Mar. 10. 1855.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES, 



177 



LONDON. SATURDAY, MARCH 10. 1855. 

 ARTHUR MOORE AND THE MOORE3. 



(Contimied from p. 159.) 



The year 1714 opened inauspiciously for Arthur 

 Moore. His friends, the Tory Ministry, with the 

 view of reconciling Parliament to the treaties of 

 peace, and to strike a farther blow at Marlborough 

 and Godolphin, presented a report from the Com- 

 missioners of Public Accounts, setting forth the 

 abuses and mismanagements in clothing the army. 

 Of course the Commissioners would be as gentle 

 and delicate towards their friends as possible, and 

 yet they were compelled to state that a contract 

 had been made by Sir J. Tredenham and Arthur 

 Moore, Esq., Comptroller of the Accounts of the 

 Army, in the year 1706, for clothing six regiments 

 of foot ; that the contractor acknowledged that 

 he was only a nominee in the affair, and "only 

 employed as an agent for the said Sir J. Treden- 

 ham and Arthur Moore," and received " a gratuity 

 from them for the trouble they had given him in 

 this matter." It farther appeared that the price 

 charged to Government was 17,061/. I85., whereas 

 the actual amount paid to the contractor was 

 13,61 IZ. 10s. Arthur Moore explained that this 

 was done with the knowledge and approval of 

 Godolphin ; that 508/. was allowed to each of the 

 colonels of the several regiments, and that these 

 sums, together with trifling expenses of packing, 

 &c., made up the difference, and that "the Comp- 

 troller always imagined they had done the Go- 

 vernment a very eminent piece of service in the 

 affair." The Commissioners however report, that 

 even if they accepted Mr. Moore's explanation, 

 still "it was extraordinary the Comptroller should 

 accept proposals from one unable to perform so 

 great a contract, and reject those offered by suffi- 

 cient and wealthy persons," and that, considering 

 the disagreement of the evidence and the evidence 

 withheld, they, instead of drawing conclusions of 

 their own, leave the whole to the consideration of 

 the House. 



The Whigs now adopted the policy of the 

 Tories — followed their example, and began to 

 inquire into the secrets of office. Even while 

 the Queen yet lived, the dissatisfaction of the 

 merchants with the " Explanations," as they were 

 called, of the Treaty of Commerce between Great 

 Britain and Spain, found a voice in the House 

 of Lords. Accounts of the proceedings are to 

 be found in many cotemporary works, but I know 

 of none better than that in the Parliamentary 

 History (vol. vi. p. 1361.). On the 8th July, the 

 Lords summoned the Commissioners of Trade and 

 proceeded to examine them. The set, if I may 

 use the phrase — the blow, as it is called, — was, 



we are told, " chiefly levelled at the Lord Boling- 

 broke and his agent Moore ; " and the other Com- 

 missioners were ready and willing to leave Moore 

 to bear the honours and responsibilities of the 

 whole Board. 



"The Earl of Wharton said ironically, 'he did not 

 doubt but one of those gentlemen could make it appear 

 that the Treaty of Commerce with Spain was very ad- 

 vantageous : which was meant of Arthur Moore, who had 

 the chief management of that affair, and who contradicted 

 himself in his answers to several questions asked him by 

 the Lord Cowper, about the three explanatory Articles.' '•' 



It was, indeed, generally asserted and believed 

 that Moore had been bribed to give his assent to 

 these explanatory articles, and the Secretary to 

 the Commissioners deposed, — 



" That Mr. Moore had shown him a letter in French 

 from Monsieur Ovry, directed to Don Arturio Moro, im- 

 porting in substance ' that he must not expect the 2,000 

 Louis d'ors per annum that had been promised him, un- 

 less he got the explanatoiy Articles ratified.' " 



As I know nothing of Moore's defence, it may 

 be just here to observe, as subsequently appeared 

 on the impeachment of Harley, that, at that time, 

 Sir Patrick Lawless was in England acting 

 secretly as Minister to the King of Spain, and 

 passing under the name of Don Carlo Moro. 



The Secretary to the Treasury and the first 

 Clerk — 



" Confessed that they were only nominal assignees for 

 the greater part [of the profits] reserved for the Queen 

 [by the Assiento Contract], and that some persons to them 

 unknown (but who were" strongly suspected to be the 

 Lord Bolingbroke, the Lady Masham, and Mr. Arthur 

 IMoore) were to have the benefit of it." 



The Lord Wharton moved for an address to 

 the Queen, — 



" To give to the South Sea Company, not only that 

 quarter part of the Assiento Contract [the part of the 

 profits reserved to her Majesty by the Contract], but also 

 the 7h per cent, granted to Mannasses Gilligan, and any 

 otherprofits arising from that Contract," 



which, however, was lost by fifty votes against 

 forty-three. 



" This day's debate," says the reporter, " took up the 

 Lords till nine o'clock in the evening ; so that they had 

 no time, as some Whig lords designed it, to proceed to the 

 censure of Mr. Moore." 



This Gilligan may have been the Gillingham, 

 " an Irish Papist," as described in the " Report of 

 the Committee of Secrecy," who was sent to Spain- 

 to settle the commercial treaty. He was, I pre- 

 sume, the party alluded to, under initials, in the 

 following report of Moore's salaries and profits in. 

 the " Letter " referred to in the previous article : 



"That as a reward for my honesty, I enjoy as C — r of 



Tr per annum . - - - WOOL 



As the K. of Sp— n's agent for the Ass— nto - 3000Z. 



As ditto, by Gil an, my deputy - - SOOOi 



As Paymaster ----- 6000?. 



And I proceed to show I pay out of it to my two 



