36 



ANNUAL REGISTER, 1810. 



be granted, to prove tliat lord 

 Gambler's defencewas contradict- 

 ed by itself — contradicted by his 

 lordsiiip's official letters, and by 

 bis own witnesses; many of whom, 

 as to essential facts, were at vari- 

 ance with themselves and with 

 each other ; and, lastly, that the 

 chart of the positions of the ene- 

 jny's ships, on the I2th of April, a 

 most material point, was false, and 

 in every respect a foul fabrica- 

 tion. He concluded with moving, 

 '« That there be laid before the 

 House a copy of the minutes of the 

 trial of admiral Gambler, on the 

 23rd of July, 1809; also the origi- 

 nal minutes taken day by day, by 

 the deputy judge advocate." 



Sir Francis Burdett seconded 

 the motion. A long discussion 

 ensued. — Sir John Orde said, that 

 lord Gambler's conduct in the 

 affair of Basque Roads, had al- 

 ready been investigated before 

 two competent tribunals ; first, 

 before the board of admiralty ; 

 and, secondly, by a court martial. 

 To try his lordship after this, 

 would beas unjustto thenoblelord 

 esinjurious tothe service. — Gene- 

 ralLoft, loo, observed, that nothing 

 could more injuriously affect the 

 discipline of both the army and 

 navy, than that parliament should 

 take into its hands the revision of 

 the proceedings of courts-martial. 

 -—The chancellor of the Exche- 

 quer concluded a speech against 

 lord Cochrane's motion, by mov- 

 ing, as an amendment, " That the 

 word ' minutes,' in the words of 

 the original motion, be left out, 

 and the word ' sentence,' inserted 

 in its stead."— Mr. Wilberforce 

 thought the motion of lord Coch- 

 rane particularly important, as it 

 threw a gross stigma on the whole 



of the members of the court-i.iar- 

 tlal. All the evidence, however,' 

 was one way. If the sentence hiid 

 been conceived in dry or doubtful 

 terms, then the House might have 

 called for the minutes. That was 

 not the case. And all that re- 

 mained for the House to suppose 

 was, that the noble lord thought 

 differently at the time of the 

 court-martial, and that he did so 

 still. — Lord Newark spoke to the 

 same purpose, adding that lord 

 Cochrane's motion carried with it 

 a serious matter of charge, not 

 only against the members of the 

 court-martial, but almost every 

 witness who had been examined. 

 — Mr. Ponsonby could not agree 

 to vote for the motion of the noble 

 lord, because the adoption of it 

 would be a violation of one of 

 the most sacred and fundamental 

 principles of the jurisprudence of 

 Enjrland. Lord Gambler had been 

 tried by a competent jurisdiction, 

 and acquitted. 



Mr. Lyttleton admitted that the 

 House ought not to take upon 

 itself the revision of such sen- 

 tences on light grounds. But still 

 the proceedings of courts-martial 

 were liable lo revision in that 

 House, as the court of dernier re- 

 sort, because there might be in the 

 minutes of the evidence, abun- 

 dance of matter to justify the 

 House in withholding their thanks, 

 though no actual blame might 

 have been incurred by the noble 

 admiral. — Mr. Yorke observed, 

 that the question was not whether 

 the House had a right to call for 

 the minutes, but whether it was 

 necessary to do so under the cir- 

 cumstances of the case. He re.* 

 gretted that a gallant officer, who 

 had undoubtedly rendered great 



