but why are we to stop the proceedings of the house, because offensive and libellous publications have been circulated? The proceedings of the commissioners in 1782 have been referred to, but they have nothing to do with the present business. The question is, whether the act of 1785 has been violated? The conduct of the commissioners in 1782, he would venture to say, did not sanction the conduct of Mr. Trotter. Their recommendation was, that none of these public officers should have public money in their hands, or be exposed to the temptation of private gain, that might end in public loss. I cannot conceive why we should postpone the resolutions. Can you obtain evidence from a committee, that the law has not been violated? This is the first instance of an application to parliament in a grave business for delay, without stating any grounds. If you have any ground, why not state it? I think the gentlemen are not aware of the consequences of delay, if any is to take place. In such event, I think bills ought to be brought in to restrain lord Melville and Mr. Trotter from leaving the country. The proceedings of a committee will occupy a great length of time. What is to become of lord Melville and Mr. Trotter in the mean while? If it shall appear that the sums have been great, it will not be fit that they should be allowed to walk the streets at large, and be at liberty to convey in trust to their friends those funds from which restitution ought to be made to the country. The right hon. gent, (Mr. Pitt) will therefore find it due to his character to follow the case of Sir Thomas Rumbold, and take care that any funds they now possess shall be forthcoming to satisfy the public demands. And now, sir, let me tell you, there never was a moment in the history of the country where the character of the government was so essential to its welfare and security. By a measure, of which I own I did not approve, this house has received an addition of 100 members from Ireland. I own, sir, I am anxious that they should give this night a proof of their spirit and purity. Public rumour stated that at the time of the union Mr. Canning rose to explain the cause of many were induced by large sums to part Mr. Trotter's continuance in office. He with their legislature too easily, and their said he had never seen him until he was apintegrity was not free from doubt and sus-pointed paymaster under him. He restored picion. They have now an opportunity of him because he was a useful man. throwing from them that imputation. I had not removed him from office, because should be deeply afflicted if that measure he considered his case adhuc sub judice. And he The Master of the Rolls argued in favour of a nature so glaring, that any man who of an inquiry, because, he said, it had ever gave it the sanction of his vote, or attemptbeen the principle and practice of our juris-ed to protect it from punishment, must be prudence to have the whole of a case before viewed in the light of an accomplice, or one any man was pronounced guilty. It was at least disposed to become the accomplice not sufficient to state that the law had been of similar transactions. Before he would violated by lord Melville; but before the proceed to the merits of the charges under house could pronounce a judgment against consideration, he thought it proper to nohim, it would be necessary to shew that he tice the arguments of the gentlemen on the had violated the law from corrupt motives. other side, not because he considered those The law might be broken, and the motives arguments possessed of any intrinsic force, not corrupt. It had never been the object but lest from the authority of the persons of the naval commissioners to try criminals, from whom they proceeded they might have or to convict men on their own confession. the effect of leading the house to a decision, Their object merely was to inquire into which, if it should correspond with the abuses, and it was for that purpose alone that wishes of those by whom such arguments they had put questions to those who came were used, must destroy its character with the before them. The house then could not, country and with all Europe. The first on the report of men having such an object gentleman with whom he would begin was in view, convict a person without hearing the last who spoke. That learned gent. dievidence at its bar. Such was the proceed- rected the whole of his observations to shew ing in the case of sir Robert Walpole, the that the house should go into a committee duke of Macclesfield, and various other per- in order to ascertain whether the breach of sons. He would not now say one word con- the act of parliament, not of which lord cerning the merits of the case; but he con- Melville stood charged, but of which he contended that the whole of it ought to be fessed himself guilty, proceeded from corheard before the house proceeded to come rupt motives. If corruption consisted mereto a decision upon it. It would be impossi- ly in a man putting money into his own ble for any man to be as capable at this mo- pocket, according to the vulgar conception, ment of determining upon the various shades perhaps some of the deductions of the learnof guilt belonging to the case, as he would ed gent. would be right. But he would be after an inquiry was gone into. From contend that nothing could be more corrupt, the report now before the house, it was im- in his opinion, than to permit a man's own possible for any man to say that lord Mel-agent to convert the money of others to his ville was personally guilty of corruptionthat he was corrupt for the sake of private emolument. Nothing like personal corruption was proved against the noble viscount. How was he to judge of his own offence but by his own understanding? How did it appear to what degree he connived at the misconduct of his servant. These and many other points were wholly left in the dark by the commissioners, and could not be cleared up without farther inquiry. Mr. Fox then rose. He said he should be extremely unwilling to suffer this question to be put without expressing his sentiments upon it. For if, unhappily, the vote of the house should be opposite to that which he hoped and wished, he should feel very uneasy indeed that his name should partake of the universal odium that must attach to any decision tending to second such notorious delinquency as the report on the table declared. He could never reconcile it to his mind to be silent upon such an occasion, lest he should be suspected of declining to mark with the strongest reprobation, guilt own private emolument. This was the amount of lord Melville's confession; and although it might be possible, from a further examination, to prove the noble lord more guilty, it did appear to him utterly impossible to prove him less so. For the most conclusive evidence of the noble lord's corruption, he would only refer to that paragraph in the report, in which the noble lord stated, that although he knew his agent Trotter was applying the public money to other purposes than that for which it was legally intended, that he did not prohibithim from doing so. What was that, he would ask, but complete corruption, even taking the case simpliciter ; but combining it with other circumstances, could any man entertain a doubt upon the subject of his guilt? What greater aggravation of his delinquency in tolerating the breach of his own act of parliament could be imagined than allowing his agent to misapply the public money, for the safe custody of which that act was intended? But it is pretended that no loss had accrued to the public from this the attorney-general to prosecute ; whether by moving an impeachment, or preparing a bill of pains and penalties, which perhaps would be the more proper mode of proceed malversation, and a very singular argument was advanced, that as there was no loss there was no risk. Now, said the hon. gent., it unfortunately happened in certain parts of my life, which I do not quote with a viewing, he would maintain that the confession to recommend my example to others, that of the party accused, would be evidence to I was in the habits of engaging in certain proceed upon, and that the house was now speculations which are commonly called called on to act, as it must in every similar gaming. If a man should, in that kind of case, as a grand jury, to pronounce upon speculation, win a large sum of money, I the guilt of the accused. It was strange to am sure that an argument would not thence hear it asserted, that the accused was not arise that he had made no risk. I rather guilty, because no loss had accrued from think the natural inference would be that this scandalous transaction. To those to his risk was considerable. Probably however, whom the loss of honour was nothing, perin this case, lord Melville did take care that haps, it might be said that no loss had Trotter should not lose any money. Trotter arisen. But what was the loss of honour to was the confidential agent of lord Melville, that government which after such a palpable and lord Melville was the confidential agent instance of delinquency, should preserve its of the state. Therefore, in this sort of spe- connexion with the delinquent? and what culation in which Trotter engaged, lord Mel- the loss of character and honour to that house, ville could guard against much risk. If should it attempt by its vote, to screen such two men play at cards together, and a third a delinquent? infinitely more than any sum person stands behind one of them and throws of money could amount to.-Whatever the hints to the other, he that receives the learned gent. to whom he had already adverthints is tolerably sure of winning. Just so ed might assert, he could not see that any in this business; lord Melville knew when farther inquiry could be necessary to enable the navy bills were likely to be funded, and the house to decide that a great public officer Mr. Trotter could act upon the information who allowed his servants to make illicit prohe might rececive. Will any one say, then, fits from the public money, in the teeth of that from such acting upon such information, an act of parliament, was guilty of a most no loss would accrue to the public? On the serious offence. The guilt consisted in the contrary, I maintain, that the public did violation of the law, and it never could be suffer a loss of 1 per cent. upon the discount pretended that any such violation could be of such bills. But, then observed the hon. innocent. There were, indeed, many cases member, the learned gent. desired the house in which the most severe punishments atto go into an inquiry, in order to obtain tached to offences to which the charge of farther evidence. He would appeal to the moral turpitude did not apply, but which judgment of the house, whether any farther were criminal in consequence of the precept evidence could be necessary to enable it to of the law. Such were many of the ofcome to a decided opinion upon the breach fences against our revenue laws. Not two of law, which the noble lord himself con- years ago an act was passed declaring a man fessed? That opinion the house was called guilty of felony, without benefit of clergy, on to declare. The public had a right to if paper of a certain sort should be found in demand it from them. It was said, that the his possession, this sort of paper being used house ought not to think of acting judicially, for the manufacture of bank notes. Now, of inflicting punishment without the fullest the reason of this statute was this, that a examination into the merits of the accusa- man could not be presumed to have such tion, and affording the accused the fullest paper in his possession but with a criminal opportunity of vindicating himself. And so intention. Therefore the breach of the act far as the confession of lord Melville went, was proof against him. And the act of the he had been already tried. He would, how- 25th of the king, which applied to the ever, defy those gentlemen who rested their case under consideration, was drawn up objection so much upon the question of upon a similar principle, and the breach of punishment, to shew, that it was at all in it was to be deemed the proof of the crithe power of that house to inflict any minal intention. Upon this proof, those punishment on such delinquents as lord Mel- which arose out of the reason of the law, ville and Trotter. But if the house should he had no hesitation in pronouncing the determine on prosccution in any way with a noble lord guilty. At all events, there was view to punishment; whether by directing no man who could say that strong suspicion did not attach to him. When private indi- | this occasion? Not, certainly, upon that viduals became the objects of suspicion, it of lord Melville, for his character was entirewas their own affair; but when suspicion ly gone; but upon the character of the house attached to men of high rank in the state, and the government, which muat depend it became a matter of great public interest. upon the vote of this night. As to the chaPutting all the circumstances of the case racter of lord Melville it was so completely together, he could not see that any thing destroyed in public estimation for ever, that could be obtained to avert the judgment of he would venture to say, that were the vote the house from farther inquiry. Whatever of the house unanimous in his favour, it delay might take place, there was only one would not have the slightest effect in wiping mode of confirming still farther the guilt of away the stigma that was universally affixed lord Melville, and that was in case Trotter to his name." What, then, must the world should " 'peach;" but there was no mode think of retaining such a man at the head of or evidence possible to be imagined that could the glory of the country? It was dreadful refute that which lord Melville himself con- to reflect that the most honourable claims fessed. On that confession then, he called should be placed at the disposal of a man, upon the house to proceed, by adopting the with whose name dishonour was inseparamotion of his hon. friend. With respect to bly associated-who had confessed himself the charge of lord Melville's having partici- guilty of an act of corrupt illegality.—Are pated of the profits resulting from Trotter's we, said the hon. gent., to connive at and application of the public money, he could approve of all this, when even the right not say that there was direct evidence be- hon. gent, who has moved the previous quesfore the house; but there certainly was tion, will not go the length of approving all strong ground of suspicion. The noble he has done. Sir, we have heard to-night, lord, it would be recollected, retained with sentiments of exultation, the brilliant the office of treasurer of the navy for efforts of a noble friend of mine (lord H. several years after he was appointed to Petty) on the bench behind me: there is that of secretary of state, and when in that not a man in the house capable of appreciathouse allusion was made to the circum-ing virtue and genius, who did not feel a stance of his holding the two offices, the secret satisfaction in the speech of that noble answer from the other side of the house lord. I recollect, sir, when the right hon. was, that although he held those offices, gent. on the opposite bench (Mr. Pitt) made he only received the salary of secretary his first essay in this house, I recollect, and of state, and nothing from the treasury of many in the house must recollect also, the the navy. Ay, that is nothing of the legal just pride which we all felt to see him, salary. Did not this justify something more much at the same age then that the noble than suspicion? Why should the noble lord lord behind me now is, distinguishing himso fondly cling to this office of his friend, self in hunting down corruption, in unmaskMr. Trotter? There were many other per- ing abuses in the public expenditure, in prosons among even his own relations who posing and enforcing reforms of various would have been glad to occupy this situa-kinds. What a contrast does his conduct on tion. But no; lord Melville seemed parti- this night afford! Under what sort of ficularly attached to it, and would any man of gure does he appear? "Heu! quantum common sense, in considering a thing of mutatus ab illo !" The right hon. gent. (Mr. this kind, make no inference from that at- Canning) who now fills the office of treasutachment. Another objection arose against rer of the navy, asserts that it is physically the proposed committee, from this consi- impossible to act up to the letter of the act, deration, that he did not see that any of the and has amused the house with an account difficulties which some gentlemen complain- of fractional sums of 8s. 6d. 14s. and 2s. of could be removed; that any of the ob- and then turns short upon us, and asks how scure accounts could be explained. Those it is possible to pay all those trifling claims accounts were indeed of such a nature, that by drafts upon the bank? I do not say it is; the parties themselves could not understand but does he not keep money in the iron chest them, and how, then, could it be possible of his office to pay them, and are not the for a committee of that house to make any sub-accountants furnished with the means of thing of them -It had been said that the liquidating them? But these abuses, it is house should proceed with the utmost deli-said, can never occur again; Mr. Trotter, beration in deciding upon character. But in his dying legacy to his successors, has upon whose character were they to decide on pointed out the means of preventing it. |