Abbildungen der Seite


and, at the time that Lord Melville 10 answer all these demands from the went out of office, the last balance that Treasurer of the Navy. No such thing; was struck amounted to 290,000 l. Did for you will find, on comp?tisor, that Lord Melville make any enquiry what when 490,00cl. were oui, te bad but he was doing with this? No, it never 16,0011. at Messrs. Coutts's; and that at struck him once that it was an improper many times when the balances were very thing in itself to be done; and yet it large in his hands, he had very small was a matter of great importance that sums at Niessrs. Coutts's ; and at other he should know what Mr Trotter was times that his account was orer-drawn; about, because, not only his own cha. therefore it could be for ny other por: racter, but his fortune was a stake. pos- but to outain private prest and My Lords, we charge, and shall prore, emolument, and there we unquestionthat the money was exposed to great abis prore ihe second, tird, and fourti risk of loss, by being no at Nlessis. articles together, barer, that be did Cuutts's but at Mr Trutter's own dispo- this for the parpose of prate enou, sal; for though it was nominals at

Ari Lord Nelsie bas indeed Messrs. Coutis's, for the purpose ci care ai nitted to the Commississers of Xayal rring on the business of the otce, re: Esquirt 2: he seered V: Tretter to I shali shew it was erert where a'rost do this for the purpose of private e.obut at Messrs. Ceuris's; and I can lurer, sher instances where great !: 125 Fox, a Lords, we come to be!2s! risked. We charge that rutonstrere divisio: or this accusation against the was a great riss or iss, but that the role ! :d; we cure schege uza roner is pihus for the cus. Lörd Mese, thx bec:: directiy partitroul of the Treasurer e: the Sary. cipate in the pros:3 12:55 V: Tro:Waist the cer was ia the Bici ier; sebere specibe ide, 28 we England i was a vers under bis cor- sta! pcre iteiteas of hose accounts tra; the reret a cit's perer of ic Lover." 23 so pitice 20:3er put it wade: ts can i mieisimpe. medzer. IV: Treier sed, or 25. Tiere cores e Foto: Jese see us wied, a.the secerate artic'esiseseis: RE: 2-mibe eteride cu Led Jense te bez , rateizza totoong in Tiersee lart, be: we To:1štas ceased N!- Trotte distretajsbesce cite=51.7 pairste botes, * nie: 13 aces Labs 9:0:32 cate oboree. Toer *dea: 223E1325 27

Barbecues :
Gas I sus,

Haa I.. Veo:

: e:: Tel:


Sitede pasa tel: ****East

un Bale

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

Trotter to him. He participated, se- account. He contended that Lord Melcondly, in a transaction in which interest ville knew the chest account contained was charged by Mr Troster to him. advances of public money, and that he He participated in a third transaction authorised this transfer: where no interest was charged by Mr Mr Whitbread then stated the circumTrotter to him : they stand in the arti- stances from Trotter to be such that the cles in that order, but, for the purpose advances he made to Lord Nelville of explaining the transactions to your could not be made out of his private Lordships more perspicuously, I beg to fortune. That in 1787 he advanced to alter, but not lo invert the order of Lord Melville on, bond the sum of them; and to take the middle charge 4,000l., for which it appeared no interfirst and then the other two together, est was paid, and therefore the advance

By the eighth article it is charged that must have been known by Lord Mel. Lorá Melville obtained and received of ville, to have been out of public money, Mr Trotter a sum of 22,000l., or some He stated that Mr. Trotter was in the other large sum of money advanced to constant receip: of his lordship's salary, him by Mr Trotter, and for which i: has which was origiually kept in a separate been olledged by Lord Melville that he account; that there was another separate was to pay interest. And we further account kept for the Melville Castle, but charge a destruction of papers to con- it being afterwards found inconvenient ceal this account also.

to keep so many accounts, they all resol. Mr TVhitbread then stated the cir. ved themselves into two, viz. the Acmstans in stock, the particulars of of the purchase of 13,500l. count Current and the Chest Account.

Mr Whitbread proceeded I would which are detailed in Mr. Trotter's evi. not consuine your Lordships time in dence; and insisted, that from the circum- minute detail, but perhaps it may be as stances Lord Melville must have known well to say that large sums were paid the loan was a loan of public money. through the account current to partia

He then stated that Mr Trotter kept cular individuals. Messrs Mansfield, two accounts with Lord Melville, the Ramsay, and Co. received to the a. one entitled the Account Current, con. mount of 5,000l, which was sent thro' sisting of receipts and payments of a Mr Robert Trotter to Edinburgh, with private nature ; and the other entitled which soool. a heritable bond on landed the Chest Account, consisting of advan- security was redeemed, by which means ces made to Lord Melville out of the Lord Melyille got rid of the payment public money,

of sl. per cent. upon so much, having He then proceeded— Your Lordships obtained that loan without interest, for recollect that in the year 1797 a loan no interest was charged in the accountwas obtained from the public ly the

current or the chest account. Another subscription of a vast number of eminent sum, which it is not material to specify, individuals, as well as respectable pri, was paid through Mr Robert Trotter to vate persons, and respectable merchants, Sir William Forbes, by which Lord called the Loyalty Loan, to which I

Melville also redeemed securities at in. heard Lord Melville say, it was gener

terest. He also relied on the circum. ally understood that all persons in high stances of 200ol. East India stock, and situations of government would sub. 7oool. in the 3 per cent, Reduced, for scribe, and he put down his name for

the benefit of Lord Me ville, as sheve 10,000l. This 10,000l. he candidly ac- ing that the public money was laid oue knowledged was not in his possession, for his benefit. he therefore was to obtain it from He then stated, that in May, 1800, friends. Some persons have suspected Mr Trotter told Lord Melville, when these payments were made from Scot. he was going out of office, that it was Jand, but not a shilling of them came necessary his balances should be made from that quarter: every payment was good, and he laid before him an accurate made by Mr Trotter, out of the public statement in wrising of what his lordmoney.

ship was to make up. Mr Trotter first of all carried this He then stated that, including the 10,000l." to the account-current, and money due for the East India stock, afterwards transferred it to the chest- the loyalty Joan, the balance of the account-current, and the balance of the 22d of November and the 19th Decem.

chest-account, the whole of Lord Mel: ber, 1782, of several sums amounting • ville's debt, in May, 1800, amounted to together to upwards of 188,000l. out of

about 70,00cl, which was discharged which 11,000l. was received in cash, by borrowing 13,000l. of Messrs Coutts, and the rest by credit on the bank. upon the Security of his Lordship, and One of the bank notes, for 1000l. rehis son Mr Robert Dundas ; and by ceived at the Exchequer on the 6th No. borrowing a further sum of Mr Mark vember 1782, was paid a week after. Sprott upon the security of Lord Mel wards into the banking house of Messrs ville's stock.

Drummonds (but it did not appear by Mr Whitbread then uttered a fine whon) to the credit of Lord Melville's panegyric upon Lord St. Vincent, who private account, and one of the nutes had been the occassion of the act for received at the Exchequer on the 22d appointing Commissioners of Naval En. November 1782 was paid a fortnight afquiry, and highly commended the con- terwards to Messrs Moffatt and Co. duct of those commissioners who had bankers, to take up a bill drawn by Mr laid the foundation of this prosecution. New.iggin upoa Lord Melville.' Se. He disclaimed all intention of imputing veral sums were paid by Mr Douglas to Lord Melville the sordid passion of to Lord Melville's private account with avarice. He admitted that his lordship Messrs Drummonds, during 1782, 1783, was of a frank and generous spirit in 1784, and 1785. Messrs Drummond gave money matters, but argued that, al notice to Lord Melville, that his account though he might not be desirous of ac- was overdrawn on the 230 June 1785, quiring wealth, he might have the desire to the amount of 2950l. and upwards. of being supplied with money to gratify The sums which were paid in to the crehis love of hospitality and thirst für dit of this account next after that notice power.

were the sum of 2000l. paid in on the Mr Whitbread then concluded, and 4th day of October 1785, being a bill the court adjourned to the following remitted from Scotland, and the sum of day.

3600l. paid in on the 29th day of DeThe next four days were occupied in cember 1785, being another remittance proving some of the formal parts of ihe from Scotland. Differences were proved case, and in the examination of various to exist between the official balances of persons from the Exchequer, the Trea- the Treasurer of the Navy, and the ba. sury, the Bank of England, the Navy lances of the bank, at several periods Pay - office, the Banking Houses of between the date of Lord Melville's Messrs Drummond, Messrs Moffatt and first appointments, and the month of Co. and Messrs Smith, Payne, and December 1785, and in that month the Smith, the substance of whose evidence difference was 10,60ol. In December was as follows.

1785 Mr Douglas died, and his execu. Previous to the act 25 Geo. 3. C. 31 tor paid to Lord Melville upwards of (for regulating the office of Treasurer 4000l., the balance of Exchequer fees of the Navy) it was the practice for the then in his hands. Paymaster of the Navy to attend at t?e Mr Whitbread (une of the managers) Exchequer, and receive in so much then offered himself as a witness, and of the money directed to be issued to proved that on the rith June 1805, he ,the Treasurer, as he thought fit so to re. heard Lord Melville declare in the ceive, and to receive the rest by'a cre- House of Commons, that, during the dit on the Bank of England. From the paymastership of Mr Douglas, he postime of Lord Melville's appointment in sessed himself of public money to the 1782, until December 1785, during so amount of 10,000), or thereabouts, and long as his Lordship was Treasurer, the that he would not reveal the applica. late Andrew Douglas acted as his Pay. tion of it, being impelled by motives of master, and attended at the Exchequer public duty, private honour, and perfor this purpose. He also drew all the sonal convenience, to conceal it; and 'money from the bank which was issued that he accompanied this admission with for Navy services. Three several is- a declaration, that he had not converted sues were made from the Exchequer to any part of this sum to his own profit Mr Douglas on the 6th November, the or emolument.


[merged small][ocr errors]

The examination of Lord Melville that speech, I will tell him whether I taken before the Commissioners of Na. can repeat the substance of it or not. val Enquiry in November 1804, and Did the Noble Lord, in the course of two letters from his Lordship to the his speech with respect to the sum in Commissioners, were read.

question, negative the appropriation of The sixth and seventh days were that sum, the same as of the other, to principally occupied with the examina- · his own private use ?-I understood him. tions, first of Mr Whitbread, and after- to do it exactly in that way as with rewards of Mr Trotter, both of which are gard to the other sum of 10,000l. given at length.

Do you recollect that the Noble Lord Mr Whitbread, one of the Managers for at the same time, in the most positive the Commons, rose and said, I again offer and explicit manner, did deprecate any myself as a witness to your Lordships, appropriation of these sums to bis own and I swear, that on the rith of June private use, or Mr Trotter's ?-I do 1.805, I heard Lord Melville declare, not think that he did, in precise and exwith reference to another sum of 10,000l. plicit terms, negative that fact. than that respecting which I de posed Can you, by referring to the notes. on the other day, that he did, at a sub- you took at that time, be able to speak sequent time to the time at which he with more positiveness and precision possessed himself of the first 10,000!., upon that part of the subject? I do possess himself of another sum, nearly not think I could speak with more poto a similar amount; and I understood, sitiveness and certainty. in substance, that Lord Melville said, Was no note taken upon that subject ? that he would not reveal the application - Yes; but when expressions are equi. of that money, any more than the first vocal, it is difficult by any note exactly 10,000l., and from the same motive. to give the precise meaning the words This was said in the presence of hun, are meant to convey. dreds of persons ; and I propose, on a

What was that equivocal expression future day, to call another witness to that was used upon that occasion ?--I the testimony which I have given. do not recollect the precise words, but

without recollecting the precise words, Cross-examined.

one may have a recollection that there It is presumed the honourable Mana. was an equivocal sense pervading seveger, upon this subject any more than ral sentences. the other, did not, at the time, take any Endeavour to recollect the substance note or minute in writing of what pas- of what was said in that part of the nosed? I certainly at that time took a ble lord's speech that made that impres.. note of the substance of all that Lord sion ?-The impression intended to be Melville said, but not of the exact, conveyed by that part of the nobie, words.

lord's speech to which I presume the The speech of Lord Melville in the learned counsel means to refer ; the imhouse took up a considerable 'time? pression intended to have been convey. Yes, upwards of two hours, I dare say.'. cd, I apprehend to have been, that he had

Could you undertake to repeat by not directed Mr Trotter to make use heart any passages that made favourably of any public money for his private ad. : for Lord Melville, as well as those that vantage. With regard to the permission you have now given to the court? I which he had given to Mr Trotter, I have repeated by heart certain words think the words were pretty precisely which I have sworn that Lord Melville, that he had given Mr Trotter such perspoke; any other particular words of mission. his speech I am not quite sure that I Permission to do what?--To place could repeat: I am only swearing to the public money at other places than the substance of what Lord Melville said, the bank, and also to make use of a

Can you repeat the substance of any part of it for his own advantage. other part of Lord Melville's speech It is begged to repeat the question, which was favourable to Lord Melville? whether the noble Lord did not in the -If the learned counsel will point my most explicit and positive terms attention to any particular passage of deny that he bad either given any per

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]


mission or had any knowledge of the solemnly assert, before that house, that public money being laid out to any he never knew that Mr Trotter had purposes of private emolument or pro- drawn any money for the purposes of ht, either for himself or Mr Trotter? - private emolument, in manifest evasion I wish the learned counsel to interpret of the act!-I am speaking to the what he means by laid out :' I under- speech, and not to the pamphlet; the stood the noble Lord to say, or at least pamphlet, which I have read more than implied from it, that he had permitted once, does not in every part of it exactly Mr Trotter to place the public money correspond with the speech as delivered at other places besides the bank, for his by the nobie defendant in the House of own private purposes ; with regard to Commons, to the best of my recolleco other places, that he did not do any tion and belief. Whether those precise such thing.

words were uttered in the House of Whether the honourable manager Commons, it is impossible for me to does not distinctly recollect that the say; but whether they were or not, averment of the noble defendant upon the context of all he said was, to make that subject, of placing it, was, that he the impression upon my mind which D had given no other permission but to have had the honour of stating to the remove the money from the bank to a court. private bank, for the convenience of It is begged to have a precise and appropriating it to the public service ? swer, whether those words, or to that? Certainly one of the reasons given by effect and substance, were used by the the noble Lord was, that he had allow. noble defendant : I will repeat them ads ed the money to be removed to a prie gain, “I never knew that Mr Trotter vate banker's, for official convenience, “ had drawn any money for private eu but it did not appear to me that that “molument in manifest evasion of the was the only reason.

"aet" - can give no other answer Then, having said one of the reasons than I have heretofore done, and I hopen assigned by the noble Lord was, that it that is perfectly satisfactory to the might be there for the public conveni- court that. I am not speaking to the ence, did he give any other reason be. words of that pamphlet, but to the sides ?-Yes, I understood for the emo. words of the speech, without recolleclument of Mr Trotter; and the noble ting precise parts of it. Lord described the manner in which he The word • pamphleti has not been thought that emolument bad accrued, made use of; but it is asked, whether namely, by interest paid by Mr Coutts in substance the noble defendant did to Mr Trotter for lodging that money. not imply to the effect I am stating?

Be so good as refresh your memory I do not recollect the precise words, upon the subject, and say whether the nor do I think that the very substance sole reason given by the noble defen- of those words was uttered in any predant was not, that the sole object of re. cise form by the noble Lord. moving it from the bank was for pub- Whether you mean not only to nega. lic convenience ; but at the same time tive the precise expression that has did suspect or believe that an advan. been stated, but to negative also the tage had accrued to Mr Trotter from substance !-- I do not mean to negative that act, which was not done for his ad- the substance altogether of Lord Mella vantage, but for public convenience ? ville having criticised upon what the

- That was not the way in which I un- words. « manifest evasion' meant"; the derstood it altogether.

substance of the speech was what I have Whether you have refreshed your me- given to your Lordships : the words mory since you heard the speech, by a themselves I do not recollect. Fitte reference to what was stated on Satur. I am not answered yet; I wished to day as intended to be read in evidence, know, whether in words and in saba the substance of the speech delivered ? stance, and also to the effect of what was I have not looked at the pamphlet in stated just now, was or was not made question since I have been otherwise use of by the noble Lord !--Not to that most laboriously occupied.

precise effect; to an effect very nearly Whether the noble defendant did similar, not, in express terms, say, that he did State what was the averment upon


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


« ZurückWeiter »