tter, who, it was said,
appropriated the public money to private purposes, at the express
connivance of Lord Melville. In making these charges Whitbread
remarked:--"To the honour of public men, charges like the present have
seldom been exhibited; and it is a remarkable circumstance that the
only instance, for a long-period, is one that was preferred against
Sir Thomas Rumbold by this noble lord himself, on the ground of
malversations in India." With respect to the first point of accusation,
it appeared from the report that there had been for several years
deficiencies in the accounts of the treasurer of the navy, to the amount
of L600,000 a year and upwards. When Lord Melville was asked a plain
question respecting the appropriation of this money, he, as well as
Trotter, professed total ignorance of the deficiencies; but presently,
beginning to recover his recollection, he confessed that from the year
1788 down to the period of his examination, he had been in the habit
of drawing out public money, and placing it in the hands of his own
bankers. When the commissioners extended their inquiries a little
further, he had the assurance to declare that they had no right to
interfere in his private affairs. In a letter to the commissioners he
acknowledged the fact of advances having been made to him, but said that
he could not give the other information required, because he could not
disclose state secrets, and because he was not in possession of the
accounts of advances made to other departments, having himself committed
them to the flames. And not only had the noble lord destroyed the
papers, but he had actually lost all recollection of the whole
transaction. This was the principal charge against the noble lord; and
Mr. Whitbread concluded by moving thirteen resolutions, founded on the
circumstances which he developed in making the whole of his charges.
Lord Melville was defended by Pitt, who observed that neither the report
nor Mr. Whitbread himself alleged that any loss had proceeded from the
transactions set forth to the public. The subject, he said, was of a
grave and solemn nature; and that if, in a great pecuniary department,
irregularities had been committed, though unattended with loss, the
house might justly set a mark on such proceedings. As, however, all
the circumstances of the case were not before them in the report, he
contended that till they were the house could not be in a situation
to come to any vote. Pitt mo