316 LORD MELVILLE. [1805. 



I give you this only as the talk of uninformed persons. 

 The general question seems to me very short and clear. 

 Whether the public lost or won whether Lord Mel- 

 ville gained or not whether even Trotter gained or 

 not, I have no reason to inquire. A statute provides 

 to the public money security against risk, and a high 

 officer in a station of great trust acts in the teeth of 

 that provision. The public has incurred risk; and if 

 you were to prove that it had gained instead of losing, 

 I would only say, ' So much the more dangerous is 

 the precedent/ If it is argued that Lord Melville 

 served the State with the navy money on pressing 

 emergencies, the answer is plain : he should have 

 applied for a bill of indemnity. But, in truth, such a 

 bill could only have been got for a part of the trans- 

 action so extremely trifling, that the application would 

 have ruined his cause. 



" But though the above is clearly the naked State 

 question, I am far from viewing the facts of profit and 

 loss as indifferent. It is something that such sharks 

 should be brought to justice ; and it is much, much 

 indeed, that an attempt is made to wipe off this first 

 foul stain which the country has ever received from 

 the conduct of its rulers. Dirty fingers will abso- 

 lutely not do in England. 



" All people of any character here seem to feel much 

 upon the occasion and well they may, upon national 

 grounds. 



" But those who love Dundas with the pure affec- 

 tion which I bear him, must feel a mixed sensation 



