616 ANNUAL RE 
much force upon «the :two 1000/1. 
bank notes, traced to the private 
use of the noble ‘defendant, which 
had been issued for naval purposes 3 
and ebserved, that if their lordships 
were convinced that the noble de- 
fendant had criminally misapplied 
one shilling of.the public money, and 
had converted it to his own private 
use and advantage, he was guilty in 
the eye of the law. He insisted, in 
the strongest terms, that neither 
Jord M. nor Mr. 'T’, were authorised 
to make private. use of the mouey 
entrusted to them; that balances of 
many thousand pounds remained in 
the hands of lord M. unaccounted 
for, from 1784 to 1800: that his 
Jordship’s declaration, that he would 
not tell how he had disposed of cer- 
tain sums, was a gross and daring 
violation of the law of the land : and 
that the representation of Mr. 'Trot- 
ter, in which he stated that lord M. 
had rejected an application of his to 
employ the public. money for his 
lordship’s. advantage, was an insult 
to the discernment of the house. 
THE DEFENCE, 
Mr, Plomer, the succeeding day, 
entered upon lord Melville’s defence, 
and continued, through that and the 
following day, to enforce his lord- 
ship’s innocence, and_ the propricty 
and justice of his acquittal. He 
began by stating, that his mind was 
relieved from much of that anxiety 
which. he had originally felr, inas- 
mich as he was. now justified in 
saying, after having heard the-case 
on the. part of the prosecution, that 
the.noble defendant was not called 
upon to answer for any malversa- 
tions of his own, but for the mal- 
versations of those in whom it had 
been his misfortune to place-implicit 
and unlimited confidence.. The 
GISTER, 
prosecutors, he said, were the 
knights and burgesses of the united 
1806. 
parliament of the British empire,a — 
body every way qualified and armed. 
with due authority and power to en- — 
force their accusations, and from 
whose discrimination and collective 
wisdom it was impossible for guilt 
to shield itself. 
the prosecution were men of splen- 
did talents, and high character, pos- 
sessing great assiduity and zeal, and 
every way competent to the task 
assigned them.—Yet, with all that 
power, assiduity, and zeal, he should 
prove, and he hoped most satisfac. 
torily, thatthere was not the smallest 
foundation for the charges pre- 
ferred. When he said that, he did 
not mean to impute blame to the 
house of commons for prosecuting 
the charges. There had unques- 
tionably existed great abuses in many 
of the public departments of govern, 
ment, and perhaps more particular- 
ly in the office of treasurer of the 
nayy—it was therefore proper the 
public should have the matter sifted 
to the hottom.—Had that been done 
in the first instance, no member of 
the house of commons would have 
violated the first principle of justice, 
by condemning a man unheard, Un- 
fortunately a different course had 
been pursued—an address had been 
carried to the foot of the throne, 
prejudgigg, the case of the noble 
lord, afid guilt ‘presumed before it 
had been clearly proved and estab- 
lished. In consequence of such un- 
just proceedings, the noble defen- 
dant had been severed from his ma- | 
jesty’s councils for ever, and in that 
act -he had suffered the worst of pu- 
nishments that could be inflicted 
upon an honourable: and. feeling 
mind.+—But in what light must such 
premature punishment appear,when, 
after 
The managers of — 
i 
