HISTORY OF EUROPE. 
impeachment, were the lord chan- 
_cellor, bishop of St. Asaph, lords 
Ellenborough, Lauderdale, Hol- 
land, St. John, Donoughmore, So- 
mers, Grosvenor, Sidmouth and 
Stanhope; and that the -chief 
speakers on the other side were 
lord Eldon, the archbishop of Can- 
terbury, lords Hawkesbury, Aber- 
corn, Carlton and Westmoreland. 
But the noble lord, whose ingenu- 
» ity and eloquence were exerted with 
the greatest effect in defence of the 
noble lord under impeachment, was 
lord Eldon. That noble and learn- 
ed lord, considering the point of 
law to be settled by the opinions 
of the judges, directed himself 
_ in this debate, chiefly to repel from 
the noble defendant the charge of 
corruption. In the course of his 
argument for that purpose, he ad- 
mitted with great candour, and ia 
the most explicit terms, that the 
noble lord, now upon his trial, had 
been guilty of ‘ culpable negli- 
gence” in the discharge of his 
duty—and of “ criminal indul- 
gence” to his paymaster; and he 
declared, that had these been the 
charges brought by the commons, 
he must have pronounced the noble 
_ lord guilty of the charges ; but the 
noble lord was charged with cor- 
fuption, and of that crime he saw 
ist | 2d | 3d | 4th | 5th | Gth | 7th | Sth] 9th 
_ Not guilty ....} 120] 81 | 83 
Semilty ......2. 15] 54 [| 52 
Majority .....- 105} 27 | 31 
127 
no evidence that satisfied his con- 
science. 
Lord Grenville and lord isclnenth 
were not present at these discus. 
sions—nor did they vote in West- 
minster-hall. They had both at- 
tended, for the first two days, the 
examination of the evidence, but — 
finding that the time occupied in the — 
proceedings in Westminster-hall in- 
terfered with the discharge of their 
official duties, they discontinued 
their attendance, and took no part 
afterwards in the trial. 
On the 12th of June the house 
having adjourned to Westminster- 
hall, and being there resumed, the 
lord chancellor put the question, 
beginning at the junior baron, ‘Is 
‘‘ Henry viscount Melville guilty 
‘Cor not guilty?” And all the - 
lords present having declared guilty 
or not guilty, the lord chancellor, 
after casting up the votes, declared 
lord Melville not guilty. Then his 
lordship declared to him, ‘‘ that 
the lords had fully considered of 
his case, and had found him net 
guilty of high crimes and misde- 
meanors charged on him by the im- 
peachment of the house of com- 
mons.” 
Wesubjoin to this account of the 
trial, the numbers of those who 
voted guilty or not guilty on the 
different articles af impeachment, - 
10th 
135] 131] 88 | 88 121] 124 
o} 3) 47 | 50 14/11 
133, 128} 41 | 35 | 107] 107).113 
We 
