APPENDIX to the CHRONICLE. 
Hlegal ; and that his lordship stood 
convicted of that charge upon his 
‘ownadmission. He also knew that 
the receipt for that 10,000I. was, 
within the two or three last days, in 
‘the defendant’s possession ; and if 
he did not produce it, he should 
_ prove that the money was not ap- 
plied to naval purposes, and that 
would be suflicient to substantiate 
‘the charge. After enumerating a 
* variety of transactions, Mr. -Whit- 
bread stated, that in November 
' 1782, his lordship’s’ paymaster 
drew 45,0001. from the bank, 
40,0001. of which was entered to the 
account of the treasurer of the 
“navy ; the remaining 5,000]. ‘was 
never carried to any public account, 
but conveyed to the éron chests iu 
the treasurer’s office, which sum he 
charged the noble defendant with 
converting to his own private pur- 
poses.—tfie next alluded toa draft of 
16,0001., of which, he said, only 
$,0001. had found its way into any 
public book of accounts, and, of 
consequence, the remainder had be- 
‘come subservient to his lordship’s 
peculations. Mr. Whitbread then 
came to the time when the act pass- 
ed for the better regulating the office 
_of treasurer of the navy; an att, 
_ Said the hon. gentleman, ofhis lord- 
_ship’s-own framing ; and yet, with 
full conviction. of his error, he was 
the first to violate it. He then 
Spoke of Mr. Alexander Trotter’s 
_ appointment of paymaster, remark- 
ed onhis scanty fortune at the time 
of thatappointment, and then enter- 
edinto a very lengthened detail of 
the manner of drawing the public 
“money from the bank, of placing it, 
mixed with other monies, at Messrs. 
~ Coutts’s, and of the subsequent il- 
 degal use of it : in short, he endea- 
_ youred to develope that system of 
Vou. XLVIII. f 
609 
fraudulent application of the public 
money, which the charges imputed 
to the defendant’s knowledge and 
connivance, and by which the law 
had been grossly violated, the par~ 
ties acting in the system enriched, 
and the country injured and im- 
poverished.: Mr. Whitbread then 
entered more minutely into the mat- 
ters of charge, and said he~ should 
prove that Mr. Trotter took large 
sums from the bank in advance, 
lodged them at his private banker’gy. 
and diverted the balances. Lord 
Melville, he contended, must have 
known of it: and if he had not par- 
ticipated, the notorious misapplica- 
tion of the public money by his 
paymaster made ita fit subject of 
investigation. In short, the public 
money was only nominally in the 
bank ; it was any where, and every 
where, at the convenience of the 
defendant and -Mr. Trotter. He 
should also shew, that the public 
money had been employed in specus 
lations ; many of which were at- 
tended with considerable loss, such 
as must have involved Mr. Trotter 
in inevitable ruin, had he not ob- 
tained a constant supply from -the 
same public source. He meant to 
affirm, that the noble defendant was 
privy to such speculations ; and his 
conduct generally was so flagrant in 
his high official situation, that he 
merited the most severe and exem- 
plary punishment. He was aware, 
he said, that his lordship had suf- 
fered much ; his name had been eras 
ed from the councils of his majesty ; 
his criminal imprudence had also. 
placed him in his then degraded 
state; and he had to answer for 
crimes charged against him, which 
aman of honour should have avoid- 
ed, as he would avoid ignominy and 
death. He next alluded to the mu- 
Rr tual 
