APPENDIX to the CHRONICLE. 
said he had no doubt but that was 
one of the notes so issued. He then 
turned ‘to the second entry of 
50,000]. and proved that a part of 
that issue was paid in three i000l. 
-bank notes, Nos. 212,213, and 214, 
dated 7th November in the same 
year. The issue of any specilic 
note on the 3d entry could not be 
proved. 
Mr. William Heald, a clerk at 
Messrs. Drummonds’, proved, that 
_ on the 29th of November, 1782, a 
note of 1000]. No. 212, was paid 
intp their house in discharge ofa 
sum credited to lord Melville of 
600]. and that 4001. was given in 
change.—‘*‘ This was paid on lord 
Melville’s private account,” said the 
managers, ‘* and was one of the 
notes drawn from the public service 
in the second entry.” 
It was then shewn, that divers 
sums were, from time to time, paid 
into Messrs. Drummonds’ by Mr. 
Douglas, upon lord Melville’s pri- 
vate account, but nothing specific 
was proved. 
_ ‘The managers then produced an 
admission, in lord Melville’s hand- 
_ writing, that he was indebted to the 
lord advocate of Scotland, on the 
_ 16th of November, 1802, in thesum 
of 10001. and it was subsequently 
proved, that the bank note, No. 
12, for 10001. part of the first issue 
_ of public money, as above entered, 
_ was paid to the account of the lord 
_ advocate at Messrs. Moffatt and 
- Kensington’s, in discharge of such 
_ debt,in the same month of Novem- 
_ ber, 1802. 
_ Mr, Whitbread now tendered 
himself as a witness. He stated 
that he heard Jord Melville declare 
in the house of commons, the 11th 
_ of June, 1804, that he felt himself 
bound in honour to conceal the ap- 
611 
plication of one sum of 10,000I. 
of the public money, and that he 
was determined. not to reveal it. 
On his cross-examination he admit. 
ted, that the tendency of his lord. 
ship’s speech, on the occasion allud- 
ed to, went to affirm that the money 
was not applied to hisown private 
purposes. ; 
The fact of his lordship having 
declined to answer questions put to 
him by the commissioners of naval 
inquiry, was then given in evidence. 
Another entry in the treasurer’s 
banking-book of the 11th of July, 
1803, for 6,000]. and a correspond. 
ing issue of 6 1000]. bank notes, 
Nos..261 to 267 (omitting 265) was 
then proved : butas the managers 
could trace none of these notes to 
his lordship’s private account, 
they contented themselves with 
shewing, that the money was paid 
to the defendant, and that no cor- 
responding entries were made to 
prove that the same was applied to 
naval services. 
Mr. Whitbread was again ex- 
amined as a witness, to prove that 
lord Melville had confessed to his 
having applied a second sum of 
10,0001. to purposes not naval, in 
Scotland. On his - cross-examina- 
tion, however, he admitted, that 
his lordship denied that the money 
was applied to his own private pur- 
poses. 
The release signed by lord Mel- 
villeand Mr. Trotter, on the 13th 
and 23d of February, 1803, was 
then put in, and read as evidence. 
By this, the partics mutually 
agreed to cancel and destroy all 
vouchers, documents, writings, &c. 
that had heretofore existed between 
them, and to exonerate each other, 
their heirs, &c. fom all further 
claim or demand : and ¢fter that 
Rr 2 Mr. 
