Skip to main content

Full text of "Cobbett's complete collection of state trials and proceedings for high treason and other crimes and misdemeanors from the earliest period to the present time"

See other formats


Google 



This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http: //books .google .com/I 



COMPLETE COLLECTION 

OF 

State Trials 



AND 

PROCEEDINGS FOR HIGH TREASON AND OTHEai 

CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS 

FROM THE 

EARLIEST PERIOD TO THE YEAR 1783, 

« 

WITH KOTES AXD OTHER ILLUSTRATIONS: 

0OMPIL£I) BY 

T. B. HOWELL, Esq. F.R.S. F.S.A. 

-^ INCLUDING, 

IN ADDITION TO THE WHOLE OF THE MATTER CONTAINED IN THE 

I 

FOLIO EDITION OF HARGRAVE, 

WPWAIBLDS OF TWO HUNDRED CASES X EVER BEFORE COLLECTED; 

TO WHICH IS SUBJOINED 

A Table of Parallel Reference, 

EIBDEBIIIO THIS EDITION APPLICABLE TO THOSE BOOKS OF AUTHORITY IN 
WHICH REFERENCES ARE MADE TO THE FOLIO EDITION. 



IN TWENTY-ONE VOLUMES. 

VOL. XXL 

18—19 GEORGE lU 1778—1779. 



LONDON: 

Vrwud by 7. C. Hmuard, Peterborviigk-Cwrt^ FUetStreet : 

LONGMAN, HURST, R££S, ORME, and BROWN ; J. M. RICHARDSON ; 
BLACK, PARBURY, anb ALLEN; BALDWIN, CRADOCK, akd JOY; 
£. JEFFERY; J. HATOBbARD; R. H. EVANS; J. BOOKER; £. LLOYD; 
J. J300TU; BUDD aAd CALKIN; AND T. C. HANSARD. 

1816. 



UBRAffYOFTHE 
AUG 27 1900 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



TO 

VOLUME XXI. 



REIGN OF KING GEORGE THE THIRD. 

KB. The Case of the ROYAL HOSPITAL for SEAMEN at 
GREENWICH, in relation to alleged Mismanagement and 
Abuses therein; and Proceedings against Captain THOMAS 
BAILLIE, Lieutenant-Governor of the said Hospital, under 
a Prosecution for a Libel upon certain other Officers of the 6ame« 

A. D. 1778-1779 : 1 

fond wk Addenda.) 

563. The Proceedings at large on the Trial of GEORGE GORDON, 

esq. commonly called Lord GEORGE GORDON, for High 
Treason, in the Court of King*s-Bench, Westminster, a. d, 1781 485 
(and vide Addenda.) 

4 

564. The Trial of FRANCIS HENRY DE LA MOTTE, for High 

Treason, a. d. 1781 687 

« 

565. The Trial of DAVID TYRIE, for High Treason, at the Assizes at 

Wmchester, a.d. 1782 815 

566- The whole Proceedings on an Indictment in the Case of the KING, 
on the Prosecution of WILLIAM JONES, gent, against tlie Rer. 
WILLIAM DAVIES SHIPLEY, Dean of St. Asaph, for a 
Seditious Libel, at the Great Session held at Wrexham, for the 

< 

County of Denbigh, at the Assizes for the County of Salop, and 

in the Court of King's-Bench at Westminster, a. d. 1783-1784... 847 

667. Proceedings against GEORGE STRATTON, HENRY BROOKE, 
CHARLES FLOYER, and GEORGE MACKAY, es^rs. on an 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

Infonnation filed against them, by his Majesty's Attorney Gene- 
ral, for a Misdemeanor, in arresting, imprisoning, and deposing 
Greorge Lord Pigot, Commander in Chief of the Forces in Fort 
St. George, and President and Governor of the P&*esrdency and 
Settlement of Madras, in the East Indies, a. d. 1779-1780. 
[Never before published] ...•• 1045 



r 



ADDENDA. 



I. lb the Case of Captain Baillix. 

« In the Will of John Barnard^ (son to the late patriotic sir John Barnard, many 
years &ther of the city of London) late of the Parish of St. George, Hanover-Square, in 
the county of Middlesex, esquire, deceased, dated the 6th of November, 1779, among 
other things therein contained^ is as follows : ' I give to captain Thomas Baillie^ late 
' deputy-governor of Greenwich Hospital, five hundred pounds, as a small token of my 

* approbation of his worthy and disinterested, though ineffectual, endeavours to rescue 

* that noble national chanty from the rapacious hands of the basest and most wicked of 

* mankind.'" New Annual Register for 1764 (Principal Occurrences, p. 97.) 

II. To the Case of Lord Georqe Gordon. 

liord George Gordon published a curious (and, as \ have reason to believe, a true) 
account of some of his strange proceedings connected with the transactions out of which 
this Trial arose. The title of his publicaUon was, '' Innocence Vindicated, and the 
Intrigues of Popeiy and its Abettors displayed in an Authentic Narrative of some 
transactions, hiUierto unknown, rektting to a late Act of the Britbh Legislature in 
fiivour of English Frists, and the Petiticm presented to Parliament for its Repeal.'' 

In this case of Lord George Gordon were first exercised the privileges granted by 
Stat 7 Ann. c. 21, to persons indicted for High Treason. See East's Pleas of tiie Crown, 
chap, d, sect, 4S ; and p. 648 of this volume. 

III. To the Case of the Dean of St. Asaph. 

Of the Richmond Park business mentioned p. 858, see Vol. SO, p. 1389, and else- 
where. 



PARLIAMENTARY WORKS. 
n^HE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES, FROM 

-■■ THE YEAR IB03 DOWN TO THE PRESENT TIME j 
feimiog a CoDtinu4tion of the Work entitled, ** The PAR- 
LIAMENTARY HISTORY OP Emglakd, from the earliest 
Period to the Year 1803," publithed under the Saperintendenee 
of T. C HANSAIip. 

The Sttbacribert are informed that Volume XXVIl. of the 
above Work, comprising the Debates in both Houses from the 
Opening of the Session, November 4, 1813, to June 6, 1814, 
may be had of their respective Booksellen.— Ptfter^p* Courtp 
t^ltt Auguti IBU. 

^i^"* Complete Sets of the Work, in 97 Volumes, may be 
had. The Debates of the present Session will be completed 
as speedily as possible ; ail CommmiicationB forwarded to Mr. 
T. C Hansard will be attended tOi 

npHE PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY or ENG- 

^ LAND, from* the Earliest Period to the Year 1803, from, 
which last mentioned epoch it is continued downwards to the 
present time in the Woric entitled, *' The PARLIAMENTARY 
DEBATES," pablished under the Superintendence of T. C. 
HANSARD. 

The Twenty-Second Volume is ready for delivery, bringing 
the Parliamentary History of England down to May 1*788. 

Printed for Longman, Hant,'naes, Ormey and Brown; J. 
Richardson; Black, Parry, and Co.; J. Hatcbard; J. Ridg- 
way; E. Jeffiery; J, Booker; J. Rodwell; Cradock and Joy; 
lUH. Evans jBudd and Calkin; J.Bootb; and T. C. HamanL 



A COMPLETE COLLECTION 



OF 



STATE TRIALS. 



\_ W ' _ - 



m»m»^m 



ihto-^B>^MHMbMMMli*i 



5G2. The CikSE of the Royal Hospital for Seamen at Greenwich^ ia 
relation to alleged Mismanagement ^and Abuses thereof; and 
of Captain Thomas Bailue^ Lieutenant^overnor of the said 
Hospital^ under a Prosecution for a Libel upon certain other 
Officers of the san»e : 18 & 19 George III- a. d. 1778, 1779.* 



{The following particulars I have extracted 
from Captain Baillie's ** Introduction to the 
Procecdmgs in the Court of King's-bench," 

Captain BaiUie prepared and caused to be 

Sinted, a book entitled, <<Thc Case and 
emoriai of the Royal Hospital for Sea- 
men at Greenwich, Addressed to the Go- 
vernors and Commissioners thereof.*' The 
« Case" I have not seen. It was not in- 
serted in captain Baillie's '* Solemn Ap- 
peal," *• because," as he states, " it might 
create fresh disputes, is ver^ long, and the 
ereater part recapitulated in the KingV 
Eench and House of Lords." The Memo- 
rial he exhibits as follows : 

' Bxttmeted from " A Solemn Appeal to the Pnb- 

lie, from an iojured Officer, Cftptain Bailtie, late 

lieateaaDt CSovernor of the Rojal Hoipital for 

Se a men at Greenwich ; arising out of a series of aa- 

theslic Proceedittga in the Coart of Ring't- bench on 

mx Praaecationa against him, for publiaiiing certain 

liMft (aa it ams allcf^) in a printed '.<»<tk, entitled, 

Tlie Case and Memorial of Greenwic'. <»jipita], ad- 

-dressed to the General Qovemoni, in bei -Jf of Dia- 

abJed Seamen, Widows, and Children ; aod the Evi- 

deoee giren on the subeeqaent Bnqnirj at Ibe bar of 

the Hooae of Lords, in conseqaenco of the sereral 

Prosecatioas bdng discharged wilh Coats. - London : 

Printed for Captain Baillio by JF. Almon, opposite 

BaHing^on-hoose, PSocadillj ; and may also he had 

of Captain Baillie, at Mr. Roberts, ohioa-man, near 

Hatton street, Holtwm. Price two g^aincas, stitched 

in sheets, with a fine eag^raring of captain -Baillie, in 

measotiato, by Janm Wation/esq. painted by Na- 

thaniei Mooe, esq. of the Royal Academy, or aepa- 

lale/j, QWi ^lUDM Moh. 1779.*' 

VOL. XXI. 



To the Commissioners and Governors of the 
Royal Hospital for Seamen* at Greenwich, 

The Memorial of Captain Thomas Bailliei 
Lieutenant Governor of the said Hos* 
pital, in behalf of Disabled Seamen, 
their Wiapws and Children, 

Humbly sheweth ; 

That through the various abuses set forth in 
the Case prefixed, the British navy has 
been deprived of the full benefit of this 
wise and munificent establishment^ which 
the generosity of princes, and the grati* 
tude of the public, had bestowed. 

That landmen have been introduced into the 
Hospital, contrary to the charter and ta 
the spirit of the institution; and that some 
of the principal wards have been torn down, 
and converted, at a great cxpence, into 
grand apartments for omcers, clerks, depu<* 
ties and servants, who are not seamen. 

That several thousand pounds are annually 
expended in repairs and alterations, under 
the pretext of nnishing or carrying on the 
building, though it is already sufficiently 
grand, roomy and convenient. 

That the settled and ample revenues of the 
Hospital being wastea by this and other 
improper means, the present managers, 
sheltering themselves under the popular 
character of the poor defenceless men 
under their care, make frequent applica- 
tion to parliament for the public money, 
which they squander in a manner that has 
no tendency to promote the welfare of th€ 
pensioners or ot the sea-service. 
B 



S] 



18 GEORGE in. 



The Cate ofCajfidn Thouuu BaSlte, 



t* 



That tlie pensioners are fed with bull-bee/, < 
and sour -small beer mixed with water. 

That the contracting butcher, after having 
been convicted in a public court of justice 
(the King*s-bench) of various fraudulent 
breaches of his contract, was, on a second 
prosecution, suffered to compound the pe- 
nalties, and renew the contract : and tnat 
many evident and injurious abuses in the 
supply of other necessaries are daily suffer- 
ed without any due enquiry. 

That under pretence of raisins a charity stock 
for the boys in the Hospital, the pensioners 
are deprived of at least 2,500/. per annum 
out of their frugal allowance of provisions, 
&c. settled at the first establishment, and 
are compelled to accept of a part of the 
value in money; which causes frequent 
drunkenness, irregularity and disobedience. 

That these enormous abuses are the effects 
of the total subversion which the due go- 
vernment of the Hospital has imdergonc, 
arising from the inattention of the great 
and respeciable characters who were ap- 
pointed its perpetual ^^uacrdians : and that 
the acting directors, being in general con- 
cerned in the receipt and expenditure of 
tlie revenues, are therefore improperly en- 
trusted with the care of controuling the 
accounts, and of directing the affairs of the 
Hospital; yet that these men have, by 
.successive encroachments, extended the 
proper powers of the board of directors, 
andf taken upon them a great part of the 
government of the house, in tne exercise 
-of which they are deaf to every expostular 
tion or complaint, however reasonable in 
itself, or regularly urged. 

That a faction, under the title of the Civil In- 
terest, is maintained in the Hospital, which 
consists of such officers, under officers, de- 
puties, clerks and servants, as are not sea- 
laring men, and who are therefore illegally 
apppinted; which faction has kept the 
Hospital in a state of confusion and disorder 
for several years : and there is no pretence 
of right or necessity for their continuing in 
offices to which seamen alone have any 
flaim, there being many brave men fully 
qualified to execute the business of these 
offices, who, afler having fought the battles 
of their country, are now in a state of po- 
verty and want 

That, independent of the obvious reflections 
suggested by justice and humanity on this 
occasion, the manner in which the pen- 
sioners are supported in Greenwich Hospi- 
tal is a material subject of political consi- 
deration; particularly at this interesting 
period, when the endeavours to obtain vo- 
lunteers for the navy are unsuccessful. 

, Were a residence in tlie Hospital consi- 
dered by seamen in general as a desirable 
object, it would have an evident tendency 
to lessen their reluctance for his majesty^s 
service, as the loss of temporary advan- 
tages, or the dread of approaching hard- 



ships, can only be balanced by the hope of 
spending a comfortable old. age. Now, 
tne Hospital is so far fi?om answering this 
valuable purpose at present, that it is men- 
tioned among seamen with disgust and 
dissatisfaction. 

Till some effectual means are taken to re- 
move this opinion, the material object of 
the foundation is entirely subverted, and 
the Hospital become an useless and ex- 
pensive Durden to the nation. This can 
only be done by an entire change in the 
management, and by ^thfully and honest- 
Iv expending the ample revenues in the 
due maintenance of s«amen onlv. The 
news of such a general reform in the affiurs 
of Greenwich Hospital would' be received 
in the navy with joy and gratitude. 

The lieutenant governor thinks it necessary 
to represent, Oiat in this application to the 
several members of the court of commis- 
sioners and governors, he "has no interests 
for which he can hope or fear on his own 
account : he was placed in the Hospital b j 
lord Anson, after a life of active service, 
with a view, as he presumes, that he might 
pass his remaining days in peace and re- 
tirement ; but the sixteen years which he 
has spent in the Hospital have been the 
most painful, harassing, and disa^eeable 
of his whole life, as he has, during the 
greatest part of this term, been inevitably 
engaged in disputes and litigation with 
joboers, agents and contractors, and in op-, 
posing the civil interest of this naval Hos- 
pital, with whom he never had any other 
point to carry, than that the pensioners 
should be peaceably and comfortably main- 
tained, agreeably to the intention of the 
founders, and to the establishment of the 
Hospital. 

That the contest, so far as he is concerned in 
it, must,' in the course of nature, be now 
nearly finished ; but it appears to him an 
indispensable duty, to state the leading 
circumstances of the atrocious facts which 
have been committed during his residence 
in the Hospital, to those who are in pos* 
session of tlie legal powers necessary for 
the speedy removal of the several causes 
of complamt herein recited, — in order that 
the ineffectual struggle which lie has hi- 
therto maintained may not be urged as an 
example to deter his successors from the 
performance of their duty. The threat of 
this appeal, though on many occasions it 
had produced salutarv effects, has however 
lately been disiegarded, from an opinion 
that It would never be made. It thereforo 
became necessary that it should be actual- 
ly made ; and, though some parts of the 
prefixed Case may seem rather tedious in 
the recital, yet the whole is confined to 
real instances of fraud, collusion, and inca- 
pacity, all of which can be proved by the 
. clearest and most indisputable evidence. 

The lieutenant governor takes the liberty to 



5] respecting the Royal Hosfital at Greenwich. A. D. 1778. 



[6 



viTgef ID the most earnest nuurner, his 
aniious hope, that these complaints may 
excite a necessary degree of attention in 
the several great and noble personages to 
whom they are now addressed ; that a full 
court of commbsioners and governors may 
be held, by whom these several charges 
mav be heard and examined, the present 
evils redressed, and effectual means de- 
vised for restoring the Hospital to the navy, 
and for the proper maintenance of seamen 
therein. When have the interests of Bri- 
tain been deserted, or her defence neglect^ 
ed, by her navy ? — It cannot be supposed, 
that a complamt of this magnituue, and 
importsince to seamen worn out and dis- 
abled in the service, can in this country be 
urged in vain. 

Amonsst the leadine measures to be adopted 
for we re-establishment of the Hospital, it 
will be necessary, 

Hxat the sixpenny receiver from seamen's 
wages^ the accomptant and comptroller of 
the sixpenny-office, the several prize- 
agents, surveyor, and chaplain, be removed 
from the direction ; and a rule made, that 
their successors be never in future appoint- 
ed directors of Greenwich Hospital. 

that persons of respectable and mdependent 
characters be appointed in their room, 
under such regulations as may be judged 
sufficient to induce and oblige them to atr 
tend the important objects of their duty ; 
and they be made responsible for the due 
execution of the trust. With respect to 
the present direction, the old proverb, that 
eveiy body's business is nobody's^ seems 
to be truly verified. 

That instead of the great number of gover- 
nors, and the twenty-four directors, if five 
commissioners were appointed, at 500/. per 
annum each, for the sole care of receiving, 
and ^thfully and frugally expending, the 
ample revenues of the Hospital, the poor 
men might be nobly provided with every 
necessai^ article of life, and more tlian the 
salary of such commissioners saved out of 
unnecessary works, repairs and alterations, 
in which case the Hospital would probably 
in a few years be restored to its proper de- 
gree of estimation and use. 

That if the present unwieldy body of gover- 
nors, commissioners and directors, should 
not be reduced to five commissioners, two 
of the captains be restored to the direction, 
of which their predecessors were deprived 
for being strenuous in the noble cause of 
protecting the seamen under their care. 

Ttuit the internal government of the whole 
house be restored to tlie governor and 
council : that this council do consist of the 
deputy governor, the four captains, and 
onJv four, instead of the eight lieutenants : 
aod that the secretary, steward, and chap- 
lains, be removed therefrom, to prevent 
the forming of parties to embarrass and 
put-vote the principal officers pf the house, 



whenever thev think proper to appear in 
council, thereby disturbing the peace and 
good government of the Hospital, for which 
the superior, and not the inferior officers, 
are responsible. 
That the two chaplains, the secretary^ 
steward, and auditor, with several under- 
officers, deputies and servants, who have 
not been sea-faring men, and whose ap- 
pointments are therefore illegal, be dis- 
charged the Hospital ; and that navy chap- 
lains, and other warrant officers, &c. be 
appointed in their room. 
That two of the three matrons, not beinz the 
widows of sea-officers, be removed from 
the Hospital, and proper objects appointed 
ii^ their stead, as tnere are now the widows 
of twenty-four officers of different ranks* 
serving in the mean capacity of common 
nurses under these matrons. 
That Greenwich Hospital be, for the future, 
preserved, inviolably and exclusively, for 
the navy^ as an asylum' for disabled sea- 
men, their widows and children ; and that, 
for their better securitv, the charter (in 
which several essential words, and even 
clauses of the old commissions are omitted) 
be surrendered to his majesty, and an hum- 
ble petition presented for a new one, mort 
consonant to the old commissions. 
That the apartpients of the several officers 
who have no concern with the internal bu- 
siness or government of the house be re- 
stored to the Hospital, they having no bu- 
siness but with the court of directors, of 
which the principal meetings are held in 
London. 
That the Roval Sovereign ward, in kino; WiU 
Ham's building, now possessed by the se-< 
cretary's clerk, be restored to the pea- 
sioners. 
That the office of clerk of the works, being 
an useless office, be abolished, as there can 
be no plea of necessity for such an officer, 
whilst there is a surveyor, and no new 
buildings carried on : that the present clerk 
of the works be obliged to surrender to the 
wards the suite of apartments be possesses, 
and to restore the posts and rails, which 
out of mere caprice were lately destroyed, 
though erected, at a considerable expence, 
round all the outer walls of the Hospital^ 
for the safety, ease, and comfort, of^ the 
blind, lame, and infirm pensioners, who are 
now frequently hemmed in between two 
walls, to their great terror, and at the risk 
of their lives from droves of horned cattle^ 
horses, &c. These walks, which were for- 
merly called the Blind Men's Walks, are 
now become common nuisances %o people 
of all ranks who visit the. Hospital.* 
That the apartments of the lieutenants Gor^ 
don and Kerr, of the clerk of the cheque^ 

* These posts aod vnils extended netrly one mile, 
and were erected on accoont of a poor pensioiier being 
kijk4 oA the jipot by a oar^^Orig. Ed. 



n 



18 GEOtlGfE IIL The Case of Captain Tkonuu SaHHef 



c* 



and of two of the matronB, be restored to 
ihe wards ; and that lodgings be 'found for 
ihem in the apartments of the non-qualified 
officers, or in the new building now occu- 
pied by the governor's clerk, steward's 
clerky and a person called the clerk of the 
works' clerk. 
That the clerk of the cheque's clerk's apart- 

nient be restored to the wards. 
That all the public passages, windows, doors, 
and stair-cases, which nave been monopo- 
lized, be thrown open for the convenience 
of the officers and strangers who visit the 
wards, and for the admission of fresh sdr, 
which is so necessary to the health of the 
numerous inhabitants. The stair-cases 
now in use are narrow and dangerous, and, 
in case of fire, would be insufficient for the 
retreat of a crowd of people, as some of the 
principal wards are1>arricadoed up at both 
ends tor the ifiagnificent accommodation 
cf individuals, who have converted the 
grand passages into galleries for pictures, 
and the roof into lodging-rooms with 
chimnies, where none were originally de- 
signed. 
That the butler's list and chalk-off list, which 
are so hostile to the establishment, be to- 
tally abolished ; and that the tables in the 
dimne-halls be filled with pensioners, and 
served with their full allowance of provi- 
sions ; it being intended, according to the 
rules of the house, that they should dine 
in public, as a spectacle for the encourage- 
ment of seamen. The soup-maiere now 
served to the men 'dishonours the nospital, 
and was publicly ridiculed in the dining- 
hall by his excellency the Due de Niver- 
nois. 
That such of the pensioners and nurses, as 
from age, hnfirmities, or other reasonable 
causes, shall be put on the money-list by 
the governor and council, and not by the 
directors, may receive the flill value of 
their provisions ; and that the late order 
procured by the secretary from the general 
court, to empower the directors to dispense 
with the mustering the pensioners on cer- 
tain occasions, be rescinded, as being re- 
pugnant to the charter, and infringing 
upon the government of the house, and the 
custom ofthe Hospital. 
That the charity stock be thrown into the 
general iund of the Hospital, and such 
boj^s as inay be judged proper objects of 
this charity be better fed than at present, 
tid a growing boy requires at least as much 
sustenance as an old man. 
That the pensioners and nurses on the mo- 
tiey-list shall not be deprived of their fes- 
tival dinners ; which is an extra-gift to all 
without distinction, in commemoration of 
the five great anniversaries. 
The royal founder^s coronation,-^king's birth- 
day,— queen's birth-day, — accession, and 
< the coronation. 
The noa-eiyoyment 6f these dap of mirth 



and festivity is a r^ gri^ante to three or 
four hundred poo^ people. 
That two lieutenants ne present at the dining- 
halls, at dinner ; and that the chaplain of 
the month say grace, instead of an old pfcn- 

sionet. 
That the captam or lieutenant of the wcelt do 
always see ^e meat delivered send weighed, 
agreeably to a former minute of the cotin* 
cil, in order to increase the present checksy 
which have been found insufficient. Thia 
laudable regulation has been Ijrtely over- 
ruled. 
That the steward's clctk be never in fixture 
allowed to .perform the duty of the clerk 
ofthe council. 
That the secretary make all the contracts, as 
formerly, agreeable to established forms, in 
order to avoid the great expence of attor- 
ney's bills ; and that he be not permitted 
to make a bill for travelFing charges, being 
allowed 20/. a year for that purpose. 
That the stewards of the Derwentwater es- 
tate, and the receiver of the sixpences, be 
obliged to remit to the treasurer and re- 
ceiver-general all such rtoney as thfey may 
receive on account of the Hospital, as soon 
as it shall amount to the sum of 50or in 
order that there may be but one treasurer: 
and that the board of directors be not al- 
lowed to extend their prooer powers by 
impresting, or advancing large sums of 
money to contractors or tradesmen, as the 
warrants for the payment of all monies 
ought to be signed quarterly at the gencjral 
, court. 

That all admeasurements of the works ofthe 
Hospital be made with the assistance of a 
sworn surveyor ; and that all the works, 
alterations, and repairs, be sworn to before 
the barons of the Excheauer, by the sur- 
veyor of the Hospital, the clerk of the 
. check, and the clerk of the works, as hav- 
ing been faithfuUv and truly performed, 
according to the best of their skill and 
judgment ; in conformity to a minute of 
the board of directors in the year 17 18, and 
to the custom of those times when the af^ 
fairs^of the Hospital were conducted with 
integrity. 
That tne steward be sworn to all his accounts 
and disbursements, being near 30,000/. pet 
annum. 
That the receiver of the sixpenny office (as 
well as his clerk) be sworn to his accoimts 
and disbursements. 
That the brewer be sworn to the faithful and 
frus:al expenditure of the malt and hops ^ 
and that, if any beer be condemned on a 
regular survey, the value of good beer be 
deducted out of his wages. 
That the houshold and other accounts of tha 
Hospital be examined at the table where 
the board of directors sit, and not partially 
and superficially passed by two interested 
members, at a separate table; and that 
five of the directors, afler proper exatnitiar 



9} retpeOing the Rojfti Hospkal ai Greirmch* 

tkxi, do attest the »aid aceoonts with their 
names ^\ length, instead of the initial let- 
ters of two names only. 
Thai ail the accounts and disbursements of 
the Hospital be sworn to, before the ba- 
rons of the Exchequer ; which is now per- 
formed partially. 

That the auditor be obliged to audit aM the 
accounts of the Hospital. 

That the pay of the lieutenants be made 
etjiial to the pay of the two chaplains, as 
onginaliy intended. 

That the general courts be held four times at 
least in the year, agreeably to the first 
commissions, the busmess of this court be- 
ing much increased: that due notice of 
the several meetings be given in the Ga- 
zette, and the business made as public as 
possible, instead of beine privately passed. 
It behig a matter of pubhc concern. 

That these courts be held in the Painted-hall 
in the Hospital, in order to add to the 
splendour of the meetings, by accommo^ 
datiDg a sufficient immber of great per- 
sonages, for the more effectual protection 
of seamen, their widows and children. 

All Which premises are most humbly sub- 
mitted to the wisdoih and humanity of the 
ri^t honourable the lords and other com- 
missioners and governors of the royal Hos- 
pital for seamen at Greenwich (who are 
the guardians and guarantees of the rights 
of seamen in the said royal Hospital, and 
who alone are able to give the poor pen- 
doiicrs speedy and effectual reliet) by tneir 
most respectnil and faithful servant, 

Thomas BxrLLit. 



On March 7th, 177S, captain fisullie laid be- 
fore the earl of Sandwich, at that time first 
lord of the Admiralty, a copy of the said 
book, together with the following Letter : 

To the Rieht Honourable the Earl of Sand- 
:h, a/duressed on his Majesty's Service. 



As your lordship has hitherto been disposed 
to hear only one side of the affairs of 
Greenwich Hospital, I take the liberty to 
enclose for your lordship's consideration, a 
State of Facts, which I trust will stimulate 
your lordship to redress the grievances 
therein complained of, and thereby restore 
me to my proper command in the f iospita), 
of which I have been deprived by a combi- 
nation of landmen, who, if they had any 
right to a footing in the Hospital, can have 
no pretence to pervert and depose the law- 
ful government thereof. 

I have the honour to acquaint yoiu- lordship, 
that I will not sit down contented to see 
the men cheated and myself insulted by 
priests, clerks or contractors. I think it, 
however, my duty to forewarn your lord- 
ship, that if you are any longer deaf to rea- 
sonable complaints, I shall put this effort 
for redress into execution, which I should 
have deferred for a more seasonable oppor- 



A.D. mft [1« 

tunity^ but the recent oTerbaariifi cMduct 
of the fiiction, so frequently alladefd «cy in 
the enclosed Case, has eompelM me to^ 
stninle for immediate redress. 
Iwoula not have your lordship inkderstaiicl 
that I mean to disturb government at thi^ 
critical time, by applying to Barliament. I 
scorn the imputation of making any ether 
appeal than to the body of the commis- 
sioners and governors of the Hospital, 
whose boundeii duty it is to hear and re- 
dress the grievances complained of ; and 
1 most sincerely lament that an establish- 
ment so tnily popular and great, should be 
so far perverted as to force me to make 
any appeal. I am, my lord, your lordship'^ 
most obedient and most humble servant, 
Royal Hmitaif Oretn- Tho. Baillie. 
wich, March 7, 1778. 

To this Letter captain Baillie received no ai»- 
swer, but oq March ]6th, it appearing that 
Mr. Cooke, lord Sandwich's chapl&in, had 
seen the printed Case several days before, 
and had mentioned it in many companies^ 
captain Bailiie then carried copies of the 
Case and Memorial to several of the go* 
vernors and commissioners, particularly te 
the first lord of the treasury (lord North,) 
the lord president of the council (earl 
Gower, afterwards marquess of Suftird,) 
the three secretaries of state, and four ad« 
inirals.] 

In the KiNoVBiifrcH. 
Monday, November 23, 1778. 



The KiMo against Thomas Baillie, Esk]uire, 
Lieutenant Governor of the Royal Hos- 
pital at Gitenwich. 

XHIS cause came before the Court upoD 
the following rule being granted on July 7, 
1778, viz. 

"Tuesday next, after three weeks from 
the day of the Holy Trinity, in th 18th year 
of king Georee the third. 

'* Kertt. — Upon reading the several aflida« 
vits of James Stuart, esquire, and two others, 
the said James Stuart and another, Robert 
Mylne and another, John Godby and another, 
John Ibbetson, esq. and another, and of the 
reverend John Cooke, clerk, and another, it 
is ordered that the first day of next term be 
given to Thomas Baillie, esq. to sheW tause 
why an information or informations should 
not bb exhibited a^inst him for certain mis- 
demeanours, in puhiishing certaib scandalous 
libels, upon notice of. this rule to be given to 
him in the mean time. — On the motion of 
Mr. Solicitor General, 

" By the Court.^ 

The joint affidavit of James Stuart^ Thomas 
Hicks, and the reverend John Cooke, three 
of the directors, was read, and also the affi- 
davit of Thomas Baillie, esq. defendant^ in 
answer to tlieirs; the separate affidavit of 
James Stuart, as surveyor, was also read, and 



"3 



18 OEOKGE lit* The Oue of Captain Thomas BaiUie^ [19 



the affidavit of Robert Mylne, clerk of the 
works, was be jiin. But the Court asked, If. 
all the complainants went through what was 
aaid with respect to themselves, and being 
answered. Yes, desired Mr. Bearcroft to pro- 
ceed in shewing cau5e> and reserve those affi- 
davits till they were Uiought necessary to be 
read. 

Mr. Bearcrqft : 

My lord ; this is an application for leave 
to file one or more informations against cap- 
tain Baillie, lieutenant governor of Green- 
wich Hospital, as the author and publisher of 
a printed libel, upon the gentlemen who are 
named in the rule ; three of them as direc- 
tors of the Hospital, and upon Mr. Stuart, in I ¥rich Hospital. 



will be necessaiv, in the first place, fi>r the 
Court to know the constitution of Greenwich 
Hospital, so far as it stands at present. 

The corporation consists m ^neral of 
some of the first characters in pomt of rank 
and ability, in the nation, who are all gover- 
nors and commissioners, who have a power, 
if they please to exercise it, of controulin^ 
and directing every thing, in respect to the 
management of the Hospital : but as it can- 
not be supposed, all the persons there named, 
who are in high situations, and employed in 
matters of great importance to the state, can 
attend to the business of the Hospital, in 
fact, it has happened, that but few of the go- 
vernors have attended to the afiairs of Green- 



the separate character of surveyor of the 
Hospital. Mr. Mylne as clerk of the works, 
Hr. Goaby as steward of the Hospital, and 
Mr. Ibbetson as secretary to the directors, 
together vnth the reverend Mr. John Cooke 
as chaplain of the Hospital. 

My lord, this rule is for leave to file one or 
more informations, and, I observed, one of 
your lordships asked just now, why it was, 
that separate affidavits were made by the 
flame )>ersons of matter contained in the same 
book ? I beg leave to answer, that it was for 
the p>urpose of adding to the oppression and 
vexation, which the prosecutors meditated 
against captain Baillie, because those pur- 
poses would be better answered by six infor- 
mations than one ; but Mr. SoUcitor General, 
with more mercy, though perhaps not a great 
' deal more judgment, than nis clients, thought 
they had a better chance to succeed in one 
than in six informations. I remember upon 
his instance, it was, that the motion for the 
six informations was consolidated into one 
rale. 

My lord, I have no difficulty 'to say, I 
thought the judgment of the prosecutors very 
extraordinary, in making this motion ; for by 
taking this step, it is likely to call down the 
attention of the public to the transactions in 
Greenwich Hospital for many years last past : 
however, upon the present occasion, I find it 
mv duty to contena before vour lordship, this 
nue ought to be discharged, and discharged 
with costs, otherwise the Court will not do 
justice to captain Baillie, neither will they do 
that iustice upon the prosecutors of this rule, 
which they deserve, for daring to make this 
kind of application. My lord, trom the prin- 
ciples ofjustice, I apprehend, and have no 
doubt, the Court will soon believe this printed 
book, which is now attempted to be prose- 
cuted as a libel, is so far firom deserving Uiat 
name, that it tells a tale to the public, which 
it is fit the public should be acquainted with ; 
that it is a merit in the party ttiat has stated 
it; that he has proceeded in all the circum- 
stances that have been printed in this book, 
that does him great credit and honour. 

Mv lord, in order for the Court to under- 
slana the matter now before them at all, it 



They have power to hold general courts, 
and general meetines of governors and com- 
missioners, in which they give absolute direc- 
tions, touching any thing they think proper, 
fiut the immediate business of the Hospital 
has been constantly done by a body of per- 
sons, constituted by the charter, and called 
the directors, and by other persons, witliin 
the Hospital, called the eovemor and coun- 
cil ; the departments of Uiese two separate 
descriptions of men, the directors, and the 
governor and council, are very different *. it 
IS the business of the directors to superintend 
and direct every thing that relates to the re- 
venue, accounts, contracts, and building, and 
every thing, in short, that relates to money 
matters, for the real internal and external 
interest, if I may so call it, of the Hospital. 

It is the business of the governor and coun- 
cil, who are or ought to be naval officers, to 
protect the numerous objects of the establish- 
ment, to direct and controul the internal go- 
vernment of the Hospital, and see there is 
good behaviour and proper subordination ob- 
served therein, and tnat every thing is con- 
ducted agreeable to the rules of the Hospital ; 
these are the two separate departments of the' 
directors, upon the one hand, and the gover- 
nor and council, upon the other hand. 

My client, captain Baillie, in 1761, came 
into the Hospital, bein^ disabled in the ser- 
vice of his country, and was a captain upon 
the establishment, as it is called— about five 
years ago, he succeeded to the second office, 
that of lieutenant eovemor ; I beg pardon 
for saying succeeded, I mean to take away, 
according to the information I have had, the 
slander which has been industriously spread 
against captain Baillie, as if by his proceed* 
ings, in the course he had taken in the suIk 
ject before the Court, he had been suspended 
for ingratitude, or what is called flying in the 
face of his patrons and benefactors : it was 
certainly not so— his character has been en- 
quired into,imd he is found a person as inca- 
pable as any man living, of being guilty of 
any baseness. 

My lord, I ssud he succeeded, I do not 
mean that it was an absolute right, but it it 
so much of course, that the next senior cap^ 



13] rapedittg ike Royal Hospital al Oreeimkh. A. D. 1778v 



tM 



taiD, when there becomes a vacancy, should 
succeed to the office of lieutenant governor, 
provided there is no objection to his charac- 
ter; and from the good behaviour of captain 
Baillie, it seems there never was the least 
objection to his character or conduct. 

Mjr lord, I will first make a few observar 
tioDs as to the matter whereon these affidavits 
turn, upon which the application is made to 
the Court. Still, I fsurly confess to your lord- 
ships, in this observation, and in almost 
every one I shall trouble your lordship and 
the Court with, my chief object is to obtain 
costs for my client : that this rule will be. 
discharged, I have not the least doubt ; for if 
the gentlemen were likelv to succeed to make 
h absolute, I do not believe any mortal 
breathing would ever advise them to go for 
damages, but the circumstances are very ma- 
terial m respect to costs. 

Now they have picked out of this printed 
Case between fifty and sixty difierept para- 
mphs ; I will not call them paragraphs, as 
ibere is hardly a whole one, they are pieces 
of paragraphs, bits of sentences, half lines, 
ana iiMie]>endent expressions ; perhaps, I am 
incorrect in calling them so, because ail these 
I have spoken of, are general conclusions 
fiom particular facts and circumstances, that 
ve precisely, clearly, and pointedly stated in 
this book. 

Your lordship will now see why they chose 
to pick out the parti<nilar charges that are in 
Ibe book; tfaoush^I always understood the 
particular story of a man was a much greater 
ubel than a general reflection, but they chose 
to point out a general conclusion of those 
&cte, to give them an opportunity of doing 
^1 they have done ; but they conclude, after 
tbree or four sentences are picked out — 
** These deponents say" (as if every thinjg 
else was true) *' so far as they tend to crimi- 
nate us A. B. and C. they are all fiilse.'' 
Iben the reason is obvious, why they did not 
pick out the particular charees ; it is, because 
th^ thought thev might shelter themselves 
ttooer the general expression, ** So far as they 
tend to criminate us, they are all false;'' and, 
I know, thc^' could not state, in this applica- 
tion to the Court, the particular charges, and 
do what was incumbent upon them to do— 
to swear they are false— for they know them 
to be true. 

Those are the observations upon the affi- 
da^ that have been read, and I call upon 
Day learned friends to know, whether, in all 
they have read, this is not the course cx)n- 
stantly taken, and I submit no other reason 
oa be given for it. My lord, it is extremely 
duficolt to attempt it, if*^! was correct enough 
^ n^ mstructions to do it, to attend to all 
the [wticular charges, and answer them se- 
^tely ; it would take up an infinite d^ of 
^e. It is sufilcient, that two of then: affi- 
daviu have been read; but I will stote to 
pur lordship the nature of certain charges, 
*^ \k »l)^w«^ to those charges; in which 



the Court will see sufficient to lead their at**, 
tention to the other affidavits, when they 
come to be read, and what are the charges t« 
which the answers are applied. 

Captain BaiUie first of all says in his affi/b 
davit, and I trust nobody will think it im- 
proper to state to your lordship, as he lias a 
proper authority tor so doing, that he has 
served his king and coimtry for near forty 
years; that he has risen to the rank he held 
when he was ap{>oinced to the Hospital, which 
was considerable, in consequence of hb cou- 
rage and conduct shewn upon many occa^ 
sions, which is shortly pointed out, not by 
any interest or influence, but by e(x>d beha- 
viour onlv^ recorded at the Admiralty ;• thus 
he finds himself in the situation of lieutenant 
governor, who is in truth the' first resident 
officer of Greenwich Hospital. It is his busi- 
ness to look daily into the affairs of the Hos- 
pital, to. see what they are about, and how 
the seamen are provided for. In this 'situa* 
tion he tells your lordship, for a considerable 
time past he observed certain abuses, which 
when they come to be .attended to, are of a 
sort and size which not only justifies what 
he has done upon this case, but that his duty 
actually called upon him to do it. He sayt 
that very soon after his appointment he saw 
a great number of the rooms and the cabins^ 
which were appropriated for the accommo- 
dation of the seamen, taken away for the 
purpose of accommodating landmen, as I see 
the phrase is in the Hospital; and your lord- 
ship may see these complaints frequently re- 
iterated m his printed Case, of its being noto- 
rious, tliat a ereat number of landmen have 
of late years Been introduced into the several . 
places, as officers and servanto of Greenwich 
Hospital, who by the charter expressly ought 
not, and in the nature of things, in point of 
custom and usage, those offices ought to luve 
been filled with seafaring men. There are a. 
great number of facts, of the cabins of the 



■•-«•■ 



* See tke foUowiflg LeUer of Mr. ClevelaiMl (late 
•eorelary to the Adoiiraltj) to captain Baillie, on the 
30th March, 1757, whioh happened daring the adaii- 
niftration of tlw late right hon. eari Tpoiple, at the 
Admiralty, to whom captain Baillie.waa entirely nn* 
known. 



u 



To Captain BatUie, Tular, Spithead. 

'* Admiralty Office, March 50, 1757. 

" Sir; I hare reoeired and read to my Lordf 
CommiMionerf of the Adaiiraitj jonr letter of the 
98th instant, giring an aooonnt of your haring taken 
a Freiioh privateer of f 4 gam, belong^g to Harre- 
de-OrMe; and I am eommanded to aoqoaint yon, 
that the Nary-board are directed to porohaie the 
veitel without Iom of time, and to regiater her in the 
list of the navy, by tho name of the Turtar'a Prise, 
and to establish the nnmber and nature of gans iha 
now has, and 160 men in her ; and their lordships 
hare appointed yoa to oommand her, as a reward for 
yoor behayioor. 

" I am, Sir, your most humble servant, 

" J. CLlVaLAND.* 

" Satered at tho Adiuralty." Orig. EtL 



IS] 



It GEORGE ill. Th€ 



«Q|jiien being Uken away, to inUoduce ;u)d 
accomoiQ4ate landmen into offices and lodg- 
\f^ in the Hospital. This shews Mr. Secre- 
tary Ibbetson's sep^urajte a|)plication might 
have beep with g^reat propriety made geaerd, 
it Mis Milder the general head of complaint. 
I think eieven of the cabins^ were knocked 
down almost ^bout Uie ppor fellows ears, to 
fUfkke w aparUnent still more magnificent 
^r Mr. Ibhetsoo, aad double that number 
|br his deik. I cano^.express myself better 
upon Jthe subjeoty tlum.ov^ of the poor pen- 
ttoners did upon the occasioip, as he was pulled 
out of his b^ ftnd hobbling dpwn.s^irs, the 
old m^ui shook his head and said, '< Ah ! this 
is very hard indeed ! that so many fighting 
men should be turned out of their beds for 
oqe .writing man f ^ I have alrc^y stated to 
tte Court, a vast number of offices, which 
were lucrative, s^nd in the hands of seamen 
foitaerly, jbftve now got into the hands of 

landmctn. 

In ^ing my duty by my client, I cfmnot 
help fqllowing his instrucUons. It seems he 
iias found out that by a most wonderful ope- 
.cation of fortuitous events, a particul^ jsort 
of 'men which you find in all these plaoei$, are 
{freeholders or burgesses of Huntingdon. So 
fer it is necessary to take jUptice ; for if pot, 
the whole of the complaint, at least most of 
*it.is attributed to such kind of proceeding, 
whi^h a^ccounts for most of the subjects I 
have>8poken of. 
C(i¥Tt. What says the charter about it ? 
Mr. Murphy, It ej^cludes.personi^ that are 
freeholders or burgesses of all counties, as 
well as Huntingdon, if not seafadog men ; 
the words are, '* No officer shall be em- 
ployed in the Hospital but seafaring men, 
pr. such who have lost their limbs, or been 
.otherwise disabled in the sea^service.'' 

,Qourt, I. doubt .whether they will find a 
ifciting man taken .notice of th^re'asex- 
.eludea? 

Mr. B^twtr^, Gapt. BailUe says-he was 
t«Kceftdingly,uawiDing to take the course he 
did. Heaaya upon his taking notice of the se- 
vendabuses committed, hethelieut^edvemor 
and the council did frequently apply to the 
directors in 9rder to remedy such abuses, but 
-their applications were in vain, and cold 
water was thrown on them. He states to 
vour^lordshipLthat he applied several times 
m writing to.the First li)rd of the Admiraltv 
without e^^^Qt; and up^n an iptcrvicw with 
his lordship at the Admiralty, he was told he 
would iv>t let business go on; but not con- 
tent with living his application thus re- 
jected by the ^First Lord of the Admiralty, 
captain BaiUie swears he left his printed Case 
and Memorial sealed up with a letter for lord 
Baindwich, requesting that his lordship would 
look into the afiairs of the. Hospital; that on 
the ninth or tenth day h^ saw his lordship, 
who abruptly told him» in the presence of 
Mr. Stephens, the secretary, that he had no 
compjmds./or hiqa. ,Ailter such recq>tion^ 



C(Uc of Captain Thomas BailU^f {IjS 

and not before, captain B^Uie seeing, and to 
his honour feeling, as it became him to, do, 
the injuiies that were daily arising to the ob- 
jects of his care, thought there was no pos- 
sible chance of redress, \^uX by applying to 
the body of the commissioners and governora 
at lacge, to whom he did apply on the tenth 
da^. And he swears positively, that his 
prmtedCase, which these gentlemen that 
prosecute the rule find to be a Ubel upon 
them, was printed solely for the purpose of 
laying before each separate governor add 
commissioner of the Hospital, the nature, of 
his complaints, in order to beget an attention 
m them, and to procure, if possible, by that 
means an efficient general court, that might 
inquire into and reform the abuses. This he 
positively swears was his sole object in com^^ 
piling, in printing, and delivenne the several 
copies of those he has dehvered ; which he 
sweass he delivered only to such governors, to 
his own counsel, and one or two to his own 
friends, for their advice and assistance when 
he was threatened to be attached at law. And 
I trust, your lordship will find that every se- 
parate charge of the facts therein mentioned 
are true, which. alone is an answer to svn ap- 
pUcation for an information ; but there is not 
a colour to consider it as a Ubel, because it is 
a representation of complaints fit to be made 
to those whose duty it is, and who have au-^ 
thority to hear and redress them; therefore it 
is impossible to consider this as a libel. 

In the first place, my lord, I take it to be 
the established practice of this Court in all 
cases, upon a motion for an information for a 
libel, to grant a rule of the i|[iformation be 
true, Uiough in point pf law it is neverthe- 
less a libel for bemg true; ^ret the Court will 
not permit them to go on in this extraordi^ 
nary vniy for an information, especially if 
your lonuhips find this printed Case was not 
printed for the purpose of publication to the 
world, nor for the purpose of exposing parti- 
cular persons to the public; but for the mere 
purpose of stating facts in a plain, but in a 
strong manner ; and it was fit in this case he 
should state them, as he has in a verv pun- 
gent manner in many parts of it. If that be 
the complexion of the business, I trust your 
loidships will mojst undoubtedly discharge 
this nue with costs. 

Now, my lord, I will go through shortlv, as 
well as I can, those parts of their affidavit 
which state the supposed charges upon them, 
as far as they condescend to particulars at all, 
and explain very shortly the answer captain 
Baillie gives to their comiplaint, which an- 
swer I may once for all say is chiefly thus : 
that true it is, Idid mean all this you sunpose 
me to mean in general, and more parUcmarly, 
and it is all true; and captain Baillie has 
himself gone through the particulars, and 
sworn they are absolutely true; and notwilh- 
stax^ding the padns ^ea at different times 
tonieventthe officers and pensioners from 
m£ing a^y viduntacy affidavits^ judd. every 



17} respecting the Royal HespUal at Greemanch. A. D. 1778. 



CIS 



DorUl of Greenwich Hospitai believe they 

committed a very great otience asainst the 

fa^ powers, and would be punished at proper 

opportunity if they did ; yet it is not to be 

vondered there were to be found amongst such 

gsUant officers and seamen, a great number 

of persons who joined with Mr. BatlHe in 

proving the truth of the facts of every charge, 

which the prosecutors chose to pick out, and 

put in their affidavits in their own way, and 

upon which they found their application to 

the Court. 

My lord, the nature of the first charge your 
lordship finds by the affidavits is, *^ Though 
there arc twenty-four directors, yet in truth 
some of them very seldom attend, except for 
the purpose of presenting or nominating a 
chanty boy upon the foundation ; that others 
lekkm interfere in the business, or stay after 
the secretary has taken notice of their being 
present, and that only to give a sanction to 
the |irocecdtngs of the court." This is a sort 
of tnin| upon the mere stating, every body 
would nardly believe, but captain Baillie 
swears it to be true, and if the Itooks of the 
UosfHtal were referred to, it would appear so : 
and many of the twenty-four directors hardly 
ever attend at all, others attend for the pur- 
Dose of some little emolument to themselves. 
Your lordships seem surprized that these 
charges should be stated as tnie, but many 
of those gentlemen receive ten shillings for 
their daily attendance ; notwithstanding the 
chaiter allows that ten shillings, it is given 
unAer this restriction, to those who shall 
think reasonable to demand it ; how shame- 
fiii it is to demand it ! yet the demand is al- 
wa^'s made. 

The directors who chiefly attend, it is 
stated, are the -wery persons concerned in the 
receipts and expenditure of the Hospital 
money ; that is sworn to be true, and it most 
undoubtedly is so, that the persons usually 
attending, are those gentlemen who are so 
nearly concerned. The surveyor of the Hos- 
pital and receiver of the monthly sixpences 
from every seaman in the merchant service, 
and the persons now complaining to this 
Court, are the persons that usually do attend. 

Mr. Baillie says, and insists it is true, that 
he has very often complained of this, but he 
has not had any redress at the meeting of 
the directors, though he is one by virtue of 
jus ofl&ce ; he also pressed them to enquire 
into the accounts and the vouchers or the 
receiver of the sixpences, but Mr. Hicks him- 
self was always present as a director, and in- 
terfered and prevented any close examination 
of those accounts. 

He says and swears to the fact of the free- 
dom of debate being interrupted, and it is 
notorious h must be so, and there ought to 
he a freedom of enquiry into the money ex- 
pended, and into the state of the accounts ; 
Wl that has been prevented by these acting 
•Bwclors, those pnersons being present who 
voce to allow their own acoouQts, and their 
VOL XXL 



presence must have a considerable weiglit 
when such enquiry was to be made; the 
Court must see as I do what, must be the 
consequence. Then it seems Mr. Hicks was 
never at sea in his life, but is a freeholder of 
Huntingdonshire. 

Court, What is his office ? 

Mr. Sol. Gen, Receiver of the sixpenny 
duty paid by the seamen. 

Mr. Bearcroft. With respect to the next 
observation, nobody will dispute that the 
agents for prizes ought not to be directors. 
One very great income for the support of 
Greenwich Hospital is the prize money that 
is unclaimed after three years, and at this 
moment I believe (I don't know whether I 
am perfectly correct in the sum) tHe prize 
money unclaimed amounts to 70,CX)0/. and 
upwards. 

Now, my lord, as for the prize-agents, it is 
not their interest to settle accounts with the 
Hospital, but to keep the prize-money in 
their hands. It is the business of the di- 
rectors to compel those accounts and the 
payment of the balance, the reason is ob- 
vious. 

Court, How arc the directors made, named, 
or appointed? 

Mr. Bearcroft, They are named by the 
charter. 

Court. How are the vacancies filled up ? 

Mr. Murphy, By the Lords of the Ad- 
miralty. 

Mr. Bearcroft, My lord, Mr. Baillie is 
complained of for having said, in his book, 
that the independent directors seldom inter- 
fere, in the business, thoii«^h they happen t^ 
be present, having found ny experience it is 
totally useless : this the complainants chuse 
to suppose relates to them. To this Mr. 
Baillie answers, with great truth, and some 
humour, that when he speaks of. the inde- 
pendent members, he does not mean to speak 
of the reverend Mr. Cooke, Mr. Stuart, or 
Mr. Hicks. 

Mr- Solicitor General. Mr. Baillie is a di- 
rector now. 

Mr. Bearcroft, He is nothing now, he is 
suspended from his office, in consequence of 
the proceedings, at what was called a com- 
mittee of enquiry. It is wonderful to con- 
ceive, how it should get into their affidavit, 
that captain Baillie complains, the commis- 
sioners and governors at large arc never sum- 
moned — Is It jiot true ? Your lordship may 
know it— though you are a governor, yen 
never had a f^ummons. 

Earl of Mansfield, No, I never had. 

Mr. Just. Willes, I did not know I was a 
governor till now. 

Mr. Bearcroft, My lord, it is fit all the 
members of a corporation should be sum- 
moned, and I am a little astonished it has 
not created a new place of sumraoner, or 
something of that sort; it might be worth 
purchasing perhaps, but nothing of that sort 
is done. It is, however, a subject' of com- 
l C 



m 



18 GEORGE III. The Que of Captain Thomas BaiOie, 



[SO 



plaint that they had never been summoned. 

Court, It would be a large summons, \ 
perceive, by the charter. 

Mr. Bearcroft, Amongst the rest of the 
' fisurts there is this one. I see that there is a 
charge in the supposed libel of a deficiency 
in one Ellis, the stewarcrs accounts, of three 
thousand five hundred and fifly odd pounds, 
and likewise a great (Quantity of stores, to a 
considerable amount in point of value— this 
is notoriously tiue — it is sworn to by captain 
Baillie, as appears by his affidavit, and otners, 
that this steward Ellis was deficient that 
sum, and he was permitted to lurk about the 
office a considerable time without prosecu- 
tion, or any method taken to get the money ; 
At last he absconded, and no enquiry was 
made farther about the matter. This is one 
of the charges in the book against the direc- 
tprs, and tlus is literally true, though they 
are pleased to call it a supposed deSciency. 
My lord, I forbear, though I see I have notes 
of many circumstances, not so well worth 
while to go into, but amongst other things it 
is fit to attend to tliis charge, that is, that for 
the emolument of the persons concerned, the 
pensioners have been served with bad meat 
of all kinds, and of a very inferior quality; 
in particular, one charge is stated, and that 
part of it, I am sure, is tnic ; I am persuaded 
It is in your lordship's memory, that the con- 
tracting butcher, Mellish^ I think the name 
is, who contracted to funiish the best of 
meat, and to be paid the best price ; whereas 
it was proved he fiirnished meat of a very in- 
.ferior kind, such as bull-beef, and putrid 
veal. 

Court. BuU-staf-beef is the phrase for it. 

Mr. Bearcrqfl, Your lordship will find tlie 
breach of contract was a long time before it 
VfSLa prosecuted, and at last, the penalties were 
not insisted upon ; and they were, in my ap- 
prehension, very improperly compoundea; 
and that same butcher was afterwards con- 
tracted with, and still supplies the Hospital, 
though it was known he aealt with the but- 
chers in the neighbourhood for bad meat of 
all kinds ; what signifies the contract, if he 
has in many instances incurred penalties, to 
a very great amount indeed, by having totally 
disreg^ded the contract, in supplymg buU 
and bull-stag beef? 

t Court. Wiis he not twice prosecuted? 

Mr. Bearcroft. Yes, my lord, my aifidavits 
prove it, and state that all the particulars are 
true. Then it states that the apartments of 
several landmen in offices were enlarged, and 
a great number of expences incurred to make 
alterations and additional buildings by no 
means necessary ; whilst the poor pensioners 
had besides, bad beef, bad beer, bad washing, 
bad shoes and stockings ; and to shew the 
proceedings to be gross to a degree of shame, 
there is a charge of persons conveying large 
quantities of water through pipes into the 
tniall beer, and sworn to be true. There are 
some paintings in the Hospital, thai are 



shewn to strangers and others. It seems 
they wanted cleaning, and there was 1,000/. 
paid by the directors, which is a very large 
sum of money, for ih& purpose of cleaning 
these pictures ; and when the particidars of 
the real expence are gone into, it tuhis out 
that one hundred ana fifly pounds or two 
hundred pounds, was the expence really and 
truly incurred, and what was necessary, might 
have been done for les^, if they had chose it 
— These arc the sort of complaints that hav^ 
been enumerated by captain Baillie, which he 
laid before the first lord of the Admiralty, 
having frequently applied to the directors la 
vain : however, it did at last pi'oduce a com- 
mittee of inquiry^ and that committee acted 
contrary to the true spirit of such a commit 
tee ; Mr. Baillie applied to the Board of Ad- 
miralty for a fair and regular enquiry into 
the truth of those charees, for the purpose of 
general reformation. But your lordship will 
sec by the manner of appointing the coo»- 
mittee, and permit me to say, by me conduct 
of those gentlemen, at their several meetinzs^ 
it was clearly shewn their object was not ^ 
enquiring into facts for the purpose of redress 
ing grievances, but their great object was, H 
they could, to find some charge, ri^bt or 
wrong, ajrainst Mr. Baillie^ to turn him out 
of his office in the Hospital — that was tht 
object of thehr enquiry. Your lordship sees 
captain Baillie's complaint is against the d^ 
rectors. Your lordship will be surprised to 
learn, that when application was made to 
lord Sandwich for an appointment of disiii* 
terested persons to make an enquiry, hi« 
lordship very coolly applied to Mr. Baillie* 
and desired him to name seven directors ; 
says Mr« Bfullie, that is strange indeed, m^ 
complaint is against the directors — it should 
be governors and commbsioners, that are not 
directors. Says his lordship, if vou will not 
name them, I will name them for you, and 
lord Sandwich appointed seven persons, all 
of whom are directors, and without makiojg 
any observations, I will repeat to your lor£ 
ship who th^ are, and their situation. Th« 
first person, is sir Meyrick Burrell, of whom 
I shall say nothing, but that he attended 
only once, and I verily believe he was 
heartily ashamed of what was going forwanl, 
and tlierefore did not attend any more. The 
next upon the Ust is Mr. Peregrine Gust, wh« 
attended all the meetings, except the last ; 
and his absence captain Saillic had reason to 
regret, for in the course of the sittings of the. 
committee, when Mr. Baillie complained, 
and with tmth, that his witnesses were not 
heard, and he not permitted to prove the se« 
veral charges in his book, he was interrupted, 
insulted, and abused by several of the par- 
ties, particularly by Mr. Mylnei be was call- 
ed a blackguard and a liar by the reverend 
Mr. Cooke— Mr. Gust said. Be patient, cap- 
tain Baillie, I promise you, before this busH 
ness closes, it will take a great deal of time« 
youfself and all ^aw wimesset shall be fairly 



81] mpeding the Royal Hospital at Greenvsich. A. D. 1779. 



[23 



inrd; on this account, his absence Mr. 

BuiJie had great reason to regret: but to- 

nrds the close of the business, on the last 
dsjy there attended one captain Barker in 
lus room, and this captain Barker was ex- 
tremely angry with Mr. Baillie for taking 
ii|M» ium to doubt, in any instance, of the 
propriety of the conduct of the directors; 
aod whenever Mr. Baillie interfered, and de- 
sired to be heard to prove his allegations, the 
ttoeral answer of Mr. Barker was this, Why, 
air, what do you mean, by charging such 
people as the directors? Their having done 
a thuig, is proof enough they have done ri^ht 
SDd proper, and there is no around to im- 
peach the conduct of such gentlemen as they 
are, and I will not suffer it : and Mr. Barker 
was as good as his word, for notwithstanding 
the promise Mr. Cust n^ade, to hear captain 
Beilue, he found all of a sudden the busmess 
dosed, and Mr. Baillie was turned out, and 
told, the court would sit but one day more, 
aod that only for the purpose of making a 
report to the Admiralty, which report captain 
Baillie never has seen nor knows, but by the 
effect of it. It seems he has been suspended 
for some months from his office, his pay and 
emoluments stopt pendente Ike, This cir- 
o ima t anc e alose, my lord, would most un- 
doubtedly, if I was not to apply for costs, 
render me inexcusable. 

Cwrf. Have any of you got the report and 
Older for his suispension ? 

Mr. Ejergratfe. The copy of the report was 
deared by Mr. Baillie, but it was refused. 

Mr. Beararof ft . My lord, it is material to 
state that this captain Barker was a captain 
ofaooliier, the other persons that attended 
arc, a Mr. Savary, storekeeper of the ord- 
nance at Gibraltar: a Mr. Wells, a great 
shipbuilder, and contractor for the Admi- 
ral^; a Mr. W. James, now sir Wm. James, 
a contractor for shipping : and a Mr. Charles 
Beynolds, fbmaerly a master of a merchant- 
man. This, my lord, was the nomination of 
the court of enquiry, and according to what 
is set forth of their proceedings by the affi- 
davit of captain Bafllie and Mr. Cowley, it 
was a mockery of every idea of justice : a 
feice and a burlesque of justice, and really 
deserves great censure. I cannot help taking 
notice of captain Baillie's complaint, for, I 
think, he has great ground to complain. 
That upon this' occasion, when he was called 
upon, though not i>eTmitted to prove the 
tnith of the charges in his book, he was con- 
fronted with a counsellor and solicitor, whom, 
be says, came to collect materials, not for the 
pabhc good ; but to give a colour to the 
complaints of individuSs, in order to bring 
wm before the court of KingVbench ; and 
^fawqgfa Mr. Baillie is a very brave man, and 
not daid of a French captain, your lordship 
Jill find he was exceedingly intimidated, m- 
•jed, at the sight; of mv worthy friend, Mr. 
Morgan: for he found that Mr. Morgan was 
M only a ooonseHor, but th^t sort of a 



counsellor, called a special pleader !-*and 
reported to be a gentleman of great eminence 
in that profession ; and I may venture to say^ 
a great number 6f i>ersons do entertam 
strange opinions of special pleaders, and take 
them for very uncommon geniuses. And I 
dare say, when captain Baillie found himself 
opposed bv a person so extraordinary, his 
fears met him ; for Mr. Morgan contrived to 
prevent his going into any one part of his 
case— One minute he was told, ' Sir, you are 

* not to prove this by such evidence — then^ 

* you shall not prove that— they are my 
' clients, and sliall not be permitted to accuse 
' themselves." At which Baillie was totally 
astonished, and his proofs put an end to. 

This is in general the nature of the procee<J^ 
ings of this committee of enouiry— I dare 
say,' I have omitted a great numoer of things 
which appeared upon their proceedings 
Upon the whole, my lord, I contend this is 
not a libel ; that captain Baillie, in printing^ 
this Case, has done no more than his duty, 
and that duty, as 1 conceive, with decency, 
and there is not the least foundation for this 
application. 

But, my lord, in consequence of the rule 
being granted for captain Baillie to shew 
cause, they have made an affidavit, giving 
their reason why they did not apply, sooner 
to the court; they say, they thought it was 
not proper to make the application, because 
there was a committee of^ enquiry, to call 
upon Mr. Baillie to prove, if he could, the 
several charges contamed in his book. My 
lord, it is singular, that when these gentle- 
men themselves are speaking of this court of 
enquiry, they will not venture to say a word 
of Its nature or proceedings ; they dare not, 
I will venture to say, not one of them dared ^ 
they were very wisely advised to abstain 
from doing it — th<^ will not dare to swear it 
was in truth a fair enquiry into the Charges, 
and that Mr. Baiilie was called upon and 
heard to prove his charges. 

Upon all the circumstances of this case, 
can there be a doubt this rule will be dis- 
charged } I am very earnest in hoping it will 
b^ discharged with costs; if not, the com* 
plainants will have succeeded in the only ob- 
ject of their application. 1 have no concep- 
tion, your lordship will make the rule abso- 
lute ; for if half a dozen are to join their 
own purses, and the purse of the ilospital is 
to be joined with them, in this case thev can- 
not but prevail in this prosecution, to the en- 
tire ruin of captain Baillie ; their affidavits 
requiring such answers, as made the business 
spread out to a most enormous size : captain 
Baillie is therefore obliged to give answers to 
particular charges, unnecessary as they are, 
and it has not cost him less than three or 
four hundred pounds upon this occasion. 

I conceive, therefore, the court will, for the 
obvious reasons I have already stated, be of 
opinion, this rule ought to be discharged, and 
discharged with costs. 



83] 



16 GEORGE III. The Case of Captain TJumas Bttillie^ [24 



I should have taken up a ereat deal more 
lime, in proportion to what I nave done, if I 
had stated all the particulars of the aiBdavils. 
This is the general outlihe of the case ; and 
when our affidavits are read, I dare say your 
lordships will find the case much stronger 
than I have stated it ; and, I trust, your lord- 
i»hip willy as justice cannot be done without 
it, discharge the rule with costs. 

Court, How is the court appointed that 
made this enquiry ; I see it is a court of go- 
vernors ? 

Mr. Murphy, It was appointed by lord 
Sandwich, and they are all directors as well 
as governors. ^ 

Court. I want to know under what autho- 
rity it was, the committee was appointed ? 

Mr. Bearcroft. It was under the authority 
of a general court of governors, which I 
should have stated. 

Court. It was not any omission. 

Mr. Bearcroft, It consisted of about seven- 
teen governors, out of that number twelve or 
fourteen of them were directors, and of those 
very directors, the court of enquiry was named 
by lord Sandwich himself. 

The Affidavit of Thomas Baillie,esq. lieu- 
tenant governor of Greenwich Hospital, was 
read, wnich being very long, is here omitted. 

Court. I see the tendency of your other af- 
fidavits ; by this they are of the same ten- 
dency with what he says. 

Mr. Murphy. My lord, they are all very 
material. 

Lord Mamjield. They can be read, when 
you have stated them, and shewn the mate- 
riality of them : I shall know better how to 
attend to them, when I see the use you make 
of them. 

Mr. Hargrove. I am not sufficiently ac- 
i|uainted with the i^ature of the case, to take 
it from what has been read, without hear- 
ing the affidavits read. 

Lord Mansfield. I take it from the defend- 
ant's affidavit, that the others ioin with him 
in verif^'ing the facts, and Cowley concurring 
with bim, as to the behaviour of the com- 
mittee of enquiry ; and when it comes to be 
^lore material, to be precise and exact, they 
will be read ; I shall take it, from Mr. Mur- 
phy *s opening de bene esacy we may stay till 
the last day of the term, if we are to read 
them all. 

Mr. Peckham : 

May it please your lordships to far 
vour me in behalf of this much-injured gen- 
tleman, captain Baillic, who, after forty 
years service with honour to himself, and 
glory to his country, is dragged into this court 
to answer as a criminal, though guilt}' of no 
other crime than — that which, in the opinion 
of the directors of Greenwich Hospital, is of 
the most enormous magnitude ; the crime'Of 
an honest and conVientio.us discharge of his 
dijtv. 



Had captain Baillie slept in his office ; had 
he been inattentive to the duties of his star- 
tion ; nay, had he been guilty of peculatieif , 
and joined in the generalplunder, he would 
not nave been brought before your lordships 
this d^yas a delinquent; but probably womd 
have been the conndeotial friend of the first 
lord of the Admiralty, and might even have 
supplanted the reverend Mr. Cooke in his 
favour. 

It was his duty to endeavour, to the ut- 
most of his power, to remedy those abuses 
which called aloud for redress. It is for the 
faithful discharge of that duty, he is now 
harrassed with this prosecution, in the vain 
and idle hope, that in his ruin will be buried 
that censure and punishment, which they 
must be. conscious their conduct and their 
crimes most justly deserve. 

My lord, the intention of the establishment 
of Greenwich Hospital was for seamen — that 
is the institution. The charter says, ^ All 
the officers to be appointed in and foMhe 
said Hospital shall oe seamen only.'' — ^The 
words are precise and positive, and can be 
neither explained away nor contradicted. 

By the original instrument by which the 
Hospital was established, the commissioners, 
governors, and directors, are all to be men of 
rank, fortune, and ability ; 24 directors are 
named by the charter, and appointed by the 
Admiralty, for the external government, so 
far as it relates to the expenditure of money, 
the making of contracts for>provbions, and 
other necessaries ; and a council of naval o& 
ficers is or ought to be appointed by the Ad- 
miralty, for the internal government of the 
house, under the name of " Governor and 
Council.'' — My client, captain Baillie, as lieu- 
tenant governor, is by the charter a member 
of the general court of commissioners and 
governors, and also a director ; he is likewise 
a member of the council ; and in the absence 
of the governor, is chairman of the two last 
boards, and commanding officer in the Hos- 
pital. 

II<5 was therefore impelled, by every tie of 
duty, to remedy the abuses he had complain- 
ed of. Added to this, there are three letters, 
stated in his printed Case— orders, I may call 
them— from two different governors, express- 
ly charging him' to keep a watchful eye upor& 
the pen-and-ink men, as the governors 
thought proper to call them. 

Captain Baillie perceiving, in everv departs 
ment of the Hospital^ most shameful plunder 
and peculation— findms landmen introduced, 
in express violation of&e charter— the provi- 
sions intolerable— the men's clothes scantily 
provided, and upwards of 30,000/. expended 
m 8 vears in useless alterations, thought he 
should not do his duty by himself, by the sea- 
men, and his country, if he did not make 
those complaints, which as an honest man he 
was bound to do, and for which every indivi^ 
dual owes him thanks and reverence. 

Th^ Hospital being in ]tbi3 situation, th« 



45] respeding the Royal Ilospkai at Greemwch, A. D- 1778. 



t25 



lieiitenant governor applied, accoidine to the 
ndoof the house, first to the council: they 
app]y to the directors, and afterwards to the 
«ovemor, who pay no attention to his com- 
plaiats : he then applies to the first lord of 
the Admirahy, but without efiect: and at 
kst he presents to him the printed Case, to 
which he desires an answer ; but after many 
days were elapsed, he is told, ** No answer 
mMjJd be given.'' 

He then appUes to the lords of the Admi- 
tahy, through the medium of the secretary, 
with a respectful letter, and his printed Case 
enclosed — that met with as ill ^ate as his for- 
mer application ; and captain Baillie then, and 
not tm then, applied to the commissioners 
and governors, as the dernier resort, to re- 
medy those evils. 

If the intermediate officers refiised to ad- 
dress the Admiralty, or ^neral court, captain 
Baiilie was willing to ^ive as little oiience as 
possible in doing it hmiself ; for he printed 
the Case of Greenwich Hospital with the ut- 
most caution : and he tells you the reason of 
piinting it was, there were such a number of 
xxmimissioners and governors, to whom it was 
necessary to communicate the facts he had 
stated, that it would have been impossible to 
have done it in manuscript ; therefore^ as the 
easiest and best method, he had it pnnted — 
but, solely with a view that the governors 
shouM read and digest it, in order that the 
truth of the several facts therein stated might 
bemvestigated. 

Soon after this publication, as it has been 
called, had l>een thus delivered, it became 
necessaiy sonnething should be done; and 
therefore a mock tribunal was instituted, 
which they thought proper to call a court of 
enquiiy^a court in itself illegal, because im- 
propeny constituted: and, therefore, what- 
ever was done in it is nothing to the present 
purpose; for though a general court was 
called, it was thought expedient to delegate 
the enquiry to a committee of seven, which 
seven are directors. 

If there had been any gross misbehaviour 
in the Hospital, and no redress could be ob- 
tained, the commissioners and governors at 
large ought to have selected a number of go- 
vernors of independent fortune and situation, 
who ^ere not directors. Men of that de- 
scription would have probed the bu^ness to 
thairattom; but. instead of those, they were 
a packed council for the occasion ; and the 
omn of enquiry consisted of the very delin- 
quents thenaaelves. 

Your lordships vrill be astonished to hear 
that the committee sat in judgmentupon their 
own criities, and that those gentlemen were 
^rpointed by the first lord of the Admiralty. 
You find, with an adroitness peculiar to him- 
^, he selected a set of men devoted to him ; 
obligated to him for the very bread tiiey eat, 
^ which, in part, arises out of a fund ap- 
fnipriated for the use of disabled seamen, and 
i» wki«b the seamen themselves contribute. 



How do they proceed? Captain Baillie's 
witnesses arerefiued to lie heard— he applies 
to the books, that he may have evidence 
from those unerring vouchers— the liooks are 
refused to be opened ---he was browbeat by 
their counsel, and insulted by their cifvil offi- 
cers, a set of landmen, in a manner that a 
gentleman must blush to hear of; Mylne, 
the clerk of the works, calling; him a black- 
guard, while Cooke, tiie cliaphun, brands him 
as a liar. That a clergyman should be so lost 
to all sense of decency, as to forget that de- 
corum which more peculiarly belongs to his 
situation, makes me blush for the profession 
of which he is so unworthy a member ; but, 
that a man of low birth, and no education, 
should talk a language familiar to himself, I 
neither reprobate nor am surprised at ; yet 
the directors that sat in the court of enquiry, 
ousht not to have permitted a brave, honest, 
ola seaman to have been treated in that 
shameless way, by men who, from profes- 
sion or situation, were shielded from his re- 
sentment. 

After the committee had sat some days, 
Mr. .Cust, their Chairman, who appeared 
ashamed of their conduct and their cause, 
withdrew himself from the committee ; and 
Mr. Barker, a captain of a collier, was called 
to the chair ; a proper instrument for the in- 
tended purpose : that man was mean as well 
as weak enough to say, that he was employ- 
ed by lord Sandwich, and was to be paid for 
his labour : the labourer proved himself 
worthy of his hire ; for, in a few minutes, 
there was an end of the committee, this ho- 
nourable man asserting, that evidence was 
immaterial; that it was libellous to doubt 
the integrity of the directors; that he,jthere- 
fore, should close the business, without hear- 
ing those witnesses of captain Baillie, which 
Mr. Cust had promised should be heard. 

Your lordships will observe, the reason this 
court was not sooner applied to, in the lan- 
guage of the prosecutor's affidavits, was, 
" We could not apply before," because the 
court of enquiry was not finished : yet there 
is not a man upon that court of enouiry who 
dares to say, tne facts charged are disproved, 
or that any one of the delinquents was not 
guilty of the crimes imputed to him. It would 
not perhaps be difficult to guess, at the real 
reason ; but it is foreign to the present pur- 
pose. Perhaps a greater man than any of 
these found himself attacked in another 
place, where, conscious of the truth of cap- 
tain Baillie's charges, and of the impossibility 
of vindicating himself, he thought it would be 
prudent to avoid the enquiry, by asserting, 
that it was to undergo a discussion in West- 
minster-hall. That apology might silence 
the peers ; and he then, to save his credit, 
mignt order his minions to prefer this prose- 
cution, not vrith the hope or success, but to 
save him from the enquiry he had so much 
reason to dread. Soon after this manoeuvre 
had succeeded, and your lordships had be*A 



S7] 



18 GEORGE HI. The Case of Captain Thomas BaiUie^ [SS 



applied to for infbrmations, Mr. Hicks, the 
sixpenny receiver, who was one of the persons 
charged by captain Baillie, who is one of his 
prosecutors, and who sat in judgment upon 
nim at a general court, where lora Sandwich 
presided ; at that court, Mr. Hicks proposed, 
that captain BailUe should be removed from 
bis employment of lieutenant-governor. The 
noble lord foi^ot, for a moment, the dignity 
of his station; and, more like a drunken 
chairman in a night^cellar than a peer of par- 
liament, bawls out, ** All you that are of that 
opinion, hold up your hands.'' They all join- 
ed in full chorus for suspension ; and every 
tdirty hand was immediately exalted ; so that, 
in five minutes, this brave old officer was tried, 
condemned, and executed. 

My lords, this sentence is to captain Bail- 
lie a very serious business ; for it robs him of 
6002. a-year ; and if his wife should become a 
widow, she loses her pension of 100/. per ann. 
more : and he now stands before you^ after 
being worn out in lone and faithfiil services— 
an honest man indeed, but without a shilling 
in his pocket ! 

My lord, it will be necessary to ask your 
lordship, whether, takine the whole of this 
Case iojgether — printed tor the expriDss pur- 
pose or giving information to those who 
wanted it, in obedience to the dutv he owed 
bimself and the public — can tliis be called a 
libel? Is it a libel for a man to do his duty ? 
Is it a Ubel, for a man to complain to those 
who have idone the power to redress the 
grievance ? 

If this is to be called a libel^ I doubt not but 
the lime will come, when a grand jury will 
baVe informations filed against them, as li- 
bellers, for the presentments they have been 
bound in duty to prefer. 

I know but of one case in point ; which is 
the case of the convicted highwayman, who 
threatened to swear the peace against his 
jury, for having put him in fear of his life. 
Having thus considered the Case, as taken to- 
gether, not to be a libel, let us state the parti- 
cular parts of it, and see whether any thing 
can be collected that is libellous. I will not go 
through a tedious detail of what has been al- 
ready spoken to ; but will mention some par- 
ticulars, if there is light sufficient to let me 
refer to my brief with respect to the joint 
affidavit of the three directors, the charge is, 
^ The directors never presume to exercise 
their own judgment, but give their votes 
agreeable to the directions they receive^ — 
^'Thereby insinuating'^-^observe the insinua- 
tions ! that the directors were guilty of fraud ! 
fmd did not vote according to their con- 
science ! 

Is that insinuation iustified by the charge } 
Does it necessarily follow, that men, who do 
not exercise their judgment, must act con- 
trary tothenr conscience, or that they are 
l^lty of fhuid, because they obey the direc- 
tums of another ? Are the mandates of loi^ 
fiaodwich so wkked, tl^at obedience to them 



becomes criminal? These wretched affidavit* 
men appear to me to be the libellers ; not the 
defendant, who has written the truth. 

There b another charge which they have 
disingenuously construed, but dare not deny ; 
and have taken only a piece of the paragraph, 
'^ That (meaning the government of the Hoa* 
pital) which has been eventually formed, is 
rather a burlesque upon authority, as nothing 
can be more absurd than to appoint persons, 
with all the grave solemnity of rod business, 
to examine into and controul their own con- 
duct; to check and point out objections to 
their own accounts,'' meaning thereby (ms 
they swear in their affidaviu) that those di* 
rectors who have accounts to settle, aie 
guilty of fraud, -and n^igence : does that 
follow? Certainy not. But the impropriety 
of such appointments is glaring; and the first 
, part of the sentence, which they have thought 
proper to lop oS, expresses it, ^* Thus, iqstead 
of a government of^ that perfect kind, which 
might naturally be expected from the anxious 
care which breaUies tnrough evei^' line of the 
original instruments by which it is estiU>l]sh- 
ed, that which has been eventually formed is 
rather a burlesque upon authority, 6cc, &c.'' 

Now your lordship sees how the sentence 
is mutilated, and what false conclusions they 
have drawn from those premises. There are 
a great variety of shnilar instances in their 
affidavits, even to bits of sentences and half^ 
lines. I wish to read, and to observe upon 
some of them ; but it is impossible for me to 
see by this light, and I cannot recollect them 
with sufficient accuracy, to state them with 
necessary precision ; therefore I shall content 
myself witn a few observations to your lord- 
ship upon the wjiole purport of what the pro- 
sepitors say, *' So far as the charge tends to 
criminate me, I deny it." That is the man- 
ner some charges are treated in — that is the 
form — ^they swear, this or that is not true ; or, 
it don't tend to criminate me. With what 
face then do the gentlemen come here to 
make the application. 

If it does not criminate, why do they make 
such application ? If it does criminate them, 
they ought to be indicted for perjury; for all 
the charges are substantiated beyond a possi- 
bility of doubt — not only by the affidavit of 
captain Baillie, but the concurring testimony 
of at least thirty others. 

For example — the facts, with respect to the 
butcher, cannot be denied. The charge is^ 
that he who has been convicted, is again em- 
ployed. Then say they '< This change, so far 
as It criminates me, is not true." Tne truth 
of the fact cannot be controverted — then it 
does not tend to criminate me — If it does not, 
for what purpose do they come here?— I take 
upon me to say, upon my veracity, thatevery 
charge is answered in the way I have now 
mentioned ; or else they draw their condu* 
sion, and say, This I deny!— For instance— 
they state a charge — from that charge, they 
draw a perverse and &lae oooclusion^-'aaid 



0] tx^ectuig tie Rotf^ Hotpkat at Gnmaich. A. D. 1778. 



C» 



then they say (hoping to impose upon the 
oooft) ** This we deny,'* referring to their 
ovn coDcrhision, which is the antecedent, that 
dicy know to he faiee, and take no notice of 
the charge which standc uncontradicted. 

1 trust these few ohservations aie complete 
answers to every part of their affidavits : I 
take upon me to say, there is not a fact in the 
book, but what is positively proved. There 
is not a &ct, which they have attempted to 
deny. I shimld therefore insult the court, if 
I oMild suppose the rule would not he dis- 
charged with costs. 

My fordy I have ever understood when 
lenttemea come into this court upon ground- 
Kss applications, though much more favour- 
ably circmnstanoed than the present, that< 
this court will give costs to the adverse party ; 
ibr it would be extremely hard indeed for an 
innocent man to be dragged here to answer, at 
a great expence, a crime which had no exist- 
ence hut in the maUce of his prosecutors. 

Costs have been granted in informations 
a^iiist justices of the peace, in informations 
in the nature of a Quo Warranto ; and though 
those informations differ from the present 
appUcatioD, yet the amercing the prosecutor 
in coats is founded on the same immutable 
law of justice, that the innocent should not 
be hamssed without reconipence^ and that 
the wron^ doer should defray the expence he 
had oocaaioneH. 

Who is at the expence of this prosecution } 
i see many of the prosecutors here : will they* 
aay it comes out of their own pockets ? I see 
the solicitor of Greenwich Hospital here, at- 
tending as their attorney: he likewise is si- 
lent. Then I am justified in saying the pro- 
secutors are not to pay^lct them deny it if 
they dare ! 

u it pos»ble, my lord, that these men's 
cxpences shall bedeiraved out of the treasury 
•f Greenwich Hospital, appropriated to the 
most praise-worthy purposes, while this im- 
happy gentleman is to be ruined by paying' 
his own costs, though he prevails against his 
prosecutors, who cannot, who dare not, deny 
the charges? 

There is a technical expression used in the 
law, ^ that every man should come into this 
court with clean hands." Which of the pro- 
Mcotors can claim the benefit of the expres- 
wmf 

Is Mr. Hicks^e sixpenny receiver, in that 
predicament? But enough has been already 
said of lum, to convince your lordship that he 
does not come with clean hands. 

la what iisht does Mr. Ibhetson appear? — 
A mere clenc in office, who lifts his hand 
against a lieutenant of the Hospital, and 
rtdkes a onvple who was without defence. 
Hub is not the onlv instance of his crueltv ; 
fer apoorhelpless old pensioner stands in juds- 
BMKt aainst him, whom he beat unmerciful- 
If- wlufe hleeding at his feet ! Are these 
the dean hands which come for informa- 
tfatts stained inth the blood of the M, 



the impotent and infirm I But let us look at 
the reverend Mr. Cooke, that worthy leader of 
these disgraceful scenes, that negociator of 
every thing that is infamous. 1 am not to ha 
deterred from my dut^, but will speak of meit 
as they are ; though I should be ashamed to 
use such language, if I could not justify 
every word I shall say of tiiat abandoned 
man. 

It is proved, beyond a posaability of donbt^ 
that tbb man, who is a director of a great 
establishment, who ought to have been tha 
first to prosecute the contracting butcher, for 
his numberless fiauds on the poor pensioners^ 
was the man, that was shameless enough to 
apply to different persons, beggine them to 
suppress their evidence against that delin- 
quent. . Can there be a more atrocious act 
thaa to suborn witnesses in fiivour of that 
defendant, which, as a director and a {daiqt^ 
in the cause, he yns bound to bring ta 
justice? 

The rev. Mr. Cooke has been guilty of an- 
other act, which cries aloud for vengeance^ 
He told different gentlemen, who wereofficera 
in the Hospital—* 

'* If you are seen with' captain Baillie, lord 
Sandwich will stop your preferment for it^ 
and, if he applies to parliament, will expel 
him the Hospital :^ ano, lest his words should 
not gain creoit, he stampt it with the sai^ctioa 
of an oath, saying, * Bv God it is true !" 

This is the man wdo is called the confi- 
dential director of lord Sandwich. I vow to 
God I am ashamed to hear it. Sure it must 
be impossible that a noble lord should so far 
foi^t the dignity of his station, as to be con- 
nected with such a man, or to descend to such 
unexampled meanness, as to prevent gentle- 
men from holding communication with cap- 
tain Baillie, or wreaten him with ruin, for 
persevering in his duty. 

I will not believe it of the noble lord ; Mr. 
Cooke must have held this languafc without 
authority ; and I trust in future he will not 
enjoy, since he can no longer deserve, the at- 
tention of lord Sandwich as a confidential 
firiend. 

Mr. Mylne, the clerk of the works, thought 
proper to call the lieutenant-governor a black- 
guard, and dared to strike one of the kin^s 
lieutenants daring the sitting of the commit- 
tee. A man bom with a trowel in his hand, 
a bricklayer, struck a gentleman for giving 
evidence m the court oT enquiry ! Yet these 
are the men that apply to your lordship, and 
beg you will nqt discharge the rule; but 
grant ah information against captain Baillie. 

These are the men, my lord, that have acted, 
I am not ashamed to say, with equal infamy 
and meanness. If ever men ouffht tu be 
amerced in costs for bringmg an ill grounded 
prosecution, they are now before the court. 

My lord, it is so dark, it is impossible for 
me to recur to my notes, to state many things 
which ought to be stated ; notwithstanding; 
I hope, fiom what has been already said bgr 



31] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case afCaplain Ttomas Bailtie, [3S 



the gentlemen idio have tpoken, and from the i 
few observationa I hayeoeen able to make, 
that your lordships will feel, that this rule 
•ught to be discharged with costs. 
fL>>urt adjourned till the next day.] 

November 34. 

The Hod. Thomat Enkinc : 

-My lord ;* I am likewise of counsel for 
the author of this supposed libel : and if the 
matter for consideration had been merely a 
question of private "wrong, in which the inte- 
rests of society were no farther concerned, 
than in the protection of the innocent, I 
snould have thoueht myself well justified, 
after the very able defence made by the 
learned gentlemen who have spoken before 
me, in sparing your lordship, already fi^tigued 
with the subject, and in leaving my client to 
the prosecutor's counsel and the judgment of 
the Court. 

But upon an occasion of this serious and 
dangerous complexion, when a British subject 
is brought before a court of justice only for 
having ventured to attack abuses, which owe 
their continuance to the danger of attacking 
them ; when, without any motives but bene- 
yplence, justice, and public spirit, he has ven- 
tured to attack them though supported by 
power, and in that department too, where it 
itas the duty of his office to detect and expose 
them ; I cannot relinquish the high privilege 
of defending such a character ; I will not give 
up even m;^ small share ofiYie honour of repel- 
ling and of exposing so odious a prosecution. 

No man, my lord, respects more than I do 
the authority of the laws, and I trust I shall 
not let fall a single word to weaken the ground 
I mean to tread, by advancing proposition!, 
which shall oppose or even evade the strictest 
rules laid down by the Court in questions of 
this nature. 
. Indeed, it would be as unnecessary as it 
would be indecent ; it will be sufficient for 
me to call vour iordship's attention to the 
marked and striking difference between the 
writing before you, and I may Venture to say 
almost every other, that has been the sub- 
ject of argument on a rule for a criminal in- 
formation. 

The writings or pubtications, which have 
been brought before this Court, or before 

* la the IntrodoetioD to thit •peeoli id the rsoent- 
ly published CoUeetion of Lord Bnkine't Specehet, U 
is stated, ** Mr. Enkioe spoke from the back row of 
the coart, we beliere for the fint time, ai he had onlj 
bdeo called to the bar on the last day of the term 
preceding." The most able and eloquent reviewer of 
that poblication troly observes, that by this speech 
Mr. fErskine, intlie very outset of his brilliant career^ 
aitonislied the legal world by a display of talent 
which has indeed been outshone, hot by no means ob- 
scured even by his own riper efforts. See Edinburgh 
Review, rol. 16. p. 103. I an informed that the 
espressioBS of delight and admiratioD, which this 
Speech excited in Wettminsler-hall, have never been 
paralleled then, 



orand juries, as libels on individualsy have 
been attacks on the characters of private men, 
by writers stimulated sometimes by resent- 
ment, sometimes, perhaps, by a mistaken 
zeal; or they have been severe and unfounded 
strictures on the characters of public men, 
proceeding from officious persons taking upon 
themselves the censorial office, without tem- 
perance or due information, and without any 
call of duty to examine into the partfcular de- 
partment, of which they choose to become 
the voluntary guardians: a guardianship 
which they generally content themselves 
with holding in a newspaper for two or three 
posts, and then, with a senerouty which. 
$hines on all tnankind alile, correct eveiy 
department of the state, and find at the end 
of their lucubrations, that they themselves 
are the only honest men in the community. 
When writers of this description suffer, how- 
ever we may be occasionally sorry for their 
misdirected zeal, it is impossible to aigue 
against the law that censure^ them. 

But I beseech your lordship to compare 
these men and their works, with my chent, 
and the publication before the Court. 

Wiiohkef What is hU duty f What Has he 
written i To whom has he zcritten f And what 
motive induced him to write ¥ 

He is lieutenant governor of the Royal 
Hospital of Greenwich, a palace built for the 
reception of aged and disabled men, who 
have maintain^ the empire of EneUmd on 
the seas, and into the offices and emoluments 
of which, by the express words of the charter,, 
as well as by the evident spirit of the institu- 
tion, no landmen are to be admitted. 

His Duty — in the treble capacity of lieu- 
tenant governor, director, and a general 
governor, is, in conjunction with othen^ 
to watch over the internal economy of this 
sacred charity, to see that the setting 
days of these brave and godlike men are 
spent in comfort and peace, and that the 
ample revenues, appropriated by this ge- 
nerous nation to their support, are not per- 
verted and misapplied. 

He has written, that this benevolent 
and politic institution has degenerated from 
the system established by its wise and muni- 
ficent founders ; that its ^oveniors consist 
indeed of a great number oi illustrious names 
and reverend characters, but whose different 
labours and destinations in the most import- 
ant offices of civil life rendered a deputation 
indispensably necessary for the ordinary so- 
vemraent oi the Hospital ; that the difficiuty 
of convening this splendid corporation had 
gradually brought the management of its af- 
fairs more particularly under the direction of 
the Admiralty ; that a new charter has been 
surreptitiously obtained, in repugnance to the 
origmal institution, which enlarges and con- 
firms that dependence ; that the present first 
lord of the Admiralty (who lor reasons 
sufficiently obvious, does not appear pubhdy 
in this prosecution) has, to serve the base mi 



53] ruptcting the Royal Hospital at GrefnmcL A. D. 1?78« 



m 



watibless purposes of corruption, InUoduced 
his prastitutea freeholders of Huntingdon into 
fbces destined for the honest freeholders of 
the seas ; that these men (among whom are 
the prosecutors^ are not only landmen, in 
ddjance of the charter, and wholly dependent 
op the Admiralty in their views and situar 
tioQs, but, to the reproach of all order and 
goTemmenty are suitered to act as directors 
and officers of Greenwich, whdle they t/ienh- 
«Aw»hold the very subordinate offices, th^ 
cmUrol of which is the object of that direo- 
tion ; and inferring from thence (as a general 
proposition) that men in such situations can- 
no^ as human nature is am^itituted, act with 
that freedom and singleness which their duty 
requires, he justly attributes to these causes 
the grievances which his gallant brethren 
actuuly suffer, and wbich are the generous 
subject of his complaint. 

He has written this, my lord, not to 'the 
jMie at large, which has no jurisdiction 
lo reform the abuses he aimplains of^ but tp 
tkote imfy whose express duty it is to hear ajod 
to correct them, and I trust they wUl be 
solemnly heard and corrected. He has not 
pcBLiSH£o, but only distributed his boolc 
among the governors, to produce inquiry aod 
not to calumniate. 

The motive which ikduced him to write, 
and to which I shall by and by claim the 
more particular attention of the Court, yrs» 
to prooiice reformation ; a reformation which 
it was his most pointed dutv^to attempt, 
which he has laboured with the most ino^ 
fatigable zeal to accomplish, and against 
which every other channel was blocked up. 

My lord, I will point to the proof of all 
this : I will show your lordship that it was 
his duty lo investigate ; that the abuses. he 
has investigated do really exbt, and arise 
from the ascribed causes ; that he has pre- 
sented them to a competent jurisdiction, and 
not to the public ; and that he was under the 
indispensable necessity of taking thie s^ep l^e 
has done to save Greenwich Hospital nom 
ruin. 

Your lordship will observe, by this suImU- 
vision, that I ao not wbh to form a specious 
desultory defence: 'because, feeling that 
every link of such sub-division will in the in- 
vestigiatioa produce both law and fact in my 
&vour^ I have spread tlie subject open be- 
fine the eye of the Court, and invite the 
strictest scrutiny. Your lordship will lik^ 
wise observe by this arrangement, that I 
mean to confine myself to the general linf s 
4)f his delence : the various affidavits have 
already been so s^bly and judiciously com- 
mented on by my learned l^wiers, to whom I 
am sure captain Baillie must ever feel him- 
self under the highest obligations, that poy 
duty has become narrowed to the province 
ttf throwing his defence within the closest 
corooassy tmit it may leave a dibtiAct and de- 
dded impression. 

.4nd lirst, as |p iU beii\g bis Pftrtigifuhr 



duty to enquire into the different matter^ 
which are the subject of his publication, and 
of the prosecutors' complaint : I believe, my 
lords, I need say little on this head to con^* 
vince your lordships, who are vourselves go« 
vernors of Greenwich Hospital, that thede** 
fcndant, in the double capacity of lieutenanl 

governor and director, is most indispensably 
ound to superintend ever^ thing that can 
affect the prosperity of the institution, either 
in internal economy, or appropriation of re^' 
venue ; but I cannot help reading two copies 
of letters from the Admiralty m the year 
1742 ; I read tliem from the publication, be-^ 
cause their authenticity is sworn to by the 
defendant in his affidavit ; and I read them 
to show the sense of that board with regard 
to the right of enquiry and complaint in all 
officers M the Hospital, even in the depart* 
ments not allotted to them by their coznmis-' 
sions. 

"To Sir John Jevninos, Governor of Green^ 

wich Hospital. 

" Admiralty-office, April 19, 1748. 
^* Sir ; The directors of Greenwich Hospi^ 
tal having acquainted my lords commis* 
sioners of the Admiralty, upon complaint 
made to them, that the men have been de^ 
frauded of part of their just allowance of 
broth and pease-soup, by the smallnessof the 
pewter-disbes, which in their opinion have 
been artificially beaten fiat, ana that there 
are other frauds and abuses attending this 
affiiir, to the prejudice of the j)oor men ; lam 
commanded by their lordships to desire you 
to call the officers together in council, and t9' 
let them know, that their lordships think 
them very blameable (or suffering, such abuses 
to be practised, which could not have been 
done without their extre^me indolence in ^ot 
looking into the affairs of tli^s Hospital : tha^ 
their own establishment in Xhp Hospital is 
for the care and protection pf the poor men, 
and that it is their duty to lopk daily into 
every thing, and to reme4y every disorder; 
and not to discharge themselves hy throwing 
it upon the under officers and servaniU; an) 
that their lordships h&ug (de^erjcnine4 ^ 89 
to the bottom of this complaint, do charge 
them to find out and Uifyvm them at whose 
door the fraud ought tp he laidy that their 
lordships ma^ five such directions heretfi aa 
they shall judge proper.— I am. Sir, your 
most obedient serva^ty Tho. Corbxt/' 

'' Admiralty-oAce, Way 7tb, 1742. 

" Sir ; M^ lords commissioners of the Ad-r 
miraliy having referred to the directors of 
Greenwich Hospital the report made by your-< 
self and officers of the saia Hospital in cpun^ 
cil, dated the S3d jpast, relating to the ^t- 
ness of the pewter dishes made use of to ho^i^ 
the broth and pease-potU^e served out to the 
pensioners ; the said directors have returned 
nither a reply, a copy pf which I am ordere4 
to send you f»clQS^4 » ^^y J^^^^ h^xiw m^ 

D 



35] 



18 GEORGE III. The Cau ofCapiain Thomas BaUUe, [36 



forth s fact which has a very fraudulent 
appearance, and H imports little bv what 
means the dishes became shallow ; but if it 
be true, what they assert, that the dishes 
hold but little more than half the quantity 
they ought to do, the poor men must have 
been greatly injured ; and the allegations in 
the omcers* report, that the pensioners have 
made no complaint, does rather aggravate 
their conduct, m suffering the men's patience 
to be so lon^ imposed upon. 

*' My lords commissioners of the Admi^ 
ralty do command me to express myself in 
such a manner as may show their wrath and 
displeasure at such a proceeding. You will 
please to communicate this to the officers of 
the house in council. 

' " Their lordships do very well know that 
the directors have no power but in the mar 
nagement of the revenue and estates of the 
Hospital, and in carrying on the works of the 
building, nor did thev assume any on this 
occasion; but their lordships shall always 
take well of them any informations, that 
tend to rectify any mistakes or omissions 
whatsoever, concerning the state of the Hos- 
pital. — I am, Sir, your most obedient servant, 

** Tao. Corbet." 

^ To Sir John Jennings, Governor 
of Greenwich Hospital." 

I^rom these passages it is plain, that the < 
Admiralty then was sensible of the danger of 
abuses in so extensive an institution, that it 
encouraged complaints from all Quarters, and 
instantly redressed them ; for although cor- 
ruption was not then an infant, yet the idea 
of making a job of Greenwich Hospital never 
entered her head ; and indeed if it had, she 
could hardly have found at that time of day, 
a man with a heart callous enough to consent 
to such a scheme, or with foreh^d enough to 
carry it into public execution. 

Secondly^ my lord, that the abuses he has 
investigated do in truth exist, and arise from 
the ascribed causes. 

And, at the word tbuth, I must pause a 
little to consider, how far it is a defence on a 
rule of thb kind, and what evidence of the 
falsehood of the supposed libel the Court 
expects from prosecutors, before^ it will 
allow the informatidh to be filed, even where 
110 affidavits are produced by the defendant 
in his exculpation. 

That a libel upon an individual is not the 
less so for being true, I do not, under certain 
reitrictionsy denv to be law ; nor is it neces- 
sary for roe to deny it, because this is not a 
complaint in the oaniKART course op law, 
but an application to Uie Court to exert an 

XCCENTRIC, EXTRAORDINARY, VOLUNTARY JU- 
RISDICTION, BEYOND THE ORDINARY COURSE 

OP JUSTICE ;— a jurisdiction, which I am au- 
thorized from the best authority to say, this 
Court 'will not exercise, unless the prose- 
cutors come PURE AND UNPOLLUTED ; deny- 
ing upon oath the tn^ of evsiy word and 



sentence which they complain of as injuriouse 
for although, in common cases, the matter 
may be not the less libellous, because true, 
yet the Court will not interfere by informa- 
tion, for guilty or even equivocal characters, 
but will leave them to its ordinary process. 
If the Court does not see palpable malice 
and FALSEHOOD on the part of the defendant, 
and clear innocence on the part of the prose^ 
cutor. it will not stir; — it will say, This may 
be a libel ;— this may deserve punishment; 
—but go to a grand jury, or bring your ac- 
tions: all men are equally entitled to the 
protection of the laws, but all men are not 
equally entitled to an extraordinary interpo- 
sition and protection, beyond the common 
distributive forms of justice. 

This is the true constitutional doctrine of 
informations, and made a strong impression 
upon me, when delivered by your lordship 
in this court ; the occasion which produced 
it was of little consequence, but the principle 
was important. It was an information moved 
for by general Plasto against the printer of 
the Westminster Gazette, for a libel publish- 
ed in his paper, charging that gentleman, 
among other things, with having been tried 
at the Old Bailey for a felony. The prose- 
cutor^s affidavit denied the charges generally 
as foul, scandalous, and false ; hut did not 
traverse the aspersion I have just mentioned 
a$ a tubstantive fact ; upon which your lord* 
ship told the counsel [Mr. Dunning], who 
was too learned to argue against the objec- 
tion^ that the affidavit was defective in that 
particular, and should be amended before the 
Court would even grant a nilc to show 
cause: for although such general denial 
would be sufficient where the libellous mat- 
ter consisted of scurrility, insinuation, and 
GENERAL abusc, which is no otherwise tra- 
versable than by innuendoes of the import of 
the scandal, and a denial of the truth of it, 
yet that when a libel consisted of direct 

AND POSITIVE PACTS AS CHARGES, the CoUTt 

required substantive travertet cf tuch facti 
in the affidavit, before it would' interpose to 
take the matter from the cognizance of a 
grand jury. 

This is the law of informations^ and by 
this touchstone I will try the prosecutors' 
affidavits, to show that they will fall of 
themselves, even witliout that body of evi- 
dence, with which I can in a moment over- 
whelm them. 

If the defendant be guilty of anv crime at all, 
it is for writing tht^ book : and the conclusion 
of his guilt or innocence must consequently 
depend on the scope and desijgn of it, the gene- 
ral truth of it, and the necessity for writing it ; 
and this conclusion can no otherwise be drawn^ 
than by taking the whole of it together. 
Your lordships will not shut your eyes, as 
these prosecutors expect, to the design and 
general truth of the book, and eo entirely 
upon the intulaied passages^ cuUea out, and 
set heada mi p^iatf inihoir wratcM aSMar 



37] reiftedittg the Royal HaspUal ai Greentmch. A. D. 177S. 



[3k 



nt% without context, or even ao attempt to 

onnddJe or explain their sense, or bearing on 

the subject; for, my lord, they have altoge- 

Ifaer omitted to traverse the scandalous facts 

iboDselvesy and have bnlv laid hold of those 

warm animadversions, which the recital of 

them naturally produced in the mind of an 

hooest, zealous man, and which, besides, are 

ID many places only conclusions drawn from 

&cts as general propositions, and not asper- 

sons on them as mdividuaJs. And where 

the fzcts do rome home to them as charges, 

9ot one of them is denied by the prosecutors. I 

astert, umlordy that in the director^ whole qffi- 

dsvit (which I have read repeatedly, and with 

the greatest attention) there is not any one 

fid mentioned by the defendant which is sulh 

MsMtisUy denied ; and even when five or six 

strong and pointed charges are tacked to each 

other, to avoid' meeting naked truth in the 

teeth, they are not even contradicted by the 

lump, but a general innuendo is pinned to 

them all;— a mere illusory averment, that 

the &cts mean to criminate them, and that 

they are not criminal; but the facts them- 

SELVES REMAIIf UN ATTEMPTED AllD UN- 
TOrCflED. 

Thu& my lord, afler reciting in their afB- 
daTit the charge of their shameful miscon- 
duct, in renewing the contract with the Hun- 
tingdon butchers, who had just compounded 
the penalties incurred by the breach of a 
fermer contract, and in that breach of con- 
tact, the breach of every principle of huma- 
nity, as well as of honesty ; and the charge 
of putting improper objects of charity into 
the Hospital, while the lamilies of poor pen- 
sioners were excluded and starving ; — and of 
screening delinquents from inquiry and pu- 
nishment in a pointed and particular instance, 
and therefore traversable as a substantive /act ; 
yet not only there is no such traverse, bu^ 
though all these matters are huddled toge- 
ther m a mass, there is not even' a general 
denial; but one loose innuendo, that the 
facts in the publication are stated with an 
intention of criminating the prosecutors, and 
that, as far as they tend to criminate them, 
^ey are false. 

Will this meet the doctrine laid down by 
your lordship in the case of general Plasto ? 
--Who can teU what they mean by criminal 
lity?— Perhans thev think neglect of duty 
not criminal,— perhaps they think corrupt 
Krvility to a patron not criminal ; and that 
if they do not actively promote abuses, the 
winking at them is not crmiinal. But I appeal 
to the Court, whether the directors' whole 
uBdavit is not a cautious composition to 
svoid downright perjury, and yet a glaring 
ahsurdity on the face of it ; for since the facts 
«w not traversed, the Court must intend 
them to exist ; and if they do exist, they can- 
i»t but be criminal. Tlie very existence of 
wch abuses, in itself criminates those, whose 
Jpos are to prevent them from existing. 

Voder the shelter of 9uch qualifications of 



guilt, no man in trust could ever be crimi- 
nated. But at all events, my lord, since they 
seem to think that the facts may exist with-> 
out their criminality, — be it so : the defers 
dant then does not wish to criminate them ; 
he wishes only for effectual inquiry and in- 
formation, that there may be no longer any 
crimes, and consequently no criminality. But 
he trusts, in the mean time, and I likewise 
trust, that, while these facts do exist, the 
Court will at least desire the prosecutors to 
clear themselves before the general council 
of governors, to whom the writing is ad- 
dressed, and not before any packed committee 
of directors appointed by a noble lord, and 
then come back to the Court acquitted of all 
criminality, or, according to the technical 
phrase, with clean hands^ Tor protection. 

^ Such are the merits of the affidavits exhi- 
bited by the directors ; and the affidavits of 
the other persons are, without distinction, 
subject to tne same observations. They are 
maae up either of feneral propositions, con- 
verted into eha(i;es by ridiculous innuendoes, 
or else of strings of distinct disjointed facts 
tied together, and explained by one general 
averment ; and after all — ^the scandal, such 
as their arbitrary interpretation makes it, is 
still only denied with the old Jesuitical quali- 
fication of criminality,— M« facts themselves 
remaining untraversedj and even untouched. 

They are, indeed, every way worthy of their 
authors ; — of Mr. God by, the good steward, 
who, notwithstanding the remonstrances of 
the captain of the week, received for the pen- 
sioners such food as would be rejected by the 
idle vagrant poor, and endeavoured to tamper 
with the cook to conceal it ; and of Mr. Ihhet- 
son, who converted their wards into apart- 
ments for himself, and the clerks of clerks^ in 
the endless subonlination of idleness; — a 
wretch who has dared, with brutal inhumanity, 
to strike those aged men, who in their youth 
would have blasted him with a look. As to 
Mr. Stuart and Mr. Mylne, Uiough I think 
them reprehensible for joining in this prosecu- 
tion, yet they are certainly respectable men, 
and not at all on a level with the rest, nor 
has the defendant so reduced them. These 
two therefore liave in fact no cause of com- 
plaint, and Heaven knows, the others have 
no title to complain. 

In this enumeration^ of delinquents, the 
Rev. Mr. Cooke looks round,* as if he 
thought I had forgottcft him. lie is mis- 
taken ;— I well remembered him : but his in- 
famy is worn threadbare : , Mr. Murphy has 
already treated him with that ridicule, which 
his folly^ and Mr. Peckham with that invec- 
tive, which his wickedness deserves. — I shall 

* Ilia pMMgo it uAmUA by the nUaterly Bdin- 
boq^ Reinewer " with a view to ihew, that the coa- 
rage which marked Lord Enkijie*s profBaaiooal life 
was not aoqoired after the succeM which rendered it 
a ttfe and a cheap rirtae ; bat, being natorally in- 
herent in the nan, was displayed at a moment whea 
attended with ths «oit fonuidable riihs." 



39] 



18 GEORGE IIL 



I%e 



iherefore forbear to taint the ear of the Court 
further with his name;— a name which 
would bring dishonour upon his country and 
its religion, if human nature were not hap- 

Sily compelled to bear the greater part of the 
isgrace, and to share it amongst mankind. 
But these observations, my lord, are solely 
confined to the prosecutors' affidavits, and 
would, I think, be fatal to them, even if they 
stood uncontroverted. But what will the 
Court say, when ours are opposed to them, 
where the truth of every part is sworn to by 
the defendant ?— What will the Court say to 
the collateral circumstances in' support of 
them, where every material charge against 
the prosecutors is confirmed ? — What will it 
say to the affidavit that has been made, that 
no man can come safely to support this in- 
jured officer ?— that men have teen deprived 
of their places, and exposed to beggary and 
ruin, merely for giving evidence of aouses, 
which have already by bis exertions been 
proved before your lordship at Guildhall, 
whilst he himself has been luspended as a 
beacon for prudence to stand'ftloof from ; so 
that in this unconstitutional mode of trial, 
where the law will not lend its process to 
bring in truth by force^ he might stand un- 
protected by the voluntary oaths of the only 
persons who could witness for him*? His 
character has, indeed, in some measure, broke 
through all this malice : the love and vene- 
ration which his honest zeal has justly 
cfcated, have enabled him to produce the 

J)roofs which are filed in court; but many 
lave hung back, and one withdrew his affi- 
davit, avowedly from the dread of persecution, 
even after it was sworn in court. Surely, my 
lord, this evidence of malice in the leading 
powers of the Hospital would alone be suffi- 
cient to destroy their testimony, even when 
swearing collaterally to facts, m which they 
were not themselves interested ;-^bow much 
more when they come as prosecutors, stimu- 
lated by resentment, and with the hope of 
covering their patron's misdemeanours and 
their own, by turning the tables on the de- 
fendant, and prosecutmg him criminally, to 
stifle all necessary inquiry into the subject of 
bis complaints ? 

lieutenant Gordon, the first lieutenant of 
the Hospital^ and the oldest officer in the 
navy ; lieutenant William Lefevre ; lieute- 
nant Charles Lefevre. his son; Alexander 
Moore ; lieutenant William Ansell ; and cap- 
tain Allright, have all positively sworn, that 
a faction of Luidmen subsists in the Hospital, 
a&d that they do in their consciences beUeve, 
that the defendant drew upon himself the re- 
sentment of the prosecutors, from his activity 
in correcting this enormous abuse, and from 

* On the tria) of a oanse, evtrj person acquainted 
xrith an\ iacl is bound, onder pain of 6ne and iiiipri- 
sonmotit, to attend on a subpoena to give evidence 
before the court and jury ; but there is do process 
|u compel any man to make aa affidarit befoiip tbe 
$ouxU^Orig, Ed. 



Case of Captain Thomas Baillie, [<iO 

his havme restored the wards, that bad b«en 
eruelly taSen away firom the poor old men : 
that on that just occasion the whole body of 
the pensioners surrounded the apartments of 
their governor, to testify their gratitude with, 
acclamations, which sailors never bestow but 
on men who deserve them. This simple and 
hpnest tribute was the si^al for all that has 
followed; the leader or these unfortunate 

Seople was turned out of office ; and the a^- 
avit of Charles Smith is filed in court, which, 
I thank my God, I have not been able to 
read without tears ;— how, indeed, could any 
man, when he swears, that, for this cause - 
alone, his place was taken from him ; — that 
he received his dismission when languishing 
with sickness in the infirmary, the conse* 
quence of which was, that his unfortunate 
wife, and several of his helpless, innocent 
children died in want and misery;— the wo- 
man ACTUALLY EXPIRING AT THE GATES OP 

THE Hospital ! That such wretches should 
escape chains and a dungeon, is a reproach 
to humanity, and to all order and govern- 
ment ; but that they should become prose- 
cutors, is a degree of effirontery that would 
not be believed by any man, who did not ac- 
custom himself to observe the shameless 
scenes, which the monstrous age we live in 
is every day producing. 

I come now, itty lord, to consider to whom 
HE has written. — ^This book is not pur- 
LiSHED. — It was not printed for sale, but for 
the more commodious distribution among 
the many persons who are called upon in 
duty to examine into its contents. If the de- 
fendant had written it to calumniate, he 
would have thrown it abroad among the mul- 
titude : but he swears he wrote it for the 
attainment of reformation, and therefore 
confined its circulation to the proper channel, 
till he saw it was received as a libel, and then 
he even discontinued that distribution, and 
only shewed it to his counsel to consider of 
a defence; — and no better defence can be 
made, than that the publication was so 
limited. 

My lord, a man cannot be guilty of a libel, 
who presents grievances before a competent 
jurisdiction, although the facts he presents 
should be false ; he may indeed be indicted 
for a malicious prosecution, and even there a 
probable cause would protect him, but he 
can by no construction oe considers as a li- 
beller. 

The case of Lake and King, in 1st Levinz, 
S40, but which is better reported in 1st Saun- 
ders, is directly in point ; it was an action 
for printing a petition to the members of a 
committee of parliament, charging the plain- 
tiff with gross hAud in the execution of his 
office ; I am aware that it was an action on 
the case, and not a criminal prosecution; 
but I am prepared to shew your lordship, 
that the precedent on that account makes 
the stron^r for us. The truth of the matter^ 
though part of the plea^ was not the point in 



41] rnpeding the koyal HotpHai ol Gneimch. A. D. 1778. 



C4S 



contest; the justification was the presenting 
it to 8 proper jurisdiction, and printing it, as 
m this case, for more Commodious distribu- 
tion; and it was first of all resolved by the 
court, that the delivery of the petition to all 
tbe members of the committee was iustifi- 
sbie;— and that it was no libel, wheinerthe 
maUtr contained were true or false, it bting 
ao appeal in a course of justice, and because 
the parties, to whom it was addressed, had 
jnrifdiction to determine the matter: that 
the intention of the law in prohibiting libels 
ins to restrain men from making themselves 
tfaeir own judges, instead of referring the 
matter to those, whom the constitution had 
appointed to determine it ;— and that to ad- 
jodge such reference to be a libel, would dis- 
courage men from making their inquiries 
vith that freedom and readiness, which the 
hw allows, and which the good of society 
lequires. But it was objected, he could not 
justify the priktino ; for, by that means, it 
was published to printers and composers ; 
but It was answered, and resolved oy the 
whole court, that the printing, with intent to 
distribute them among the members of the com- 
iadfee,was lesal ; and that the making many 
eopics by clerKs, would have made the matter 
more pvmlic. I said, my lord, that this being 
an action on the case, and not an indictment 
or inforaiation, noade the stronger for us : and 
I said so, because the action on the case is to 
redress the party in damans, for the injury 
be has sustamed as an individual, and wnich 
be has a rieht to recover, unless the defendant 
can shew mat the matter is true, or, as in this 
case, whether true or fiailse, that it is an ap- 
peal to justice. — ^Now, my lord, if a defen- 
dant's right to appeal to justice, could^ in the 
case of take ana King, repel a plaintiff's right 
to damages, although he was actually damni- 
fied by me appeal, how much more must it 
lepel a criminal prosecution, which can be 
undertaken only for the sake of public justice, 
when the law says, it is for the benefit of pub- 
fic justice to make such appeal? And that 
case went to protect even falsehood, and 
where the defendant was not particularly 
caDed upon in duty as an indiviaual to ani- 
madvert:— how much more shall it protect 
w^bo were bound to enquire, who have 
wntten nothing but truth^ and who have ad- 
dressed what we have wntten to a competent 
jmiadiction? 
I come lastly, my lord, to the motives 

WHICH IVDrCED Bill TO WRITE. 

,Thc g|overnment of Greenwich Hospital is 
divided mto three departments : the council ; 
the diiectors ; and the general governors : 
the defiendant is a member of every one of 
these, and therefore his duty is universal. 
Jie CouTf cii. consists of the officers, whose 
dttU it is to regulate the internal economy 
JM disctptine of the house, the Hospital 
wing as it were a large man of war, and the 
cwncil its commanders; and therefore, these 
"K&i even by the present mutilated charter, 



I ought all to be seamen. Secondly, the di- 
rectors, whose duty is -merely to coni^em 
themselves with the appropriation of the re- 
venue, in Contracting for and superintending 
supphes, and in keeping up the structure m 
the Hospital ; and lastly, the general court of 
governors, Consisting of almost every man in 
the kingdom with a sounding name of office: 
a mere nullity, on the members of which no 
blame of neglect can possibly be laid ; for the 
'Hospital might as well have been placed 
under the tuition of the fixed stars, as under 
so many illustrious persons, in different and 
distant departments. From the council^ 
therefore, appeals and complaints formerly 
la^r at the Admiralty, the directors having 
quite a separate duty ; and, as I have 
shown the Court, the Admiralty encouraged 
complaints of abuses, and redressed them. 
But since the administration of the present 
first lord, the face of things has changed. I 
trust it will be observed, tnat I do not go out 
of the affidavit to seek to calumniate : my re^ 
spcct for the Court would prevent me, though 
my respect for the said first lord might not. 
But the very foundation of my client's defence 
depending on this matter, I must take the 
liberty to point it out to the Court. 

The Admiralty having placed several land- 
men in the offices that form the council, a 
minority is oflen artificially secured there ; 
and when abuses are too flagrant to be passed 
over in the face of day, they carry their appeal 
to the directors, instead of the Admiralty, 
where, from the very nature of man, in a 
much more perfect state than the prosecu- 
tors, they are sure to be rejected or slurred 
over ; because tnese acting directors themselves 
are not only under the same influenoe with 
the complainants, but the subjects of the ap- 
peals are most frequently the fmits of their 
own active delinquencies, or at least the con- 
sequence of their own neglects. By this ma- 
ncBuvre the Admiralty is secured from hear- 
ing complaints, and the first lord, when any" 
comes as formerly from an individual, answers 
with a perfect composure of muscle, that it it 
coram nonjudice ; it does not come thfoush 
the directors. The defendant positively 
swears this to be true ; he declares that, in 
the course of these meetings of the council, 
and of appeals to the directors, he has been 
not only uniformly over-ruled, but insulted aa 
governor in the execution of his duty ; and 
the truth of the abuses which have been the 
subject of these appeals, as well as the insults 
I nave mentioned, are proved by whole 
volumes of affidavits filed m court, notwith- 
standing the numbers who have been deterred 
by persecution from standing forth as wit- 
nesses. 

The defendant also himself solemnly swears 
this to be true. He swears, that his heart was 
big with the distresses of his brave brethren, 
and that his conscience called on him to give 
them vent ; that he oflen complained ; that 
he repeatedly wrote to^ and waitedon lord $ai)d»> 



43J 18 GEORGB HL Tke 

wicb, \vithout any effect, or prospect of effect; 
and that at last, wearied with fruitless exer- 
tions, and dis^sted with the insblence of 
^ corruption in the Hospital, which hates him 
for his honesty, he applied to be sent, with 
all his wounds and infirmities, upon actual 
service again. The answer he received is 
worthy of observation; the first lord told 
him, in derision, that it would be the same 
thing every where else ; that he would see 
the same abuses in a ship ; and I do in my 
conscience believe he spoKe the truth, a$/ar 
as depended on hinuelf. 

What then was the defendant to do in the 
treble capacity of lieutenant governor, of di- 
rector, and of general governor of the Hos- 
pital ? My lord, there was no alternative but 
to prepare, as he did, the statement of the 
abuses for the other governors, or to sit silent, 
and let them continue, ^ad he chosen the 
last, he might have been caressed by the 
prosecutors, and still have continued the first 
inhabitant of a palace, with an easy indepen- 
dent fortune. But he preferred the dictates 
of honour, and fulfilled them at the expence 
of being discarded, after forty years gallant 
service, covered with wounds, and vers;ing to 
old a^e. Yet he respected the laws wnile he 
fulfilled his duty ; his object was reformation, 
not reproach : he preferred a complaint, and 
stimulated a regular inquiry, but suspended 
the punishment of public shame till the guilt 
should be made manifest by a trial. He did 
not therefore publish, as their affidavits false- 
ly assert, but onl^ preferred a complaint ^ 
distribution of copies to the governors, which I 
have shoMm the Court, by the authority of a 
solemn legal decision, is not a libel. 

Such my lords, is the Case, The defendant, 
not a disappointed malicious informer, prying 
into official abuses, because without office 
himself, but himself a man in ofBce ; not 
troublesomely inquisitive into other men's 
departments, but conscientiously correcting 
his own ; doing it pursuant to the rules of 
law, and, what heightens the character, doing 
it at ,the risk of his office, from which the 
effrontery of power has already suspended him 
without proof of his guilt ; a conduct not 
only unjust and illiberal,, but highly disre- 
spectful to this Court, whose judges sit in the 
double capacity of ministers of the law, and 
governors of this sacred and abused institu- 
tion. Indeed, lord Sandwich has, in my mind, 
acted such a part ♦ ♦ * ♦ ♦ 
» * * «««*« 

[Here, Lord Mansfield, observing the Counsel 
heated with his subject, and growing personal on ** 
the First Lord of the Admiralty, told him, that 
Lor4, Sandwich was not before the Court,^ 

I know, that he is not formally before the 
Court, but, for that very reason, I will bring 
him before the Court : he has placed these men 
in the front of the battle, in hopes to escape 
under their shelter, but I will not join m 
battle with them; their vioes^ though screwed 



Case tf Captain Thomas Baittiet [44 

up to the highest pitch of human depravity, 
are not of oignity enough to vindicate the 
combat with me, I will drag him to light, 
who ia the dark mover behind this scene of 
iniquity. I assert, that the earl of Sandwich 
has but one road to escape out of this business 
without pollution and oisgrace: and'M^ isy 
by publicly disavowing the acts of the prose- 
cutors, and restoring captain Baillie to his 
command. If he does this, then his offence 
will be no more than the too common one of 
having suffered his own personal interest to 
prevail oyer his public ctuty, in placing his 
voters in the Hospital. But if, on the con- 
trary, he continues to protect the prosecutors, 
in spite of the evidence of their guilt, which 
has excited the abhorrence of the numerous 
audience that crowd this Court ; if he keeps 

THIS INJURED MAN SUSPENDED, OR DARES TO 
TURN THAT SUSPENSION INTO A REMOVAL, X 
SHALL THEN NOT SCRUPLE TO DECLARE HIM 
AN ACCOMPLICE IN THEIR GUILT, A SHAME- 
/.ESS OPPRESSOR, A DISGRACE TO HIS RANK, 
AND A TRAITOR TO HIS TRUST. But, RS I 

should be very sorry that Uie fortune of iny 
brave and honourable friend should depends, 
either upon the exercise of lord Sandwich's 
virtues, or the influence of his fears, I do most 
earnestly entreat the Court to mark the 
malignant object of this prosecution, and to 
defeat it : I beseech you, my lords, to ooiiaider 
that even by discharging the rule, and with 
costs, the defendant is neither protected nor 
restored. I trust, therefore, your lordships 
will not rest satisfied with fulfilling your ju- 
dicial duty, but, as the strongest evidence of 
foul abuses has, by accident, come collaterally 
before you^ that you will protect a brave and 
public-spirited officer from the persecution 
this writing has brought upon him, and not 
suffer so dreadful an example to go abroad 
into the world, as the ruin of an upright man^ 
for having faithfiilly discharged his duty. 

My lords, this matter is of the last import- 
ance. I speak not as an advocate alone — ^I 
speak to you as a man — as a member of a 
state, whose very existence depends upon her 
NAVAL STRENGTH. If R misgovcmmeut wcre to 
fall upon Chelsea Hospital, to the ruin and 
discouragement of our army, it would be no 
doubt to t)e lamented, yet I should not think 
it fatal; but if our fleets are to be crippled bj 
the baueful influence of elections, we are 
LOST indeed ! If the seaman, who, while he 
exposes his body to fatigues and dangers, look- 
ing forward to Greenwich as an asylum for 
infirmity and old age^ sees the gates of it 
blocked up by corruption, and hears the riot 
and mirth of luxunous landmen drowning 
the groans and complaints of the woundef 
helpless companions of hb glory, he will 
tempt the seas no more ; the Admiralty may 
press HIS BODY, indeed^ at the expence of 
numanity and the constitution, but they can- 
not press his miiui-^they cannot press the he- 
roic ardour of a British sailor ; and instead of 
a fleet to cair^ terror all round tha globci tho 



- 



I 

J 



45] respecting the Royal Hospital at OreentoicK A, D. 1778. 



£46 



Admindty may not much longer be able to 
amuse us, with even the peaceable unsub- 
stantial pageant of a review * 

FiKE AND IMPRISON MENT I—The man de- 
serves a PALACE instead of a prison, who pre- 
vents the palace, built by the public bounty 
of his country, from being converted into ^ 
dungeon, and who sacrifices his own security 
to the interests of humanity and virtue. 

And now^ my lord, I have done ; but not 
without thanking your lordship for the very 
indulgent attention I have received, though 
in so late a stage of this business, and not- 
withstanding my great incapacity and inex- 
perience. I resign my client into your hands, 
and I resign him with a well-founded confi- 
dence and hope : because that torrent of cor- 
ruption, whicn has unhappily overwhelmed 
every other part of the constitution, is, by the 
bks&ing of Providence, stopped here by the 
sacred mdependence of the judges. I know 
that your lordships will determine according 
to law ; and, therefore, if an information 
should be suflered to be filed, I shall bow to 
the sentence, and shall consider this merito- 
rious publication to be indeed an offence 
aeainst the laws of this* countiy ; but then I 
sEali not scruple to say, that it is high time 
lor every honest man to remove himself from 
a country, in which he can no longer do his 
duw to the public with safety ; where cruelty 
and inhumanity are suffered to impeach vir- 
tue, and where vice passes through a court of 
justice unpunished and unreproved. 

Mr. SoUeUor General^ (leading Counsel for 
the Prosecutors :) 

Please your lordship to favour me on the 
part of the proseaitors, who have had no op- 
portunity whatsoever of answering the affi- 
davits, particularly those gainst wnom, if I 
am able to judfe of the af&lavits in the cur- 
sory manner I beard them, the whole attack 
is levelled. My lord, the application is made 
to your lordship by people m public offices, 
and have the honour of executing these pub- 
lic trusts. They conceive themselves calum- 
niated by this paper, which I shall presume 
to call a ubel — and a libel it is in every sense 
of the law. My lord, the application is 
against a person, who has taken upon him- 
self to state to your lordshios the several ser- 
vices he has been in, whicii made no part of 
the business before the court, but upon that 
sabject your lordships have heard much, in 
this motion that was stated by Mr; Baillie. 
It is stated, the directors are to have lOf. a 
time for their attendance, but I contend ^ere 
is no clause in the charter, nor any bye laws, 
which regulate that time ; the intimation is, 
that it is expected they will all attend con- 
ilantly. notwithstanding which there are se- 
veral directors who generally constitute a 
board, for which they receive lOs. as a gratuity. 

* IWre bad joit before bMo a osTal r«ricw at 
PbrtMaoBlb. OHjp. Ed. 



I did not hear that it had been sworn by cap- 
tain BaiUie, that he, as a member of this 
board, has not as constantly as any one re- 
ceived this lOs. a day, which he conceives to 
be totally against the i^irit of the charter; 
he has not said in his affidavit, or hinted, it is 
not in the charter; though he condemns tht 
practice, he does not deny, that he has not 
most regularly accepted of xOs. for his attend- 
ance.* Mr. Baillie making one of this board, 
is of opinion, that on every motion (unless it 
id to make the same motion he wishes to have 
adopted, and which does not succeed) those 
that constituted the board, were not left to 
decide upon it, but vote by directions they 
received. What evidence is there of this, 
which is charged imon the directors of tht 
board ? What proof nas captain Baillie given, 
that there is a foundation tor that imputation 
upon them : and yet they very wisely slipped 
over where the charge in the first part of the 
affidavit began, with the particulars respecting 
one person only ; but here is a direct chalrge 
upon every member of this board, except ivfr^ 
Baillie himself, that in eiving their judgment 
upon the deliberations neld by that board, 
they went by directions they recdved fiom 
othersy and every vote they jgive, b not a vote 
that in conscience thev ought to give, but an 
implicit obedience to the dictates of somebody 
else. Can a neater imputation be thrown 
upon any boara, authorized to act upon their 
own judgment ? and yet this is a direct charge 
in this book by Mr. Baillie, w1m> is a director. 
This will tend to shew^ whether this book was 
meant to redress grievances or not. One 
g[reat charge too, is, there are landmen in this 
situation, who are reprobated by the very 
terms of the chiurter. Mr. Murphy, from his 
knowledge, said he knew of the number of 
officers of S7 landmen and only 32 sea officers. 
With respect to the landmen in the several 
deparfenentsofthis charity, there is and even 
must be some, if they have no other persons 
qualified. There are many offices which musf 
be the particular business of landmen, as their 
educations enable them to discharge the du- 
ties of their iVinctions, which is absolutely ne- 
cessary. But Mr. BailUe thinks the descrip- 
tion is that they should be seamen, who have, 
served for many years, or have lost tiieir limbs, 
that they are the proper persons to execute 
this office. He is so kind as to say the clerk 
of the works may not perhaps be a scaring 
man. And also the surveyor, who is to do 
their works, and make the estimates of theb: 
buildings, to phm them, and to propose their 
contracts ana their alterations, trom time to 
time : these probably may be landmen— «nd 
vet these offices are as much within the prohi- 
bition as any other. Mr. Mylne is supposed 
not to be particularly attacked in this book, as 

* Gftptain Bafllie did oerer receive hit 10«. bat 
for every actaal attendance : what he haa oompldncd 
of is, that aeveral of the directors retire as soea as 
their aaaies are taken devra, Orig^ EtL 



47] 



18 GEORGE IlL The Case of Captain Thomas BaUlie, [48 



Mr. Erskine save, but in general he has mis» 
behaved himselfy and therefore he wonders he 
should be amongst those who have thought 
fit to complain to this court. There are o& 
cers too that ai« called landmen, mere clerks 
in office, those whose duty reqiure them to be 
landmen— he has taken the clerks in office, 
and Mr. Mylne and others, who are to consti- 
tute the number stated ; though Mr. Mylne 
may not be a particular person alluded to, yet 
he may be of the number. 

Court, 1 don,'t know any affidavit that 
atates it. 

Mr. Solicitor General, I have not seen the 
affidavits: your lordship knows, there was 
such a noise in court at the time they were 
read, it was impossible to disUneuish some 
parts of the affiaavit. I believe the meaning 
of the affidavit comprehends all these men, 
who from their several fiinctions in the Hos- 
pital must be of the same description. 

My lord, the reverend Mr. Cooke is ano- 
ther person, who is the first chaplsdn to this 
Hospital, who has suffered so very much in 
the business, Mr. Erskine, out of compassion 
to him, would say nothing more upon the 
subject ; but from the ridicule of one gentle- 
man, and the invective of another, he has al- 
ready had his share of the abuse. As to the 
ridicule or invective, if any answer is to be 

f'lven, it is to be left to Mr. Cooke himself, 
can only tnswer to those particular narts 
that respect his duty here, and the subject 
matter the Court is to enqun^ into/ Mr. 
Cooke is charged in thb pamphlet with hav- 
ing purchased a seat at this board, and with 
having bargained for this place of chaplain, 
under the sanction of the first lord of the Ad- 
miralty. My lord, these are not places pur->- 
chasea ; a directorship is not a place for pur- 
chase ; it must be exercised, at least, it ought 
to be eicercised by persons appointed, upon 
the consideration of the abilities aad situa- 
tion of the person who can or cannot attend 
the duties of this Hosmtal, and discfaare^ 
^em. Though I don't know it, at least it 
has not been stated by the counsel, and, I 
presume, there is nothuig in the affidavits to 
prove any such transaction ever happened, as 
that Mr. Cooke oorchased a seat at this 
board, or bargained for it with money. 

Mr. Bearcroft. My Jord, this charge is 
ix>t denied by Mr. Cooke in bis affidavit 

Mr. Solicitor General. But it is said, he is 
an unfit person to apply to your lordship. 
With respect to Mr. Cooke, there is another 
objection made to him, wfatch J should have 
thought did not oome within the qualifica- 
tions necessary, by the tenns of the charter : 
the objection is, he happens to be a Hunting- 
donshire man and a landman. And it seems 
4h6 industrv «f Mr. Bsdttie, who says, there 
are a number of them freeholders or bur- 
gesses of Huntingdon, has found out that 
there are three or Tour of them officers of the 
JSospitaL I do not know the affidavits go 
ivther— that tbey ase fiBeholders or m- 



gesses of the county of Huntingdon. Mr. 
Godby, the steward, is charged with having 
connived with a Mr. Melli«), in imposing 
upon the Hospital ia the most cruel manner, 
respecting the poor pensioners within it. 
That the Hospital, in the most hooourable 
way, contracted for the best, provisions they 
could be furnished with, their intentions 
were defeated by the criminal corrupt con- 
nivance of Godby with Mellisfa, that instead 
of the best ox beef there was bull beef, and 
ram mutton instead of wether. Then there 
is a charge against somebody, I don't know 
against whom it is meant, for compounding 
the penalties ; I presume the court of direo- 
tors, against whom the charge is meant, for 
compounding this offence with Mellish, afler 
his being convicted before your lordship once 
in an action ; afterwards another fu^tion was 
brought, and he would again have been oon- 
victed, but the penalties were again com- 
pounded, to the aissatisfaction of Mr. Baillie 
and others, who expected he would be se^ 
verely punished. With respect to that most 
criminal connivance of Godby, there is not, 
as I conceive, the least evidence U) support it 
in truth, I speak now from some: knowledge 
I have upon the subject, there was no sudi 
imputation of a cruiie upon him at the 
trial.* 

My lord, that action against Mellish mav 
be in the memoiy of your lordship, which 
was brought by the order of the court of di- 
rectors, wnen a verdict was found against him 
upon the several breaches assigned m that ac- 
tion against the bond, which expresslv obliged 
him to furnish meat, according to me stipu- 
lated contract and prices. It appeared, he 
had mixed it with oull-beef, in such a way, 
that to the eye it would deceive m^ny people 
and judges, he had contrived it in so tauou- 
lent a. manner, but the truth came out ; there 
wroae complaints all was not rieht; upon 
which they appointed the meat to oe inspect-' 
ed, and particularly examined b^ boiling, to 
detect this abuse ; they did try it, in conse^ 

Sience of which there was a conviction of 
ellish ; though there was a great many pe- 
nalties sued for, they did not take any other 
but what they thought they had evidence of; 
it stood in your lordship's paper, and there 
was some talk of delaying the cause, when it 
was mentioned that it was made up. 

Since that action was brougjht, there has 
not been ^e least complaint, and the last ac- 
tion was for breaches of a contract that had 
been made before the bringing the first ao- 
tion; since the action, meat has been delivered 
according to the contract, and there has been 
no ol^^ection. 

This man was willing to sabmit himself to 
^he /direclots, and at last it ended, upon the 

* Upon the Irid it wu obmrrod bj the jnAge, 
that the inpodtioii could not havs happened* bat 
fronifas iAOffanoe sr owmplisn of Dmb xeottnag 
oAoork Grig, Ed, 



19] mpeeiing the Royal Hospital at Greenwich. A. D. 1778. 



[50 



man making a submission^ which was a mat- 
ter as proper for the ctirectors to animadvert 
iqN>ii, as any men whatsoever : his crime was 
compounded, upon what terms Mr. Baillie 
does not state, nor do I know any thing more, 
than that it was stated in the way I have now 
sUted. 

One great charge against the directors was,, 
this man was permitted to contract with them 
again. Mt lord, firom the time of that action, 
has there been any breach of contract ? Mr. 
BaiUie does not pretend there was any. 
Capt Baillie. An hundred times. . 
Bfr. Solicitor General. There is no such 
thing in the affidavit, that I know of; the mo- 
deration of captain BailUe convinces me of 
nothins but that the directots acted upon 
neat ^liberation and full eitamination ; but 
I see there is no objection stated in the book, 
nor is there any affidavit of the kind. 

It b said there was no advertisement to de- 
liver in any proposals, I did not hear it was 
sworn in the affidavit; but the contrary is 
true, and that Mellish delivered in proposals 
more reasonable than any body else. 

He now receives a certain sum from the 
victualling office, and they have found his 
ability b such he can perform the contracts 
within the time and can serve them in as good 
a way as any. 

It is certain the Hospital brought actions 
gainst him, and foimd him guilty of frauds, 
but there is no pretence to say it since this 
new contract. Mr. Baillie does not mention 
there has been any fraud committed siuce, 
and yet this is the charge upon the directors, 
that th^ have since contracted with a man 
that had been convicted of fraud. 

F4very body conceives from a charge of this 
kind, from the manner expressed here, Mel- 
lish has a corrupt influence in the court of di- 
rectors, and a preference before every bodv 
else, in the maimer stated to your lordship it 
is shewing the directors had the worst of mo- 
tives for contracting with a man whom they 
knew would be guilty of frauds upon the con- 
stitution of the Hospital, or else it meant no- 
thing, and Mr. Baillie would not have insert- 
ed it without some meaning or other. 

Then, my lord, there is a charge upon one 
EAis, that he got into debt with Uie Hospital 
to the amount of about three or four thousand 
pounds of the charity money, and he ab- 
sconded with part of their money, nothing is 
more true than that it g<^t into his hands, and 
he absconded, and they have never got the 
money. 

And what is a more serious truth, they 
have no chance of getting their money, be- 
cause Ellb at the time he was found out in 
thb business was not worth a shilling ; re- 
specting this your lordship knows that the 
kpard necessarily advised vFith people for the 
direction of a business of this kind of the law ; 
Md in tmth it appears the moment his detec- 
tion was laid before a proper officer to prose- 
vdft, Biiia disapfieared. 
VOL XXL 



And this is charged as a criminal neglect 
upon the part of tne directors, in sufferinjg 
Ellis-to abscond with so much money in his 
hands, or which he had embezzled ; these are 
charges that are made in this book against 
the directors that generally constitute the 
board. 

A story w^ told you of one Huggin, Mr. 
Mylne's labourer, that made no part of the 
business, I believe it was not sworn to, I took 
it from Mr. Murphy's stating some action^ 
which brought about a dispute of a nurse in 
the Hospital, and she would not submit her 
case to a decision of the council, and she was 
turned out, and they add as a fact a son of hers 
was turned out too. 

Mr. Baillie has not assigned the reason in 
his affidavit for turning out the son of thi;} 
woman, if he had I should have had no obser- 
vation to have made about it, but I have en- 
quired about this business, and I do not see it 
makes any part of the affidavits. The son 
was turned out because the mother had not a 
proper certificate. 

The mother had produced a forged certi- 
ficate to get him in, this was in truth the rea- 
son why this boy was turned out of the cha- 
rity, and would of itself be a sufficient reason 
to turn the woman out that had got tl^e 
forged certificate; bqt tliis makes no part, 
that I know of, respecting the question in this 
case. 

As that was mentioned as an act of cruelty 
in somebody not named, I thought proper "to 
take so much notice of it that it might be laid 
out of the case. 

My lord, that there is matter of libel and 
calumny contained in this book, not one of 
the gentlemen have disputed, that a reproach 
is thrown upon the body of directors^ not one 
of them have said a word about. 

We are told it is not a libel though it were 
false— though it contained calumny of the 
deepest dye^ it is not a libel — Why ? because 
it is laid before proper persons in the ordinary 
course of redress, oy a person whose duty it 
was to represent to those that were to hear 
and redress ; that was the position laid dovm ; 
the genUemen might have spared themselves 
the labour of citing any author whatsoever. 

If it was captain Baillie's dut^ to represent 
any abuses or supposed abuses of this charity, 
and be bad made that representation really 
and with intention to have the same redress- 
ed, without any intention to calumniate tht 
character of any gentleman. 

The gentlemen might have contented 
themselves with that proposition, and been 
sure it would riot be opposed — Who are the 
officers to remove them? The appointment is 
in the Admiralty, the amotion is in the lords 
of the Admiralty by the charter. 

Did captain Baillie deliver this to lord 
Sandwich and the rest of the lords of the Ad- 
miralty merely with a view to have an ea« 
quiry mto the abuses he is supposed to have 
exposed? 

E 



61J 



18 GEORGE III. Tht due of Captain Thomat BaUMe, 



[6i 



Did he deliver it to the lords of the Ad- 
miralty to let them know the directors voted 
by some iiifluenoe or other, he could not tell 
what? Coy Id it be 4ihe purpose of this book, 
framed as it is with reBections upon that first 
lord of the Admiralty, and every person serv* 
ing under the first lord of the Admiralty f 

Could it be imagined this was done with a 
view to draw down an enauiry, and to have 
redress ? Is it possible hd snomd abuse those 
in the grossest terms in whom the redress 
lay, at the time he vwas supplicating for re- 
dress ?* 

Ha9 he confined it to those he supposed 
had the power of redress, to the governors of 
the Hospital ? lias he confined it to them ? 
No — He says it is true I have delivered it to 
them, but I have delivered it to some friends 
of mine. 

Court. Only since the prosecution to advise 
with his counsel, or a friend or two for advice 
upon the prosecution. 

Mr. Solicitor General. I thought he con- 
lined it to his counsel. 

Court. To his counsel and a friend or two, 
and before he let any one person have it he de- 
livered one to the first lord of the Admirally. 

Mr. Peckham. When he delivered it to me, 
it was with a strict charge not to let it go out 
of my hands to anv body. 

Mr. Just Willes. Cowley's a&davit ex- 
presses it. 

Mt, Solicitor General. I stand corrected — 
Then it will be for your lordship to say whe- 
ther this could be the motive of captain 
Baillie in delivering this book, with the seve- 
ral chaises contained in it, which were not 
the subject matter of redress? 

In particular, wliat complaint is there 
f^nstMr. Stuart, who now appears before 
your lordship as one arraignea for having 
voted in the directorship under the influence 
and the direction of somebody else : nay in 
being told his sitting in the directorship is in- 
competent to him, and the office he bears, as 
he was by that means to inspect his own ac- 
counts, and be the judge otthe reasonable- 
ness of the articles? Is there any tbundation 
for this? 

What as the foundation ? 

. Mr. Stuart is the surveyor of all the works 
c^^urried on in tliis Hospital, it is not contended 
by Mr. BaiUie (I don*t know whether he piakea 
an express exception of that in particular) he 
is not fit for this duty, or to judge of the plans 
and estimates laid before the Hospital. 

It is particularly tiie business of Mr. 
Stuart, not only to inform himself of the 
{ilans or estimates laid before them, but the 
utility of them, and the axpence with wliich 
Ihey are to be attended. 



* The Lords of tbo AdminiUj make bat a tmall 
fart of the gorernorsand •ommuaionen of the 0o»- 
f ital. Mr. Solieitor General aays grota tbnie with* 
Aot najliig vihaX that abase was— oalj a plain repM- 
•anUtioB of facU Orig, E<L 



Mr. Stuart \m a certain annual salary a« 
survevor of the works of this Hospital, and 
whether there are more or Jess is nothing to 
Mr. Stuart, but he is charged in his depart- 
ment with giving his opinion upon some aiv 
ticles for the benefit of other people -^Is there 
any foundation whatsoever in this charge 
, against Mr. Stuart, who is- in truth an officer 
at an annual salary- ? it is totally indiffcrend 
to him, as the exuence the Hospital is p^ to, 
is not determlnecl by him, he is only to se» 
there is nothing improper done or charged. 

This is the nature of Mr. Stuart's situiatioD 
with respect to these cliarges made upon him 
by Mr. iiaillie. 

W^ arc told too we are not within the or- 
dinary rule or course witli respect to informa- 
tions ; and tlie case of general Plaistow has 
been mentioned, where the court required 4 
particular denial of one of the charges, in ft 
paper upon that general's conduct. 

These persons are charged with hgivvag im* 
posed upon the court in the manner set forth ; 
and that they have in their breast a salvo for 
the oath they have taken» and that they 
themselves have put a construction upon the 
articles and charges — and they swear thej 
are not true according to that construction. 

Is it possible to put that construction upon 
tliis affidavit ; or if an indictment were pre^ 
ferred against them, is it possible for any 
coi4psel to stand up and tell a jury what they 
have sworn from their own ideas are contrary 
to the ideas of every man upon the subject. 

They conceive the cliarge to contain that 
imputation, wiiich in truth the directors do 
not deserve, and therefore they swear they 
are not guilty according to that imputation. 

What they hav« sworn does not apply to 
tliem any otherwise; there is not one of 
them, nor any counsel of the bar, would stand, 
up to state such a fact before a jury, and call 
it perjury— it is impossible. I have stated to 
your iordshi{) many general charges I have 
selected, so fiir as the general charges affect 
any one of them— so fiu* they say they are not 
guilty. 

In the first place, it is said they all vote 
according to direction, they never give a vote 
but from direction, and they suspend their 
vote till then — What does that imply ? Oudl 
it have more than one meaning, which ie 
this, they don't use their own judgment as 
they are bound to do? it cannot lutve ^nj 
other construction. 

It is said tliey have not ffone into particut- 
lars, but contented themselves in FPftV^fig 
these denials, with a reservation in their own 
mmds— from which reservation they cannot 
possibly be guilty of negury. 

I wish they woula state to me that altd^ 
native in any part which is applicable to the 
denial, as it would go to a great number more 
of the general charges to which these gentle* 
men have sworn (it is said) to satisfy the couit 
—I take it in each of thep there is a denial 
sufficient, and no prevarii^tiaD whatever, ygsr 



H] pispGiing the ttoj^ai HtapHai at GreEmnth. A. D. 1778. 

hnWp will consider the denial and ^e import 

^Ifatscfavrge. 
Hat these are also pablic officers executing 

sfoblic tnist; the Court have thought any 

ofgections beins reported of people m such 
apadtiesy ana not founded in ikct, have 
fteeo a soffideDt ground to grant an infor- 
mation. 

As a charge upon a mail in a public capar 
dty^not doing his duty is a libel ; in private 
fftoe maj be libeh, as in the case of general 
Fiaistov, it was not onlj charging him with 
krbg teen at the Old Bailey singly, as Mr. 
ZrskiDe has sud, but the facts of his being 
abroad as a gamester, and dealing with false 
^De, and many other particular charges of 
that land in a particular company. 

The Court required him to make, an afB- 
davit of these articles; that was what the 
Oxot teouired him^ to make an affidavit — 
he complained of tnis as a libel — the facts 
Here stated with precision and particularity, 
ft he could not be under any difficulty in an- 
sivering. 

That was the case of general Plaistow, but 
your lordships have heard a great deal which 
passed at the committee of enquiry, and that 
'It was a joke, and the trial was set on foot for 
seqmtfing Uiose charged, and throwing the 
Uame upon Mr. Baillie. 

And Mr. Millie states he went to the Ad- 
mirat^tohave this enquired into, and lord 
Sandwich told him to name seven out of the 
Sectors, which consist of twenty-fom", some 
by their offices, ss the governor, lieutenants 
governor, ancfitor, and treasurer, are directors, 
ttid the rest maJce up twenty-four, that are 
appointed by the Admiralty. 

Have they stated the names of those ap- 
pcnnted hy the Admiralty ? They have stated 
the chaplain, surveyor, and six-penny re- 
ceiver to be three ; but have they stated the 
other seventeen? of what description they 
are ? how likely to be influenced to prostitute 
their cbaracters for the acquittal of ihen 
finhy of offences of this kind ? the amotions 
Ming in the Admiralty, the first lord of the 
Admiralty wishes he would appoint seven, as 
he admits in his hook, and that many of them 
ire of irreproachable characters. Says lord 
Sandwich, do you name seven out ot them, 
and I will send an authority for them to make 
^ enquiiy ; he wasr to name seven of the 
&cctors to enquire into the directors' con- 
duct, and of those several officers that are ap- 
pointed by the Admiralty, who have a power 
to remove them. 

Mr. Baillie in his book has injured a great 
Jteny persons of most irreproachable charac- 
ters, some of them men quite at liberty. 
^•ys lord Sandwich again, Mr. Baillie, name 
•even men out of the directors, and I will 
■end a direction to them to enquire into the 
bottom of it ? No, Sir, says he, I will not have 
toy of the directors : then says the lord of the 



Adimnd^ to hiin, If you will not name them, 
I will: he names sir Meyrick Bunrell, Mr. 



[54 

Cus% captain James, captain Barker, Mr. 
Wells, captain Reynolds, and Mr. Savar^. 

Court. I do not find. Mr. Bearcrofl, m the 
present affidavit, any of^ihose directors refer- 
red to by the printed memorial in the book 
amongst the seven directors ? 

Mr. Bearcrqft, My lord, there are some 
of them. 

Mr. Solicitor General. Not one of them 
among the seven named; and out of the 
whole number Mr. Baillie might have taken 
an^r seven. He might have taken anv ; nam^ 
whrch you will out of ^e body, which you 
know to consist of men of the first charactelh 
and beyond all reproach ; name them your- 
self? I wiH not name them because thev are 
parties : What could be done ? Lord Sandwich 
named seven of those directors, not one 
against whom there was any particular chaise, 
and they were not at all concerned in uic 
transaction whose general business it was to 
attend these meetings. 

In every corporation and a.ssembly they 
must be selectea as these were ; every body 
knows they must do all the business incum- 
bent upon the members t6 do ; it must fall 
into the hands of those who attend in general. 

This enquiry was appointed, says Mr. Peck- 
ham, but it was an illegal oourt. 

Mr. Peekham. 1 did not call it a court, but 
men appointed to enquire and report upon 
their own conduct, not to give judgment and 
sentence too, they should nave done nothing 
more than report to those who had that 
power. 

Court. I take it to be a committee ap- 
pointed by the governors; at a eenend 
court of governors they were appointed. 

Mr. Sol. Gen. Yes, the court of governors 
a>nsist of a great number of gentlemen; 
seven of those men are appointed by the 
court of governors, and Mr. Baillie might harve 
had the nomination of them, as I said before, 
of every one of them; he would not ac- 
cruiescc; says lord Sandwich, I will name 
tnem : No, says he, the governors arc to name 
them. 

We did not know what was the intention 
of the committee to do, becaa<% the applica- 
tion to this Court was first made ; we aid not 
know at that time the report of this court of 
enquiry. 

Court. Not by the report? 

Mr. Sol. Gen. Yes, oy the report so soon 
as the enquiry was over, but during the en- 
quiry, while they w^e consulting amongst 
tnemselves about the report, this 'application 
was^ade to the Court, not waiting till the 
report was made. 

Court. The report was publicly read to 
Mr. Baillie, though he had no copy of it? 

Mr. Sol. Gen. No, not then; it was in 
August. 

Court. The motion was in Trinity term. 

Mr. Sol. Gen. The motion was m Trinity 
term for the information, but the business oif 
the enquiry was not over. 



65] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case of Captain Thomas BaUlie, [56 



Mr.JvksX.Ashhura, Where was the use of 
waiting till the end of the enquiry ? 

Mr. Bear croft. My lord, it is sworn by our 
affidavit, that the business of the meeting of 
the committee was to consider of and make 
the report, and they do not make the appli- 
cation then. 

Mr. Sol. Gen. Mr. Murphy says, to their 
knowledge it was in August, and not before. 

Court, It might be in August, but on 
what day of the month was it read* in the 
hearing of captain Baillie ? 

Mr. Sol. Gen, It certainly was not read 
to him ; it was not drawn up ; I remember 
asking the question, what was the result of 
the enquiry, and they said, they could not 
tell. 

Court. Something runs in my head that it 
was read to him. 

Mr. Bearcroft. It was read to him, my 
lord, at the time he was told he was sus- 
pended. 

Mr. Sol. Gen. It was read in the general 
court of governors. 

Court. The report is the 6th of August. 

Mr. Sol. Gen. It was read to Mr. Baillie 
at the general court of governors of the Hos- 
pital, who suspended him in the month of 
August. In truth, I was not certain to the 
time the report was made. I asked the at- 
tornev, when he came into court the last day; 
he told me, those who were advised upon this 
business, thought it not a proper thing to 
move this Court till after the enquiry was 
finished, they thought it might be an impro- 
per influence. 

The gentlemen have over and over again 
alluded to the great delay in the process of 
that enquiry, not a word of which did I ever 
hear a hint of, till Mr. Bearcroft stated it. 

And, that this gentleman suffered extreme- 
ly, not only from the indecent manner with 
wniph those that constituted tliat committee 
treated him duripg their proceedings, but by 
a gentleman who fortunately is here, Mr. 
Morgan, to answer for himself, and, I tnist, 
will acqiiit himself of every insinuation upon 
him before the Court. 

There is another part of the case which 
your lordship has heard a great deal upon in- 
deed, which was what passed subsequent to 
this report. Your lordship has had an* ac- 
count of the manner in which this report was 
read, in what way it was received, and the 
consequences that attended Mr. Baillie ; that 
he was dismissed by the holding up of hands, 
or in some such ridiculous manner, by the 
meeting of persons whom they did not name; 
it was a meeting of the governors of this 
Hospital. 

. Tnis part of the case which has happened 
in August, your lordhhips have no opportunity 
of hearing a syllable about ; the biismess was 
a subject of complaint, originally founded 
upon affidavits previous to the transactions. 

Your lordships have heard a great deal of 
fhut which was stated upon affidavit. Is 



there any person applying to this Court, if a 
party in the transactions alluded to in August, 
that has a possibihty of being heard? 

Are your lordships to take all these suspi- 
cions and apprehensions of Mr. Baillie, with 
respect to tne motives for these transactions^ 
as containing imputations upon any one geiir- 
tleman } 

Court. As to that you are heard ; but as 
to the fact, that the governors have exercised 
their Judgnient so far as to have suspended 
him, is tlmt denied ? 

Mr. Sol. Gen. I only mean de facto he is 
susnended. 

Court. Then de facto he is suspended ; if 
so, I would adjourn the consideration of this 
and have it enquired into. 

Mr. Sol. Gen. He is in fact suspended. 

Court. That is all I wanted to Know. 

Mr. Sol. Gen. As to the mere fact of sus*- 
pension, they have had no opportunity of 
being heard upon it. If there is any imputa^ 
tion arising upon them for that, they have no 
opportunity of answering : to be sure, I do not 
pretend to say, that is not a material fact to 
De laid before your lordship in the examina- 
tion of the business, whether it is proper for 
your lordship to proceed or not, seeing Uie 
party has had some punishment for this of^ 
lence. 

I do not quarrel with the fact being stated 
to the Court, but the manned in which it was 
stated, and the animadversions made upon 
the persons that constituted that Court wnen 
the suspension took place. 

This is a part of the case that cannot be 
taken into consideration at all more than the 
mere facts of the case, and that the party has 
suffered to the amount of 600/. a year. 

It may be so; thiat fact, to be sure, is a 
very material consideration for your lordship 
in the discussion of a subject of this kin<i^ 
when using that discretionary power which is 
in the Court. 

I apprehend this business is within the 
very rule necessary for informations, as there 
have been imputations upon a body of men 
executing this charter according to the best 
of their ability and agreeable to their con- 
sciences. 

They are charged with having acted by tlie 
mandates of others, and not only so, but they 
suspended their vote till they received such 
directions; and in other instances, the seat^ 
were bought at this board, and if so, they are 
unfit to come there ; that they ought to be 
placed there by persons in whom the trust is 
invested, and not by others; these are the 
facts charged upon the directors, and no anT 
swer has been given to it. 

Therefore, under all these circumstances, I 
trust your lordship will see it is a case propei: 
for the animadversion of this Court ; it is a 
libel upon persons in public stations; it is in^r 
suiting them in those stations, and is distin- 
guishable from the common case of a perso|; 
applying for an information for a libel. 



57] retpeetk^ the Royal HaspUal ai Greentoich. A. D. 177S« 



^58 



I submit to your lordship, here b such a 
denial of the chams in the libel as ¥rill sa- 
tis^ the Oust ; if your lordships do not in- 
taierc in this case, eveiy person's application 
hereafler may be over-nued, though the ap- 
pliaticm be made by a body of this kind. 

And thcry may be told, as these have been, 
they are influenced by other motives than 
tfam own conscience when they give their 
voles; and, I trust, your lordships will say, 
this nile^ ou^ht to l>e made absolute against 
captain Baillie, for it is a libel upon the cha- 
racters of mpn that did not deserve it, with 
an intent to transmit to posterity this stigma, 
that the men who were to execute this public 
trust did not act upon their own judgment, but 
were made the mstruments of revenge of 
others. 

Mr. Wewnham : 

May it please your lordship to favour 
me upon the same side as Mr. Solicitor Gene- 
laL Having attended as carefully as I could 
to every thing said by the gentlemen upon 
lht €>tJkka side, I confess^ I was rather inclined 
to think they were movmg for an information 
iiom the manner they defended themselves, 
than shewing cause against this rule. 

Tbe gentiemen have all founded themselves 
upon the affidavit of Mr. Baillie as supposing 
it substantially true, and upon that they sup- 
pose ev^ abuse, which the book says is true, 
is founded in fact, and that was the defence 
he meant to make. 

It is not expected we should answer the ri^ 
dicule of the two first gentlemen, the in- 
vectives of the tlurd, nor the florid eloquence 
that fell from Mr. Erskine, but to submit 
what we have to say in favour of the prose- 
cutors, who are only attentive to their own 
character, and in their consciences knowing 
(as they state) they are guiltless of the charges 
contained in the libel. 

That there are charges against them was 
admitted bv some of ^e counsel. Mr. Bear- 
croft stated some very severe charges, though 
jLhc other eentiemen seemed to say, there 
were no charges of a specific fraud against 
>t^m. I do not know what charge can be 
more severe or specific against any body of 
men^ namely, that for want of ability or in- 
tegrity, they are unfit any longer to continue 
in the exercise of that important office they 
held ; it is calling them in other terms, fools 
or ki^ves, or boUi, and they thought ^t in- 
cumbent upon them to proceed against the 
gentleman that dared to asperse them, and to 
say the charge is groundless. 

There are several other specific charges— 
one, that a great quantity of prize-raoney Mr. 
Baillie supposed to be due for prizes taken in 
the late war. 

Your lordship knows those prizes unclaimed 
areeiven by parliament to Greenwich Hos- 
pital Ue states, since the charter that pass- 
ed preceding the date of this publication, the 
i^^n hatt been sg inattentively negli- 



gent to the affiiirs of the Hospital, that nO 
steps were taken to recover this money ; 
whereas, if any step had been taken, more 
than forty or fifty thousand pounds might 
have been recovered. 

Mr. Baillie must know steps have been 
taken, and thirty or forty thousand pounds 
has been recovered, and every step has been 
taken to promote a speedy recovery ; and, aa 
he states, these prize^ents were living at the 
West Indies, it was necessary to file a bill ia 
the court of equity in Jamaica, and upon 
eveiT interlocutory order, the prize a^nts ap- 
plied to the privy council. Mr. Baillie knows 
that they applied to the privy council. I have 
had the honour to attend them upon ten dif- 
ferent consultations ; I think they dismissed 
the appeal with costs. 

The order of the privy council went as far 
and farther than they had ever done before ; 
particularly, one of the learned judees desired 
them to 20 as far as they could, ana they gave 
consideru>le costs in the business ; so they 
went on in the course of the business as far as 
the court of chancery in Jamaica would per- 
mit them to proceed. 

Court. I hope Xhey always giveinteresL 
I always give it at Guildhall, and the privy 
council should : I only give you an instance 
of a precedent. 

Mr. Newnham, J hope they will ultimately 
give interest in Jamaica. 

Court. You observe it was a case where 
the stents seemed to be feinting, and keeping 
the money back, after it came into their hands. 
Mr. Newnh4im. Then with respect to the 
other instances, particularly the butcher, the 
directors must have been plaintifis, thoum not 
by name, and it was not to be expecteothey 
would betray the cause of the pensioners. 
What was the opinmn of the directors ? they 
directed that an opinion should be given inw 
mediately, and in decisive terms. 

In consequence of that opinion, a method 
was taken to prosecute Melfish, and he was 
convicted ; and would have been convicted a 
second time; but the directors are charged 
aflerwards with contracting with this man. 

The contract was open, in consequence of 
public advertisements, and Mellish was the 
lowest bidder, his offer vras the lowest terms. 
Would not Mr. Baillie with greater propriety, 
and more force, have abuMd the directors 
with want of attention to the interest of the 
Hospital, if they had not taken the lowest 
contract. Is Uiere any thing to say of him 
after the second action ? He is staled to h^ 
worth 80,000/. that is not by defirauiUng the 
Hospital. 
Court, He meant that. 
Mr. Newnham. He offered to do it upon 
better terms than any body else. Respecting 
the specific terms of the charges, they are 
found to be groundless, and they are in fact, 
and in terms, positively denied. It is said, so 
far as they tend to criminate the persons 
making the affidavits, they are falser Otit 



m 



18 6EOROE III. The Case of Captain Thomas BailUe^ [60 



person cannot ^ear wbat relates to another 
peraoQ is false, but so far as relates to himself, 
eacb says it is false. 

What is the objection to Mr. Stuart ? Is he 
incompetent ^ Is he unfit for the office of sur- 
veyor r afid his knowledge in the profession 
BO ba4 atttd trifling, as not to make him worthy 
of the apfointment^ Is there any instance of 
the sorU or any thing in this affidavit oi Mr. 
BeuUie niing any particular charge upon Mr. 
Stuart? 

I think it is the same, only in the publica- 
tion with respect to Mr. Mylne, it says he is a 
landman. 

That is not imputable to the directors. Is it at 
a.11 said or proved, within the construction of 
this charter,- tliat every person whatsoever, 
employed in the management of the Hospital, 
must be a seaman ? Should an architect and 
a builder be a seaman, or any sach persons 
who are paid lor their particular labour, is it 
incumbent upon them to be seamen ? I -con- 
ceive notr; and what is stated of Mr. Mylne 
being the clerk of the works, is applicable to 
other builders, and they will not say the clerk 
of the works ought to be a seaman. 

Then one of the gentlemen is charged with 
being the contriver to defraud the Hospital of 
1/)00/. for cleaning pictures, as Mr. Bearcroft 
said of Mr. Stuart. 

Would TOUT, lordship imagine this was a 
}»ainted hall, containing I do not know how 
m^y thousand feet, and could not be repured 
in a proper manner, under 1,000/. or there- 
abouts? 

It was stated to be an immaterial thing to 
the Hospital, whereas in fact Mr. BaiUie is 
obliged to acknowledge it brings in 4 or 500/. 
a year revenue fbr shewing this to stran^rs. 

It was necessary to preserve it, and it does 
not appear Mr. Stuart was in any degree 
ftuilty of the smallest impropriety, or the 
mend he recommended, who actually has 
done it at an inferior price to that which was 
usual. 

With respect to Mr. Cooke, the subject has 
been worn quite threadbare, he (Mr. Cooke) 
states the charge against him to be false. 

He is stated as Imving purchased, under the 
sanction of a particular person, whose name I 
do not wish to mention, the office he enjoys. 
Is there any proof of it ? None ; and it is de- 
liied fkitly and positively by Mr. Cooke. 

CoMff . Do you mean that he gave the chap- 
lain that resigned, money fbr so doing— not 
ihat he purchased it, but gave the sea chaplain 
something to 'go out. 

Mr. liewnham. It is stated in the book he 
purchased the chaplainship ; that he bar- 
gained and paid money for it under the sanc- 
tion of the nrst lord of'^the Admiralty 

Mr. Bearcrqft, Is that denied m any of 
your affidavits ? 

Mr. Newnftnm, I do not know. My lord, 
it is made matter of complaint. I considerea 
it as a complaint made against the proseeutors, 
in the mAoner the gentleman admitted, that a 



vast number of landmen found their way to 
the Hospital. By whose means ? 

Is that imputable to the directors ? 

Certainly not. 

It is stated however, that this book was not 
intended as a general publication, but merely 
as a remonstrance to persons competent to 
redress grievances, of wnich it contams a long 
detail ; in conseauence of which Mr. Baillte 
is desirous to have an enquiry into their con- 
duct, and a general board of the dire^ors is 
summoned, and Mr. Baillie attends. 

To whom was the application to be made 
for redress of internal grievances, and the re- 
gulation of the house, but the directors that 
were competent to interpose ? 

Mr. BaiUie was offered to choose seven of 
his own naming ; he declines it ; he could 
not decline it upon account of none of them 
being competent, for he states, that many per- 
sons were of irreproachable character and ho- 
nour amongst them, and there was no persoft 
amongst the committee, against whom there 
was any particular charge made. 

They sat seven da^s^ and make a reporfy 
which was subsequent, m point of time, to thfe 
application to your lordship for this rule ; for 
tne application was made in TrinHy-term, thft 
report bears 'date in August, considerably 
after the expiration of that term, so that 
every thing was subsequent to that original 
application to the Court for an information. 

The prosecutors of this rule have not had 
the smallest opportunity to answer in any r6- 
specbthe affidavits, and it rests wholly upon 
the affidavit of Mr. Baillie, and the others, 
without the smallest opportunity of being 
heard agidnst them. 

I take it from them, that all the specific 
charts asainst every one of them are false ; 
and tney have as good a ri^ht to say they are 
false as they have to say they are true. The 
affidavits contradict each other. 

I have no doubt volumes of affidavits of 
other very respectable people might be pro- 
duced to contra(hct every one of the charges 
in the affidavits, and with respect to some of 
them, they are exceedingly mistaken and mis- 
represented, which is as much as decency will 
permit a counsel to say of those that fall kn- 
mediately within my knowledge. 

But supposing them all true, or false, it 
matters not — it is said it was only a complaint 
to persons competent to redress grievances, 
ana meant as a remonstrance or memorial-, 
and in the first place, it was not meant to be 
public, only to a set of gentlemen competent 
to redress the grievances. 

I do not think it is proper to lessen or di- 
minish the right of application for redress of 
nievances, to any persons competent to re- 
lieve them ; but I do not know now any man 
presenting a petition or memorial to any set 
of men, has a right to say, You are a pack of 
fools or knaves. If such a thing is done, it is 
not within the right of petitioning ; that is mv 
idea with respect to this pubfication. Te 



$IJ rupeding the Royal HospUal at GreentvicL. A. D* 1778; 



[68 



wbatn does he ddiver it? Not to persons ca- 
pable of vedres6-<-he delivers it to persons who 
laye no authority to amove — he tells you the 
directors are knaves; Can the directors 
•move themselves, or their fellow directors ? 
Certainly not : and therefore it was not com- 
petent to apply to them for redress, in any 
VBSpecty of tnat particular grievance, which, 
he says, was occasioned by a pack of knaves 
OF Ibols, having found their way into an hos- 
fiital by meenB of parliamentary influence. I 
mve nothing to do with Uie ground upon 
which tb^ were appointed to the office tney 
^^joy? 1 know nothung of it ; but sure I am, 
IfcAt -soame of jthe persons, I see in the list of 
the direction, are directors, that were in be- 
Ibre the first lord of the Admiralty had any 
office in this country. I believe some have 
been thiete for thirty years or more— this 
aecmed to be the great ground upon which 
the gentlemen have eone : I shall leave Mr. 
Morgan to defend himself in the way he 
thinks fit, concerning his oonduct at Oreen- 
wich Hospital ; I have nothing to do with that 
pert of the taoatter. 

Ctmrt, That is not kind. 
Blr. Neamham. I was not present, I can- 
not say a syllable upon the ill language they 
talk off in respect to Mr. Baillie. 

Cauri, You are concerned to defend an 
attack made upon special pleading. 

Mr. Newnhinn. I have nothing to do with 
that in this case ; there were some complaints 
4^ Mr. Baillie's heat, which has been conspi- 
cuous to^y; but we have nothing to do 
with it; if they have, by warmth or heat, be- 
haved amiss to Mr. Baillie, I am persuaded, 
the gentlemen are sorry for it ; I have no 
doubt there was a sood deal of ill knouage, 
but I am peFBuadea such langjuage coukl not 
have fidlen without provocation. Upon the 
part of the present application to the Court, I 
am to submit to your lordship the present 
fircsefaitors think themselves aggrieved and 
il^treated, and upon that ground they apply 
for an infiarsaation, denying in a general way 
every fiict that tends to criminate them, or 
|hat is made part of the charge. 

Mr. Macdonald. I am of counsel upon the 
lame side, and I have |;reat acloiowledgments 
to make, and thanks io express, to the ^entle- 
inen who hf^e gone before me, for domg, in 
a great measuie, lAy duty for me ; it remains 
Cor me to state amongst the rest, how ex- 
tremefy ill Mr. Stuart liAS been treated ;. and 
all the nbjections in the afiklavit of Mr. Bail- 
lie, and eveiy other objection that has been 
made, do not extend to the case of Mr. Stuart. 
Two classes of peracmsy architects and other 
officers, have moved for an infonnatio&, for 
bdng cahimnialed by this officer of the house, 
Cflpedallj Mr. Stuart, who is more particu- 
hngr ooaceroed Mr. Baillie has thought 
r, in a separate capacity, to affect him in 
and oGcupalion in life. I shall 
before your lordsmp those passages that 
biB> aA4 ahftw tuthe ia ralumraated. 



For Mr. Stuart my more iaimediaie addovs 
will be ; but I shakl say something, with yeiir 
lordship'ir permission, respecting the general 
point. 

It is very well worth obeerv^tion, and I in- 
quest your lordship's attention to the season 
at which Mr. Bailhe chose to publish this ac- 
count— just at that season when eneoumssa- 
ment to seamen was most necessary, and ixff 
means of this book setting into their, hands, 
or the examination of jpeo^ who could com- 
municate it, your lordship must see the con- 
sequence. Certainly the motive is clear ; and 
the directors, as individuals, )iad a vei^ propiv 
motive for bringing this be^re the public. It 
icertainly tends to discountenance aea^aen 
from entering into his majesty's servioe, if 
such a spirit, a& this book might occasion, 
should dimise itself amongst such a body of 
men— it was nartacularly dangerous at that 
point of time, tne beginmng of March laat : it 
certainly was not a proper time to make siirjt 
an aiiplication by publishing such a book. I 
shall not go through every wing that has been 
suggested upon the other side ; but it strikes 
me, the gentlemen have siven the go-by to 
the principal question, and directed their at- 
tack in a quarter not before the Court -^where 
it is not my business to defeiKl. The argu- 
ment the gentlemen on Uie other side went 
upon, was ridicule, which has been used with 
success, from every hand that it came ; and 
the eloquence that has distin^ushed Mr. 
Erskineeave me great satisfaction! In the 
course of my life I never felt greater pleasure 
than in hearing my old school-fellow, and one 
of the earliest friends of my infancy, deliver 
himself with such great ability, ai)d I can only 
say of him qualis ub incepto, Mr.Bearcroiitold 
y6ur lordship it was a statement of facts to r^ 
fresh the memory of the governors and direc- 
tors, and not meant to be published at the 
booksellers or stationers by a public sale. As 
to public or private, is it possiole for any bodj 
that reads a single page of it, or looks into 
any part of it, not to see that the publication 
was meant for general inspection, and meant 
at least to be seen by idi those whose rank 
and situation of life make them sovemors? 
and then it can hardly be supposed the ooiif- 
tents of it should not be perfectly (>ublic : aa 
to publication there *is little doubt it is to he 
considered as such, and that it is a libel ; as 
to the pubhshing it every where, though per*- 
haps it is not so universally publish^ as if 
there had been a sale of it ; but it ;haviaig 
been given to all the goyemors, thei%can be 
no doubt it would be &iown to your lo^shipi^ 
and that sill the kingdom must soon know of 
it. It is said it does not charge the dkrectees 
with firaud by any manner of means. What 
does it do in jthecaae of the butcher and of 
Ellis ? If your lordship turns to almost any 
one pagjein that book, the veiy word ^ifraudr 
occurs in ahnost every instance, cooruptioii 
must appear in the facts themselves ; that ip 
the prindfial idea, and that an e&tira-aubordi- 



63] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case of Captain Thomas Baillie, |^G4 



once. 



tioninjg the case of the Seven Bishops with the 
least £gree of lenity ; it was upon resisting an 
illegal order which had been made, and it 
became the catechism of almost every subject 
in the kingdom ; it appears there were certain 
specific acts required of them which were iUe- 
eal. Was any specific act required of Mr. 
BailMe ? In^ the next place what was said to 
ibe a libel in them, was couched in terms 
more decent than any fh&t ever aopeared be- 
fore in the history of England, and that could 
not have been proved without their confes- 
sion, which was saueezed out of them by the 
privy council, not oy any proper process ; the 
names of the counsel then were Saunders, 
Pollexfcn, Sommers, and others. Is this deli- 
vered in that cautious and delicate way? 
Does it contain such form and at the same 
time such proper language for subjects in the 
exertion of their duty, with a due regard to 
the ccmstitutiou ? Is that Mr. Baillie*s case ? 
No, on the contrary, every page is full of the 
harshest terms ; it is not Viierely stating them 
as matters of flippancy, and a little warmth 
which an honest intention might naturally 
produce, but there are innumerable passages 
expressed in the strongest terms. Your lord- 
ships have the book, and I might put it to the 
test to see whether the language is not li- 
bellous. 

I think the construction put upon the affi- 
davits is denied by Mr. Erskine pointedly. I 
have not any idea but in your lordships' judg- 
ment Mr. Stuart falls under a very different 
description from the rest; in so far as the 
■buildings, decorations, and alterations of 
buildings have been altered, it was owing to 
bad design that he says the buildings have 
been altered, and it must be so when you con- 
vert a palace into an hospital; he says altera- 
tions have been made because the number of 
pensioners have been enlarged, and he denies 
any unnecessary works bemg done with a 
view to enrich himself, and 1^ expressly de- 
clares all he has been concerned with has been 
in his apprehension necessary. 

Court. The charge against Mr. Stuart is, he 
wants to have it a palace instead of an Hos- 
pital. 

Mr. Macdonald, That he wanted to 4o so 
for his own profit I think it is. 



nation to the direction of others was the case 
with all but a few of the particular managers 
of the Hospital, some of whom are contrac- 
tors, and then that the directors are from 
want of ability or integrity, imfit to be direc- 
tors of that Hospital, and that many other 
frauds might be proved ; and it is not proved 
to be simply confined' to those persons who 
are guilty of actual fraud. 

But as for Mr. Murphy — to relieve Mr. Bail- 
lie, whom they had frightened with the terri- 
ble name of Mr. Morgan the special pleader, 
80 as to h^ve almost thrown him into convulr 
sions, — ^he compares his case to the Seven 
Bishops ; that must be flattering indeed to 
hiin, to be compared with seven bishops at 
I should make an apology for men- 



Court. He has sworn positively he did not 
mean that, you will find the words don't 
cany it. 

Mr. Macdonald. The words in my appre-' 
hension chai^ Mr. Stuart with acceding to 
the enlargement of the building to his own 
profit, and vastly to the injury of the pen- 
sioners of the Hospital; if I understand it, it 
charges Mr. Stuart 

Court. It charges him with making great 
rooms instead of 1 odgin^ for poor men ; other 
people might be of a difierent opinion, and may 
think there should be a mixture of both. 

Mr. Macdonald. Is this no charge upon 
Mr. Stuart, that for the purpose of a ^ob 
he recommends a friend to clean the paint- 
ings in the hall ? he says a friend of his 
wUl clean it for 1,000/. Is not that meant 
as an impuftation, when it is said it might 
be done tor 250/.? but his proposals were 
sent in two months after Mr. Stuart's pro-- 
position was accepted. It is one of the 
most beautiful things in this kingdom, and as 
to the equity of this recommendation, if it 
was to be done by the yard it would amount 
to four or five times that sum ; besides it is 
material into whose hands it goes -. it is not so 
much for the mere labour as the price you pay 
for a man's art in the business. Is it no 
imputation upon Mr. Stuart that he goes 
hand in hand with such persons f My lord, 
Mr Stuart swears he did it not with any 
view but to preserve that profitable part of the 
building ; if it should be considered as no 
merit, certainly there is no foundation for 
any imputation, and in that case, as upon 
liis part against Mr. Baillie, I dare sa^ he 
would be as well satisfied if it is not, as if the 
information is filed, if no merit is allowed, 

Srovided there was no imputation. I will not 
etain your lordship upon a subject of this 
sort any longer, I will only just bee leave to 
state to your lordship the state of the suspen- 
sion of Mr. Baillie ; when so much confiision 
had been bred in the Hospital bv these dis»- 
putes, and in some measure by tne publica- 
tion of Mr. Baillie, and when the Hospital 
was in confusion, the lords of the Admiralty, 
finding the business of the Hospital almost 
stopp^, they thought fit to suspend Mr. 
Baillie, only leaving mm in possession of his 
apartments : in other cases they would not. 
when a person is suspended, have permitted 
the use of their apartments without a very 
particular application. There he remains 
still; what will become of Mr. Baillie afler 
this application, remains in the breasts of the 
lords of the Admiralty, the directors have no- 
thing to do with the necessity the lords of ti^e 
Admiralty thought themselves under U> sus* 
pend Mr. Baillie. At Mr. Bculhe's request 
they thought fit to have a committee to en« 
quire into it, this is appointed by a general 
court, the persons named were of respectable 
characters; upon the enquiry being made, 
they make their report, which respect them* 
selves and their ownservants, the surveyoTi 



m 



TopeeHng the Royal Hospital at Greenixich* A. D. 1778. 



[66 



tbe dx-penny receiver, the chaplain,* and the 
others. How was it possible to do this in any 
other mode ? The directors are in a manner 
the masters, for a time, of the servants of the 
Hospital, their good or ill conduct is to be 
enimined by them, they are the persons to 
complain of abuses; could it be by persons 
out of the Hospital a complaint could be 
made ? Certainly not In the first place they 
would not understand the business; in the 
neit place it is said it was not proper to com^ 
plain to these boards, or to bring it before 
them, for Mr. Baillie says the directors are 
accused, and they are not to be made judges. 
It is true every one of the directors were ac- 
cused in a lump, they were accused of .sur- 
reoderinf their powers to a few that do at- 
tend, ana sufficing them to waste the finances 
of the Hospital in every way they could for 
their own profit. It was impossible that could 
be the case; they made a report upon this 
enquky, and I tnink they falsify every part 
if not the whole of these charts. My lord, 
bow was it possible a publication of this sort 
should make its appearance at the Hospital, 
and not extend itseltmuch farther ; then pub- 
lishing it at such a critical moment, it was 
readering it impossible for the servants of tHe 
Hospital to carry on their respective business 
ID their departments, when they were charged 
vith supplying the men with bad food, bad 
raiment, and every tiling else wrong, every 
species of charge that could disgust these men 
that are entitled to national protection and 
compas^n ; these gentlemen have had 
strange pictures drawn of them, and some 
very ably; Mr. Mylne and Mr. Cooke in 
particular. Mr. Mylne is as ingenious an 
artist as any can be, and when Mr. Mylne and 
Mr. Stuart are attacked in such a way as this, 
charged with such a breach of duty to this 
Hospital, and those thinzs imputed to them 
that might diminish them much in the 
esteem of every body, and more especially 
the rev. Mr. Cooke has been treated as a man 
of his profession ought not to be ; finding 
these men stigmatiz^ in this way, it was im- 
possible for the directors to do otherwise tlian 
they did. Your lordship sees the hbel itself 
isfer beyond any comment upon it; if your 
lordship sho\dd think it of an injurious nature 
and libellous, your lordship will make this rule 
absolute, as the suspension of Mr. Baillie can 
"oake DO difference as to these gentlemen, 
vho are accused of doing wrong as members 
of a public body in their public papacity. 

Mr, Dunning made an apolo^ for troubling 
^ Court, as he observed sufficient had been 
»idby the gentlemen before him, to explain 
tl»e ground upon which they hoped the rule 
would be mane absolute, ana he should sp^e 
ninaself the trouble of saying more, as^it would 
al become him to trespass upon the time of 

lerTaiU of the Hoapital are a)»» di- 



*T1ieie 
**"*»»• Orig. Ed, 



VOL XXI, 



the Court, especially considering the [opinion 
he entertained of the matter and abilities the 

fentlemen had shewn who went before him ; 
e should therefore leave it to his friend Mr. 
Morgan, who stood in a particular situation to 
explain the matter more fully in defence of 
himself and his cUents.* 

The Earl of Mansfield : 

There has ^eat heat appeared upon 
this motion, and this motion has taken up a 
great deal of time unnecessarily, and it is not 
to be wondered at, for the arguments have 
gone into a variety of matter, not at all before 
the Court, and have chargecl persons who are 
not here to defend themselves, and not being 
here they have no opportunity to reply to 
them, upon vague assertions, not used upon 
one side more than another. Mr. Morgan 
has bee^ even with the chaises of that sort 
without any affidavit at all ; but it is charged 
by affidavits by way of answer, to which there 
has been no opportunity of making a reply, 
'and it has opened a large field, which we can- 
not possibly go into. 

This is an application for an information for 
a libel, and it has been truly said, it is an ap- 
plication for an extraordinary interposition of 
the Court, and that interposition must be 
guided by all the circumstances of the appli- 
cation, and the answer that is given to it. 

It aon*t follow because tfaft matter is a 
libel; it don't follow, because that libel is 
published, that therefore this Court should 
grant an information. 

The parties have a right to go to a grand 
jurv by way of indictment. They have a 
right to bring an action; and therefore the 
Court always weighs the circumstances, and 
particularly the state of the case l^d before 
them when the application is made. 

And it is expected when the application is 
made, that the true and full state of the case 
should be then laid before the Court; because 
if there is that in it kept behind, which, if 
it had been disclosed, would have prevented 
the rule fi-om being made at all ; all the ex-^ 
pence that is occasioned by it, is owing to 
those who have kept any thing behind. 

In this book, as it is called, I have no doubt 
but there is a great deal of that^ which, in its 
own nature, is defamatory and hbellous. 

It charges these officers with fraud, with 
abuse of office, with incapacity, with neglect- 
ing the interest of the Hospital, and breaking 
the duly of their trust i I nave no doubt but 

* N. B. See Mr. Mor)|ran's evidence in the Hooto 
of Lords IB defence of himself and client^. 

As four eiument connitet of disUngnished merit 
and abilities had followed each other on the part of 
the prosecotors, it it thoaght unnecesaar y to lengthen 
these proceedings, already too ToluminonSp wiUi tho 
speeches of the rest of their ooansel, for however 
ingcnions their argoventa might have been, tbet 
were eTideoUy onfooBded in iact and law, tbej aro 
therefore omitted for the si^e of brevity. ^On^« 
Edit, 

F. 



67] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case ofCapkin Thomas BaUlie, 



C0S 



that in its own nature, many of the particular 
parts pointed out] bv those who apply, are in 
their own nature, defamatory and libellous. 
And wit}i regard to Mr. Stuart and Mylne^ 
whom captain Baillie vindicates by his affi- 
davit, and says, he never meant to charge, 
personally with doing any thing wrong ; yet 
most undoubtedly there is an insinuation in 
it ; no man can read it that don't understand 
it as they do. 

If a charge is made, that they that had ac- 
coimts to pass, were sitting as directors; it 
certainly infers they made a bad use of sitting 
upon their own accounts. 

If a charge h made of the computation 
being much too large, with respect to a man 
that was to have the paintings of the Hospital 
retouched and coloured for uie benefit of^the 
Isociety; it carries certainly an inference of 
something wrong and improper in it. 

Tims it stands in general^ barely upon the 
view of the subject matter of this book. 

With regard to the publication, it is most 
certainly true, the distinction taken at the bar 
is sound and well founded. In a proceeding 
(in a court of justice) of the parties^ that are 
under the control ot the Court, notning can 
be a libel ; because if it is scandalous or im- 
proper, the Court where thai matter is uttered 
or made use of, have it in their power to re- 
primand, to censure, and to punisu. 

And I remember very well that case alluded 

to by Mr. Lee, of sir. Astley and Mr. 

Young; that was ftn affidavit of a mktler 
which was scandalous indeed, but it was a 
charge made use of seriously, for the opinion 
of the Court, and read in a discussion here, 
for a rule of the Coiut to be made upon it. 
And if the Court had had a mind to have 
taken it up, they might liave censured the 
maker of the arodavit, or attorney, or any 
one else concerned in it. But it was not the 
subject matter of an action or prosecution^ if 
it is reaily so used in the course of a judicial, 
proceeding. 

But if the course of proceeding is a colour 
only, I agree with Mr. Lee, that will only ag- 
gravate the offence, by making use of a colour 
of justice to protect it. 

I recollect the case of a man, one Perry, 
who was concerned in the matter of Dageu- 
ham Breach : he printed a brief in the coun- 
try, where he cnarged his adversary with 
perjury in his answer. Lord Macclesfield 
committed him for it ; that is not in a proper 
course of proceeding for you make use of all 
the abuse you can in your brief agcdnst your 
lidversary. 

I remember a cause, where from the length 
of the' proceedings, it was thought necessary 
jto print it. The case of Penn and Balti^iore. 
It was a voluminous brief: all the counsel 
Iiad printed briefs in it. Inat could not be 
libeilous, if it had been so charged upon the 
other side; because it was a proceeding, boni 
Jide, in the way of justice, not a colour to con* 
vey scandal. And there are many otlier cases 
where the proceedings have been printed. 



In the House of Lords they print tiieir case#. 
If it was matter of scandal, the House of 
Lords would animadvert upon that ; ^nd th^ 
counsel concerned in the catise always ^gn 
the case, that they may be answemble tor 
what it contained m it. They proceed in thfe 
House of Commons with pnnted cases, de- 
livered to the members ; but that is really and 
seriously with a view to tiie cause, and it 
comes under their protection. BUt if, in the 
time of the recess of parliament, while there 
are no proceedings, and under cover of an 
application for ildress to bo^ Hou^^ of 
Parliament, scandal and defamation is cbtk- 
veyed, it is agunst law ; and such printing and 
publishing would kiot be within the rule. 

Now let us Newborn this application is made 
by. It is made by the several persons con- 
cerned as directors it transacting tlie afllurs of 
the Hospital. They state, before they came 
here, they themselves hsuA taken this pamphlet 
up, in an application to the governors of 
Greenwich Hospital, as a matter upon -vdiiih 
the governors ought to proceed in vindicaik>ti 
of tneir characters; and stating^ that they 
ought to proceed in the examination with re- 
gard to the abuses themselves. 

In their own natujre as governors (let 'who 
would be blameable if there was a foun- 
dation for it) they ought to proceed with 
respect to the calumniator, and tney ought to 
maice a proper enquiij, to see whether therfe 
was any foundation for it or iiot The pre- 
sent defendant is an object of the jtirisdiction 
of the general court, for he happens to h^ 
lieutenant-governor of Greenwich Hospital, 
and as lieutenant-governor of Greenwich 
Hospital to the extent of all the appointments, 
and the emoluments, and the place itself he 
held — ^he is the subject of the jurisdiction 
of tlie governors. 

I see, by the charterj^ the management of 
the whole corporation is in the governors; 
but, from the number of governors, and the 
persons of whom they were composed, the 
charter supposes, the greatest numbo* would 
not attend; and therefore, the charter prcmdes 
a standing conlttiitCee, and they are the direc- 
tors ; and not only that, but it provides for 
geneMl <JOwrts. 

^' And we hereby direct, that the mcimbers 
of the corporation, or so many of them as 
conTeniently can, idiall, fipom time to time. 
m«et together, at some convenient place, ana 
that they, or any Seven or more of tnetn shall, 
and are hereby appointed to be a ^Mnemi 
court, whereof our hi^h admiral foe the tima 
being, or any three ot the •commissioneFs for 
holding the office of kn:d high axlmiral/wlr 
trcfasUrer, or any thrte .c6inmissi<)ners of our 
trea^ry, or Any three or more lonls ofour 
tirivy council shall be of the ^aDitim", and 
'Uiey are to meet from tlme'to tithe. 

The brdsof the Admiralty llave apotitr^f 
grantlnG; places, and displacing, but under the 
oontfouIoftbegoveiiiQiui aid tb«reis1his 
express dayse I 



01 rapfeting tie HqyatHotpUal of Greefnuch. A. O. 1778. 



[70 



*^ Pnmded always, all proceedings whatso- 
ever rebtins to the ouuis^eiBent ot the affiurs 
f^the said Hospital be laia before the general 
oourt, to be held as hereaa before mentioned, 
and the same ai« to be ^t all times subject to 
their controul, to whom we do by the^ pre- 
itwts give full power and authority tp cootroul 
accQjr&agly." 

Now^ now did the case stand at the time 
that this applicadon was made to the Court ? 
The gentlemen complaining, had applied to a 
gEDeral court of the governors to take tnat 
^adter uqder their cognizance. The general 
court of i^e governors had appointed a com-; 
miltee to fsaxnine into it T\i^ committee 
^ad goae though and made their report; 
Which report was to be the foiu^tion for ^e 
^ftber acting of the court of governors. 

The a&davit upon whicb the rule was made, 
as 1 observe, was sworn upon the 6th of July, 
Wf^ m ths^ affidavit, whicn was sworn the (jth 
i^ Su^y ii^y take notice, that the committee 
b4 jgPi^ tnrou^ the whole business, and 
kftd beard ilL ana ha^ finished the whole, as 
lipon the Tuesday preceding. Now^ what 
was the representfition, when the rule was ob- 
tained ? Why, that the defendant had acknow- 
ledged himself to be ttie publisher. Not a 
^Ford of the manner of the publication, and 
jet the criminaiitv, or the innocence, aiid jus- 
tification of piibfishing the libel^ depends upon 
the occasion, the motive^ the view, the intent, 
and the purpose to which ^at app^cation was 
made. 

Suppose ^ officer of this court reads in a 
.^tfliciu procee<£ng9 9> libel— that is no publi- 
cation in the ciimmal sense of the words. He 
caniea it to his counsel in this case ; that is 
no publication ip a criminal sense. To apply 
io any jurisdiction, proper to take the mattg: 
into con^eration, is no publication, provide^ 
leatty ^d bqnA^de^ he did not concur with 
pubhshmg it to all the world ; and there is not 
a pretence in all the affidavits (and they have 
}N3ca all looked into)ther^ is not a pretence of 
fibe of them ever being bought, or any being 
f^diibiled at a stationer's or pamphlet shop. 
And the defendant, Baillie, swears positively, 
they were never by him given but to the go- 
vernors, in an application for redress, and tnat 
he did not deliver them to the governors till 
hue had delivered one to the first lord of the 
^Admiralty, who, to be sure, as fir^t lord of the 
'Adnqoralty, is one necesisary to be of the 
guonm at every general court, and he was 
with him ten daj's Wore he ever published 
k; and if it had been put in away of^redress it 
would not have b,een published at all. And 
he swears ailerwards, till he gave it to hb 
counsel, to liave advice upon this prosecution, 
and to one or two ^ends privatel^ for advice, 
he never gave it, or nublished it, in an v man- 
ner whatsoever, ana to this day he nas not 
pi4>Ushed it. 

It 15 said, this is an ^biguous tenp, his 
having owned the pubUcation. He did, sub 
9wlo; but the Cj9urt should fiave bee^ told of 



this sort of publication to gukle our discretion 
upon the circumstances of ^e publication, 
wrth respect t^ what we were to do * if he 
did confess xL it is equivocally laid before 
us : for if we had been told it was only given 
to the governors for redress ;* that upon the 
application of those that applied tpr the rule, 
me governors had taken it up, aiid it was thei) 
aepend^ing before tl^em, and a report made by 
the committee, it would have been worth con- 
sideration, whether the court would have 
mac^e any rule at all. And this notice in th^ 
affidavit^ with regard to the committee, is 
all artflilly put ; for it artfully leads one to un- 
derstand the question is another thing ; and 
they leave the excuse for not coming sooner ; 
but ^he stronger part of the case is this; they 
tell you they did not know of the report, ft 
cannot be supposed they did not know of the 
report. 

Mr. Morgan, My lord, they did not kno^ 
of the report. 

'EsltI' of Mansfield. Sit down— I don't take 
the information. No man of them but must 
know the opinion of the boan). If what you 
say is true, many articles are not proved, and 
others are proved against the affidavits. Could 
any body not jcriow the general tendency of 
the report? If they did not know it in the 
words (besides it bears date the 6th of August^ 
they must know the general tendency, and 
they must know, from the nature of the re^ 
poit, It was impossible for the court of go- 
vernors, i4pon tnai report, not to do, at least, 
l^hat they have done ; they would have been 
warranted to have done more. , 

As to the appointing this committee, I 
see no ipputation whatsoever ; none ; for Mr. 
Baillie in nis own affidavit says, that many of 
the directors were worthy, honourable, re- 
spectable men ; and his only objection is, 
^ney did not attend. Y^hy ? That is the case 
we all know of many very worthy respectable 
men that are governors of many hospitals in 
this city, and trustees in many public chari- 
ties ; from other business they cannot always 
attend. The^ don't look upoi; that as a 
failure in their duty j they leave it to others, 
unless they areparticulariy called upon to act 
as directors. Tne only objection is, they djd 
not attend. 

Such a general charge would not prevent 
any man that did come' and attend upon the 
investigation to do his duty that day ; add 
there is not one, by the book, upon whom 
there is the least charge or imputation thrown ; 
not one; as appears by the affidavit of the de- 
fendant, which is very strong, considering the 
asperity and warmth of those affidavits, in 
which, they have behaved not very judicious- 
ly upon tins occasion, for the less warinth that 
appears upon these occasions the bettor. But 
they have thought proper to introduce a great 
deal of warmth mto them. 

There is not one upon which there is any 

•objection thrown out except Mr. Barker ; not 

one of the coimsel have thrown out any oh- 



71] 



18 GEORGE 111. ' The Case of Captain Thomas SaOGe, [7S 



jection to any of the committee except Mr.' 
Barker; and, I thmk, they complaiA, sir 
Meyrick Burrell did not attend but once ; and 
Mr. Cust was absent but once (that is the last 
day) but there is no otlicr imputation on their 
proceedings. 

Then such a committee, sitting seven days, 
report, they heard all that he could offer; 
they go through an examination of every offi- 
cer charged by him, and into every particular ; 
they CO through the indecency or his beha- 
viour before them (which was highly impro- 
per; he should have complained m a proper 
wav) and, having gone through all that, it was 
laid before the general court. 

I agree with Mr. Lee, it was imj^ossible the 
^neral court should not animadvert upon it, 
if that report is true* and if it was true, they 
could not do otherwise than censure any man* 
that appeared in the light of a groundless car- 
lumniator of all those people. 

Then how does that agree with this appli- 
cation? You came with Siis report, which is 
to be the foundation of a farther proceeding, 
at the instant you were seeking redress from 
them. 

If you had said, we proceed before the go- 
vernors, and mean to nave him censured by 
the governors, he being the subject of their 
jurisdiction, the court would never h* ;e grant- 
ed an information. 

A case not unsimilar, occurs now this 
moinent. Suppose a fellow of a college, in 
application to a visitor, libels the whole so- 
ciety, and they complain to the visitor of that 
libel ; .and the visitor is of opinion, though in 
the shape of a complaint, it is an infamous, 
scandalous^ ^undless calumny, and he ex- 
pels him for It, and the fellows come to this 
court for an information, would they grant it? 
Certainly not. 

The expulsion was the proper punishment 
for members of such societies, as they suffer in 
the capacity in which they commit the injury. 

He nas mjured, as licutenant-govemor, his 
fellow members of the society ; it comes be- 
fore all the members; they think proper to 
punish him ; that is the proper judicature. 

Then it was wrong in them to suppress this 
KTOund. It was wrong in them to come till 
the censure was past. And the moment they 
had him punished in this way, tiiey should 
have given notice and dropped the mforma- 
tion. 

Upon that ground, independent of an^ other, 
I am of opinion, this rule should be discharg- 
ed, and discharged with costs.* 

* Tliat is, aboat one half of tie expenoe acdmlljr 
incvired. Orix. iJi— In 2 Espinaue'f Niri Prin», 
p. 10, if a very ahort nolo of Uiii case. See also Mr. 
George*ii TVeatife on the oiTenoe of Libel, obapter 4, 
" on the motiTe to the act which most have been oom- 
MJUcd with regard to tlie Hbel." 



PROCEEDINGS 

IV THE 

HOUSE OF LORDS, 

Upon as EyatJiRT into the Abusxi» 
AND Mismanagement of the RoyaXt 
Hospital vor Seamen at Grsen^ 

WICH.* 

On Thursday, March 11, 1779, certain pa^ 
pers relating to Greenwich HospitaL which- 
nad been moved for by the duke otRicnmond,, 
were presented : whereupon his grace, in a 
speech of some length, stated certain abuses^ 
which, according to captain Baillie's account,.- 
existed in the management and conduct of the 
Hospital; and particularly, 

1. The leaving out essential words and 
whole passages in the charter, and adding new 
powers and authorities, without the know- 
ledge, privity, or consent of a general court of 
governors. 

2. The violation of the original institution^ 
by the appointment of officers in the Hos- 
pital, who are not seafaring men. 

3. The appointment of such officers in the 
council of tne house to govern seamen, of 
whose disposition, temper, and manners, they 
were totally ignorant. 

4. The admission of a number of clerks, 
deputies, and servants, who are not seafsirin^ 
men, into apartments in the Hospital, ana 
some of them into the wards of the pen- 
sioners. 

5. That the directors have given fresh con- 
tracts to Peter Mellish, the contracting butcher, 
who had been convicted of fraud; that whilst 
another action was pending, they gave him a 
second contract, and a third contract, afier 
they had compounded fifty other fraudulent 
breaches for 100/. 

6. That money, instead of provisions, is 
given by the directors to above 1,000 pen- 
sioners, which encourages drunkenness and 
disorder in the Hospital. 

7. That this matter had been represented 
as an abuse^ by the unanimous consent of the 
council of the House, to the directors, without 
effect. 

8. That money arising from such savins^, 
in giving less money than the value of the 
provisions, together with the mulcts and 
checks upon the pensioners, create a fund, 
called the Charity Stock, out of which addi*- 
tional salaries are given to v&rious civil offi- 
cers, who have votes in laying on those 
mulcts. 

9. That in many Mrts of the clothing, such 
as shoes, stockings, linen, beds, washing, &c. 
there are great abuses. 

10. That the provisions have been fre- 
quently represented by the council to the 



* From the ' Solemn Appeal/ ko. 



IS] rapeetvig the Royai BotpiUi at Greewmeh. A. O. 1778. 



[74 



board of directors to be bad, by the mal- 
pncdces of the receiying officers and of the 
contractors, without proper attention on the 
|igit of the directors. 

11. That the beer in particular has been 
iband so bad, as to oblige the council at one 
time to start 4,000 gallons, as unfit for use, to 
prevent its being served to the men, without 
any punishment being inRicted on the brewer, 
or^toy of the civ]> officers, whose duty it was 
to superintend the brewery. 

12. That the directors have given 1,000/. 
by private agreement for cleaning the pictures 
ID the Painted Hall, without advertising for 
proposals by contract, in order to ascertain the 
value of that public work. 

13. That the danger of fire, for want of 
better regulation, has not been attended to, 
by which neglect a most dreadful misfortune 
bas happeneo, ivhereby the Hospital will not 
be enabled, in this moment of war, to provide 
fax so many pensioners, as with proper pre- 
caution it mi^t have done, besides the great 
ZDGonvenience brou^t upon the pensioners, 
and expence to the Hospital. 

Other noble lords spoke ; afler which, the 
House adjourned till tne next day. 

On Friday the 12th of March, the Lords 
met again, and the order of the day b^ing 
read for the House to resolve itself into a com- 
mittee, the Lord Chancellor left the wool- 
sack, and lord Scarsdale took the chair, a 
great number of papers, which .had been pre- 
sented relative to the subject, were read. 
' The£. of Sandwich then rose, and said, as he 
had found himself mistaken in a particular to 
^ch he had spoken the preceding day, he bes- 

gid leave to take the opportunity of that flul 
ouse to recal his assertion. The noble duke, 
in his opening speech, had mentioned the no- 
gociation between captain Baillie's counsel 
and the Admiralty, and in his reply he had 
declared that the negociation took place sub- 
sequent to captain ISaillie's dismission ; the 
feet, he recollected, happened prior to Mr. 
Baillie's dismission firom his office of lieute- 
nantrgovemor ; the error, his lordship de- 
clared, arose naerely from torsetfulness, and as 
he, upon recollection, found he was wrone. 
he thought it incumbent upon him, as well 
oat of respect to their lordships, as in point of 
candour uid truth, to acknowledge it, m order 
that an improper idea might not be enter- 
tained, either as to his attempting to chm^ 
the noble duke with having stated a false fact, 
or that he should rest anv part of his reply to 
the matters of charge, which might come out 
ffl the course of the enquiry, upon false 
grounds. 

The Duke of Richmond agreed, that it was 
perfectly feir ftwr tjie noble Iom, upon his better 
T^lcction to recal any of his assertions, and 
*i9o that it was extremely candid to do it in 
«o early a stage of the business ; he only 
^|md their lordships to remember, that upon 
^ contradktion oi the assertion relative to 



the negociation with captain Baillie's counsel, 
the noble lord had built an inference, and an 
argument which extended a great way, he 
having flatly and directly said, that one asser- 
tion was false, it was very natural to imagine, 
might induce their lordships to conclude, that 
all or most of the rest were equally false, 
which he had also asserted ; but as the noble 
lord had now called to mind the real state of 
the negociation, and acknowledged it ; for a» 
the latter grew out of the former, they ought 
certainly to fall together, and the one to be 
given I p as well as the other. 

His ^race said, he was at a loss in what 
manner to proceed, as to the discussion of tiie 
several articles of enquiry, which was, in fiwt, 
their true name, as they were not matters of 
charge, but matters of parliamentary enquiry. 
He oeclared, he was perfectly indifferent as to 
the mode of proceeding, and submitted it to 
their lordships, whether it should be, by di- 
viding the articles, and entering upon an exa- 
mination of evidence, in defence of each se- 
p^ately, concluding entirely, and determining 
upon one before another was begun, or by 
hearing evidence generally to the whole, and 
drawing an ultimate conclusion from the evi- 
dence at lai^ge. His only, wish was to adopt 
that line ana rule of procedure, which should 
tend best to render the enquiry short, clear, 
certain, easy to comprehend, ana conclusive. 

This candid appeal to the committee gave 
rise to a warm deDate, which lasted above an 
hour. The Lord Chancellor, the dukes of 
Richmond and Grafton, lord Camden, lord 
Mansfield, and lord Ravensworth, taking a 
part in it. 

The Lord Chancellor and lord Mansfield 
contended, that the proper mode of proceed- 
ing would be to hear the whole evidence to 
the whole charge, (for a charge in effect it 
was, though the noble duke did not urge it as 
a matter of accusation) ; then for the noble 
lord on behalf of himself, or any person he 
might think affected by what came out in the 
course of the enquiry, to state his defence, 
and tliat their lordships would by sucH a mode 
of procedure be best enabled* to judge of the 
entire matter. 

Lord Camden, the duke of Grafton, lord 
Ravensworth. and the duke of Richmond, 
were of a different opinion. They thought it 
would be an endless matter to go generally 
into evidence, contending that perspicuity, 
and an endeavour to renoer the evidence on 
each point comprehensible to every capacity, 
and impressive on every memory, were cer- 
tsunly the principal objects to be desired. 
That if one article was not concluded upon, 
and finally disposed of before a second was 
begun to be enquured into, the enquiry might 
last for ever; that the minds of the noble 
lords in general would be peirplexed, and it 
would be absolutely impossible either to dis- 
criminate the nature, or the degree of evi- 
dence adduced, in support of one articki or ia 



75] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case tfCkqfiain Tkomoi BaOUe^ [79 



any shape whatever, to decide with truth aud^ 
precision upon the whole. 

In the course of this debate, 

Lord ManyUld s^id, that the impending 
enquiry had been brought in by a. noble duke, 
yffho had very candidly declared, that he took 
it up merelv upon public grounds; that the 
noble duke had flirther acknowledged, that he 
did not preten4 to say the assertions were 
founded, or to vouch for the truth of any one 
of them, but that he thought they were of 
suBicient importance to oul for a parlia- 
mentary examination. His lordship went 9n 
to declare, that as a material part of the ob- 
je^ arose from captain Baillie's book, which 
contained a v^ety of aggravated charges of 
^use of the charter of the Hospital, ax^ of 
mismanagement in different shapes, which 
tended to affect and cri^nsite many persons 
who were absent, thouffh chiefly centering 
in an accusation on a noble lord who had a 
seat in that House, he did not doubt but thcif 
lordships would take cape of the absent par- 
ties, and reg^d them as men accused fund un- 
heard, and that in the whole proceeding of 
the enquiry, they would conduct the business 
with candour and fairness respecting the noble 
person who was a member of the house, 
which, he contended, they could not do wiith- 
put hearing the whole of the evidence re- 
specting eveiy part of the object of 'enquiry, 
since their ultimate conclusion must necessa- 
rily be general, and consequently be founded 
OB the totality of the matter adduced in evi- 
dence, both in support of the charges, and in 
deience of the parties accused. 

In reply to this, 

Lord Camden protested against any idea of 
the present enquiry being founded on a per- 
«Muu attack, and hoped .tha^ no noUie lord 
'would consiaer it in so odious and {NTQludicial 
a point of view ; be solemnly disdaioQMBd every 
auggestion or intention of attack on any man, 
or a/xy set of men^ declaring, that the only 
fnoAive which weigned with him, and induced 
lum to take a part in the enquiry, vw the 
JHiblic good, and an ardent desire, at this cri- 
iical moment, to convince those brave and 

fJlant men, the navy officers and seamen of 
ngland, on whose cotu-a^e and ac^vity this 
country depended for swty and prosperity, 
jthat the noblest fonndation in the world, a 
foundation which did the utmogt honour to 
£r&eat Britain, was attentively regarded and 
.watched by parliaBieot with a jealous eye, as 
the nation*s gneat man of war, as an is«ylum 
ibr disfld)led seamen, and for suoh only as had 
-purchased it by their blood, by their services, 
and by the contributions they had paid ; that 
it was the business. of parliament to defend 
-^nd protect them, and to prevent every abuse 
in tbepunagementof it, inorderthat itabould 
he a place of seat, fit to .noceiMe them and 
<thei^' successors, the piUow on which .thfly 
^mre to repose, alter -their daio^er, toil, and 
care, in doenoe of the public ; m «fact,.that 
■4hi8 placeof^setiieinent, which tb^ cegaodid 



as their l^st port, a^ their only hav^n of com- 
fort, happiness, and peace^ ought to be pre-^ 
served for them, and them only, with every 
enjoyment and advantage deducible from ita 
oru|Uial constitution. 

The Duke of Hickwumd professed himself 
puch hurt at what had fallen from the noble 
and leartied law lord. He begged again and 
again, that it might be considered he meant 
no personal accusation, that he brought not 
charge, nor wished to criminate either the 
noble Iqrd at the head of the Admiralty, or 
9ny other person. The noble and learned 
lord had hurt him still more, by suggesting 
that he had braught a charge against absent 
persons. God forbid, th$it ne should ever ac- 
cuse men who were not present, or who could 
not make their defence ! much more ashamec| 
should he be to attempt to drajr any conclu- 
sions of a criminating nature against those 
who wer^ absent. In nis opening speech, h^ 
had expressly declared, that all the vanoua 
matters which he had stated, arose fronci 
ejt parte evidence, and th^t he did nof 
lay them down ^ facts, which he under- 
took to. provje. He was perfectly indif- 
ferent as to the issue of the enquiry ; con- 
vinced, however^ as he was, that the subject 
of it was sufficiently important to require par- 
liamentary eiLax^inatiop, 1^ shoidd certainly 
Eroceed, but he ag^iu submitted it to their 
. )rdsJiips^ considcpUlpn, which woukl be the 
best mode of receiving the evidence. 

Lord Mqwjkld^ in reply, said, th|s noble 
duke had certainly ibisen looking ovisr some 
papers, or had his thoughts otnerwi^ so much, 
iepg^ged when he l^ul spoken, that b^e did not 
hear nim distinctly. Nothing could be far- 
tlier from his meanixig, than the idea the 
noble duke had revoUedat, and nothing could 
he stronser in expression, than the words he 
had used, respecting th/e nature of the ea- 
quirv, and the candid mariner in which the 
joobfe duke had brought it forward. His lord- 
ship jnepeated his wordsL ^d shewed that he 
had not uttered a svUablc, which led to an io- 
sinuati^ of the cnarffe peing personally le- 
velled, or that the n^le duke meant to cri- 
minate absent persons. 

At ler^^ the Committee proceeded to exa- 
mine wituesses, who being all previously 
sworn. 

Captain fiar7/if,t}ic late lieutenant Governor, 

was called in. 

' Pi^e to inform the committee whether 
you hav» read tl)e new cluirter } — I have. 

I^ave yoy read the old conwi^sion? — I 
have. 

Have you compared the old commission 
with the new charter ? -4 have Hi:ompared 
them. 

Is there any difference between them?-- 
There are a great many alterations and addi- 
tions which are .nvy m^tesial, in my humble 
Judgment 
§ 



ft] rapeMng Ute Rogid lioipHai at Greermich* A. D. 1778. 



C7B 



Do voa know who frepued the tHarter ?-r 

I bdieve it was preplired by Mr. Ifobetfion^ 

thesecretaiy to thedireclorsof the Hospital 
Hid genersl court of govemots and conunis- 
flooers. 

Was the charier ever re%d at a geaend 
court tet you know of t— Wfaen it was pro- 
duced at a general court at the Admiralty, in 
cfder to be read, lord Sandwich was pleased to 
siy he thought the t^adin|giinneces»ury^ as it 
mtsiBMre copy of the old commission, ex- 
cest some alteratioiis in point of form. 

Was the ch^uter then sealed, or was it the 
dn^gfat of the charter f— It was the charter. 

Wis the mat seal to it ^— I believe it was. 

Was any oraught of that charts laid before 
ihe general comfprevions to its being sealed 
vkh the great aeal?-^! dont know that dnere 
vas; thete was a r6i!igh draught of it brought 
Id the beard <»f directors. 

Have yo)i2 constantly attended ihe general 
cnirts f~I ^ene:^y attended tery constantly. 

You den°t recollect thact any draught of the 
darter was produced at a general court, pre- 
vious to the great seal being alfixed to it ?— 
I doot recoil^ that thet« was. 

Was it before the court of directors thit yon 
spbkeofthe rooeh draioght b^ing predueied? 
—Yes^ I really <£m*t recoHect the partacalar^ 
of it, but i did not vndemwand theai tiiat there 
were any alterations, additions, oroAiiasioBs, 
from the orinnal commission. 

Wfaopmchioed that draught f-^Ibelileve the 
aii£tor or the secretaxy, I-am notstnewhich. 

l^pOQ what (xxa^ioB was the charter 9euA 
before the general coort?— It iilaB not read'^ft 
aii in my nBarizi^. 

With what, view was h attempted to be 
*read ?^I have eaid it was supposed unneces- 
sary to read it; that itwasameretopyofthe 
old commissions, some iterations only lin 
point of form, on account of the iilooiporating 
of the governors and commiBaioners. 

Wfaoi you found that there were some vna- 
terial alterations, <hd von ever represent that 
as a grievance, and a thing thift ought not to 
have been>-^I never knew that there were 
aDjr alteratbns till the dharter-had passed the 
great seal, and then I compared the old com- 
nussitms with the charter, and 'foond very 
enential, alterations. I beg your IbnMiips to 
undersfand that the charter was «|4' entirely 
read, only soine partioidar parts of it, at Idie 
deareof capt. Hood, thetrsasorer, who foond 
himself aggrieved by leaving out part of his 
titles; Receiver General was left out^ whieh 
hethou^t afiected liim, o^rwise, I believe, 
iM>jmrtof it had been read at all. 

Cutam Baillie said, if I understand him, 
that he believed the charter was prepared by 
Mr. Ibbetson; does captain Bailfie'know of 
^ <Mhflrperson employed be»des himf'-^-Mr. 
^J^etsoii IS secretary ; we have no other to 
wHoBpital, to the boerd o(dheetor8,andthe 
poenX cotirt of governors and conmnssionerB. 

^hat reason nave you to believe tt was 
piepsnd by him ^Becanae bQ 4te8 idl #» 

I 



business of, Greenwich Hospital, as for as 
comes under my knowledge, as far as I know 
in that line. 

Did you never hear of this charter being 
laid before and orepared by any eminent 
counsel f — ^I have neard that it was to be re- 
fehed to the attorney and solicitor general ; 
I did heikr that mentioned, that it lay some 
tame with them, af^er it was drawn up. 

Had the solicitor to the Hospital any hand 
in preparing it ? — t don't know that he had. 
[Capt. Baillie withdrew.] 

Mr. Ibbetson (Secretary to the Directors of 
Greenwich Hospital) called in. 

Please to give an account to the House of 
what you know of the new charter; bow it 
was prepared; by whom it was planned; 
who shewn to; and what steps it went 
tlirough ? — ^It was originally proposed by Mr. 
Edeo, the auditor, the having a charter for in- 
corporating Greenwich Hospital. The soli- 
citor for Greenwich Hospital was directed, 
with the assistance of Mr. Eden, to prepare 
the draught of a charter to be laid before the 
attorney and solicitor general ; a draught of) a 
charter was accordingly prepared, first o£ all 
there was an opinion takeil from tlye^ttorn^ 
and solicitor-general, and Mr. Edp^'a opinion 
of the necessity and expediencv J^^^havin^ 
charier for Greenwich Hospital. j.^I^hc^ gav^ 
their opinion, that it was expedient dndQi9ce»- 
saiy; a draught of a charter was ordered to be 
prejpared, with the assistalice of Mt;, Edeif, 
ana to be laid before the attorney and aoh- 
citor-eeneral ; by them it was settled ; it was 
-brougnt before the board of direaors as set- 
tled oy the attorney and solicitor-general; 
the board thought it would be necessary to 
add a clause to iit, with respect to the trea^ 
surer, and other people concerned in the re- 
ceipt of money for Greenwich Hospital givii^ 
security ; that was proposed, laid before the 
attorney and solicitor-general, and with that 
amendment the charter passed the great^^eal. 

When that was laid before the general 
court, was it then sealed ? — Yes> it was sealed ; 
it came perfect ; the charter itself under the 
seal was brought to the general court, arKl 
was laid before the general court. It was not 
all of it read. 

What general court was it this charter was 
laid before? — ^The general court immediately 
after the date of it, in December, 1775, -I 
think — I. can refer to the books. 

Have you the mimites of that general court 
here ? — ^I have. 

Please to read them. 

[The^Kttnees prdducedthe minutes, andivtd 
an entry Purporting that the new charter was 
presinteato aiseneral oourt. on Saturday the 
16thbf December, 1775,!and that Jts the ikw 
chatter emitted to stile the treasurer ' rccehrar 
general,* which title he had in the old oom- 
mrisskn,^the-treasarerheing*pfC8ent;e}mDressed 
his doabts whether ai) omission of me bat 
MUli q pB d -title taaight >not afibeuha^piArais. 



79] 



18 GEOROE III. The Case of Captain Thomas 



[80 



of his office; tipon which the genera) court 
ordered, that a case be stated, and laid before 
the attoniey and solicitor general, if the trea- 
surer, upon further consideration, should 
think the same necessary.] 

What was done in consequence of that? — 
At a subsequent general court, held on the 
16th of February following,' the governor ac- 
quainted the court, that the charter had been 
altered in 'the presence of his majesty, by 
adding the woros " Receiver General" to the 
treasurer's title, as expressed in his patent and 
the old commission. 

Then am I to understand that tins charter 
was never laid before the general court till it 
had passed the ^eat seal ?— I am not prepared 
to speak to that immediately : I don't thmk it 
was ; but I can refer to that. fThe witness 
refers to the Minute-book.) It does not ap- 
pear to have been laid before the general 
court. 

Not any draught of it previous to passing 
the great seal ? — No. 

when it was laid befbre the general court, 

- after having passed the great seal, what was 

the notide to persons to attend that general 

'(toxxri .>'* Wliat number of persons were sum- 

S' oned?H^^e governors and commissioners 
at had llRually been summoned were sum- 
moned upon that occasion ; there was no ex- 
traordmaW summons. 

Who are usually summoned ?— The lords of 
the Admiralty, the secretary at war, the trea- 
surer of the navy, the commissioners of tlic 
navy, and the lieutenant-governor, the auditor 
and the directors of Greenwich Hospital, and 
the deputy master of the Trinity-house. Thfe 
deputy-master of the Trinity-house, in the last 
summons was one of the directors. 

Has it been usual when there has been ex- 
traordinary business come before the Hospital 
to summon nobody else ?— I neve^ remember 
but one instance of it. 

What was that instance ?— It was upon the 
appointment of a receiver to the Derwentwa- 
ter estate. , 

Who was at the head of the Admiralty at 
that time ?^Lord Egmont. 

Upon that occasion who was summoned ? — 
Tlie greatest part of the commissioners were 
summoned upon that occasion ; I cannot ex- 
actly state them ; except the princes of the 
blood, I believe almost the whole commission 
were summoned. 

But upon this occasion of a new charter 
being laid before them, there were no more 
summoned than ordinary ?-~The summonses 
went in the usual way ; I received no direc- 
tions. 4 

When that charter was read before the ee- 
neral court, was it read distinctly, article oy 
article, or only parts of it ?— A very small part 
of it was read. 

Was it intimated that there were but few 
alterations, or was any notice taken of any 
material alterations ?-«-There was no notice 



taken at that time biit of the omission of 
part of the treasurer's title^ which was observ- 
ed, as J have already mentioned. 

Did any body state there was anV material 
alteration?— I don't remember that there 
was. 

Was there any thing said that there was not 
any material alteration? — I don't recollect 
that any thing of that sort passed. It had 
been laid before the attorney and solicitor-se- 
neral ; I imagine it was supposed to be ri^ht. 

How did the treasurer luoow that his titles 
were left out ?— I don*t know. 

You said it was not read ?~ Probably from 
the draught of it, as settled, having bem read 
to the b^utl of directora. 

When was it read to the board of directors ? 
—(The witness refera to some minutes.) On 
the linh of January, 1774, ** a draught of a 
charter, as settled by the attorney and solici- 
tor-general, laid before the board." 

I understood you to say that the solicitor 
and Mr. Bden were directed to prepare a 
draught of a charter ? — Yes, to be laid before 
the attorney and solicitor-general. 

Who gave those directions? — ^The board of 
directors. 

Were they the only pnersons who save the 
orders for the charter being prepared?— Yes. 

Who was consulted in drawing up the char- 
ter? — It was upon the proposition of Mr. 
Eden, who at that time was auditor and coun- 
sel to the Hospital. In the case of Mr. Ellis, 
a former steward, there had been a defi- 
ciency ; there was some difficult how he was 
to be prosecuted ; this suggested an idea that 
it would be necessary tonave a charter to 
give powers to that body, as well to sue as for 
other purposes, and the commissioners having 
all along directed that a charter should be 
prepared. 

I meant to ask who were those persons that 
instructed Mr. Eden, and the solicitor, in what 
manner they were to make out that draught ? 
— There were no instructions given at all ; the 
solicitor was to prepare a charter, with the as- 
sbtanoeof Mr. Eden, and haviug so prepared 
it, it was to be laid before the attorney and 
solicitor-general. 

Do you know how it came to oass that Mr. 
Eden and the solicitor, of themselves, thought 
fit to mal^ any material alterations between 
that and the old commission? — I know no- 
thing respecting the preparation of the char- 
ter, Siough I am charged wiUi it, than merely 
its passing the board. 

If you donH know who suggested these al- 
terations, or advised them, then I have no- 
thing to ask you ?-^I do not The solicitor is ' 
here, probably he maybe able to answer that 
question. 

How long is it since the treasurer of the 
Hospital was required to give security ? — This 
very charter requires it There was a clause 
added ; I mentioned that to the House before. 

Do you know whether since that security 
was required^ there has been a greater sum9f 



8IJ respecting the Rmfol HoipUal at Greefnaoick. A. D. 1778* 



tst 



maoej Mged in the Dneasurer's hands ? — Upon 
mj wordy I am not able to speak to that 
pomt 

Doyoa not know that the treasurer has re- 
ceived much less since the security^ which I 
sfmehend to be 10,000/. ? — ^Yes, it is. 

Whether he has not received much less 
sinoe that time than before ? — He has had less 
than 10,000/. since. 

How much? — Six thousand pounds less. 

How were the prosecutions, respecting the 
Hospital, carried on. before the new chsuter ? 
in wnose name?— The solicitor will be more 
able to speak to that than I can; but in the 
case which occasioned the taking up the busi- 
ness of the charter, Mr. Ellis's case, there was 
some difficulty how to proceed. There was 
one opinion, that it was right to proceed by an 
assumpsit; another opinion, that an informa- 
tioQ should be filed in chancery, by the attor- 
nqp-general, and that was directed, but there 
was sone difficulty about it; and from that 
and other things, it was thought necessary to 
get a new charter. It had b^n attempted in 
sevcnl reigns; I traced it almost ready to pass 
the great seals, and then it was stopped. 

By whom were those difficulties made; in 
wbsl court, or in any court?--! only said I 
traced the charter having been prepared : I 
flaw letters in the books of the Admualty to 
Ihe attocney-general, pressing him to expedite 
the diarler,in queen Anne^sand king Creorge 
the first's time; no less than two or three 
chaiters had been in a state of preparation, 
and thai th^ died away, and we cannot trace 
what stopped them. 

Then you do not recollect any prosecutions, 
and persons transported under prosecutions. 
in the name of the directors, under the old 
commission ? — ^There have undoubtedly been 
mosecutionSy but the solicitor can expkun that 
Better. 

I think vou stated, that there were direc- 
tijyisfirQm tne board ot directors to the solicitor, 
and Mr. Eden, to prepare tins charter ?'*^Yes. 

Do those directions appear upon the minutes 
of the court of directors ? — Yes, the^r are here. 
(Refers to the Minute-book.) I wiU, if you 
please, read a minute immediately preceding 
It, respecting Mr. Ellis. ^ On the 26th of Feb- 
niaxy, 1772, The solicitor laid before the 
board Mr. Eden's opinion, in regard to the 
method proper to be taken tor recovering from 
Ellis the bsuance due fix>m him to the Hospi- 
tal ; he advises an assumspit, though he could 
not be certain of success. The solicitor was 
ffirected to take the attomey^^general^s opinion 
upon the matter; Mr. Eden havins reported 
upon the above occasion, that he thinks the 
want of incorporation a considerable defect in 
the constitution of the Hospital, &c. Be- 
sdved, that the same be submitted to the con- 
aderation of the next court 

<' On the 11th of March, 177S, the solicitor 
kid before the board a case, respecting the in- 
corpoialing the Hospital, with the opinion of 
the attomqr and solicitor-general, and Mr. 

VOL. XXL 



Eden, thereupon, by which it appears, that 
they think it on many accounts expedient, and 
even uecessaiv; and that a charter of incor- 
poration should be prepared for that purpose, 
as recommended by the king's commission. 
Ordered, that the solicitor do, with the advice 
of Mr. Eden, prepare a draught for that pur- 
pose, and lay the same before the attorney 
and solicitor-general to settle/' 

Before what court?— The court; the board 
of directors. 

The first, I think, you mentioned, was at a 
general court? — ^The ^neral court, in the 
first sta^e of this business, went to parlia- 
ment, with a petition for a charter by act of 
parliament. 

What I want to know is, what the direction 
is. whether it was a general court, or a court 
or directors, that gave directions to Mr. Eden 
and the solicitor to prepare the charter?-^ 
That I have just read ot the 11th of March, 
and that charier, as settled by the attorney and 
sohcitor-general, was laid before the hoiid of 
directors on the 13th of Jidy, 1774, and then 
they proposed the addition to it of the securi- 
ties. 

Then that draught, as laid be£>re . the direc- 
tors, was that draught with the alterations, the 
same as the charter now stands, except in the 
case of csu9tain Hood? — ^I cannot charge my 
memory ; 1 suppose no alterations were made 
in it aner, except the security clause ; but the 
solicitor is the person I must refer your lord- 
ships to upon this occasion. 

You had no hand in drawing the charter ?r- 
No; I had no hand in it, but what appears 
upon the face of the minutes ; I never saw 
the draught of the charter, except when it was 
read to me board of directors; I never saw it 
in the interval of its preparation. 

[Mr. Ibbetsvn withdrew.] 

Mr. Evereit (the Solicitor to the Hospital) 

called in. 

Give an account to the House of what you 
know relative to the new charter. — ^To the 
best of my recollection, I received no other di- 
rections, thsui what I received from the secre- 
tary, and those in writing. 

Have you a copy of those directions that 
you received in wnting ? — ^I have not a copy of 
them by me at present. 

Do you recollect the substance of them ? — 
I do not. « 

Do you recollect whether there were any 
directions to make any alterations in the 
charter from the old commission? — ^None, 
that I know of 

Then what did you do in consequence pf 
those directions? — In consequence of those 
directions, some old papers that had been for- 
merly, as I understood, prepared on this occa- 
sion, for incorporating the Hospital, were tum^ 
ed to ; and from those papers, m which were a 
draught of a charter, which was intended to 
have been passed, as I understood at that 

G 



83] 



18 6EOROE III. Tke Cote qfO^ptam Thomat 



CM 



time, and from the oommiseion the present 
charter was drawn. 

Acauaintthe House if you received no direc- 
tions from any body to make any alterations 
in the charter, how you came to make any al- 
terations. — ^I cannot immediately satisfy your 
lordships how I came to make those altera^ 
tions; but your lordships wiU please to ob- 
serve, that I had many materials to take this 
draught from; I had no one line to go by. 

Prav, was not the old commission a line to 
go by f — ^It was in a great degree, but not to- 
tally so. 

Is it not like the old commission in a great 
manjr reacts? — It is so. 

Is it not word for word in a great part <^it? 
*-T>I cannot recollect that circumstance. 

On what ground did you make Uie altera- 
tions ? Did you make them, or any body else ^ 
•— They might be made by me, Init I cannot 
any ivhether they were or not; it is a thing I 
am totally unprepared to give an answer to. 

What occasion had you to refer to those old 
papers? Did any body tell you to refer to 
them ?— I don't recollect that thev did. 

I thought you said you referred to them? — 
Certainly I did refer to them. 

Who told you to refer lo them?— To the 
beetof my recollection, but it is a thing I can- 
not he positive in, they were taken out of the 
record-room, in Greenwich Hospital; a place 
for depositing the Hospital deeds and papers. 

What reason had you logo to look in tnis old 
record-room for these papers? — ^I had never 
drawn a charter before; I wished, therefore, 
to see what the idea had been ; wiaerstanding 
long since, and many times, that there had 
}M)en such dreuehts prepared. 

When you <fid make these alterations, did 
you acouaint any body wiUi havmg made 
these aIteratH>ns ?— I don't know that I did ; 
and I so Uttle understood that I was making 
an improper, or any deviation finom what the 
charter should^ or was intended to have been, 
that I had no idea of acauainting any person 
of it : there was bo line that I OHild oraw the 
charter by ; I took i| sometimes from one pa- 
per, and sometimes from apgther, as tiiere 
were a great variety of theoL 

Don*-! you know that there are alteratiims 
in this pharter from the old one ?•— Till it was 
pointed out in Mr, Qatllie's bpok, I did not 
fi:now it. 

Did you not know the Hospital had been 
governed under a commission from the time 
of its institution? — ^Yes^Idid. 

You did not then refer to the original oomr 
nussion? — I believe, I expressed myself so tp 
your lordships. 

Then, if you did refer to it, when you drew 
tlus charter^ do you mean to say upon your 
oath, that you did not know that tnere was 
any materiu difference between them ? — ^I did 
not know that there was any more difference, 
than what seemed to me to be iiecessaiy tp 
constitute a new charter. 

I>id not you knpM^ at th^t time, that Uiere 



was a material difference?--- 1 did not think 
the old commission to be a direct rule forme ; 
there were many papers. 

I understood you, that you did not know 
that there was any materials difference in th« 
charter, till you was apprized of it in captain 
Baillie's book ?— These is a diffisrence ; there 
must be a difference. 

Why must .there be a difference ?**TIm 
commission did not make a corporation, there 
must be words to that purpose. 

But is there no difference but that ; is lfa« 
recommendation of the general court of com* 
missioners and governors to the AdnumHy, ia 
the appointment of all the offices, left out in 
the cnarter, or is it not ?-^It is left out 

Why was it left out?— I cannot undertakw 
to say why. 

Did any body desire you to leave it outf— - 
No, so help me God. 

You took it upon yourself ?— I cannot aa^ 
swer at this distance of time, whether I took 
it upon myself, or wfaa took it upon theai^ 
selves. 

I am aure I do not mean to lead you, e^ 
I thought the inference ftir, when you aail 
nobody directed you, that yon took it upon 
yourself ^—^[ cannot say. 

What was your reason for leaving it out^— 
I had no particukr reason for leavings it out 

Is it possible that a man of busmeei cmi 
make a nuterial alteimtkmy without hani^ 
some reason for it; you are here vsgoa your 
oath, and I insist upon knowing what ^kmk 
reason was?--I do not from my raoottectioa 
know, that either I did or did not Wnve itoirt^ 
nor how it was left out, I protest 

There was also a power of removal of tlM 
officers, which was not in the oticinal coib* 
mission, and which is in the new charter. Is 
there not?— I believe there is. 

How did that happen?— I do not recolleel 
how that happened. 

Did any body give you directions to do itF 
—No. not tluit I remember, any body. 

Did any body else make the alterations^ or 
was it you?— Not that I know of. 

Was it you or any body else? — ^Upon tbj 
honour, I do not know, I protest 

Do you know the reason why that alttrfr* 
tkm was made?— No. I do not 

Do you recollect tnat there is another al« 
teration in this charter, and the application of 
the money arising ftom the chariw, being fo^ 
the uses of the Hospital, is totally left out ; do 
you repollect that?— I do not know how it 
came to be left out; it is a long while for a 
person's recollection to go to December, 1775. 

The words I mean are these, <* And we do 
hereby, for us, our heirs, and successors^ 
strict]^ chaige and commuid, enjoin and r^ 
quff^ that none of the monies, or other things^ 
irhicn shall be gdven, contributed, &c. shall 
he diverted, issued, or applied, or be in any 
ways applicable to any use or purpose what* 
soever, otherwise thanr to the chaittaMe pmv 
poses afi^reoMiitionedy'' &e. Tbesewordsari 



8S] re^ecthig Ae Roj/d Hoquid at Greewakk. A. D. 1778. 



[86, 



feftoatiotlwiiewcluorter; I desire to know 

if fou JiA thott oiit?-^! do not know. 
Do you know whether any hody else loft 

Am tot?— No, I do not 
Do tou know why they were left out?-— 

Noy I do not know why they were left out. 

•lliGn there are some other words whkh are 
imerted; these words are inserted in the new 
dnrtor, ''And also to sell, grant, demise, 
sfieo, or dispose of Ae same manors, me«- 
flmges," ftc. Do yon know why tiiat power 
of seUn^ was introduced in the charter, selling 
the whote estates of the Hospital ?->I believe 
tint claiise was found in one of the (draughts 
tint I had for my guidance ; but ifyour lord- 
sbips will please to attend to the charter, ftom 
the best ot my recollection, there is a clause 
hnaiediately p receding tha^ which gives the 
Hosptiri a power to purchase estates, which I 
beUere they had not by the former conunis- 
sien ; it gives tfeem a power to receive devises 
of manors, meseoages, boids, and so on, and 
mtumfiatery, as I mink, this clause of which 
lus erace sp»ks, follows, and it was not. to 
the best oTm^ memoiy, then understood, mat 
4e ckuse giving a power to the Hospital to 
teN the estates, eictended any farther tnan to 
those tb^ had bought, or such as were de- 
filed to mem, to the best of my recollection. 

You mentioned materials tlwt you h^ for 
your guidance, be so good as to mention what 
they were ?— It is almost impossible for me to 
do that, who have never seen them since. 

Whoe did you take them from ?— To Uie 
best of my recollection they were taken £rom 
the Record-room in Greenwich HospitaJ. 

Who gave them to you ?-^Yoiir lordships 
wiH please to understand, that this Record- 
non is under four locks and keys; I have 
te keeping of one of tiioee k^ myself; I do 
not know who eave them to me, but, from tile 
keslof oiy fecMOction, I hadthem from that 
room. 

Did you taiw them yourself, or any body 
give them to you? —I believe, but 1 cannot 
speak cerlaBily to it ; I beheve that I desired 
to have them. 

Did you return them to that placed— I 
ttik they are returned, but I cannot speak 
positively to that point. 

DU you keep any copies of «those materiah 
Ihatserved you for your guide?— No, not to 
1^ recofiecuon. 

Tour kwdships will be pleased, that thb 
Boitleman may come another day, and I beg 
M nay bring those papers with him. If you 
had DO authority from any bo^ to make those 
material alteratkms, how came you to lake 
^on yourself to make them ? — I cannot un- 
dsrtake to say either that I <fid or did not 
make them; 1 drew tb :$ charter to the best of 
i^afailhy, and it wai passed by Mr. Eden, 
»dafWr that went to the Attorney and Soli- 
otov General, and was finally settl^. 

Do you take upon you to swear that you db 
vot know whether you made any of these ma- 
*B«iatoemlioi»t, or who did make thttn, or 



that you received any directions from any per- 
son whatever to make any of those altera- 
tions?^! do not know that I received any 
directions ftom any person, (except, as I said 
before) fixnn the directors of the Hospital in 
writii^ : I considered myself acting under the 
directions also of Mr. Eden. 

Did Mr. Eden ^ive you any directions rela- 
tive to the alteration that you mentioned ? — It 
is impossible for me to say at this distance of 
time, but I think not ; I do not know. 

You swear then you dp not know, yon do 
not recollect whether any body gave you any 
directions, or whether it was you or any bo<fy 
else made them ? — 1 beheve I stated, that I 
had received directions from the board of di- 
rectors, ^iflt I considered myself acting under 
Mr. Eden. 

But did you receive from the board of direc- 
tors, or Mr. Eden, any directions to make al- 
terations in the charter ?— Not that I recollect 

Think a IHtle before you answer the ques- 
tion 1 am going to ask you, and answer it se- 
riously : I understand that these alterations in 
the charter were taken by you from certain 
loose papers that you got out of the Record- 
room m Greenwich Hospital ; it was so, was 
h?— I believe 1 informed your lordships, that 
I had no line to go by upon that occa^on; 
that I had never drawn acnarter before ; that 
I had recourse to such papers as I thought 
would be iisefoi to me; and with them, the 
be^ judgment that I could form upon the oe- 
casioOj and the commission, were the things 
by which I was guided. 

Then in the alterations in the charter, 
which are not found in the commission, I ask 
you, if you took those alterations from the old 
papers that you got out of the Record-room or 
not ?— I cannot undertake to say that I did or 
did not 

If yoodid not take them from those papers, 
from whence else could you have them?— 
Upon my oath I do liot know. 

Did Mr. Eden give you any such instruc- 
tions?— Not that I recollect. 

Did any bo<h^ else whatever g^ you such . 
orders ?— Not tnat I know of. 

Unless you had the autiiority of these pa- 
pers, how came you, without such orders, to 
take upon you to tal^ the appointment of of^ 
ficers out of the general coint, and give it to 
the board of Adndtalty?— I do not know at 
this time what was the occasion of it; or 
whether it was intended at all^ I do not know. 

You do not know whether it was intended 
to be done ?— I do not know^ my lord. 

You will be so good as to mform their lordu 
slupe, how, as a solicitor, and a very young 
man, you could undertake^ and could justify to 
yourself, to make material alterations in a 
charter, from the original commission? — I 
understood, that I was to draw the charter 
from such miiterials as I could get, and from 
my own jjudgment about it ; I have discharged 
my conscience about the matter, and I do not 
know of any directionsthat were given, any 



87] 



18 GEORGE IIL The Case ef Captain Thomas BaiUe, 



[88 



•therwiae than those I have stated to your 
lordships. 

When you carried the charter, to lay it be- 
fore the Attorpey ^d Solicitor General, did 
you then apprize those two great lawyers that 
you had altered several of the points from the 
original commission ?~I did not, to the best 
of my recollection, take it to the Attorney and 
Soiiator General; a Mr. Sibthorpe, who was 
at that time concerned jointly witn me, had a 
great deal of the transaction of that business 
¥rith the Attorney and Solicitor General. 

Do you ondertake to savthat you did not 
carry it to the Attorney and Solicitor General ? 
— I do not recollect that perfectly. 

As your memory is so extremely short, I 
imagine it is some days since you have been 
summoned to attend this House, have you 
ever had the curiosity, knowing that your me- 
mory is so extremely defective, as it appears 
here, to compare the charter vrith the original 
commission ?«— I have looked at them. 

How long ago ?— I was looking at them thb 
morning. 

How long is it ago since you were summon- 
ed to attend this House?— I believe about 
ten, or positively [jqu. possibly] eleven days. 

Did you not think it material, when you 
had had so great a hand, and absolutely the 
drawing of this charter, not to refresh so short 
a memoiy as vours is, with the particular in- 
vestigation of that cluLTter, and comparing it 
with the commission before this morning r-— 
No ; I have looked at it. but not as comparinjg 
it, nor under any idea ot giving evidence of it 
here. 

Did you ever take notice to any body, that 
you had made these alterations in this char- 
ter ?^Not that I recollect 

At no time did you ever mention it to any 
body ?— Not that I know of. 

How long is it since you have been sum- 
moned to attend this House?— I tlunk, about 
ten or eleven days. 

Have you hadfany conversation during that 
time, respecting the business of Greenwich 
Hospital N— I have conversed at several times 
with various officers of the Hospital. 

With whom upon this business? — ^I believe 
most of the officers; I don't know any one 
particularly that I have conversed with 
about it 

Have you conversed upon the subject of 
the charter ?— Not that I know of. 

How long have you been the solicitor to 
Greenwich Hospital? — I was concerned witii 
Mr. Sibthorpe immediately after my father's 
death, which was ten years ago. 

How were you bred? To what business?— 
An attorney. 

How long have you been an attorney ? — ^I 
was an attorney very soon afler my father's 
death. 

We don't know when your &ther died ?— 
I believe, I explained to your lord^ps, it was 
about ten years. 

How long have you been appointed solicitor 



to the Hospital ?-r-Alino8t immediately upoa 
my fetber's death, which b about ten years 
ago. 

Were you an apprentice to any attome j 
before you was an attorney? — ^I was clerk Vm 
my father. 

How long? — Not quite Ave years, but I 
served the remainder with Mr. Sibthorpe. 

I only wish to ask the witness; he says 
that this new charter was laid before the At- 
torney and Solicitor General, I desire to know 
whether they made any alterations in it, after 
it was laid before them ?^— I believe, that the 
almost, if not entirely, the only alteration 
made by the Attorney and Solicitor General, 
was the clause directing security to be taken. 

Was the old commission laid before the 
Attorney and Solicitor Gveneral at the same 
time, with the draught of the new charter? — 
I don't know. 

Who' were the Attorney and Solicitor Ge- 
neral at that time? — The present Chancellor 
was Attorney General, and Mr. Wedderbume^ 
Solicitor. 

So you don't know whether the Attorney or 
Solicitor .General did know there was any va- 
riation made between the new charter and 
the old commission ? — ^I don't know that any- 
otherwise, than was necessary to constitute a 
charter; there must be some variation, to be 
sure. 

[The witness was ordered to attend oa 
Monday next, and bring those materials with 
him, which he made use of in drawing up iJie 
charter.] 

Whether you singly drew up the charter, or 
whether Mr. Sibthorpe was concerned with 
you in drawing it upr — ^Mr. Sibthorpe and I^ 
to the best of my recollection, drew it toge- 
ther. 

He was concerned with you in drawing of 
it? — ^Yes,hewas. 

I think you say, Sibthorpe and you togeUier 
drew it f^-Yea. I think so. 

Under the direction of Mr. Eden ?— Yes. 

You recollect that was the oue, do you?— 
Yes, perfectiy. 

I suppose, after you had drawn this charter, 
you delivered it to Mr. Eden for his perusal f 
— It was laid before Mr. Eden for his perusal. 

When you laid it before him, did not yeu ol^ 
serve to him, that you had made these esseifo 
tial alterations?—! cannot recollect, whether 
I or Mr. Sibthorpe bud it before him. 

Did Mr. Eden make any alterations?—! 
cannot recollect. 

Mr. Ibbetson called in again. 

Mr. M. In the hurry of looking over tha 
minutes at the bar, I did omit one which I 
should have taken notice of; I did mention to 
the House, that there had been an application 
from the general court to parliament, for an 
act of jparuament to incorporate the Hospital, 
that did not take place; and, I find, upon 
looking over the mimiteBi stnoa I withdrew 



•fS} nqfteUng tiui Ragat Ho^d at Greetmich. A. D. 1778. 



n» 



Aom the bar, that the draught of the charter 

bd been settled by the Attomejr and Solicitor 

General, with the addition of the security 

diDK, was laid before the general court, an^ 

thit was on the 10th of Match, 1774. The 

dbectors in their Memorial to that eeneral 

court say, thus: that having laid herore the 

Attoroey and Solicitor General, a draught of a 

cfanrterofincorpoistion for the Hospital, &c. 

lad having addedf according to their recom- 

BK&dation, a clause for the treasurer to ^ve 

Kcority, the resolution of the general court 

was, tha they approved of the draught of the 

new charter. 

Who were present at that time?— Lord 

Stodwidi, Mr. BuHer, lord Pahnerston, lords 

ef the Admiralty, &c. &c. in the whole fifteen 

ia number. 

Was the charter read paragraph by para^ 

Sph at the general court?— The draught of 
charter appears to have been read through ; 
I recollect very well, that the charter itself 
was not read. 

You say it appears, that the draught was 
Rsd through, it may be entered as read, it 
my appear so upon the books; but were you 
ffoent at the general court?— I don't recol- 
lect that it was not read ; and I am very well 
convinced, in my own nund, that the draught 
was read, but that the charter itself was not 
lead, anv more than sometimes as your lord- 
shms' bills are read, just the title of it 

Please to rocoUec^ an4. will you take upon 
you to say that it was r«d?— I think I can 
venture to say it, but I will not say it posi- 
tively, but I have no reason to think that it 
^«s not read. 

Do you take upon you to say positively that 
it was or was not?— I believe it was read, I 
know nothing to the contrarv. 

Whether it was not one of the points of bu- 
aness, upon which they met to consider of 
this drai^t? — It was a part of the business 
of the day^ it came in among other business. 

Was this draught of the diarter, to the best 
•f jtur knowledge, read to the general court ? 
—To the best of my knowledge and belief, 
certainly it was read. 

Were any of these alterations between the 
sQounisaion and charter, pointed out to tiie 
geaoal court at t|)at time? — No, there was 
BMhii^ pointed out in it, that I recollect. 

Was the commission produced at that court, 
and read? — ^No, it was not, nor any compari- 
son made between them. 

Did no member there take notice of any al- 
teition between one and the other?— Not 
that I recollect; and I cannot aee how they 
could, unless they had had them both before 
them? 

How soon did you observe^ or were you ac- 
qnainied with the alterations in the charter? 
—I never knew any thing of the alterations 
in^self in the charter; I never compared it 
with the commission; I concluded it was 

Kly settled, having gone through such 
; tiU Mr. Batlli^ pointed thtm out in 



I his book, no other alteration than the security 
clause, that was an addition as it stands upon 
the books, as recommended to be inserted. 

[Mr. Ibbetson withdrew, and the House ad- 
journed to Monday.] 

Mr. Everaiy the Solidtor, called in. 

Have you* brought those papers that wei« 
ordered ? — I have. [Produces some Papers.] 

What are these papers ? — The ■ several 
draughts and copies of charters, that I have 
been able to collect unce last Friday. 

That you have been able to collect? — ^Yes. 

When were those draughts and papers made 
out? — ^The first was drawn by myself; was 
corryted, as I find afterwards, by Mr. Sib- 
thorpe, who was then joint solicitor of the 
Hospital with me ; a copy was made fi«ni 
that, and laid before Mr. Eden, and corrected 
by him after that; three copies were made^. 
one for the Attorney GeneraL one for the So- 
licitor General, and another for Mr. Eden. 

Are those all the papers that you have pro- 
duced? — I was going on, if the Ctmmutleo 
will eive me leave : the Attorney and Soli- 
citor General advised, by an opinion in writing 
at the end of one of them, that a clause should 
be added for the treasurer to eive security: 
this was laid before the board otdirectors, and 
thev ordered the clause to be drawn ; accord- 
ingly a copy was then made for the board, 
with the clause inserted; I find, l^ the mi- 
nutes of the board, that it was then laid be- 
fore the board, and they made alterations in 
it ; from thence another copy vras made for 
the general court, and by ttiem finally ap- 
proved. 

Are these all the papers? — ^I have not them 
all. 

Are those that you have been describing all 
the papers ^ou have brought vrith your— I 
will r«id their titles. 

Are the^. or are they not, all you have 
brought With you ? — ^I have not brought all I 
have been describing, because I couldnot find 
them all; what I nave brought is tiiefint 
draught which I drew myself, and which was 
corrected by Mr. Sibthorpe ; that was after- 
wards corrected by Mr. Eden, and then the 
third draught was corrected by the Attorney 
and Solicitor General, and Mr. Eden. 

Have you any papers but what you have 
produced ?^None, but what I have produced. 

Have you searched into the record-room, 
and made any enquiry concerning these old 

Spers and draughts you spoke of the other 
y?— I have been into the record-room and 
searched there ; I found that the papers were 
not there, but in my possession, and I have 
now delivered them to your lordships. 

Were there any other alterations ever made 
in the draiight of the charter, but those you 
have mentioned ? — ^No. 

Did you ever converse with any body else, 
but those that you have named, upon tha- 
drawing of the charter, to [au. with] my lord 
Sandwich, or any of the loros of the Adou* 
ral^?^N^. 



18 GEORGE HI. The Cau qfCaptaiii Thaam BaUUei [9S 

but the answer ww, you had better go to the 
usual foim for it through the crown offiGcn; 
we don't wish it agitated here. The business 
of the charter then went on, and several meet- 
ings were had about it; I beliere about this 
time, till in the month of March^ 17711, that I 
then pve instructionB to the solicitors of the 
Hosphal. Mr. Sibthorpe and Mr. Eveiesi; 
Mr. Sibthorpe, very emment in his professioB 
there, and a man we had iiill confidence in; 
Mr. Everest was then a very younff man; I 
directed them to prepare a draught for us to 
look at They prepared a draught upon the 
ground of the Foundling HospitaPs charter 
and the commission, takmg out as much of 
the commission as they tfaoueht applied far 
the benefit of the Hospital; when it came to 
be put into the charter, I did not know who 
prepaiedit,but I now understand Mr. Everest 
did ; Mr. Sibthorpe corrected it, and brau{^ 
it so corrected to UK. Thbdon't car^nau I 
believe, later down than the month of itoeh ; 
I made some corrections, which I understand 
are now before the House, and which nu^ be 
aeen ; in making those corrections, i should 
not have thought it necessary to have retabied 
a single syllable of the commission, if I eould 
have suggested better words; I beheve, howu 
ever, itso happened, that in general the ex- 
pressions of the old commission ate retained, 
as iiir as they were proper to be retained. 
There were several o&er things occurred in 
settling that charter, which seamed material 
to be attended to for the benefit of the Ho9w 
pital. Hitherto we had a considetaUe estsk 
blishment for the benefit of the beys who 
were sons of seamen. That establishmeat 
had not been r^ularly put under theestar- 
blishment of the Hospital ; it arose from, and 
was supported by, some c^^gent sunii. 
The boys ffo off in three years toknd^ com- 
pleted m their education. This wae srown 
so considerable an establishment, tSat il 
seemed material to subject that to a eenenl 
court, and the general form that goes wongh 
the rest of the regular business that is inserted 
in the charter, not in the former oonumaskMn ; 
so all the security clauses of those that have 
the Hospital money pass throuj^ theii haads» 
were submitted for the opinion of the Attam 
ney and Solicitor Genend, and they gave 
their opinion that it was necessary to insott 
such a clause : that is a oonsidnabls benefit 
to the Hospital, as at all times there is at least 
50,000/. or 60,000/. m cirodation^ fot which 
liie Hospital before had no secunty^ and for 
which it has now a full security, 'fhcre were 
some provisions put into the charter about 
the i^er of altering and dy»poang of the 
Hospital's lands, which I hear has dnwm 
some attenti<m. As £ur as I can lecolleet of 
the matter, I apprehend that no such power ef 
aliening or disposing of at^ thing b men by 
these woids : I conceive them to oe mere 
words of fonn, so &r as relates to any p06a»« 
bility of impainng the property of the HospW 
* Now [a. d. i;i4.] Lord AttAlaait, tal : I conceive that evcfy purchaser tnkM» 



91] 

Nor receive any message up<m the subject 
fimn any body ?— Ngne. 

Was Mr. Ibbetson concerned in drawing up 
that charters—Not by any means. 

What was the expence of the charter? — ^I 
have not taken that out. 

Do you know how much you have received 
upon that account ?•— Upon account of the 

doarter? 

Upon account of the expence of passing it? 
— I am not prepared at present to answer that 
question, but I believe it was upwards of a 
UKWsand pounds : if the House have any i^sh 
to go into that, I will, upon another day, proo 
duce idl the papers I can respecting thaU 

When did you propose to return those par 
pers tiiat belongeo to the record-rocMn ? — ^I had 
not foied any tune in my own mind about it; 
I really thought they were returned ; it has 
been a long tune since I have seen any thing 
of then. 

Have you compared any of those old papers 
unce you were here on Friday with the pre* 
sent cnarter, to see whether the alterations in 
this new charter are contained in these old 
papers ?-*Some of them are in the old draught 
of a charter in George the Snd^s time, which 
I have ddivered to your lordships. 

Is that part contained in that old p«per, 
which gives authority to the lords of the Ad- 
miralty to sell the Hospital laud?— I don't 
know. 

That charter never passed, did it ?— No. 
[Mr. Everest withdrew.] 

The Auditor, Mr. Eden^ called in. 

Please to nve the Committee an account 
of what you Know relative to the passing the 
newcluurter of Greenwich Hospital? — ^In the 
begimung of the year 1779. Mr. Ellis, the 
steward of the Hospital, fiuleu for a consider- 
able sum of money, I believe about d,MM>/. ; 
I was at that time at the fawr, and acted as 
ooiiOttal for the Hospital; it was my duty to 
settle the form ^ recovering this money; I 
found, on looldng into the matter, that it was 
veiv difficult to curect a mode of prosecution; 
and I also found, that if any such mode could 
be carried o% there weie no means of recover- 
ing, in case Mr. Ellis's circumstaiices should 
be found tnsoKent ; for there had been no 
jMUiUj! ^^nM bv him, or indeed anv other 
person, entrusted with the money of tne Hos- 
pital: it was my duty to represent this to the 
beard of directors; andlpomtedouttothem, 
that thev were ctorectcd under the commis- 
siooy under vriiich we acted, to have a char- 
ter. I knew that under that charter it would 
be easy to euard aratnst any such iioconve- 
nienoe in foture. The board upon this di- 
facted that the matter should be consideied, I 
believe, by myself, and the then Attorney and 
Soifitor General. It was our first wish of 
aUy I believe, to have had this charter passed 

It was moved in parliament, 



tSj nspecling ike Royal Hospital at Greemoich. A. D. i77d. 



[M 



iriljsctlDthattnist, and at his own peril; so 

fir m those wovds Ave a power of purchasing, 

IdonHknow, I rather apprehend tney do not; 

Ar ia cases sabsequent, I understand it has 

kci kmd oecessaiy to liave special licences 

Aon flie crown to nuike those purchases ; and 

k Kgud to exchanges, it happened two years 

agOy when there was an exchange, and then 

it wu found necessary to pass an act for that 

piapoie, which aet actuaUy passed. 

I have not looked into tne thine, because 
As House did not give, me notice S^t I was 
M h$ summoned here ; I heard it by accident ; 
I have not had much time to look into it ; 
bu^ I believe, that upon looking into the acts, 
mdk vest tne IDeiwentwater estates in the 
Hbapila], it will be found, that no charter of 
4ie nog's akme can turn and affect that, ex- 
chtsive of the nature of the trust, by which 
•BT purchaser might be subject to the trust ; 
1 00 not ^ this moment recollect any other 
mstioiis m the charter. There h an omis- 
M, which has been taken notice of: the go- 
asEU courts recommending the persons proper 
Id be admitted ; the words that were m the 
M eommission w^*e, I believe, pretty nearly 
th«e, that the commissioners, meaning the 
faend court, shall recommend to the board 
w Admiraltv, to appoint officers necessary for 
the Hospital. Now I can only suppose what 
I <Kd th«n tiiink ; by what I think now upon 
% it can only lutve one of two meanings, 
Ma that I must have thought at that time, 
Ihatthe commissioners were meant to recom- 
ttMd the persons, so that tiiey must be ap- 
pointed; in which case I should have had no 
hesitatioD of striking it out, because I am 
desriy of opinion, it is a much better trust to 
bsiathe hands of the board of Admiralty, 
^must know the merits <^ seamen who 
h»re served, than in the hands of persons 
^rcbpectahle in life, but not seamen. I 
vujerstand this is an old clause, from the first 
ttstitotion of the Hospital ; and I conceive 
that the words meant, that the commissioners 
should recommend all officers necessary to be 
xtpsinted; so many captains, so many lieu- 
^eQants,and so on ; but that the board of Ad- 
■ihalty are to name the particular captains 
ud lieutenants. There is a clause too, giving 
weAdmiralUr ^wer to displace. Now, as 
w as that addition goes, I believe, it restrains 
"•power of the Admiralty: the Admiralty 
■JwtoappcHnt, and do now, indeed, till fir- 
mer ofderj what I must have thought was 
vis^ that mis is rather a hard tenure upon an 
oU officer in the Hospital, that he should 
hoW it during the will of the board of Admi- 
™ty, whatever his behaviour was ; therefore, 
jMawted, I think, they should have power to 
*M«cefbr misbehavkyor. There were some 
2*«jjwds, that the revenue of the Hospital 
™odd be applied to the purposes of the chak 
™y> «pd no other purposes whatever; I don't 
K<»Bect (it will appear) whether I scratched 
?*^^»OTds; if 1 did, I am not ashamed of 
9? Decaose they are words ^t mean nothing; 



and, at this instant, if applied to any purposes, 
except the purposes of the charity, they are 
punishable. 1 don't know whether I hAV% 
answered the noble lord's question, but I 
donH recollect any thing more at.present. 

Whether the committee is to understand 
from what you have sud, that these several 
alterations in the charter were made by yoor^ 
self ?— Upon my word timt is a veiy haitl 
question to answer; I have not seen the 
paper, except casting my eyes upon than h| 
the bundle ; I have not seen them to examine 
them, therefore I cannot tell ; at the distance 
of seven years^ it is impossible for me to knom 
If any body will take the trouble to examine 
them, my hand-writins is very easy to be 
seen, wheth^ I altereothem or no; I appie* 
hena I am responsible for every word that Is 
in this charter. 

I don't mean whether you are answerable 
for H or not; but I want to know the hcL 
whether you made the alterations pr not; if 
you wish to satisfy yourself^ bv looking into 
the draueht that is laid before tne House, that 
may easuy be handed up to you, to rdresh 
your memory? — If you will please to let me 
see the draught, I will tell your lordships. 

(The draught is handed to Mr. Eden.) 

Mr. Eden. I certainly did notUter every 
thins, because I see in the Attorney OeneraFs 
brief, there are some passages that aie altered. 

Please to look at the alterations, one by one, 
and acquaint the committee of what yon have 
altered r — ^In my brief^ there does not happen 
to be one alteration, which I am surprkea at : 
but, I believe, the reason was, I had quit^ 
the bar before it was brought to me. 

Then, fix>m thence, are we to uadarstand, 
that none of the alterations were nufede by 
you?-— I am afVaid to say that, because the 
solicitor's having free access to me, many 
thingsthat may appear to be altered, might 
be by their askmg, and my suggesting aHera* 
tions : I should mention, that there appears 
to be a great delay in tnis business; it wa« 
slated in the beginning of tike year 1779, and 
was not completed tiu* tiie end of the year 
1775 ; in the course of that time it was revised 
very repeatedly by difierent persons; and 
was, I believe, a long time before the Attorney 
and Solicitor General ; ihey had too. much bu- 
siness to give it out of their hands^ but at last 
it did come, though I have sent for tlMttr re- 
port upon it ; it was brought to me f^m ^tM 
secretary of state's office, and I have it here| 
if the House wish to see it. 

(It is banded up to the table.) 

There were some other persons consulted 
in this charter. I believe; who were these 
persons? I understood you to say, it was laid 
before the Attorney and ^licitor General, 
and soine other persons ?-~I am misunder- 
stood, I am afraid ; I don't recollect any othet ^ 
persons, except Mr. Sibthorpe, the solicitor of' 
the Hospital; I Ad not mean to say sir. 



W] 



18 GEORQE UL The Case of Captain Thonuu 



r 



[99 



Can you recollect that particular circum-r 
Btance. of th^ recominendation being taken 
£rom tne general court, having been agitated 
and di9CU88ed between you and any other per- 
aon?— No, I do not indeed ; it is very aiffi- 
cultyupon the short notice I have had, to 
have any recollection of these particulars. I 
don't know how it happened, but I had not 
that attention shewn me which is usual ; for I 
bad not any notice of it. till I went into the 
House of Commons to-oay ; and if I had not 
be^n very miich disposed to it, I should not 
have attended, for the House would have in- 
terposed respecting it. 

X ou have said,! think, that you look upon 
yourself as answerable for all these alterations, 
irhether you made them or not, as the draught 
was lud before you? Do you think that a 
proper alteration for the recommendation be- 
Vig made to the board of Admiralty, from the 
general court? you said, that the board of Ad- 
miralty were much better judges of the merit 
of seamen; that though the general court 
consisted of very respectable persons, yet 
they were not seamen. Had you it in con- 
templation, that the general court consisted 
of all the flag-of&cersr-r-I conceive that the 
seamen have the best guardians of their me- 
nts at the board of Amnirsdty ; but there b 
another objection, which is a very forcible 
one ; that is, that the general court meet at 
very uncertain times, sometimes at six or 
seven months distance. Now suppose a cap- 
tain in Greenwich Hospital dies. 

The general court were directed to assem- 
ble four .times a year, by the commission ; by 
this charter, which you have taken upon you 
to answer tor, they are directed to assemble 
twke a yepur; but, I believe, they can at any 
time assemble a court? — The charter directs 
them to assemble twice a year; before, they 
were directed to assemble four times a vear; 
but many things broke through that, ancf they 
could not meet upon it 

As ]^ou don't recollect at all any one of the 
alterations, can you take upon you to say, 
whether they were of your recommending or 
putting in? — ^I believe, if they were gone 
throu^ singly, many, I should vouch for 
v^ readily, to the best of my belief. 

The draught you have been looking at, is, 
I presume^ Uie draught in the hand-writing 
ot the Sohcitor? — ^It is. 

Was that draught the first you ever saw of 
this business; had you conversed with the 
SoiUcitor. or any other person, upon the sub- 
ject, before you saw the draught? — ^At that 
time I must nave conversed very firequeutly, 
because I was much at Greenwich, and at- 
tended the board very frequently, and must, 
as I saw the Solicitor there, converse with 
him frequently. 

Then, I should presume, you can recollect 
whether you were the adviser, or any other 
person, of those alterations? — I should pre- 
;isume I was the adviser, as I was ihuch more 
acquainted with the subject than the Attorney 



or. Solicitor General were, and they bdng 
much more employed than I was in other 
matters. 

You still seem to think, that all these alte- 
rations might spring originally from yourself? 
— ^I think, m the nature of the business, the^ 
must have sprung from myself; I think it 
was more likely the Solicitor would have con* 
suited tne about them, than have taken it 
upon himself, as I was always attentive 
to it. 

Then it was of your own suggestion, to take 
the power from the general court, and give it 
to the Admiralty?^ don't think that is done 
by the charter. 

I will read the words of the commission to 
you, [reads them] *^ And we do l^reby em- 
power and direct you, our said commissioners, 
or any seven or more of you, to recommend to 
our commissioners for executing the office of 
high admiral now, and for the time being ; or 
our hieh admiral for the time bdhg, to ap- 
point, mm. time to time, all officers necessary 
to be employed in and for the said Hospital ; 
and we do hereby empower our commissioners 
for executing the offi^ of high admiral now^ 
and for the time being, to appoint all such ou 
ficers accordingly, except tne governor and 
treasurer of the said Hospital, provided, that 
for the future, all such persons to be so re- 
commended and admitted into the said Hos- 
pital, as the officers of the house, or otherwise, 
be sea-&ring men, &c. &c." These are the 
words of the commission. Do tiiese words 
import, or do they not, that the general court 
have the power of recommending all their 
officers ?— I don't know what I thought then, 
but I now think, that those words do merely 
mean only this, that the general court was ta 
recommend the officers necessary, that it was 
to recommend the establishment of the Hoa- 

Eital; because, I believe, that the clause will 
e found in the original charter, before there 
was any establishment at all ; that is to say, 
that there should be so many captains, so 
manv boatswains. &c. and that then the Ad- 
mirals was to fill them up, by inserting pro- 
per officers, those officers being seamen. 

The commission says, that the general 
court are to recommend, and the Admindty t» 
appoint accordingly, as they are recommend- 
ed. Now the recommendation, such as it is, 
is totally omitted here. I desire to know, 
whether that omission of ^e recommendation 
is of your doing and advising, or whether it 
came from any other quarter? — ^It certeinly 
must be of my doing, or of my approving. 

And fix)m no other quarter whatever ? — ^No; 
excepting the solicitor of the Hospital, I don't 
know that ever I consulted an v person in my 
life ; and, if it is an allusion, that I consulted 
with the Admiralty, I must say, very solemn- 
ly, that I don't bdieve that the Admiralty 
knew of this thing till it was in a great degree 
of completion ; I believe the charter was ver^ 
batim, as it now stands, before the Adniiftdty 
knew of it ; and, I believe, there are minute^ 



9f] raptcitmg the Royal Hatplal at Greenmch. A. D. 1778. 



\m 



m the possesion of the < Admiralty, if they 
choose to look to them, that will prove that. 

I understood Mr. Everest, the other dav, 
that he took those alterations from certain old 
papers, &om former charters? — Here is a 
oiaiightof a charter, I believe in the year 
1780. 

Are any of these alterations suggested* in 
thb cbarter? — I believe, if it is looked at, it 
will not be found, that this charter, though 
drawn by able men at the time^ followed a 
angle word of the existing commission at the 
time ; I believe the persons that drew it did 
not think it necessary to adhere to the old 
charter, but to draw a good charter from them, 
for which they would be answerable. 

If I understood you rigjht, vou said, and re- 
peated it just now, that m drawing the new 
charter, you did not feel yourself ooimd, or 
limiled in any respect, by the commission ? — 
I certainly meant to draw as good a charter 
ibr the Hospital, as I could draw. 

Then the charter you looked upon as tanta- 
mount to a new constitution of Greenwich 
Hospital ? — I looked upon it, as the instru- 
ment which vras to give further powers, that 
were found in the commission to be wantins, 
and to draw every thing else for the benefit 
of the Hospital that could possibly be done 
under that instrument. 

Did you feel yourself, in that situation, 
warranted in drawing and forming a new con- 
stitution for Greenwich Hospital, without 
consulting any of the king's ministers what- 
ever, and particularly those at the liead of tiie 
naval albirs ? — I don't feel that I did draw a 
new constitution, only that I was drawing 
improvements to what was existing before, 
snd some essentially necessary. 

Did you, or did you not, in respect to these 
improvements, take the opinion of anv person 
in the king's council ? — I solemnly declare I 
did not 

I shall be glad to ask you a question, which 
aeems a weighty one: you said, that you 
thought y6urself responsible for the alterations 
in the draught of the charter, tiiough the al- 
terations should not be founa in your hand- 
writing. Now I ask whether you do not think 
you were exonerated from that responsibility, 
nom the moment you laid the draught of that 
charter before the Attorney and Solicitor Ge- 
neral, and had their approbation of it? — I cer- 
tainly shall be veiy glad to share any cnmi^ 
nah^' with the then Attorney and Solicitor 



In what year were you appointed auditor of 
Greenwich Hospital ? — ^In March, 1771. 

Whom did you succeed ? — The present lord 
chancellcM*. 

What do you look upon to be your duty as 
auditor of Greenwich Hospital ?— To audit the 
accounts, atler a manner prescribed by the 
constitution of Greenwich Hospital ; there is 
a book recites that. 

Do you not, at yomr first appointment, look 
ipon yourself as counsel for Greenwj|ch Hos- 

V04 xxz. 



pital ?— As that office always used to be filled 
by a barrister, it was a mark of attention in 
appointing me, I then being a banister; 
when I discontinued being a barrister, I gave 
up every paper respecting the Hospital. 

Were not you a diredor at first ? — ^I was, 
two or three months. 

How ? — ^I was a director by warrant. 

Are you now ? — Yes. 

How ? — Ex officio. Before I was personally 
auditor, and personally director \ at present, I 
am auditor and tx officio director : if I cease 
to be auditor, I cease to be director ; before I 
had warrants by name from the Admiralty. 

Who laid the new charter before the Attor- 
ney and Solicitor General, or by whose direc- 
tions was it laid before them ? — I fancy it was 
by the direction of the board. If the minutes 
of the board are called for^ I fancy it will be 
found, that the draught of^ the charter being 
produced, it was ordered to be laid before the 
Attorney and Solicitor General. 

Whether there was any particular opinion, 
stated in writing, to the Attorney and Solicitor 
General, or the copy of the commission laid 
before the Attorney and Solicitor General to 
be compared. Was any opinion asked ? — ^The 
charter recites that commission ; I apprehend 
the commission was laid before them ; but if 
not, I take it for granted, the Attorney and 
Solicitor General must have examined it at 
the time, because it is recited in the draught 
of the charter. 

Then no particular opinion was desired of 
any particular fact? — ^No; I apprehend all 
that was done, was giving this paper to their 
clerks, which is a draught of the cnarter, and 
which they have signed at the bottom, afler 
making any alterations that they had thought 
necessary. 

How long was the charter laid before the 
Attorney and Solicitor-General, before it was 
returned to you? — ^It was never to be re- 
turned to me; I was not the solicitor for thok 
charter, it was laid before me in the same 
manner as it was laid before them. When I 
Quitted the bar, I gave back my brief, and 
tney having other occunations, I believe did 
not give it back till Marcn 1773 ; I know that, 
as a director of the Hospital ; I believe it was 
returned by them in tne spring following ; 
then several difficulties and delays arose; I 
believe, about the quantum of security to be 
given by persons having the Hospital's mo- 
ney; that carried iton^ I believe, until the 
end of the year 1775, before the whole business 
was arranged and settied. 

You say you sire answerable for all that is 
lefl out. In the appointment, * in and for 
Greenwich Hospital to be seafaring men,' why 
was the word ** for' lefl out ? — I did not know 
that it was left out^ I don't know now that it 
is left out. 

^ All the officers of the House, or otherwise, 

to be seafaring men,' why are the words ' or 

otherwise' left out ? — I should rather venture 

to risk the saying^ it was not ioserted in any 

H 



99] 



IS GEORGE III. The Case of^aptain Thmas BaULk^ (KM 



draught that was laid before me ; I will ven- 
ture to say^ I should not have put it into any 
^ught, and will venture to say, I should npt 
have struck it out. I forgot to mention there 
'was an act of parliament passed, in regard to 
the landed estate^ a year after this charter, 
which takes notice of the charter. 

I understood you, that the motives of the 
new charter was to vest the landed estates, 
and give a power to buy and sell landed 
estates. — ^No. by no means, the meat motives 
of the new cnarter were, to enable the Hospi- 
tal to act in all those capacities that it was ne- 
cessary a corporation should act in ; because, 
it was before necessary to make every mem- 
ber of tiie Hospital a party in civil suits. An- 
other great motive was, to give the Hospital a 
«ecuri^ Tor their money. Another was the 
case of the boys. 

The other alterations of the charier were 
made by the solicitor, which you did not at- 
tend to ? — ^I cannot quite say so, because my 
own hand is before the House and may prove 
against me, but I rather believe it is so. 

Was the charter confirmed by act of parlia- 
inent? — ^Not strictiy, but there b an act to 
vei«t the estates, which were prior to the 
charter, and by charter were strictiy vested 
by two acts of George the Snd. There is an 
act, a year af\er this charter, which vests 
them out of the king into the commissioners, 
pursuant to charter, and which recites this 
charter at that time. 

It appears, by the Records, that this matter 
of charter had been in agitation several times 
formerly? — I believe from the beginning of 
the century. I believe there are draughts of 
charters as old as 1790, but all that time the 
Hospital was in a fluctuating, unsettied body, 
and rather pressed for supports, and not in the 
magnitude that I found it. 

You take that to be the reason, when 
draughts were made, that the Hospital's reve- 
nues were not sufficient ? — ^I believe, when the 
Hospital ^rew to this magnitude, that the ne- 
cessity or getting a charter was felt ; and it 
was a work of some time, and great trouble, to 
get it through the several offices. 

What part of the establishment of Green- 
wich Hosoital do you mean, that has not been 



believe additional captsuns and UcHtenants, 
and men. and many officers to attend those 
men. All the business pf the management of 
the Derwentwater estate is a very modem 
story, and was never settied, in the manner it 
is now, till 1749. [Mr. Eden withdrew.] 

Mr. Sibtkorpe, (late Solicitor to the Hospital) 

called in. 

Please to ave an account to the Committee 
of what you know relative to the new charter 
of Greenwich Hospital ? — ^About the beginning 
of the vear 1772 of 7S, I am not ouite positive 
as to the time this circumstance happened in 
ihe Hospital, I was at that time, with Mr. 
Everest, joint solicitor of the UosptUtlf lieute- 



nant^ovemor Boys, when I was attending at 
the b^d, I believe it was March 1778, lieute- 
nant-governor Boys was in the chair, at the 
head of tiie board, the solicitor was ordered 13 
be called in, and I went in. 

What board?— The board of directors of 
Greenwich Hospital, at the Hospital. The 
lieutenant governor said to me, Mr. £llis» 
Sir, is gone away with the Hospital's money. 
I said I had heard so. Then Sir, said he, you 
must contrive to get it. I said . I thought that 
was impossible, as the Hospital was then cir* 
cumstanced : I asked Mr. Boys how it was to 
be done. Sir, said he, it must be done. I 
answered, that might be very well in his idea^ 
but it was not possible, in mv opinion ;' for 
that there seemed to be no mode of setting at 
this money, but by filing a bill or imonnaUon, 
in the name of the attorney general, at the ref- 
lation of the governor of the liospitol, against 
Mr. Ellis for an account, and that before that 
business could bejgot to perfection, Mr. lEllls 
would be gone. There dia not appear to me to 
be any shorter way, as no person wnatever could 
possibly swear that Mr. Ellis was indebted to 
nim, or to a rope of sand, for so I caUed the 
Hospital at that time, it not beinjg incorporated. 
I was then directed, as solicitor, with Mr. 
Everest, to tsdce the opinion of Mr. Eden, and 
I believe too of the attom^-general, as to 
the proper mode of proceedmg against Ellis. 
Some of the directors seemed to be struck with 
what I said, and thought it might beneces- 
sary to have fiirther powers vested ilfSem, 
and that there shoula be a charter, and that 
gave rise to this charter in a very sfiort tim^ 
ailer, perliaps even at the same board ; Iml, 
in a very short time €Ufter, the board of direc- 
tors came to a resolution that a charter should 
be applied for in the common course of busi* 
ness. When the minutes were brought to tht 
solicitor, the business was set about; Mr. 
Everest drew the first draught and brought k 
to me, he having, I believe, under my oiiec- 
tions, applied for and ^ot tiie charter for ioi- 
corporating the Foundlmg Hospital, and took 
that, in some degree, as a mode for the words; 
of course, after he had made his first ina^t, 
ne brought that draught to me, in whidi I 
made several alterations, and after I had made 



settled till within this two or three years?— 1 1 those alterations, that dnuight was copied and 

Isud before Mr. Eden: Mr. Eden, I think, I 
am pretty sure too. made some small altera*- 
tioiis in the draugnt so laid before him, and 
also drew out a paper in which he prescribed 
other alterations, and, in pursuance of which 
direction firom tdi. Eden, I did, in thatdraught, 
make more alterations than I had in the 
former draught, my lords. The matters being 
in that state, Mr. Eden returned the draught, 
and said, tluit he though it was a proper 
dnuttht ; and then,! take it, that the draii^ght 
itseltwas copied and laid before the then at- 
torney-general, another oopv was made for 
the solicitor general, and a third copy for Mr. 
Eden, with mtent that they shoula meet to- 
gett^r in consultation, and s^Ule the chactec 



M] rap&Bthig ^ ikayai tfa^pUal at Greemoidi* A. D. ms* 



[102 



n it ODgbt to b6. After the Misiness was 
got into tbat stage, there was a meeting be- 
tween the the& attorney and solicitor general, 
and Mr. Eden,, at which I was present. I 
Ifamk, and am pretty certain too, though I 
iave not had any connection with the Hospi* 
tdfor about three years past, therefore if I 
or it may be easily allowed me, ^at there 
wen some alterations made in the copy, 
ubich Mr, Wedderbum had as his copy; 
tboe «asadiTecti<Hi also at the bottom of one 
of these oc^ies^ signed by the then attorney 
fBoeral, and Mr. Wedderbum, directing the 
MHity clause to-be added to it; that clause 
wu also drawn, and they approved it. In the 
CQuraeof this business me charter, or draught 
af the charter at least, was laid before uie 
bond of directors, I think more than once : it 
nsBy fewards the close of the business, laid 
hem the general court, and it was at that 
time^and I oelieve the only time, that I was 
ever called into the general court to be asked a 
<|iie8lioii respecting that charter. I had ex- 
PfesMdm^ doubts what the stile of the Hos- 
fNtal should be ; I thought the word commis- 
asner was not a proper one, because it was a 
charter, aad not a commission : I thought the 
•wd governor not a very proper one, there 
Kane another governor, or a particular officer 
ttUea a pernor : I thought the word guar- 
fiao; which I believe is part of the title of 
FoQEpdhn^ Hospital, an improper thing. 
Having signifiedT these doubts, I wa» called 
inta a geoeral co>urt of admiralty, at the head 
afwfaidi board lord Sandwich was, and bavins 
been asked, I am not sure by whom, I think 
Mr. Stephens, what I had to say respecting 
the titled I made nearly the same obser- 
vatioDsthen that I have now. Lord Sand- 
wich said, it did not seem to signify one far- 
thing what they were- called, so that they 
we incorporated by some title, upon which I 
withdrew. These are the general outlines of 
^vhafc I have had to do, m respect of this 
tharter. It was my duty, after the business 
U been gone tlu-ough at tiie Admiradty, 
feciag older and having had more experience 
tban Mr. Everest, to conduct the matter, 
ttoie especially as I lived in town and he at 
pteenwich, and I prosecuted the charter till 
it got under the grrait seal ; and, I think, the 
m Saturday, or perhaps the second in De- 
**»iber, 1775, I carried the charter to the 
Hospital, and thought that I had done the 
w*l noble act that I should ever do, if I 
lived an hundred years. 

Whether you recollect which were the 
tkeiationsthat weretnade by Yourself, before 
rt was sent to the attorney and solicitor-eene^ 
nJ, and Mr. Eden, and which were made by 
"Osc gentlemen afterwards? — I cannot say as 
to the purport of them now, if I had the pa- 
V^ 1 believe I could point them out^ 

Are thw the pi^>ers which are before the 
™>ic ?— I bdieve they are. 

(.Some papers shewn the witness.) 



This is the drau^t as first prepared by Mr. 
Everest, and brougnt by him to me ; tne al- 
terations made are in my hand-writing, and 
are numerous. 

I don't mean to give you the trouble of 
mentioning every ven>al alteration you have 
made, but to particular points ; the first is, 
the omitting tne oower to the general court, 
and giving it to uie Admiralty ; the second, 
the power of removal in the Admiralty ; the 
third, the appropriation of these monies for 
the use of the Hospital; the fourth is, the 
|)Ower of selling ? — As to one of these ques-' 
tions, ^e words of this first draught, as it 
originally stood, were those. '* And that the 
said governor, and deputy-governor, and the 
treasurer now and fbr the time being, do as- 
sist at all meetings, the said commissioners 
and governors, or the directors, of the said 
Hospital hereafter mentioned ; and we do 
hereby empower our said commissioners, or 
any seven or more of them, to recommend to 
our commissioner for executing the office of 
high admiral now and for the time being, our 
high admiral, for the time being, or as they 
may be, to appoint, firom time to time, ail 
officers necessary to be employed in and for 
the said Hospital." These words were in this 
draught, when Mr. Everest first drew it and 
brought it to me. 

Is the word * accordingly^ there ? — ^No, I 
altered it in this way. " And we do hereby 
empower the members of this corporation, or 
any seven or more of them, so assembled in a 
general court, to recommend to our high ad- 
miral, for the tune being, or our commission- 
ers for executing the office of high admiral, 
now and for the time being, to appoint, fi-om 
time to time, all officers necessary to be em- 
ployed in and for the ssud Hospital.'^ And it 
appears by ^is draught, that upon reconsi- 
dering that clause, I struck it wholly out. 

Will you be pleased to recollect, whether it 
was of your own motion, or fix)m instructions 
firom any body else, that you did strike that 
clause out f — ft was either from my own mo- 
tion, or conjunction with Mr. Everest, in con- 
sidering the matter again, and not from any 
person whatever, except himself and me, that 
that alteration was maae so. 

What might be your reason for striking of 
that out? — I cannot possibly say what my 
reason was, but I am well convinced ii\ my 
mind, that at the time I did it, I had good 
reason for so doing ; for I had no wish what- 
ever to do any thmg but prepare such a charr 
ter as should be for the benefit of the Hospi- 
tal, in all its parls, as far as my judgment 
should extend. 

Do you recollect any abuse that had been 
made,' by that power in the general court, 
that made you tnink it necessary to strike it 
out ? — I have endeavoured a great deal to re- 
collect since what I heard passed from Mr. 
Eden, that there was any such power prac- 
tised by the general court, but during the 
time I had the mahagement of the business of 



87] 



18 GEORGE IIL The Case ofCaplidn Thomas BttUUet 



[88 



•therwiae than those I have stated to your 
lordships. 

When you carried the charter, to lay it be- 
fore the Attorney ^nd Solicitor General, did 
you then apprize those two ereat lawyers that 
you hadaltmd several of the points from the 
original commission f — I did not, to the best 
«f my recollection, take it to tiie Attorney and 
Solicitor Greneral; a Mr. Sibthorpe, who was 
at that time concerned jointly witn me, had a 
great deal of the transaction of that business 
with the Attorney and Solicitor General. 

Do you undertake to sav that you did not 
carry it to the Attorney and Solicitor General ? 
— I do not recollect tbit perfectly. 

As your memory is so extremely short, I 
imagine it is some days since you have been 
sununoned to attend this House, have you 
ever had'the curiosity, knowing that your me- 
mory is so extremely defective, as it appears 
here, to compare the charter with the original 
commission ?— I have looked at them. 

How long ago ?->I was looking at them this 
momine. 

How long is it ago since you were summon- 
ed to attend this Houseful believe about 
ten, or positively [jqu. ])ossibly] eleven days. 

Did vou notthmk it material, when you 
bad had so £T^t a hand, and absolutely the 
drawing of this charter, not to refiresh so short 
a memoi^ as vours is, with the particular in- 
vestigation of that clmrter, and comparing it 
with the commission before this momingr— 
No ; I have looked at it, but not as comparii^ 
it, nor under any ideift of giving evidence of it 
here. 

Did you ever take notice to any body, that 
you had made these alterations in this chctf- 
ter ?_Not that I recollect 

At no time did you ever mention it to any 
body ?— Not that I know of. 

How long is it since you have been sum- 
moned to attend this House?— I think, about 
ten or eleven days. 

Have you had any conversation during that 
time, respecting the business of Greenwich 
Hospital? — I have conversed at several times 
with various officers of the Hospital. 

With whom upon this business? — ^I believe 
most of the officers; I don't know any one 
particularly that I have conversed with 
about it. 

Have you conversed upon the subject of 
the charter ?— Not that I know of. 

How long have vou been the solicitor to 
Greenwich Hospital? — ^I was concerned with 
Mr. Sibthorpe immediately afier my fathei's 
death, which was ten vears agb. 

How were you bred? To whatbuuness? — 
An attorney. 

How long have you been an attorney ?— I 
was an attorney veiy soon afUr my father's 
death. 

. We don't know when your &ther died ? — 
I believe, I explained to your IcwdshipSy it was 
about ten years. 

How long have you been appointed solicitor 



to the Hospital ?r'Almo8t immediately upoA 
my father's death, which is about tea years 
ago. 

Were you an apprentice to any attorney 
before vou was an attorney? — ^I was clerk tm 
my father. 

How long? — Not quite five years, but I 
served the remainder with Mr. Sibthorpe. 

I only wi^ to ask the witness; he says 
that this new charter was laid before the At- 
torney and SoUcitor General, I desire to know^ 
whether they made any alterations in it, after 
it was had before them?-*— I believe, that the 
almost, if not entirely, the only alteratioo 
made by the Attorney and Solicitor General^ 
was the clause directm^ security to be taken. 

Was the old commission laid before the 
Attorney and Solicitor General at the same 
time, with the draught of the new charter ? — 
I don't know. 

Who* were the Attorney and Solicitor Ge- 
neral at that time ? — The present Chancellor 
was Attorney General, and Mr. Wedderbunie, 
Solicitor. 

So you don't know whether the Attorney or 
Solicitor .General did know there was any va- 
riation made between the new charier and 
the old commission ? — ^I don't know that any 
otherwise, thui was necessaiy to constitute a 
charter; there must be some variation, to be 
sure. 

[The witness was ordered to attend oa 
Mondav next, and brmg those materials with 
him, which he made use of in drawing up the 
charter.] 

Whether you singly drew up the charter, or 
whether Mr. Sibthorpe was concerned with 
you in drawing it up? — Mr. Sibthorpe and I, 
to the best of my recollection, drew it toge* 
ther. 

He was concerned with you in drawing of 
it ? — ^Yes, he was. 

I think you say, Sibthorpe and you together 
drew it ? — ^Yes, I think so. 

Under the direction of Mr. Eden ? — ^Yes. 

You recollect that was the case, do you ?— 
Yes, pcrfecUy. 

I suppose, after you had drawn this diarter, 
you delivered it to Mr. Eden for his perusal? 
— ^It was laid before Mr. Eden for his p^nuaL 

When }[ou laid it before him, did not y«u ol^ 
serve to him, that you had made these essen* 
tial alterations ?~ I cannot recollect, whether 
I or Mr. Sibthorpe laid it before him. 

Did Mr. Eden make any alterations?— I 
cannot recollect. 

Mr. I(>bet9on called in again. 

Mr. Ibh. In the hurrv of looldng over tha 
minutes at the bar, I dud omit one which I 
should have taken notice of; I did mention to 
the House, that there had been an application 
fi!om the general court to parliament, fot an 
act of jparuament to mcorporate tiie Hospital, 
that did not take place; and, I find, upon 
looking over the mimrtes, sinos I withdtew 



'89] re^eetuig tie Rm/al Ho^dl ai Greenmkh. A. O. 1778. 



[96 



fiom the bar, that the draught of the charter 
had been settled by the Attorney and Soticitor 
GcaneraJy with the addition of the security 
dnise, was laid before the general court, and 
that wu on the 10th of March, 1774. The 
directors in their Memorial to that eeneral 
court say, thus: that having laid before tiie 
Attom^ and Solicitor General, a draught of a 
cfairterofincoiporation for the Hospital, &c. 
tad having addedf according to thev recom- 
mendation, a clause for the treasurer to give 
lecurity, the resolution of the general court 
was, that they approved of the draught of the 
new charter. 

Who were present at that time?— Lord 
Sandwich, Mr. Buller, lord Palmerston, lords 
«f the Admiralty, &c. &c. in the whole fifteen 
in number. 

Was the charter read pan^raph hy para- 

Sph at the general court?— The draugnt of 
charter appears to have heen read through ; 
I recollect very weD, that the charter itself 
WIS not read. 

You say it appears, that the draught was 
leadthioi^i, h may be entered as read, it 
may appear so upon the books; but were you 
ment at the general court?— I don't recol- 
lectthatitwas not read; and I am very well 
convinced, in my own mind, that the draught 
wssread, but that the charter itself was not 
Rsd, anv more than sometimes as your lord- 
thiM' bifis are read, just the title of it 

rlease to recollect an(l will you tsdce upon 
you to say tlmt it was read?— I think I can 
venture to sav ity but I will not say it posi- 
tively, but I nave no reason to think that it 
was not read. 

Do you take upon you to say positively that 
it was or was not?— I believe it was read, I 
know notlung to the contnur. 

Whether it was not one of the points of bu- 
■ness^ upon which they met to consider of 
this draught? — ^It was a part of the business 
ff the day^ it came in amone other business. 

Was this draught of the charter, to the best 
of your knowledge, read to the general court ? 
—To the best m my knowledge and belief, 
certainly it was read. 

Were any of these alterations between the 
•onunission and charter, pointed out to the 
Ccneml court at t||at time?— No, tiiere was 
lotiuQg pointed out in it, that I recollect. 

Was the commission produced at that court, 
and read? — ^No, it was not, nor any compari- 
son niade between them. 

Did no member there take notice of any al- 
teration between one and the otiier?— Not 
that I recollect; and I cannot see how they 
could, unless they had had them both before 
them? 

How soon did you observe, or were you ac- 
quainted with the alterations in the charter? 
—I never knew any thing of the alterations 
B^aelf m the charter; I never compared it 
^"^ the oommisaion; I concluded it was 
poperly settled, having gone through such 
haads; till Mr, Baillie poiatad thm out in 



his book, no other alteration than' the security 
clause, that wras an addition as it stands upon 
the books, as recommended to be inserted. 

[Mr. Ibbetson withdrew, and the House ad- 
journed to Monday.] 

Mr. JEkferttty the Solicitor, called in. 

Have you- brou^t those papers that were 
ordered ? — ^I have. [Produces some Papers.] 

What are these papers ? — The . several 
draughts and copies of charters, that I have 
been able to collect since last Friday. 

That you have been able to collect? — ^Yes. 

When were those draughts and papers made 
out? — The first was drawn by myself; was 
corr|pted, as I find afterwards, by Mr. Sib- 
thorpe, who was then joint solicitor of the 
Hospital with me ; a copy was made fitHoa 
that, and laid before Mr. Eden, and corrected 
by him after that; three comes were made^. 
one for the Attorney GeneraL one for the So- 
licitor General, and another for Mr. Eden. 

Are those all the papers that you have pro- 
duced? — I was going on, if the Committee 
will nve me leave : the Attorney auod Soli- 
citor General advised, by an opinion in vrriting 
at the end of one of them, that a clause should 
be added for the treasurer to give security: 
this was laid before the board ofoirectors, and 
thev ordered the clause to be drawn; accord- 
ingly a copy was then made for the board, 
with the clause inserted; I find, by the mi- 
nutes of the board, that it was then laid be- 
fore the board, and they made alterations in 
it ; from thence another copy was made for 
the general court, and by them finally ap- 
proved. 

Are these all the papers?— I have not them 
all. 

Are those that you have been describme all 
the papers you have brought with you? — ^I 
will r^ their tities. 

Are the^. or are they not, all you have 
brought with you ? — ^I have not brought all I 
have been describing, because I coulonot find 
them all; what I tuive brought is Ihefint 
draught which I drew myself, and which was 
corrected by Mr. Sibthorpe ; that was afiber- 
wards corrected by Mr. Eden, and then the 
third draught was corrected by the Attorney 
and Solicitor General, and Mr. Eden. 

Have you any papers but what you have 
produced?— None, but what I have produced. 

Have you searched into the record-room, 
and made any enquiry concerning these old 
papers and draughts you spoke of the other 
day?— I have been into the record-room and 
searched there ; I found that the papers were 
not there, but in my possession, and I have 
now delivered them to your lordships. 

Were there any other alterations ever made 
in the drati^ht of the charter, but those you 
have mentioned ? — ^No. 

Did you ever converse with anv body else, 
but those that you have named, upon th*^ 
drawinjg of the charter, to [au. with] my lovi 
Sandwich, or any of the loroa of the Adnu* 
ral^?^N9.. 



91] 



18 GEORGE III. 



Tie 



Nor receive any meeiage upon the subject 
faun any body ?— Nqne. 

Was Mr. Ibbetson conceroed in diawii^ up 
that charter >---Not by any means. 

What was the expence of the charter? — ^I 
have not tak^oi that out. 

Do you know how much you have received 

Xn that account ?-— Upon account of the 
rter? 

Upon account of the expence of passing it? 
— ^I am not prepared at present to answer that 
question, but I believe it was upwards of a 
Uiousand pounds : if the House have any Wish 
to go into thaty I wiU, upon another day, pro* 
duce idl the papers I can respecting thaW 

When did you propose to return those pa- 
pers that belongea U> the record-room ?— I iiad 
not fixed any tune in my own mind about it; 
I reatty thou^t they were returned; it haa 
been a long tune since I have seen any thing 
of them. 

Have you compared any of those old papers 
•ince vou were nere on Friday with the pre- 
sent chaiter, to see whether USe alterations in 
this new chsurter are contained in these old 
papers ?'^Some of them are in the old drau^t 
of a charter in George the find's time, which 
I have delivered to your lordships. 

Is that part contained in that old p«per, 
which gives authority to the lords of the Ad- 
miralty to sell the Hospital laud?— I don't 
know. 

That charter never passed, did it ?— No. 
[Mr. Everest withdrew.] 

The Auditor, Mr. Erf«n,* called in. 

Pkase to sive the Committee an account 
of what you Know relative to the passing the 
new chaurter of Greenwich Hospital ? — ^In the 
beginntng of the year 1779. Mr. Ellis, the 
steward of liie Hospital, fiuka for a consider- 
able sum of money, I beUeve about 3,500/. ; 
I was at that time at tlie bar, and acted as 
ooimMl for the Hospital; it was my duty to 
settle Uie form of xeeovering this money; I 
ibund. on lookii^ into the matter, that it was 
venr difficult to <&reet a mode of prosecutian ; 
wnil also Ibond, that if any such mode could 
be canied on, there were no means of recover- 
ing, in case Mr. Ellis's ciroumstaiices should 
be R>uud insolvent ; for tiiere had been no 
ascivity gt«en bv him, or indeed anv other 
person^ entrusted vnth the money of the Hos- 
pital: it was my duty to rej^sent this to the 
mid of directors: andlpomtedoutto them, 
tiiat they were cbrected under the commis- 
aioDy under which we acted, to have a char- 
ter. I knew that under that charter it would 
be easy to 8;uard wunst any such iiiconve- 
aienoe in mture. The board upon this di- 
tectedthait the matter should be considei«d, I 
believe, by myself, and the then Attorney and 
Mkitor Goieral. It was our first wish of 
ally I believe, to have had this charter pasaed 
in parliament. It was moved in parliament, 

* Now [a. d. 1914.] Lord AncklMMl. 



Cm qfCapiain Thmoi BmlUei [98 

but the answer was, you had better go to the 
usual fonn for it throu§di the crown offloets; ' 
we don't wish it agitated here. Thebusmess 
of the charter then went on, and several meet- 
ings were bad about it; I believe about tfaas 
time, till in the m<mth of March, 1779, that I 
then ^ve mstructions to the solicitors of ^ 
HospKal. Mr. Sibthorpe and Mr. Eveicst; 
Mr. Sibthorpe, very enunent in hie jnrofesskm 
there, and a man we had Mk oonndencein; 
Mr. Everest was then a very youns man; I 
directed them to prepare a diraui^ for us to 
look at They prepared a draught upon the 
ground of the Foundling Hospital's charter 
and the commission, takmg out as much of 
the commission as they thoueht applied §ar 
the benefit of the Hospital ; wnen it came to 
be put into the charter, I did not know who 
prepaxedit,but I now understand Mr. Everest 
did; Mr. Sibthorpe corrected it, and broi^t 
It so corrected to me. This don't eannr ne. I 
believe, later down than the month of lAurch ; 
I made some corrections, which I understand 
are now before the House, and which m^ be 
seen; in making those oorrecUens, I shotdd 
not have thoueht it necessary to have retabied 
a single syllable of the commisskm, if I could 
have suggested better words; I befieve, bows- 
ever, it so haopened, that in general the ex«^ 
pressionsof the old commission are retained^ 
as far as they were proper to be retamed. 
There were several ottier things occurred in 
settling that charter, which seined material 
to be attended to f<Mr the benefit of the Hoe. 
pital. Hitherto we had a consideniUe eslel 
blishment for the benefit of the boys who 
were sons of seamen. That estaUisfanieat 
had not been regularly put under the esta- 
blishment of the Rospital ; it arose fioin, and 
was supported by, some contingent aunia. 
The boys eo off in three years toktaUy com- 
pleted m their education. This was grows 
so considerable an establishment, tSat ¥t 
seemed material to subject that to a eeneml 
court, and the general form that gees tmongh 
the rest of the regular bumness tlwt is inserted 
in the charter, not in the former coramisuon ; 
so all the security clauses of theee Uiat have 
the Hospital money pass throu|^ theii hands^ 
were submitted for the opinion of Iht Att8». 
ney and Sohcitor General, and th^ gave 
their opinion that it was necessary to insect 
such a clause : that is a considerable benefit 
to the Hospitid, as at all times there is at leaKt 
60,000/. or 60,000/. in cirodation^ fot whick 
the Hospital before had no secunjhr^ and for 
which it has now a full security. 'Uiere were 
some provisions put into the charter about 
the ^wer of altering and disposing of the 
Hospital's lands, which I hear has drvwn 
some attrition. As far as I can lecoUeCt of 
the matter, I apprehend that no such {lower of 
alienii^ or di^osing of any thing is liven bgr 
these words : I conceive thea to be »cie 
words of fonn, so fiur as relates to any pOBa»* 
bility of impairing the proper^ of the HoapW. 
tal : I conceive that evory purchaeer talRO^ 



fJJ festpeeling ike Royal Hospitai at Greentokh. A. D. I77d. 



[M 



micttothattiust, and at his own peril; so 

fum tlKMe wofds five a power of purchasmg, 

I don't knowy I rather apprehend tney do not ; 

Ar ia cises subsequent, I understand it has 

ben ibmd necessaiy to have special licences 

fivathe cfQwn to nmke those purchases ; and 

ii MffiA to exchaogesy it happened two years 

i^ when there was an excnange, and then 

it VIS (bund neoessaiy to pass an act for that 

fopfOBty which act actually passed. 

I have not looked into the thinsy because 
tha House did not give me notice Sat I was 
Mke summoned here ; I heard it by accident; 
I hivt not had much time to look into it ; 
bn^ I believe, that upon looking into the acts^ 
which vest tne Derwentwater estates in the 
Hospital, it will be found, that no charter of 
tike Idn^s alone can turn and affect that, ex- 
duave of the nature of the trust, by which 
ittT purchaser might be subject to the trust ; 
1 00 not at this moment recollect any other 
iviatioBs in the charter. There is an omis- 
m, wluch has been taken notice of: the ge- 
lanl courts recommending the persons proper 
to be admitted; the words that were m the 
«ld commission were, I believe, pretty nearly 
Aese, that the commissioners, meaning the 
^neiai court, shall recommend to the board 
sf Admiiai^, to appoint officers necessary for 
the Hospital. Now I can only suppose what 
I did then think ; by what I think now upon 
i^ it can only faAve one of two meanings, 
Mher that I must have thought at that time, 
Ihstthe coramiseioners were meant to recom- 
Mid the persons, so that they must be ap- 
pointed; in which case I diould have had no 
ne s ita t ion of striking it out, because I am 
deniy (^opinion, it is a much better trust to 
hi in the bands of the board of Admirahy, 
who must know the merits of seamen who 
hive served, than in the hands of persons 
veiT ntopectaUe in life, but not seamen. I 
iDderstand thia is an old clause, from the first 
ustitution of tlie Hospital ; and I conceive 
that the words meant, that the commissioners 
ahoiild recommend all officers necessary to be 
adpointed ; so many captains, so many lieu- 
tepants^and so on ; but that the board of Ad- 
■iralty are to name the particular captains 
Md fieolenants. There is a clause too, giving 
the Admiralty power to displace. Now, as 
6r as that addition eoes, I believe, it restrains 
the power of the Aamiralty: the Admiralty 
>Ka to appoint, and do now, indeed, till fur- 
ther order: what I must have Hiought was 
Ibis^thal this is rather a hard tenure upon an 
old officer in the Hospital, that he should 
hold it during the win of the board of Admi- 
^^, whatever his behaviour was ; therefore, 
Imssrted, I think, they should have powerto 
displace for nusbehaviour. There were some 
m9 words, that the reveAue of the Hospital 
mdd be applied to the purposes of the cha* 
ntr, and no other purposes whatever ; I don't 
Rcoflect (it wdl appear) whether I scratched 
J*^e words; if I did, I am not ashamed of 
Py mate th^ are wpids that mean nothing; 



and, at this instant, if applied to any purposes^ 
except the purposes of the cbaritv, they are 
punishable. I don't know whether I hav« 
answered the noble lord's question, but I 
don*t recollect any thing more at.preseot 

Whether the conunittee is to understand 
from what you have said, that these seven] 
alterations in the charter were made by yeuf^ 
self? — ^Upon my word t^t is a very hani 
question to answer; I have not seen the 
paper, except casting my eyes upon them ii| 
the bundle ; I have not seen them to examine 
them, therefore I cannot tell ; at the distance 
of seven y ears^ it is impossible for me to know* 
If any body will take the trouble to examine 
them, my hand-writing is very easy to be 
seen, whether I alteredthem or no; 1 appre* 
hend I am responable for every word that is 
in this charter. 

I don't mean whether you are answerable 
for it or not; but I want to know the fact, 
whether you made the alterations pr not : if 
you wish to satisfy yourself bv lof4dng mto 
the draught that is laid before the House, that 
may easDy be handed up to you, to refresh 
your memory } — If you will please to let me 
see the draught, I will tell your lordships. 

(The draught is handed to Mr. Eden.) 

Mr. Eden. I certainly did not*>dter ererj 
thins, because I see in the Attorney General's 
brief, there are some passages that are altered. 

Please to look at the altemtions, one by one, 
and acquaint the committee of what yon have 
altered) — In my brie^ there does not happeii 
to be one aheration, which I am surprbea at : 
but, I believe, the reason was, I had quit^ 
the bar before it was brought lo me. 

Then, firom thence, are we to tflrierstand, 
that none of the alterations were nukde by 
you? — ^I am afVaid to say that, beeauQe the 
solicitor's having free access to me, many 
things that may appear to be altered, might 
be by their asking, and my suggesting altera- 
tions : I should mention, that Uiere appears 
to be a great delay in tnis biisiness; it was 
slatad in the beginning of the year 17712, and 
was not completed tiH the end of the year 
1775 ; in the course of thattime it was revised 
very repeatedly by different persons; and 
was, I believe, a lone time before the Attorney 
and Solicitor Generu ; th^ had too. much bu» 
siness to give it out of their hands^ but at last 
it did come, though I have sent for their re- 
port upon it ; it was broughtito me from th^ 
secretary of slate's office, and I have it here| 
if the House wish to see it. 

(It is handed up to the table.) 

There were some other persons consulted 
in this charter. I believe; who were these 
persons? I understood you to say, it was laid 
More the Attorney and ^icitor G^eneral, 
and soine other persons?— I am misunder- 
stood, I am afraid ; I don't recollect any othet ^ 
persons, except Mr. Sibthorpe, the solicitor of' 
the Hospital; I did not mean te say m^. 



Ill] 



IS GEORGE IIL The Case of CapkAn Tkmiu BaiiUe, [1 IS 



Whom did Mr. Tindall succeed ? — Mr. Po- 
codc, who had been at sea. 

Whom did Mr Pocock succeed? — Mr. 
Beny, who succeeded Mr. Stubbs. 

Had Mr. Stubbs been at sea P^Never, I be- 
lieve ; his son is here, who can speak to that. 

Mr. Stubbs was the fi^t chapuun that was 
ever appointed? — ^Yes^ the first that appears 
by the Hospital books. 

Who is the next upon the list?— The au- 
ditors. 

Who is the present auditor ? — ^Mr. Eden. 

Was he ever at sea? — Not that I ever 
heard. 

Whom did Mr. Eden succeed ? — Mr. Thur- 
low. 

Was he ever at sea? — ^Not that I ever 
heard^ 

Whom did he succeed ? — ^Mr. Hussey. 

Had he ever been at sea ? — ^Not that I ever 
heard. 

Whom did he succeed ? — Mr. Jarvis. 

Was he ever at sea ? — ^Never a one of them 
M I ever heard. 

What is the business of the auditor ? — ^After 
the accounts pass through the clerk of the 
eheque'is inspection, they are delivered to the 
board of directors, from whence they are de- 
livered over to the auditor, and by him .au- 
dited ; and all such accounts as are readv are 
dedared twice a year before the chancellor of 
the exchequer. 

Are you acquainted witfithe nature of au- 
diting them ? — Yes, I have seen many of them 
audited. 

Is there any thing in passing of these ac- 
counts^ that could not be done by a purser ? — 
Hiere is no great difficulty in it. 

Do you thmk that there is any thing in that, 
• that an ingenious clever man, who has been a 

Surser to a man of war, might not be able to 
o ? — ^No, I think not. 

Who ia next upon the list ? — ^The governor's 
clerk. 

What is his name ? — The present governor's 
clerk is not the person set down here ; he has 
not lodged in the Hospital ; at present, the 
only person here is William Pagett, who was 
•ecretaiy to sir George Rodney, m the West- 
Indies. 

Has the present governor's clerk been at 
tea ? — I believe not. 

What is his name ? — ^Pansfbrd. 

He is clerk of the council ? — That is by vir- 
tue of his being the governor's secretary. 

You think he has not been at sea ? — ^No, I 
have heard he has been an officer of horse. 

What has been his particular duty? — ^I 
apprehend the particular duty of the secretary 
to the governor, is to cany all correspondence 
that he may have with the Admiralt)r, and to 
attend at the councils, of the Hospital, and 
that has been for many years seldom or ever 
acted by the principal, it always has been by 
deputation. 

Then Mr. Pansford has aot attended at the 
S^Uidl l»^l believe not, 



Did you ever see him there ? — ^Never. 

And how nuiny years have you been in the 
Hospital attending the council ? — I don't at- 
tend the council. 

How many years have you been in the 
Hospital ? — From my childhood. 

Did you ever s^e him in the Hospital ? — 
Yes, at sir Charles Hardy's house, and have 
dined with him there, but have not seen him 
upon duty. 

What IS your rule in i[^rd to checking 
people that are absent ? — Tne men are mus- 
tered every day, and checked all those out of 
their provisions tiiat are not present. 

By whom Is the governor's clerk appointed? 
— ^By the governor. 

Does there appear to you to be any thing in 
the duty of clerk of the council, that could not 
be done by a person having been at sea ? — The 
duty is very easy ; it is nothing more than the 
little dirty complaints of the men getting 
drunk, and all that is his principal busmess. 

Who is the next ? — The secretary's clerk. 

Who is he ? — The present one is *Mr. Francis 
Cook. 

Is he a landman, or has he been at sea ? or 
is he in the Hospitstl ? — ^A landman, and in the 
Hospital. 

Whom did he succeed? — ^Mr. Eichanl 
Home. 

What was he ? and was he lodged in the 
Hospital ? — Mr. Home had never been at sea^ 
so far as Z could leam, nor lodged in the Hos- 
pital. 

Had you any other before him that had 
been at sea ? — ^Not that I could ever leam. 

Who are the next ? — ^The dispensers, there 
have been only two of them, the present one 
has never been at sea. :, 

Wliat is his name ? — John Pocock. 

What is his employment? — ^Heisthe di»- 
penser of medicines, the immediate instrument 
under the physician, who prepares and com- 
pdunds all the medicines. 

Is there any thing in his business, that 
might not be done by a surgeon in the navy } 
— f apprehend not. 

Who is the next person? — The brewers, 
Stephen Coleman Hickman is the present 

Was he ever at sea? — No, nor any of his 
predecessors. , 

What is Mr. Hickman ? — So far as I know 
of him, he was an officer in the army ; he had 
a fortune of his own ; he quitted the army, 
and married a young lady at Greenwich; he 
went into the brewing busmess ; he continued 
that six or seven years, and failed twice. 

And then he was appointed brewer to 
Greenwich Hospital? — ^After some time. 

As far as you know of that business, do vo« 
think that a man- that had been at sea, and had 
not failed, might not have been as good a 
brewer as Mr. Hickman? — ^I cannot be a jud^ 
of that. 

Do you know any thing to the contraiy ?— - 
No. 

I8beagooclbr6wer?-^W9 have sever ba^ 



UJ] mpec&tg ike Rcfioi Ho^fital at Greewmeh. A. D. 1778. 



[114 



oneoamplunt as I know of, since he has been 

btver to the Hospital. 
How long has he been brewer to the 

Hosfihal?— Be was appointed in August, 

1777. 
How long is it aso that he failed ? — ^A year 

er tiro before thai, I believe. 
Please to go on to the next } — ^The next are 

tbe mations; the present ones are Sarah 
Smith, Mary Krt, and Eleanor Power. 

Are either of them the wives or widows of 
seunen?— Sarah Smith is the widow of a late 
captain in the Hospital; the other two are 
said to be unmarried. 

Are they daughters of persons that have 
been at sea ? — One of them, I heard, was sister 
to a lieutenant, that lord Hawke made some 
tone ago; he was drowned, and left his &- 
milj in great distress. Lord Hawke put her 
in as a matron. 

Had she any employment in lord Hawke's 
family, before she was sent to Greenwich 
Hospitd ? — Not that I know of. 

Had any of those matrons any employment 
in my lord Sandwich's family ? — Lord .Sand- 
vich was not at the board of Admiralty when 
aoy of those matrons were appoiiited. 

Who was at the head or the Admiralty 
liben they were appointed ? — Mrs. Power was 
put in, I have heara, by lord Egmont; the 
other two by lord Hawke. 

Do you find any before them that have 
been widows or wives of sailors? — Mary 
Chamberlain, who was before Mrs. Poorer, 
sras a captain's mdow; £llls Gregoxy was a 
captain's widow ; Elizabeth Smith was a lieu- 
tenant's widow ; the three first, I cannot learn 
vfaat they were. 

As &r as you have been able to learn any 
tlung about them, they have always, till now, 
been widows of seamen? — ^Yes, widows of 



I would ask, whether you think the beine 
miithig women ; we will say to either lora 
Anson's or lord Hawke's lady, or the lady of 
any others, that have been at the head of the 
Admiralty, entitles them to be {mt into the 
Hospital as matrons or nurses, or in any capa^ 
city m the Hospital ? — Certainly not. 

Go on to the next ?-— They are the butlers ; 
the present one is William Saward, who has 
been at sea. 

When was he appointed? — ^On the ^5th of 
r^mofy, 1772. 

Had he been at sea before his appointment, 
<v afterwards? — Before his appomtment, he 
vas clerk of one of the yachts, and had been 
maonr voyages, I believe. 

The next?— The next is John Izard; he 
bad not been- at sea, as I could learn. 

Who was at the head of the Admiralty 

when the last butler was appointed? — Lord 

Sandwich. The next are the butler's mates ; 

«c present ones are, James Skeene and Philip 
lewis. 

Have they been at sea?->Skeene has never 
«en at sea; JLcwis, I have Icanied* within 
VOL XXI. - 



this day or two, was going with sir Charles 
Wager, as his stewsuxl, but never went out of 
the Channel ; I received that information since 
the list was delivered in. 

Do you know anything relative to their 
predecessors ? — No, there are four of them ; I 
nave marked them, such as I have been able 
to coUect, that the butler's mates have all 
been at sea ; the two before that, John Watts 
and John Qieese, I can learn nothing, con- 
cerning them. 

Who was at the head of the Admiralty 
when the two stewards and the two last chap- 
lains were appointed ?— Lord Sandwich. 

Who appomts Uie butler's mates? --They 
are appointed by warrant from the Admiralty. 

£. of Sandwich. Don't you mistake? the 
butler's mates are not appointed by war- 
rant firom the Admiralty. — A, Yes, they are. 

Who are the next ? — ^The cooks. 

Who is your present cook ? —There are 
three, Alexander Moore, James Wartell, and 
Samuel Troke, now Wartell is dead. 

What is Troke?— He was at sea with my 
lord Anson ; Moore luis not been at sea that 
I can leafn. 

Who were their predecessors? — Henry 
White had been at sea ; Thomas Cale, Thomas 
Bird, and William Wilson ; the three prior to 
them, I cannot learn tiiat they had ever been 
at sea. 

But from your not being able to learn, you 
don't concluue whether they have or not ? — I 
have made the best enquiry that I could 
amongst the old persons in the Hospital. 

But those that you have not been able to 
learn any thing oi\ you don't from thence 
conclude they have been at sea or not? — No; 
the next are the cook's mates. 

Who are they ? — The last that stands upon 
the list is Roser Hunt, who has not been at 
sea; John IV&thews has been at sea; James 
ArundeU has not been at sea; Moses Joice 
has not been at sea. 

Who were their predecessors? — ^There are 
seven or eight; some of them have been at 
sea, and some have not been at sea. The 
next are the scuUerymen ; the present one is 
Nicholas Levitt; he has not been at sea. 

Who were his predecessors ? — Randolph 
Norris, Edward Griffith, John Bardin, Thomas 
Cole, William Steel, and Francis Steward; 
none of them, as I can learn, have ever been 
at sea. 

What is their employment? — ^The scouring 
the pewter pots and dishes of the pensioners. 

Tnere is nothing in that, but what a man 
that has been to sea might do ; is there ? — 
No, the next are the scullerymen's mates; 
they are assistants to the others ; the present 
ones are WiUiam Gardner, Robert Russell ; 
neither of them have been at sea ; preceding 
them, there were three others that had not 
been at sea ; then Arthur Knight and Jacob 
Stranger have been at sea ; those before them 
are William Silkworth and William Stalbert, 
who have not been at sea^ 

I 



115] 



18 GEORGE III. Tke Case nfCapiain fh&mai iSditU&, [i 1$ 



"Who are the next? — ^The porters of the 
Hospital ; the present one is James Lane ; he 
has nerer be^ at sea; John Willeyis his 
predecessor ; there are five of them never been 
at sea. 

What is the bimncss of the porter? — ^Hc 
has a lodge at one' of the gates of the Hos- 
pital. 

Is his business such that cannot be done 
by a seaman? — Certainly not; the barbers are 
the next. 

Have any of them been at sea?— The pre- 
sent one is James Mackeness, he had been at 
flea; he was, as I understood^ valet de cham- 
bre to my lord Anson. 

Have any of the rest of the barbers been at 
«ca ? — ^None of them. 

Is this Mackeness a barber? — Yes. 

Is that a place of any profit? — ^A very con- 
siderable one. 

To the best of your knowledge, does he at- 
tend ? — ^Never. 

It is a sinecure; is it? — Yes. 

The barber employs others ; he acts by de- 
puty, does he not r--Ves. 

How many deputies does he emplov? — 
Onlv one principal man; but he has a nun- 
dred other shavers under him. 

What profit may he have for doing nothing 
at all^— I don't know; I should suppose that 
he has about ISO/, or 130/. a year clear. 

Was not his employment of more value for- 
merly? — ^I have understood some years ago, 
from some complunts of the pensioners not 
being duly shaved, that his depu^ was paid 
something more in addition to his mi^. 

How much salary has he from the nosintal ? 
-•-Twelve^pounds a year. 

What does his profit arise from? — ^Hehas 
so much : a halfpenny a ^meek for all the men, 
and a penny for the boys. 

Who are the next?— The me s sengers. 

Who are they? — ^The present one is Wil- 
liam Herbert, he was at sea with lord Hawke. 
The next are treasurers clerks, the present 
one is Edward Boxley, he has been at sea. 
The next is ^e clerk of the works. 

Who b he?— The present one is Robert 
Mylne. 

Has he been at sea? — ^Not that I know of. 

What is his particular business? — ^Tocany 
en all such works and repairs as he may be 
directed to do, from the board of directors of 
the Hospital. 

Who was his predecessor ?-;-William Ro- 
binson. 

What is he? — An architect. 

Was he ever at sea? — ^No. 

Is this clerk of the works a permanent 
officer, or only a temporary one? — Formerly, 
the clerk of the works was only paid 59, a day, 
while new works were canying on^ but now 
there are works always going on, his place is 
looked upon to be permanent 

What IS the next article ? — The dispenser's 
assistant : the present one b William Wheat- 
ley,he has never N^en at sea. 



Is there but ona assistant?— Only one. 

Have his predecessors ever been at sea ?-^ *" 
Never aooe ofthem^ to the amount of nine. 
The next article is snrgeon's assistants, tha 

S resent vee Thomas Carnarvon, and David 
tacy Story; neither of them have been at 
sea. William Wallace, and Francis Thomas, 
their predecessors, both had been at sea. Th6 
next article b the tumeock of the Hospital^ 
Robert Dickey, he has never been at sea; there 
are but two before him; they bad neither 
been at sea. 

What is the next article?— The whale list 
b sone through. 

Is there not a schodmasler ? — Yes ; there is. 

Is Mr. Furbor the schoolmaster ?-~Yes. 

Was he ever at sea?— Not to my know- 
ledge ; there are some gentlemen that say he 
has been at sea. 

Do you know ahy body that can speak ta 
that point better than you? — ^Mr. Taylor, the 
surgeon of the Hospital, says he has been al 
sea. 

The steward's clerit, Mr. Daniri Ball ?— He 
is lodgdl in the house. 

Has he been at sea?— He does not stilfc 
himself in that hght, he has been at sea a few 
montiis, but does not call himself a seafaring 
man. 

What do yon mean by seafaring man ? — I 
understand a man that has been borne on 
board a ship's books, and has actually been 
at sea. 

So you think this one has actually been at 
sea? — ^Hehas. 

He hasmade a voyage ?— I cannot si^ that : 
I have heard him say he h^s been at sea, aiM 
borne on a ship's books. 

Do you iqpprehend that this person has 
been a voyage, and comes under tne descrip- 
tion of beins any ways qualified to partake of 
thb charity? — ^He b in the House, and caa 
best answer for himself. 

To the best of your knowledge, do you know 
of any new offices that have been lately intro» 
duced into the Hosfntal, that were not known 
before: that there was no foundation fbc ia 
any ola charter, or even in the new charter, 
that there b any provision fbrN— I don't at 
present recollect any. 

If I was to a^ you a question, woidd yon 
be able then to answer? Do you recollect a 
music-master in the Hospital, to instruct the 
boys in sinnng? — ^I know that the present 
organist haa an addition to hb salaiy, for 
e»:hing the boys to sing; I don't know of 
any new office. 

What was the additbn?—TwBOIy pounds a 



Was that addition made by the 
or general court?— -It was r ec om mended bj 
the gener^ court. 

Was there any directk>n ^ven to that ge* 
neral court, to the best of your knowledge, to 
name that person ?— I don't know of any. 

And you never heard ?-^No. 

[Mr. Maide withdrew.] 



llf} retpeOiHg iSesfhj/d Ho0fiid i^ Gminn^ A. D. 1778. 



[118 



Mr. AhiMs called m; 

W» jowfiuber the fii9tGha|^aiQ«f Greeo- 
wkh Hosptel ?-— Yes. 

Had he erer been at sea? — No ; he wasid- 
wwf% barae imoa a shu> in oWbnaiy; he was 
mimster of Woolinch fio^iital when be was 



' You say be was borne upon « ahq^ in ordi- 
aaiy, so are the preasnt chaplains ; you un- 
dentood tfa»t he was chaplain to the oidinaiy 
at Woohrich?— Yes. 

Kotbomeuponasl^p in indipaiyF— Yes; 
bis servant used to be mustered. 

Are not the present chaplains home oo 
board a ahip in oidinary ? — ^I cannot teU that. 

[Mr. Slubbs withdrew.] 

Xr» JntUc caned m again. 

Dojflwvaderatand Jmiw^ fRsentohap- 
kins are borne as belonging to Uie oidinaiy F 
—By virtue of being chaplains of Greenwich 
Ho^ital; one is eolerea upon the Hulk's 
book, at Woelwid^ the other at Defitford ; 
the two present chaplains are so, and it was 



Mr. 1StiM$ called in again. 

Was 3poar father borne upon the ordinafy 
before lie was chaplain? — Yes; he was made 
chaplain of Greenwich Hos|»tal, bf being 
boRie upon the books. 

Do tfiey ever contribute to the charity, by 
being boine in ordinai^y ^ ^^ Hospital?— 
That is a thiqg I cannot answer, it is so loi^ 



You are sure he never was at sea?-*Ican 
a^r l>e never was at sea to go a voyace. 

Were those chapbunsj by being oome ia 
ordinaiy, looked upon as bdeaging so to the 
Homtal, as to contabute any fu^ which 
chaplains have done who have been at sea, to 
the diarity of the Hospit^?— *I don't beheve 
that, I cannot aoeount for that» I don't know. 

Your fother was chaplain to the Hoapilai? 
i^Yes. 

How long«>?— In the year 1704 or 17i05. 
. Upon the test establishment of the Hos- 
pital?— The veir first of all. 

And was he looked upon as a sea-chaplain 
when he was put into the Hospital ? — I can- 
not account for tfaat^ the two first chaplains 
were taken fiom the ordinary. 

Taken Itobi the ordinary as sea chaplains? 
— ¥es; one from Woolwich, and the ether 
£iom I>ept(ord. 



Wedn€$d^y^ilArch 17, 1779. 

Mr. IUetem,'(tfae Secretary) called in agsdii* 

i think you ware desBred to make some 
search into what had been the practice of the 
Hft«pi1aJ^ relatiiM to the Tecommendation 
coouog fiom the general court to the Admi- 
ralty. Have you made any such researches? 
i^have. 



What is the result of them?-4 have kioked 
ov«r the books firom the commencement of 
the establishment of Greenwich Hospital to 
the present hour, with as much care as I have 
been able to do. in the short space of time ; 
for I hailtyraed them over pegs by page, that 
I misht not miss aa^ thing. The nrst thing 
I fina that has any relation to tins busloess, ia 
a memorial which appears in the books in 
November, 1704; thore b neithex the day of. 
the month nor s^poatur^ but it iis clearly in 
November; the memonal is firom the com- 
missioners to prmce George of Denmark, then 
lord high admiral, setting forth, that they had 
made preparations for 100 men; that was the 
first hundred that was taken into the Hos- 
pital; that tb^ had considered of the ofiioers 
and servanto necessary to be employed, and at 
the same time presenting his hignn^ a bst 
of candidates for the respective offices, that 
his royal highness might appoint such as to 
him might seem meet: these are the words of 
the recommendation. ^ In March 170^-8, Ed- 
ward Smith stands upon the minutes of the 
general court, as appointed cook's second 
mate, upon the recommendation of the direc- 
tors ana the oesnmiasioners;" and on the Ist 
of April I find entered into the books the 
prince of Denmark's warraiKt in form, appointr 
ing the same man. On the 6tk of January, 
1716, I find that the general court recom- 
mended six persons (naming them) to the 
board of Admiial^, for their approbation of 
either of them that they should tWk proper, 
if theiy should appear to their lordships to be 
duly oualified; tney were recommended for 
the omce of secretary, in the room of Mr. 
Vendrick, deceased. On the 9th of Deoend)er 
1716-17, Hhe general court recommended to 
the Adxniralty Mr. Thoi;iias Srowne, to be ap- 
pointed master brewer. On the 23d of the 
same month, thi^ recommended a lieutenant, 
Edward Smith, to the lords of the Admiral^^ 
to be appointed a clerk of the cheque, -and m 

June 17 S2, thc^ recommended Mr. ^ to 

be the master brewer. I don't find apy thing 
after that date. 

None since the year 17ftS ? — ^None. I find 
many recommendations fi:om the Admimltv 
to tbye general courts, to desire that they will 
recommend a perscm, such as the organist. 

How many books have you brought? — ^I 
have broMght those books. They are what I 
have made these extracts from, and I brought 
the books that I might refer to them. 

Put marks in them, and let them be handed 
up to the table ? — There are marks in tbem< 
there are papers which refer to the particular 
dates. 

(Tiie books and the papers were laid on the 
table.) 

You mention an instance of six reconn 
mended. One of those was appointed; was 
he not ?«— It was so. 

Was any one appointed, who was* not in- 
cluded in the reGommendation?«-It will ap- 



119] 



18 GEOllGfE ni. The Case qfCapiam Thomas BaUlie^ [ISO 



Eear by the books, that the list of these people 
as been omitted to be entered at the bottom 
of the memorial to the prince : they have not 
entered the names of the several' people then 
recommended. 

Does it not appear in any account of the 
Hospital, whether those persons were actually 
in the office afterwards? — ^It is impossible to 
know that, unless we knew the nersons re- 
coiimiended, and tiiere is no list ol tiiem. 

[Mr. Ibbetson withdrew.] 

Mr. Maule (Clerk of the Cheque) called 

in again. 

Whether from the list of different officers 
that have been appointed by warrant from the 
Admimlty, you nave made any computation 
of the number that have been appointed since 
the present lord has been at the head of the 
Admiralty? — I am preparing the list, I have 
not quite finished it, I shall soon have done it. 
ills grace the duke of Richmond ordered me 
to n^e such a list, a little before the House 
met; I immediatelv began to prei>are it. 

With rcjgard to those officers tnat are land- 
men, does It come within your knowledge that 
any of them have given any thing for their 
employment? — ^Not to my knowledge. 

Do you particularly know whether the chap- 
lains have made any allowance to the preced- 
ing chaplains for coming into office ? — I don't 
know farther than report; I cannot take it 
upon me to say it is so. 

Were not you in an office that received the 
pay, and did you always transmit that pay? 
What office were you in when these gentlemen 
were first appointed chaplains? — I was trea^ 
surer's clerk. 

As such, did you pay the chaplains ? — ^Yes. 

Did you pay it to them or their predeces- 
sors? — I cannot take upon me to say that at 
present. 

Recollect. — ^I have often paid the salaries of 
different officers to their relations or fiiends, 
upon their signing the books of the Hospital ; 
I don't recollect tne case of the chaplains at' 
present; 1 have frequentiy paid the officers' 
salaries to different people. 

Please to endeavour to recollect, whether 
YOU ever since the present chaplains have 
been appointed, have paid any of their pay to 
the late chaplains? — ^I believe I may. 

The late chaplains were Mr. Tindal and Mr. 
Campbell? — Yes. 

Wtio came in upon Mr. Tindal's resigna- 
tion ? — Mr. Cooke. 

Do you recollect whether you have or not 
paid any of Mr. Cooke's pay to Mr. Tindd, 
since he has been a chaplain? — I cannot take 
upon me to speak to that at present. 

Have vou paid any of the other chaplain's 
pay to Mr. Campbell } — ^No. 

I understood you to say before, that 3'ou 
thought you had paid some of their pay to 
their predecessors.^ — Some of Mr. Cooke's, I 
believe, I have paid; but I cannot say posi- 



tively, without referring to the books of the 
Hqspital. 

Do you think that by referring to your 
books you could speak more positively ? — ^Yes; 
I believe I could. 

What was Mr. Tindal's age when Mr. Cooke 
succeeded him? — I believe 8 1 or 89. 

Did not Mr. Tindal use to discharge the 
duty by deputy ? — ^For some years. 

And did not Mr. Campbell do the same?— 
They jointiy procured a person to do the duty 
for them. 

Did they lately perform the duty in person f 
Have they since lord Sandwich has oeen at, 
the board F — ^No ; very seldom. 

Was Mr. Tindal's curate lod^ in the Hos- 
pital ? — The curate of the Hospital had a room 
or two, and has been lodged for a great num- 
ber of years. / 

I think you said the other day, that Mr. 
Campbell, the chaplain of the Hospital, had 
ran away from a ship, and had Ibs R taken off 
afterwards; did you say that? — 1 believe { did. 

From whence did you gather that informa- 
tion? — From the navy office. I believe it 
may be proved from the books of the navy 
office, and the Admiralty books ; there is an 
order on the books of the Admiralty, by which, 
he received that five or six months pay. 

Do you know the particulars oi tnat run- 
ning away? — ^No; there are people that canr 
give an account of that, I believe. 

. Do you speak from hearsay? — ^I speak of what 
I saw upon paper, that Mr. Campbell had be- 
longed six or seven, or five or »x months to a 
ship, and had ran away; he had interest at 
the Admiralty, and had got that R taken ofi, 
and there is an order from the Admiralty for 
bis receiving his pay, and he did receive it. 

Can you tell wnat year that was in ? — ^No. 

Can you guess at all at it ? — ^No ; I cannot. 

Did you see it yourself? — ^No. 

Whether of late years, before the appoint- 
ment of the two present chaplains, the man 
appointed by Mr. Tindal and Mr. Campbell as 
their curate, for some time did not do the 
general duty of the Hospital ? — ^He did. 

Whether in Mr. Campbell and Mr. Tmdal's 
time, they ever did any duty at the infirmary ? 
— ^Never. 

Is there any duty done there now? — ^There 
is constanUy. 

You said that the present chaplains were 
entered upon the books of some ship, and that 
their pay went to the Hospital; I did not 
quite understand that, be so gO€>d as to ex*- 
plain it ? — By virtue of their appointment to 
Greenwich Hospital, one is borne upon the 
ordinary, which is the hulk at Deptford, and 
the other at Woolwich, and they receive the 
groats for their 8er\'ants and for themselves ; 
tne Hospital receives that, in aid from the 
treasury of the navy. 

When they are borne upon these iiulks, are 
they as chaplains to these ships? — ^Yes ; they 
are. 
When a clergyman b appointed chaplain t* 



ISI] fitipeeHng ike Royal HotpUal at Greewmkh. A. D« 1776. 



{in 



Greenwich Hofl|Mte], is it in conBequence of 
fab appoiMlui ent that be becomes chaplain 
also to a faolk ^— It has e^er been so since I 



Is it under one appointment, or are they 
separate? — They are separate appointments, 
biA fXD^ is in consequence of the otner. 

Now ibr what hulks are these gentlemen 
appointed chaplains? — I don't recollect the 
ntmes of the ships now. 

In these two snips, are there any men ? — 
There are men in the hulks ; the men that 
are lent from Greenwich Hospital; and all 
those men that are lent from otner ships that 
come frtnqk Deptibrd, they are all Tictualled in, 
and bonitfon board of the ordinary, and there- 
fore #11 the chaplains pay for that ship, and 
the wtele ordinary goes in aid lo Greenwich 
HospitaL 

Ek> the chaplains do any du^ in oonae^ 
quence of that? — ^No; none. 

Are they liable to be called upon for any 
duty ? — ^I never heard that they were. 

Then the additional appointments which 
are ^en to a chaplun, for nimself and for his 
servant, are converted to Greenwich Hospital, 
for the use of the Hospital ? — ^Yes. 

But they are paid and discharged for chap- 
lains of such a hulk ? — Yes, the treasurer for 
the navy pays the pay due to them, as chap- 
lains of tne hulk to Greenwich Hospital. I 
have paid it myself many times. 

Are not the ordinary the men that are em- 
ployed to do business, a^float, rimng, and se- 
voal things of that sort ? — ^AU a%at. 

Are they not paid as belonging to a hulk, 
not to a ship ? — ^They are paid as thonging to 
a hulk, not to a ship. 

To a hulk, which is an old ship, cut down 
with a pair of shears, and mast put in it ? — 
Yes. 

Then have they not four-pence a month out 
of every man's pay who is concerned in that 
yard ? — ^Ycs. 

Were you ever concerned in any other 
dock-yard ? — No. 

This four-pence a month is only a mode, if 
I understand you rieht, of sivine that pay to 
Greenwich Hospital, in aia of tne revenue of 
the Hospital ; if I understood you right, it b a 
sinecure at Woolwich and Deptfor^ because 
the men go to church in the parish churches, 
they being both in towns ; but at Portsmouth, 
Chatham, and Plymouth, the chaplain does 
the duty of the ordinary, and reads prayers to 
the ordinaiy? — ^Yes; there are church-ships 
there. 

These gentlemen do ne^duty, they are not 
sea-chaplains by being appointed chaplain to 
the ordinary? — No; certsunly not. 

Is it usual or not for these chaplains, who 
have served a regular time at sea, to pay any 
thing out of the pay so earned towards the 
chanty of Greenwich Hospital; I don't mean 
people who have been borne on board of ship, 
lor aii infrmt may be that? — The stoppages 
are ail made by the proper officers} it is not 



ill the option of the chaplain whether ke will 
contribute or no, all stoppages whatever are 
made at the pay-office : there is a stoppage 
made put of tneir pay always, regularly ev&y 
month, for Greenwich Hospital, whether they 
like it or not 

Do' you look upon persons to have a right 
to hold a chaplainship in Greenwich Hospital 
who can claim it no other ways than having 
having been borne on board of a ship, or an 
hulk ? You have seen the charter? — ^I have. 

Then you will answer the question I have 
put ? — I cannot give any answer to tlmt. 

Are you acquainted with the dock-yards of 
Portsmouth, Plymouth^ or Chatham, to know 
tke manner the chaplains do the duty and are 
paid there ? — No, I am not master of the sub- 
lect ^ I have been freauently there ; I have 
been on BOard a churcn-ship at prayers ; but 
how their proceedings are there, I cannot take 
upon me to say. 

Do you apprehend that the chaplains of 
those dock-yards are paid for the ordinary bu- 
siness, being paid by the dodc-yaord for the 
duty on board the church-ships? — They are 
not paid for the ordinary, I take it. They are 
separate chaplains, I think. 

You are not sure of that ? — ^I think it is so - 
but I will not be positive. 

Then we will come to Deptford or Wool* 
wich. Do you know, or have you ever heaid 
that there were two chaplains, one for- the or- 
dinary at Deptford, another tor the ordinaiy 
at Woolwich r Did you ever hear that ? — ^No, 
I never heard it. 

Upon the present establishment of the chap- 
lains for Deptford and Woolwich ; for I ap. 
prebend that one of the chaplains is borne on 
board the hulk at Deptford or Woolwich. Is 
it so? — ^Itis so. 

What becomes of that pay ? — ^I have said 
before, it eoes to the Hospital, in aid to the 
revenue : I have many years received it my- 
self, when I was the treasurer's deputy. 

Then since the Hospital has been establish- 
ed, there has been no duty done on board the 
ordinary of Deptford and Woolwich ? What 
does it amount to ? Is it considerable ? — ^Not 
very considerable. 

From what stoppage does it come ? — The 
treasurer of the navy makes the stoppages, 
and he pays it under the several heads ofchap- 
lains wages, and groats for the ordinaries. 

Are the chaplains for the ordinaries borne 
on board the hulks^ supposed to be chaplains 
of all the ships lying at that port ? — ^No, it 
has nothing to do with the ships at that port, 
only the men that are borne on board the 
hulks. 

Is not the chaplain of a dock-yard, chaplain 
of the whole ordinary, let it be Deptford, 
Woolwich, or Chatham? — ^I believe not, for 
this reason ; for if chaplains to the dock-yards 
werechaplainsto the whole ordiiuuy, Green- 
wich Hospital could not receive it at the same 
time. 

'There is a chaplain besides to Woolwich 



99] 



18 GEORGE IIL 



draught that was laid before me ; I will ven- 
ture to say, I should not have put it into any 
^rau^t, and will venture to say, I should npt 
have struck it out. I forgot to mention there 
was an act of parliament passed, in re wd to 
the landed estate, a year after this charter, 
which takes notice of the charter. 

I understood you, that the motives of the 
new charter was to vest the landed estates 
and give a power to buy and sell landed 
estates. — ^No, by no means, the ereat motives 
of the new charter were, to enable the Hospi^ 
tal to act in all those capacities that it was ne- 
cessary a corporation should act in ; because, 
it was before necessaiy to make every mem- 
ber of the Hospital a party in civil suits. An- 
other great motive was, to give the Hospital a 
security for their money. Another was the 
case of the boys. 

The other alterations of the charter were 
made by the solicitor, which you did not at- 
tend to ? — ^I cannot quite say so, because my 
own hand is before the House and may prove 
against me, but I rather believe it is so. 

Was the charter confirmed by act of parlia^ 
xaent? — Not strictiy, but there b an act to 
vef«t the estates, which were prior to the 
charter, and by charter were strictiy vested 
by two acts of Georee the Snd. There is an 
act, a year after this charter, which vests 
them out of the king into the commissioners, 
pursuant to charter, and which recites this 
charter at that time. 

It appears, by the Records, that this matter 
of charter had been in agitation several times 
formerly? — I believe from the beginning of 
the century. I believe there are draughts of 
charters as old as 1T20, but all that time the 
Hospital was in a fluctuating, unsettied body, 
and rather pressed for supports, and not in the 
magnitude ^t I found it. 

You take that to be the reason, when 
draughts were made, that the Hospital's reve- 
nues were not sufficient ? — ^I believe, when the 
Hospital erew to this magnitude, that the ne- 
cessity of getting a charter was felt ; and it 
was a work of some time, and great trouble, to 
get it through the several offices. 

What part of the establishment of Green- 
wich Hospital do you mean, that has not been 
settied till within this two or three years?— I 
believe additional captains and lieutenants, 
and men. and many officers to attend those 
men. All the business pf the management of 
the Derwentwater estate is a veiy modem 
story, and was never settied, in the manner it 
b now, till 1749. [Mr. Eden withdrew.] 

Mr. Sibthorpe, (late Solicitor to the Hospital) 

called in. 

Please to give an account to the Committee 
of what you Know relative to the new charter 
of Greenwich Hospital ? — ^About the beginning 
of the vear 1772 of 73, 1 am not ouite positive 
as to the time this circumstance happened in 
ihe Hospital, I was at that time, with Mr. 
Everest, joint solicitor of the Uo8piUtl» lieut^ 



The Case qf^apiain Thvmos BaiHie, (KlO 

nant-govemor Boys, when I was attending at 
the board, I believe it was March 1778, lieute^ 
nant-governor Boys was in the chair, at the 
head of tiie board, the solidtor was ordered lo 
be called in, and I went in. 

What board? — The board of directors of 
Greenwich Hospital, at the Hospital. The 
lieutenant governor said to me^ Mr. Ellis, 
Sir, is gone away vdth the Hospital^s money. 
I said ihad heard so. Then Sir, said he, you 
must contrive to get it. I said . I thought that 
was impossible, as the Hospital vnis then cir- 
cumstanced : I asked Mr. Boys how it was to 
be done. Sir, sud he, it must be done. I 
answcr«i, that might be very well in his idea^ 
but it was not possible, in mv opinion ;' for 
that there seemed to be no moae of setting at 
this money, but by filing a bill or information, 
in the name of the attorney general, ^t the r^ 
' lation of liie governor of tne HospitaL against 
Mr. Ellis for an account, and that before that 
business could hejgot to perfection, Mr. Ellts 
would be gone. There dia not appear to me to 
be any shorter vray, as no person whatever could 
possibly swear that Mr. Ellis was indebted to 
nim, or to a rope of sand, for so I caUed the 
Hospital at that time, it not beinjg incorporated. 
I was then directed, as solicitor, with Mr. 
Everest, to take the opinion of Mr. Eden, and 
I believe too of the attorney-general, as to 
the proper mode of proceeding against EULs. 
Some of the directors seemed to be struck with 
what I said, and thought it might beneces- 
sarv to have further powers vested iifmm, 
and that there shoiUa be a charter, and that 
gave rise to this charter in a very snort tim^ 
aiW, perliaps even a4 the same board ; hut^ 
in a very short time after, the board of direc- 
tors came to a resolution that a charter should 
be applied for in the common course of busi- 
ness. Whcnthe minutes were brought to the 
solicitor, the business was set about; Mr. 
Everest drew the first draught and broudht it 
to me, he having, I believe, under my oiiec- 
tions, applied for and ^t uie charter for in- 
corporating the Foundling Hospital, and took 
that, in some degree, 98 a mode for the words; 
pf course, afler he had made his first drauehtp 
he brought that draught to me, in whiSi I 
made several alterations, and after I had niadc 
those alterations, that draught was copied aad 
laid before Mr. Eden: Mr. Eden, I think, I 
am pretty sure too. made some small altera^ 
tions in the draugnt so kid before him, and / 
also drew out a paper in which he prescribed 
other alterations, and, in pursuance of which 
direction from tdi. Eden, I did, in that draught, 
make more alterations than I had in the 
former draught, my lords. The miAters being 
in that state, Mr. Eden returned the draught* 
and said, tluit he thou§^ it was a pn^er 
draught; and then,I take it, that the draught 
itself was copied and laid before the then at- 
torney-general, another oopv was made for 
the soUcitor general, and a third copy for Mr* 
Eden, with mtent that they should meet to- 
gett^r in consultation, and s^Ule the chartfic 



JOi] retp&ftmg the iayal tto^fUal at Greewanch* A. D. Vn^* 



[lOS 



h oug^ to be. After the bbsiness was 
got into that stage, there was a meeting be- 
Iveeii the tbei^aMomey and solicitor general, 
and Mr. Eden^ at which I was present. I 
liaDk, and am pretty certain too, though I 
have not had any connection with the Hospi- 
tal ibr about three years past, therefore if I 
or it maybe easily allow&d me, that there 
WBre 9mo» alterations made in the copy, 
iduch Mr. Wedderbum had as his copy; 
there was a directi(» also at the bottom of one 
of these oopies, signed by the then attorney 
general, zbA Mr. Wedderbum^ directing the 
le tiaiiy clause to* be added to it; that clause 
was also drawn,, and they approved it. In the 
course of this business the cnarter, or draught 
of the ciiarter at least, was laid before tne 
board of directors, I think more Uian once : it 
WB8^ towards the close of the busfawss, laid 
MoFo tiie general court, and it was at that 
time, and I believe the only time, that I was 
ever called into the general court to be asked a 
(juestMA^ respecting that charter. I had ex- 
pressed- mv* doubts what the stile of the Hos- 
^tal should be ; I thought the word commis- 
flioner was not a proper one, because it was a 
charter^ and not a commission : I thought the 
word governor not a very proper one, there 
Mi^ aaother governor, or a particular officer 
called a governor : I thought the word guar- 
ifiaD; which I believe is part of the title of 
Foundling Hospital,, an improper thing. 
Ksvmg signifiedf these doubts, I was called 
iata a eeneral court of admiralty, at the head 
of -whiSi board lord Sandwich was, and having 
been asfced, I am not sure by whom, I thinS 
Mr. Stephens^ what I had to say respecting 
the title? I made nearly the same obser- 
vatwRsthen that I have now. Lord Sand- 
wich said, it did not seem to signify one far- 
Ifaiog wtet tiiey were* called, so that they 
were incorporatea by some title, upon which I 
withdrew. Theseare the genml outlines of 
a4iat I have had to do, m respect of this 
charter. It was my duty, after the business 
iMkd been gone through at ^e Admiralty, 
Mng older and having had more experience 
than, Mir. Everest, to conduct the matter, 
more espedally as I lived in town and he at 
GreeBwich, and I prosecuted the charter till 
it got under the great seal ; and, I think, the 
first Saturday, or perhaps the second in De- 
cember, 1775, I carried the charter to the 
Hospital, and thought that I had done the 
moflt noble act that I should ever do, if I 
lived an hundred years. 

Whether you recollect which were the 
alteiations that were made by yourself, before 
it was sent to the attorney and solicitor-gene^ 
ral, and Mr. Eden, and which were made by 
those gentlemen afterwards ?-^I cannot say as 
to the purport of them now, if I had the pa^ 
pers^ I believe I could point them out^ 

Are th^ the papers which are before the 
House I — ^1 b^eve they are. 

(Some papers shewn the witness.) 



This is the draudit as first prepared bv Mr. 
Everest, and brougnt by him to me ; tne al- 
terations made are in my hand-writing, and 
are numerous. 

I don't mean to give you the trouble of 
mentioning every ven>al alteration you have 
made, but to particular points ; the first is^ 
the omitting tne oower to the general court, 
and giving it to uie Admiralty ; the second, 
the power of removal in the Admlralt^r ; the 
third, the appropriation of these monies for 
the use of the Hospital; the fourth is, the 
power of sellins ? — ^As to one of these ques-' 
tions, ^e words of this first draught, as it 
originally stood, were those. " And that the 
said governor, and deputy-governor, and the 
treasurer now and for the time being, do as- 
^st at all meetings, the said commissioners 
and governors, or the directors, of the said 
Hospital hereafler mentioned ; and we do 
hereoy empower our said commissioners, or 
any seven or more of them, to recommend to 
our commissioner for executing the ofBce of 
high admiral now and for the time being, our 
high admiral, for the time being, or as thev 
may be, to appoint, from time to time, all 
officers necessary to be employed in and for 
the said Hospital.'' These words were in this 
draught, when Mr. Everest first drew it and 
brought it to me. 

Is the word * accordingly' there ? — No, I 
altered it in this way. " And we do hereby 
empower the members of this corporation, or 
any seven or more of them, so assembled in a 
general court, to recom^iend to our high ad- 
miral, for the time being, or our commission- 
ers for executing the onice of high admiral, 
now and for the time being, to appoint, fi-om 
time to time, all officers necessary to be em^- 
ployed in and for the said Hospital." And it 
appears by this draught, that upon reconsi- 
dering that clause, I struck it wholly out. 

Will you be pleased to recollect, whether it 
was of your own motion, or from instructions 
from any body else, that you did strike that 
clause out ? — ft was either from my own mo- 
tion, or conjunction with Mr. Everest, in con- 
sidering the matter again, and not from any 
person whatever, except himself and me, that 
that alteration was mane so. 

What might be your reason for striking of 
that out?— 5 cannot possibly say what my 
reason was, but I am well convinced ii\ my 
mind, that at the time I did it, I had good 
reason for so doing ; for I had no wish what- 
ever to do anv thing but prepare such a charr 
ter as should be for the benefit of the Hospi- 
tal, in all its parts, as far as my judgment 
should extend. 

Do you recollect any abuse that had been 
made," bv that power in the general court, 
that made you think it necessary to strike it 
out ? — I have endeavoured a great deal to re- 
collect since what I heard passed from Mr. 
Eden, that there was any such power prac- 
tised by the general court, but during the 
time I had the management of the business of 






103] 



18 GEORGE lU. The Case of. Captain Thomas BmlUe, [101 



the Hospital^ eeneral courts were Terr imfre- 
quent ; four, nve, even to nine months haVe 
elapsed, from one general court to another. ^ 

Had you any information from any body, 
that the genend court had not made use of 
that power ? — ^Not that I know of. 

Upon what ^ound do you say they had not 
made use of it ? — I don't say they had not. 
but that I did not know they had. I haa 
nothing to do with the appointment of 
officers. 

Had you any reason to think that they had 
not made use of that power? — ^I rather think 
I had no particular reason, more than that 
the general courts were held so seldom, there 
seemed no necessity to continue that pnower ; 
that it might be injurious to the Hospital, if 
the officers should be delayed nine or ten 
months. 

Was there not a power for the Admiralty 
to call general courts when they thought 
proper ? — I do not recollect that, I have not 
seen the commission these three years. 

The other alterations were the additional 
power given of a displacing or removal ? — That 
was an alteration in pursuance of Mr. £den*s 
direction, this draught having been copied 
from my alterations hy my son ; this is that 
copy. Mr. Eden, when he looked through it, 
has made marks in the margin; and u])on 
loose paper, gave his thoughts respecting 
what alterations should be made in such ana 
such places ; he has also made several other 
trivial alterations in the draught, as he goes 
on; in this draught, folio leven, there is 
tomethine which I am well convinced in my 
mind is Mr. Eden's; and these words are 
underlined, afler the words '^ except the cover- 
xiors and treasurer of the said Hospital pro- 
vided that all such persons to be admittea mto 
the said Hospital, as the officers of the House, 
or otherwise^ be seafaring men, or such who 
have lost their limbs," down to the words, " or 
otherwise," are underlined ; and in conse- 
quence tbls alteration was made^ *^ except the 
governor and treasurer thereof, and to dis- 
place, remove or suspend any such officer or 
officers for his or their misbehaviour, and to 
appoint any such officer or officers in the 
room of him and them so displaced or re- 
moved, provided that all such officers to be 
employed in the said office are seafaring men." 
These words are my writing, in pursuance of 
^r. Eden's directions. 

Do you know what were the reasons in Mr. 
Eden's directions, for leaving out the words 
•* or otherwise T— That will appear I believe 
upon that paper of Mr. Eden's writing. 

(The Paper read.) 

In the power eiven to vacate the offices, 
and to alter the salaries, that is all upon a re- 
presentation of the general court upon Mr. 
£den|s plan, how came it to be 'different from 
that in the charter? — I have no doubt, but 
these words as they stand in this draught so 
nserted^were shewn to Mr. Eden ai\er they 



were so inserted, and that he approved them ^ 
the words are these : ^* And we do hereby au^ 
thorise and empower our high admiral for the 
time being, ana commissioners, &c. to lypoint 
all officers necessary to be employed in. and 
for the said Hospital, except the governor and 
treasurer thereof, and to displace, &c." 

With regard to the other two alterations,, 
the leaving out these words in the charts, that 
say, all monies shall be applied strictly to the 
use of the ssud Hospital. — ^I believe they were 
lefl outj^ as being thought wholly unnecessary,, 
for the inserting them would have no kind of 
effect, more than the law would have on those 
who took the money. 

And the power of selling, who put that in ? 
— ^I 16ok upon it, so much as I know of char^ 
ters, that the charter would be incomplete^ 
unless such a power were inserted, tboueh 
perhaps it woula not be efiGsctual to enable ue 
corporation to sell. 

What I want, is to know who was the per- 
son that inserted that, and was it in the origin 
nal draughty as sent to you by Mr. Everest? — 
They were m the first draugnt. 

So that they are inserted by Mr, Everest 
originally ? — ^YeSr 

Has there always been a joint solicitor, or 
was it peculiar to that time ? — I have h«uicl 
that Mr. Radley, and Mr. Everest's father, 
were joint, but I don't know it of my own 
knowledge ; I did not know Mr. Radley. 

The powers, as I understand you, for fram- 
ing this new charter, were not given you at a. 
general court, but by lieutenant governor Boys,, 
at a court of directors. — ^No, by the minute of 
the board, not by the directions of any one 
man ; I ^nk the minute of the board of di* 
rectors, but I am not sure whether it was that, 
or the minute of a general court; I rather 
think the minute of a board of directors. 

Where was it held ? — The general court al- 
ways at the Admiralty, the board of directors 
is neld generally, but not universally^ at 
Greenwich, or Saltcrs-hall. 

Then you can certainly recollect, whether 
your power came from the general court, or 
board of directors? — I cannot say that. 

Had you powers in writing? — ^We had, for 
we never did any thing without power in writ- 
ing. 

Signed by whom ? — The secretary. 

Who is Uiat } — Mr. Ibbetson. 

Where is that? — I delivered it, with all the 
papers I had respecting Greenvach Hospital,, 
when I quitted London about three years aco* 

Can you recollect what the powers wereX— 
To prepare a charter,, under tne direction of 
Mr. Eden, as I think^ and am pretty sure too»~ 

Without particulariring the alterations that 
were to be made in it? — ^Without describing 
any alterations at all. 

Do you apprehend, that a board of directors, 
without consulting a general court, have a 
pow^r to order new charters to be made out, of 
their own accord ? — I think that they mifiht 
have that power, but am not sure which ilr 



J053 rtipeeUng the Rcjfol HtapUal of Greitmch. . A. D. 1778« 



CMW 



wwa, Ihe general court's minute, or the direc- 
tonf minute; I am not sure, but the minute 
vfll speak for itself. 

£^ where are these minutes ? — The origi- 
nal in the hands of the secretary, Mr. Ibbet* 
son ; the copy came to me. 

You have mentioned what lord Sandwich . 
said to you at the board, that it did not signify 
under what name, provided they were incor- 
porated. I will a^ ymx whether you had any 
other conversation with lord Sandwich,, rela- 
tire to the charter, and whether he ever gave 
}fou any directions relative to it, except that 
time? — I had never any conversation ¥dth 
him I think upon any subject, and never any 
Erections fVom him of any sort whatever, ex- 
cept what I mentioned. 

Whether in the number of years, that you 
banged to Greenwich Hospital, previous to 
the charter beine granted, you ever knew of 
one instance of we genersd court recommend- 
ing any officer ? — ^No. 

Honv many years have you been acquainted 
with the omce? — ^I was first concerned as 
agent for Mr. Everest's father, about the year 
1766. 

You must explain that if you please; you 
sudy that you never knew that the general 
court had recommended officers to the board 
of Admiralty, to be appointed for Greenwich 
Hospital. Have you said that? — ^I have said 
so. 

Had such a thin^ happened, must you have 
been acquainted with it ? — It does not follow 
ihaX I should. 

Did you attend the general court ? — Yes. 
Where? — ^At the Admiralty, they were 
never held any where els^ as. I^ know of. 

Why were the eeneral cotirts reduced to 
twice a year instead of four times ; ' for by the 
commission, they are to be held four times a 
year, and oftener if the Admiralty board called 
them- why was that alteration made ? — ^lean- 
not take upon me to say that. 

Can you take upon you to say, who made 
that alteration ? — ^I cannot without having re- 
course to the papers. 

Whctiier you carried the draught of this 
new charter to the consultation alluded to, of 
the attorney and solicitor-general ? — The co- 
pies were either carried by roe or Mr. Everest, 
or one or other of my clerks, but to say which 
at this time, I cannot ; I did attend the consul- 
tation. 

At that consultation, did you point out to the 
attorney and solicitor-^neral, the alterations 
made in the draueht <? the new chartei;, from 
what was in the old commission ? — The attor- 
ney-general was in possession of a commis- 
aon ; he had been auditor, and as such, doubt- 
less had a commission, and I think I remem- 
ber to have seen it in his custody bound in red 
leather; the solicitor-general, I have no 
^doubt, had a commission, Mr. Eden, as an au- 
ditor, could not have executed his office pro- 
peily without one ; I therefore conclude he 
huA one, but to say that I pointed out the diL 



ference between the comnussion and the char- 
ter, I cannot 

> Do you remeinber thaft it was a subject of 
the consultation, whether those alterations 
were proper to be adopted in the new charter 
or not ?-^I don't know that; Mr. Wedderbum 
did make some alterations at the consultations 
in the form, and the then attorney and solici- 
tor«2eneral did subscribe one copy, and I 
think the writing itself is of Mr^ Wedder- 
bum's writing. 

Then you know, finom these circumstances^ 
that they were- fully aware that these ahera-' 
tions were made in the new charter ? — I can- 
not take upon me to say, that the attorney 
and solicitor-general, or either of them, did 
compare the charter with the commission. 
Some short time before the charter passed the 
seal, the then attorney-general requested U> 
see the old commission ; he de^red to see 
those commissions which had been granted 
by former prmces, and they were carried to 
his house in Ormond-street ; af^r the charter 
was completed, I fetched them from thence. 

It was not a matter that you heard discuss- 
ed at the consultation ? — The principal matter 
that was discussed at the consultation, was re- 
specting the security that should be given by 
those that had the receipt, or expenmture, of 
the Hospital money. 

When I speak of the alterations, I allude to 
the four particular points that have been stated 
to you ? — ^I don't tnink they were particularly 
attended to at that time. 

How long was this consultation beibve the 
charter passed the seal ?— The paper will shew 
you, because there is the signature of the then 
attorney and solicitor-general, with the date 
to it, as I think. 

You don't recollect ? — No, but dare say th* 
paper will tell you, because, I dare sav, thera 
was a date to it [Mr. Sibthorpe withdrew.}. 

Mr. Ibhetson called in. 

How long have you been concerned in 
Greenwich Hospital?— Seventeen years, next 
May, I have been appointed secretary to 
Greenwich Hospital. 

What has been the practice of the jgenend 
court, with respect to recommendations to 
offices? — ^I am very certain that there has 
not been, in one instance, not only since I 
have been secretary of Greenwich Hospital, 
but since I have been in the Adbmiralty, 
which is 34 vears, the eeneral court having 
recommended to the Admiralty, any one 
officer to be appointed into Greenwich Hos- 
pital. 

Do you recollect, finom any documents thai 
you Imve in your possession, whether there 
ever were any recommendations, from the ikst 
institution of the Hospital ? — ^I believe therm 
was ; I believe it will appear, upon examining 
the books of Greenwich Hospital, that, for 
some few years after its first establishment, I 
think that I have seen that the general court 
did recommend to the Admiralty,; but I W* 



131] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case qfCaptdn ThomM BaiOie, [139 



^m€^ past, slaughtered bulls, which were cut 
up for the use ot the pensioners, brought down 
to Greenwich Hospital, and served up at their 
tables. I represented this to sir Charles 
Hard^, the governor, desiring he would lay the 
depositidns before the board of directors, that 
the contractor might be prosecuted; they 
were laid before the board ot directors, and he 
was prosecuted; but the prosecution was car- 
ried on in such a desultory manner, that it was 
a whole year before it was brought to an issue. 
I set oil at first with six witnesses, most of 
them the butcher's own servants, at last they 
dwindled away to only two, the prosecution 
was so tedious ; and long before it came to 
issue, one man I was obliged to secrete in the 
coimtry, where he was not known, or clse^ I 
believe, I should have lost that man also, and 
have had no evidence at all. 

Did these six witnesses make affidavits? — 
No, only three; I thoiight it would not be so 
proper to take them all to be sworn before I 
came into a court of justice ; so I took three only 
to be examined before the magistrate, the pro- 
secution was carried on, the butcher was con- 
victed, but I should have told your lordships, 
whilst he was under prosecution, the directors 
thought proper to renew the contract with the 
same man, though there lay before th^m in- 
formation upon oath, that he had cheated the 
Hospital ; I objected to that contract, but it 
was to no purpose. 

What court of directors was that? call for 
the/minutcs of that court, to see who were 
present? — I don*t know the number of the 
du'ectors, but it will appear by the minutes, it 
was in June 1775; I believe the depositions 
were laid before the board of directors; the 
contract was renewed in the March following; 
in the mean time I will inform yoiu- lordships, 
that while he was under this prosecution, a 
•econd contract was renewed with the same 
man, afler he was convicted of frand. 

(Mr. Ibbetson produced the book of the Mi- 
nutes of the Di^tors) 

' '^ A minute of the board of directors of the 
14th of June 1776; present, sir Charles 
Hardy, captain Baillie, captain Hood, Mr. 
Fonnereau, Mr. Pet^ Mr. Steward, Mr. Cust, 

Mr. , Mr. Hicks, sir Peter Dermis, Mr. 

Barker, Mr. Marsh, Mr. James, the rev. Mr. 
Cooke, captain Campbell, and Mr. Palgrave. 
The governor laid before the board a paper, 
which had been brought to him by the lieute- 
nant-governor, containing the affidavit of 
James Hattersiey and John Boycot, two per- 
sons late in the service of the butcher, and 
Alexander Moore, cook, first mate, setting 
forth, that the Hospital has, for some time 
past, been served with the flesh of bulls and 
bull-stags, instead of that of oxen, agreeable 
to the contract. Odered, that the solicitor 
lay the 'said affidavits and the butcher's con- 
tract before Mr. Newiiham, and take his opi- 
nion in what manner it is propei^ to proceed 
ugainst the contractor.'' 



Capt Baillie, In March following the con- 
tract was renewed again. 

Mr. Ibbetson, There is something which 
followed this, the sohcitor, oh the 14th of 
June, the very day the affidavits were brought, 
it was desired to take an opinion in what 
manner the butcher could be prosecuted. At 
the very next meeting, which wa9 the 24th of 
that month, the solicitor delivered to the board 
Mr. Newnham's opinion upon the case, laid 
before him in consequence of the resolution 
of the last board, &c. Whereby he recom- 
mends, that both the present and former con- 
tractor should be prosecuted on their re- 
spective bonds, for not having compfied with 
their contracts ; ordered, that the solicitor do 
cause prosecutions to be immediately com- 
menced against them, agreeable to the said 
opinion. 

Are there any other orders of the board re- 
lative to this business, between the order and 
the renewing of the contract? — ^No. On th«^ 
13th of March, 1776, present sir Ch|u:lei 
Hardy, captain Baillie, captain Hood, Mr. 
Fonnereau, Mr. Pett, Mr. Steward, Mr. Cleve- 
land, Mr. Hicks, Mr. Barker, Mr. Wells, Mr. 
James, the reverend Mr. Cooke, captain Camp* 
bell, Mr. Wells, and sir Richard Bickerton^ 
proposals were given in for supplying the Hos- 
pital with meat ; and Mr. Mellish the present 
collector, offering to do it at 1/. 12<. per hun- 
dred weight, his proposal was found conside- 
rably the lowest, and was accepted. Ordered 
that the solicitor prepare a contract between 
the Hospital and Mr. Mellish accordinglv. 

Are those contracts determined by ballot or 
a division ? fii what manner is it settled ? — 
The method of contracting with Greenwich 
Hospital is, advertisements are always pub- 
lished, and people that are inclined to servs 
the Hospital, give their tenders in writing 
those tenders are sent in sealed to the board, 
and the general practice has been, that before 
they are opened^ the people are called in; 
they write tneir names on the outside, and are 
asked, whether those are the lowest proposals ; 
if they say yes, they are desired to withdraw^ 
and then it is opened ; tliat has been the con- 
stant practice ; I don't say^ whether it has al- 
ways been the practice, for it has been thought 
a useless thing latterly to call them in, aner 
once they have sent in their proposals sealed, 
tlien the lowest proposer is the man who has 
it ; I never rcmem>»er any division about it. 

You were present at this court, were you } 
— I was present ^ the one in 17 7 6. 

Do you recollect that any objection waa 
made to renewing the contract with the per- 
son who was then under a prosecution by that 
very board ? — I don't recollect in 1776, if any 
^'as made in 1777, I cannot say, because I 
was not present then. 

Whether after the contract was made once 
to Mr. Mellish, was there any proof ^ven of 
Mr. Mellish's having served the Hospital with 
any meat that was improper or was there 
any fault found with his peiionnance of the 



139] respecting the Royal Hospital nt Greenwich. A. D. 1778. 



[134 



renuiiUDg part of the contract, after this gen* 
tleman was turned out ? — ^At the first contract, 
afio- the affidavits^ I mean the contract in 
1776, the matter had not been brought to 
trial, consequently he had not been convicted. 
and must be looked upon, I apprehend, till 
nth ooaviction, as an mnocent man. 

W8& or was not this person who was com- 
pkuned of, continued aider there had proof 
been given of his serving the Hospital with 
had meat ; I think it has come out that he 
was discontinued? — ^No, it does not appear 
that he was discontinued. 

Was not the contract given to Mr. Mellish ? 
— ^YeSy he was the person that was prosecuted. 

Was there any other person that that con- 
iract was ofiered to, I understood you so ? — 
No. 

If there had been any objection made to 
renewing the contract with this person, by 
their method of keeping the minutes, that 
objection would appear ? — It certainly would, 
if It had been an oDjection made to the board ; 
if any one of the members present, had de- 
sired that his dissent might have been entered 
in the minutes, it certainly would, but it is not 
usual to take aown in mmutes, any thing a 
ainsle member says. 

Would it have appeared, if it had been de- 
•lexmined by a majority ?— -Certainly it would. 

Was captain &illie present at that first 
meeting? — He was. 

It does not appear that captain Baillie did 
object? — ^It does not appear by the minutes. 

You were present, dia he in hci object ? — I 
^on^t recollect that he did. 

Can you refer to the advertisement, and the 
^nm of it ? — ^I cannot produce the form of the 
advertisement, we do not keep any copy of 
them, they are things of course. 

From your recollection of them, are those 
advertisements of such a nature as to oblige 
the court to give it to the lowest bidder ? — 
No, there is nothing obligatory to the adver- 
tisement; it is for such persons as may be in- 
clined to give in their proposals at SalterV 
hall at such a day, and such a time, and they 
are to do it agreeable to a form, wnich they 
will receive at the proper office at Greenwich 
Hosmtal, where, by the advertisement, they 
are oirected for the form. 

Is there any thing said in the advertise- 
ment, that the lowest bidder's terms will be 
accepted? — ^Not at all. 

But it has .been the constant practice among 
the directors to take the lowest ? — ^Yes, ever 
since I have been there. 

A to Captain Baillie. Did you object at 
that board of directors? — A. ' I did positively 
object to Mr. Mellish's having a renewal of 
hb contract ; the answer vras, it was a mere 
natter of suspicion, and that those servants of 
the butcher who nad given evidence, were 
under prosecution themselves, for stealing the 
contractor's meat; therefore their evidence 
Might oat to be taken at all, upon that I said 
tH) wnffe, the contract was renewed. The 



prosecution commenced in June, 1775, it was 
not brought to issue till June, 1776: ailer 
that it appeared, that Mr. Melhsh had, prior 
to this contract^ supplied the Hospital with 
bull-beef for a considerable time. 

How does it appear? — Upon the affidavits 
of the different persons earned before the ma- 
gistrate, they had sworn to different contracts; 
one man to the contract then existing, another 
to the contract prior to that, and I moved it 
to the board, that he might be prosecuted for 
that contract also. Mr. £den was a principal 
person that assisted to bring on that prosecu- 
tion, which continued another whole year. 

What was the event of the first prosecu- 
tion?— He was prosecuted only for ten penal- 
ties, but I believe a hundred might have been 
proved in the course of that contract; he was 
convicted upon ten penalties. 

Were vou at the trial ? — I was. 

You heard the sentence pronoimced.^ — I 
heard it pronounced by the judge and jury, 
that he was convicted for ten penalties, they 
brought the action for 100/. only. 

You say you objected when the contract 
was renewed, whilst he was under a prosecu- 
tion? — ^Yes. 

You say somebody objected to your objec* 
tion, do you recollect who that was? — I re- 
member very well, if it is proper to mention 
names, which 1 would rather wish to decline ; 
Mr. Marsh, formerly a commissioner of the 
victualling, did declare, that he had heard the 
butcher's men were under prosecution, for 
stealing the contractor's meat, and that de- 
fence was set up for him in the King's-bench. 
which appeared to be entirely groundless, and 
without a shadow of foimdation ; on the se- 
cond prosecution I was ready in court with 
five witnesses; he was prosecuted for fifty 
penalties, for fifly breaches of contract. . 

In what year was tliat? — 1777. 

This man was convicted in ten penalties, 
for ten breaches of contract; I suppose there 
was in the contract a penalty of 10/. for each 
breach of the contract) — Yes. 

Was there or not a general penalty besides, 
for the breach of the contract? — I understood 
that the penalty of 10/. was merely to oblu;e 
him to Dring his meat in due time, that the 
people might have their dinners at the proper 
hour, and a general bond for the performance 
of his covenant in 300/. 

Was the next contract renewed with Mr. 
Mellish before the second trial or not ? — Hav« 
ing been convicted in the ten penalties, after 
that the contract was renewed with him, then 
a second prosecution was carried on. 

Was the second contract renewed with him, 
before the compounding the second trial ? — 
Yes, afler he was convicted on the first trial, 
he compounded the penalties on the next. 

When was that ? — ^He was prosecuted first 
in 1775; he was convicted in 1776; and .in 
1776, there was a fresh prosecution carried on 
against him, for fifly other breaches of his 
contract 



135] 



18 GEORGE UL The Case ofCapiain Thtmas Baitty:, ^S6 



You don't understand me ; when the con- 
tract was renewed a second time, was it pre- 
vious to his compounding the penalties, for 
the second prosecution, or after? — The iist 
contract was after he had compounded the 
penalties. 

Give an account of compounding the pe- 
nalties. — He had several times petitioned the 
board of directors, acknowledging himself in 
the wrong, and would have submitted entirely 
to their Humanity, or goodness towards him ; 
the prosecution was ordered to be carried on, 
and it was brought into court, and I had five 
witnesses ready to convict him, when it was 
all on a sudden compounded for 100/. though 
he was charged with fifty breaches : and, after 
that composition of the penalties, the contract 
was rencTi-ed again, and he still serves Green- 
wich Hospital. 

Whellier there were not two of the same 
name concerned ? — Father and son. 

Distinguish when the contracts were made, 
who were prosecuted, the father or the son? — 
I believe the &ther and the son were the 
tome ; for my part, I could nevar distinguish 
the principal; the son took upon him the 
contract the last time, in his own name, I be^ 
lifcve. 

In whose name was it?— They were both 
Earned Peter. 

Were they both joined in it? — ^In fact, I 
believe tiiey were ; after they had compound- 
ed the penalties, the contract was put up 
aeain, and Mr. Mellish proposed ; I objected 
then, and hoped, and entreated the board that 
they would not deal any more with a person 
♦rho had been convict^ of fraud, and after- 
wards compounded the p.enalties: I addressed 
inyself to Mr. Marsh, who had been a com- 
Aussioner of victualling, and asked him, if at 
the victualling board, a hop contractor, that 
had cheated tnem, had not been excepted by 
public advertisement? 

But we shall hear that from him.— The 
eontract was . renewed again with the very 
person. 

At that lime?— In March, 1778. 

Q. to Mr. Ibbeisan. What was the next 
time to that, after the man was convicted, 
that the contract was renewed?— -4. Those 
have been yearly contracts; the second time 
Was m March, 1777. 

0. to Captain Baillie. What is the date of 
the conviction ?— J. June, 1776, he was con- 
victed in the ten penalties. 

Does any thing appear in the books, rela^ 
tive to that conviction, since the time you 
have read, and before the time you are coins 
to read .?— Yes, there does. , 

I beg that may be first stated.- Mr. 
Ihbetson reads : " On the 12th of June, 1776, 
the solicitor, by his letter of this date, ac- 
midnted the board^ that in consequence of 
their directions, two actions had been brought 
against the contractors for siipplying the Hos- 
pital with butcher^ meat, for having served 
bull beef, and bulUtag beef, instead of , good 



fat ox beef, agreeable to contract ; one of the 
actions on the former contiact, the other on 
the last ; that, by advice of counsel, the action 
on the last contract only was thought proper 
to be pfoceeded upop; in consequence of 
which. It was brought on to a trial, befote lord 
Mansfield and a special jury, when a verdict 
was given for the Hospital, of 100/. besides 
costs of suit, and costs of the special jury ; it 
was then immediately ordered, that he bo 
prosecuted for the penalties on the other con- 
tract. iDtii March, 1777, present sir Charles 
Hardy, captain Hood, sir John Major, Mr. 
Hicks, sir Peter Dennis, &c, proposals Were 
given in for supplying the Hospital with 
butcher's meat, and Peter Mellish, jun. th6 
present contractor, havine offered to do it for 
1/. 18<. per hundred weight, his proposal waft 
found to be considerably the lowest, and was 
therefore accepted." 

Was that Mr. Mellish, jun. the prekint eon- 
tractor, the same Mr. Mellish who had been 
convicted of the fraud upon the Hospital? — 
I believe it is the same Mr. Mellish. 

Does any objection appear to have beerL 
made ? — ^I was not present at the board ; there 
does not appear to be any by these mimites; f. 
have brougnt the propoMils hither, there were 

Eroposals, and here they are, in the ori- 
, as presented to the board of directors ^ 
tne from Peter Mi^ish, which is the 
father, his offer was, for twelve Aipnths, at 54^ 
and 4d. a hundred weight. Mr. Peter Mel- 
lish, junior's, proposal, at the same time, was 
S2s. per hundred weignt. 

Were there only those two that sent bfop«>. 
sals ? — ^There was no otiier sent proposals. 

This was in March, 1777 ?— Yes. 

Has this contract been since renewed with 
this Mr. Mellish f — I believe it has. t Utank 
he is the present contractor. On the 4th of 
March, 1778, one proposal only being given 
in, by Mr. Peter Melush, for supplymg the 
Hospital with butcher's meat, oncred at 
1/. lis. 6d. per hundred weight, his proposal 
, was accepted. 

I understood then from you, that this con^ 
tract was renewed in March,- 1777, and in 
March, 1778, with Mr. Mellish, junior, the 
same person that had been convicted in ten 
penalties, and afterwards compounded 100/. 
for the second time ? — I am pretty certain it 
is the same person ; the solicitor will be able 
to explain that ; but I think it is certainly the 
same man that has been contracted with three 
times running, and who is the present cott* 
tractor. 

Have you, in yoiirbooks, any entry -of the 
contract upon which he was prosecuted?— I 
have one of the original contracts upon which 
he was prosecuted ; this is the original coti- 
tract that was made with the butcher, to com^. 
menceonthe 1st of April, 1776, it is dated 
the 15th of March, 1775. 

Who are the parties ?— Between Peter MeK 
lish, the younger, on one part, and sirCharM 
Hardy, knt. &c. 



1573 r^pMng the Roynl Jfotfitat at Gfeetmich, A. D. 177^> 



tl^ 



See how the penalties are.— That if any of 
the lands or sorts of meat aforesaid, so to be 
deliTered, shall, in the jndgment of the 
steward, orxlerk of the cheque, be deficient in 
weight or goodness, or not cut as the same 
ought to be, that then it shall be lawful to 
cause all such meat to be surveyed by the 
captain and lieutenant whosoever it shall be 
to do the duty of the week ; and, if disap- 
proved of on such survey, so often as they 
ihall neglect to cut up the meat as agreed 
tipon, to nay 10/. for each, or every breach or 
de&ult, that shall happen in ^e performing 
this contract. 

Is there not a general penalty of SOO/. ? — 
That is in a bond, which bears date the same 
day, the 15th of March ; the bond is \a the 
Sum of SCO/, for the fulfilling his contract. 

Whether or not there were bonds general- 
ly ^en by the butcher, who had the con- 
tract made to him, before that bond ; whe- 
ther it was usual in your memory, to have 
those bonds ? — I believe it wa2?, I cannot speak 
positively. 

Whether or not, since these complaints 
have been made, and the butcher has been 
fined, and there has been a detection of this 
VObiiny, the Hospital has been well served ? 
«— With respect to these bonds having been 
wnially given, I see by a notation I have made, 
tnaking a little abstract of the contracts made 
Ibr some yean back, I Se^ in lt74, when he 
was contracted with, that it is expressly men- 
tioned in the minutes, that care should be 
taken, that he gave the customary security : 
urhetfaer the Hospital has been well served 
jobce the butcher has been convicted, or com- 
promised the other acUon, I can't say ; I be- 
fieve' it will appear there have been ho com- 
plaints, at least^ I have heard none; but 
ftntst beg to refer your lordships to the mi- 
liiaxT o&er there. 

WiA regard to the notices that were given 
hy advertisement, what time is usually given 
for those advertisements, for persons to deli- 
ver in their proposals ? — It is sometimes ad- 
irertised kmger, sometimes shorter, just aB it 
happens ; generally a week's notice is given, 
aaia my derk has it in direction to put it in 
iiftost of the morning papen ; and if it is a 
contract for woollen or linen cloth, where 
pieople may propose out of the country, there 
tre give lon^ notice, but for the butcher, we 
gener^ly give about a week's notice* 

Were not tho&e advertisements inserted by 
the order of the court of directors ? — ^Yes ; the 
steward generally represents that a cohtract 
is near expiring, and then the board of direc- 
tots order it to be advertised. I see the no- 
tice *for lt78. ** On the «lst of February 1778, 
upon a letter from the steward, wherein he 
ineiitioned that the butcher's contract would 
expire at the efid of Maith. Ordered, that 
BOtice be given in tlie new»)apers as usual, 
ftr such persons as may be wilfing to contract, 
ke. to grtre lA their proposals on Wednesday 



Does it appear on what day of the week 
that was } — It was on Saturday the Slst. . 

So that the directions were on the Satur- 
day, that the proposals should be Made on the 
Wednesday se'ennight ; does it appear how 
soon that advertisement was put into the pa^ 
per ? — ^We have nothing here that wiU shew 
that, without referring to the paper. 

How long has Mr. Peter Mellish and hit 
father been contracted with? — I find in the 
year 17C4, one Samuel Mellish was the con- 
tractor ; in 1765, a Mr. Land; in 1766, a Mr« 
Preddy ; and in 1767, he only contracted for 
six months at a time ; in 1768, comes Mr. 
Pel^r Mellish,' whether he is the father or the 
son, it does not appear^ he has it for that 
year; then Mr. Preddy comes again, and in 
September, 1769^ Peter Mellish is contracted 
with, and again m September, 1770- in Oc- 
tober, 1771, he is contracted with, and the 
Mellishes have had it fi-om that time, without 
any persons besides intervening ; there is one 
year that I have not eot, which is in 1771, and 
whether it was this Mr. Mellish or not, I don't 
khow ; but he seems to go regularly hack as 
far as 1771. 

When was Preddy ?— The last of Preddy is 
the 15th of March, 1769, he contracted fof 
six months, arid then Mr. Peter Mellish takes, 
it up the other six months. In 1771, it doe^ 
not appear who was tiie contractor, but other- 
wise Peter Mellish, either father or son, seem 
to have had it from Sept. 1769, regularly. 

For how many years back does it appear 
that no othei^ persons offered, except the 
father and son?— We don't ascertain the 
number of proposals unon our minutes with- 
out lookine back, and endeavouring to find 
the proposals themselves. 

Because you mentioned Mr. Mellidh, the 
fother and son, made different proposals ?-^In 
1764, 1 have made notations, that there were 
four proposals ; in 1765 there were several. 

Read the names of the persons who were 
present in March, 1777, when the contract ^vas 
renewed ; what notice was there given to the 
Hospital, and entered in their books, that the 
penalties were compounded ?— ^It was from a 
letter of the solicitor's ; the solicitor informed 
the board, immediately after the actioh, of the 
event of it 

Crhe Solicitor's letter read, dated the Slst of 
May, 1777.) 

Lord Fortesctte. After having premised 
that, as this afi^r is likely to Be a pretty 
considerable length, I am the last lord in this 
House that ^omd desire to procrastinate it ; 
I would ask you after tiiete two Mr. Mel- 
lishes Were out, after these things being 
proved, whether or Hot there was any feu It ; 
or on the contrary, whether the other person 
who was takeA in upon the Mellishes being 
put out, to perform the contract of the Hos- 
pital, did or did not serve them with meat, so 
as to give general satisfaction? — ^The Mel- 
Ibhea were not put but. 



199] 



18 GEORGE tiL The Case of Captain Thomas BaiUie, [14(> 



Were ihcy never put out at all ? — ^Not since 
those prosecutions. 

Was there no pen>on ever put in? — ^No; 
there was on the dlst of May 1777, tliat Mr. 
Bverest had commission given to compromise 
it on the llth of June, 1777. [A letter of thio 
date, firom the soUcitor, was read, representing, 
that the clause a^unstthe butcher was com* 
promised in court J 

Were both the actions brought upon the 
same contract? — ^No ; they must have been 
upon different contracts, because they were at 
different periods of time. 

Read the names of the fjersons who were 
present at the renewal of the contract in 
1777. — Sir Charles Hardy the governor, cap- 
tain Hood, the treasurer, sir John Major, Mr. 
Hicks, sir Peter Dennis, Mr. Barker, Mr. 
Marsh, Mr. Wells, Mr. James, and the rev. 
Mr. Cooke. 

That was after the first conviction ? — ^Yes. 

Captain Baillie called in again. 

Who first Informed you about the pensioners 
"being supplied with bull beef? — ^Alexander 
Mdbre, the cook's mate. 

What month was tliat in ? — In the month 
of June 1775. 

Are you sure it was in the month of June 
that Mr. Moore first told you of the bull beef? 
^I have it m my minu^s; I carried the 
butcher's servants and the cook before justice 
Pell, where they confessed on the 7th ot June, 
1775. 

My ouestion is, who first informed you 
about tne bull beef? You say Alexander 
Moore did ? — ^Yes. 

In what month was it he gave vou this first 
information ^ — It was either in the latter end 
of May, or the be^ning of June, 1775, but I 
believe in the begmning of June, because I 
see the affidavits are sworn on the 9th. 

When was it you acquainted the directors 
of it.?— I thought it my duty to complain first 
to the governor of Greenwich Hospital, and I 
laid authenticated copdes of the depositions 
before the eovemor of the Hospital immedi- 
ately after 3iey were sworn. 

When did you lay them before the direc- 
tors ? — ^I did not lay them before the direc- 
tors; they were laid before the governor; I 
desired him to present them to the directors. 

The following fourteen Questions were asked 
by the Earl of Sandwich. 

Did you examine William Fleoe? — I be- 
lieve he was examined upon that business. 

Did you examine him? — ^I believe 1 had 
someiconversation with him upon the subject. 

Whether his examination at any time was 
taken in writing by you^ or in your presence ? 
-~I don't recollect that it was ; I am not cer- 
tain! I don't speak positively ; I had some 
conversation with all the butcher's servants 
upon that occasion concerning bull beef. 

But cannot you say positively wheUier this 
man's examination was taken m writing be- 



fore you or not? — I cannot say; there were 
three of them that were. 

Did you never give the examination im 
writine to any person, and to what person ? — 
1 don^ recoUect that I ever gave it to any 
person whatever ; I remember very well such 
a man was upon the list of e\idences ; but 
that man, when it came to the day of trial, 
he was not to be found ; hp went out of the 
way. 

That is not the question, it is a plain ques- 
tion, and I think I put it very clearly ; you 
doubt whether any examination was taken 
before you ; in order to prove whether it was 
taken before you or not, 1 desire you will here 
say, whether you did give to any body the 
examination ot Fleoe ? — I cannot say positive^ 
ly whetlier I did or no ; I had some conver- 
sation with the man upon the subject, and I 
might have taken some examination from 
them all. I had, as I said, ^y^ evidences at 
first, and they all went off except two ; 1 had 
the examination of one Payne and of one 
Largent. 

I stick to my question, to which I expect an 
answer, whether you did or not lay the exa- 
mination of Fleoe before any particular per- 
son ? — I cannot answer that Question, because 
I don't remember it ; I had nve upon my list 
at first, and they diminished away to two; 
one man was going to Holland, another to 
America, I stopped him, and got his exami- 
nation. 

I will refresh your memory farther; did 
you ever give the examination of Fleoe to the 
solicitor of tlie Hospital? — ^I believe that Mr. 
Kerr might have taken that man's evidence, 
but not I. 

Did Mr. Kerr take it in your presence? — ^I 
don't think he did, 1 don't know. 

That is not an answer to my«question > my . 
question is, did you or not give it to the soli-. ' 
citor of the Hospital? — I cannot tell vou; I 
save him all the information I coula upon 
uat business. 

Upon what day did you give the solicitor 
of the Hospital all the information that you 
could give nim ? — ^At different times. 

When did you give him the last informa* 
tion.^ — ^I cannot remember such a thing as 
that. . 

Do you recollect when the cause was tried ? 
— I remember tlie day of the trial perfectly 
well. 1 

Was tlie information and the examinatioii 
you gave to the solicitor of the Hospital given 
to him the day before the trial, or was it not? 
— I don't know on what day it was given to 
him ; I declare, I gave him all the informa- 
tion I could collect, and I was at great expence 
in collecting that information. 

[Capt^ Baillie withdrew.] 

Mr. Marsh called in. 

Whether you have not been in the victual- 
linz office, as a commissioner ? — I have. 
Whether, in the victualling office^ there ar^ 



141] rapeciing the Royal Hospital at Greenimch A. D. I778. 



[f4« 



cases of persons haTine been guilty of breaches 
of contract, and have been excepted to by ad- 
vertisement ? — ^Not while I was in Uie victual- 
ting. 

Was there such an instance in the case of 
an hop contractor? — ^I have heard of such an 
instance, but I don't know it of my own know- 
ledge. 

Has there happened any breaches of con- 
tnct, in the victualling-office, since you have 
been there ? — There has. 

ABd have . the persons guilty of those 
breaches been employed again } — ^They have. 

In what instances? — ^A butcher we con- 
tracted with to serve the fleet at Chatham and 
the Nore ; he sent inferior oxen, our officer 
there refused them, and agreeable to our order 
and the terms of our contract, he went to 
Chatham market immediately and purchased 
meat at an extraordinary rate, and made him 
pvy the difference. 

And that very person was employed again ? 
—Yes, upon a public advertisement ; he was 
the lowest tenderer. 

What were the terms of your advertisement ? 
—Advertisements for those that would tender 
to serve the Hospital with ox meat. 

Are there any expressions in them that 
mentions, that you engage the lowest bidder ? 
— «No, that is understood m course. 

Was there any thing ^eivourable in the cir- 
comstance of that man, who had been guilty 
•f that breach of contract, that had induced 
you to renew it again with him I — ^We punish- 
ed bim in the first instance ; he performed his 
contract very well afterwards. 

This instance that you mention of the hop 
contractor ? — ^I know nothing of that of my 
own knowledge ; I' was a commissioner of the 
victualling about nine years, and nothing of 
the kind happened in my time. 

Do you recollect to have heard at what 
time the affisdr of the hop contractor happen- 
ed ? — ^I have heard of it, but never heara now 
many years it was before my time. 

Have there been many instances in which 
tiiere have been breaches of contract, in the 
victualling-office ? — ^Not a great many, but the 
iontiactor was ^nerally punished in tnat way. 

Do you imagine it is very easy to convict a 
contractor that is guilty of*^ breaches of con- 
tract? — ^I think so. 

Don't you think it is possible for a contrac- 
tor to be guilty of breaoies of contract, with- 
•ut being found out and detected ? — ^Not in 
the victualHne-office. 

Why so ?— -Because we receive live oxen at 
the victualling-office ; the contractor had 
drove down live oxen to Chatham^ and they 
were judged, by the officer there, inferior to 
the contract 

I am onlv asking in general, whether it does 
not very often happen, according to what you 
must know of that business, imX contractors 
are guilty of breaches of contract, without it 
being possible to prove it in a court of Justice ? 
—I never knew an iostanqe of it. 



Did ytm never hear complaints of bad pro- 
vision from the victualling office, being fur- 
nished on account of any ships ? — I have not ; 
partial complaints there ever were and ever 
will be, in so great a concern as that of vic- 
tualling his majesy's navv ; partial complaints 
there alvrays were, ana for various reasons 
which I can acquaint this House with. 

Do you believe th<iy were always partial, 
bad reasons ? — ^Partial reasons they must be ; 
but in the general we have been served well, 
and the navy has been served well. 

But I ask ;]^ou, whether it is possible always^ 
with great facility, to bring a contractor ta 
conviction? — ^With respect to what has been 
said about the commissioners of the victual- 
line, captain Baillie has gone out of his road^ 
ana charged the commissioners of the victual- 
line with providing bad meat for the navy ; 
ana I take ui)on me to say it is false. 

If the victualling office had ordered a pro- 
secution against any man for a breach of con- 
tract, do you think that they would, during a 
prosecution, enter into another contract with 
him } — I mean that after an advertisement of 
the lowest tenderer proved to be a Mr. Mel- 
lish, or any body else who had been supposed 
guilty of fraud, or had been guiltjr of fraud, if 
no other person offered, and the king's service 
would have suffered, as it must have done for 
want of meat, I certainly should have taken 
Mr. Melllsh. 

Would you at the victualling-office renew a 
contract with a man who, under a prosecution 
ordered by the victualling office, had been con- 
victed? — Certainly I should, if the service 
would have suffered by not accepting him ; if 
there was no other tenderer but himself, the 
service might Have suffered for want of flesh. 

Would you have taken any means of adver- 
tising, or otherwise, to have got proposals 
from some other persons, who were not under 
that predicament? — ^Not af^r public adver- 
tisement for a week or a fortnight before : I 
should think it would be to no purpose ; out 
if there had any other persons offered, I 
should have proposed to have taken one, 
though he mignt nave been something higher 
in his demands than he. 

If Mr. MelHsh had been excepted in the ad-" 
vertisement, as a person with whom the Hos- 
pital would not treat, might not other persons 
have offered? — I do not know whetner we 
might not look upon it as dangerous to say 
that of a man in public print. 

You will do well to re-consider the nature 
of the question, and the answer you have 
given the question ; whether, if you had ex- 
cepted by name this Mr. Mellish, as a person 
you did not choose to deal with, other con- 
tractors might not be expected ? — I cannot say' 
as to that question f if^ no other contractor 
tendered, in consequence of a general adver- 
tisement^ I should not have thought of adver- 
tising again. 

I ask you, if you had advertised with a spe- 
cial exception of Mr. Mellish, whether some. 



143} 



18 GiSORGE lit. The Case of Captain Thmas BaiOie^ [144 



otliier persons voi^t not have offered ? — ^No 
l^h exception has ever heen made dunng my 
tune. 

You are a commissioner of Greenwich Hos- 
pital ? — ^Yes, and of the navy^ 

)iow came you not to make it the secon4 
time? — Because I apprehend the Hospital 
wpuld have suffered for want of flesh. 

Do you apprehend then that there is but 
one person m. this great metropolis that is ca- 
pable of contracting with the Hospital for 
nveat? — It was evident there was not; for no- 
body tendered but the father, or uncle, and 
son, I don't know which. 

Did you make the trial, by excepting Mel- 
lish, wnether any body else would offer? — 
When it was published, nobody tendered but 
the two Mellisnes. 

Do you really believe that there was no 
6ther person in the city of London capable of 
undertaking the contract but Mr. ISfellish ? — 
tt appears to me firom consequences, that no- 
body cares to deal with us hardly. 

Are you a commissioner of the navy at t^is 
time ?— I am. 

I believe you cannot be so easily imposed 
Vpon as to the nature and quality of meat 
which is sent to the victualling-office, because 
they are delivered alive ; did you say that? — I 
said that. 

Whether any man that is not accustomed 
to look at beasts, and to know the quality of 
them, may not be exceedingly imposed upon 
in beasts alive ? I have always understood so, 
but it may be otherwise, perhaps ? — We have 

E roper officers, an experienced master butcher, 
esides other officers, to view the beasts be- 
fore we suffer them to be killed. The concern 
is very great in the victualling-office ; there 
^ are 4 or 5,0Q0 oxen killed in a winter ; they 
4re drove into the office alive; they stand 
tliere 24 hours to cool ; they are then examin- 
ed. by a master butcher, and by tlie office^ of 
the cutting-house ; and then if the master 
butcher and the officer of the cutting-house 
approve, they kill the beasts; those they do 
not approve of are not taken; after they are 
killeOy they are cut up; ^he four quarters are 

Kinto a scale, 'md if they don*t weigh seven 
dred weight, we don't take them. 

If no person ofifered but Mr. Mellish, could 
they not have entered into ^ contract for a 
shorter ti^ie, and so have got another contrac- 
tpr for the remainder of the year ? — ^I'he board 
were of opinion that it would be best to con- 
tract for a whole year, for fear provisions sliould 
be dearer; that was the reason of contracting 
for a year; or else, generally, the conjtract is 
for six months. 

Do you, as a director of Greenwich Hospi- 

a recollect what number of men are victual- 
there?--*! believf about 2,000, but I can- 
oot say. 

Yctu don't know, do you, that one half of 
them are paid money instead of having previ- 
aions?-^! doa't know the nupber. 
In your advertisement fpr Qreenwid) H)o4" 



1 



pita], what time do you give for delivering ii| 
of proposals? — ^The secretary of the Hospital 
can tell the time best. 

What time do they give at the victuallings 
office ?^-Generally three weeks an advertise- 
ment for a certain number of oxen, 2 or 3,000 
to be killed at such a time. 

I understand you that the reason you 
thought it was allowable to renew the contract 
with a man that had been psoved tp be guilty 
of a fraud was, that there was no other person 
offered, and it might be necessary for the ser- 
vice to deal with that man, because no other 
offered? — Yes. 

And you ^so said, if I don't mistake, that 
you behoved no other person would have offer- 
ed, but Mr. Mellish, if the advertisement had 
been issued? — ^Nobody else had tendered to 
serve the Hospital for a considerable time. 

Mr. Mellisn is the contracting butcher for 
the navy too, I believe? — ^Yes, he isgenerally, 
but not always. 

You can nnd somebody else for th^ navv? 
--Sometimes ; but, in general, he and his fau- 
mily have been the contractors. 

You have also said, as I understand, tha}, 
though you had fouud tliat this man had bcea 
guilty, or should be suilty, of a breach of con- 
tract, that you would be obliged to take firom 
him because nobody ebe tendered? — ^Wq 
could not of a private butcher find meat suffi* 
cient to feed 2,000 men, therefore it was fof 
the benefit of the service : I did not say hf 
was the only person did offer. 

Has any attempt been made to find aaj^ 
other ? — By public advertisement. 

Any othier way ? — I know of no other. 

With regard to . the complaints that haa^ 
been made, I don't mean by ai^ individual, 
captain Baillie, relative to the victualling-i 
office, that Greenwich liospital has nothing 
to do with : have you had no complaints of the 
captains of the navy, relative to the victual* 
ling.office ? — There ever has been partial comr 
plauits while I was a commissioner of the vic- 
tualling ; since which^ I have heard of none^ 
but the partial complaints. 

Explain what you mean by partial com^ 
plaints. — I mean of a cask of beef turning out 
Dad, or such a. thing, there can be no bulR>eef 
with us. 

Has there not been general complaintf 
s^gainst the provisions flu-nished by Mr. MeU 
lish, from the captains of the navy at Ply* 
mouth? — ^Not that I know of, I am not ^ 
commissioner of the victualling. 

The Earl q{ Sandwich, Do you know whether 
last year, when the contractor at Plymouth had 
refused to fulfil his contract, Mr. Mellish was 
not called upon, and went down, and was the 
only man that could supply the fleet? — I heard 
so; your lordship knows I am not at the vic- 
tualling board. 

Is not Mr. Mellish one of the largest, per- 
haps the ereatest dealer in live cattle in ^ig- 
land? — ^We all look upon him to be the greaV 
est dealer m live cattle. 



145] rapecHng the Rftyal Hospital at Crreetimch. A. D. 1778. 



[146 



Is not the person who has the most of it in 

fab possession, more likely to serve you well, 

than a person who is not so largely concerned? 

—Undoubtedly. 

Do you imag^e, that, if during the prosecu- 
tioD that this Mr. Mellish was under^ there 
had been an aikertisement for other contracts, 
^fliM«ng Mr. Melii&l], o^ered, would that 
hare prevented any other contractors offering ? 
—I cannot answer for that, because we have 
faad public advertisements, and no butchers 
tendered to serve us. 

Do you imagine, that if any other person 
had been commissioned with an advance of 
public money, and to have gone to Smithfield 
and boi^t up 100, or 200 txead of cattle, as 
Tou bad wanted, don't you think that would 
be a means of flumishingthe Hospital as cheap 
as Mr. Mellish ? — ^I cannot say but it would. 

I understand you are one ot the directors of 
Greenwich Hospital? — Yes. 

As sudh, whether, when it appeared by the 
ver^ct given, that fraud had been committed 
in this contract, you thought yourself, as one 
of the directors, not bound to endeavour that 
the like fraud should not be committed again? 
^As tbe Hospital was in immediate want of 
meat for a vast number of men, it did not 
strike me, the method the noble lord has 
pomted out now, nor do I know whether it 
was practicable. ' 

As a public man, did not you find yourself 
hound to prevent fimids from being commit- 
ted? Did you take care to prevent such fraud, 
when you made this contract with Mr. Mel- 
lish ?->If the officers do their duty, who are 
the receiving officers* at the Hospital, no such 
frauds coula have happened, and had the 
hoard of directors been acquainted with it in 
the first instance when it happened, we should 
have prevented it in future. 

The board of directors knew at that time 
that such verdict had been given, and those 
fiauds proved, my question is, whether upon 
your engagement with Mir. Mellish, any extra- 
ordinary caution was taken to prevent simitar 
frauds again ? — No other than a public adver- 
tisement, as I said before. 

Whether or not there were not abuses firom 
Plymouth, in regard to the provisions ? I ap- 
prehend that your answer was, that you did 
pot know that there was, but there was nobody 
ui that part of the world who would undertake 
that contract but Mr. Mellish ; as you have 
said that, I ask if there was not another per- 
son that undertook the contract for the whole 
of sir Edward Hawke*s fleet?— I have told 
your k>rdship, tliat I don't know any thing of 
It, of my own knowledge. 
, Whether Mr. Peter Mellish, senior or iu- 
oior, are really the same persons as to trade ; 
axe they partners, or concerned with one ano- 

^?— I don't know; there was the father, 

«*K ^n,and the uncle, I think of that name. 

' * Receifiag officers, steward and clcr)^ of the 

JMI&. Mr. Godby and MauU. Qrig. £d, i 

VOL. XXI. ' J 



• Do you really understand any reason why 
there should be two proposals come, in for 
Greenwich Hospital; one from Peter, senior, 
the other junior? — It is a common thing for 
contractors to get a person to tender a l^gcr 
price, in order that tne other may have it. 

Then you understand that the offer of these 
two gentlemen to Greenwich Hospital was a 
collusion ? — I do. 

I think you said when you were asked 
whether Mr. Mellish was not so large a dealer, 
relative to an afiair that happened at Ply- 
mouth, that there never was another man 
that could supply the navy: you were asked 
whether he was not likely to serve the better 
for dealing more largely, than a small dealer. 
I ask you whether there may be great incon- 
veniences arise, for letting one man n\onopo- 
lize all the contracts of government.^ — Mobt 
certainly. 

And whether it might not be much better 
for some branches of government to exclude a 
man when he has another contract? — ^The ser- 
vice must be distressed perhaps, without they 
give a large price, and even then, people ten- 
der sometimes that are not equal to it, and 
that give security. 

You say, one man monopolizing the whole 
is a great inconvenience? — Certainly. 

Is there not a way to prevent that ? — ^In a 
pubFic board, we take every method we can to 
prevent it. 

You took no method to prevent it ? — By a 
public advertisement ; and it any butcher had 
been sufficient to have supplied the Hos- 
pital, I should have thought he woulc^l have 
offered. 

But if Mr. Mellish had been excepted in the 
advertisement? — ^The board were of opinion 
we could not do otherwise, than contract with 
the man that oflered ; and I was of the same 
opinion with the board. 

You have said, that if this matter had been 
communicated sooner to the directors, that 
they would have put a stop to tliis; what 
steps would they have taken, different from 
those they did, when the man was convicted ? 
— ^They would, I apprehend, have prosecuted 
the butcher immeuiately, upon the first com- 
plaint. 

He was prosecuted. — I did not, for mj; own 
part, know of the complaint till a year after. 

But when he was prosecuted and convicted, 
what steps did the court of directors then take, 
to prevent the'Uke thing happening again?—* 
All they did was, making a public advertise- 
ment. 

Was that anjT thing different from what 
they had done before? — It was not. 

You know there is a large tjuantity comes 
to the spring markets, at this time of the year, 
whether t|)6t is not tlie kind of cattle that 
would come within the price for furnishing 
the navy, and for furnishing Greenwich Hos 
pital ? — Not for the navy. 

Would it not for Greenwich Hospital ? — I 
apprehend it might for Greenwich Hospital, I 



147] 



18 GEORGE III. 



don't know that they are confined to weight 
there. 

As you have had experience in this matter, 
I ask you for information, whether you ever 
knew a man convicted before Mr. MelUsh, 
upon so notorious a breach of contract, as sup^ 
plying bull-beef, when his contract was for 

food fat ox beef ?— Nothing of that kind has 
appened in mv time, 
lou appear here in a double capacity ; you 
arc a commissioner of the navy, and also of 
Greenwich Hospital ? — A director of Green- 
wich Hospital. 

As a director of Greenwich Hospital, do you 
believe, up^n your oath, that there are not a 
hundred butchers, that could supply Green- 
wich Hospital? What quantity of meat is eat 
at Greenwich Hospital ? — I aon*t know the 
quantity. 

Do you think there may be two beasts' in a 
week ? — I can't speak to that; there are offi- 
cers here can tell you the exact quantity. 
Who can inform mc of that? — The steward. 

[Mr. Marsh withdrew.] 

Mr. Godby called in. 

You are steward of Greenwich Hospital, I 
believe ? — ^I am. 

What is the quantity of meat consumed in 
the Hospital ?— Ahout 860lb. a day. 

How many oxen is that in a week ? — Three 
I believe. 

Do you' believe, upon your oath, that there 
are not many butchers that could undertake 
that contract ? — ^I believe there are some, be- 
cause there formerly was a butcher of Green- 
wich offered to serve Greenwich Hospital, and 
to the best of my memory, his price was two 
guineas a hundred weight, which would be 
ftbput 6 or 700/. a year, I speak at a guess, 
Hibre than it is at present 

Must not he be a poor butcher that could 
not supply three oxen a week ? — At an exor- 
bitant price no doubt they could. 

Why at an exorbitant price ? — A butcher of 
Greenwich, who is now present, served Green- 
wich Hospital at an exorbitant price, and lost 
money by it. 

Did you ever hear that there was any at- 
tempt made to get another butcher to bid 
Against Mellish? — I don't know that there 
was. [Mr. Godby withdrew.] 

Mr. Manh called in again. 

Whether you remember upon the proposing 
to contract with Mr. Mellish, captain Bmllie's 
objecting to it ? — ^I don't . 

Do you not recollect that circumstance that 
has been mentioned by captain Baillie, of 
yoitf having mentioned the case of an hop 
contractor? — It is so long since, and I am at 
the head of so important a branch of business, 
that I cannot recollect sufficient to speak to 
that ; but if captain Baillie says I did say so, I 
dare say I did. 

I mentioned the circumstance of the hop 
contractor, to bring to your memoiy captain 



The Case nf Captain Thoma* SaHlief [14S 

Baillie's objectioli to Mr. "Mellish's having the 
contract — I don't recollect that; the whol^ 
hoixd of directors would have wished for any 
other contractor. 

I understood from the minutes, that the 
governor laid these affidavits of the discovery 
of the bull beef before the board of directors ? 
— There were no other tenderers. 

You are a director of Greenwich Hospital, 
and have been a long time in the business i 
if the contract had been advertised, with an 
exception to Mr. Mellish's serving the Hos- 
pital, do you imagine that the Hospital would 
not have immediately been supplied by any 
person, as well as they were by Mr. Mellish } 
1 have already said, from what happened, I 
fear not, because there was no other tenderer. 
But there was no exception made to Mr. 
Mellish in your advertisement ?— There was 
not. 

If anv exception had been made to them 
(the Mellishes) in your advertisement, that 
the contract would not be entered into with 
them, whether you do not imagine there 
would have been immediately proposals made, 
by which the Hospital wouM have been as 
well supplied as it was by them ? — ^I cannot 
speak to that. 

I ask your opinion; do you believe this 
kii^dom would not have produced a person 
or persons, who would maKo an offer to sop- 
ply Greenwich Hospiul with beef as well 
as Mr. Mellish, knowing that he was not to 
be treated with ?— I should suppose, as it wi^ 
open to them, they might have tendered if 
they pleased. 

Your opinion seems so vague?— It is an 
honest opmion from my heart, and upon mj 
oath. [Mr. Marsh withdrew.] 

Captain Allmright called in. 

Inform the Comnuttee of what you know 
of there having been any mismanagement in 
Greenwich Hospital, and what complaints re- 
specting the provisions have been made to 
tne court of mrectors, or to the council ?— I 
remember many complaints being made; I 
have been sent at times by the lieutenant go- 
vernor Baillie into the kitchen, to sec the re- 
ceipt of meat, and to look at the quality ; thcrt 
have been compbdnts, and there have been 
complaints in tide hall sometimes : I once ob- 
jected to some meat being received, because it 
was contrary to the contract; the contract 
expresses, that the meat shall be received in 
whole quarters, except some part of the neck 
taken off, and the legs and shms taken away ; 
I found there was a practice of bringing the 
beef into the Hospital, with the prime parts 
cut out of the quarters ; the chines, and great 
part of the roasting pieces were taken from it ; 
I had objected to tnat, and indeed, once in 
particular, I objected to it to the steward. 
The steward paid verylittie attention to my 
objection ; I went to the heutenant eovcmor 
as I had received my orders from him, and 
told him thai ther<f WIS little attontioQ p» 



ttS] retpecAig the Royal Ho^al at GrStnnM. . A. D« 1778. 



[150 



t»it;ttidtl]9lthe vtewttd had received such 

kef. The lieutenant govemor, in oonae* 

fMDce of that, ordered me to go back min 

atd call a survey upon it, to send for the Seu- 

tessnt of the week, and with the clerk of the 

diemie, and his ckark, to survey that meat, to 

oil far the contract, and see wnether that did 

not foittd the receiving such meat. I did so, 

1 ifere my opinion, the lieutenant of the week 

^peed in -opinion with me; I asked the 

steward's opmion, the steward would not 

give his opinion ; I desired him to go with me 

to the lieutenant governor ; he absolutely re- 

iiind it, and told me, that 1 had given my 

opinion unasked ; that he did not send for me 

to give my opinion ; that it was his business 

toicad for me, and not mine to send to him. 

I don't want you to enter into particulars ; 
but, in general, have you often observed that 
there has been bad meat delivered to the men, 
nd that there have been compkupts made ? — 
Hiere have frequently. 

To whom? — ^There have been complaints 
mide in the kitchen, there has been some 
eoBpliint made, I recollect, to the board of 
Sectors. 

By whom ? — ^It was made by the council ; 
Ivasnot at the making that complaint* but I 
mat the council when we Gomplainea of the 
dark of thedn^ue's clerk, who had received 
bid vial, and I never remember any official 
Ittwers inm the board of directors. 

Had jmi any redress ?-*! don't remember 
any ofl&oal answer, nor any redress. 

The Kof Sandwich, Wereyou present when 
William Fleoe's evidence was taKen down ? — 
I don't recollect that I was ; I was present at 
some; I recollect that Fleoe did not attend at 
&e trial at Guildhall. I remember he was 
absent then. [Captain Allwright withdrew.] 

lieutenant Kerr called in. 

Oive an account to the Commitlee of what 
you know of any complaint having been 
aade at Greenwich Hospital relative to provi- 
sions in general, and what steps have been 
taken in consequence of it f — When I first 
came into the Hospitid, there was a complaint 
thtt the men baa been served with shins, 
Mcks, and legs of beef; I acquainted lieut^ 
itaot governor Boys of it; the lieutenant gp- 
^WQor complained to the board of directors. 
Th^ immediately sent for the butcher ; the 
inest wad broii^ht, the legs, shins, and necks, 
and shewn to than, and that was redressea 
iBUnedistdy upon my complaint to lieutenant 
govonor Boys; aAer that the meat still conti- 
nned to be complained of. Upon my being upon 
^ty, I comphsned often to lieutenant Ver- 
ier fioys of it of the smallness of the pieces, 
^ of the raUier blackness, as I callea it, or 
badness of the beef. Mr. Boys often ordered 
tiie meat to be delivered to the contracting 
bttleber, wfaicfa vras afterwards complained of 
•■ittspi: th^ sud, alW the meat was bdl- 
M, it flidbiMft be fetutned to the butcher, or 



he make amends for it ; that it should have 
been complained of before it had been boiled, 
Upon these complaints, I myself thought 
there had been something extraordinary in it ; 
the meat, when it came, appeared to look very 
well, but upon being boiled in the copper, it 
turned out so bad, as I being often upon duty 
had occasion to see. I found that the meat 
did notv^tis called spend so well, that it 
did not look so well, and did not seem to hang 
together; I thought there was something 
wrong when I was upon duty ; I had great 
reason to suspect the outchcr's man guilty of 
a fraud ; and as I had often occasion to go to 
London, I frequently saw the butcher's man 
at petty ale-houses on the road. I was by a 
shower of rain forced into an ale-hou3e called 
the Half-way-house ; I saw the butcher's man 
selling the meat ; the woman and he were 
disputmg about the price, whether he should 
have three5>ence or two-^»ence halfpenny 
a pound. I sat down, and heard the conver*- 
aation go on ; I found th^e was some fraud; 
I told nobody of it, but I was much upon my 
gu«d, still finding the meat, during a space 
of time, to be veiy short, and giving the men, 
when ttiey complained, choice pieces did not 
seem to sa^ty them; I complained many 
times to lieutenant governor ooys, and he 
could not tell what to do; I then ordered the 
boatswain (I cannot recollect his name now) 
to be upon hb guard, for I told him tiiat I 
thought there was a firaud ; he detected the 
butcher's man in a leg and fore-quarter, what 
they call a jigget df mutton, a shoulder of 
mutton, and part of a breast, to the amount 
of 40 or 45 pounds ; it was brought to the 
council ; the butcher's man told the counci! 
that it was the surplus meat belonging to his 
master ; he made it appear to the gentlemen 
of the ooundl, I believe then, that it was sur- 
plus meat of hb master. I myself, in ray opi- 
nk>n (if I may use that expression) thought it 
was not, but I could not prove that it was not 
so : the meat was ordered to be eiven him ; 
I thought mvself hurt, and I let it drop for m 
months. I had some business callea me to 
town ; as I was coming through Kent-street, 
I saw the butcher very drunk in an ale-house, 
I did not go in there to examine, but when I 
came to enquire, I told the blue-frock men^- 
but I am going too fast— on the Monday I 
think that I came on duty, I said, Emanuel 
Tucker, I am come upon duty, if you don't 
tell your master to send proper meat, I told 
him by the blessed name of God. that I would 
complain to the directors, and nave him pu- 
nished, and the contract taken from him ; he 
said the meat was very good. The meat was 
oomplahied of, I tbdnk it was the Thursday 
following. I will not be positive to the im- 
mediate day, but it was the beef day : I went 
to Mr. Boys ; three pieces had been carried 
to the steward's office ; it was thought proper, 
because the meat had been boiled; they were 
very bad, and I don't believe the pieces when 
cut up weighed xn»ra than five or six ounces 



151J 



18 GEORGE IIL The Case of Captain Thmas BailSe^ [153 



for a man ; upon this Mr. Boys said he could 
not tell what to do in it 

You need not be so very particular in all 
this description, only acquaint the Committee^ 
whether there have not upon the whole been 
complaints?— Yes, I detected the butcher's 
man in stealing the meat; he was tried and 
transported. 

How long was it from the time that you 
first suspected these frauds till the time you 
made tne complaint ? — There were manv 
times complaints, and many times redressed, 
bv giving the men that complained the 
choicest pieces, and every pains was taken in 
■the office to give the men satisfaction. 

You said you had reason to think that there 
were frauds committed by the butcher from 
some conversation yoii heard at an ale-house, 
how long was it after that when you made 
the coniplaint ? — I was suspicious of the fraud 
long before^ from the badness of the meat, the 
meat being boiled and not bavins a proper 
quantity on the bohes ; I was called the bone- 
carrier of Greenwich Hospital, because I de- 
tected the bones which he had been serving. 
How long afler you had these suspicions 
wasitbeforeyou made a complaint?— Tne first 
complaint that I made was of the meat ; it 
was a year and a half, I b€!lieve^^)efore I could 
be certain to make any complaint of that 
fraud. 

Then it was a year and a half af^r you 
had suspicions before you made a complaint ? 
. — ^Yes. 

Whdm did you tnakc that complaint to?— I 
never made any complaint to any body, be- 
cause I could not ascertain it. The com- 
Slainl that I made was of the beef at different 
ays, that to the lieutenant governor, which 
was redressed immediately by the lieutenant 
■ governor's orders ; but the great complaint I 
never made till the Monday of the week the 
butcher was detected; I told one Jonathan 
Fell, you blue frock men are all parties of this 
fraud, and I 9)iall, I hope, see some of you 
turned out ; the man, conscious of the fraud, 
wrote an anonymous letter to the lieutenant 
governor, that he would shew him where the 
meat was secreted. 

How do you know that he did write it > — ^I 
hear^ the man confess that he did dictate that 
letter to another; I asked him that per- 
sonally ; he wrote that upon my saying that 
I had them now, I hope I shall detect you, I 
hope I shall have the pleasure to see you 
turned out, for you must be concerned in this 
fraud. I did not make a complaint, because 
I could not prove it, I only suspected in my 
self that there was a fraud. 

Did you suggest these suspicions to any 
body? — I never did to any one person in the 
world till afterwards. 

Whether you don't think it extremely easy, 
for a contracting butcher, in the situation Mr. 
Mellish was, to commit ereat frauds, without 
it being in the power of^people of detecting 
htm, and to bfiftg proof of it ^— I hare been 



in the kitchen, luive seen the meat received, 
and received with great care^ but ^who can 
withstand an artful cunning fellow, afier the 
officer had received it, then we went in aini 
detectjed him ; if we had not gone in as we 
did, it would not have been in the power or 
man to detect him, because he said it was the 
surplus meat; I enauired, and found, that 
there was a pound and an luilf, or two pounds 
of surplus meat, therefore if he had six^ 
pounds, he must have stole it. 

Then do you think it extremely difficult to 
detect firauds in the butcher ?^— Certainly. 

It is not the butcher, but the butcher's man ' 
you allude to ?— Yes. 

And it is not the butcher himself, but his 
man, that all this transaction related to ? — 
Yes. 

But do ^ou think it easy for the contracting 
butcher himself, to carry on frauds without 
being detected ?— I cannot think it can, be* 
cause there is the steward and so many other 
officers all there, and it is impossible for me 
to think that any fraud can t>e committed; 
the meat is seen and examined, if they com* 
mit it, they must be all concerned. 

Whether you imaeine, that the firaud of 
selling bull beef, and bull-s^ beef, was car* 
ried on for a considerable, time, before it was 
discovered ? — Yes, I think it was ; but I can- 
not see how that can be, when the meat is 
served in, so I havi; said several times, tiutt I 
really believe this is bull beef, but I could not 
ascertain that it was ; I have saki oflen that I 
believed it was so. 

Am I to understand, that you believe that 
there were abuses in the contract from the 
butcher himself, a long time before it was de- 
tected ?— I do believe that there was, to the 
best of my knowledge, there has been meat 
returned, and very bad. 

Did any of the pensioners ever complain 
that the beef was very tough ?— They have ; 
that complaint has been, and I have acauunt- 
ed the heutenant governor of it, ana they 
have had a choice piece the nextdayi and 
eveiy step was l^en to regulate it 

Was there an^r particular reason ever asked, 
after the complaint was first made, why it was 
not lodged with the proper officers, the direo- 
tors; was there any mtimidation? — Never, 
none to my knowledge. 

[lieutenant Kerr withdrew.] 

Lieutenant Smith called in. 

Give an account to the committee, of what 
you know relative to the mismanagement of 
the Hospital, in respect to the provisions? — I 
have known very freouent reason to complain 
of the beef particularly, and many complaints 
were made to my superior <^cers; I did 
make it to sir Charles Iiardy ; I have made it 
repeatedly to Mr. Baillie ; I not only did it 
from complaints of the men, but have done it 
of my own accord; because there isalettar 
from the lords of the Admiral^, dated soma 
years bsok^ wherein the officers in general am 



i5S] rapeciing ihe Rot^l Ho$pii4d iU Oteimoich* . A. D. 1778. 



[iM 



reflected upon for sufiering abuses, when they, 
knew them to exist ; in consequence of that 
letter, I thought it my duty to inform my su- 
perior officers of such abuses. One day in 
particular, in which I was happy to find the 
iKitcher prosecuted tor bad meat> which I dis- 
covered (Ml'. Everest called to tell me of it) 
as the meat was going forward, without any 
complaint being nuide to me by any of the 
pensioners ; I stopped it, havine seen before 
bull beef boiled, which I had seen in the 
eountiy aven away by noblemen : I took no 
notice of the first, second, or third dishes, but 
afterwards I stopped one dish, and sent ^em 
all to ^e lieutenant governor ; at that time 
captain Clements did not attend so much to 
hb duty, therefore I did not trouble him ; I 
sent dish after dish to captain Baillie. 

Do you recollect any tning about bad veal ? 
— Certainly I do ; the complaint was made 
very properly, as I thought, by the infirmary 
gentlemen ; I believe Dr. Hossack and Mr. 
Focbck, the dispenser, were the two principal 
people that brought it to light ; that upon its 
Dcing examined, we all declared it to be bad. 
Was complaint made of it ?^There was. 
Whom to P— First of all to the council, after 
that it was laid before the board of directors, 
to that we never had any answer. 

Was it ever redressed ?— I don't know whe- 
ther it was, for I heard nothing about it after- 
wards. 

Pray who receives the meat in the kitchens 
from the butcher ? — The steward and the clerk 
of the cheque are the proper officers to receive 
it, but it is frequently left to their deputies, 
who, I suppose, are very worthy people for 
what I know, I may be deceived. 

It is the dut^ of some of the officers to 
attOMi in the kitchen? — The commissioned 
officers take it in turn to attend in the kitchen, 
and if they see any abusiss or frauds, they are 
to make it known. 

Were you ever obstructed in it? — ^No, 
never. 

Is "bull beef easily to be distinguished from 
ox beef after it is dressed ? — Yes, I think so ; 
I had frequently seen bad beef; and after- 
wards it appeared before lord Mansfield, that 
the man was convicted upon that very action 
jis bull beef; my own suggestion was, because 
it was shrivelled up, and appeared very black, 
and not to be full weisht it it was weighed. 
' Was this discovered frequently ? — ^I cannot 
sav that, I only discovered of my own accord, 
fAa a complaint from a pensioner. 

[Lieulen^t Smith withdrew.] 



Tkur^dtty, March 18, 1779. 

Mr. Alexander Moore called in. 

What are you in Greenwich Hospital? — 
Cook of one part of it at present. 

How long have you been in the Hospital ? 
j— Since September, 1774. 
L Vi^ do you know of there iiaving been 



bad provisions served to the Hospital ?— When 
I came to the Hospital, I was rather amazed 
to see such proviswns served to the Hospital, 
but was not acquainted with the contracts 
that were entered into; beii^ acquainted 
from my youth in breeding and feeding cattl& 
I was acquainted with these meats; 1 found 
them to be nothing but bull's fiesh and bull 
stags, and so on, and mutton in the turn 
much the same as ram, and ewe mutton espe* 
cially, a mixture of all sorts. 

Was this only occasionally or frequently^ 
^nerally ? — ^All the time, from the *^9th of 
beptember, 1774, to the 1st of June, 1775, I 
believe certainly there was not a lot that waa 
killed real ox, or wether mutton. 

Do you mean ^at it was constantly bad 
meat, or only occasionally ? — Every day. 

What, the beef and the mutton both ? — The 
pensioners were continually grumbling ; and 
It was so bad, that at that time of day we re- 
ceived mc^e meat than we do now, because 
some pensioners are gone out of the house. 

Did you complain of this ? — I did not k(iow 
what the contract was ; I was a straneer ; t 
did not know any thing about it; I was 
afraid. The contract was to be out in March ; 
the people murmured a good deal; they 
thought some other butcher would have it ; 
the contract was expired, and a fresh contract 

fiven to Mr. Mellish again. The very first 
ay of the contract, nothing but bull beef 
came for that day ; so it went on. I fre- 
quently complained to the butcher's men ; I 
told them to tell their master the meat was 
not fit to eat. I asked him next day what the 
master said ; they used to tell me the master 
asked who enquired after it, and they told 
him ; the answer he gave to the servants was. 
Never mind them, they don't know any thing 
about it. I found it not bearable; I ac- 
quainted captain Bsdllie, the lieutenant go- 
vernor ; I told him there were iniquitous af- 
fairs carrying on in the Hospital ; I enquired 
what price the meat was ; ne told me it was 
then near a groat a pound ; the contract was 
for ox beef and ^etner mutton at that time ; 
from that ten months^ Mr. Mellish had very 
artfully in his trade killed many ewes^ beside 
rams and ram stags, which is generally In 
breeding of sheep ; a farmer wul generally 
keep tmrfy or forty wether lambs uncut, be- 
cause they can firequently sell them for a good 
price; if they don't turn out well, they cut 
them, which are not so good as wether 
Iambs, nor so bad as rams ; these rams aie 
not known very well, only by the entrail 
parts, and chiefly the fat of them, as any pear- 
son that is acquainted with them knows, lies 
in the neck ; those animals that are uncut of 
all kinds, are very thick in the fore parts, and 
are very easy to De known by a person that is 
any judge of it. 

When did you make your compl^t? — Oa 
the 1st of June, 1775, the meat was amazins 
bad ; I told the butdier's man that morning I 
would not take it ; he was in a g^e&t kuny to 



1551 



18 GSOflGE in. The CUut tf Captain Thonuu BaiUkf [156 



fetehthestenndlto panit; Mt. Coaies, the 
dark of Um tbeque'» assistant, came in, looked 
at the beef, said m thoajriit it was pretty good; 
I said I hoped he wouici not take it, tt was 
ttotlung but bulPs flesh. The steward, Mr. 
Oodby, came in, looked at it, said he thought 
H pretty good. Mr. Coates told Mr. Godby 
what I had said ; a survey . was made of the 
meat ; captain Lyne and lieutenant Bosson, 
came to survey the meat. The governor was 
then acquainted with it; I told them not to 
cake my word what it was, but send for any 
butcher in the kingdom ; and if it was not 
bulVs flesh, I would forfeit my life ; however, 
the gentlemen went to the steward's house ; 
they had a meeting, and the steward ac« 
quainted sir Charles Hardy, the governor; sir 
Charles ordered the meat to be boiled that 
day, and it was boUed ; the gentlemto then 
came to taste of It afterwards ; I omitted one 
thing in the interim of that time, Mr. Coates 
andMr. Bdl, the steward's clerk^ wanted me 
to drop it, aiMl say nothing about it any more ; 
they would see it lectifieci. 

Who are they ? — One is clerk assistant to 
^le chequ^ and the other to the steward ; I 
then thou^t I was wronging my own con- 
adence ; I thought, if I should be called upon 
to come, I was not satisfied in my own mmd. 
I saved some pieces of that meat particularly, 
and acquainted the lieutenant governor of it, 
and told him what it was ; he then, I suooose, 
acquainted sir Charles Haidy ; and I told the 
'lieutenant eovemor, that we butcher's ser- 
vants that £y hi^ said they were Sony thev 
ahouM bring Such meat down to Greenwich 
Hospital, bt% they could not help it, it was 
tibeir mastei's orders ; t asked tnem if they 
'^rould choose to say ^t before the lieutenant 
0)iveniQr, or any justice of peace ; they jaid 
'Siey were willing to say it any where; they 
were very mtich ashamed to bring it down. 

What is the difference of the price of the 
meat that was furnished for ttat ten months, 
and the contract price? — I look upon it that 
Imll beef in any part of the country is not 
worth above three half-pence a pound ; Mr. 
Hellish in his bunness, I look upon it, might 
bar it alive at a penny a poimd. 

You made your complaint you say on the 
1st iA June to captain Baillie } — ^Yes, and to 
the proper officers of the Hospital. 

You mentioned that Mr. Godby's clerk, 
and the clerk of the cheque's clerk had per- 
auaded you not to take any notice of it ?— ics, 
that vefy mominc. 

Did any body else persuade you at any other 
time not to take any notice of it f— Yes, after- 
wards, but not that day. 

Give an account of^tiurtP^^-Gn the 9th of 
Jnn^ 1775, nine days after that date, Mr. 
Baillie went ud with captain Allwright to Lon- 
don: two of tne butcher's men met captain 
* Baillie at justice PelTs, in Well-close square ; 
they were willing to give in their affidavits 
that they had. fran the time that they lived 
with Mr. MeOidi, never ataoytime nought 



any parcel of real ox beef or wether mutton 
down all the time that they lived with Mn 
Mellish, both of them. 

That was not to your knowled^; you ifid 
not hear them say ixaX ? — ^Yes, I did, and gave 
my affidavit to the same on the same day. 

It is no matter 'what they said; but what 
did you say ? What otjier persons endeavoured 
to persuade you not to make this complaint 
known } — ^Afler this was done, upon the 1 1th 
of June, which to the best of my remem- 
brance was Sunday, at night Mr. Godby 
sent for me to his house, told me there would 
be some enquiiy upon the complaints of the 
meat, beesea that I would not say that any 
bull beefnad been delivered into the Hos- 
pital ; I told him my conscience cannot do it ; 
he said he was very sorry that I did not ac^ 
quaint him sooner; that he would not have 
accepted of it ; I told him I had told him 
enough of it before. 

What did he desire you to do } — ^He desired^ 
that if I should be called^ to say that there 
was no bull beef ever deUvered to the Hos- 
pital. 

Repeat that conversation that you had with 
Blr. Godby directiy as it happened in mint of 
timef — Upon the 11th of June, a Sunday 
night, Mr. Godby sent for me to his own 
house, and in his own parlour he told me» 
that there would be some enquiry made about 
the meat; he hoped I would not say any 
thing that there had been bull beef de- 
live^ to the Hospital. I told him that I 
certainly could not deny the truth; tiSat I 
certainly must speak the truth ; that there 
had becoi all the time I had been there. 

What did Mr. Godby say about it?^Mr. 
Godby did not say any thin^ i^her about it ; 
only he said, if I nad told him of it before, he 
would not have accepted of it; I repeated 
that I had told him sevoal times. 

And had you in fact told him ? — ^I did on 
the. 1st of June, and told him it had been so 
all the time I had been there. 

To what time did Mr. Godby refor, when 
he said if you told him before ; did he mean 
before the 1st of June, or any other time?^- 
No such words passed as tiiat 

What did you understand that he meant, 
when he said he wbhed you had told him ao 
before? — ^I cannot tell what he might think 
when he said that. 

Did any body else endeavour to persuade 
you not to speak about it? — ^Yes, upon the 
ISth or ISth of June, the rev. Mr. Cooke seM 
for me to his apartments, and had a good 
deal of conversation about the meat, and said 
he thought that bull stag beef, and such like, 
was very eood for the pensioners, as they are 
well clothed and laid in eood beds, and so 
on ; that he thought it m^nt do very well ; I 
reasoned a gooa deal about it ; told Mr. 
Cooke that there was as much difference b^ 
twecn bull beef and ox beef, as between a 
piece of coarse hop-bag and fine cloth. 

Did he endeavour to persuade you not ta 



157] ftipeciiHg the Hoyal HoMpUal td Oremmch. A. D. 1778. 



[ifia 



ay there had heen bull-beef ^-^He did not say 
much about that; he only argued that the 
beef was so and eo ; hedid not persuade me. 

Was it all bull beef? From the time you 
cnne there, had you no good beef? — Cmen 
ve had a good quarter ; but a mixture of that 
sort. 

But, in general, during the whole course of 
that ten months, from September to June, 
was&e beef bull or bull-stag beef, or good 
ox beef? — It was all in general very bad. 

Do you imagine, for instance, that there 
was any day that passed in which it was all 
good? — ^Ketone. 

Was there any day in which there was no 
piopartion of ^mmI?— There might be one 
part or two parts good ; one very good auar- 
ler; two quarters will do at one kitciwn; 
there might be one quarter of bull or bull stag, 
and one quarter made up of fairish good sort 
of meat? 

Utatishalfandhalf?— Notsomuch; most 



The days you speak of there was one quarter 
of the right sort of beef, and one quarter of 
tlus sort? — Somethnes. 

Did that happen every day ? — ^No. 

How often aid it happen? — ^It might be 
ence a week or so. 

How many times did it happen in the 
whole year, that bull beef was brought in in- 
stead of ox beef? — There never was a day, 
fer ten months, that a real lot of ox beef was 
brought in. 

What did you mean by saying just now, 
tiiflt once a week it happened ? — ^Iliat a quar- 
ter might be good, and the rest bad. 

Wfa^ was the proportion of eood and bad ? 
What was the whole quantity brought in? — 
Abeut 460lb. a day to each kitchen. 

How many pounds of that 460lb. were bad 
beef?— May be SOOlb. 

And this happened every day, or once a 
%eek ? — ^Evcry day. 

Every day during all that time ? — ^Yes. 

How lone have you been at Greenwich 
Hospital?-— £ver since the 99th of September, 
1774. 

Has this practice of ^vins bad meat to the 
mea prevailed ever since?— No. ' 

In how much of that time have you had 
good or bad meat? — Since the butcher has 
been convicted it has been in general very 
good. 

Before the butcher was convicted, how long 
had you bad meat? — ^For ten months. 

And since that time you have had tolerably 
good meat? — ^Tes. 

Have you had any bull beef since ? — ^No> 
none I believe. 

Expbtn what you mean by buU-staes? — It 
happens among tiiose animals of buUs they 
are subject to a disorder, they call it, that tl^y 
take firmg ; after they are past serving cows, 
thnrarecut 

Do you mean to say, that from the time 
Ibese eompiaiiits were made, in June, iff 5, 



that the butdier altered his behaviour to the 
Hospital, and gave ydu the meat he ought %» 
do?—- Yes. 

Would an inspection of the meat shew how 
long that bull had been cut? Can vou dis- 
tinguish if it had been cut a considerable time 
before? Can you distinguish tiiat from ox 
beef? — Yes, very easy, either deadorahve; 
more alive than dead. 

How do you distingubh H ? — By the shape 
and make of them ; these animals are very 
thick in the neck, from an ox that is cut when 
it is young. 

In the mean time that vou found this bull 
beef and buU^'Stag beef delivered into tba 
kitchen, that you had not made any eom- 

glaint, had you been advised bv any friend; 
>r your own interest, to hold your tongue 
upon it?— No. 

You will explain that matter, about the beef 
being good since the prosecution. — ^It has 
been very good in general; sometimes oo 
butcher in the kingdom can make it all atike; 
sometimfBS there nave been lots of beef and 
mutton that were not extraordinaty. 

Were there any complaints in 1776, or 1777, 
respecting sow-pork? — ^Yes, it will be tw^ 
years, the 33d ot April next. 

Then it was in April, 1777 ? — ^Yes; it was 
the pork day, before the Founder^s day, as it 
is called. 

What butcher was it from ? — ^Mr. Melliah. 

How was it complained of? — I believe it 
would have passed without any complaint ; I 
did not mean to make any complaint of it ; I 
did see it. A lieuteiumt, who nad no mean- 
ing, happened to speak of it in the council- 
room ; and on the Friday ni^^ and the next 
board day, the gentlemen of the Hospital, the 
steward, and clerk of the cli»[|ue, and some 
other people, wrote against this lieutenant to 
the board, for mutiny, for saying there wa» 
sow pork in the bin that day. 

But you are a judge ot the matter; waa 
there sow pork defivered in March 1777, or 
not? — ^Yes ; there was one sow delivered wi^ 
the teats cut off. 

Was there only one sow ?--Only on^ 

That has not been lepealed, hasit?— No^ 
never. 

How much pork was sent in that dayK->r 
Between IS ana 14 cwt 

How much did that sow weigh?^-We did 
not weixh one by itself; it is all ^leithed ia 
one scale. [Alexander Moore witbdiew.] 

Captain Baillk called in. 

Whether you received, at any time, aagf 
thanks firom any body for oroaecuting, in tbia 
bu^ess, either of the butener or oi ^ ser- 
vants? — I received a veiy honourable testi- 
mony of my poor services, in the traaspcrti^ 
tlon of the butcher's servant, fiom the first 
lord of the Admirahy, when he was trails 
ported. 

In what manner did you reeeive that teiti- 
nony?— I had writtei^ aktter to hit loidahif. 



159] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case ofCofAtnn Thomas BasUie, [160 



upon that occasicHiy setting forth the abuse 
that had been committed in the Hospital; 
and his lordship was pleased to send me a let- 
ter acknowieagingy that my services were 
very laudable, and| in his estimation, veiy 
proper and rieht 

Have you uiat letter about you } — ^Yes. 

I suppose the noble lord has no objection 
to its being read? 

TheEarlof&iiMiincA. Not in the least. 

Captain Baillie then read the following letter. 

« Admiralty, Oct. 6, 1772. 
Sir; I was favoured with yours some days 
ago, and think your activity, to bring the per- 
petrators of the late abuses to justice, highly 
hudable : and I should imagine you must 
feel much self-satisfaction, as I am satisfied 
you have done yourself real credit. This, how- 
ever, makes me much at a loss to understand, 
why you are uneasy in your situation, nor can 
I guess what sort of retreat you have in view ; 
as noticing occurs to me, in this department, 
l^t can be an object of your pursuit, afler 
your retirement upon the noble foundation 
wh^ne you are now settled. — I am, with regard^ 
your most obedient, humble servant^ 

" Sardwich.^' 
« To Captain Baillie." 
. What made you uneasy in your situation, 
as you have represented ? — When I was a cap- 
tain of the Hospital, I clearly saw that if ever 
I arrived at the heutenant-government of the 
Hospital, that I had a torrent of abuses to 
stem ; which made me ver]r indifferent about 
any preferment in Greenwich Hosmtal ; and 
even at that time of day, I would nave gone 
out of the Hospital upon any terms ; and after 
that rtpresented my situation to lord Ssuid- 
wich, and would have gone to any part of his 
Duyesty's dominions, to have gone out of 
Greaawich Hospital ; but it was my fate to 
stay there, and I have discharged my duW, in 
every part of my office, to uie best of my 
ability. 

. Were there any thanks about the butcher ? 
— ^When the butcher was prosecuted, and 
when depositions wc;re taken oefore Mr. Pell, 
1 inclosed authentic copies of those deposi- 
tions to the first lord or the Admiralty, and 
was quite astonished that I received no answer 
or support from his lordship upon that occasion ; 
and upon an interview with nis lordship after- 
wards, I mnasreceived in a manner that I did not 
expect, in a veiY cool manner. I entreated 
his lordship to take the contract from 1^1 r. Mel- 
lish ; that a man who had cheated the Hos- 
pital, by both himself and his servants, would 
persevere in the same kind of conduct; and I 
believe he has, till since the last conviction. 

What time was it you sent an account of 
your detection of the butcher } — Soon afVer the 
.9th of June, I enclosed the depositions already 
^nentioned to his lordship ; I did not choose 
to write to the board of Admiralty, because I 
thou^t it would not be proper to disclose the 
whok ioteraal managqueat of Greenwich 



Hospital to the board, therefore I sent it more 
privately to his lordship. 

Infomr the committee what number of 
clerks, deputies or servants, who are not sea- 
farin,^ men, have apartments in the Hospital, 
and those that have wards? — I beheve in alL 
twenty-six, twenty-seven, or twenty-eight of- 
ficers, under officers, and servants of the esta- 
blishment^ that are actuallv lodged within the 
walls of the Hospital, and some in the warda 
of the pensioners ; if your lordships please, I 
will begin with Mr. Eden ; he has a large 
apartment at the south end of the buildingv 
called Queen Ann*s Buildings. M& IbbetHon 
has a very handsome and spacious apartment,' 
ait the other end of the same building, twQ 
large stair-cases leading to those apartments, 
communicate with seieral of the wards in that 
quarter ; these stair-cases are not enclosed, 
but the avenues leading to the several warda 
are enclosed for the private convenience of 
these gentlemen ; I have been oflen obstruct- 
ed in my duty, in Visiting those wards, because 
there now remains only a narrow staircase 
leading to them ; it has been my pleasure and 
my pride, to shew that Hospital to several fo- 
reign princes, particularly to the prince of 
Brunswick^ two princes of Hesse, &c. &c. but 
that quarter of the Hospital is not now shewn 
to Strangers upon that account, not to mention 
the other inconveniencies. There are, besides, 
the rev. Mr. Cooke; he is lodged there as 
chaplain of the Hospital ; the rev. Mr. Maule, 
and Mr. Godby, have handsome apartments, 
Mr. Godby has had an addition to his apart- 
ments; the secretary to sir John Nonris 
brought up a large family in that apartment, 
without requiring any addition to it; Mr. 
Godby has had an additional room or two 
since, his apartment not being thought ho^ 
enough. 

What was that room taken out of? — ^I be- 
lieve part of one of the offices, either out of his 
or the treasurcr's-office, an exchange was mado 
ilpon that occasion. 

Upon the whole, there are twenty-six or 
twenty-seven landmen, who are lodged in the 
wards of the pensioners ? — Not so many land- 
men actually locked in the wards of the pen- 
sioners, some of them are in apartments in the 
Hospital. 

How many are lodged in the wards? — 
Francis Cook, secretary's clerk, has a hand- 
some apartment in the wards of the pen- 
sioners, I believe little inferior to a captain's 
apartment; he occupies to the amount of 
twenty-four or twenty-sL\ cabins. 

How many cabins of pensioners do you 
think are occupied by officers in the House ? — 
If I include the officers, there are several 
officers lodged in that psurt of the building; 
that was originally intended, certainly for 
wards, because tlie proper apartments are oc- 
cupied by otlicrs, wno don*t appear to me to 
have a right in the establishment ; lieutenant 
Gordon is lodged in a part of the Hospital 
founded for wards ; lieutenant Kerr, the derk 



J6I] re^iediMg the Royci Hotfkid at Greemuch. A. D. 1778. 



[162 



of thecbeque, the two ihatrons, and the clerk 

of the works, but there are about forty-eight or 

fifty cabins occupied by intruders, that have 

beak cabins durii^ my time. 
Upoa the whofe, blow maiiy cabins of pen- 

noners are occupied by oflfcers? — AeaUy I 
camiot tell how many cabins, because some of 
those cabins were occupied before I came into 
the Hospital, but there are about forty-eight 
80 occupied, that have been cabins, that I re- 
meoiber the greater part of, if not all of them. 

Is th^e any objection for want of room for 
the pensioners? — There is certainly room 
sufficient for the number of pensioners that 
inhabit at present, but there are always seamen 
waiting in expectation of admission. 

The Earl of Sandmeh, Was that the an- 
swer, that there were always seamen waiting 
to be admitted? — A. I understand there are 
always people coming down to Greenwich 
Hospital, intreating for admission. 
. Do you say, that you know that there are 
seamen waiting to be admitted ? — I have oflen 
heard it. 

Speak from your own knowledge; do you 
know any such thing? — I know an extraordi- 
naiy instance of a seaman, that did not get 
adfloission into the Hospital ; I don't know at 
present. 

. Whether ^ou don't know of any vacancy at 
the present time for pensioners ? — ^I am not in 
office at Greenwich tiospital at present 

I ask you if you don*t know that there ' is 
any vacancy mr pensioners? How can you 
say that there are seamen waiting to be admit- 
ted ?— I understood it to have been always the 
case, that there are a number upon the list at 
the Admiralty. 

Do you say it is so now ? — I don't say so 
by any means, because I don't know the list 
of the Admiralty ; I cannot judge of that. 

Be so good as give the remancable instance 
you roenti0ned that you have known? — I 
Knew a particular instance of a seaman, who 
was recommended by admiral Harrington, to 
be admitted into Greenwich Hospital, the man 
died in Greenwich, in the room of a mess- 
mate of his, that was a pensioner in Green- 
wich Hosoital, he died with twenty years ser- 
vitude in his pocket, which I can produce ; he 
bad been at the Admiralty between the exar 
minations, they examine but once in three 
BMmths, and he (between the examinations) 
dic^ and did not get admittance into the Hos- 
J^ital. I don't mean to bring any charge 
against anj^ persoi^ for that it nught oe an ac- 
cideQtal thing, andf I believe it was. 

How man^ examinations do they go through 
at tiie Admiralty ? — ^I cannot say as to that ; I 
believe but one, on the first Thursday in the 
quarter. 

How many pensioners are lodged in the 
Hospital? — Two thousand one hundred and 
ttcty-nine, besides nurses and boys. 

Do you ever remember a time when more 
weie kdged lii the Hospital than now ?«-I be- 
lieve thefe never were more. 

VOL XXI. * 



Then where is the difference between one 
time and another ? if there is always stifiicient 
for this purposoy and there never was more, 
the waras of the pensioners might be as well 

given up for other purposes as not? — It would 
old more pensioners, fifty more, if those ca- 
bins were sivenup for ttiat purpose; when I 
came into the Hospital, there were not above 
1,500 pensioners, they are continually in- 
creasing; as the funds of the Hospital in« 
crease, so the pensioners increase, because I 
humbly imagme, there are always objects 
sufficient; we have 500 outpensioners now. 

Where was the mischief m taking off 48 or 
50 of these cabins of the pensioners, when the 
reminder of the Hospital was more than suffi* 
cient to lodge all the pensioners in it? — ^There 
are more than 500 out-pensioners now, I dare 
say, every man of them would be glad to get 
into the Hospital if they could. 

Ai:e they out-pensioners from choice, or 
how is that? — ^Tne one has 7/. a year, the 
other has a much better establishment. 

How many out-pensioners are there now ?■<— 
It is uncertain to say now ; I believe about 
500 ; some of them go to the East-Indies and 
abrc»d ; it is difficult to ascertain them. 

How many men might be admitted, if those 
out-pensioners were to be received ? — If those 
gentiemen I have named were removed, I 
suppose the Hospital would contain 200 more. 

But if they were removed, would there be 
room to lodge so many more pensioners con- 
veniently ? — If the persons that have no right 
to Greenwich Hospital were removed, tiiere 
would be room for a great many more than 
there are now. 

The eleven following miestions were asked by 
the Earloi 5andzzHcA. 

Do you mean that all those apartments <^ 
the Hospital have been cabins formerly? — 
No, I do ^not mean to explain myself in that 
manner. 

Have these cabins been taken away from 
men that inhabited' them? — ^Yes, about 48. 

About 48 have been taken away. Was the 
number of pensioners dismissed when they 
were taken away ? — I don't saV that they have 
been turned out of Greenwich Hospital, but 
there have been so many less admitt^. 

Less admitted ? there is a certa^ number 
established : when those cabins were taken 
away to be fitted up for roooks for the officers, 
whether all the pensioners had not been ad- 
mitted? — ^Noboay has been turned out of the 
Hospital, but those apartments have been de- 
stroyed, and other apartments mad^ up for 
pensioners. 

If those officers were t.umed out of tfiit 
Hospital, must not lodgings be taken for theih 
in the town, or somewhere else? — ^No> b^ 
cause I don't understand that they have 
any right to the establishment, those clerks 
that Iwve not been at sea. 
« Suppose they bad been all seamen, you wiU, 
%llow;' I iuppose, that it is A«9«Maiy to hava 



m 



IS GEORGE III. Tie Case ^Otpiain Thomas BmOk, JlOi 



«oine derks and people to co on vitii the^ 
busmess of the Hospital ?-— ^ ; bat I donH 
tNink that a charity like Greenwich Hoflnital, 
should be incumbca^ with people that nave 
never been at sea in their lives. 
. But supposing those clerks were all seamen, 
then are they, or are they not, necessary for 
(tarrying on the business of the Hospital? — 
The business of Greenwich Hospital cannot 
be carried on without clerks ; but there is such 
^ number of landmen lodged in the Hospital, 
that they out-number the sea officers in pro- 
portbn, because those twent^six or twenty- 
Beven are more than we have captains or lieu- 
tenants, or naval officers, in the Hospital. 

Does not a man who lias been at sea take 
up as much room in a bed, or in an apartment, 
as a man who has not been at sear— One of 
these men take up -six, nay, ten times as much 
room as a common pensioner. 

But a pensioner or a clerk, being a seaman, 
take;? up as much room as a landman, does he 
not ? — One of those clerks takes up much more 
room. 

You were asked by the noble lord, whe- 
ther one man does not take up as much room 
as another f — Certainly so. 

Did the taking away these fifty cabins leave 
less room for the pensioners than formerly ? — 
Certainly. 

Earl of Chetter^ld. How came you in your 
letter, afler the fire, to desire that a lodging 
might be appointed for you ; afler that 
fire you say there was room for all the burnt 
««t pensioners, and for you into the bargain ? 
«— In the first place, the service has required 
the aid and assistance of a great numo^of 
j>ensioners from Greenwich Hospital; I did 
Hiyselfprocure 950or300men to fit out the 
dinerent ships in the river; when, befi>re my 
return from Briehthelmstone last year, they 
oould not raise above 40; the men burnt out 
are, I apprehend, lodged in their cabins; 
there are about SOO more have leave to lie out 
of the Hospital with their wives and families; 
and I conclude, of course, that those men's 
beds are occupied who lie out. 

How came you to write such a letter from a 
conclusion ? How many cabins were destroyed 
by the fire?*— I was not in office then; about 
S50, 1 imadne, or 900. 

If the clerks lodged ouL would not their 
Jodginsbe liable to be paid for by the cheir 
rity F—There is no such establishment. 

If the handsome and spacious apartments 
which are allotted to these gentlemen were 
qontracted, so as to give them a decent md 
convenient habitation, would not the Hospi- 
tal, upon such an alteration as that, be able to 
contam a great maiiy more pensioners? — ^It 
would be veiy difiKcult to contract some of 
"those apartments, unless you put the officers 
«nly upon onefioor ; that part of the building 
vras intended originally as a palace; it was 
not finished in snug small apartments. 
• Then I imderstwd you it woukl be diffi- 
c^)^ gr retf lacQaveuenty to convert some of 



tiiMe apartments into penakmenf wavds or 
cabins?— -Some of thase spartments might be 
easily converted into apaitmenla m the 
lieutenants who otcapy wuds, and then the 
pe&sionen xnight be (mt into their apartments, 
which were intended for wuds. 

They ooold raAke audi an alteration to make 
it convenient for the officers? — ^Yes. 

And what doyoathink micht be the nrnn- 
her of pensioners that might be added to tlie 
Hospital ?— Fifty. Some of them might bt 
altered in a short time and at a little expence. 

And should you have room enoueb tnemtb 
lodge the officers who are lodted there at 
present ? — ^No ; I speak of the derks, who I 
think have no right to lo<^ there at all. 

Have there not been oonsiderabie enlarge- 
ments made to the apartments of several 
of these officers ?— Yes, some ad<fitional apart- 
ments. 

Have they been considerable ; and to what 
an;ount? — ^In 1771 or 177S, eleven cabins 
were taken away to accommodate Mr. Ibbet- 
son ; I complained of it to the lords of the Ad- 
miralty, and that was redressed. 

I want to know what have beoiumedresfl* 
ed ? — The secretary's derk, the derk of the 
cheque's clerk, tfie steward's derk, have had 
apartments, which have not been redressed. 
. Are those apartments taken fiom the pen* 
sioners' wards ? — ^Most of them were. 

Were the additions to the steward's deilt 
taken from the pensbners' wards? — ^No; that 
was a part taken in the new buildins that 
would have lodged a lieutenant very well. 

The Earl of Sandwich, Whether I did not 
myself make it my business to have Mr. 
Ibbetson's cabins immediately restored to the 
pensioners?— I had the honour to lay that 
complaint before your lordship at the Admi- 
ralty; I waited all day ; I haa no answer of 
any sort directly or indirectly, and never knew 
that the cabins were to be restored till I saw 
them putting up again. 

The Earl of Sandmkh. 1 have not had an 
answer ; m v question was, whether you doni 
know that the moment I heard of these cabins 
bcong pulled down I made it iny business to 
call a general court, and ordered them to be 
put up again in three weeks ?— They were put 
up again. 

The Earl of &miMcA. And you don't know 
that I ordered it?— No. 

Pray do you know whether the revenue of 
the Hospital will bear the additbn of more 
pensioners than are in at this time ? — I believe, 
if there was the same sort of frugality in everjr 
other department in the expences of the Hoa- 
pital that is held out towards the pensionerau 
It would: the directors are reserved ami 
sparing in every thing that concerns the pep- 
sioners, such as their shoes and stodcings; in 
every article concerning the pensioners ; and 
in my hinnble opinion^ gfpai part of the rev^ 
nue of the Hospital is Ind oqt i(^ mKOj mme* 
cessary alterations, reparations and fautldingi^ 
when we have not money to pay fot it. 



US] rupeeOng iks ABy«2 Hotpikd ai Grtmxidu A. D. 177^. 



[16» 



Ai IXky I defiketo ioiow whctker the re- 
feawB of Ike fiospUal wiU bear soore pea* 
•McntiiKi are bow in k ? — I can't pretend 
to iBSwer that question fn^ciaely, the ex* 
poice of the pensioQera now is SOf. or dSt. 

rr BDapi per scummy more than it was, and 
fosttively say the necessaries have been 



Dd von know that any oMMiey has been ap- 
)^ied tor to parhamoit this year and the last 
towards the support of Greenwkfa Hospital ? 
—I have not seen the votes to know what 
has been done this year; but I beheve in the 
last thiee years they have had 15^000/. 6,000/. 
4filOOLmA&fiQOl. 

I think you said there had been about fi)rty* 
dg^t cabins taken firom the peasionera since 
your aaesMMnr^ for the increase of the apart- 
ments of dwnent officeis; did you say so or 
not? — I don't 8]^eak exactly to lbrty«eighty 
birt^maboiits, It inighibe twoor three more 

W«re there additional officers aooonuno- 
dated^ that it was necessary to take these 
cabins ? — There was no c^&cer acoommo^ed, 
but tbeee clerks, in that part 

1¥faere were the clerks lodged before?--^ 
8eme of them had iv> lodgingis in the Hos- 
pital befiwe. 

Was the business of the Hospital carried on 
as wdl before as it has been since? — ^Much 
betftar ; there was qc^ then that Action or party 
of lanwien that there is at present. 

Was the duty of the Hospital carried on 
faettev Off woffse? — Fidlaswell; because tlury 
have introduced net only themselves but their 
wives and &milies. 

Whether these forty-eight cabins, or there- 
abouts^ were taken for the nurpose of putting 
isk then fresh offioersy or cierkisy or servants, 
or were they for enlarging the apartments of 
those gentlemen ?-^I toUcvo the greater part 
:ivere tor entire new apartments; there was 
one apartment that was appropriated for the 
we 01 the governor's clerk. In conseauence 
of so many c^luns being taken away oefore, 
there was not room for the pensioners, and 
then that apartment he had was converted 
into ealMn% and another apartment given him 
in the new building. 

. Where were the chief of those clerks and 
people l<4ged before those forty-eieht cabins 
were applied to their use? — ^1 don't know that 
they had any lodgings but what they paid for 
in the town on their own account. For in- 
staDce» the secretary's clerk ; he has no busi- 
iiessin Greenwich Hospital but once in Uiree 
weeks for about two hours; the boards of di- 
rectors are prmcipally held in London. 

You wereaskeci if there is not a fixed num- 
ber of pensioners in Greenwich Hospital? Do 
vou know of any fixed number? — I donH 
Kncyw of any fixed number, according to the 
teem we have; the men haveinerea^ con- 
sideiab^. 

Is there not always a certain, fixed number 
fi^m^ u|K)ii theeitabliihmeQttbeie?— Ac 



cording to the number of cabins we have to 
accoinmodate them. 

This goes to the former point; you don't 
build cabins, 'do you, unless the revenue wiH 
pay the biuldii^ of the cabins, and for the 
nouurishment of the inhabitants of those 
cabins ? Do you think it for the advantage of 
the Hospital to lay out mon^ in building 
cabins, when you can't afford to mid provisions 
to maintain the people that are to inhabit 
them ? — ^I think it would be much more for 
the benefit of Greenwidi Hospital to find 
cabins for pensioners, than to lay out 
1,500Z. at one stroke, for cleaning the Painted- 
mdl, and 1,300/. for obtaimng a new charter. 

You said, heretofore, several of the clerks 
were lodged out of the Hospital; I should be 
glad to know, whether they had any increase 
of salary to provide lodgings ? Or were lodg- 
ings provided and paid for out of the Hospi- 
tars funds ? — ^I beUcve one steward's clerk had 
a httle matter allowed him, to pay for a lodg- 
ing in town. In that case, neithet his u- 
muy, nor children, nor servants, were entailed 
on the Hospital, which is a great expence to it. 

When he got an apartment in the Hospital^ 
was that little taken off? — Certainly. 

You say by receiviiu; the wives and fomi- 
lies into the Hospital that they become a 
burthen upon the Hospital. Are they maii>- 
tained by the Hospital ?— The surgeon and 
apothecary's bills run high ; they are entitled 
to the advice of those persons; that entaib not 
only one but ten persons, perhaps. They are 
allowed several other little things, beside 
their apartments; and small beer without 
excise, and all those little kind of things. 

The Earl of Cketteffield. Has your fiimily 
been any expence to tHe Hospital ? — By the n^ 
stitution of the Hospital, every officer's fomily 
is allowed those indulgences. • 

Was your family any additional expence to 
the Hospital? — I believe not more than any 
other oflScer; 1 believe a great deal less than 
anv other officer's family in the Hospital. 

If I understand you right, those additional 
officers that were lodged m the town, are lodg- 
ed in the Hospital now; by which means they 
have remov^ about forty-eieht cabins, or 
thereabouts ? — ^l don't know wnere they lodff- 
ed before ; they did not lodge in the Hospital; 
some lodged in London, some in Deptford. 

You have been asked, whether it would be 
advantageous to the Hospital to have more 
cabins £an thev have a fund for providing for 
the people? You were, I think, asked that 
question ? — ^I was. 

What was your answer to that? — Certainly, 
I think, paruament would not besrudge a 
small matter to the seamen of the Itospital, if 
the revenue should foil a little short 

If I misunderstood you, you will set me 
right. Did you not say you think there might 
be a great many more pensioners maidtaiiMd, 
if there was a piroper economy in the Hospital? 
— ^I do think a considerable number more; I 
think so sincerely in my conscience* 



V 



167] 



18 GEORGE III. The Que ofCaptaim Themat 



[168 



And in that case, if there were more pen- 
sioners, would not the additional cabins, that 
are now given to those officers and servants, 
he wanted for them ?--Certainly . 

May it not be an inducement to those offi- 
cers. Knowing they would be turned out of 
their cabins, not to increase the number of 
pensioners? — ^It does not depend upon those 
officers. 

If the fund was increased for the pensioners, 
might there not be more rooms made in the 
Hospital for pensioners? — Certainly there 
mignt. 

Without removing those officers you com- 
plain of? — I don't know that there could. 

Was there any room, before tiie fire, to put 
up more cabins, without removing any of the 
Clerks out of the Hospital ? — I believe not, un- 
less the infirmary were to be filled ; we alwavs 
keep a little spare room, in case of any epide- 
mic distemper. 

How many spare rooms do you keep? — 
Thirty or forty cabins, I believe, firom me- 
mory. 

The Earl of Sandwich', Were not some of 
those rooms taken away, and had cabins put 
in them, since I have l>een at the Admiralty ? 
— There have been some fire places taken 
.away, to make more room at a very consider- 
able expence. 

But has it been done?— Yes; but if the 
clerks had been removed, it would have been 
done without any expence hardly. 

Don't the out^pensioners come up here 
every year, to receive their pay ?— No, at their 
own pleasure, as it suits them; sometimes 
they make a voyage to the East or West In- 
dies, and then come and get Uieir money, or it 
is paid to their attomies. 

Suppose they are in England, are they not 
obliged to come and receive their pension? — 
Not unless they choose it; their money is re- 
mitted to their attomies. * 

Without their comins up?— Yes, without 
the expence or trouble ofcoming up. 

There are out-pensioners live as far off as 
Liverpool?— In all parts of the kingdom. 

Do you know any at Liverpool ? — Not parti- 
cularly. 

But you say there are some who would wish 
to be m-pensbners?^I believe the greater 
part of them. 

- Have they some difficulty to receive their 
money? — ^I don't believe they have any diffi- 
• culty to get it ; it is always paid regularly. 

You tmnk it an advantage to be an in-pen- 
aioner? — ^Yes. 

How many out-pensioners do you think there 
are now^ that would wish to be in-pensioners ? 
— I dare say more than half, three quarters 
perhaps * there are very few but what would 
wish to be in Greenwich Hospital. j 

• How man^ in-pensioners do you think tiiere 
are at this tune, that are not seamen?— I be- 
lieve they are all 8eafaring4nen ; I don't know 
my abuse in that particiUar; I don't know of 
anysuch* 



Whether it is necessary for an out-pensioner 
to come to London to receive his pay ? — ^No, I 
believe it b not; they have it remitted to 
them, with all fiM^ity, to the difierent collec- 
tors where they happen to live. 

Inform the committee what mone^ is given 
to the pensioners of the Hospital, instead of 
provisions? — There is a great deal of money 

F'ven to the pensioners instead of provisions, 
believe to at least half the pensioners. We 
have near 9,400, including pensioners, nuraes, 
and boys, and I dont think we feed, upon an 
average, 1,000. 

Please to repeat what you have just said ? — 
We have S, 169 pensioners, 1 SO nurses, and X40 
boys ; out of that number, amounting to about 
SS,400, we feed about 1,000. 
- What are the persons that have mon^, in 
what manner, and on what account? — Inere 
is first of all a list, that is called the money- 
list; that money-list was originally the fiill 
value of the pensioners' allowance, when that 
was first instituted, how long ago I can't tell ; 
I believe it took place about the year 1730, or 
since perhaps, I cannot say ; the nrovisions of 
a pensioner were then estimated at 6d. per 
diem, I consider it now worth Td, or T^d. ; 
they are paid only td. that is a saving to the 
Hospital. 

How is that granted? Is it granted to every 
pensioner who chooses to ask for it? — ^It is a 
sort of favour granted by the directors of the 
Hospital ; there was a ereat abuse in that, but 
now it is only done by ue recommendation of 
the phvsician and surgeon; that list has in- 
creased to veiy near 400, 1 believe. 

And at the recommendation of the surgeon, 
money is ei ven to these pensioners f What is it 
given in lieu of? — ^AU kinds of provisions 
whatever; it makes them a sortot out-pea- 
sioners, for Uiey don't even muster. 

Do they lie in the Hospital ? — ^Yes ; uidess 
the council give them leave to lie out, which is 
sometimes granted. 

They receive sixpence without any deduc- 
tion ? — ^Yes, without any deduction wnatever. 

How does it appear that this is a saving to 
the Hospital? Is 7 id, charged?— No, but if 
they were victualled, it woidd certainly cost 
that. 

Does that saving g» to the charity stock?^ — 
I believe it is not apmied to that purpose. 

What were the aouses that occasioned that 
alteration that you say has happened there, 
that now it is only upon the recommendation 
of the surgeon and physician? — That list in- 
creased so much, that it took the men off the 
butier's aijid the chalk-off list, which are ap- 
propriated to the purposes of the charity : as 
the charity suffered by their beinjg taken m>m 
the butler's and the chalk-ott list, it was 
thought necessaiy to put some restraint upon 
it. 

What number have now the money allowed 
in lieu of provi»ons? — From 360, 1 believe, to 
400. 

What is the chalk^off list?'-It i3 a li«t tiifei 



l6Sf] rnpecting ike RoyiU HospUal at Greenwich. A. Vf} 177d« 



[170 



mry man indiscriminately, upon liis first ad- 
missJOD into Greenwich Hospital, is put on 
whether he likes it or not; in short, they 
dim't ask his consent, hut they give him 
money in lieu of meat and cheese twice a 
week ; that instead of having meat five times 
a week, they have it, upon an averajge, about 
three times ; tbere is a profit arising from that, 
moe fifth part of the original contract price is 
deducted ; the profit gOes to the charity stock. 

How much are they allowed ? — There is one 
fifth part d^ucted Irom the contract price. 

Upon what articles? — Upon the meat, and 
upon the cheese ; for instance, they get about 
^d, fin- a pound of meat, which costs perhaps 

What becomes of that? Is the meat fiir- 
mdied by the butcher and then sold again }-^ 
No, it is not fiimished. 

And then is that set down, as so much fur- 
nished by the Hospital? — ^No, they only set 
down what is received, certainly. 

How is the difference applied to the charity 
stock? — The men are paid less money for 
their provisions than the contract, and the 
dUerence between what they pay the men, 
and what would have been otherwise paid to 
the ocMitnictor, is appropriated to the charity 
stock. 

And that is instead of meat and cheese? — 
Yes. . 

For how many days in a week? — ^Upon an 
average, about twice in a week ; in order to 
induce liiese men to submit to that reeulatien, 
tiiiey are allowed broth made out of me other 
men's meat; so that they have that indul- 
gence alternately, because every man alike is 
subject to that regulation. 

Are all the men in the Hospital indiscrimi- 
nately subject to this? — ^Yes, except those 
upon the money-list and the butler's list : I 
was going to say that by that regulation the 
broth is much impoverished, because we make 
broth for 400 men that do not boil meat in 
the copper, which impoverishes the broth, and 
«ich poor broth brings disgrace upon the Hos- 
pital. 

What is the butler's list ? — The men on that 
list sell all their allowance, except beer; they 
cannot sell that, because it would j>robably 
bring excise upon the Hospital ; besides, it is 
better than they can buy tor the money Uioy 
.would receive, thero being no excise upon it. 
There is one-fifUi part likewise deducted from 
the or^nal price of the rest of their allowance, 
which IS applied to the charity stock. 
* What is the consequence of this? Do you 
.im^ane that it b nroductiveof any disorder or 
dninkenness in tne Hospital? — ^It causes a 
scene of dissijpation and drunkenness through- 
out the Hospital; for seamen are like children, 
they have little or nathought for themselves. 

Have there been any complaints made upon 
that subject to the proper officers ?— Hie board 
of ^ferectors themselves took notice of this 
scene of drunkenness and irregularity in the 
Ho^Mtaly and desir^ the couacil to enquire 



into the cause of it; tiie council did ao^ ayidre- 
ported to the board of directors unanimously, 
that they thought itowii^ to the chalk-off list 
that occasion^ all that drunkenness and iire- 
gularity in the Hospital. 

Be so good as to point out the minutes of 
the council upon that matter? — It is in the 
minutes of the council of the 9th of August, 
1776. 

Mr. Ball (Clerk of the Council) called in. 

Read the minutes of the council of 9th Au- 
gust, 1776. 

Vlr, Ball read the following Minute : 

^ A minute of the board of directors com- 
plaining of the irregularity of the pensioners, 
was laia before the council, who were unaqi- 
mously of opinion, that the money list and but- 
ler's fistp smce the great increase of pen- 
sioners, IS now become necessary and expe- 
dient, having no place at present to accommo- 
date them at the tables, where only Ji,<250 can 
commodiously dine; besides which, it contri- 
butes to the ease and satisfaction of those who 
have families, by dining with them, and also 
from the confinement of attending twice a day 
at the hall for then: provisions. That the 
chalking off the pensioners, and ^ving money 
indiscriminately to all upon their first amis- 
sion, is not only contrary.to the establishment, 
but injurious to the health and morals of the 
pensioners, and is attended with many incon^ 
veniencies, improprieties, and irregularities; 
and the council are unanimously of opinion, 
that the said custom ou^ht to l>e totally abb- 
lished, there being suffiaent room in the din- 
ing halls to dine all the chalk-off men.'' 

You keep the minutes of the council? — 
Yes. 

You don't keep the minutes of the court of 
directors? — No, Mr. Ibbetson keeps them. 

Mr. Ibbetson (Secretary to the Directors) call^ 

edin. 

Do you know of any answer that was made 
to the minutes of the council of the 9th of 
August, 1776? — I donH know of any answer 
that was made immediately to the council 
upon that business. 

Were any steps taken in consequence of it ? 
— ^I will read to your lordships what passed 
upon that occasion. 

<« On the 3d of Au^st, 1776, the board 
takine notice of many inconveniencies which 
attend the practice of the pensioners selling 
their provisions, and also that of their being 
chalked off, and money given them in Ueu oT 
their meat upon admission into the Hospital 
on account thereof, instead of having the al- 
lowance of meat, according to the establish- 
ment five days, they have it onlv in their 
turns, three days in uie week, and improper 
uses made of the money so received by them 
in Jieu, &c. &c. 

** Resolved, that Uie council be deured to 
report their opinion to this board on Saturday 



171] 



18 GEORGE UL \ The Que qfO^ain Thomas BaiOUy [172 



next, if the aboii^iiag tbecustom of cfaAtkwS" 
off, and giving such money in lieu, which n^ 
pears ptoduGtive of so many irregiuanlieSy &c. 
-win be attended with any, and what impro- 
prieties and inoonveniencies. That the board 
meet on SaUirdaTf next to take this matter into 
consideration. 

,** On Saturday followin^^ the lOth of Au- 
gust, a minute of the cotmcil of the 9th instant 
was read, in answer to a reference (torn this 
board, whereby it appears, that they are una- 
Bimously of opinion the money aiui butler's 
lists should be continued^ but the custom of 
chalking off should be totally abolished, to 
prevent their making improper uses of the 
money so received by them, in lieu of meat 
and cheese. The fartner conmderation of the 
money and butler's hsts, and chalking off the 
penskmersy are postponed/' and nothing seems 
to be done upon that occasion. 

My lonk, I was absent through illness; 
and the motives of it, and how it came to be 
dropt, I cannot say, Anther than the minutes 
say. 

Was there no iiulher step taken upon it? — 
No. 

That practice continues to this day ?— There 
has no alteration taken place that I know of. 

[Bftr. Ibbetson withdrew.] 

Captain Baillie called in agaii^ 

Whether you know who instituted this cus- 
tom of the chalk-off list — In whose time was 
it instituted ? — ^It was before my time. 

Don't you know who vras steward of the 

rHosnttal when it was instituted? — I cannot 

weak iroon oath to tiiat, 1 believe it was Mr. 

Bell, a tartaer steward — ^it was done before I 

came into the Hospital. 

Did you never see it in a book that it was 
Mr. Bell? — I have, in a book lately published, 
called '* A State of Facts," but I don't know 
positively that that is the fact, because I see 
It there in print. [Captain IbiiHie withdrew.] 

Mr. Ibbetson called in again. 

Whether or not you think that the giving of 
mon^ instead of the aUowuK:e of meal, has 
been the means of increasins drunkenness, 
idleness, and dissipation in the Uospital ? — For 
one, I cannot conceive that it has, because, if 
the pensioners had been permitted to eo on, 
as they did at the time that that regiuation 
was made, which is now upwards of 50 years 
a^ ; it was made, I tiunk, in the year 1725, it 
did appear then, and appears upon the mi- 
nutes, I believe, on the books, which are now 
upon your lordships' table, tlmt the reason of 
wing it up was, tnat the pensioners at that 
time took their provisions and sold them in 
the neighbouring villages about Greenwich, 
and that they got for it much less than when 
that regulation afterwards took place, to sdl it 
tothebutier; ifthey can make money of pro- 
visions, they will, with that money, undoubt- 
edly buy drmk^ if they are inclined to do so ; 
the only question b, whctiier they may not be 



enabled to buy more, because they have a 
greater allowance for it from the Hospital. 

I think the allowance now is thi*ee oxen a 
week on beef days? — ^I don*t )aaQw any thing 
of the detail of that. 

The Earl of Sandwich. Do you know who 
was the contriver of this chalk-off list? — Of 
the money lists, in general, Mr. Bell; the 
chalk-off, I ims^gine, is one of them ; there is 
a minute that lies now upon your lordships' 
table of the general court, where Mr. Bell, 
when he applied for superannuation, hath 
enumerated all the services that he had done 
to Greenwich Hospital; there was a printed 
memorial handed about it, but the substance 
of it is entered in these minutes; among 
other things t^t he took ciedit and merit for, 
was his having introduced this r^ulation of 
the pensioners being permitted to take money 
in lieu of provisions, and he had a reward of 
.500/. given him by the general court for his 
services, that among the rest. 

(Reaas.) ^ At a general court held at the 
Admiralty, November 17; 1761, present lord 
Anson, Dr. Hay, &c. &c. 

'' Resolved, That Mr. Bell, the stewaid, wha 
through his l^g service, great age, and other 
infirmities, is become incapable of perfomung 
the duty of his office, be superannuated at 
100/. per annum during his natural Itfe, &c. 
and in consideration of the great and beneficial 
services following by him ^ne and perfoimed 
to the Hospital during his stewaraship, the 
Court are pleased to order and direct, that a 

Satuity or 500/. be given him as a reward for 
e flame ;" among uie rest were the introduc- 
tion of the three money lists. 

At what time was the institution of these 
charity boys ? — ^I believe about the year 1785. 

I want io know how long sJiier the institu- 
tion of these boys it was, that Mr. Bell had 
planned iJtm scheme that you have now read 
for the better maintenance of these boys? — I 
betieve it was about the very time tliat the 
first estabMshment of the charity boys took 
place, that this regulation took place. 

That you say was in the year 17«5. — ^Ycs. 

Does it appear by the minutes that you have 
before you there, that Mr. Bell had then the 
stewarcbhip of the Hospital ? — He was ap- 
pointed steward in 1719, and continued in it 
till 1761. 

If these three money lists were abofttshed, 
must not the boys be turned out of the Hos- 
pital, or must It not be paid out of the revenue 
of the Hospital ? — ^In the year 1778, by an ac- 
count I have in my hand, the produce that is 
from the savings arising from these regukh~ 
tions. was ],65S/. 14i. S^tL 

when was that court of directors held, 
when they recommended the consideration of 
this list to the council of the House ? — ^I think 
the 3d of August, 1776. 

The minute is, ** The board of directors ob- 
serving the irregularity ;" was tiiat an irregu- 
larity that happened just at that time ? — I have 
already said I was abaeiMi and ill in the 



175} rt9peeHng the Rog&l Uo9pi$ia tU Grmmcieh. A.D. 111$^ 



[174 



try at tfae time tim happened; my clerk n 
hoe, if the House wUl permit him to etre any 
ftftfaier infbnnation ; this is as it stanos on the 
WBuies^ and I don't know the reasons why 
they did not go frrUier into the enmihy . I 
fctve a&ked my clerk about it, and he says 
tbey tfaoti^t it would be taking too much off 
mn this chanty fundi 

I think vou are a director? — ^No, I am se-^ 
oetary to the boardof directors. 

Are you one of the council? — ^Yes. 

Doa*t you think it part of your duty to be 
attentive to the economy of the Hospital ? — 
Undoubtedly. 

Then don't you think that a saving made, 
the consequence of which is drunkenness and 
inmioralityy is a species of such economy 
which you think not undeserving the atten- 
tion of the board of directors ? — I must first be 
certain that it is the fact, and that it is the 
occasion of that drunkenness and disorder that 
is stated ; I am by no means certain that it is. 

Were you present at that council thatuna^ 
nimously repmented that it was? — I have al- 
leady said I was absent at that time^ and in 
the country. 

Whether you imagine that the unanimous 
opimoD of the council is likely to be well or 
91-fouiidedy are thev proper judges of it ? — In- 
^eed, I shouki think they are proper judges ; 
It IS not impossible if I had been tnere, that I 
miidit have concurred in the opinion. 

What ore the different funds that produces 
tiie charity stock ? — The profits arising on the 
provisions bought of the pensioners, that is 
Iheprincipal one. 

What do you call the provisions bought of 
the pensioners?— The men that take money 
in lieu of their provisions. 

Is that the money list ? — No, the money list 
is a very inconsiderable part, but this is out of 
my department very much, and there are peo- 
ple in the House tlutt can ^ve your lordsnips 
better information. 

Who are those persons? — The steward, I 
should think, and tne butler, I am very sure 
will be able to give the House better infor- 
mation. 

If these money lists were annihilated, whe- 
ther the muntenance of the boys must not 
come imoD the revenue of the Hospital ? — Un- 
doubteol^, or their number must be dimimsh- 
ed ; tha mcome is more than the expence df 
them a Uttle, but if you take away 1.600^ out 
of 9,900/. or 9,300/. which is the whole amount 
of that revemie, your lordships must easily 
conceive that must decrease the number of 
them, or supplies must be raised some otiier 
way. 

Are not the savings of these several lists as 
much the revenue of the Hospital as any 
other part of it? — They certdnly may be ap- 
plied to it. 

Are they not part of the revenue of the 
Hospita], that is my question ?•— Not a part of 
the letenue of the Hospital that has ever been 
sppfied to-aoy other bmmess but thb of the 
koys. t- 



Out ei'whosepodket comes this money that 
is 80 Bavtd ? — ^rat of the money comes from 
shewing the painted hall and chapel ; that 
might be appned certainly to the cnamtenanct 
of pensioners as well as the boys ? 

That is a part of the revenue of the Hos- 
pital ? — Certainly. 

Out of what revenue comes the money that 
is saved upon the Sfveral lists ?--Supposing 
every man was to take up his provisions, that 
saving, which is now a profit to the Hospital, 
would be in the butcher's pocket, by supplying 
more meat. 

It might be in the butcher's pocket, but 
would it not be in the pensioners' bellies ^ Is 
not the fund itself the revenue of the Hospital, 
out of which all these savings come?-^I dbn't 
understand that. 

Is it not the fund out of which the savings 
issue, as well as every thing else ? Is not that 
a part of the revenue of the Hospital ? — This 
is a saving that arises from the allowing the 
pensioners a fiflh part less than what is the 
real value of their provisions. 

I will put it another way; suppose 7s. a 
week was tfae allowance of the pensioner, 
would that 7f . be a part of the revenue or not r 
•^Undoubtedly. 

Then suppose bv a subsequent order, *1j; 
out of this seven should be converted to the 
maintenance of the charity boys, that is apart 
of the revenue ? — ^Undoubtedly. 

Then the Question I asked is. Are not the 
savings a part of the revenue?— They are part 
of the revenue now of Greenwich Hosplta^^ 
appUed in this particular way. 

1 wanted then to understand that, as the 
noble lord asked if there had been no savings ; 
then the bovs must be maintained out of the 
revenue of the Hospital? — If this custom was 
abolished. 

Then you answered they must be maintain- 
ed out of the revenues of the Hospital ? — If this 
custom was abolished, this saving of 1,000/. a 
year, would be lost to Greenwich Hospital, 
then if that was lost, it must be suppliea out. 
of other revenues of Greenwich Hospital. 

But still they are both the revenues of 
Greenwich Hospital ? — I apprehend this sum 
would not be a part of the revenue in any way» 
if you abolish the practice, the revenue would 
notarise. 

Is it any thing more than this, that 'out of 
the allowance of the pensioners, you take so 
much money and give it to the charity boys ? 
— But it is not taking it from the revenue of 
the Hospital, and giviQgittothe ch«ity boys. 

Why, the whole is th^ revenues of the Hos- 
pital ; are nbi the chari^ boys part of the ori-^ 
ginal institution ? — No, the charity boys are 
an excrescence. 

Then I believe you have not read the act of 
the 17th of king Willkm, because I find in 
that acL they fue part of the original institu* 
tion?— i can i^ew the minutes of the first es- 
tablishment of these boys ; the directors found 
that there were some little prefits arising from 



175] 



18 GEORGE IIL The Case ^ Capain Thonuu SailUe, [17G 



shewing the painted-haU, the mulcts of pen- 
sionerSy and meir cheaues ; that it amounted 
to something, and tney asked the general 
court if thev might not apply it to the main- 
tenance of the sons of the pensioners. 

Was that the first commencement of it ? — It 
was. 

I am very sorry for it, for it was the original 
institution by that act of parliament ; the Doys 
have the same right u^n the act to a main- 
tenance as the pensioners have; when were 
the boys established ? — I think about the year 
1795, I am not quite certain; it was a great 
while after the institution. 

Mav not these pensioners that are put upon 
the chalk-off list at their option, be put off 
of it whenever they please ?-r-I understand 
that it is by no means compulsory. 

Do vou know whether they may be put off 
upon their application ? — I understand so. 

Suppose they all received their provisions 
in meat, is there room for them todme P — ^No, 
I understand that the two dining halls will not 
accommodate more than 1,200. 

Then to go a httle further, how lone ag;o b 
it since more than 600 could dine P—AVithin 
6 or 7 years: since lord Sandwich has been at 
the Adnuraity, a new dining-hall has been 
fitted up, which has accomm<raated 600 more. 
' Was It not the custom that 600 people dined 
in the hall, and that they were obliged to he 
hurried away from their dinner, ancf then 600 
people came to their diet in the same hall to 
dine upon their table ? — I understand that to 
have been the practice. 

Then bv whose interposition was it, that an 
additional. hall was formed, that enabled 1,900 
people to dine at the same time at different 
tables? — I was absent when that came under 
consideration, but I understood it was firom a 
survey lord Sandwich made of Greenwich 
Hospital; his lordship found this place as 
suitable as the other, for it is just a similar 
buildine to it, and it was ordered to be fitted 
up, ancT it is now as complete as the other, 
and holds as many people. 

If the pensioners diet not some of them re- 
ceive money instead of provisions, must they 
not return to that custom of dining, either in 
the open air, or of coming and dinmg at the 
tables where those other people had dined ? — 
Undoubtedly, because there are only 1,900 
out of 2,100 that can be accommodated. . 

Acquaint the Committee if you know what 
the different funds are. firom whence the cha- 
rity stock arises?— Tne profits arising from 
the sale of those provisions. 

I want to know what you mean by the sale 
'of provisions, is that the money list, or is any 
other list included?— It means the buUer's- 
list and chalk-off Ust; I apprehend it b con- 
fined to those two ; the money list, I appre- 
hend, as near as I can calculate it ; they iuive 
the fi^ll value of the provisions, consequently 
there is no saving to the Hospital, but that is 
a veiy small part ; the butler's Ust is the prin- 
cipal thingi every man who chooses it goes to 



the buUer, and may take money in lieu of pro- 
visions. 

We have had that explained; I desire to 
know, when you say the first article, finom 
whence the charity stock arises, is the provf- 
sions boueht, what are the articles you in- 
clude in that, do you mean the butlerfs list 
and cl^k-off list, or only one of them ?-^Both 
of them. 

Do ^ou know the proportions that those 
two articles produce ?— I ao not. 

Do you know the sum total that both pro- 
duce? — In this paper, which is of what it 
produced in 1778, it is 1,65?/. 14s. another 
mnd is the.monev collected for shewing Uie 
Painted Hall, ana the chapel; when there 
was a chapel, that produced clear to the cha- 
rity, (for the porter^ has a fourth part of it) 
the otner three-fourths, in the year 1778,'pn>- 
duced 753/. Bf. 4id. then there is 8,000/; in 
Old and New South Sea annuities, which 
bears an interest of three per cent and 8,5001. 
South Sea stock. 

How did that stock arise ? — From savings ; 
the fimds for the boys were more than suffi- 
cient for their maintenance, and the surplus 
has been invested, firom time to time, in Uie 
fimds, on their account 

Then I understand from you that there are 
several sums of money in the stocks, amouQt- 
ing to about 14,000/. ?— Sixteen thousand five 
hundred pounds. 

Which are savings th^t have been made out 
of the fimds which were applicable to that 
charity for the maintenance of the boys, ig 
that so ? — ^Yes, it is. 

How is the interest of that applied again ? 
---To the maintenance of the chanty boys ; it 
forms a part of their fund. 

Do you not look upon that stock to belons 
to Greenwich Hospital ?— It is a separate finna 
that is kept for the boys. 

Don't you imacine that the general court 
might apply that fund for any other purpose 
of the charity, if they thought proper ? — Un- 
doubtedly. 

Then what other funds are there that pro- 
duce the revenues of this charity ? — Another 
fiind, which, in the vear 1778, produced 
168/. Sf. 4|</. was, the absences, cheques, and 
mulcts. 

What did those cheques and mulcts arise 
firom ? — When a pensioner is absent without 
leave, he is chequed of his provisions, and I 
apprehend that he is charged to the Hospital 
as victualled, but that the amount of his pro- 
visions goes to the charity stock. 

What are the mulcts? — Mulcts are put 
upon the men for various misdemeanors, 
small mulcts. -. 

Are there any other articles ? — Here is in 
this accoimt, the produce of some old shoes 
which were sold, which applied to that stock, 
that amounted to 10/. Inere is money be- 
loxmng to a deceased pensioner, put into the 
stock by order of the council ; it is a rule, if 
a pensioner dies without a will, and there L» 



17^ ttipeMng the Royal Hospital at Greeniaich. A. D. 177B. 



[lYS 



DobodjiodEim-what he has left, it-is put into 

the stewud's hands to be apptied to the cha- 
nts stock, Subject to be restoied^ io case 
tbore ife ti^ dainant. 

b there any more P— -No. 

Nmr, with r^ard to the application of this 
money, how much was the total produce of 
the revenues of the charity stock for that year ? 
—Two thousand five hundred and thirty-four 
pounds^ if I have cast it right. 

How was tiiat applied, in Che course of that 
5W?— Here are the particulars of the applica^ 
tioBofit. 

Is that account lona?--Yes. 

Is there any of that fund applied to any 
other purpose than the muntenance of the 
bojrs?— There are some of the officers of the 

nital, myself among the rest, that have 
additiuns to their salaries out of that 
fimd, m omsideiution of the extraordinary 
Mobie that we have on account of that busi- 
ness ; the steward has %0i, for his trouble ; 
he has a great deal of business. 

Be so good as read the list of those officers, 
asdtbesalariea that they have out of it?— 
The persons that are employed about the cha^ 
litj boys and have their salaries, or additions 
t» other salaries, paid out, are, the schoolmas- 
ter has too/, a year, the surgeon an allowance 
of so/, a year, the clerk of me cheque has 10 
guineas a year, the clerk of Waterman Vhall 
10 euineas a year ; the clerk of Waterman's- 
haliiised to 'be employed upon the business I 
am ftoing to state to your lordships ; there is 
noUier person now employed, a person living 
ia LiMxlon, in order to go on board ships, to 
see whether the boys tlmt are bound out are 
really belonging to those ships, and to keep up 
atorrespon&Dce with the clerk of the cheque, 
relative to that business. The dispenser nas 
10/. his joumeyman has 10/^, the steward's 
int clerk 10/., tiie clerk of the cheque's first 
derk has 10/., the guardian's salary lo/., and 
three assistants 5/. each, five nurses 15/. 
each, two helpers 6/. each, a person for teach- 
vg vsahnody to the boys 5/., that particular 
<Wwymeat is now abolished; the chapel 
derk U^ and the sexton S/. Since this esta- 
bhshment, the steward has had 20/., myself 
^i I think the two chaplains have had 
their salaries increased 30/. each, which is 
fiid out of that stock, and that is the ^hole 
that I recollect. ' 

Whether these addhtional salaries, that you 
have mentwned, are to be paid out of the 
charit;^ stock at all events, or only in case 
*tte tsasurphis? — ^Upon my word I don't 
know how they would be paid, if there v«ras 
not a surplus. 

There 18 nothing of thaif sort in the warrant 
^directions? — It Is ordered to be paid out of 
^ charity ntodk-^ I should hope and ima|^e 
they would think ' it veiy reasonable to p^ it 
m of some mher iiind, if there ia not suifi- 
aentia'that* 

Who are the Tteitods that h^tcl 1»ie diulbts 
^9tm themcn^^he.<^M9BBil in Moeral. 

VOL XXL 



And how many of these gentlemen have 
seats M the council ?— I believe only four, 
that have any allowance out of the charity 
stock ; the two chaplains, the steward, and 
myself. 

Have there been any savings of this charity 
stock lately, that have been vested in the 
stocks to increase that fund f — ^Not very lately, 
on account of Mr. Ellis's deiiciencv ; it is aa 
muth as the^ haVe been able to cio to keep 
above water, if I may so say ; his deficiency 
was near a thousand pounds upon this stocky 
and they have built a school-house since that, 
which might cost 5 or 600/. or more, so that 
has taken away a good part of what would 
otherwise have been a saving, and woidd 
otherwise have been invested in the funds. 

What is the particular use these eentle;nieA 
are to the boys, who you mentioned, I think, 
had some extraordinary trouble } Is that ex« 
traordinary trouble greater than before the al- 
lowance was made f — I don't know Uiat it is 
greater. 

What is- the extraordinary trouble that the 
chaplains are at, more than they used to be f 
—I cannot speak to that. 

Does the chaplain catechise the boys?«- 
Yes, he does. 

How often ?— I don't know how often, by 
their instrue^ons, they are to do it. 

I doh't ask what he is bound to do, but what 
you know he does? — ^I don't know that he 
does it. 

Captain Bailiie again. 

I would ask you relative to the charity 
stock ; do you know what funds it arises from ? 
— From the ftmds Mr. Ibbetson has describ- 
ed, but in some points I think rather a little 
different; it arises from the butler's list, the 
chalk-oflTlist, and the mulcts and the cheques 
of pensioners; not only from the pensioners 
that are absent without leave, the pensioners 
never have any leave of absence without being 
chequed, unless it is for one single day ; if a 
pefisionergoea down to Chatham, to receive 
tTie remains of anv little pension that may be 
due to him fit>m the chest of Chatham, if it 
is only for four days, though he is obliged to 
borrow the money perhaps to carry him down 
to Chatham, in the mpn time he is chequed 
for the benefit of the charity stock ; it appears 
to me, on that account, to be very hostile to 
the pensioners. 

what are these charity boys ? Are they tHe 
children of disabled seamen, or the children 
of seamen maimed, drowned^ or killed in the 
service? — I believe they don't in any way 
confine it to that ; for I have known a clerk 
of a yacht have four children in Greenwich 
Hospital; it is not confined to the sons of 
seamen kiHed^ drowned, disabled, or dead in 
the* service. - 

Who appomt these boys ?•— The directors. 

^ Mr. Soawrd called iflu 

Are you the butler ?-**Ye9» 

. N 



179] 



IB GEORGE III. The Case of Captain Thmoi BaiOie^ X'SO 



' Give an account of the produce of the but- 
.ler's list ?-^Thc produce of the butler's list, 
together with the chalk-off list, aBiounts to 
.about 120/. a month. 

I bee to have them separated f — The 
chalk-off list amounts to about 350/. or 370/. 
•a year. 

What does the butler's list produce per 
annum ? — About 800/. 

So that the whole produces about 1,900/, a 
year ^-r-Better than that, because there is 
^dieese ; the men are paid for cheese^ as well 
as their meat, every seven da^s. . 

What does the money list produce?— I 
cannot say^ that is not in my department. 

You said something about tne cheese ? — 
They are paid, every seven ^days, money in 
lieu, of their cheese ; there are about 1,S00 
men victualled at the tables ; 800 have meat, 
and 400 have money alternately, and are paid 
every seven days for their cheese. 
. Does the butler's list include every article ? 
— ^Itdoes, except beer; the chalk-on is about 
570, the cheese, about 500, tifid the butler's 
list perhaps may be about 600. 

Is the cheese thai part of the chalk-off 
list? — Yes; the people who have money in 
lieu of provisions, are not coippelled 16 take 
flaoney m lieu of their provisions ; I spoke to 
them to-day upon that account, in case they 
^ould have any thing to say. 

Do I understand you right, that the cheese 
alone, without the mea^ produce 500/. a 
year ? — ^I believe it does. 

And the meat d60/.?~Ves, it is in the 
whole about' 1 ,600/. I only mention this iirom 
remembrance; I have not the list. 
. Did not you say you told them to-day about 
this? — ^U^hen I paid them their money for 
their meat, I asked them whether they chose 
to have their meat or their money, because I 
told them I believed I shoidd be called before 
this honourable House to-day, to give an ao- 
count of their chalk-off, and I wished to know 
whether they chose to have their meat or 
their money; the^ begged of me that I would 
present it, at their request, that they migjht 
have meat two days, and be paid ior it uie 
third. 

Did it stand otherways before than only by 
choice ? — No, always by choice. 

[Mr. Saward withdrew.] 

'Captain Baillie called in again. 

What do you know of any additional salaty 
being ^ven to an <H^uust? — ^I only knoiw 
that the organist has had an additional ap- 
pointment within this short time. 

Is it a new office ? — Entirely a new office. 

What does he do for it? — Be ^teaches the 
pharity boys to sing hymns by note. 

Does tluit office seem to he nepessary ? — ^J 
thjnk it quite foreign from tbfi ediicat^on of a 
boy intended for fie sea service ; the elder 
pensioners axle many of them ftmd of singing 
psalms; by this pewxegulatiqfiy Iho meo are 



deprived of that part of their devotbns in a 
great measure. 

Do you know what salary this ox»nist has f 
— I believe SO/, a year, over and wove what 
he had before. 

What had he befoire ? — ^I believe 40L as 
omnist 

Did he attend before, and play the oigan ? 
— ^Yes. 

And he has 20/. additional salaiy forteach- 
ingthe boys ?•— Yes. 

They are not taught the usual way of sing^ 
ing the old psalm^y ?— They sing by oote^ 
not the psalms, but hymns. 

Where does the organbt reside? — ^In the 
town of Greenwich; he is not lodged in the 
Hospital. 

You mention this ta a new institution ; ho# 
long is it since the oifpanist has been appoint- 
ed ? — ^I mean the instituti^ of a new organist 
to teach the boys; thatwaswhatlalludedto. 

You did not mean then that the organist is 
a new institution ? — ^No, I did not. 

Give an account to the Committee of what 
abuses you know of h&ving existed relative to 
clothing, such as sho^ stockings, linen, beds , 
and washihg? — The washing, for a great 
many years last past, I don't say within this 
vear or two particularly, but for seteral yean^ 
nas be^n notoriously bad; insomuch, that 
one never sees a pensioner with a dean shirt 
on. 

But what , complaints have you had? — I 
have had a great many complaints of it ; I 
beg leave to refer to the minutes of the 
coimcil. 

Mr. Ball reads the Minutes. 

** At a pouncil held in the Royal Hospital for 
seamen at Greenwich, January 16, 1778. 

''The nurses, Bolton, Hendy, and Roeey 
having compluned to tiie council, that the 
linen oelonsing to the men under their car^ 
was very baaly washed^ and not fit to be deli- 
vered to the pensioners; and the fbilowinc 
pensioners, viz. William Sedden, John Foi«^ 
Aaron Johnson, Andrew Wilson, Thomas 
Rapely, Dennis Donovan, Christopher Cle- 
ments, Allen M'Donald, and several others^ 
declared, the^ were obli^ to wash their ow& 
linen afler it came from the laundry; and 
having produced th^r shirts, stocks, towel% 
&c. and the same having been inspected bj 
the council, anpeatedbad^ washed, dkty and 
of a disafireeabie smell ; sind the nurses being 
examined to know whether they had cook 
plained to the matron, answered, they bad» 
out that the linen was always retumed in the 
same manner; and they had likewiae oon^ 
plained to the contractor, threatening te ap« 
peal to the officers and oouhcil of the Houai^ 
and that he replied, that the council luii 
nothing to do with it^ and that il was on^ 
the matron'* business to kmeot into it ; and 
it appearing to the council that the compiaint 
ia jiffit and welMountMb Mid the waahinig the 
pensignen' Jioen equiOy bid throughout the 



J817 ntpfcAig the Rojfol HoBpUal at Greemokh. A. D.' 1778. 



[182 



Eospitily the matrons are therefore hereby I 
dnteiei not to give cert^cates for any linen 
tbit is not really ckan and well washed. — Bf 
Older of the council, Daniel Ball." 

Captain But/Zte again. 

Was any thing of tins represented to the 
fioard of mreciors ? — I don*t know that that 
minute wzs; I have been quite tired out in 
lepresentiiig matters which nave not been re- 
dressed; it has been a general received opi- 
moD in the Hospital^ it has been inculcated 
into almost every officer of the house, that 
the council of the house for naval officers had 
nothii^ to do but to discipline the pensioners, 
to pumsh them when they are refiactory, but 
not to be their guardians or protectors in any 
other way; that respecting their provisionS| 
washing, and bedding, it is the deoartment 
of the steward and the clerk of the cheque. 

Have you othei" instances to produce of 
complaints having been made of tne badness 
of the washing? — There is scarce a pensioner 
cf Greenwich Hospital but can speak to that 
•tfclcj I will refer to one Jolm Glass, if your 
Mships please to call him in ; he hsis rnade 
many complaints; it was the same in my 
predecessors time ; complaints were made to 
the council then, but I believe it was not en- 
tocd upon their books ; 'it was ssdd the coun- 
cil had nothine to do with ^ese matters^ 
captain Allwright can tell your lordships about 
the linen, if you please. 

You may jgo through any other article. — To 
my certain laiowledge. the men's shoes and 
^kings don't last them half the time ; I 
have had many hundred complaints concern- 
ing the shoes and stockings from different 
prasioncrs. 

Have you made complaints of that to the 
««ctors?-.No; I thmk it is the duty of the 
officers to apply to the Admiralty ; the coun- 
cil and board of directors are to be a check 
'Jpon jBach other, as I humblv conceive. 

Have you complained to the Admiral^ ? — ^I 
c«nnot sav I have in my own person particu- 
^rly. I nave mentioned it at the council, 
hot they have had a majority there not to lay 
11 hefiwe the Admiralty. 
, Is there any minute of the council respect- 
ing the shoes and stockings? — ^I believe we 
can refer to the minutes of the council re- 
^^cctmg that matter; as to the shoes served 
to^ pensioners, it cannot be expected that 
^qr should last the time; they have only 
^^ pair allowed for two years ; and whilst 
w pnce of leather has been increasing, the 
wntract price of shoes has been reducecT In 
«c hst contract before this, I believe they 
J^ only three shillings and seven-pence 
^^penny a pair ; and to my certain know- 
jjd^ at the work-house in the town of 
Greenwich, they allow four shillings and six- 
Mr. Bail reads aMinuie of the Council of the 
16tb of July, 1777. 
" fntegx, lieiitBMBt^ovcnM>r BaiUiey^- cap- 



tain Allwright, captain Chads, lieutenant 
Answell, captain Lynn, lieutenant Moyle. 
Thomas Frencham having complained to the 
council of his stockings, that one pair of the 
two served him at the last serving, that is in 
Mav last, were worn out in a fortnight, which 
ouglit to have lasted eight months, and that 
the other pair were much womi in the samtf 
time, which he produced before the council ; 
and John Robinson, and several others, hav- 
ing also complained that their stockings which 
they now have, are much inferior to what thev 
uaed to have ; and it appearing to the council, 
that these complaints are justly founded, or- 
dered, that a co^jr of this minute be sent to 
the steward, 'desirinv he would lay the same 
before the board ofdirectors for their infor- 
fliation, that the necessary measures may be 
taken for redressing the men. By order bf 
the council, Daki£l Ball.'' 

Mr. Gadlnfy (the Steward) sworn. 

Did you recfttve a copy of the minutes of 
the council the 18th of July, 1777, to lay be- 
fore the eouH of directors? — ^I did. 

Did you lay them before the board of direc- 
tors } — ^I did not 

What was the reason ?— Upon my clerk's 
informing ihe that there was an order of 
council for me to do that, I told him I had done 
it already, and that Mr. Baillie, who was at 
the head of the counci), was at the board 
when I reoresented the matter of the subject 
of the stocxings to the board. 

Do you imagine that a representation from 

you, as an individual, would have the same 

weight with the board as the unanimous re- 

^ presentation of the coundl ? — ^I think it oug;bt 

' to have more weight, as it was my particular 

du^ to attend to it. 

Do you think yourself authorized, when you 
receive directions from the council to lay their 
complaint before the board of directors, to 
refuse to do it? — ^As the matter had been al- 
ready represented and remedied as much as 
the boara could possibly do at that time. 

Had you ever laid those very complaints 
that are represented in that order of council, 
before the Doard ?-— That very cdmplaint, the 
complaint of the same stockings delivered 
some time in the latter end of May, there 
were about 500 pair of stocking delivered in 
for the use of the pensioners ; it being a large 
quantity, I had no place in my store-rooms to 
lodee them, they were lodeed in the Painted- 
hall, all the day before they were delivered 
out to the pensioners ; when the officer cwne 
down to assist in delivering out these stbck^ 
ings, I attended in person to examine thes<& 
stocidngs; upon looking over some in the 
iront they appeared tolerably good and near 
the pattern, and I began to serve them: the 
derk of the cheque and his clerk, or both^ 
were with me; after about 900 pair^were 
served out, I discovered that they were not 
equsd to the pattern. I got upon the bench^ 
and took smae down ; I examined them iby« 



ISS] 



IS GSORGE m. The Case tfCt^Uun Thmoi BmUie, (Wk 



fielL and immediately ordered the Hall doors 
to De shut, ^ and stopped some ^t had got 
stockingSj and in that very dav it was cried, 
for the men to return the stockings that had 
got them ; a few days ader there was a board 
of directors; I represented the matter to 
them^ and receivea theiir orders how to 
proceed. 

What were these orders ? What was done 
in pursuance of tliis P — I believe the minutes 
of board will shew that. 

Mf. Ibbetson reads. 

<< On the 2l8t of Ma^, 1777, the steward 
having represented by his letter of this date, 
that ihe contractor for hose lately deUvered 500 
dozen, great part of which appeared much 
coarser than the pattern, haa saved some 
which were produced, &c. 

■ '< The contractor was called in and ques- 
tioned, how he came to serve them ; he said 
the stockings were much thicker, stronger, 
-and of more value than the pattern, though 
not so fine.- 

^* Ordered, That the steward cause as many 
to be selected of the best, as there were some 
good, as will be sufficient to supply the men 
with two pitir each ; the rest lo be returned to 
the contractor." 

Q. to Captain Baillie, You have heard what 
Mr. Godby has said about thi^, that the same 
complaint you made, and which was stated in 
that order of the council, had been made by 
him, to that board of directors, when you were 
present, and that he told you ^t was the 
Teason he would not prefer the complaint 
again? — A. That was in May, the other was 
on the 18th of July 1777 ; the pensioners, 
iirst, I understand, would not receive them in 
tlie Painted-hall. 

Were they the same stockings that were de- 
livered in May ?— These are the stockings that 
the men complained of that were delivered in 
May. 

il. to Mr. IbbetsoiK. The complaint it ap- 
pears^ by that minute, is the Slst of Mav; 
does It not appear by the minutes, that the 
stockings which were found to, be not equal 
to the pattern, were notwithstanding that de- 
liver^, that there was such a direction given, 
that such as were good and sufficient should 
be ddivexed. — ** Oraered, That the steward do 
cause as many of the best of them to be se- 
lected as will be sufficient to provide each 
/Dian with two pair, the rest tp be returned to 
the contractor.'' 

Then, do you imagine that, according to 
that order, ,tluit any thing but the best, and 
such as were sufficient and good for the men, 
ought to be delivered ? — Undoubtedly not. 

Now will Mr. Godby be so good as read 
that part of the complamt made afierwaids in 
Juhr? 

ISr. IbhetioH. I beg to be ^mderstood in 
tibat last part of it ; the order directs, tbfA the 
|>est of them that could be selected. 
. X)o jou understand that the t>^t of them 



were to be delivered wbefter good or bad? — ^I 
do certainly understaad t^s minute, that the 
best that could be selected, to the amount of 
two pair to each man. 

^ Do you imagine that the court of directora, 
in givmg that order, meant that any thing 
should be given that were not serviceable for 
the men ? Read the order and see who were 
present?— Sir Charles Hardy, captam Baillie, 
captain Hood, Mr. Stuart, sir tercy Brett^ 

Mr. , sir Peter Dennys, Mr. Hicks^ 

and the rev. Mr. Cooke. [Reads the Order.! 

Then I ask you, should you have thought 
yourself warranted under tliat order, in which 
order is stated, that those which w«re different 
from the pattern were stronger and bettej, fo 
have delivered any to the men that were not 
fit for their use ? — I should have looked upoa 
myself as authorised by that order to bave 
selected the best of them, let their qualily 
have been what it would, and to have issued 
of those best, two pair a man. 

And should you have thought yourself au^- 
thorised so to luive done, without representing 
to the directprs that they were bad?--rlf Ihaa 
found any extremely bad, I certainly should 
have represented that to the board of directors. 

Q. to Captain BailUe, I wanted to know 
whether you objected to the order of the 
board respecting the selecting two pair per 
man out of that bad quantity.— il. I did ; I 
said that the people could not be so much 
distressed for stockings, because they had not 
returned their old stockings. I made use of 
this particulau* argument I am going to use 
now; I said, that the men could not be dis- 
tressed for a week or a fortnight, because 
they had their old stockings, which were 
made of double yam, and were stronger than 
the new. 

Q. to Mr. Ball. Read the order of council, 
the 18th of July, 1777.— Mr. Ball reads the 
order. ^ ' 

Q. to Mr. Godby, Do you imderstand that 
your having complained to the board of di- 
rectors, that the stockings were originally 
bad, and they, had in conseauence oF that, 
upon an enquiry, been told, that they were, 
though a dinerent quahty, stronger, and in 
many respects better than the pattern ; they 
having directed you to deliver out two pair of 
the best, do you think that a complaint, 
stating, that these stockings, which hao been 
delivered in May. were excessive bad, and«. 
that they had not lasted a fortnight, do you 
think that was the same sort of complaint 
you had made in May.? — A, I do. 

Why so? — ^When I represented this matter 
to the board, the hosier was called in ; he 
mi^t represent that there were some of them 
equal to the pattern, but I never conceived 
any of them were equal to the pattern. I 
tfamk, to the best of my knowledge, the board 
gave him four months to provide others ; he 
required that time or nearitto provide others; 
it was impossible therefore to remedy it be- 
fore that time, aid we .weiei>hliged ta take 



R3] fHftcAtg Hke Roj^ Hoipiial ui Oreetmclu A. D. 1?79« 



[1S6 



ihem as we could, deductfog a filing a 
doKO for those we received ; I received an 
opkr of the board to receive that, which 
UDOunted to 10/. 

But did you not think it your dutv when an 
application was made to you from tiie council 
to represent a partiicular tact to the board of 
Sectors, don't you think it was your duty so 
10 have done? — I think it impossible to be 
icmedied; I represented ^t Mr. BaiUie was 
present; Mr. Baillie being present at the 
Mtfd of directors^ and at the councij, I 
^MHi^t, upon my clerk's informing him at the 
council, that tha;t was sufficient; Mr. Baillie 
must know as well as I that no remedy could 
be applied. 

I did not ask you what you thought about 
Mr. Bailhe and your clerk, but whether you 
think it is your duty, if you receive an order 
horn the council to lay a complaint before the 
kard of directors, to lay that complaint be- 
fore the iKMird or not ? — It had been done' in 
that very instance. 

Did you lay a copy of that complaint before 
the board?— No. 

Do you apprehend it was your duty to have 
done it? — ^I apprehend it was not necessary. . 

I ask you whether it' is a part of your d^ty 
to obey^ those orders?*— I understood that I 
Ind done my duty sufficiently in every re- 
spect 

I ask you a seneral question, whether it is 
vour duty to i%ey the positive orders of the 
council or not ? — Certamly, and I thought I 
bad done my duty. 

The council directed you to lay a copy of 
their minute before the dhrectors, and you did 
not do that. Do you think you did vour duty 
in that?— When I informed them that I had 
done so before. 

Did you inform the council so ?— The clerk 
of the council told me so, and I gave him 
that answer, liiat it was already done. 

I wish the minute of the council to be read ; 
I think it is said he was ordered to lav this 
before the board of directors. — Mr. BaM reads 
it: <* Ordered, that a copy of this minute be 
sent to the steward, desinnff he would lay the 
Mine before the Iward of directors for their 
information, that the necessary measures may 
be taken for redressine the men.'' 

Lord Chrnncelior to Mr. Godby, Does the 
oonstituticm of the house make you the ser- 
vant^n any respect, and what? — ^In none ; I 
te one of the council. 

Thto this, Uiat they are calling an order, 
was a desire of your brother counsellors, that 
you would txutke that representation ? — Yes. 

Of which council you were one ?'r-Yes. 

Who is the proper person to lay it before 
the board of dveciors r — ^I was, certunly. 

Why are you the proper person to lay a 
eomplaint of this kind before the board of di- 
TectQis ? — ^Because I received these stockings 
^y pattern^ and issued them with the assist^ 
Mce of my clerk. . 
. Is it youri»usioeis to receive^ examine, and 



issue them ^-'-^Yes, vnth the assiatanoe of the> 
clerk of the cheque. 

I should be glad to know, whether the 
board of directors (at the time they nuide that 
order to deliver two pairs to the several pen^ 
sioners of the best) knew at that time that 
the stockings so to be delivered would not 
last above a fortnight? — You understand, my 
ford, tfiat I had laid a sample, taken promis- 
cuously out of the whole, for their inspection, 
sunposing them to be as good a judge as my- 

I I ask, whether the court of directors could 
know or understand that the stockings so to" 
be delivered would not last above a fortnight ? 
— It was impossible for them or m^ to say 
how long they would hist; they were not 
equal to the pattern. 

If upon a trial they wore out in a fortnight, 
and a new comph^t was made, was not Uuit 
complaint fit tn be carried to the board of ^ 
rectors ? — ^We had no remedy. 

I ask, if upon the trial they wore out in a 
fortnight, and a new complaint was made, 
was not that com^hiint fit to be carried to tiia 
board of directors ? — I had received my orders, 
and acted under those orders. 

But was this a fact fit to be carried to them 
or not? — If the council had thought proper. 

They did think proper, and desired you to 
do it^ — ^I represented in return, that I had 
done it; I received no farther orders from the 
council. 

You had never laid before the board of di- 
rktors that the stockings upon trial had not 
lasted a fortnight ? — No, I had not 

Why did vou not lay that complaint beforo 
the board of directors ? — ^It did not lie with 
me to do it. 

I misunderstood you then ; I thought you 
were the proper person to carry the representa- 
tions of the council to the board ol* directors? 
— I am ; but I thought I had done sufficient. 

Do you think that a representation to the 
board di directors, at that time, could have 
answered any purpose? — I don't. 

Do you think it is fit for vou to have made 
a representation which coula answer no pur- 
pose? — ^I don't 

Whether if tliis complaint had been made 
to the board "of directors, that the stockings 
were so bad they would not last a man a fort^ 
night, whether it would have been a good' 
ground for them to have turned off the coA- 
tractor, and employed somebody else? — ^It 
ver)' possibly mieht, but I don't know th^ 
wero so bad as that. 

Then if it is possible they might, or if they 
had done it, would not that have been some^ 
thing like a remedy against the complaint?-— 
Not an inuiedtate remedy ; there could be no 
immediate romedy according to the represen- 
tation of the hosiers. 

Could it not be remedied another time ? — It 
is remedied now ; th^ have now a new con- 
tractor. 

Did not the board of directors know, upon 



187J 



18 GBORGE IIL 



The 



^xaminiitg some of theae stockings^ that 
many of them were much worse t&n they 
ou^t to have been ? — ^Yes. 

Would not that have been a siifficient ex- 
cuse for torniag o£f a contractor ?-~€ertBinly* 

From what appeared to you upon inflect- 
ing these stockmgs^ whether they looked as 
if wey would not last a fortnight, and whether 
it appeared to you that they did not last a 
fortni^t?*— It never appeared so to me; it 
willonen happen upon a contract that some 
will be bad. 

Was it a general complaint in the Hospital, 
that they wcnild i^ last more than a fort- 
night ; or was it only a few people that made 
that complaint ?*^I believe it was\ very &r 
firom a general complaint ; I believe they did 
not last the time they should do. 

Do you know any men that were satisfied 
with their stockings?— I* believe some were 
very well satisfied ; and whenever they came 
to my office, I changed them frequently for 
what thev call dead men*s stockings, that the 
men might not suffer so much, which we are 
authorised to <k) from our instructions. 
. I think you stated, that it would be impro- 
per in you to make a complaint to the direc- 
tors that it was not in their power to remedy } 
— ^I may have said to that purpose. 

Do you think that you are to be the judge, 
or they, whether it is possible to remedy it or 
not ? — ^I understand that I had made the com- 
plaint to the board * had received their orders, 
and I U>oujght that sufficient ; and then I was 
justifiable m acting under those orders. 

But a fresh complaint had arisen? — ^I did 
not seie. any occasion for a fresh complaint; 
the council met, and therefore it was their 
duty to see to it. 

I ask you, whether it was your duty to lay 
that complaint, when it was made by the 
oounciL before the board of directors ? — ^If in 
DHy judgment I had seen reason for a fresh 
complaint 

I ask you, whether you think you are to be 
the judge, whether a complaint 'made by the 
eouiKil was proper to be laid before the board 
of directors ? — I had nothios to do with it ; I 
receive the orders from the boaxd of directors 
io act in my department. 

But did you not receive communication of 
this ?^I did. 

Why did you not lay that complaint before 
the board \ — For the reason I gave before ; I 
thought the answer that I had given to the 
couiicil sufficient. 

Tlienyou were to judje, whether that com- 
plaint was well or itt-munded, and not the 
.toard of directors ?— That is a different thing; 
I do not say that I do. 

At tiie time when you did not lay this be- 
fore the board, were not you satisfied, that if 
the council had consisted of reasonable peo- 
ple, that it was a suffifcient ajiswer to say, that 
that complaint already the directors were acs- 
quainted with ? — Yes. 

And was not tbat the reason for not doing 
it ?— Yes > and the reason I gave. 



Case of Capain Thomas BaUli^ . [180 

Had you befbie acquainted the boara of di« 
rectors, that since the delivery they had worn 
out in afortiiight? — I had compuuned ibtiy 
were bad, and not equal to the pattern. 
, But that was before the trial) — Yea. 

And are these two thinp the same ? — -As 
the stockings were bad, iy is reasonable to 
suppose they would wear out before the time 
limited for them ; I don't look upon it \hat 
the whole, or near of them, would wear out 
in that time. 

I ask you, if it were but for one that was 
worn out, whether that is the same complaint? 
No, it is not. '' 

You say, that the contractor had not time 
to find the quantity of stockings necessary for 
four months, I think? — ^I do. 

At the end of those four months, did he 
bring stockings equal to the onginal contract? 
— ^I think they were very near. 

Aseood as you could expect? — ^Yes; and 
much better than the former. 

And his reason for not giving them good 
before^ was, another man umiertaking it, aod 
he was forced to bring goods that otherwise 
he wouTd not have done ? — Yes, that was the 
reason he gave. 

As you complained in the first instaiice to 
the council that they were bad, why did not 
you in the second instance make the com- 
plamt ? — ^I thought that complaint had beea 
made to the board, and I thought that would 
be a sufficient answer to the council. 

Though «the stockings proved bad afteis 
wards ? — Yes. 

I think you just now said, that there was 
no remedy at that time; you acknowledge the 
stockings, were very bad, but you had no re- 
medy; now I think it appears to me there 
was a remedy. — It does not appear to me. 

You gave these people two pairs of stockings 
each, did not you ? — Yes. 

Suppose, when you had found them so very 
bad, you had delivered out but one pair to 
each { why did not you remedy it in that 
manner ? — I did not think two pair were suf* 
ficient to deliver them out for a change. 

But they had stockings, Mr. Baillie saya^ 
of their own before ; that was a change.-— 
Thc^ had old stockings certainly. 

Suppose, if a pair had been worn out, you 
might have got another pair for each of them 
in a fortnight?— The contractor demanded 
four months. 

Could you not have got others in a forU 
night? — ^I believe not. 

You say you could not have got these 
stockings from these people in a fortnight ; X 
will answer for it, if you had applied to the 
hosiers at Leicester, you would have got them 
in a week. — ^I don't think they could be dyed 
in the time, much more made. 

Do you think the contractor could not have 
n>t them there ? — ^I don't think he could have 
Uiem dyed in t^e time ; when I have applied 
to the contractors for stockings, tbey nave 
made vofA answer, that they were dying, and 
would be ready m a week or a montn, or so. 



789] retptetiug ike Royal HotfUal^tA Greemdch. A. D. 1778. 



[190 



But if vfNi had appiwd propcrlj where I 

teli Tou, <fo jou thiok thev coiud nol be sup- 
plieaw^msiflkie&tnuinber ina tbrtni^? 
— Idon^know. 

Because voa aaid . you did not see any re- 
ndT.— I did not see any remedy ; nor did 
the board at that time, I believe ; I dont 
tUnk it was possible to be served in tlie 
time. 

Lord Chancellor. Whether you look upon 
yoorself to be under the orders of the council ? 
-i. No. • 

And whether it is usual for vou to carrv the 
minutes of the council to the board of mreo- 
tors?~-€ertainly not. 

Did you deliver the two pair of stockings, 
bj the order of the directors? — I did. 

W^s the same contractor continued after this 
abuse? — ^No, we have a new contractor now. - 

But who was the contractor thenP — The 
man that serves us now followed the man 
that served in these bad stockings ; he did 
not supply us aflerwards ; I believe he did not 
bid for the contract aflerwards, I am not cer- 
tain whether he did or not ; but^ however, 
there was a lower bidder, and the person has 
it now. 

You did not exempt him from the contmct? 
-No, 

And dkl he continue contractor, the four 
months between) or how Icme ^— He continued 
for the serving of these stockings for the two 
years. 

Then he served four months aflerwards?-^ 
Tes^ several months aflerwards. 

Without applviog to any body but the con- 
tractor, after tne men had had one pair of 
stockii^ which they mi^i have made a 
shift with perhaps, would it not have been 
better, and would there not have been time 
enough without taking two pair, to have 
wait^ for the contractor's providing? — I don't 
think theie woukl. 

How knag were these stockings to last? — 
£ttht monthe, I think. 

Then how long time would yoti give him 
for another pair? — I think it was four months 
the cotttraetor wished to have, aad aaid he 
cMld net complete the oonlract in less time. 

l)on't you know three pair <^ stockings 
It to last two years? — Yes, a pair lasts 
itaionlhs. 

ihen, according to that, might they not 
have had time enough to have vouled for Uie 
Kcond peir being made ?— I don*t think there 
woukL 

Ooyouiflsainne that the board of direotors 
thouffht ^lat the ntockings, that were deti-^ 
«aed mthe UMintb of M«^, were fit .for the 
nui to weaf, and fit tO/last eight montha or 
jot?— That they were not is certain; if (hey 
■u» there waano ocoation forme to hatwt 
nadeaeampteaii. r 

Thatldon^^OB; for you r c p ata entadjthat 
»«7 vera noi. ^qiial to the patlterD^ and the 
watncioifB^ mtfreseatatiaa ^«as,' tW thty 
*** >tj:oo|sr Iban the pattern; ^ wiia^ was, 




done in consequence of this ? Were any more 
stockings allowed to the men, in .consequence 
of those having been delivered which were 
bad ? — When a man came to my office with a 
complaint, which I look upon the proper 
place to come to, I ordered my people to 
change any of those that were iMidy and give 
them some old ones that were returned iu 
from dead men; we have an order, when a 
man dies, his clothes are letumed into my 
office, and they are mended and provided for 
new pensioners. 

And that was the case with all that com- 
plained ? — I believe most ; when I thought it 
a just complaint, and that the man had not 
wore out his stockiitts by working as a la- 
bourer, or any thine or that kind. 

Was it done in tne case of those men that 
complained to the council? — ^I don*'t know 
who those men were, and should not remem- 
ber if I saw the list of them. 

What is the method that the council usually 
follow, when they want to communicate any 
thine to the board of directors? — ^They order 
the clerk of the council^ I should apprehend, 
to jpresent such a letter to the board. 

Whether you have ever carried any thiiw 
before the board of directors by the desiieM* 
the council ?— I don't recollect that I ever 
have ; I may, but I don't recollect that I ever 
did. 

I think you said, you told the clerk that you 
had already made the complaint ; where did 
you tell him that?— I tola my clerk, who 
told me the message. 

Do you know that your clerk declared that 
to the council ? — I don't know that he did, but 
I believe he did. . [Mr. Godby wiihdrew.] 

Mr. Ibhetton called in again. 

Do you look upon it to be the dutv of the 
steward to make representation by thediree^ 
tion of tlie council, to the board of directors? 
—No, I don't. 

Then you don't look upon Mr. Oodbv to ba 
resfwnsible in not makina Uie second com- 
plamt at the desire of uie council^ to the 
board of directors : whose business is it to 
make the complaint from the counciLto the 
board of directors ? How is it usually done ? 
*T~I have never known it otl^rwise since I 
have been secretary of Greenwich Hospital^ 
th^t any complaint or any orders of the ooubp 
cil have ever come to me in anv other way 
than under a cover fioom the clerk of the 
council; I never knew an instance where the- 
slieward was desired to convey it, and I- was. 
su^rprised to see that tacked to this resolution j 
I never knew an officer a beafer of those mi'^ 
nulos^ er desired to repieaent them. 

[Mr. Ibbecson withdmwi] 

Captain Baillie called in again. 

■ • ' ♦ ^ 

- . Give an account of any other abuses ?•— t« 
b^ to say a . word or t«ro upon the si4ti^t of 
th^ 9tocluag»« In the first plaoe^ we wens 
very well served 1^ the former contractor of 



191] 



18 GEORGE m. The Case of Captain Thomu SailUef [191? 



the Hospital for stockings ; there was no cough 
plaint in his time that I know of; the men 
were served with stockings made of double 
yarn . For the saJte of reducing that contract 
only one penny a pair, or thereabouts, the 
contract was given to another man; who made 
them of single yarn, which was of very little 
use to the men. When the stockings were 
jeotnplained of, two thirds were issued to the 
pensioners, only one third was returned to the 
contractor, and instead of prosecutini; him 
for the penalty, they let him off; ahd I believe 
verily the same stockings were afterwards re- 
turned to the pensioners ; there is a hosier 
here that can tell you more of that matter 
than myself, because he viewed a great num- 
ber of those stockings, at the time the com- 
mittee of enquiry were sitting, who refused to 
inspect into this matter ; I 6eg leave to ob- 
i5erve, that in regard to desiring the steward 
of the Hospital to present that minute of 
the council to the board of directors, it was 
said, if we make a complaint about these 
stockings, let it go through the proper 
officer, the steward of Greenwich Hospital, 
your complaint mav be attended to ; we have 
made many complaints to the directors, to 
which we "have had no answer, as your lord- 
rilips will see by the minutes, that they were 
never attended to, and therefore we applied 
through the proper ofEcer, hoping it would 
then be attended to. 

Did Tou ever employ the steward upoft that 
,80rt of business before? — ^No. 

I wonder you should think hitft a proper of- 
ficer } — Because he is a servant to the direc- 
tors, and b^use he is the person that has the 
inspection of all those kindis of stores, receives 
them, aod ought to see that they are good 
andameable to the contract; he ought to 
tell the directors of it ; it is not to be sup- 
posed this can come immediately under tfieir 
Lhowledge without his information. 

If you had sent this in the ordinary way by 
a letter to the secretary, they would of course 
have sent for this man, and had the informa- 
tion from him, who was the proper man to 
^ve it, as I understood at the beginning of 
your examination upon this subject; iff am 
mistaken, the clerk will set me right. I un- 
derstood you said; that it was improper for the 
council to apply to the board'ot directors for 
any order at all, 'and you thought it the duty 
of the council always to make application to 
the Admiralty? — What we could not redress 
ourselves, I thought it our duty to represent 
it to the Admiral^ ; no complamt can arise in 
Greenwich Hospital, but irom the misconduct 
of the council or directors. 

I understand you were president of this very 
council who applied to the board of directors, 
whom you thinx the improper persons to ap- 
ply to ? — ^I have but one voice at the councd, 
and have been frequently and constantly over- 
ruled at the council, or else the afiiurs of the 
Hospital, I humbly conceive, wKMdd not have 
been in we plight they are now to.^ 

t 



Did you at the council propose preferring 
the complaint immediately to the Admiralty 
or to the directors?*— Not in that particular 
instance I did not, but I have in others; our 
commission says, when we cannot redress our- 
selves, as I understand, we are to apply to the 
board of Admiralty. 

There have been firequent instances men- 
tioned of provisions having been represented 
to the jgovemor and board of directors as bad 
by the mal-practices of clerks that received 
them, and o! the contractors, without redress; 
are there any more instances of that sort than 
what we have heard of? — ^Upon the subject 
of the putnd veal, that was served in the io- 
finnaiy, I believe w^ wrote three times to the 
board of directors, aiyl to the governor, who 
was in London; and in order to stimulate 
the governor, we^wrote him firom the council 
inclosed copies of two letters from the board 
of Admiralty to the council, in which the 
duty of the council officers is particuliu-ly 
pointed out, and no answer-could be procuredL 

The Minutes of the 15th of April, 17r4, read: 

" At a council the IMh of April, 1774. The 
council findinff no official answer is come from 
the board of oirectors, respecting the two mi- 
nutes of the 4th and 8th inst. laid before them, 
complaining that the clerks had not done their 
duty by receiving the meat complained of by 
the physician, surgeon, and dispenser, and 
also that the oontraetor had veiy much im- 
posed upon the Hospital in sendine such meat, 
unanimously denre, that the genttemen of the 
council, who are in the direction, would in- 
form them what was done in the affiur. 

** The lieittenant-govemor acquainted th< 
that he had told the directors he ho 
something would be done, as the butcher 
since that, on Monday the 1 1th instant, sent 
beef, part of which was so bad, as was obliged 
to be returned by the officers, whose duty it 
was to inspect it, and that if the butcher was 
permitted to ») on, the patience of the pen- 
sioners would be worn out; upon which the 
butcher was sent for, and reprimanded. 

^ The coimcil are therefore unanimously of 
opinion, that the measures taken by the board 
of directors^ after such incontrovertible evi^. 
dence, have not been satisfactory to the ooun* 
cil; nor etfectual to prevent the hke abuses for 
the future, &c. 

^' The council are likewise of opinion, thai 
copies of the two minutes, which were laid be* 
fore the board of directors, together with that 
of the 18th of March, be laid before the «>- 
vemor, that the governor may please to tiuee 
such steps as may more eftectuaUy prevent 
such mal-pcactices of the clerks and con^ 
tractors -in future; and that copies of letters 
from the secretary of the Admiralty of tho 
19th of April and 7th of May, 1749, to sir 
John Jennings, be also hud before the go- 
vernor; and Uiat whenever 'te councii hayo 
oceasion to lay any roattevs befbcp the board 




US] re^iecA^ ike Royal Hospital at Oreenwfch. A. D. 1778. 



[194 



if (firedois, tbegr wish to have offidal answers 
tfaoeto. By ocder of the Council. 

« Daniel Ball." 

Wb^ are those letters that are referred to 
in that minute?—** They are three letters 
tiiat we found in the books of the council^ 
film a late secretary of the Admiralty, Mr. 
Coibett, reprimandmg the counpil very se- 
Tordy for not looking minutely into the afiairs 
of the Ho^ital ; that their lordships had been 
infonned oy the directors, that the men had 
been defrauded of their just allowance of pro- 
visions, and that there were frauds and abuses 
in the Hospited to the prejudice of the ooor 
men; that he was commanded by their lord- 
ships to desire 4 he governor to Altogether 
the officers of the council, and to let them 
know that thdr lordships thought them very 
btameable for suffering such abuses to be 
practised, which could not have been without 
their extreme indolence in not looking into 
the a&irs of the Hospital; that their own 
cstdblishment in the'Hospital was for the go- 
verament, care, and protection of the poor 
DMO, and that it was their duty to kwk daily 
ioto every thing, and to remedy every dis- 
order. 

^ That the allegations in the officers report, 
tittt the penaioners had made no complaint, 
does rather aggravate their conduct, in suffer- 
iug the men's patience to be so long imposed 
upon. 

** That the lords of the Admiralty had 
commanded him to express himself in such a 
■umer as might shew their wrath and dis- 
pleasure at such a proceeding. 

** That their lordships did very well know 
that the directors had no power but in the ma- 
ugement of the revenue and estates of the 
Hospital, and in carrying on the works of the 
faidtding, nor did they assimie any on that oc- 
CB9on; but their lonfehips should always 
take well of them any informations that tend 
to rectify any roistajLes or omissions whatso- 
ever concerning the state of the Hospital.^' 

An entry read of an order of the council the 
4th of April, 1774, respecting the badness of 
the veal, viz. 

"Present, Lieutenant-governor Baillie, cap- 
tain Maple«len, and ten other officers of the 

OOUDcil. 

** The cook of the infirmary having repre- 
Koted to the dispenser, that the veal pro- 
vided for the sick on Sunday last, was very 
bad, aiKl Mr. Pocock having insoected the 
ttnie, was of that opinion, and ordered it to 
he carried to the pnysician, who, finding it 
uofit for the pensioners to eat, ordered it to 
he retiiroed to the butcher, who refused to 
take it back, saying, in justification of him- 
wlf, that it had been received by Mr. Court, 
the clerk of the cheque's clerk, and Mr. 
Bambly, one of the steward's clerks. 

** The council were therefore unanimously 
of opinion, thai the botcher had very much 

VOU XXI. 



imposed upon the Hospital, by sending such 
bad meat, and that the clerks did not do their 
duty in receivinjg it, and beg leave to lay this 
copy of the minute before the board of di- 
rectors, that they maybe pleased to give such 
directions as may be thought necessaiy to 
))revent the like impositions m future. 
" By order of the Council, 

" Daniel Ball.** 

Was the complaint made, in consequence 
of this, to the Wml of directors, that they 
did not eive an answer to it ?— Capt. Bailiie, 
Yes; and there was no answer to it. 

In the minute of the council, of the 15th 
of April, 1774, to the »)vemor, notice is taken 
of two complaints being presented lo the 
board of directors, to which they received lio 
answer : what were those complaints? — 
Complaining of this bad veal : afler that we 
complained to the governor. 

Tnere must have been a minute of council^ 
statins that complaint. — This minute of the 
councn relates to those complaints. 

How does it appear, that this minute of 
the council was laid before the board of di- 
rectors? — Mr. Ball. It was lud before the 
board of directors by myself, who officiate 
for the clerk of the council. 

Does it appear there, that it was ordered to 
be laid before the board of directors? — Mr. 
Ball reads : " Resolved, that a copy of the 
minutes, of the 4th and 8th of Apnl, be laid 
before the bcMud of directors, for their infor- 
mation in this afiair ; and also the minute of 
the 15th to be laid before the governor." 

Does it appear by any minute of the board 
of directors, that it was laid before the di- 
rectors ? — At a board of directors, on the 6th 
of April, a minute of the council of the 4th 
instant vras read, in relation to some bad vea), 
&c. &c. 

Mr. IbbetMon called in again. 

Is there any communication of that to the 
council ? — As much as there ever is, in any 
cases of this kind ; which is, that the lieute- 
nant-governor, and several of the members of 
the council being generally at a board of di- 
rectors : there are subsequent minutes. At 
the next mcetine, which was on the 18th of 
April, a minute of council, of the 8th inst. was 
read, relating to some farther particulars con- 
cerning the veal complained ol by them in the 
minute of the 4th in^^^tant 

What was done upon that?— That is all that 
was stated of it ; the board had given direc- 
I tions before ; this also contains some fresh in- 
formations with respect to the subject. 

Captain Baillie, I beg the minute of coun- 
cil, of the 8th of April, may be read, in order 
to explain what sort of veal it was. 

Mr. Ball reads the minute. . 

"At a Council, the 8th of April, 1774. 
Present, lieutenant-governor Bailbe, captain 
Maplesden, captain AUwright, and eight 
others. 



195] 



IB GEORGE III. Tkg-Ctue of Captain Thofkas BaiOier [199 



" Wherein it appeared, that the cohtractor 
said, he was ordered to send in small veal for 
the sick, by Mr. Taylor, the surgeon ; and Mr. 
Taylor being sent for by the council, was ask- 
ed whetlier ne ^ve such orders to the butcher 
or his servants r He answered^ that he never 
gave such orders, directlv or indirectly ; and 
tnat, to the best of his knowledge, he never 
saw either the contractor, or any of his people. 
Mr. Taylor being likewise asked, whether he 
saw the veal complained of that day, said he 
did; and being asked his opinion ot it, said it 
appeared extremely indifferent ; the colour not 
0)od, verv bony, Uie skin flillof air, the flesh 
nabby and loose, and in no degree marketable : 
and Mr. Pocock, the dispenser, being asked 
his opinion of it, sai(L it appeared to him to 
be in a state of putrefaction, and confirmed 
Mr. Tavlor's opimon of the meat. Mr. Tho- 
mas, the surgeon's assistant, being likewise 
asked whether h^ eave any orders to the but- 
cher to bring smaU veal, said, he never did ; 
and it further appeared,' by uie evidence of 
James Webb, Thomas Hardcastle, and others, 
that the butcher's servant refused to take back 
this veal, &c. 

" Resolved, that a copy of this minute be 
laid before the board of directors for further 
information in this affair. Daniel Ball.'' 

Were the minutes of that coimcil laid be- 
fore the board of directors? — Certainly they 
were. 

Let us see what was done in consequence 
of that? 

Captain Baillie. That is what was read m 
the director's minute of the 13th. Aflcr this 
the council, on the 15th, made representation 
to the governor, hopins we might have an- 
swers from the board of directors, when we had 
occasion to apply to them ; but all to no man- 
ner of purpose ; we never could get an an- 
swer from them in any way. 

Was there any remedy given ? — The but- 
cher was sent for to the board of directors, 
and there told by the governor, that if he dia 
not supplv better mea^ especially for the sick, 
he should not enjoy the contract any longer. 
I have already told your lordships, that the 
butcher said, he would have the contract, that 
he would supply the Hospital with meal^ and 
that there was no complaint of him or his 
meat till that troublesome fellow, the lieute- 
nant-governor, got into office. 

Q. to Mr. BalL You are the secretary of 
the council ? — Yes. 

It would appear in your minutes, if there 
had ever been transmitted answers from the 
board of directors to the council ? — ^There have 
been minutes from the board of directors, but 
I don't remember the answers. 

Captain Baillie. I recollect one instance, 
when the complaints of the bad quality of the 
beef rose to an enormous height. ' The direc- 
tors answered upon a remonstrance from the 
council, that they had acquiesced in their de- 
sire to cut off the waler cocks, which commu- 



nicated with the beer pipes ; it was on the lOtb 
of May, 1777. 

Mr. Ihbetson called in. 

. What is the usual method for the board oC 
directors upon receiving complaints from the 
council at Greenwich Hospital, whether they 
ever return answers, or if they do. in wha^ 
manner?— The general practice wnen they 
make anv complaints, the board redresses 
them if tney can be redressed ; there is gene- 
rally, or almost always at all the boards, either 
the governor or lieutenantrgovemor, or per^ 
sons of the House, present. 

Mr. Ibbetaon reads an entry of the lOth of 

May, 1777. 

"Present, sir Charles Hardy (governor), 
captain Baillie (heutenant-govemor), captaia 
Hood (treasurer) sir Peter Dennis, Mr. Monh, 
and several others. 

" The board resumed the consideration of 
the council minutes of the 21st and S5tii of 
last month, and took into consideration ano- 
ther minute of theirs of the 8th instant, rela« 
tive to the bad beer; and having disooursed 
with the brewer, came to the following resolu* 
tion, viz. 

"That all the water-cocks in the brew- 
house, which communicate to the beer pipes, 
be locked up, and the keys delivered into tifie 
custody of the steward, till they shall be want* 
ed for the purpose of opening the said locks^ 
in order to cleanse those pipes, at which time 
he, or one of his clerks, are to attend with 
tliem; and when the business is done, vad 
the cocks locked up, to take care of the keys, 
until they shall be wanted again for the iike 
purpose. 

" The brewer was at the same time told, 
that he must attend to the brewings himself, 
taste the beer before it be drawn Inftn the 
vats for the use of the pensioners, and if he 
finds it not as it ought to be, not to let it be 
drawn off, but to serve such as is ^ood, and in 
every respect fit for the men todnnk, and ne 
other, for which purpose he is always to hav« 
a sumcient stock in store; and if he finds Uiat 
his servants are negligent or incapable of their 
duty, to dismiss them, and to appoint such 
others as he may think more diligent and ca- 
pable, in their stead. AoO^^u"^®^*" 

Did they communicate that to the council f 
— No, nor there was no order of the board, 
for it to be communicated ; here is a string of 
resolutions, and the remedy is applied imm^" 
diately. 

What have you to say to this, captain 
Baillie ?— 4 beg leave first to say, that I liave 
in my hand a copy of the minute which Mr. 
Ihbetson has now read, nven'tomebvMr. 
Ball, in Ball's own tumd-wrking, and Mr. 
Ball hav'mj; no access to the minutes of Iks 
board of directors, he therefore could not have 
furnished me with a copy of that n^inute but 
through Af r. Ihbetson or his clerk. And se- 
condly, I beg the first article of Mr. Ibbetson's 
instrucUoES may be reftd^ by which it will a[^ 



Iff] nqMrfb^ tie Royal HospUal ai Grsmmch. A. D. 1778. 



[198 



pir, thftt be k onkred to give ansyrers in 
milfflg to aU ptities, making repiesentatiMis 
totbe boeid of directors; otherwise, if the 
iieotenant^covtrnor happens not to be pre- 
MDt at the board, it is impossible the council 
en ever hear an^ thing certain concerning 
Ihe oomphuntB which they make. 

}fr. Ibbetton reads the first article of his In- 
structions from a printed book. 

<* The secretaiy, or his deputy, is to attend 
at ail the meetings of the general court and of 
liie direcfeors, and to read all papers necessary 
Id be hid before them, and take minutes of 
tbop proceedings, copies of which he is to de« 
lirer to all persons concerned^ attested under 
Ibs hands. 

Cairtam BaiUU, That is what I allude to. 

I will aak captain Baillie, what complaints 
do jou know have existed relative to any bad 
m?-*-A great number of complaints. 

It there one short &ct about it^ Do you 
recollect whether at one time there was any 
^eat quantity that the couiicil thought proper 
to itart? — 111 barrels of bad beertne coundl 
weie under the necessity to start at cme time, 
because they were mixing it with new beer in 
the tun, for the use of the pensioners. 

At .what time was that ? — October 9, 1775 ; 
there have been more complaints of the beer 
than of any other article, and it is a material 
fart of the provisions of the pensioners. 

Does it appeat that the beer was started bv 
the minutes of the council? — ^I should think 
b certainly would. 

Mr. Ball reads the Minutes of the Council^ 
October 9, 1775. 

- " Present, lieutenantrgovemor BaiUie ; cap- 
tain Maplesden, lieutenant Gordon, lieutenant 
^essoD, lieutenant Le Fevre, lieutenant A n- 
sell, captain Lynn, lieutenant Moyle, lieute- 
nant Kerr, lieutenant Smith, Mr. Godby. 

^ The lieutenant-governor acquainted the 
oouodl, that he haid received repeated com- 

e Its from the officers and pensioners, of the 
quality of the snudl beer, and that ne had 
as frequently admonished the master brewer 
thereof, without its being properlv remedied* 
bi ODDsequence of which he now laid the said 
connJunt bdBmre them, agreeable to the 17th 
article of the eeneral instructions, for the re- 
Spiating, and better government of the pen- 
aioneis and servants of the said Hospital, 
wherein they are directed to apply a proper 
flcmedy, without delay, to all just causes of 
comnhunt The council thereupon went to 
^ brewhouse, and tasted each vat of beer 
3«psrBtely, and found 111 barrels of the said 
^^, as sour as the nature of small beer would 
■dmitof; aadjwere unanimously of opinion, 
that it was neither ^od, wholesome, or fit for 
^ pensioQers to drmk ; and that it would be 
Judicial to the health of the men to have 
vm that was turned, broke into new beer in 
^ tun, which haUi been hitherto practised ; 
vUic&tt flrdef^ ihe said beer to be started. 



to prevent such practice in future. The coun~ 
cil also^ upon tasting the beer for present use, 
found it good tasted, but very small, and 
scarce fit to keep a week, firom brewing to 
brewing. And the master brewer being culed 
in, and asked the reasons concerning ue po- 
verty of the beer, answered, that it could not 
be otherwise during the three sunmier months, 
firom the heat of the weather, and drawing six 
barrels of beer from a quarter of malt ; there- 
fore proposed dnwing half a barrel less during 
the above monUis. which would make a ma^ 
terial alteration in the quality of the beer. 

. ** The oouncil having maturely considered 
the causes that mieht afiect the quality of the 
beer, and examinea the malt and hops, and 
compared the same with other samples, found 
the malt good, but the hops of an inferior 
quality; and having likewise considered the 
frequent complaints made formerly in the 
summer months, do unanimously recommend 
to the board of directors, the master brewer's 
proposal, for making no more than five bar- 
rels and a half of small beer (instead of six) 
from a quarter of malt, during three months 
in the summer, in order to answer the com- 
fortable and siedutary end intended for the 
general welfare of the establishment. Ad« 
joumed." 

Captain Baillie. I beg leave to observe, my 
lords, that this bad beer was not during the 
summer months, but in October, that is our 
October in Greenwich Hospital. 

Are there any more minutes of the council 
respecting the bad beer? — Yes, April 21st, 
asth. May 8th and 30th, 1777. 

Read them. 

Mr. Ball reads. 

" At a Council held in the Royal Hospital for 
Seamen at Greenwich, April 81, 1777. 

" Present, lieutenant-^vemor BaiUie ; cap- 
tain Maplesden, captain Lynn^ lieutenant 
Moyle, lieutenant Kerr, lieutenant Smith, 
captain Allwrigbt, captain Chads, lieutenant 
Besson, lieutenant Le r evre, lieutenant Ansell. 

^< The Minutes of the last Council were read 
and confirmed. 

*' The Ueujtenantrgovemor acquainted the 
council that ci^itain Allwru;ht, the captain of 
the week, upon duty, informed him, that 
Adam Meldrum, a pensioner, had, in a very 
quiet, decent, and orderly manner, complained 
to him in behalf of himself and several other 
pensioners, that their allowance of beer, for 
several days successively, had been of so bad 
a quality, that they could not dnnk it; that 
the beer served to them in the morning grew 
sour by the evening : that in consequence of 
such representation, the lieutenant-governor 
directed captain Allwrigbt, and lieutenant 
Ansell, the lieutenant for the week, to taste 
the b€>er at the sinks at the usual hour of 
serving it, and to report to him if there was 
any just cause of complaint ; and they having 
reported to him yesterday, that they nad tast« 



199] 



IB GEORGE m. The Case ofCdpUm Tkamu Same, [900 



ed the beer at the sinks, which was of a veiy 
indifferent quality, and Uie butler coniirming 
the same, tue iieutenant-goveraor lays the 
matter before the counciL agreeable to the 
17 th article of the orders tor tne better regu- 
lating the pensioners and servants of the said 
Hospital. 

" Adam Meldrum^ a pensioner, being then 
called in, and asked what cause he had to find 
fault wiUi the beer, said, it had no taste either 
of malt or hops; that if he kept it three or 
four hours it erew sour, and gave him the 
gripes ; and tnat it continued in the same 
state the whole week ; and says, be was in- 
formed it affected several other men in the 
same manner. Being asked, why he did not 
complain sooner, says, that several people 
talked of complaining, but deferred it, in 
ho])es that the beer would be better ; upon 
which he replied, that he would complain to 
captain Chaos, and to captadn Allwright, the 
captain of the week. 

^'Joseph Sunpson, another complainant, 
being asked if he had any cause to complain of 
the beer, says, it was of a sour, watiy, cold qua- 
litv for about eight or ten days past ; and being 
asked, why he did not complam sooner, saio, 
be was sorr^' to be the first, hoping it would 
be better, but that the bad quality of the beer 
frequently eave him the gripes ; and that he 
was served with the beer at the north side of 
the hall. 

" Several other pensioners gave much the 
same account; declaring, that all the men in 
their wards also complained of the bad -beer. 
The two sink-men oi the east and west dining 
balls, sai(L they imputed the bad beer to a 
mixture of^ beer ana water, sent in through 
the pipes from the brewhouse ; that they had 
complsuned to the butler three times in eight 
days ; that they had frequently seen 20 ^Uons 
of water let in between the old vat bemg out 
and the new vat turned on ; and the same 
was corroborated by many others that that had 
beenpractised for some years past. 

'^ The butler beins asked, if he knew the 
cause of the bad quality of the beer, said, he 
supposed it to proceed from a mixture of beer 
and water turned on from the brewhouse. 

''Mr. Fearon,the master brewer, being call- 
ed in, and the foregoing declarations of the 
pensioners read to him. was asked, to what 
cause he attributed the bad quality of the beer 
for eight da;^s past, said, that the buUer sent 
to inform him, that there was water mixed 
with the beer; and bavins enquired of Pope, 
the foreman, was informed by him, that there 
was a cock which had communication with 
the reservoir of water to the pipes that convey 
the beer from the brewhouse to the sinks, 
which he supposed leaked ; that he sent to 
the clerk of the works' office^ and had it re- 
paired. And Mr. Fearon bemg asked, whe- 
ther he found any surplus of beer from the 
quantitv of water let in between the servings 
fix>m the different vats, remarked, that one 
day last week he had three barrels and a half 
surplus. 



" John PopCj^the foreman, being asked if he 
knew the cause of the bad quality of thebeer, 
said, there was a leak m the cock that com- 
municates with the water firom the reservoir 
to the main pipe, which he supposed mixed 
with the beer ; uiat he applied seven or eij^t 
times to the clerk of the works' office before 
he could get it repsured^ and that it was near 
six months since his mrst application ; that 
when he first applied to tne clerk of the 
works' office, he acquainted the master brewer 
with the defect 

'^ Mr. Skecn, who attends for the clerk of the 
works, being called in, said, that about a 
month ago, Mr. Fearon, the master brewer, 
sent a note to the office, to repair the pipes at 
the brewhouse that wanted mending, which 
was done accordinglr ; and that whenever any 
application was made from the master brewer 
to repair the pipes, it was done immediately. 

'' The council, from the foregoing declanie- 
tions, are of opinion, that the frequent com- 
plaints of the badness <^ the beer proceeds 
from the ready and easy communication of 
the water cocks with the pipes which conv^ 
the beer fit>m the brewhouse to the sinlc 
where the beer is served ; and therefore re- 
commend it to the board of directors, for the 
safety and security of the pensioners, that 
their beer may not be inpoverished with 
water, to have the communication of the 
water cocks cut off, as the beer pipes may be 
cleansed without them. 

^ Daniel Ball, Clerk of theCoundL*' 

Was this representation laid before the 
board of directors ? 

Capt Baillie. Yes, it was ; but we receiv- 
ed no answer: the brewer was discoitfsed 
with again, upon these complaints, by thetli- 
rectors. 

Mr. Ibbetson read a Minute of the 7th of 
October 1776, at a Meeting of the Directors, 
&c. &c. 

Q. to Capt. BailUe. What was done in 
consequence of this ? — I don't recollect that 
there was any such desire to me or the coun- 
cil, directly or indirectly, in any way what- 
ever, to survey the beer in the brewhouse ; 
nor was I to be a messenger from the board 
of directors to the council of the Hospital ; it 
would well beccHne the directors themselves 
to visit the brewhouse. No such minute ever 
appeared at the coimcil : our complaint was 
on the 9th of October, 1775. 

Q. to Mr. Ihbetstm. Was capt. Baillie pie- 
sent at that meeti^ ? — ^He was president. 

Capt. Baillie The board of directors have 
the expenditure of the money of the Hospital, 
and not the council, and therefore the obneo- 
tors are responsible that all sorts of stores and 
provisions be good. 

Mr. lbbet9on. It is something extraordi- 
nary that this recommendation to the counciL 
which must have been carried to the councu 
by somebody, is dated the 7 th of October, and 
on the 9th of October it appears that thejr 



'9t\ rapeeHmg Hie Uogei HtapUti ai Greemoich* A. D. 1778. 



[90V 



bd been to tiie faiewlKMise, and started this 

greitquuithy of sour beer. 

Then on the 9th there is an unanimous re- 
pnsentttion to Uie board of directors; what 
I vsDted you to read» was, the proceedings of 
the board of directors, in consequence of this 
representation of the 9th ? 

Mr. /Mef «m. I dont see any thing upon 
that minute. 

When was the next meeting of the directors 
sfterthe9th ?— The 18th. 

Is there no notice taken of it there ? — No ; 
bat 1 remember very well, the board of direc- 
tofSy xsfoa some occasion, I don't know whe- 
ther it was this, or upon some representation 
of the brewer, thinkmg it very unproper. to 
make any alteration, or to allow anv more 
mah or bops than had been usually allowed, 
far every Dody knew his predecessor had 
breved good beer, and every body knows his 
successor brews very good beer. 

Was any bo^ punished in consequence of 
das; the officer whose business it was to in- 
spect this? Does capt. Baillie know of any 
body that was punished ? 

Capt BaiiUe. I donH know that any notice 
vas taken of it. 

Was the brewer dismissed ? — ^No ; on the 
coDtiary, there was bad beer again ; particu- 
larly in the months of April and May, 1777 : 
the men assembled in a t)od^, and threatened 
to go to the lords of the Admvalty : threaten- 
ed to go to St. James's ; I had oifficulty to 
keep Uiem back. 

Does Mr- Ibbetson laa5w whether the 
brewer or bop-&ctor were dismissed in conse- 
(pience of this ? — ^Not in consequence of this ; 
oat there are manv entries by which your 
lordships will see tnat the board of directors 
took a deal of pains upon the subject. 

Read the minutes of council or the board of 
directors, as they come in order. 

. Mr. Ibbetson reads the Minutes of the Coun- 
dl, April 81, 1777. 

Mr. libetton. There came with it, at the 
same time, one of the S5th ; they were both 
laid before the board together : at a meeting 
of the board of directors, on the dOth^ the next 
after this, two minutes of the council, one of 
the Sist, another of the 25th' instant, were 
Isid before the board : at the next meeting of 
the directors at Greenwich, dated the SOth of 
May, tlie board resumed the consideration of 
the council minutes respecting the beer, and 
took into consideration another minute of the 
8th, relative thereto : at a subsequent meet^ 
iog, which is the 41st of May, a letter of this 
date iiom the steward was raid. 

Whether there are any steps taken between 
the first complaint that was read, previous to 
this, which, if I don't mistake, is in October, 
W5, between 1775, and May 1777, that is 
wvc a year and a half, whether any steps 

were taken to rectify the complaints that had 
K^eea made before ?-^I do beheve that there 



were no firesh complaints laid before the di- 
rectors from the council in that interval. 

Were any steps t^en in consequence of 
the first coinplaint in 177.% by the board of 
directors? — The board of directors did under- 
stand what the council had done in going to 
the brewhouse, and starting all that bad beec, 
which I believe they do not think they were 
perfectly right in doing, without consulting 
them; for it was a very large quantity of 
beer ; which, though it was not fit for the use 
of the men, it mi^ht have been of some value 
to the Hospital ; in coi^equence of that step, 
in the new book of rules and orders, that has 
been published under the charter, there is an 
express direction, that whatever things upon 
surveys shall be found unserviceable, £all not 
be thrown away or destroyed. 

I want to know .whether any ponishmenk 
was iniiicted upon the brewer, for offering to 
give to the men such a quantity of beer ml 
was unserviceable ? — ^I don't know that thera 



was. 



Was any punishment inflicted upon the 
officer whose duty it was to inspect into it ?-^ 
No. 

The Earl of Sandwich. Was there not a 
man, a turncock, that was detected in em- 
bezzling the beer, and turned off for it? — That 
is a very curious anecdote indeed ; Uiere was 
a man who had attended at one of those sinks 
or places where the beer is drawn, this man 
appears by the minutes; his name I have just 
read ; he is a principal complainant in this 
business, and, as the council afterwards. un- 
derstood, a man who had stimulated others 
very much to complain ; this man, in the ab- 
sence of capt. Baillie, was brought before the 
council ; it was one of those council of four 
only, that I have ever attended since I have 
had the honour to belong to the council. I 
did examine him, and took minutes, which I 
believe are. now in my box ; it appeared as 
clear as possible, that this man had embezzled 
great quantities of beer, had carried and given 
to the Doys more than their proportion, more 
to the helpless ward than their proportion; 
that they nad given him money and drams 
for the difference. He had embezzled the ale 
upon festival days in large quantities, and 
sent it out to his own house ; upon all this 
appearing to the council, they Ordered this 
man to be expelled, and I joined in that 
heartily ; now the situation of these sinks, 
where the beer is drawn, is such, that it is in 
the power of the sink-men themselves to mix 
the beer with water; for there is a water- 
cock, as I understand, in order to cleanse the 
beer away that is spilt, that there is a water- 
cock at lumd ; the beer is drawn off in large 
black jacks, four or five feet high ; it is much 
in the power of men standing there to draw 
beer, to make up a deficiency uiey have occar- 
sioned by embezzling, to fill it up with a little 
water ; uiat struck me and the council, that 
this man, who was a principal complainant, 
had been the iasUumentifi Busing tne beer; 



A 



•JKBd 



18 OEOROE III. ne Case ofCapUun Thmas 



tsof 



iiow«ver tbitf enffebealement was veryclewiy 
proved, and he was expelled. 
> What was the date of that expulsion ? — 
Upon referring to the book, it is the 82d of 
.August, 1777. 

Capt Baillie, go on with any further account 
jou have to give. — If your lordships will be 
bO good as hear the minutes of tne 8th of 
Ma^, 1777, read, and also of the S6th of 
April. / 

Mr. Ball reads. 

** At a Council held in Royal Hospital for Sea- 
men at Greenwich, April 25, 1777. 

'* The master plumber to the Hospital de- 
clared, that it was impossible such ouantities 
of water could issue from any leak in the 
bee^ pipes, and proposed cutting off the water 
cocks and fixing a key, and lodging it with 
the commanding officer." 

'^ At a Council held the 8th of May, 1777. 

'' In consequence of a complaint from all 
the pensioners in the east dming hall, this 
morning, of the badness of the beer, which 
they remsed to take, that it was watery and 
ill-t^tcd ; and Mr. Godby, the steward, hav- 
ing, in the absence of the lieutenant governor, 
acquainted the captain of the week, that it 
was not fit to be served to the pensioners, the 
captain desired it might be started into casks 
'and guaged, and another vat of firesh beer 
served : and this aflemoon, at half past two 
o'clock, all the men in both halls complauied 
to the lieutenant governor, that thev beer 
was ill-tasted and' wateiy ; and he having di- 
rected the captain and heutenant of the week, 
with the steward*s clerk, in the absence of 
the steward to taste the beer, and report to 
him if there was just cause of complaint, and 
thev having reported to him that the beer is 
bad, ill-tasted, and watery, and not fit for any 
men to drink, the lieutenant governor there- 
,upon summoned a council, who sent for se- 
veral pots of beer firom both ends and the 
middle of each dining hall ; and are unani- 
mously of opimon, that it is thick, ill-tasted, 
and watery, and not fit for the pensioners to 
drink, therefore resolved to renair to the 
l)rewhouse, to taste the beer in tne vats, and 
found two vats^ numbers ten and sixteen, of 
the same brewmg not fit to be served to the 
pensioners ; and having tasted another brew- 
ing, which was som^ing better, ordered 
that the same be served, there being none of 
*a better sort in the brewhouse. TKe master 
brewer being asked what he had to say re- 
^^cting the quality of the beer, acknowledge 
tnat it was weak, ^nd of a very indifferent 
quality. 

'^Resolved, that the lieutenant governor be 
desired to wait upon the governor with a copy 
of the above mmutes, Hoping he will take 
some method with the board of directors for 
the relief of the pensioners. Daniel Ball.'' 

. Capt. BatlHe. I have besides survevs of 
the officers of the Hospital upon jlhe oeer, 



wherein theyfr^port the be^ ao% to be good ..^ 
the 5th of Jiuy^ 1774 ; there is a survey upoi» 
the beer. 
Read those surv^s. 

" Royal Hospital Greenwich,. July 5, 1774^ 
** Sir ; accoroing to your desire, we have 
tasted the beer complained of, and find it thick 
and weak, but neither stinking nor sour ; and 
as there is only a small quantity, sufficient to 
serve two days, are of Opinion, that it is not 
so bad as to be thrown awa^, but that the 
pensioners may drink H. — We are, Sb-, your 
most humble servants^' Jarvis Maplesdeny. 
captain. A. Gordon, lieutenant, Theodore 
Court, for Mr. Maule, clerk of the cheque. 

T am of opinion that it is not baa small 
beer.— John Godby.'^ 
" To the lieutenant governor." 

Here is another report signeii the dd oT 
October, 1775. 
Read it. 

" Royal Hospital Greenwich, Oct. 2, 1775, 
" Sir ; -agreeable to your desire, we have 
been to the brewhouse and tasted the small 
beer for the use of the pensioners ; but as the 
master brewer has intimated to us, that he is 
to give his reasons to the board of directors 
ne.vt Saturday, relative to the said beer, we 
beg leave to postpone our opinion for the pre- 
sent — We are. Sir, your most humble ser- 
vants, Francis Lynn, W. Lefevre, J. Hossack^ 
John Godby; for Mr. Maule, Theodore 
Court." 
" To lieutenant governor Baillie." 

Were they a committee fi-om the council 
or from the directors ? — The brewer intimated 
he was to dve his reasons to the bowd of di* 
rectors, and not to the council. 

Were those people who have signed that 
report a committee of the council ? Did the 
council authorise them to make the survey ? 
— ^No; ,it has beeh the custom firequently, 
upon particular occasions, for the command- 
ing officer to order such a survey. 

Are there any rules and orders authorizing 
the Heutenant eovemor to order such a sur- 
vey ? — I don't know that there are ; it has 
been the custom. 

There was no person punished for this 
beer? — ^Neither the brewer, his servant, the 
steward, nor the clerk of the cheque, nor 
either of tlieir clerks, that I know of. 

Whose business is it to inspect the beer? — 
The steward and the clerk of the cheque, and 
their clerks, are to inspect the brewery. 

The BaA of CheUerJield. Whether the beer 
has been in general good, or in general bad, in 
the Hospital? — There have been a great num- 
ber of Complaints. 

That is not an answer. I want to know if, 
in general, the beer was bad } You sud many 
people preferred being put upon the butler*s 
list, beoiuse by that means the)r had their 
small beer at the Hospital, which is free ircMn 
excise, and better than tlw^y. could buy; I 



'SnS] re^eeUmg the Royai Hospittd at Greenmch* A. D. 1778. 



[S06 



ka\ tfamk bad beer is better than money to | 
buf good ; I tiwat to have that explained ? — ^1 
dool understand that the small beer is alwieiys 
kd; but these last four years it has not been 
^ beer, such as might have been expected" 
ID a royal brewhouse. I don't know the 
OBBber pot upon the butler^s list annually ; 
tliBc may be ten or twenty added, in a year, 
BD ereat number. 

ms tbat been the reason the last four years, 
as vellas fonner years when the beer was good, 
t)f ben^ put upon the butler's list ?>-The peo- 
jk upon the butler's list get almost as much 
aswhcD they are upon the money list. 

Hive the numbers differed ? — ^I don't know 
as to that point ; many of the men prefer the 
butler's list to the money list. 

Mr. Godby called in again. 

Eave there been any complaints made of the 
badness of the beer, since Luke Davis has 
been expelled P — I don't recollect one. 



Wednesd4i^y March S4. 

The Lords met again on the business. of 
Greenwich Hospital. 

The Duke of Richmond rose and moved, 
*Thatthe chairman of the committee do leave 
the chur, and that the House be resumed." 

His g|race insisted upon it, that as he meant to 
tomolnn of a breach of privilege i^inst capt. 
UaiMesden, for sending sway from the House, 
wtaesses imder summons from their Itfrdships, 
his motion was a matter of right, and not of 
debate; that all complaintsof breach of privi- 
lege, according to the standing orders on the 
journals, must supersede every other business ; 
he therefore would not recede from urging, 
-that the House be resumed. 

His mce defended the pensioners who had 
dieereu the lords, as they entered the House, 
and said, that tnere was no breach of the 
peace' in their conduct; th&t the warmth 
they shewed did them honour; that it was 
the characteristic of British seamen ; a sam- 
ple of that honest zeal, to the repeated exer- 
tions of which this country owed all its great- 
ness, its happiness, and its glory ! He also laid 
it down as a matter of nght, for the pen- 
sioners, or for any other persons whose cause 
cither was, or was not, unaer the consideration 
t>f ]iariiament, V6 Stand in the street near the 
^oon of parliament, so long as they did not 
commit what the law term^ a riot, or what 
the law construed a breach of the peace ; on 
the other hand, he argued, that captain Ma^ 
plesden had been guilty of a eross insult lb 
that House, in a most unjustilable piece of 
conduct respecting the pensioners. What- 
^er might be the discipline, even the neces- 
Miy diaapline of the Hospital at Greenwich. 
^ held it as a matter exceedingly clear ana 
•obvious, that when the pensioners were sum- 

^ned as witnessBes df tn&t House, that during 
w operation of the susmionsi aU discipline, 



respecting them as (>ensioners, must be sui- 
pended ; they were in charge of their lord- 
ships, and not subject to the controui of any 
other persons whatever. That telling the 
witnesses that he would mark them, arid 
holding up his cane, were tokens of awe, and 
tokens of menace, which he could prove MV. 
Maplesden used, and which might nave a bad 
effect on the minds of men, who, from their 
situation, were under his influence as lieute- 
nant-governor. 

His grace said, such a mode of conduct 
might effectually check and prevent the ob- 
ject of the present enquiry, which was the 
discovery of truth. Upon the whole, he con- 
tended, that the matter highly demand^ their 
lord^ps' attention, and that the present was 
of all periods the most proper to take it under 
consideration ; because, if^ it were not imme- 
diately enquired into, such pensioners as It 
should appear necessary to call to the bar, in 
the future course of the enquiry, would be 
afraid to speak out, if they were not certain of 
meeting with the protection of their lordships ; 
and the lieutenant-governor might go on, pu- 
nishing and im])bfiing mulcts upon the wit- 
nesses, if he were not given to understand, 
that the House kept a wary eye on his pro- 
ceedings. 

The Lord Chancellor as strenuously con- 
tended, that captain Maplesden's conduct ra- 
ther merited the prusc than the censure of 
their lordships. He declared he had himself 
observed tiie mob of pensioners, at the door of 
the House, when he alighted fit>m his coach ; 
that their behaviour was very improper and 
unseemly; that he expected to have heard 
something relative "to it, in the course of last 
Wednesday's business ; that it was extremely 
wrong to suffer the doors of parliament to be 
besieged either by Greenwich pensioners, or 
by any other description of persons, whose 
cause was under parliamentary enquiry ; the 
example, thouzh m the present case not very 
alarming, might be extended so far as to be- 
come matter of serious wrong ; that the peers 
of that House, or the members of the othef, 
oueht to have free and undisturbed access to 
bo3i chambers of parliament. If, however, 
the noble duke was resolved to make a formal 
complaint of a breach of privilege, undoubted- 
ly he, or any other peer, nad a right to prefer 
such a complaint ; in that case, be intreated 
the noble duke to consider whether it would 
not be better to let the complaint stand over 
till the enquiiy was ended ; he was not hini- 
self aware that an^ pensioner who had been 
summoned as a witness, had been prevented 
from attending ; if, however, the noble dixkp 
had proof of any such matter, the proceeding, 
let it originate from what quarter it might, 
was an atrocious act, and merited severe 
censure. 

In answer to the learned lord's sayins that 
the House was besieged, the duke of Rich- 
mond declared he had not heard of any sort 
of siege, but a siege of cheers and kisses from 



1 



207] 



18 GE0ROE IIL The Cote of Captain Thomas Baillie, 



[SOS 



old men and old^omen, pensioners and nurses 
in the Hospital, entreating to have their old 
lieutenant-governor agadn: that he under- 
stood several lords were almost smothered in 
the way from their carriages to the staircase. 

Lord Fortescue declared, for one, that he 
never had been so kissed in .his life ; that it 
was rather unfair in the women to attack him 
in that manner, and open their trenches be- 
fore him as they had done, because he was 
now an old man, and could not open his bat- 
tery upon them in return. 

The Earl of Mansfield supported the Lord 
Chancellor, saying, however, that he passed 
through a double rank of pensioners, who only 
huzza'd, and called out for the restoration of 
their old lieutenant-governor. The Lord Pre- 
.sident^poke also on the same side. 

Lord Camden and the duke of Graflon on 
the side of the duke of Richmond. The 
former asserted that the pensioners had a 
right, a legal and a constitutional right to as- 
. semli^e before the door of parliament ; that 
every British subject, an^ eveir man in ex- 
istence, let his station m life be what it 
might, had the same right ; and he hoped to 
God, the day would never come when that 
right should be taken away. 

His lordship added, that he had observed 
the learned lord on the woolsack had only 
said, that the pensioners had assembled at 
the doors in an unseemly manner, by which 
expression, he conceived, the learned lord did 
not mean to dispute their right of assembling 
as a matter contrary to law. 

The^ Duke of Kichmond, in reply to the 
mention which had been made of the word 
^ * riots' by the noble speakers in support of the 
Lord Chancellor, said he was no friend to 
riots ; that he thought as ill of them and their 
abettors, as any man could possibly do ; that 
it was grossly perverting the meanmg of 
language, to apply the word ' riot' to an as- 
sembly of the poor pensioners at \he door of 
the House the preceding Wednesday, who at- 
tended only with an humble petition ; that he 
remembered what really deserved the name of 
riots, and that was, the assembling of the 
weavers at the door of the House some years 
ago : he remembered the proceedings of the 
committee instituted to enquire into the pro- 
per mode of pimishing those rioters, and the 
.sudden manner in which those proceedings 
were stopped ; why they were so hastiw 
stopped, the lords, who undertook that busi- 
ness, best knew. 

Lord ShelbumCf with his usual perspicuity, 
supported the duke of Richmond. He began 
with professing his extreme candour in the 
whole business of the enquiry ; that he was 
determined to keep himself oerfectly impar- 
lial, neither to give any juagment, nor to 
Bufter any opinion to be dniwn from him till 
he had heard the whole of the evidence, and 
was fully competent to decide on the subject. 
He was free to confess, that all he knew pre- 
vious to the commencement of the present 

§ 



enquiry, was from reading Mr. Baillte's book, 
above a year ago ; that it was then sent him, 
for he liad not soudit after it; that captain 
Baillie had since called repeatedly at his door, 
but he never had seen him ; that he had not 
an idea, that the noble lord at the head of the 
Admiralty could possibly be proved to have 
been at all concerned in causing bull beei^ 
bad veal, bad shoes and stockings, and sour 
beer, to be served out to the poor pensioners. 
That the noble lord certainly must be al^ve 
an^ such petty larcenv baseness, however he 
might appear neglectml in not having taken 
proper care of the navv. or in discharge of the 
other leading duties of nis offices, as president 
of a great and important board, where he 
might be employed with much honour to 
himself, and advantag^e to the public, in fitting 
out his fleets and giving' his orders there; 
that he would own, were he in the noble lord's 
place, he had much rather stand accused of 
the greater crimes of neglect of the navy, &c. 
than have it imputed to him that he had 
either encouraged, countenanced, or winked 
at any such nitifiil frauds and impositions on 
old men, ola women, and helpless children, as 
the present enquiry tended to bring to li^ht, 
and in which the noble lord seemedso highly 
interested by his regular attendance. 

At length the &r\ of Sandwich rose, and 
begged tnat the noble lord might be per- 
mitted to quit the chsdr, and that the House 
might be resumed. He said the present de- 
bate looked to him like an intention either to 
check or procrastinate the enquiry, or to ground 
a pretence for putting a stoo to it altogether ; 
that it was his interest ana his wish that it 
should proceed. 

His lordship said it would be unjust to him 
if any sort of^ impediment was thrown in the 
way of the enquiry. He considered the coiv- 
duct of captain Maplesden as highly lauda- 
ble ; he had no doubt it would appear so, and 
therefore he beeged that the House would also 
do the captain the justice to suffer it to be en- 
quired into. 

At length thf question was put, and carried 
to examine witnesses op a breach of pri* 
vilege. 

dharlet Smith, a boatswsdn, was called in, 
being one of those persons who was threatened, 
severely mulcted, and reduced to a private 
pensioner by captain Maplesden, for not dis- 
pers&B£ what he called a mob, tliough be 
shewed him an order for his attendance on the 
House, when this witness appeared and was 
sworn. — The duke of Richmond put the fol- 
lowing question to him : 
^ Didcaptain Maplesden threaten you with a 
cane or stick over vour head, at the door of 
this House, on Wednesday last? 

The Lord Chancellor immediately inter- 
rupted his grace, by putting the question 
thus: 

When captain Maplesden came down to 
the door of the House, what did he do ? 

Upoa this Qbvious alteration, the duke of 



819] re^aeeting the Royal HoipUal at Greenxvich.' A. D. 1778. 



[210 



SidDBODd instantly ordered the witness to 
witiMlnw, and as soon as he had withdrawn, 
J» ^race chaiged the Ijord Chancellor with 
knng assumed a ri^ht to alter his question, a 
poogativeVhich did not belong to nim. 

The Duke of Grafton very warmly attacked 
tiK learned lord on the woolsack, and spoke 
to his want of &imess and candour with a verv 
becoming spirit His grace said the breath 
liad scarcely escaped the lips of the learned 
lord, which served him ib express the ques- 
tioD, before it was perverted ; observing at the 
ame time, that he would never suffer such a 
conduct to pass uncensured, whilst he had the 
Ixuuur of a seat in that House ; it is true, he 
aid, persona may be called up there for the 
purposes of administration; if, however, a 
day ^uld arrive when the House swarmed 
with lawyers ; if the benches were stuffed full 
of pleaders, he hoped the ancient and here- 
ditary nobles of the land would have spirit 
enough to resist the confident incroachments 
of that profession, and would neither suffer 
sense and reason to be cavilled away in verbal 
fetinction, nor the forms and orders of their 
proceedings to be altered at the will of any 
one lord, however high in office, however 
great his abilities, however respectable his 
efaancter. « 

The Lord Chancellor lefl the woolsack, and 
sud he was exceedingly astonished to hear 
himselT accused of havins assumed any thing 
which did not properly belong to his situa- 
tioD ; that on the present occasion he had no 
dificul^ to admi^ that he had altered the 
words of the noble duke's question ; in justifi- 
cation, however, of his conduct, he had only 
to say, that he wished to expedite the pro- 
ceeding of the enquiry, and therefore took 
Upon him to alter the question, as it ap[>eared 
to him to be a leading Question, which in his 
gnce^s form could not oe put, without 8on\e 
alteration ; but as it was rather in point of 
form than in substance, he should have first 
nmonstrated with the noble duke, and then 
have asked his permission to have changed it. 
His kyrdship then, instead of defending the 
diputy of a private birth on the equal line of 
tttuie, descanted on the labours of his pro- 
fession as a compensation for the honours at- 
tached to it, ana that those labours which 
liereditaiy lords were not bom to, should 
Bttke them happy in their own situations, 
without reflectine on those of others ; that 
▼hen he looked back on ^e lineage of Uie 
JDoent and hereditary nobility of the king- 
dom, it was, however, not a little flattering to 
^, that a great many of the nresent peers 
m spnmg from men who had filled the office 
he had tioMB honour to hold, and some fit>m 
P^ns not equally intitled to the honours 
▼hich they poKessed. 

The Eari of Mansfield justified the Lord 
Chancellor's mode of altenng the question, 
"w mid it was a common custom in both 
liouses of Parliament, for the ease of busi- 
^^'^l that he bad sat many years in both 
VOL XXI. 



Houses, and had oflen been a witness to it, 
and never heard it objected to before. 

The Duke of Richmond ably defended the 
propriety of his question, and having shewn 
the advantageous ground of truth over law, 
declared, that the learned lord's quoting the 
custom of the other House of Parliament 
should not satisfy hitn. That the learned lord 
on the woolsack liad no right to alter his 
question without consulting him, and that if 
he did not allow that he hau assumed an im- 
proper power, he would move the House in 
form, that the learned lord had done what he 
was not warranted to do by the forms of the 
House. 

The Lord Chancellor again \^h the wool- 
sack, and repeated what he had said, in ac- 
knowledgment of his having no right to alter 
any lord's question ; he declared he had done 
it for the sake of accommodating business : 
that as to consulting the noble duke, he had 
no right tp consult hun, for that the moment 
the noble duke had uttered the question, it 
became the question of the House, and the 
proper mode would have been for him to have 
appealed to the House, if the question ought 
to be put. He thought it, however, much 
more manly to confess an error than to persist 
in it, and therefore he was easy in declaring, 
that he had, though from a good motive, 
acted contrary to oraer. 

The Duke of Richmond admitted what the 
learned lord had said as a sufficient explana- 
tion, and jocosely added, *^ That hereditary 
birth did not always exclude persons from 
laboijr; for though he was bom noble, and 
was not in office, he believed the leanted lord 
would not say he had never any labour upon 
his hands/' 

At length the Committee proceeded to exa* 
mine witnesses, and Charles Smith, boat-, 
swain, was again called in and examined. 



Wednesday, March 34, 1779. 
Charles Smith, a Pensioner, caUed in again. 

Inform the House whether you were here 
any day last week. — ^Yes ; last Wednesday. 

Were you ordered to attend the House ? — 
Yes. 

You had received an order to attend the 
House? — ^Yes. 

As a witness ? — Yes. . 

Did you attend it ? — ^Yes. 

Inform the House what captain Maplesden 
said to you, what passed between you P — No- 
thing, tnat I know ; but we attended here ; 
we were giving three cheers to every lord, and 
wishing maX we might receive our lieutenant' 
governor Baillie again : captain Maplesden 
came out and ordex^ silence, and ordered me 
to withdraw the men off; I said, if he could 
not do so, to so many hundred men, how 
could I do it ? accordingly he ordered me to 
withdraw myself: I said, Ihad as much riglit 
i as another man to. stand there, and I staid 



Sll] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case o/Ca^ain Thomas BaUUe, [SIS 



there till the duke of Bolton came up ; and 
when the duke of Bolton came up, he spoke, 
and asked what was the reason ; and I said, 
that we all staid there for the sake of wishing 
that we might have our ]ieutenant-»)vernor 
into the house again^ that was all uiat was 
said, and the mob all dispersed directly; if 
you call it a mob, there was no mob in the 
case, no auarrelling, but only gave three 
cheers to the lords, and we all dispersed di- 
rectly. 

Was that upon the duke of Bolton's desire ? 
—Yes ; he desired us to withdraw. 

What did captain Mapiesden do to you ? — 
He ordered me to come and draw the people 
off; I told him if he could not do it, how 
could 1 ; for I was but one man ? he said, 
then get away yourself; I said, I had a right 
to stav there, as well as another person. 

Did captain Mapiesden do anv thing to 
you ? — ^He came witn his stick, with a flourish 
over mc, and went to run it in my face. I 
said, it is a thin^ beyond my ability ; if you 
cannot do it, which way can I ? he up with his 
stick, and was going to shove it into my face, 
because I did not do it. As soon as the duke 
of Bolton spoke to me, af^r we had given 
eyery body cheers, we withdrew directly j not 
by my order, but by the good consent of every 
body ; after they gave the lords three cheers 
When they came in, then we withdrew. 

How long were the three cheers after caj^- 
tain IVIaple^cn had been talking with you? — 
Kot more than a quarter of an hour. 

Whether you said any thing to captain Mar- 
plesden, relative to your beii^ summoned to 
attend this Hquse? — ^Yes. and pulled out my 
pocket-boo]^ to shew nim my summons; 
moreover, he did not take it from me, but I 
put it into my book agaui, ailer ^e people 
had all withdrawn. 

What did captain Mapiesden say, when you 
shewed him the summons ? — ^Nothing at all 
then, for he did not take it out of my hand, 
and so I nut it in my book again ;' afler we 
had done that, we spoke to the auke of Bolton 
agam, and then we all withdrew. 

Are you very sure that you mentioned to 
captain Mapiesden, that the paper that you 
shewed him was a summons, or a subpana, 
from the House of Lords ? — Yes. 

You are sure of that?— Yes, and pulled it 
out, and was gomg to shew it to him, but he 
did not take it out of my hands, but I opened 
it to him. 

When did you return to Greenwich Hos- 
pital ?— That same night 

What happened to you, after you returned 
to Greenwich Hospital ?— The very next day 
he ordered all of us, that he picked out as he 
thought proper, to appear at his own house, 
and he kept us all in doors and examined us : 
after examining us, bringing us to a coimcil 
that we have in our house once a week ; but 
instead of that, he made a private council of 
it ;. he broke me, that is, taking U . 6d. out of 
8*. 6d, wliich la my sala^ per woek. 



You were summoned to a council ?-'«^Not 
siunmoned to a council ; he ordered Ms there 
instead of summoning us properly to the coun- 
cil-room, as it should be; he made a priTate 
council of it to himself, and so calledf us all, 
one by one ; and as for my part, he examided ' 
me so ; at last he damned me, and bid me be 
get out of his house : I made answer, I did^ 
not want to come there, if he had not sent 
for me. On the Mqnday following he had a 
council on it ; he brought me to the council 
and broke me, and he broke another; he 
mulcted another 30<. and another 10s. and 
another 5$. and another 4«. ; and then he ex- 
pelled a nurse of the house, for three montlu ; 
and the man that was mate of the Painted 
Hall, he happened to kick a dog in the 
Painted Hall, and he was turned out of tft]# 
house. 

What do you mean by saying captain Ma- 
piesden broke you? — I am a boatswain of the 
Hospital, and I wear this lace; now he has 
broke me, and taken this lace away; and out 
of my pay, which is Ss. 6d, a week, he hae 
taken I5. 6d. away, and I have but Is. re- 



mainmg. 



Was that done by the order of the council ? 
— By his own order ; it was a private council. 

On what day was that council? — ^It was a 
private council, which should have been on 
the Friday, he brought it on the Monday. 

Was any other j^unishment inflicted upon 
you? — I was to go mto the hall and stand in 
the pillory, and ask his pardon. 

Whether you did go into the hall and stand 
in the pilloiy? — ^Ycs. 

What was the crime you was chareed with f 
— For disobeying his orders at the House of 
Lords, in not taJdng the mob off as he or- 
dered, which was a thing impossible for ma 
to do. 

Whether you saw captain Mapiesden, on 
the Wednesday, endeavour to drive away any 
other person nrom the door of the House ? — 
No, he only pitched upon me ; and as he did 
it, another man, a man that attends upon our 
omce, took our names down, and another fel- 
low that was there, was his witness ; so there 
they took down what few people th^ pitched 
upon, and tliose he owed an animosity to ; ha 
took our names down. 

Whether you did go away, on the Wednes- 
day, in conseauence of captain Maplesden's 
order ? — Not airectly, not before we were dona 
with here, at the House of Lords, then wa 
went home. 

Was it your charge to bring the witnesses 
fi*om Greenwich, to the House of Lords ?•«- 
No, only 1 came up in the coach along with 
them ; but these people were all here long be>- 
fore we came. 

Whether you cheered aa^r paitkulsr lordhL- 
or whether you could disttn^sh one lord 
from another? — ^Not'at all ; we cheered evoy 
one as they came by. 

Who set you to cheer the lords ? — ^No soulp 
it was by nobody's order, but only by the 



ilSl re$peeting tie Royal Hospital- at Greetttmck. A. D. I77S. 



[214 



■m's own good will. We witnesses did not 
JoNW that &e pensioners were all here. 

Who put jou upon cheering the lords at all? 
— Ood Almighty knows, it was their own 
doiu. 

Du any body v^ you upon cheering the 
knls?-No. 

Was it of your own thought? — Our own 
gDod wills. 

Were you the oldest boatswain attending, or 
lideiedio attend the House? — No. 

Whether any of the pensioners that were 
SDomioned to attend the House of Lords, to 
gne evidence, were sent away bef<»-e they had 

S' m their evidence ? — ^We did not go away 
ore the House of Lords broke up. 

How many pensioners were there ? — God 
Ueasmysoul! I cannot tell. 

As near ay you can guess? — ^I suppose 3 or 
100. 

Were they all witnesses ?— No, no ; not we 
witnesBes; I don't speak of them ; I sprak of 
the people thai were cheering. 

How many of them were there that were 
witneaaes ? — ^I believe about a dosen. 

Whether you met with any obstruction in 
coming down to the House of Lords to give 
your evidence? — ^No; we came down very 
ivdl, and went home aeain verv SMBife; nobody 
afionted us, only Mr. Maplesden. 

Did captain Maplesden obstruct your com- 
ingU) ^ve evidence ? — ^No. 

Did captain Maplesden order all of you, or 
the witnesses only, to so ? — All. 

Did captain Maplesden ever order you liot to 
come agam ? — ^No, he never was against that.* 

When you retired, was it at the order of 
captam Maplesden or at the desire of the duke 
of Bolton? — ^I must tell you the truth; by the 
duke of Bolton's order. 

How long had captain Maplesden ordered 
jou to retire before tne duke ot Bolton ordered 
yoQ ?— About a quarter of an hour. 

Whether captain Maplesden ordered you to 
retire after you had shewn him the summons 
from the House of Lords, or before ? — Before ; 
1 offered to shew him tlTc summons then, but 
be would not take it out of my hand 

Did captain Maplesden order you to retire 
tfter vou had shewn him the summons ? — 
Yes ; but we did not disperse before we gave 
the last three cheers; nut before the duke of 
Bolton spoke to us. 

Whether captain Maplesden ordered you to 
retire afier you had shewn him the summons 
feom the House of Lords ? — Directly ; he did 
not take it from me, but he ordered me to re- 
tire then, and I sua I had as much right to 
stay there as any one there. 

When was tliat ? Before he ordered you to 
go, or ailerwards? — Afterwards. 

Was it before or ailer you shewed him the 

paper ? — ^It was at the time I shewed him the 

paper; when I put it up into my pocket-book, 

Ml told him that. 
I)id he, after you had shewn him the paper, 

Wtt you to ga home ?— No, ke did not. 



Do you not ufiderstand that each pensioner 
of CKreenwich Hospital has, by leave, a right 
to be absent 124 hours ? — ^Yes. 

Were all these that came here undec that 
description, persons that had a right to the S4 
hour's absence? — They were all at home : I 
question whether there were five of them laid 
out. 

Have any officers of the Hospital, if men 
are absent during those 24 hours, any more 
right than any other persons, without they 
find those men are actmg disorderly, to order 
them to disperse? — ^No. They ask leave bo* 
fore thev come, out, and they may stay. 

Whether captain Maplesden ceased giving 
you any orders as soon as you shewed him th6 
order of the House of Lords for your attend- 
ance ?— He spoke no more to me; he never 
gave me any more orders aAerwards. 

He did not order you to retire ? — ^Not after ; 
he had no more to say afterwards to me. 

How long have you been in Greenwich Hos» 
pital ?-^£leven years. 

How long have you been a boatswain there ? 
— ^Ten years and ten months. 

How long had vou been at sea before you 
went to Greenwich Hospital ? — Forty years. 

In what service have you been? — Thirty 
years in the king's service. 

Were you ever in the East Indies ? — ^Yes. 

And in the West Indies? — Yes; ax^ at 
Newfoundland, and other places. 

Did you use any other words to captaia 
Maplesden, except that you had as gooa a right 
to be there as the other people ? — No other 
words, as I know ; not any words of impu- 
dence. 

Were you ordered back to Greenwich? — 
No. 

Only to keep farther joff?— Yes ; and I came 
into the lobby ^erwards. 

[Charles Smith withdrew.] 

Mary RoKy a nurse, a seaman's widow. 

What passed between you and captain Ma- 
plesden, on Wednesday last, at the door of 
the House ? — ^^^hen captain Maplesden came 
out, he shook his cane over his nead, and bid 
us disperse, when we were seeing the honour- 
able tne House of Lords come in. 

Over whose bead did he shake his stick? — 
Over his own h^ ; and bid us disperse by 
order of the House of Peers. 

Wliat did captain Maplesden sa^? — He 
swore a very ^eat oath, and bid us disperse; 
and, damn it, if we did not, he would mark us 
all, and punish us very severely when we came 
home. 

W^ere you punished ?— Yes ; I was brought 
before the honourable council, and mulct half 
my wages for seeing the honourable peers 
come ; and was very oasely ill used by what 
he was pleased to say to me besides. 

What did he say ?— -He made use of a great 
many words, called me hussy and jade, and 
used a great many words not proper to makt 
use of before your lordship^. 



215] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case of Captain Thomas BaiUie, 



Were you summoned to attend the House 
on Wednesday? — I was; and I told him so; 
and he damned me, and asked me, how I 
dared to come without an order from the 
house. 

What house do you understand he meant 
by saying an order from the house? — That I 
did not ask leave of Greenwich-house; I 
thought the summons was sufficient. 

Did he order ybu to go away after you said 
you was summoned by order of the House of 
Lords ?— Yes, he did ; and told me he would 
mark me for so doings and take notice of me 
when I came home. 

' How much were you fined ? — ^Twenty shiU 
]ine:s. 

Where did captain Maplesden bid you go? — 
He bid us disperse and go home ; these were 
the words he said.^ 

Did you shew captain Maplesden the sum- 
mons of this House?-— Captain Maplesden 
knew very well that I was summoned; he 
asked me, and I told him^ Yes ; he did not 
ask me to shew it to him. 

Did you offer to shew it to him ? — No ; he 
did not ask it, and I did not shew it. 

Was jt said to you in particular, or to you 
all together ? — He .bid us all disperse. 

Then what he said was no more spoke to 
you than to the rest? — No; he bid us all dis- 
perse ; and he told me, when he went by me, 
that he would mark me when I got faiome ; 
and so he did. [Mary Rose withdrew.] 

Dorctkjf Perrtfy a seaman's widow, called in. 

Were you at the House of Lords on Wed- 
nesday last ? — ^Yes. 

Dia you see captain Maplesden there ? — 
Yes. 

What passed between captain Maplesden 
and you? — ^When he came out of the coffee- 
house, there were a parcel of people standing 
by the side of the conee-hous«^ pretty near the 
door of the House ; when he came out, he 
came up to boatswain Smith ; he passed me ; 
boatswain Smith stood beside me : he turned 
to him ; he had a cane in his hana ; he ran it 
up close in boatswain Smith's face, and damn- 
ed him, and asked him how he came there : 
boatswain Smith said his feet brought him 
there : captain Maplesden damned his feet, 
and desired him to take all the men and wo- 
men home, and take every body awav. He 
said he did not bring them there, and it was 
not his business. Captain Maplesden said if 
he did not, he would punish him. Boatswain 
Smith said he could not help it, whether he 
did punish him or not, for he could not take 
the people away. Captain Maplesden said, if 
he did not, he would mark him. 

Did any thing else pass in your hearing ? — 
Not concerning captain Maplesden ; we came 
away /soon afler. 

Did captain Maplesden say any thing to 
you in particular? — ^No. He spoke to boat^ 
swain Smith to call us all away. Us that had 
summonses said wc had summonses^ and had 



therefore a right till we were taken into this 
House. Your lordships had not all come in 
then. 

Did you tell captain Maplesden that ^ou 
were summoned ? — ^I told it in his hearings 
close by him ; when boatswain Smith said hm 
had a summons, he damned him, and us all, 
and told him to take us away, and the sum- 
monses too. 

Did captun Maplesden order you to go 
away, or to go to any pardcular place ? — He 
did not order us to go to any place here in 
London ; he ordered us to go to Greenwich. 

What time of day was it that he said this ? 
— About two o'clock, to the best of my know- 
ledge. 

Did you stay till this House was up ? — Yes ; 
we staid till the House broke up that night ; 
it was about eight o'clock. 

Did all the witnesses stay till ,the House 
was broke up ? — ^Yes. 

Did the rest of the people disperse ? — ^Yes ; 
every body but them that were summoned, 
went away directly. 

[Dorothy'Perry,tiursc, withdrew.} 

After the examination of these three wit- 
nesses, who fiilly proved the menaces and 
mulcts of captain Maplesden towards them, 
it was moved by the duke of Richmond, that 
the captain might be summoned to answer 
for this breach of privilege to the House : but 
it was contested warmly by the other side on 
the ground of impropriety. 

The Lord Chancellor, lords Mansfield and 
Bathurst (for all their arguments ran in the 
same stream) stated, that as there was no de- 

See of criminalitv proved agdnst captain 
aplesden, it would be contrary to their lord'^ 
ships' justice to order his attendance. 

The duke of Richmond, lord Camden, and 
many other lords combatted this doctrine 
with great calmness, clearness, and precision ; 
lord Camden, in particular, asked what 
greater degree of instdf could be offered their 
lordships, than by attempting to drive away 
witnesses from tneir attendance ? As to the 
actual forcing them away he did not, proba- 
bly because it was not m his power, but he 
held out terror todhem, to do so ; nc com- 
manded them away, threatening, with oaths 
and imprecations, to mark them; and to 
confirm all this, the veiy next morning, with- 
out waiting for the usual council day, he fined, 
and otherwise punished them severely as de- 
linquents. 

Notwithstanding this, a majority of 55 to 
SO thought there was no manner of occa- 
sion for captain Maplesden's attendance. 

Adjourned till to-morrow. 



I 



Thundi^f March S5, IfTQ. 

Captain Baillie called in. 

Whether there have been an^ abuses in 
the linen in Greenwich Hospital ?-~There 
have been many complaints mi|ue to fne.bjr 



917] respecting the Royal Hospital at Greenmch. A. D. 1778. 

tbe pensioners of Greenwich Hospital, that 

the Quality of the linen has been very diffe- 

lent from what it used to be, that it has de- 
creased in size as well as in goodness. 

Iiiibrm the House whether you made any 
esperimenti^ to know whether it was de- 
creased in size ? — ^In consequence of that in- 
formation, I sent the proper people, as I 
thought they were, the boatswains and nurses, 
isto the difierent quarters of the Hospital, to 
iDeasurethe linen throughout the Hospital, in 
particular in the infirmary, where I thought 
it was of the most consequence ; the persons 
who measured the linen there, brought re- 
ports to me that all the men's sheets, upon 
an avera^ were deficient in half a yard in 
eveiy pair, one with the other ; some wanted 
a vara, some three quarters of a yard, and the 
average about half a vard upon the whole, 
leneially throughout tne Hospital. 

Is there any body here that can speak to 
that^There are the people here who mea- 
sured it; they likewise measured the shirts; 
Thomas Field measured them. 

As to the eoodness of the linen that has 
been delhrered out at this time, in comparison 
with what has been dehvered out before, have 
3rou any samples of that ? — There are patterns 
of what they had some few years ago, and 
what they have now. 

Have you some with you now ? — ^I brought 
them with me for that purpose, that there 
misbt be no mistake as to the evidence. 

fie so good as to produce them. — [Captain 
BaiiUe iiroduces several samples. J This is the 
bed-ticking the men were allowed formerly, 
such as any nobleman in this House might 
lie upon in comfort, lliis is what they have 
now; it is an inferior quality, not worth a 
quarter put of the money of the other ; it has 
induration in it, it is not fit for the pen- 
siouers of Greenwich Hospital. This is what 
they used to have formerly ibr their shirting ; 
it is of a verv good quality ; there is a blue 
ttripe in it, that there might be no reduction 
whatever in the cutting it ; the mode now is 
peatly altered, there is no such precaution 
tiJceD^ the linen is not worth half tne money, 



nor will it last half so long ; it is obliged to 
be patched and mended before a year is out ; 
ttuke manner the nurses of the Hospital, a 
Quniber of whom are very respectable charac- 
ters, there ire a matter of 24 of them that are 
sca^lficers' widows, reduced to that sad ne« 
<^ty of benig common nurses; the gowns 
^y give them are not so good as th^ used 
to be, they are worse than work-house clothes, 
vorse tha^ pauper's linen ; these are the pat- 
terns, [producing them] their pillow-cases are 
niade now of dowlas, of a bad quality, for- 
^^y it was a very good cloth, such as any 
body nueht lay their heads upon in comfort ; 
theh" beos were formerly filled with very good 
*ool, and- flock of the finest sort, now it is ra- 
^htt a cutting of mops,or something of that sort. 
7* Ho is tl»e person that measured the linen? 
r-i nomas Field. 



[218 

Mr. Maule, the Clerk of the Cheque, called in. 

Have you made out that account ^ou were 
ordered to do ? — I have. [It is dehvered to 
the House.] 

Thomas Field, one of the Boatswains, called in . 

Did you measure any linen belonging to 
the Hospital at any time ? — ^Yes. 

How much did ypu measure? — ^I measured 
388 pair of sheets m the infirmary. 

How much did they measure ?-^They mea^ 
sured half a yard short and better in each pair 
of sheets. 

Half a yard short of what? — Of the cloth ; 
I had been told bv the lieutenant governor, 
that they were to be two yaida and one half 
long, five yards in each sheet ; there are two 
breadths in a sheet. 

Upon an average, how much did' they mea- 
sure short of that ? — Better than hdf a yard. 

In each pair, or in each sheet? — ^In each 
pair. 

Upon what niimber pf sheets did you say 
you made this measurement ? — 388 pair. 

And upon each of the 388 pair, it I under- 
stood you right, there was a deficiency of half 
a yard ? — ^There waA in each pair. 

Did you measure any other linen ? — Yes, 
all the boatswains in the House had orders 
to measure the linen that belonged to the 
pensioners that were in their division. 

Did you measure them ? — ^I measured the 
linen that was in the division that I belonged 
to ; they run 95 yards short upon shirts and 
sheets, 160 sheets, and 160 shirts. 

What you mentioned before related to the 
mfirmary ? — ^Yes. 

What you speak of now relates to your 
ward ? — ^i es. 

And in your ward how much did you find 
short in the sheets and shirts ? — 95 yards. 

What do you imagine was the allowance 
for shirts? — ^I was told three yards and an 
half. 

Did you measure the linen in any other 
wards ? — No, none at all but the division I 
belonged to, and the infirmary sheets. 

[Thomas Field withdrew.] 

Mr. Godby, the Steward, called in. 

Is there any allowance made in the Hospi- 
tal for the measure of sheets and shirts ? — 
Three vards and an half tor a shirt, and five 
yards for a sheet. ' 

Were the sheets less than they usedi to be 
the last time they were cut, at the time that 
they mention? — ^I believe they are full as. 
long now as ever they were, and are made in 
the same manner in ever^ respect. 

But were they not half a yaid less in each 
pair of sheets than before ? — No. 

Are you positive and clear in that? — ^Yes ; 
it cannot be ; if any sheets are shorter than 
the standard, it is because the pieces of sheets 
ing run a certain length, and we cut them so 
as not to leave any remnants; that is thQ 



ii9] 



IS GEORGE III. The Case of Captain TJujuas Bailiie, [SSO 



estabUsiunent in the Ho^ital, and has beeo 
always the practice; at least for 40 years 
back to Mr. Bell's time ; I have pursued the 
^ same method, and employed the same people, 
and I have no reason to believe that tney 
have made away with any of it. 

You say there is the same quantity in the 
sheets now as fm-merly f — The same. 

How could it happen, that the sheets, when 
measured, appeared to be half a yard less ? — I 
fancy it will not appear so^ when your lord- 
ships oaii upon the derk or the cheque's clerk, 
who is a cheque upon my office ; he receives 
these sheets, and is a cheque upon them. 

You are positive they are the same size as 
usud ? — ^Yes, the same size as usual. 

Whether you speak absolutely from having 
measured the present sheets?—) have seen a 
greatjnany oftliem meakored, aad I believe 
all the linen is accounted for very clearly; it 
appears so to me. 

I wish to have a direct answer ; have you 
measured all these sheets yourself? — ^Not all ; 
it is impossible I can measia^e 8 or 9,000 pair 
of sheets ; that cannot be supposed, I should 
imagine ; I have seen a great many of them 
measured. 

Upon what convicti(m then do you deliver 
this evidence, to the House? You positively 
ysert they are the same lene[th the old ones 
used to be, without any kind of diminution ? — 
I have seen some of them measured, and have 
measured several; I have taken here and 
there one of a quantity when they are made, 
and haye measured them the same as they 
used to be in every respect. 

What quantity may you have measured 
yourself? — ^When there have been two or 
three hundred pair at a time delivered into my 
/office, I have measured three or four, and 
have been satisfied. If I have found a de- 
ficiency in any respect, I have looked farther 
^to it. 

What is the measure? — Of the sheets five 
yards. 

Did those you measured measure five 
yards? — They measured something under, 
because we cut them so as not to make any 
lemnants. 

I ask you the positive measure of what you 
measured yourself? — Sometimes a nail of a 
yard short, sometimes two nails short. - 

But none of them were poatively five yards 
long ?— Some of them were. 

Of what lengUi were the shtets that you 
did measure yourself? — Sometimes a full 
length, sometimes wanting a nail of a yard, at 
iother times two nails perhaps; but then, 
when I came to enquire into the matter, I 
found that it should be so ; a piece of sheet- 
in|g,if it runs 40 yards, would make five pair 
ofsheets, but they run 38 and an half, and S9, 
and 39 and an half; they are generally about 
, that length, and then we make just the same 
sheets as if they run 40 ; it is an advantage to 
the Hospital, and is the method that was al- 
ways adopted by the former stewards. 



Is it not somebody's province to measure 
ail the sheets ? — ^The people in my office mea- 
sure a number of them, but not all of them, I 
dare say. 

Whether or not the measuration you have 
taken of these sheets was befi^re or after the 
complaint was made by captain Baillie?«- 1 
have measured them since the complaint, and 
I hove measured them before. 
" Is it your office properly to measure this 
linen ? — It is with the clerk of the ch^ue, 
never without him. 

Is it your practice, as well as your office, 
constantly to measure them?— Yes, we aU 
ways measure some : I hardly ever knew it 
otherwise, and I constancy attend. 

What is the reason, if it is your duty, that 
you don't measive them all ? — ^It is impossible 
for me to measure them all, the nature of tiie 
. business would not admit of it. 

Wh^ is it impossible ?— On account of the 
quantity of it; becauseif we were todo bu^ 
smess m> that way, there would be a need of 
ten stewards and ten clerks. 

Would there not be time enough for you 
and the clerk of the cheque to take your 
leisure, if you have not sufficient time imme* 
diately, to measure the whole number ? — I ap^ 
prehend it is a thins that could not b^ ex* 
pected of any steward. 

Is the whole number measured by any 
body ? — I don't believe they are, indeed I ant 
certain they are not. 

Have you always took the measure upon 
the faith of the contractor to be according to 
the contract? — No, I measure here and men 
a piece; if I find a deficiency or a yard or 
half a yard, I go farther, and measure more, 
and if there is a yard deficient in any one of 
those pieces, I deduct a yard from every one 
<^ those pieces I receive. 

If from the number of sheets you have 
spoken to, you hod found a deficiency of half 
a 'yard upon every pair of ^sheets, should not 
you have thought it worth your while to com- 
plain to some body , of the Hosnital, in order 
to rectify that abuse ?— Certainly not, these 
sheets have been delivered out of my care a 
twelvemonth. 

If in the measurement of the sheets you 
yourself had discovered a deficitocy, whether 
you would not have thou^t the Hospital 
greatly defrauded by such a deficiency r — It 
could not happen in my ofilice. 

But I ask you if you had discovered a de» 
ficiency ? — ^If so, certunly . 

If again, id the measurement of 388 {>air of 
sheets, you had discovered, as the witoess 
discovered, a defidenc^r of 196 yards, which 
he has sworn to upon us measurement, would 
not you have thought that a fraud too ?— Not 
if it was accounted for some other way. 

I ask you, if upon your ^measurement yw 
had found the deficiency ? — No doubt of it ; 
if there was a deficiency of 190 odd yards^ 
there must be a firaud somewhere. 

Do you know of any complaints bttog 



M] . reipecttngike Uoyal Ho^piUiat Oreimdch* A. D. 1778. 



i%s» 



mfe to the council of a deficiency in the 
boen ?— None. 

You said the sheets were delivered out a 
vur b^«e they were measured; will not 
vashing contract linen ?— We must make aU 
knrances certainly for cutting out, we must 
mke aUowances for hemming, and for the 
shiinkins; in the washing. 

Whemer upon the delivery of the sheets, 
jou do or do not apprehend it to be the duty 
of the steward, before they have been washed, 
to measure the sheets, or at least to measure 
such a Quantity as you think they may be 
able to Qo ? — If I vinderstand the question 
right, it is, whether I measured the sheets 
before or after the washing ; I have nothing 
to do with them after they are washed, and 
therefore could not have measured them after 
tbey were washed, except what were returned 
to IDT office. 

Whether you understand that linen slmnkd 
or ^tietohes bv washing? — ^I understand it 
sfaiinks hy washing ; I have tried the experi- 
ment within these six months. 

What has been the result of the experiment ? 
—1 saw five vards of sheeting cut off, the 
dak took it home, and had it made in his 
own family, and washed, and then^ brought it 
to BIT office again; upon measuring it, we 
fomidithad shnmk near two nails of a yard 
iocne sheet ; now that would come out some- 
tibingniore upon wearing, I should think half 
a uu, but never near the fiill length. 

I istnild ask you not what you conjecture, 
\hSl whether you made anV experiments of 
measuring the sheets, ana measuring the 
sune sheets after it YaA been wash^ and 
noit for a twelvemonth ? — ^No, I have not. 

You mentioned, that when a piece of linen 
no sooMwllat short, that they cut the pair of 
sheets that were last made^ so much snorter, 
in order not to cut a^ew piece ?^We deduct 
somelhine firom every sheets or else the last 
dieet womd be so short, it would not be fit for 



How far is tout rule to go by, when you 
find a piece snort of its measure ? You say 
fcrty yatds ought to make five pah- df sheets? 

i€8k 

Suppose a piece of linen is thirty-nine 
3fiids?-— Then we make fji allowance ac- 
cordingly, we divide it equally. 

Suppose it is thirty-ei^ht yards? — ^We di- 
vide it accordingly ; but if it is only thirty- 
aeyen or diirtyHMven and an half, so that we 
think the piece would be too abort for use, 
that there would be a complaint, we make 
only seven sheets and leave a remnant. 

What is 'die precise nile you go by to term 
tbeyiece too short, whether it is thirty-seven 
jwos, or thirty-seven yards and an half ?— It 
u kfk to the judgment of the persons that cut 
them. 

Who are those persons ? — ^Two of the clerks' 
^viveshave <xlt them for late years before my 
Woiatmenty and before my predecessor's, I 



. Who are those people ? — ^My first clerk's 
wife, and the clerk of tne cheque's wife, I be*, 
lieve, cut them all. 

It is entirely left to their discretion, whether 
they choose to cut any quantity that may be 
in a piece Into five sheets?— My clerk often 
applies to me to know my opinion; if he has 
any doubt about matters of that kind^ he has 
applied to me to know what I would have 
done in that case, and I have given him di- 
rections accordingly. 

I understood you to mention two women ? 
— Yes, but under his inspection. 

Whose ?— My clerk's, and under my own 
when he lipplies to me. 
• Is it left to the women or clerk's, or your 
discretion, or whom is it left to, to be deter- 
mined, wnat quantity shall be put into eight 
sheets?— When we deliver the linen out, I 
take it down in a writing, upon paper, so many 
yards delivered, to be made into sheets ; the* 
cleirk of the cheque, or his clerk, is present, 
and cheques that account; when they are 
delivered in, we see that it answers to that 
account, as near as possibly may be ; We must 
make some little allowance; if there appears 
an inch in a sheet short, we suppose it may be 
from cutting, or some such thing. 

You say, forty yards is to make eight 
sheets ; is there not any rule by which th^ 
number of yards is ascertained, that is Xxs 
make four pair of sheets ; suppose the priece 
is thirty-six, thirty-seven, thirty-eicht, thirty- 
nine or forty yards, have you any rule when to 
stop, and not to make four pan- of sheets out 
of the piece ? — ^They know my instructions 
and directions in general, whicn are to make 
five yards in a sheet, but if the piece nms, so 
as by deducting a little firom each sheet, they* 
Mali make the liill number, then it is left to 
them ; but upon deliverii^ them into my of- 
fice, if I think they are made too short, I send' 
for those people, and give them my directions 
to cut thenr longer inmture. 

Is the committee to understand, that your^ 
directions go to these people, in case there' 
is a little fess, that you leave that little^ to* 
their discretion, and then' they are to brmg 
them to you, and vou are to judge whether 
they have used that discretion properly or 
not?— Certainly so. 

ITien are you answerable whether they use^ 
that discretion properly? — ^Yes, I and the- 
clerk of the cheque. 

Then whether you ever heard of those three- 
hundred and eighty-eight pair of sheets being 
deficient half a yard in each pair of sheets ? — 
I iMive read it in Mr. Bailhe's chaise before 
the committee, I believe, but never before ; I 
am not sure though whether it was not made 
to the board of directors upon my represent- 
ing the matter ; how it was to the committee 
that he afterwards brought a fi'esh charge be- 
fore the board of directors, which was, to the 
best of my recollection, heard' before the 
bos^, and I believe there isammuteupon 
it, but I cannot recollect when it was. 



223] 



18 GE0&6E III. The Case of Captain Thomas Baillie, [23i 



Did you take anv pains after this measure- 
ment has bebn made, and you heard of it, to 
examine these sheets, and have them mea- 
sured again ? — ^No, I did not. 

Did you have any of the shirts measured to 
see how they were? — ^Yes, wl^en they were 
returned into my office. 

What doypu mean hy when they wercretum- 
ed into your office?— Of late there has been a 
number of pensioners serving in his Majes- 
ty's yard, and they have wore out their linen 
. much more than if they had not been emploVed, 
and at the end of a serving, we have had three 
or four hundred shirts returned, which have 
been washed and delivered out according to my 
discretion ; I have delivered out four or five 
hundred within this twelvemonth of that kind, 
and when I have taken in the old ones, I have 
had them measured, to see if there was that 
deficiency as complained of, and talk^ about 
the Hospital. 

Had you any measurement made of those 
sheets of which the witness that has been l&st 
at the bar has given an account in hb ward ? 
— ^No, I had not; I have nothing to do with 
them in his war^. 

Have you measured any of the sheets ill 
tlie infirmary ? — ^No. 

You said that there were five hundred, 1 
think, returned into your office ; I want you 
to explain whether you measured those shirts ? 
— ^I measured some of those upon being re- 
turned into my office. 

How did they turn out? — They did not turn 
out as represented ; I remarked it to my clerks 
and people in the office, that those shirts were 
what I thought a good length, and what one 
might expecl^ allowing for making, and pro- 
per allowances that ought to be made in my 
opinion. 

You say they did not turn out as represent- 
ed, by whom represented? — By the lieute- 
nant-governor Baillie; so far as I thought, 
they were a good and proper length. 

Did vou measure tnose complained of in 
the infirmary? — I did not; I aid not know 
in what part of the Hospital he had been to 
measure. 

Whether the contractors are not required to 
deliver in their pieces as near to forty yards 
as possible ? — ^They are Russia sheeting, and 
they generally run, I apprehend, about that 
length ; it is not, as they are Russia goods, in 
our power to alter them; we buy them at 
so much a yard, and therefore, when we take 
in the pieces, it they are thirty-seven yards, 
th^ are marked on the outside, and I mea^ 
sure here and there a piece, to see wheUier 
^ey run the length they are marked. 

And would it Be impossible to have all the 
pieces of that length, if they were required to 
send them in of tluit length ?— I cannot speak 
to that question; but f Apprehend, as they 
are made in Russia, that it would not be an 
easy matter to do. 

Whether they are not paid according to 
the number of the yards they contain?— 



According to the number of yards they 
contain. 

Then the Hospital only pays for thirty- 
seven yards, if the piece contains no more?-^ 
No. 

By what authority or order is this measure- 
ment settled? — ^By a former steward; it is a 
method he proposed. 

What do you imagine to be the reason of 
there being any standard at all ? — He thought 
it proper, or else we could not settle our ac- 
counts; we settle our accounts by that 
standaiti. 

Don't you imagine that standard mi^ht be 
settled, Decause it was a reasonable size ta 
make sheets of ?->-€ertainly. 

Do you think that ought to be departed 
firom ? — I find Mr. Bell, the steward, who set- 
tled that account, has varied from it himself; 
for I have a sheet in my possession, which* 
has been in the possession of one of the ma- 
trons a number of years, and I find it not 
longer than those in general made in my 
time. 

W^hen you find these pieces don't answer, 
where would be the great inconvenience of 
having one sheet pieced ? Or would not that 
be more likely to keep the rest according to 
their standard, rather than to have so many 
cut short of the standard ? — ^There is no in- 
convenience, at least I never heard of a com- 
plaint of deducting that small quantity, and 
It is an advantage to the Hospital, and there 
would be a loss, if we were to make them ex- 
actly of a length ; there would be a loss of 15 
or 90/. in the clothing, to the Hospital. 

Do you imagine that it is a benefit to the 
Hospital, that the standard should be dimi- 
nished, to the inconvenience of the pen* 
sioners? — It is neither an inconvenience nor 
a prejudice to the pensioners, I am clear of 
that, and it is a benefit to the Hospital. 

Then do you imagine that the standard is 
too great? — No. 

Then account for why you think it no in- 
convenience to the pensioners to have the 
sheets shorter than the standai:d; and yet 
you think the standard not longer than it 
ought to be? — If it was less, and a piece was 
to run over fmrty yards, we should have an 
overplus ; and we could not then account for 
our cloth at all. 

You have, I think, said, that as fiir as the 
ward extends, where captain Baillie complains 
of the grievance, vou never have taken any ' 
measurement at aU ? — In that ward, I never 
did as I know. 

Have you heard, that it was usual to de- 
liver a pattern made up of sheets or of shirts, 
answerins the description that was laid down ; 
and whewer it was or was not a very com- 
mon thing to deviate fi*om that pattern shirt 
or sheet ? — ^There is no pattern or a shirt or a 
sheet, but the standard. 

They are all made in the bouse? — ^Yes; 
they arc made from my office. 

You say it would be impossible to go through 



IRQ r«)M0fnigf the Rojfol HospUalat Grufnach. . A. D. 177S« 



esse 



jUjjewtfgicniof tiie wbok^ without hav- 
mg s{;reat many people umler you ; or do you 
ailllMk k necesBaiy to lake indisoiminately 
it diftreiit mrdsy and to try such a numbcor 
in each di£brent vnxdj to see whether they 
avmredf-^If you understand by their bemg 
vade ui the house, that they are made withm 
tke walk of the HoyitaL they are not; there 
lie none, as I know, made within the walls. 

Whether you, or any of the p^ple under 
VH, have any perquisite upon cutting out thb 
mn?— I have none. 

Nor the people under you? — ^Nor the 
Adn; except tneir wives that make them 
so much a riiirt, and so much a 



Are there any remnants allowed to themf 
—No; no such thing b admitted in any re- 

Ihe maaufiurturers of linen in general, I 
believe, allow an over-measure to what they 
let down ; now does a piece, nominally of 40 
ymkf measure no more than 40 yards ? — 1^ 
this case it does not; because we don't con- 
Inet by the piece, but by the yard. 

Bat the person that contracts for this linen, 
eootracts by the piece ? — No, by the yard, at 
voMich a yard ; if a piece contains 37 or 38 
juds, we pay for no more than 97 or 38 
jnds. 

But apiece that b set down to you as 40 
fards, shoold measure 41 or 42 yards? — In 
Ihis case they charge to a quarter of a yard ; 
tfacy charge ar and a quarter, or 37 and three- 
fBoten. 

They always allow a piece ; a thumb as 
they call it? — There is no allowance made; 
the contract b for so much a yard ; if we con- 
tacted by the piece, then, in most pieces of 
IbcQ, tikere b an aUowance of three-quartcBS 
oft yard, or a yard over; but as we contract 
hytfae yaiid, they measure to half a yard, or to 
aouarterofayard. 

The contractor buys it of the linen-draper 
b]r the piece ; then, of course, he should serve 
m contract with the pieces as he pays for 
them; and if he pays for but 40 yards when 
he has 41, he should chaige but 40. — It has 
•Inayt been customary to charge to half a 
|iid, or a quarter of a vard. 

Whether yoii recollect your having said, 
tiiat thi^ contracted by th^ piece ; that some- 
tunes the piece ran 37 and sometimes 40 
JtA} My reason for asking this question is, 
to fix it tluit the contract is made by the piece. 
*-No^itbnot; and your lordship misunder- 
stood me. [Mr. Godby withdrew.} 

Mr. Maule called in. 

lilQiedier ftke ^eets are of the right length 
it nesent? — I believe so. 

whatveason have yon to think that they 
y^ I have known the Hospital a great 
Mgf years, and, till very lately.! never heard 
oft complatnt at aU of the kind. 
- Wbttreaaonhave you to think that they 
•BQoiihoitflr ihaatlvy wtfrc formerly ?--4 

VOL XXI. 



don't know that they are shorter than they 
were formerly* 

Did you never hear a complaint of the kindf 
—Not till very lately ; and though there is an 
establbhed quantity for each sheet, it has not 
been the custom to makd them so, if the 
pieces of cloUi did not run- in proportion to 
the nuinber that each piece should make ; and 
I believe that has always been the custom^ 
wace Uie Hospital was first established. 

vAre the pieces of linen not always of the 
tame length?— They run from 37 to 37|, 38 
and so on to 39( ; .very seldom to 40. 

You seldom find any pieces of the full 
lensth ? — Very seldom. 

Do you speak from your certain knowledge, 
that the sheets are not now shorter than they 
were before ? — ^I don't say that they are at 
present. 

You say they are not shorter now ; whether 
they were not shorter before the complaint 
was made by captain Baillie? — ^I belieire they 
are now, as they have been made for many 
years past. 

Do you speak firom your certain knowledge 
that the sheets are now no shorter than they 
^ere before ?«*-! never heard till very lately, 
as I said before, that the sheets were shdrter 
now than they were formerly. 

Answer thai question directly ; do you kno^ 
of your own knowledge, that the sneets aie 
now of the same lengtn as they were before^ 
— ^Ail that have come within my knowledge. 

How many have come within your know- 
ledge? — ^A great many. 

How many ? — ^I suppose 100 pair or more. 

Oil of how many ?--^me thousands. 

How many thousands ? — Very likely three 
or four thousand. 

How many hundred pair, out of these three 
or four thousand, have you measured ? — I sup- 
pose an hundred pair I have seen measured. 

And were those equal to the standard? — ^I 
have alreadv told your lordships, that I never 
knew that they were to the standard. 

What rule have vou to go by to say, that in 
former times the sneets were shorter than the 
standard ? By how much were they shorter f 
— I cannot speak particularly to that; but I 
do, from my own knowledge, know that the 
sheets were formerly made as they are now, 
and in Uie same manner, and by the same, 
people. 

You say they were shorter, but don't know 
by how much; I desire you will saytiieii, 
Kow you can possibly know that the present 
sheets are not shorter than those were? — 1 
said, at the same time, that though it was a 
nominal thing that the sheets were to consist 
of five yards, yet I believe they never were of 
that quantity. 

By now much were they shorter ? — I oannot 
particularly say. 

If you don't know by how much^hey were 
shorter, how can you possibly mv, wet vou 
donH laiow that they are now shorter uam 
they were tl^en*?— 4 n^er heard vooeafdaisl* 

Q 



93T] 



18 GEORGE m. The Case of Captain Thomas BaUtk^ [fi2S 



That is not the question; you say, that 
from your knowledge, the hundred sheets you 
measured were the same length as those be- 
fore; now you say, jrou don't know the exact 
length of those betbre; how then can you 
know that these ate of the same measure ?— 
I have measured them- freqiiently for- 
merty, when I was a clerk in the clerk of ^e 
cheque's office ; and I have seen them mea- 
sure since I have been in the present office, 
and since I have been clerk of the cheque 
myself I have often seen them measured, and 
I don't know that there is any difference be- 
tween those made formerly and those made 
now. < 

When you measured the sheets formerly, 
of what length were they? — ^I believe short a 
quarter of a yard;* I have seen them so very 
often. 

You said you measured them; you are to 
speak to a fact, not lipon belici'; have you 
taken any account of now much, upon an 
average, a certain quantity of sheets mea- 
sured r— I have not ; but it occurs to my me- 
mory that they have been a quarter of a yard 
in a sheet short formerly. 

Have you measured any number of sheets 
latterly ? — I have seen a great many measured 
lately. 

Have you made any computation, and cast 
it into an average, to see how much they were 
^ort ? — ^No ; wit I apprehend they were not 
more than that short ; none that I have mea- 
sured have. beea more than that short. 

Are the committee to understand yon^ that 
when you say they are not shorter, it is from a 

Eeneral supposition, and not from any calcu- 
ition or measurement ? — ^I have seen a great 
many measured lately, and seldom any of 
them have exceeded that of being a quarter of 
a yard short. 

Have you made any computation upon any 
number, to say that such a number produce 
so much, and upon an average they were so 
much shorter ?— No, I have not. 

Are the committee to understand you that 
you speak from conjecture, and not from 
measurement? — ^I have seen a great many 
measured. 

Can you speak to any certain number that 
you have seen measured, t^iat do all of them 
come within a quarter of a yard exactly, or 
nearly ? — No ; I have only seen here or there 
•ome measured when a quantity have been 
delivered in. 

Then do you speak from your judgment of 
the measurement of one, or two. Or uuree pair 
of sheets, but not from the measurement of 
any large number from whence you have made 
an average ?-*No; I have never measured 
any larae nimiber. 

E. of Chesterfield, Whether the sheets are 
long enough for the beds?-— I think they are. 



• At 

Ulis 



•re- four bmdllis -in a pair of ibeets, 
a dsfioieiiev of 5.000 vardt in lo-ouuiy 
thtkpvpilaL Orig.EdH. 



Do you know whether they are ornot?^-! 
say, I think they are. 

In that ward particularly that captsin Bail- 
lie comphuned of ?— No ; I speak ot the whole 
house in general. 

You say the sheets are nominallv five yards ; 
have you no pattern sheet to go oy; what is 
the standard measure you go by? — ^I don't 
know that there is any pattern sheet. 

Is there no standard to eo by.^— No; it has 
been looked upon to be nve yards; it is a 
mere nominal thing that they should consist 
of five yards. 

Do you understand a standard rule is to be 
a mere nominal thine, and never to be ad- 
hered to? — I speak, that it has been custo- 
marv in the cutting up the cloth. 

The standard is two yards and an half long ^ 
—Yes. 

What length are the sheets now cutting 
up ?— I really don't know. 

Do you lieep up to your standard of two 
yards and a half? Have you measured them ? 
— I have not. 

Have you measured none of them ?— Not 
very lately. 

How lately since you measured any? — It la 
a twelvemonth ago, I believe, since I meap* 
suredany. 

And are there none at this time making f — 
Yes, there are. 

How came you not to measure them ? Is it 
not in your office ? — ^I have not been long iu 
the office that I now enjoy; the first clerk in 
the office that I preside at has been SO yeara 
in that «nploy, and I looked upon him to, be 
a better judge than I am, with regard to all 
them matters. 

Therefore you leave it to your clerk to do 
all that business ?--Only some particular parte 
of it. 

What length were those sheets when a 
c«)mplaint was made about them? Did you 
measure them then ?— The sheets were not in 
the custody of any body, but were delivered 
out; they were in the infirmary, and as I un- 
derstand, the late lieutenant-governor sent te 
tlie infirmary in an odd manner, and got those 
sheets and measured them ; it was not known 
to any of the officers of the Hospital that 
those sheets were measured at all. 

What was the measure of them then ? — ^I 
don*t know. 

How much less than the standard ?— I don't 
know that. 

You were not then clerk of the cheque, I 
suppose ?— I have been a long time at sea. 

How long have you been clerk of the 
cheoue ? — Smce May, 1776. 

Tnatwas before this complaint, I under- 
stand? — Yes. 

As it was in your office, you certainly mea- 
sured them a year ago ? — I saw a g^eat nuo^ 
ber of them measured at the steward'a office^ 
thev were measured there. 

What did they measure a vearago? Di4 
they come up Id thiagtendaTa of twe yai^ 



fiH|} n tpe aing Ae Rm/al ttotpiul at Greemuck. A. D. 1778» 



C230 



tnl » half in kogth? — ^I have said heSoie, I 
kave found tbem to be a Quarter of a yard 
ihoit of what ia oommoiuy esiaemed the. 
sdiidanL 

Uj questioD to you was thiSy what did they 
meisuFeayearago? You said you measured 
them a Tear ago. . Did they come up to the 
itandara of two yards and a half lone, and 
fire yards to the sheet, at that time?— No ; I 
have told your lordships before, that several I 
measured a year ago were a quarter of a yanl 
ihoil, and I believe that was owing to the 
shrinking of the linen. 

I understood that you were to measure 
those sheets before they were made up; we 
have just been told that was the time of mea- 
funngthem, and not afterwards ; when did 
you measure them ? — ^Ailer they were return- 
ed made. 
And washed?—- No. 

Then how could they shrink so much ? — ^It 
was after they wer^ brought home made, and 
not washed. 

And then they were a quarter of a yard 
short? — ^I observed several of them a quarter 
of a yard short, as I mentioned to your lord- 
ahqis before. 

And did not you try to redress this because 
it came into your own office? — ^No; it has 
been the practice of the Hospital^ as far as I 
can remember, and ever heard, with re^ird to 
the Quantity of linen that each piece contain- 
ed, that the sheets were calculated so as to 
cause the shortness now complained of 

Whether you have anv reason to believe 
that the measurement that Mr. Field made 
was not a fair measurement ? — I believe a hit 

[Mr. Maule withdrew.] 



one. 



Captun BaiUie called in again. 



Whether you ndade any complaint at any 
time of the situation of the tailors' shop being 
such, as to be likely to occasion fire in Green- 
inch Hospital? — ^Ab6ut last January was 
twelve months, there was a proposal from a 
tailor to take the Hospital contract, upon 
some information he had received tnat the 
contractor was in a bad state of health, and 
wished to decline; there was a circular letter 
sent, I believe, to all the directors of the Hos- 
pital upon that occasion ; amongst the rest I 
Lad one, and some time after that a public letr 
tcr appeared at the board from a contracting 
lulor, making a tender to the board in conse- 
mience of the information he had received of 
toe ill state of health of the former contractor ; 
the matter was then only talked of at the 
hoai^ of directors^ for the former contractor 
bad no intention it seemed to resign. I gave 
my opinion to the board of directors, that 
tbere was danger of fire from the tailors' shop 
in the Hospit^, where I thought there was a 
scene of orunkenness and mssipation ; the 
taiknrs were permitted to sell drams, and they 
kept a kind of suttling-house in the Hospital ; 
I peinted out the danger of fire, and when the 
aunmittee joat in A« Hospital to enquire into 



the g^pounds of the several charges, they paid 
not the least attention to that matter, no more 
than they did to many o^ers. 

Whether you gave information to any set 
of men, that there was danger of fire from the. 
practice of the tailors in the Hospital? — ^I 
mentioned it when the contractor made pro- 
posals ; I objected then ; I said I thoueht it 
an improper place for the tailors to work in ; 
that tnere was danger firom fire, saving, it 
would be a shore eiigibte mode to buy the 
clothes ready made, and to serve them out as 
pursers do in his majesty's ships. 

Did vou object to the tailors working in tha 
place they work in ? — I did. 

You represented that there was danger of firo 
from the tailors working where they did by 
candle light? — I did, to Uie board of atrectors, 
and pointed it out afterwards in my com- 
plaint. 

Do vou know any thing of the fire that 
lately happened in Greenwich Hospital? — I 
knew nothing of it till the morning I was 
ffoing to London ; at eight o'clock I heard 
uiere was a fire in Greenwich Hospital. 

Is there any person here that can ^ve an 
account where that fire began? — I should 
think it the dutv of the captain and lieutenant 
of the week to know something about it. 

Who were the captain and lieutenant of the 
week? — ^I was out of office ^en; I have 
heard that lieutenant Kerr was lieutenant of 
the week. 

Why do you think that place particularly 
improper for the tailors to have worked in ? — 
Because it is a great way from the officers to 
visit that wud, and it incumbered the Hospi* 
tal very much, and took up the place of a 
great number of pen»onav; I thought it 
would be better applied in havine cabms for 
pensioners ; that ward is not under the care 
of the officers ; the steward has the direction 
and management of the tailors' shop, and it is 
scarcely ever visited by the officers of the 
Hospital ; your lordships will find it was inune- 
diately over the chapel. 

Was your objection to the danger of fire, 
because the tailors were not under the inspec- 
tion of the officers ?— That ward was always 
locked up at night ; if the officers or guard so 
their liimds there, they can't get in ; it is lock- 
ed up, and the key is under the care of the 
stewanl and tailor, and these people. 

I understood you objected to it, because tha 
tailors sold drams, and kept a kind of suttling- 
house? — ^I did not object to it particular^ 
upon that account, because till after the mk 
I did not know tlwt circumstance; it came 
out then. 

What was the reason of your objecting to it 
at that time ? — It ^as when the contracting 
tailor made an offer- 
Why did you think it likely that fire should 
take place there? — Because it was never visit- 
ed at nights by the euard of the Hospital; tha 
patrole never viaiteo it; they never oonAi get 
mto that ward* 



«S1] 



18 GBOttGfe III. The Que ofCapkm TkMfat BMUy 



Do you apprehend the fiit begin in the;te« 
lore' room? — I have every reason to believe 
86, from what has transpired in the Hospital. 

Have you seen any of the examinations that 
were taken before sir John Fielding ? — ^I never 
saw any of the examinations; but I have 
great reason to believe that neither the cap- 
tain nor lieutenant of the week were called 
upon on that occasion ; it seemed to me to be 
rather a partial enquiiy. 

It was upon oath, therefore what reason 
to\AA you have for thinking so ? — ^I did not 
hear that any body was examined upon oath ; 
I was outof office, and I was not calred upon ; 
the captain and lieutenant of the week were 
ihe proper officers ; the House vrill hear whe- 
ther all the. commissioned officers were exa^ 
mined or not. 

' Is that the only reason you have for think- 
ing it a partial enquiiy, that you have not 
heard thev were examined upon oath ? — ^I did 
not hear that the commissioned officers, whose 
duty it was to know something about it, were 
all examined. 

Was that the duly reason for your thinking 
it a partial enquify? — ^I don't Know of any 
ether reason. [Captain Bailtie wiUidrew.J 

Lieutenant Kerr called in. 

Inform the committee of v^at you know 
respecting the fire that happened m Green- 
wich Hospital. Do you know where it began } 
— ^Upon my word I am incapable to tell where 
H began. In the morning, about a quarter 
before five^ when I happened to be m bed 
With my wifo, and the Koyal Charlotte ward 
is directiy over me, which has a passage down 
from where the fire began, or near to it, I 
heard people running backumd and forward ; 
I thought it had been the boys running, as 
usual, at six in the morning to go to school ; 
soon afler I heard that the tailors'* shop was 
on fire ; I jumped out of bed, put on my clothes, 
and went up to the place, where I fomid a 
^reat deal of smoke m the Duke of York's 
ward; they told me there, tiiat the tailord* 
shop was on fire; I went up close to it, and 
found a prodigious deal of smoke ; I was ask- 
ed by one of them if I had an hatchet; I ran 
down and brought up a broad axe to break the 
door; I gave it to a man, and then ran to eet 
open the two great reservoirs of water, and I 
ordered the water to be thrown on the floor, 
hoping it was an accidental local fire in the 
vrutl: in about ten minutes after I found 
they had broke open a place on the lefl side 
of the steps goins up to the tidlors' shop; I 
looked down, anasaw a small fire, not blazing 
up, but as if it had been continued for some 
time. They broke open the door. The boy 
and the man gave their evidence to sir John 
Fielding; how they ^ve their evidence, God 
onlv knows; they said — 

The committee donH want to know what 
fhey said. What did you see?— What I saw 
iiras only that there was a fire at the left side 
of the steps a going up; when it broke 



p 



tfcx<liigh.we could not getat the#irt^; Ipff^ 
the clerk of ^e chequers clerk the a^ to eut 
open the doors to get at the reservoir^ of 
water ; I went to the King's, the uppermost 
ward: then I went down to the Townsend; 
and then to the Prince of Wales's ward: cap- 
tain AUwright went with me to see if t})m 
was any fire in the nurses' ward, or in the 
anartments Ihat were under these apartments ; 
tnere vras none ; I put my cheek to the side 
of the place, and said, here is the fire, I fed 
the heat strike to met I ran up again to the 
wards above me and found the fire. To the 
best of my knowled^, and the jndgmetit I 
can ^ve of the afian*, it was in the taHorsP 
shop that the fire began. 

Were you the officer of the mttk ?— Yes. 

To what extent did this fire go ?— To a Very 
unfortunate extent indeed ; beyond the expec- 
tation of mankind ; beyond what any man ac- 
quainted with Greenwich Hospital ever could 
conceive. • 

How many pensioners were burnt out?— I 
believe not above SOO, or about 890 or 390 ; I 
cant ascertain the exact number ; but I don't 
brieve more thantluit 

Have you any guess of the extent of the da» 
mage, to what amount it will reauire to rfptir 
it? — I am no judge of anv such thing. 

Was there a great deal of furniture lost?*^ 
I don't know ^mat fiimiture might be lost bj 
the indiscretion of the people mo were tent 
fifom the different yards; more damage was 
done than what the fire did ; if they would 
have taken advice, there would not have beea 
so much damage aone ; many wards #ere ia^ 
m^d that were not damaged by th^fire. 

vv hether you did ever apprehend, or declare 
your apprehensions of a rear of fire in that 
particular part where the iixt happened, before 
it did happen ?— There was a man brought U> 
the councu; I bdng lieutenant of th^ wedt, 
our nurses compkined to me that a man had 
a candle in his cabin; when I cametoefi* 

r\ into it, I found the man Was guli|^ ^ 
fault ; he had no ridxt, at any time, te 
have a candle in his cabin; the nurse took 
the candle out, and he struck her; the malt 
made frivolous excuses to me ; I insisted upon 
it that it should be brought to coundlt I sent 
down to captain Chads, who was the captm 
of the week, and bid him put it upon the list 
of the complaints ; I said I woula never fofw 
give a candle's being in a cabin at an unusual 
time ; the man came, and asked me to fox^gfv# 
it ; I sud if I did, I hoped God would never 
forgive me ; it was brought to council, and he 
was punished; I wislied him to have had 
three months, or two months at least, but he 
had only a month's punishment; I begged 
the council would give orders to ^e boat- 
swains to prevent the irregularity of the pen- 
sioners havine li^ts in their cabins; lor if 
any accident happened, I was afraid H would 
be from the tXnce of York's ward^ for they 
were irregular, drunken, turbulent, trouble*' 
somepeo^; and this was aH I did say ; bot 



iHS] rapeeliHg tke Roy^ Hospittl at Onandch. AttkVnB, 



ISM 



vWi M fiirllMf nteiitiony WiAilig the coon* 
ai would ooDciir with what I bad said. 

If I imderstood yon right, you tmd that be- 
fcre tlie fire happened, you wete apprehensiTe 
that that was a likely part for a fira to ha^n 
m; andTouhadiDadeaeompkunt; twisnto 
fellow that question a Ultie fiirther: who 
were the persons jwl idade the eomplaint tof 
^t was in councd I made the complaifit 

Who composed that council? — Hwas the 
conunoD council of the Hospital ; I heliere 
tiie fieutenant-gorefnor and captain Lynn 
were there, and several captains ; I cannot as- 
eertain iramedtately that ; hut all my mean- 
iitt was no more than wishing tiie concurrence 
ifme council to support me in my duty as a 
faeatenanty having a (arge and extensive dtvi- 
^bn under my care, that they would give an 
order, which would be more circumstantial 
than :aine, as an individual officer ; I netther 
mesit^ nor thought, nor ^hed no other. 

Whether you were apprehensive that a fire 
m^t happen in that place, and made your 
eomphdnt to the council? You named the 
Keutenant-govemor as one of th&t couiKil; 
#13 the apprehension of the fear of fire in that 
^bce su^ested by you to the lieutenanVgo- 
vemor orby the lieutenant-governor to you? 
—I meant it in j^eneral, that I would wish to 
br sujmortedy as I had given orders that there 
should be no Hghts ; 1 meant no other, tlmn 
tbatmy orders should be enforced. 

Were yon ever examined by ^ John Field- 
ing?— I was. 

TOO said, that there were about 900 pen- 
sioners burnt out ; how long was it before 
there were lodg^gs for them again ?— >I be- 
fieve if the men would have come in, if they 
bad not availed themselves of wishing to lie 
out, they might have been accommodated the 
veiy ni^t the fire was : I believe I could have 
accommodated them myself, if I had been left 
to do it; and I believe every officer in the 
Hospital, to tbe utmost of their power, took 
every method to accommodate them. 

You were examined, you say, before sir John 
Fielding ?— Yes. 

Did It appear, upon that exammation, tibat 
the fire broKe out first in the toem where the 
tailors were? — I cui only answer for what I said 
njself; I was jaot present; I believe it waa 
very evident to every body, to the best of my 
knowledge, tfaat it fcffoke out there, and there 
ody. 

^ Who was the lieutenant-governor at the 
time yon mentioned to the council your appre- 
henaions of fiie? — Lietitenant^vemor Ma- 
pieaden. [Lieutenant Kerr withdrew.] 

lieutenant Smith called in. 

^ Were you at Greenwich Hospital at the 
fitne the fife i>egan?— «I was not; I was in 
town. 

Bow soon were you at the Hospieal ?— I 
bc&nre about noon ; the damage was mostly 
*^ by the time I came. 

wre yoa «Dy jeascm to kftow yfhett the 



fife began f—Aa to formhig aay fto«iOD wtoB 
it beean, I cert^My could not; llMǤ^ I ditf ' 
s^(l donl knowiyheth«r I havi aftr fouA^ 
tion for it ornot>tlia«I iraaginM H broke dot 
at the vestry. 

[lieutenant Smith withdrew.] 



3\f eadsy, April 90. 
Captain B<ulUe called io. 

Whether you know any thing of tlie method 
in which the linen is eut out id Greenwicll' 
Hospital ?— Do yott apeak of sheets or ahirts? 

The sheeti^e. — ^A piece of sheeting is g^ne* 
rally cut into nxteen lengths^ to make ^n 
sheets ; each length ought to connst of ^vo 
yards and an half; a piece of Russia sheeting 

gsdetally contains thirty-seven ywds and an 
alf ; tint beinr cut kite sixteen lengths, 
dues not run to we standard of the Hospitid ; 
instead of sixteen lengths, it ought to be cut 
into fifteen only ; by which means two pieces 
will make fifteen sheets ; and by cutting fbtir 
pieces in that manner, they will makt exactly 
fifteen pair of sheets ; instead of which the 
praetiee is, to cut four pieces into sixteen pur 
of sheets, by wtiieh means there is a pair of 
sheets more ttum there ought to be oy tho 
establishment. It has l&ewise bOen the 
practice of the butcher's servant to reduce 
each man's potmd of meat to fourteen ounces, 
for whkh he was transported. 

Whether the pieces of Ikien in genera! nah' 
thirty-s6ven yards atid an half ?— -Thev are 
bougnt for thirty ells, that is exactly thir^-' 
seven yards and an half; and if you search 
Cheapside, from one end to the other, I be* 
lieve It vrill be fbimd to be the length. 

With regard to the men's shirts, whether 
they have been delivered according to the 
standard? — I believe not. Three yards and 
an half is the standard lor every shirt in 
Greenwich Hospital. Throughout the Ho»« 
pital, I will venture to say, they run but about 
three yards and a quarter; for the larse men 
they genentiy aJkw three yards anl three 
quarters. There is a gentleman I have seen 
here to-day, who is a draper, he can tell the 
exact lengui of the pieces. 

What IS hia Aame ?->Hi8 name is Price ; I 
do not know hi^ Christian name, for I never* 
saw him before. [Csqptun Baillie wHhdrOw.] 

The duke of Richmond then moved. That 
the House be resumed ; and a short debate 
ensued upon the propriety of Mr. Price eiving 
evidence, as he had not been summoned. 

Resolved, That Mr. Price inight be ad* 
mitted to give evidence. Mr. Price was ^hero- 
fore called, and sworn at the bar. TheQouae 
being again resolved into a committee. 

What is vour name ? — Edward Price. 
Where do you live } — ^I live m iMadttiOOr^ 
street, Clare-market 
Are you a linen-draper ?--^l am. 
Do you deal m Russia linen ?-^I do. 



9SS] 



ISO^KGB m. The OueofCaptm Thomas BaiOie, [236 



What kngth are J^o^ of Russia sheeting, 
upon' an avenge ?— The fabric is thirty ells, 
or thirty-seven yards and an half each piece, 
seldom more or less. [Mr. Price withorew.] 

Capt Baillie called in again. 

Whether there were any proceedinffs amnst 
you, in Westminster-hall, tor a libel ? — There 
were six informations moved against me, in 
the court of King's-bench, for the Memorial I 
drew up of the state of Greenwich Hospital; 
it was m the name of the directors and others 
of Greenwich Hospital. 

What were the names in which the infor- 
mations were brought?— rin the name of Mr. 
Hicks, the sixpenny receiver ; Mr. Stuart, the 
surveyor of the Hospital ; and the rev. Mr. 
Cooke, as directors. After that, my lords, 
they were consolidated into one or more in- 
formations ; and there was the secretaiy, Mr. 
Ibbet^n; the clerk of the works, Mr. Mylne: 
Mr. Stuart, the surveyor of the Hospital ; and 
Mr. Godby, the steward; in theu* separate 
capacities. i 

Do you mean actions or informations? — 
Actions. They moved for rules^ in the King's- 
bench, to shew cause why an mformation or 
informations should not be granted against 
me for a libel. 

Is your solicitor here ? — "So, 

Do you mean motions for informations or 
actions ? — ^Motions for informations ; it is my 
want of knowledge of the technical terms of 
the law made me express myself so. 

Do you expect vour attorney here to-day ? 
—He has attendea constantly till to-day. 

Who carried on the business on the other 
side ? — ^The solicitor of Greenwich Hospital, 
Mf. Everest [Captain Baillie withdrew.] 

Mr. Eoertft called in. 

I beg to know whether you carried on any 
prosecution iwainst Mr. Baillie, in Westmin- 
ster-hall i—xes. 

Of what nature; and at whose suit? — I 
was employed by several individiuds at the 
Hospital to prosecute captain Baillie for a 
libel; they were, Mr. HicKS, Mr. Stuart, Mr. 
Ibbetson, Mr. Mvlne, and Mr. Godby, on 
their separate and private . accounts : it was 
some time before I received any- farther or- 
deiB; I think^ at last, the comimltee of en- 
quiry on captam Baillie's book, called me in, 
and I received orders from the directors to 
take the necessary steps, on their part, to pro- 
secute captain Qaillie. 

When you were called in by this commit- 
tee^ did they direct you to prosecute captain 
Baillie in their name, as a committee, or as a 
court of directors, or a seneral court? — I un- 
derstood I was to take the necessaiy steps on 
the part of the directors; the necessary affi- 
davits were prepared, and the rule made, to 
shew cause why informations should not be 
filed. 

In the name of any person, individuaUy, or 
by the court of directors?—-! first received 



orders firom individuals, and then at the com-- 
mittee of enquiry. 

When you did move to shew cause^ did you 
do it in the name of any person, individually, 
or on the part of the board or directors? — 
One in the name of the court of directors; 
the others on the part of the individuals I 
have mentioned. The rule was, why an in- 
formation or informations should not be filed ;. 
I believe an information only was intended to 
be supported. 

At whose expence was that carried on ? — 
The expence has not been paid ; captain Bail- 
lie's expences have been paid out of the 
pocket of Mr. Stuart, Mr. Hicks, Mr. Godby, 
and Mr. Cooke, &c. 

Your part of the business, at whose ez- 

rmce was that carried on ? — ^I conceive that 
am to be paid by the individuals that' em^ 
ployed me. 

Was there any thine about who was to pay 
it ? — I wrote to the ooard of directors, the 
17th of October. I think it was. I was called 
upon, and askea if I looked to the Hospital 
for payment; I was told I was not to look to 
the Hospital for payment, but to the indivi- 
duals that employed me. 

[Mr. Everest withdrew.] 

Mr. Lefevre called in. 

I be^ he may be asked, whether he knows 
any thins of prosecutions carried on against 
Mr. Bulfie, or any steps taken to engage per- 
sons to carry on those prosecutions?-— I will 
begin, if your lordships please, and relate the 
whole. About the 8th or 9th of January. I 
was in company with the Rev. Mr. Cooke, 
who read to me a part of a letter he said he 
had received firom the steward of the Hos- 
pital, the contents were. That the contracting 
Dutchers were cast for the sevcaral frauds they 
had been accused of at Guildhall ; and after 
the tiial was over, the said steward, and the 
rest of his friends, which I suppose were the 
landmen, enjoyed themselves with a very 
good dinner, and a bottle of good wine, while 
Sie lieutenant governor and ms party sneaked 
ofi* like a parcel of dirty dogs. 

Here a short conversation took place, whe- 
ther the witness should he permitted to pro- 
ceed in his narrative, or answer to such ques- 
tions as might be propounded. Agreed, that 
he should confine himself to answers only. 
Witness called in. 

I desire Mr. Lefevre will answer what he 
knows relating to steps taken to induce per- 
sons to bring about these prosecutions against 
captain BaiSie? — ^As to what could induce 
them, it is impossible for me to say. 

If Mr. Lefevre will be so sood as to answer 
what stejjs he is acquainted with which werr 
taken to induce any gentlemen to prosecute 
captain Baillie ? — ^I should suppose tney did it 
merelv fi^m dislike to captain BulUe. 

Had you any conversations with Mr. Codke^ 
relative to any prosecutions against captain 



'fSr) ftipeeimg ike Ro^ HoipUd Mi Gremmf^ A.D.177& 



[898 



BttUie? — ^IwasgQD^ to that; I was going 
to mentMMi it as it wib told me by the Rev. 
Mr. CodDe ; I was going to relate from the 
bemmine of Mr. Cooke's discourse to the end. 
The ouy thing wanted is^ that you will re- 
late that Dart that concerns an attemfyt to in- 
duce anybody to prosecute caotain Baillie? — 
I ^BOoUect, alter captain Baillie's book came 
out, Mr. Cooke informed me, that lord Sand- 
wich had said, that any person that should be 
seen to keep company with captain Baillie, 
should have a stop put to his preferment for 
cver. 

[Mr. Lefevre interrupted by several noble 
loras, and ordered to withdraw.3 . 

While the witness, Mr. Lefevre, was giving 
his testimony, Ibrd Denbigh, who at just 
within the biur, near the witness, aaid, in a low 
voice, two or three times to hini^ that he 
ahouhl confoie himself to the question; if he 
did not, be must interrupt him. The witness 
not attending immediately to what his lord- 
ship said, he rose to olyect to receiving any 
kind of evidence, but what contained an an- 
swer to the question put by the House. 

The Duke of Riekmond rose to complain of 
the veiy disorderly conduct of the noble lord, 
who went down to the bar, and endeavoured 
to intimidate a witness delivering his testi- 
mony upon oath. 

The Earl of Denbigh acknowledged, that 
he told the witness that he would mtemipt 
him. if he deviated from the question. 

The Duke of Richmond replied, that it was 
lughly improper and indecent, to offer to di- 
rect a witness, and intimidate him, by holding 
a private conversation with him; tiiat no 
noble lord had a right to put a question, as an 
individual, to an^ person under examination 
at the bar ; and^ if the noble lord did not de- 
sist, and immediately retract, he would, for 
the honour of the House, and the order and 
decency of their lordships' proceedings, fiame 
a question, and t^e the sense of the House 
upon it. 

After a warm altercation between the two 
noble lords, and sevend direct contradictions, 
in which the duke of Richmond affirmed po- 
sitively, that the noble lord had endeavoured 
to intimidate the witness ; and from, what he 
said in his defence, had conferaed the dis- 
oideriy conduct imputed to him. 

The Lord Chancellor rose, and said it was 
very true, that every question . should come 
through the medium or the chair ; that that 
form was, however, irequentlv dispensed with, 
for the sreater dispatch of business ; but if 
the noble duke insisted upon adhering to 
strict order, he was certainly rieht. 

The Earl of Denbigh said, that was what 
he meant to do ; that it was permitted every 
dav ; and that so for . from mtimichiting, be 
oiuy wished to wevent trouble. 

The Duke ofuiekmond replied, the question 
staled by the noble and learned lord, and the 
JBoUecm who spoke last, was veiy difierent 



to Ae species of disorder he complained of 
When a noble lord propounds a question, in 
the manner described, he did it openlv, and 
with an audible voice, so that every kud pre- 
sent misht hear it It was never therefore 
imaeineo, that because the question was <h- 
rectJy answered from the bar, that, dispensing 
with the riffht orders of the House, in not in- 
sisting to nave the question agiin repeated 
from the chair, or the wooludc, left any 
noble lord at liberty to go down to the Imr, to 
hold a private conversation with a witness, in 
order to intimidate him. 

The Earl of fhaterfield said, that the pre^ 
sent beinft an enquiry into the conduct of the 
noble ford, whose name was mentioned hav- 
ing made use of such an expression, that 
hearsay was no evidence, and that conse- 
•quently it was inadmissible, and the witness 
ought to be restrained from mentioning lord 
Sandwich's name. 

Here a very warm debate commenced on 
two grounds. First, whether the present en- 
quiry could be properly considered as an en- 
(miry into the conduct of loid Saiidwich ; and 
if it coqfd, whether hearsay evidence of what 
the witness heard Cooke say that loid Smd- 
wich told him, was admissible evidence in a 
court of justice. 

The first of those questions was debated for 
upwards of an hour. The affirmative was 
contended for by the Lord Chancellor, and 
the lords ManAeld, Bathurst, Chesterfield, 
and Dudley; the negative, by the duke of 
Richmond and lord Cunden, mixed with their 
question of fact and the general supposed 
understanding or the House, the question of 
the law forced itself into discussion. At 
length iord Mansfield framed a question, m 
order, he said, to take the sense ot the House 
to the following effect : 

'^That it be resolved, that the name of 
John earl Sandwich be not mentioned by the 
witness at the bar, in his eyidence of a con- 
versation with any other person, of what the 
said person informed him that the said earl 
had said.'' To which the duke of Richmond 
moved an amendment, by adding the words, 
^ in order to intimidate said witness.'' 

As soon as this motion was handed to the 
, table, a new and most important d^te re- 
commenced. 

The Earl of Mantfield contended, that it 
was repugnant to every principle of law, to 
.admit evidence upon hearsay, which, in its 
consequences, might affect a third person; 
that certainly, though he did not consider the 
present enquiry to be specifically directed 
agaiast lord Suidwich, yet only considering, 
him as one person charged among many 
others, it was well known uiat in proceed!^ 
upon indictments, where several persons 
were included in it, no evidence of a criminal 
act of any one of the parties was ever received 
as evidence against another. Lord Sandwich 
and Mr. Cooke stood in exactiy the same 
predicament of persons so indicted, 



li^] 



18 GEOBGE ni. The Casi f^Ca^am Thmfu B^iUie^ [8M 



^uently tiolhmje th^t Cooke SBid ougbt to be 
ndnuUjBd «9 evflkioce spiostlord Sandwich* 

tmd Camden ackoowledgod the pnacifKle 
laid down by the letmied lora; but taking vp 
the matter upon the noble lord's own ground, 
allowing that lord Sandwich and Mr. Cooke 
were before the House in the character <^ cri- 
minals, the learned lord must acknowledge 
that they were not tryine for the same offence, 
nor were their cases at £ul alike. Mr. Cooke 
might be convicted of the charse now made, 
irould tlttt affect lord Sandwich r God forbid ! 
What Cooke said, was no evidence against 
IcKFd Sandwich, or any person on earth but 
himself. Suppose lord Sandwich never made 
use of any suoi expression, wluch he hoped 
and believed might turn out to be the truth, 
would it not be cruel to condemn the noble 
lord, not for what he said, but merely because 
another person had slandered him ; the very 
slander was an act of a criminal nature i^nst 
the honour and character of the noUe lord, 
and was little connected in one point of view 
with the pvesent enquiry. In another, so hi 
to be sure as those discourses tended to inti- 
midate and prevent reformation and justice, 
^y might Aimish just grounds of further 
proceeding aoinst Cooke. But he would 
meet the noble lord fairly upon the point of 
law and analogy to the proceedings on indict- 
ments, which ne seemed so much to rely 
upon. liord Sandwich mi§^ht appear to have 
wen guilty of certain acts ot mismanagement, 
as first oommiasioner of the Admiralty, in the 
exerciae of directing the affiurs of the Hospi- 
taiy or of none. So miafat Mr. Cooke, as im- 
l^roperly interfering, and by abusing lus func- 
tion, or he might not. One of them might 
be proved innocent, and not the other, conse- 
4|uently the case Btfl^ by the learned lord did 
not applv. But he would put a case to the 
leacoed lotd, which must apply. Supaosing 
that aevtial persons had been included m the 
same indictaMbt, for sevei»l specific offences^ 
might aotevideticc be competently given and 
ffieeived of a specific criminal act, connnitled 
by one of the parties, though it amounted to 
hteaay only reapecting another charged with 
a different species of ottenee? Most certainly; 
the learned k>rd knew it would not serve to 
convict that other person i^ another ofience, 
because hei^y was no evidence, and could 
only be admissible against the par^ on whom 
the ofienee was chaiged. 

The Lard Chancellor asade two or thi«e 
y&f long speeches in the above debate, in 
wmok ha chiefly laboured to establish the two 
Mlowing propositjons i 

IhU the cBQiniY amounted lo a speciic 
diaige against igid Sandwkh; and if taken 
aaagnnialchaqipeagMnstalltheae cpncehi- 
4ld«a the taaoagementaf Oreenwieh Uospi^d, 
twgtimhr part of it applied ganmHy 
' avarypataan cancerned; conwquaM- 



Jbr» whalhirtfae enwnry waa«a«al or indM- 
JbaiHy idileeted^ the evedelare was i^ 
^mm,wmf pan of tlw testimaiiy given «t 



Ihe bar, was evidenoa of misconduct of lord 
Saodwieh; or if it was not, it affected him a» 
ane of the parties accused* 

[His lordship's pardon is asked, if bi$ 
mesning be here mia-atated or mis-conceived ; 
for there is every rational ground to suppose 
such doctrine diametncally opposite to the 
whole code of English jurisprudence, and cour 
sequently foreign from the noble lord's senti- 
ments.] 

To prove his first proposition, be quoted- 
capt. Baillie's book on the table> which char;^ 
ed lord Sandwich, in direct terms, with cor- 
ruptioD. To prove the second, he presumed 
that the permitting tlK>se mismanagements to 
continue, amounted to a failure of duty, in 
not putting a stop to them ; and of course, if 
proved^ would ultimately reach the noble 
lord. 

The Earl of Snndwich said, he had been 
charged with corruption ; that he looked upon 
the enquiry as totally personal against hnn ; 
that he wished the witness might be per- 
mitted to proceed, because he was consctoua 
of the injure and falsity of the char|^ ; but 
he should be sorry that any convemenceor 
deare of his should be preferred to the order 
and estabhshed mode of proceeding in that 
House. 

Lord Camden again rose, and in a most aUe, 
correct, and learned speech, answered every 
thing material which had been urged on the 
other side. He sud, the present motion, if 
carried, would amount to a real dissolution of 
the Committee, even upon the argum^ats of 
Uie noble lords who framed and supported it. 
llie present, say the noble lords, is an enquiry 
into the conduct of the earl of Sandwich, 
charing him with manifest corruption in the 
exercise of a pubhc trust of very mreat conse* 
ouence. What will be the manitest effect of 
tnis motion? that you may sit here till the 
dog-^ys, to hear the examination of wit- 
nesees, to hear complaints and chaiges made 
against any person, or every person, but the 
conduct of tne noble lord into whicn you ase 
convened to enquire. I only repeat this, to 
shew the manifest absurdities people are drove 
to adopt, when they want to effect purpoaea 
upon principles which directly make againat 
them; for I am perfectly satisfied that the 
pmsent enquiry contains no single specific 
charge against any man, so as to produce con- 
vktion or condemnation. The event of it, I 
acknowledge, may afford matter Pfopet to 
found a criminal proceeding upon; out in the 
first instsnce, I afBrm as a member of this 
House, and a lawyer, that il cannot produce 
stkT issue, wht^ may inunedialely afEect 
either the noble loid or any otiier of the 
tiartiesl 

fiktc!^anif itdid, I will foUow that aaser- 
linn with anoliier, that evidsnoe of what ano- 
ther person said thact kid Sandwich lakl, am 
jufermch narafbetthatnoUe lord in the 
mtHdUmki dnipm. U is but heanm av>. 
at the hmx. It «a|i oiilf aiSact Mki 



a 



!U] regpecting the Ro^ Hospital at Greemoich. A. D* 1778* 



[242 



if not disproved ; and if ten or ten 

d witnesses, one after another, came 

tovDsr lordships' bar, to con&rm the testi- 

acDTof what Mr. Lefevre heard Mr. Cooke 

p'thst lord Sandwich had told him, it 

vaii, it could not wdgh a feather with your 

Mips. If it could not, the conclusion is 

ftKtnd inevitable, that the mentioning lord 

Sodwkh's name, as it cannot affect in the 

I SHt remote degree that noble lord, so it is 

I Mztely necessary that his lordship's name 

Mdbe mentioned, as directly and circum- 

AotklJrnecessary to prmx the means of in- 

taidition made use of^by Cooke, to deter the 

viliKss from shewing anv countenance to 

apt Bailiie. Once for all, I say, truth and 

^itice oblige your lordships to believe the 

ttiblekdi innocent of the expressions imputed 

to htm; jou are bound as judges to believe 

lis brd^ip innocent, till you have receiv- 

idpwf to the contrary, and h^eard his de- 

|face: and having no proof to the contrary, 

liDthe evidence objected to, you have no 

Rhtwhilfcver to refuse a species of evidence, 

Iwly applicable and exclusively to another 

IjRoa, wnich will certainly be the case should 

[Kpresent motion be carried. 

1^ Tw question was put, and carried by a raa^ 

|«tycf46to 10. 

Tfc Diike of Richmond moved, that the 
teolntbn now carried, be read and delivered 
>>tbe witness, that he be informed, that he 
toy answCT any question,«so that he does not 
■HiticDlbe name of the earl of Sandwich. 
This was strongly opposed, as unnecessary 
Nonprecedent^; the reading of the mo- 
was sufficient, and no instance was ever 
mof a witness at the bar being permitted 
, hwe any of the proceedings of the House 
JJ^posbession. A very interesting debate 
F*M> and the noble duke*s motion was ne- 
PM by a majority of 44 to 15. 
^j^Hness called in, and the two last ques- 
wteaod answers read.] 

Clerk reads. 

* Had you any conversation with the rev. 
*• Cooke, teldtive to any prosecutions 
JPasicipt Bailiie?*' — I was gomgtothat; 
*•» going to mention it, as it was told me 
pw re\'. Mr. Cooke ; I was coing to relate 
^theb4^inningof Mri Cooke's discourse 
» UK end. 

*Tbe only thing wanted is, that you will 
■™«tbal part that concerns an attempt to 
■«^ any body to prosecute capt Bailiie ?" 
"^i recolleci after capt, Baillie's book came 
?^}t. Cooke informed me that my lord 
?«^ bd said, tliat any person that 
**j!u be j-een to keep company with captain. 
**j^ sliouid have a stop put io his prefer- 
■^^ 'OT ever. 

^e following Resolution was also read to 
««^itnts8. 



/T^ it be resolved, that the 

yr. ^^ Svidwich be mi mei 
^^L XXL 



name of 
mexUioQed by 



I 



the witness at the bar, in his evidence of a 
conversation with any other person, of what 
the said person informed him, that the said 
earl had said, in order to intimidate the said 
witness." 

That Mr. Lefevre may be told, that if any 
questions are asked him which he cannot an- 
swer without going contrary to tliat resolu- 
tion, he must not make any answer. 

Whether he received any intimidations from 
any person relative to giving support to capt. 
Bailiie? — A number, my lords; I may say 
numberless. , 

Fron^ whom ? — From the rev. Mr. Cooke. 

What were those intimidations ?— -Frequent- 
ly he told me, if I was to be seen in company 
with capt. Bailiie, or had any correspondence 
with him, an end would be put to my prefer- 
ment. I was going out lieutenant m the 
America; he came to my house and said to 
me, I find you keep company with capt. BaiU 
lie, and he swore by his Maker, there would 
be an end put to my preferment if I did not 
desist. 

Wjiat were the words he made use of? — By 
God your preferment will be stopt, if you per- 
sist any longer. 

Did any conversation pass between Mr. 
Cooke and you, relative to any encourage- 
ment from Mr. Cooke, to any person to pro- 
secute capt. Bailiie?— No encouragement to 
prosecute him, only to have nQthing at all to 
do with him. 

Did 'you hear him make use of such expres- 
sions of intimidation to any others ? — ^To my 
father, who was then a dying man ; my fa- 
ther told capt. Bailiie there was mischief 
against him, and bid him be on his guard- 

Did your father belong to the Hospital } — 
He did. 

You were intimidated several times ? — ^Fre- 
quently. 

By any other person than Mr. Cooke ? — ^No 
others. 

When was the last time he made one of 
these declarations ?— April, 1778. 

When did vou relate this conversation ?-^ 
To my father immediately. 

When to other people ? — Some part of the 
conversation long before to captain Bailiie; 
this I spoke of particularly before the ship 
sailed. 

When did you make this conversation of 
Mr. Cooke's public.^ — ^Immediately. 

To whom ? — Captain Bailiie and mv father. 
. Any body else? — I cannqt jecollect any- 
body else. 

Had you any employment in the Hospital ? • 
— ^None. 

How were you intimidated ? — I was a lieu- 
tenant in the navy. 

You said, Mr. Cooke told you your promo- 
tion would be stopt N— He did. 

Did he say in what manner it would be 
stopped? — He said an entire stop would be 
put to my preferment, and that it would be 
the entire ruin of my father and family, if I 

R 



eiS] 



18 GEORGE m. The Case of Captain Thm^ SafOk, [944 



w«s ever seen to keep company with captain 
Baillie, or to correspond wiUi hiin. 

How was a stop |o be put to your prefer- 
jnent? — By my remaining a lieutenant as I 
tras, I suppose. 

Did Mr. Cooke say he had any authority for 
sayins, any person would be marked that con- 
versed with capt. Baillie?— He did say he had 
autliority for saying so. 

I desire he may be asked what authority 
be had for saying so?— He told me he had it 
(rem a nobleman high in oftce. 

What nobleman ? [Ordered to withdraw.] 

Here a very warm debate ensued: The 
£arl of Sandwich saicL he wished most heartily 
that the resolution nad not been made ; and 
if there was any way of getting rid of it, he 
should be e.ttremely glad to do it. He com- 
plained greatly of the conduct of noble lords 
on the other side^ who, in order to harass and 
tire the House, started debates upon every 
trifling occasion. They wished, he said, to 
put the enquiry off till the very close of the 
session, to preclude him from a defence ; and 
lamented, that the enquiry had not at the be- 
ginning been so constituted, as to have ad- 
mitted him to make his defence to every dif- 
ftrent species of charge, as they were brought 
forward. 

\ The Duke of IRicbmond disclaimed any in- 
^ntion of procrastination or delay; observed, 
that it was not a pleasant task on his part : 
that the charge of delay lay much more justly 
ajgainstthe noble earl and his friends, than 
on those at his side of the House ; he acknow- 
ledged indeed, that he had fortunately laid a 
temptation, which ihev had caught at; and 
that they now found they were in a situation 
ffom which they could not e.xtricate them- 
selves ; that the noble lord's affected sorrow 
might easily be accoimted for ; he voted for 
the question, on the division, when, he might 
have prevented it ; he now lamented that it 
hiad ever passed, and recommended to have it 
rescinded, or dispensed with, when he knew, 
by the orders of the House, that it was totaUly 
impracticable. Hb grace spoke for some time 
i^ this strain, and vras very severe on the no- 
ble e^rl. A very considerable pause now en- 
sued, several methods were proposed to get 
rid of the difficulty ; the witness was at length 
called in. 

Asked, Who was the nobleman mentioned 
by Mr. Cooke? — ^Aml to mention the noble- 
man's name? 

He must read the resolution. — That de- 
prives me. 

Whether he may name the noble lord or 
npt ? (The Resolution re^ to the witness.) 
You are to answer what nobleman ? — I shoukl 
be sony to fall under any censure of the 
House, but that resolution entirely prevents 
me from mentioning the nobleman. 

Will you be so good as to tell the House 
what other intimidations passed from Mr. 
Cipoke to you, or whether. ypu took any op- 



portunity of eomplaining to any person when 
you was so intimidated ? — ^Last May I made 
It my business to £o to the Admiralty ; I went 
four mornings with intent to see a noble lord,'' 
to tell him 01 Mr. Cooke's behaviour; I could 
not see that noble lord ; I was denied him 
frequently, and told that the noble lord would 
see nobody. I went the next morning into 
the captains' room, the servant was £sixed 
to go up to the noble lord, but I could not see 
him that mornine; I went then to endeavour 
to see Mr. Stephens two or three moniingi^ 
and waited from two or three o'clock till aitec 
^ve, but could not see Mr. Stephens. 

Did any thing pass between you and Mc* 
Cooke, about these af&drs coming into |^aili|-. 
ment? — ^Yes, about the middle of June, 177r« 
I spoke to Mr. Cooke about his speaking 
something disrespectful of the lieutenant* 
governor; I said these affairs might QOinii 
mto parliament ; he seemed to catch at tbal^ 
and said, a noble lord would take care and piiit 
captain BaiUie out of his office before waJt 
should be. 

Whether he is to name that noble ]ord?<^-« 
I am not at liberty to mention that. 

Did he mention what noble lord would put 
him out of his office ? — He did mention him. 

I desire he may answer who it was? — Have 
I a right to answer while that resolution is in 
being? 

Not against the resolution; I wish Mr. Le« 
fevre would be correct in repeating to th^ 
House, the substance of what passed Oetweea 
I^r. Cooke and him about turning captain 
Buillie out, rather than it should come befora 
parliament? — As I mentioned before, in t|ie 
middle of June, 1777, as we were talkipg of 
the affair^ of Greenwich Hospital, he took oc- 
casion to mention captain ^ailUe's name ; I 
bid him desist; I said perhaps the affiiirs of 
Greenwich Hospital might come into narliai- 
ment ; he seeiped to catch at that, ana said, 
a noble lord would take care he Should noi 
do that, he should be turned out of his office 
first. ' 

Did any thing more pass between yoa and 
him on that particular sul^t? — ^Not on tbpi 
particular subject 

Did any thing else pass, on any other sub- 
ject, relating to Greenwich Hospital ?— -J 
summoned before the committer at 
wich Hospital ; Mr. Cooke stood up nnd 
sisted upon it that I should not say one word ; 
and Mr. Barker, the chairman, I believe, bid. 
mc CO out, and said that I should not s«^ a 
woro. 

Did any thing pass relaUve to any other 
matter of Greenwich Hospital ?-r-No other in 
particular. 

Are you ^ lieutenant in the service?— I 
not. 

When did you leave the service ?- 
May ; I guitted it entirely from the threats K 
received from Mr. Cooke. 

What threats?—- That a stop should be put 
to niy proffiotioiv because I spoke to eaptola. 



ft$] reipecHng iht Royal Hospital at GreetvoouA. A. D. 177S. 



[246 



^; Itil&MIWDotkiiowthatlhadacted 
ivrong m anj particular, and therefore I shouM 

H<H^ Ugh ^efe Vdit in (he list of lieiite- 
flttiuf^ Mlk^ &ete nught be 3 or 300 

' wfaBftifioe were ymk-made a lieutenant?— 
CMMr, 1775. 

y^htA did tou qtdt?— November, 1778. 

Wto^fh^ h it common to promote lieute- 
ihsfe^ im)^ they merit it by their own gal- 
hlWr^P*J never said I expected preferment; 
wd^wAl expect to meet with it, from what 
^vaStOld tncf. 

BM of Sandmich, Whettier you recollect 
a co&vehKtiioh betweeh ydu and me at Port^ 
Bouth ? And whether you did not apply fur- 
Iherf— ^Tcs, I did; to know whether what 
Mr. Cooke told die was true or no ; and I 
iKNigbt^ fh)m what you^ lordship said, it was 
Me. 

Wbcihct yotir ouitting the service was not 
th act of your own r — It was ; fifom the threats 
tf flr. Cdoke, ta& the answer I received fifom 
your lordship. 

* Whether you were ever threatened by me ? 
—I never said 1 was threatened by your lord- 
dim. 

^. W hen you met the noble lord, what pre- 
famefil tfid you ask for? — ^Not any in parti- 
War; I believe' I asked him to consider me, 
if any preferment was going forward, and if I 
^bsto expect any further preferment from 
Hie nc^le lord. 

How iot^ had yoH been a lieutenant when 
llr. Cooke said a stop should be put to your 
ifeHcfiucnt? — \ had b^ a lieutenant two 
youi and a hadf. 

* Sfioutd von hafve thought of qintting the 
Afviodp when you had been two years and a 
WC if jou had not been told that you should 
rteeC With no preferment? — ^No, I should itot; 
I loved the service. 

You were made a lieutenant in 1775? — 



And jou quitted in November, 1778 ?— Not 
^ited the service, only on half-pay. 

In October, 1776, you met lord Sandwich? 
—No, I, did not mention that time; I said 
#beD lus lordship was at Portsmouth ; that 
was last year, that has nothing to do with 
1775, or 1776. 

Ton said, ftom the conversation between 
mrand lord Sandwich at Portsmouth, you 
oelieved that what Mr. Cooke said was true, 
that a stop diould be put to your preferment; 
pve an account of^ that conversation?— I 
asked his lordship, if I was to expect any fur- 
Iber preferment ; his lordship, for a long time^ 
OKufe; no answer at all ; at last, I think, his 
lotdship ssdd, that he had a eood opinion of 
m^ but that if I stood there from tnat time 
to tnat time twdvemonths, I should get no- 
f^uoutofluin. 

W^xmaX all he sud to you?-— Ves; that I 
ttAAX expect no other answer. 

m ssQr/tbat the only thing that lord l^d- 



wich said to you was. th^t he had a very good 
opinion of ^u, butihat if you st^d there 
from that time to that time twelvemonths, 
you should get nothing out of him; how did 
you understand from that, that he did not 
mean to prefer you? — From the very great 
indiflerence widi which it fell from him. One 
circumstance I forgot to mention ; prior to 
this discourse, early in the morning, I went 
on board of the yacht, his lordship turned his 
back on me, aiid went down into the cabin 
immediately; this was the same morning, 
before my conversation with lord Sandwich. 
I went on board the America, told my captain 
of it, and mentioned Mr. Cooke's converse 
tion ; and he said, did I not tell you^ that that 
man would not do you, or any body else, any 
good. 

How long might it be after you asked, the 
question, before nis lordship made any answer 
*atall? — I believe some minutes; for I fol- 
lowed my lord from sir Thomas Pye*s house, 
a good way down Portsmoutli. 

How long was it?-rl believe a quarter of 
an hour, at least. 

Whether yo\i solicited the First I^rd of the 
Admiralty frequently before this ? — Several 
times ; I suppose three months before. 

What was your father? — ^A lieutenant in 
the Hospital. 

One of the complainants with captain BaiU 
lie? — I believe he was ; I hav^ heard him say 
he should certainly assist captain Baillie, that 
he believed he \vas an honest man. 

Had you received any answer firom lordf 
Sandwich? — ^Yes; he said I was aver^young 
officer, he wished me success. I told it to my 
friends, and they said there was no hopes of 
my being preferred. 

When was your first application ?— My first 
application was before I was lieutenant of the 
America. 

After jfin w^re lieutenant? — ^December, 
1777. 

What answer <fi'd you get then ? — ^Rather a 
flattering one. 

When was this answer, that you were a 
voung officer, and he wished you success ? — X 
believe it was in February, 1778. 

It was since that, that you saw lord Sand« 
wich at Portsmouth ? — ^Yes. 

Since that, you have made no application 
at all ?— None. 

What ship were you in at that time ? — ^Tha 
Aqierica. 

Who was commander ? — ^Lord Longford, 

A man may have been a young lieutenant 
and have been a long time at sea; what age 
are you ?— Thirty-two. 

How long have you been at sea? — Twenty- 
two years ; I went to sea when I was ten years 
of age. 

When did that conversation pass between 
you and lord Sandwich| at Portsmouth? — ^I 
believe in last May. 

When was the conversation with Mr. Cooke? 
-— BetweeaFebniaiy and April, 1778. 



S47] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case of Capiain Thomas BaiUier [S48 



In May, you saw lord Sandwich at Ports- 
mouth ? — Yes. 

How many lieutenants stood on the list 
wlien you applied to lord Sandwich ? — Many ; 
perhaps 7 or 800; or perhaps 1,000. 

Though vou had been so long at sea, would 
you have felt any sort of inclination to have 
quitted, supposing you had thought you were 
in a likely way to have the chance with other 
people for your preferment? — I never should; 
other people know I never should ; it was an 
* employment that I loved. 

[Mr. Lefevrc ordered to withdraw.] 

The House adjourned to the next day. 



Wednesday, April 21. 
Captain Baillie called in. 

What proceeding he took in consequence 
of his book ; and what persons he laid the 
complaints of Greenwich Hospital before ? — 
Does your lordship mean in regard to tlie 
printed Case of Greenwich Hospitiil ? 

Tes. — When I had prepared the printed 
Case, I thought it prudent, nrst to lay it before 
the First Lord of the Admiralty, hoping that 
he would pay some attention to the com- 
plaints in tnat book, as it is called; I think 
tliat was on the 7th of March twelvemonth. 
It lay with his lordship nine or ten days before 
I attempted to make any fiirther application ; 
then I waited in person on the First Ix)rd of 
the Admiralty, hoping he would give me some 
satisfaction, and redress the grievances com- 
plained of. He did not pay that attention to 
them that I expected ; ne said he had re- 
ceived a particular letter from me ; I told his 
lordship it was on a particular occasion ; and 
asked his commands upon it ; he said he had 
BO commands upon it ; I thought an exami- 
nation was likely to take place, sir HughPal- 
liser and Mr. Stephens being present; and, as 
I had no witness, I made a now, and came 
away. I have a copy of that letter. 
' Is it not on the table ? — ^No ; it is the letter 
said to be lost^ and not produceable by the 
Boble lord to whom it was addressed. I 
thought it prudent to lay it privately before 
his lordship first : I beg the permission of the 
House to have that letter read. 

Clerk reads the following letter : 

« To the Riffht Honourable the Earl of Sand- 
wich ; addressed on his Majesty's service. 

« Royal Hospital, March 7th, 1778. 
''As your lordship has hitherto been dis- 
posed to hear only one side of the aflkirs of 
Greenwich Hospital, I take the liberty to in- 
close, for your lordship's consideration, a state 
of facts, which. I trust, will stimulate your 
lordship to rearess the grievances therein 
complained of; and thereby restore me to my 
proper command in the Hospital, of which I 
nave been deprived by a combination of land- 
men, who, if they had any right to a footing 
in the Hospital, can have no pretence to per- 



vert and depose the lawful government there- 
of. 

** I liave the honour to acquaint your lord* 
ship, that I will not sit down contented to see 
the men cheated, and myself insulted, by 
priests, clerks, or cdntractors. I think it, how- 
ever my duty to forewarn your lordship, that 
if you are any longer deaf to reasonable conv- 
plaints, I shall put this effort for redress into 
execution; which I should have deferred for a 
more seasonable opportunity, but the recent 
overbearing conduct of the faction so firequ^it- 
]y alluded to, in the inclosed Case, has con^ 
pelled me to struggle for immediate redress. 

** I would not nave your lordship under- 
stand, that I mean to disturb government at 
this critical time, by applying to parliament; 
I scorn the imputation of making any other 
appeal than to the body of the conunistdoners 
and governorsof the Hospital, whose boundeD 
duty it IS to hear and redress the grievances 
complained of; and I most sincerely lament 
that an establishment, so truly popular and 
great, should be so far pervcrtca as to force 
me to make any appeal. 

" I am, my lora, your lordship's most obe- 
dient, and most humble servant, 

" Thomas Bail Life."" 

Give an account of what steps were taken in 
consequence of this? — In conscqiicnce of that 
letter and printed Ca^^e, instead ol any exami- 
'nation into the affairs of Greenwich Hospital, 
there was a complaint set on fuut against me z, 
a number of the officers were encouraged to 
complain of it ; I did not know that I had 

fiven any cause of complaint against me. 
he printed Case was brought down to Green- 
wich Hospital ; otherwise 1 should have wait- 
ed longer for his lonlship*s indulgence than 
ten days ; perhaps a month, or perhaps till 
now. The rev. Mr. Cooke set on foot a com- 
plaint against me ; and went about among the 
ofRcers, as if he had been canvassing for votes 
at an election : the m^ority of the naval offi- 
cers did not complain; nor was any complaint 
made an act of the council of the house ; it 
was rather a kind of conspiracy; I don't know 
what to call it. Another complaint was set 
on foot against captain Baillie at the board of 
directors that met with more success ; that 
was sent in form to the lords of the Admiralty. 
The clerk of the works, and the civil officers 
of Greenwich Hospital, also complained, who 
were accused themselves -. nor ^^as this an act 
of the councD, which is usual when any com- 
plaint is presented to the board of Admiralty. 
The governor did not sign any complaint 
against captain Baillie, as governor, but as a 
director only. In consequence of these com- 
plaints, a general court was held in April ; 
but instead of a court of the noble persons 
that constitute a great part of that body, there 
was a sort of a puisne general court convened^ 
in order to have it submitted to them, what 
should be done respecting the book. That it 
was not such a general court as I had wished ^ 



fi9] respecHng the Royai HotfiM ai Greenmci^ . A. D. 1778.. 



[250 



tfaat Mr. Ibbetson had once, on his own sug-^ 
gestioQ, summoned a full eeneral court, to 
elect a new steward to the Hospital ; I hum- 
bly conceive it was of more consequence to 
enquire whether the finest and noblest charity 
in the world was well or ill manaeed ; abused 
or not abused ; was a matter of inSnitely more 
importance than the election of a steward to 
the Hospital ; and therefore I hoped, that as 
much pains would be taken to assemble an 
impartial general court, to take the Case, stat^ 
ing such a variety of criminal charges, into 
consideration, as Liad evidently been &sstowed 
on the former occasion. Tliat on the 14tH of 
April, 1778, the general court, consisting of 
six lords of the Acuniralty^ Mr. Stephens, "meir 
secretary, the governor of the Hospital, three 
commissioners of the navy, the lieutenant-go- 
Temor (captain Baillie),and thirteen directors, 
met. The first lord of the Admiralty was 
pleased to say, when the complaints were read, 
at this court, against captain Baillie, if he 
would name a committee of directors out of 
the number present, he should choose his 
men. I objected to the directors, because 
they had complained of me. and were im- 
peached by me ; I therefore tnought it an im- 
proper tribunal to try me, or themselves, who 
were the very persons I had accused. I object- 
ed to these directors sitting in iudsment upon 
their own conduct. Lord Sandwich, however, 
thought it a proper tribunal to examine into 
the Sairs of Greenwich Hospital. His lord- 
ship desired me to object to anv of them. I 
thought, as they hacl turned the tables upon 
me, none of them were proper persons to sit 
on the enquixy. They were, however, consti- 
tuted a conmiittee^ and they sat seven da^s. 
The whole of their proceedings was partial, 
arbitraiT, and unjust 

Give an account of what happened at that 
court. What day was the general court of en- 
quiry ordered? — I believe, the 14th of April, 
1778. The resolution of the eeneral court is 
among the papers on your loroships' table. 

Mr. Ibbetton called in. 
(Reads the following Resolution.) 

^ At a general court of the commissioners 
and governors of Greenwich Hospital, which 
was held at the Admiralty, on Tuesday, April 
14, 1778. 

*' Present, right hon. earl of Sandwich, John 
Buller, eso. lord Charles Spencer, right hon. 
earl of lisoume, sir Hugh Palliser, right hon. 
lord Mulgrave, lords of uie Admiralty; Philip 
Stephens, esq. secretary to. ditto. — Director, 
sir Charles Hardy, admiral of the white ; Di- 
rectors, George Marsh, esq. Timothy Brett, 
esq. sir Rich. Temple, hart, commissioners qf 
the navy. — Captain Baillie, lieutenant^ver- 
nor, sir Memck Burrell, hart. Z. P. l^nne- 
reau, esq. James Stuart, eso. John Cleveland, 
esq. Perefliae Cust, esq. T. T. Savary, esq. 
Thomas Hicks, esq. John Barker, esq. Wil- 
liua Wells; esq. rev. Mr. Cooke, Joah Bates, 



esq. sir Richard jBickerton, WiUiam' Reynolds, 
esq. directors. 

** The Earl of Sandwich informed the court, 
that he had called them together in order to 
la^ before them a letter, which the secretary 
of the Admiralty had received from captain 
Baillie, lieutenant governor of Greenwich 
Hospital, dated tlie ^6th of last month; toge- 
ther with a printed book, which accompamed 
it, entitled, ^* The Case of the Royal Hospital 
for Seamen,'' &c. as also several appUcations 
from the board of directors, the officers of the 
council, the principal civil officers, and great 
numbers of the clerks, &c. who conceive 
themselves greatly traduced and injured by 
the charges contained in the said book, de- 
sirinz redress ; all which papers were read ; 
and Mr. Brett and Mr. barker, tMro of the di- 
rectors who were not oresent when the appli- 
cation from that board was signed, declared 
their fiill concurrence in every Uiing set forth 
therein. And the secretary read to the court 
a letter which he had received from Mr. £den» 
another of the directors, representing, that it 
would not be in his power to attend the pre- 
sent meeting to-day, as he was to leave Lon- 
don yesterday' ; but that having read captain 
Bailiie's performance, he wa^ satined that il 
was improper and unwarrantable in every re- 
spect, and that he should be very glad to near 
tnat the general court was disposed to proceed 
accordingly. 

'< Captain Baillie, who was present, acknow- 
ledged iiimself to be the author of tne above- 
mentioned Case ; at the same time insistii^ 
that it was not a book but a memorial. 

'' Great part of the said Case was then read ; 
particularly such part of it as niore imme- 
diately reflected upon the proceedings of the 
directors and their secretary. 

''Mr. Cust then moved, that a committee 
might be app^ted to investigate the grounda 
of the charges contained in the said printed 
book : and the court being of opinion that it 
nrould be a very proper measure, captain Bail- 



lie was desired to name seven of the most in- 
dependent directors to form a committee for 
that purpose, which he declined. Lord Sand- 
wich then took a list of the directors, and 
having put down the names of the following 
gentlemen, viz. ^r Merrick Burrell, Mr. Fon-> 
nereau, Mr. Cust, Mr. Savary, Mr. Barker, 
Mr. Wells, Mr. James, and Mr. Reynolds; 
captain BailUe was asked, if he had any ob- 
jection to them, or to any of them. ; to which 
he declined giving any other answer, than 
that he disapprove of the mode. 

"It was tnen resolved, 'That the above- 
mentioned gentlemen, except Mr. Fonnereau, 
who desired to be excused on account of his 
ill health, should, be a committee (of whom 
three to be a quorum) to investigate the 

grounds of the several charges contained in 
le above-mentioned book ; and they werie 
desired to proceed upon that business with all 
convenient dispatch, at such times and places^ 
as they should think most proper for the pur . 



«5I] 



Ig GEOAGE UL ThdOueof Captain ThcfkOi BOtte, t^f 



pom; a&dtrhen ih^ had completed sach tiv. 
vestigation, to let the lords of the Admiralty 
iaanw it» that another general court might be 
called to receive their report'"— -Adjourned. 

It appears by the directions given to the 
^mmittec. that they were to investigate the 
grounds of the several charges contamed in 
captain Baillie's book ?— Ye^ 

Are there any directions in the order, to 
«tiquire into the complaints against captain 
BuUie ?^That is all that appears. 

Captain Baillie again. 

Give' an account of what yon know of the 
]^fOoeedihgs of that court of enquiiy, appointed 
to investigate the grounds of the complaints. 

, 1% was a most complicated business ; it is 

impossible to remember the whole of it ; it 
was the course of seven days examination. 
First, iJiey came down with a special pleader, 
ft counsel at law, which I thought not neces- 
sary on an enquiry into the management of 
Greenwich Hospital ; I had no iaea that a 
counsel was to be employed against me, eft 
the pensioners. This gentleman brow-besct 
me, he brow-beat the evidences ; he drew out 
the charges, by taking a chain of sentences, 
bits of lines, apd scraps of paragraphs, out of 
my book. I was brow-beat; I was called a 
blackguard by the clerk of the works, and a 
liar by the Rev. Mr. Cooke. I beg to refer 
to my letter to Uie general court of governors 
and t:ommissioners^ in which is a particular 
account of all or most of the transactions of 
the committee ; it is dated the l!2th of Au- 
gust, and lays on vour lordships' table. 

You understand, it is expected that you are 
to swear to the truth of the contents of the 
letter ? — If there is the smallest draimstance 
tlwt I cannot swear to, before your lordships 
end before God, £ will point if out First of 
all, a respectable officer of Greenwich Ho^* 
l^ital, lieuteneint Gordon, as soon as he had 
given his evidence, he was told by Mr. Mbr- 
nui, because he did not approve of his evi- 
dence^ That he mkht go to the devil; he is 
^ officer that had Dotb bos legs hto^je m the 
service. 

Did this coihmittce repi^ve Mr. Morgan 
fyi so doing ?— Not in the least ; after lieute- 
ikaAt Smith had given* his evidence, Mr. Mor- 
^n said. Your evidence i^ a libel, Sir. This 
terrified the officers ; they thought they should 
be brought into the predicament that I was. 
I beg to read my letter of the isth of August, 
to the general court of eov^tiiors and commts- 
Moners. My lords, I beg leave to add, that 
this gentleman (the shor&hand writ>!rj whom 
I difnot expect* to see here ; on the first day 
C»f the enquiry I saw a great deal of foul play; 
I thought the proceedings were not to-be war- 
ilmted ; I sent for this persbn to take mmutes 
on the second d^; I had hmi at a side-table; 
I toldsMr. Cust that he Was a person I had 
itftiroduced to takte miiiittes by his leave ; he 
ashed' him who kewte; he said he wa» a 



shoruhand writer brought there by captain 
Baillie 40 take notes; upon which Mr. Cust 
said, Then Mr. Short-hand writer ple&se to 
walk out; and he was turned out in that 
abhipt manner. I believe the gentlenian wajT 
frightened, and thought he was going to be- 
beat Here is an expression in this letter, I 
bee leave to mention before I declare it upon 
oath; I understood, at a prececKng general 
court, that lord Sandwich ^id none were 
summoned to the court but whom he thought 

Goper ; when I objected to the court, to die 
!St of my belief, he said, '^ A general court 
is not such as yt>u choose to petition for, but 
such as I think proper to direct;*' which being 
contradicted by several persons of chaiacter 
and reputation, I don't wish to give it in ev^ 
dence, thoueh I have it on my minutes exact* 
ly as it stands in my letter. 

Captain Bailie reads the foUowing Letter 
as evidence: 

** To the GovEavoRs and Commissiovers of 
his Majesty's Royal iiospttal for Seamen 
at Greenwich. 

" My lords and gentlemen ; 

** As I find that a special gcncrat! court is ti 
be held this day, to which I have received nd 
summons, and of which I knew nothing till a- 
few days ago, I imagine that it is intended to 
receive the report oT the proceedings of the 
committee appointed to enquire mto the 
charges laid by me before the general court^ 
in order to obtain your sanction to the in* 
tended report. 

" I therefore thhik it my duty, in supperi 
of the cause which I have undertaken, to re* 
peat my protest against the ^mmittee, which 
has undertaken to enquire into and repoil 
concerning the truth of charges, the gre^s^ 

Eart of wFuch is against themselves, as men^ 
ers of the board of directors. 
** When I first laid the Case and Memorial 
before the eehcral court, I had no idea that 
the truth of any of the chafes could be dis> 
puted. I drew them up with great care, and 
on the- last review, erased evei^ thing* about 
which I had the smallest doubt in my own 
mind. I was sensible of the powers and m* 
flueiice of those whom I was opposine, and 
that iK>thing could support me but truth and 
justice ; I appeal to your candid recollectioa 
of m^ conduct in several instances in which 
l^e pensioners have been injured ; I appeal 
to the inclosed testhnonials* concerning m^^ 
character in near forty years service, and to 
my conduct in the Hospital, whether I could 
have any other motive than a wish to recover 
and preserve this noble establishment to the 
sole use of the navy, and that the pensionera 
might be maintained in such a manner, * as 

% 

* Tlieae testimonials were not delivered ; o«p^il| 
Baillie had them ready, but finding Utile or no at» 
tentioa paid to thin Letter, he declined sbj fbrtjier 
attenpts to- obadn jot tioe;-«Or^. Sd. 



fS8\ rapeMng the Rojffd HotpUal at: GreeniMch. A* D. 1779. 



' to eooouiBge fit and. able persons to betake 
' themselves to tbe sea-service/ 

<< My situatioiiy as lieutenant governor of 
the Hospital, is the highest preferment of 
jvhjph my nmk in the service will admiL I 
)ave therefore nothing to hope from the suc- 
cess of the chaises which I have exhibited, 
iiiit in the line ol my duty as an officer of the 
H ospi t a l ; and there is nothing ur^ed in any 
jnrt of the Case or Memorial in which I have 
pe least personal concern : I was myself fully 
Hcured in ease and comfort, if I could have 
keard with indifference the complainants that 
vere continually crowding to my door ; and I 
know that I have acted contrary to those 
maiimf of prudence and circumspection which 
govern the world ; but I should have ill de- 
served the ^pointments with which I have 
been honoumi, if I could have been deterred 
by menaces or dangers from doing my duty. 

**I mpeal. Gentlemen, to vour general 
iQBowleaigpe of the world, whether it is not 
more natural, in the current of human afiiiurs, 
losupposcy that abuses have crept into the 
management of the Hospital, wbicn has been 
|o lonf established, than thaVevery thing is 
perfectly right,. and whether the knowledge 
if thoee abuses is more likely to arise from 
the complaints of the injured, or tbe reports 
^ those who are termed the proper officers ; 
abuses, it is well known, can only be preventr 
<d by frequent enquiries by those wno wish, 
and have power to reform them, and such a 
wish must appear in the candour and attenr* 
tion with which the complaints are heard. 

** That I have not been beard with candour, 
}S too evident from every part of the proceed- 
ings on my complaints ; i meant. to app^ to 
a fidl court of ^ the jgreat and noble per- 
sonages who are named in the charter as go- 
yemors and commissioners of Uie Hospital ; 
iMtteadof whicky 1 have been informed by lord 
8&9dwiehf that none are summoned to Vte gene^ 
tel courts hut those vhom he thinks proper^* I 
nave brought a general char^ of^ neglect or 
misconduct against the majority of those into 
vhose hands the government of the Hospital 
has fallen, supported by a variety of instances ; 
MdA I have imdertaken, at the hazard of every 
thing which is dear to me as a man of honour 
and reputation, to prove both the genend and 
ifie particular charges. 

/* But I had no idea that in this country a 
tlibunal could have been erected, in. which 
the accused have sat in judgment on their 
«wn conduct, and are now to determine and 
Report on charves against themselves; a situa- 
tion which I £d not imagine any man of re- 
putation could have been betrayed to appear 

• ^ la drawins up many of the charges, I 
tvposely stated them in the strongest terms, 
because I meant to provoke an enquiry. I 
WW how common xt» maxim b to stMe and 

' *.TlDsanlaiicQialtaliotwu vilbdnwa, u be- 



DKM 



suppress all complaints of this kind, and I 
dreaded if 1 did not bring on a full and fair in* 
vestigation of the charges, that I should injury 
the cause which I meant to support. 

" As I am convinced that several of the 
directors mean to act well, and are therefore 
conscious of their own integrity, I expected 
that on reading the Case and Memorial, they 
would have been as anxious as myself for an 
open and fiiir enquiry, as the only oceans of 
clearing themselves from imputations, espe- 
cially those in which frauds are cl\argedto 
have been committed on the Hospital, with- 
out any proper enquiry or punishments by th« 
directors. 

" My expectations would have been fully 
answered, when I heard the complaint of the 
directors at the general court that tliey could 
no longer act witn credit to themselves or ad« 
vantage to the public; if the^r had added, 
' till tne charges had been enquired into, and 
' their falsehoods proved ;' instead of which 
they say, * till exemplary notice has been 

* taicenof the {uitbor.' 
** The general court acted perfectly wre^ 

able to my expectations, when they deter- 
mined that a committee should be appointed 
to investigate the grounds of the several 
charges contained in the printed Case of the 
Hospital. But I was much surprised tp hear 
roy lord Sandwich propose that this commit* 
tee should be appointed out of the directors 
themselves. Mr. Brett anticipated me in the 
objection, by observing, « That they had al- 
' ready pronounced the charges to be false 
' and scandalous, and that after the enquiiy, 

* the committee could do no more;' he might 
also have added, * they could do less.' They 
had also demanded that I might be punishoi 
for having made my charges, a demand which 
they had a right to make, if thcv are false and 
scandalous ; b\it they oueht to pave seep that 
this demand disqualified thei]a from under- 
taking to enquire, or to give any further r9^ 
port, in order to obtain the punishmj^ whi(4i 
they had denumded. 

" It was contrary to every appearance of 
fairness and candour, and to eveqr rule, of 
public business In like cases, to appoint any of 
the directors members of the committee; in- 
stead of which, the committee appointed con** 
sisted entirelv of directors ; and the gentle* 
man who took the most active part in report-, 
ing the complaints against lo/e, was appointed 
chairman. 

"I considered the offer of his lordship for 
me to name the committee out of the direc« 
tors, as a mockery and insult. I had seen al 
the board at Salters-hall, in which their.com* 
plaint to tbe eeneral court was resolved on» 
that many of the members, who were b^ no 
means included under the term ^ acting direc- 
torsy' are yet liiehly ofibided at eyerv unputa- 
tion on the conduct of the board, and ^so/that 
they seemed eager to listen to every excuse 
that could be offered bv thosa who were, 
jniore Mtiv^ly concemedi.as an excuse.. tQ. 



«55] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case of Captain Thomas BaOlie, [S36 



themselves for not havin^ paid more alten> 
tion to the business of the Hospital. Had 
I not observed this, and had they not joined 
in pronouncing the charges to be false and 
scandalous without any enquiry, from the 
opinion which I had entertained of several of 
the members of the board, I should have been 
induced to have waved the general objection, 
and submitted the whole to their candid de- 
termination. Anxious as I am for my reputa- 
tion, particularly on this occasion, when the 
welfare of the pensioners, in whose cause I 
have engaged, is so materially involved, I fear 
that the angry director will be forgot, and the 
private character of those by whom I am op- 
posed will be weighed against me. I appeal, 
therefore, gentlemen, to your own bosoms at 
this moment, whether you are not much too 
angry against me for having made these 
charges, to hear with calmness and temper 
any proofs which may be brought to support 
ine. 

*^ Notwithstanding the objections which I 
have here made agamst the committee, I ad- 
mit that their conduct might have been such 
as to have removed tlie greatest part of them. 
It was on this account tnat I appeared before 
them, though I was advised not to give any 
sanction to their proceedings, and that I 
urged them on, the first day of their meeting, 
to attend to the extreme delicacy of their si- 
tuations ; instead of which, the greater part 
of their proceedings have still been more ir- 
regular tnan their appointment. 

^ A counsellor nas appeared a^nst me 
during the whole procecaing, of which I had 
no notice; and I nad no idea that counsel 
would have been brought down to Greenwich 
Hospital to plead against me, or the pensioners. 
The secretary and solicitor of the Hospital, 
who are both complainants, were present, and 
took notes throughout the whole, and Mr. 
Cooke, the clerk of the committee, is in the 
full predicament, against whom the greatest 
part of the Case is directed, as he is a land- 
man, and now lodged in the wards of the pen- 
sioners, though his place does not entitle him 
to apartments in the Hospital by establish- 
ment. The rev. Mr. Cooke, Mr. Hicks, and 
Mr. Stuart, were generally present, though 
not of the committee, took an active part m 
tlie proceedings, and seemed determined to 
shew that they are the manadng directors, 
whilst tlic door was carefully closed against 
those to whom the committee had any objec- 
tion, and every person called by me ordered 
immediately to withdraw, af^r they had an- 
swered the questions proposed. 

'^ Mr. Morgan, the counsel against me, was 
permitted to point out, and direct, all the pro- 
ceedings of tne committee ; which he calcu- 
lated so as to thwart and defeat the evidence, 
in a manner which I was by no means aware 
of, instead of investigating the grounds of the 
several ghanres, as ordered by tlie general 
court, and tokmg the Case fairly from the be- 
ginning to the end ; . the compkints of the »&> 



veral officers, clerks, and others, were taken 
as the foundation of the proceedings. 

'* Mr. Morgan had selected several passages 
from different parts of the Case and Memorial, 
which he had strune together in an uncon- 
nected manner, under the head of charges 
agsunst particular persons, all of whom he &e- 
auently declared to be his clients. And I was 
then desired to prove not my own charges, 
but Mr. Morgan's; many of these passages I 
had no idea of applying m the manner wnich 
Mr. Morgan did ; and others were matters of 
opinion, grounded on a long train of facts and 
arguments, which were n9t enquired into by 
the committee; on those which related to 
private characters, it was found that the opi- 
nions of some of the witnesses were of such a 
nature, that they did not think it safe to de- 
clare them, unless compelled by an oath. 
This was deemed a failure of proof, though it 
ought to be taken as a proof tnat the powers 
of tne committee were not sufficient tor the 
enquiiy. 

"Though Mr. Morgan's clients were by 
his contrivance become plaintiffs in the en- 
ouiry, yet they were all heard as evidence for 
themselves and for each other. 

" Notwithstanding thev were so much in* 
terested, particularly the landmen, in defeat- 
ing the enquiry, whilst I made no attempt to 
avail myselfof my own testimony, though £ 
doubt not but my character and situation will 
intitle me to be heard with attention before 
any proper tribunal, as I have no interest in 
any part of the dispute, but the interest 
of the Hospital. Whenever I appealed to any 
of the complainants on things which are ge- 
nerally known in the House, if they seemed 
inclined to answer, they were stopt by Mr. 
Morgan, who very frequently declared, that 
he would not suner his clients to give evi- 
dence against themselves ; an artifice which 
may be proper for the counsel of a prisoner 
at the Old ^dley, but it is a very imfair and 
suspicions precaution in a court of enquiry 
into the affairs of Greenwich Hospital. 

" When any of the evidence went in the 
least beyond the line drawn by the counsel, 
or spoke of facts which were charged, but not 
within the prescribed limits, they were told it 
was too soon ; and if evidence after presented, 
which affected the same person, they were 
told it was too late. 

" This mode of proceeding was more per- 
plexinjg to me, as I had been reflised copies of 
any of^the complaints or proceedings against 
me, by the general court, by the directors, 
and by the committee, — as there was no 
opening or explanation given, which could di* 
rect me to the passages complained of, I was- 
generally at a loss to know what those pas- 
sages were; in points wherein I was fully 
prepared, — my evidence were usually refused 
to be heard, onpecially if ttu^y were pension* 
ers ; of this there a great many instances in 
the notes which I have taken of the proceed- 
ings I and amongst the rest^ is the refiisai W 



257] reipecfhig ike Royal HosfiUd at Greeitaiich. A. D. 1778. 



[258 



hear tlie evidence of the men who hap- 
peaed to be then on gimrd, which was pro- 
posed as the most impmal method of takmg 
the leal sense of the pensioners in general^ on 
the complaints of the linen, thoo^ thb was 
first proposed by Mr. James. 

* On those points in which I appeared to 
be the most fully prepared, the cnarge was 
geneimUy declared frivolous, or not to affect 
me particular person who had complained of 
it, vdA therefore could not then he heard. 
But in all other cases, if the most pointed evi- 
denoe was not immediately produced when 
demanded, the clerk was ordmd to write no 
proof; and nothine afterwards could be heard 
on the subject, tnough the most unexcep- 
tionable testimony was oiSered. 

** Ml. Charles Lefevre, who was at sea, at 
the time in which Mr. Morgan had called on, 
what he deemed the charges against the rev. 
Mr. Cooke and Mr. &)dby, though he 
was the person from whom I had received 
the information of the letter written by Mr. 
Oo&y, after the composition with the but- 
dier; and also the declaration of the rev. 
Mr. Cooke, in the Hospital, concerning the 
denunciation of lord Sandwich asainst me, 
through the rev. Mr. Cooke to Mr. Charles 
Lefevre, is now sworn to; and though he ap- 
peared at the last meeting of the committee, 
and offered his evidence, it was positively re- 
Aised; and I believe that botn these pas- 
sages in the Case, now stand in the minutes 
ofthe committee, and will be reported to you 
as not proved. Many other of the racts 
charged are in the same predicament ; 
amongst others which have not been proved 
iieforethe committee, is the great nuisance 
in three capital wards, arising from the sink 
in lieutenant Besson's new Kitchen^ which 
passes through them, though it matenally af- 
fects the hodth and happiness of sixty pen- 



This every man in the several wards 
is ready to prove ; but the committee have 
fepatedly refused to hear them; and the 
brntswain, who was waiting to eive evidence 
on the nuisance of the sain sink, was com- 
plained of, for not payine proper respect to 
the reverend Mr. Cooke, who was continually 
passing to and from the committee-room ; for 
which lie was turned out of his office, though 
a man of a very respectable character. This 
and other proceedings of the like kind, ereatly 
intimidated the pensioners, and created a ge- 
neral opinion amongst them and the nurses, 
that they would be punished if they gave evi- 
dence. Notwithstanding which, great nunKi 
bers of them appeared ; and I believe that 
they are still ready to give their testimony, 
which b a proof of their int^rity and the 
Justness of their comolaints. 

** The effects of tne denunciation of lord 
Sandwich's resentment, by his chaplain, on 
the officers of the house, was very evident, in 
the cautions manner in which some of them 
gave thdr testimony before the committee, 
on those points which they had been accus- 

VOL. XXL 



tomed to declare their sentiments in the 
strongest terms, and the most public manner. 
The treatment which they received before the 
committee was calculated for the same pur- 
pose : an old and respectable officer of the 
house was most crossly insulted ; and another 
told that his evidence was a libel. I was my> 
self addressed by the chaplain, and the clerk 
of the works, in the most vulgar terms of 
abuse; the latter of whom had the insolence 
to reproach the qjival officers of the house, as 
living on charity; and has since knocked 
down a disabled officer of the house, with his 
cane, within the walls of the Hospital : whidi 
is a fresh proof of the want of discipline and 
due government in the Hospital, as mentioned 
in the printed Case. 

** It will appear, however, hem the attesta^ 
tion subjoinea to the declaration of lieutenant 
Lefevre, that a majori^ of the naval officers 
resident in the house, have given the fullest 
and most unreserved attestation, in support of 
my character and conduct in the Hospital; 
and I appeal, gentlemen, to your candia con- 
siderations, whether these attestations, which 
do me so much honour, could possibly have 
been given imder so many discouraging cir- 
cumstances, but from a conscientious convic- 
tion of the truth of their declaration. The 
declaration of Mr. Lefevre's father must be 
considered as that of a dying man ; as he was^ 
during the whole sitting of the committee, 
cdnfined to his bed, and believed to be in great 
danger; ;^et when this paper was ofierra to 
the committee, by another officer, afler I had 
been ordered to retire Irom the committee, it 
was refused to be heard, and his offer to an- 
swer any questions from the committee total- 
1 V disreearded ; by which I was deprived of 
the whole of his evidence. If the naval offi- 
cers of the house, who thought proper to join 
in tlie complaints to the general court, against 
me (though they could have heard or read but 
a small part of the printed Case) had had pro- 
per ideas of their duty as naval officers, they 
would have felt it as an irresistable duty to 
give the strongest support to the cause, in 
which thfe interests of the navy, and the sea- 
men under ^eir care, was so materially consi* 
dered. 

^< One of those officers was so &r from ful- 
filling his duty as a guardian of the pensioners, 
as to tell the committee that the men ]vvbrked 
in copperas grounds, and that this dirtied and 
spoilea their linen, rotted their shoes, heir 
stockines, and their breeches. This cause, as- 
siened by captain Maplesden, was afterwards 
fiuly prove! to be without foundation (see the 
6th oa^s minutes), which fairly demonstrates 
how inimical he is to the cause of the pen- 
sioners, whom it is his duty to protect, though 
he was thus inadvertentlv^lrawn in, to give 
evidence on the wretched state of the linen> 
the shoes, and the stockings. 

** With others of those officers who signed 
against me, I have had frequent disputes, on 
their attempting to take quantities of the pen- 

S 



259] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case of Captain Thomas BailUe^ [260 



sioners' broth, which they claimed as a privi- 
k^ and contended for with great violence, 
even at the council, and also on receiving ale 
as perquisites from the brewer, though they 
have no right to it. This I caused to be stop- 
ped, as I apprehended that it was one cause of 
the ^reat complaints about the beer of the 
pensioners. 

'^ These officers, for whom captain Chads, 
though the youngest officer in the house, un- 
dertook to speak, declared before the commit- 
tee, ' that they never heard of any com- 

* plaints, but about the beer, and that was im- 

* mediately redressed,' though their names ap- 
pear to several minutes of council ; copies of 
which were sent to the directors^ in which 
there are various complaints, particularly 
about the shoes, stockings, and other necessa^ 
lies. 

^' Captain Chads also undertook to give an 
high oanegyric on the excellent moral charac- 
ter or the reverend Mr. Cooke, in opposition 
to the account of his conduct which I had 
given in the Case; who has spoken nearest 
the truth, on this delicate subject, may be a 
matter of future contest; but there has been 
laid before sir Charles Hardy ^e governor, a 
complaint in behalf of a poor bak^r in Green- 
wich, who has frequentry decked, that the 
reverend Mr. Cooke had ordered aquantity of 
bread from him, above two years ago, to be 
distril)uted, instead of money collected at the 
sacrament, amounting to 4/. If. and also 40s. in 
silver which he ordered from htm at the same 
time, neither of which are paid for yet; and 
the Hospital is under the disgraceful imputa- 
lion of jpvins bread in duurity, and running in 
4ebt wUh the baker. The committee will 
probably recollect how anxious Mr. Cooke 
.was, that he should have full credit for his roar 
nagement of the charities in the Hospital ; 
IMuticularly that given m a late severe wmter ; 
and in this case, the baker was not paid till 
aix months afterwards, as he the baker has 
averred. 

^ As the characters of the several persons 
who were called by me, underwent a severe 
scrutiny before the committee ; and as I have 
J)een deprived of the opportunity of stating 
these facts before the committee in return, u 
is unnecessary to oftr any apology for men- 
tioning them here. 

** Notwithstanding the most unprecedented 
mode of conducting this enquiry, every fact 
charged, which has been enquired into, has 
been fully proved ; and generally appeared in 
» stronger liriit than has been chareed in the 
Cag^ particularly the linen there said to have 
decreased in size and goodness, which was 
proved by a variety of positive testimony, and 
by shirts, sheets, &c. produced before the 
committee. Yet, though this complaint was 
more attended to than any others, it was by 
no means sufficiently investigated, and there 
b, at this time, a deficiency of a very large 
• «)uantity of linen, which is allowed by the es- 
tebliahufiat of the Hospital. 



<' But the facts which have been enquired 
into make a very small part of those which 
are charged in the printeo Case. 

''The great charge, that landmen have 
been obtruded into the Hos{Htal contrary to 
charter, to the establishment of the founder^ 
and hisYoyal successors, to the will of the nu- 
merous benefactors, and to the nature and 
end of the institution, the committee have po- 
tively and repeatedly refused to enquire into, 
though this is the parent of nearly all the 
grievances complained of. It was to obtain a 
report on this artide that I attended the com* 
mittee, notwithstanding the unworthy treaU 
ment I received, and compared with this, I 
feel litUe anxiety about the rest of the chams ; 
as I am convinced, that if this was remeoied; 
the greater part of them would of themselves 
fall to the groimd. 

^' No enquiry was made into the charges on 
the conduct of'^the several officers and under* 
9fficers now in the Hospital, who were coiw 
cemed in the improper management of the 
beer, in receipt of the bull beef, and other 
transactions ol the like fraudulent kind ; but 
several of them seemed inclined before the 
committee, to dispute even the verdict of tiw 
jury ; as they prooably would, the justness of 
the butcher's man, who was transported. No 
enquiiy has been made into the oad state oT 
the shoes, which was so fully proved before 
the council, and which are worse in eveiy Te» 
spect than those served ui common work* 
houses ; the stockings, which are in still a 
worse state, have also not been enquired into; 
and are totally incapable of defence or pallia^ 
tion. 

^ The whole business of the charity stock, 
in which is involved so many abuses, has not 
been taken the least notice of by the commit 
tee. tliough charged at length in the Case;, 
ana though the drunkenness so frequently 
imputed, as a reason for treating the pei>- 
sioners with contempt, is occasioned by im- 
properly giving so many of them money u^ 
stead 01 provisions. 

*' The nnproper admission and treatment of 
the boys, and every other circumstance relat- 
ing to them, were also neglected. The evi- 
dence which I offisred, to prove the mischieft 
and terrors to which the bund and feeble men 
are subjected, by the removal of the posts and 
rails, were all refused to be heard. 

*' Of the number of officers' widows now 
serving in the mean capacity of common 
nurses, under spinsters who have no claim to 
the establishment, no notice has been taken. 

" Many of the matters which have been 
mentioned, were very slighUy investisited ; 
as the question, whether the Hospital is nnish^- 
cd or not ; and nothing has been ofiered on 
the subject, except the extravagant idea of the 
clerk of the works, that the Derwentwater es* 
Ute was granted in perpetuity to finish the 
building. The several circumstances relating 
to the ousting the pensioners ; and the en- 
croachments by badfiRni in diffsrent pacH 



i6I] retpectmg the Royal HtfiUA at Greenuidi. A. D. 1778^ 



t26f 



^ the Hospital; were veiy alightly enquired | 

IDtO. 

^ The bad state of the infirmary the com- 
■uttee refused to view; and have heard no 
evidence but that of Mr. Myhie; which can 
le fully controverted. 

"The matter of the Painted-hall was 
afightly investigatedy and appeared as stated 
in the printed Case. But haa the committee 
▼isted it themselves, they must have seen 
■nny defects which were never observed be- 
fore ; and it is now doubtful whether it is not 
BOW injured by the great expence attending 
tiie cleaning of it. 

•^Tlie many inconveniences and losses 
which have happened to the Hospital, from 
the very slight manner of examining and pass- 
ing the accounts by the directors ; particular- 
"hj the great loss in the case of Mr. £llis, 
R€m the meffectual checks on the steward's 
office; and the large sums wliichare annually 
expended under the head of necessary works, 
from the reports of the clerk of the works, 
with very uttle examination or controul. 
These, with many others, most material ob- 
jects of enquiry (which may hereafter be more 
carefully enumerated) were all referred to the 
committee by the general court; but have 
either not been investigated, or the evidence 
which'was offered,, refused to be heard. And 
en many of them the committee might have 
had the best information and evidence, by 
examining the matters themselves, which they 
declined to do. 

*• But the great finesse by which every pur- 
pose of full and fair enquiry has been finally 
defeated before the committee, has been, that 
on many occasions, when I strongly pressed 
that my evidence might be heard^ I was told 
by Mr. Cust, the chairman, that it was not 
proper now, but that when Mr. Morgan had 
gone through the charges against his clients, 
whatever matter I should then declare had 
not been investi^ted, or properly enquired 
into, should be fully heard under the general 
bead of charges against the directors : this 
promise^ Mr. Cust particularly repeated, when 
the gowns of the purses were shewn to him ; 
which complaint was so evidently just, that he 
appeared to think it would not be disputed. 
And he very frequently declared that the 
committee could not fimsh their enquiries for 
several months. 

** But on the day in which the charges se- 
lected by Mr. Morgan were to be finished, 
Mr. Cust did not attend, and another chair- 
man appeared, who behaved in the most un- 
warrantable and arbitrary manner ; refused to 
hear evidence on almost every subject ; treat- 
ed every attempt to impeach the conduct ot 
the directors as a personal insult, which he 
resented with great violence; and decided 
v^oa several suojects of debate without at- 
tends to any other authorities or arguments 
than his own, which generally was,^ *' that 
there were different opimons about the matter, 
and that was aU he could learn about it.'' 



" I was at len^h ordered to withdraw; 
after which the officers of the council, whose 
evidence had been finished, and they had- 
withdrawn, were called in again, and the exa- 
mination into the complaints against me re- 
sumed in my absence. 

" On the breaking up of the meetiifg, I was- 
informed that the next meeting would be to 
examine into the charges against the direc-^ 
tors ; and that they should want nobody but 
themselves. 

**• Thus, all the promises of Mr. Oust, ancf 
the expectation, which had prevented me 
firom making any objections in the course of 
the enquiry, were defeated. 

" I now find that the task « which I have" 
undertaken, to enumerate the several objec- 
tions to the conduct of the committee, much 
too great to be effected in this letter ; as it 
reqmres an enumeration of the whole, and 
appears much stronger in the proceedings 
taken at length, than in this abstract of them. 
As I have laid a full account of the proceed- 
ings before counsel, I must wait for their opi- 
nion and assistance. But I thought I should 
have been inexcusable to myself, to the pen- 
sioners, and to this court, if I did not in^ke an 
attempt (however slender my hopes may bej 
to induce you to review and consider well all 
your proceedings against me, in this stage of 
the business. 

'' It is necessary, my lords and gentlemen^ 
for your Own honour and reputation, as well 
as for the cause of truth ana justice, and the 
welfare of the pensioners under your care, that 
you should review the proceedings in the most 
dispassionate manner. I cannot yet suppose 
but there are here several gentlemen who will 
not submit to become instruments of oppres- 
sion, and that they will declare the committee 
was improperly appointed for the iiivesti^atioA 
of tnith, (on which ever side it is) or tor thfe 
clearing the characters of the several parties 
— that the proceedings were irregular and ar- 
bitrary; and that it broke up m a manner 
which will not do honour to any of those con- 
cerned in it. 

** Attempts may be made to hold me out to 
all future officers of the House, who shall dare > 
to suppose that there are abuses in Greenwich 
Hospital — and I may suffer for having made 
those complaints — ^but I will not patiently 
submit to oppression. I must somewhere be 
fairly heara ; and as the whole matter is now 
subjttdice ; iind as I have a great number of 
affidavits of men of character, ready to pro- 
duce and oppose lo the volumes sworn against 
me in the King's-bench, by the parties who 
have moved for informations, I trust, my con- 
duct will not be prejudiced by the general 
court ; for I never had the least wish to at- 
tract the attention of any of the public on the 
affairs of tlie Hospital, if I could possibly avoid 
it; and as a faithfiil servant to his majesty, I 
am particularly desirous of avo'ding every 
thing which may tend to disturb the minds of 
the seamen at so critipal a moment as the 



J6S] 



18 GEORGE UL The Case of Captain Thonuu Baiaiet [264 



present; I therefore anxioii^ wish to gain 
the attentioik of the court, so &r as may be 
necessary to put a stop to the priiicipal evils 
complained of in the management of the Hos- 
pital, which disturbs the comfort and happi- 
ness of the pensioners, as there may then he 
no nec^sity for pursuing the retrospective 
Tiew of the various causes any further. 

** I well know the prejudices which arc en- 
tertained against me ; I have told truths of a 
very unpleasant nature; and I have stated 
facts, wnich are considered as reflections by 
those to whom I profess personal esteem; 
and others to whom I owe personal obliga-' 
tions. But when I made this attempt, to ob- 
tain a reformation of all the abuses in Green- 
wich Hospital, and a thorough investigation 
of the several causes, in order to prevent them 
for the future, I thought it my duty to tell the 
truth, and the whole truth, or that I should 
otherwise beti^v the cause which I meant to 
support. If I nave erred^ it has been on the 
side of a very sincere zeid ; and if I have been 
imprudent, it has been principally at my own 
hazard ; but I can solemnly assure you, gen- 
tlemen, that I had not the smallest personal 
interest or view in any of the comphunts 
which I have laid before the general court ; 
and that there are none of them but what I 
thought it my indispensible duty to make, in 
behalf of a body of men who blave deserved 
well of their country. — ^I have the honour to 
he, with great respect, my lords and gentle- 
men, your most obedient and most humble 
servant, Thomas Baillis/' 

*' P. S. I must now beg leave earnestly to 
repeat my former application, to be furnished, 
by order of the court, not only with copies of 
the several charees retorted upon me, by the 
directors of the Hospital, and by the several 
officers of the house, and of the clerks, turn- 
cock, labourers, 6lc, who have been urged to 
sign complaints against me, to the board of 
Admiralty, and to the general court; and like- 
wise that you will onler me to be furnished 
with copies of all such letters to the directors, 
from several officers of the infinnary, com- 
plaining of the defective state of the wood 
work in their apartments ; and also copies of 
all such minutes or proceedings of the direc- 
tors, as myself or counsel may uiink necessary 
for my defence, in his mqiesty's court of 
King's-bench. which I trust will not be revised 
me; especially as the contracting butcher was 
furnished by the Hospital with all such papers 
as were thought by bun and his counsel to be 
necessary to strenc:then his defence against 
the Hospital, in the action brought against 
him, in the court of King's-bencn, for the 
several breaches of his contract, in supplying 
the poor pensioners with the flesh of buUs ana 
bull stags, instead of good fat ox beef, agree- 
able to contract 

** Thomas Baillie." 

'* Royal Hospital for Seamen, at Greenwich, 
August 12, 1779." 



Who do you refer to, in that accoant, tha^ 
struck the officer ?-— The clerk of the works. 

What is the name of the boatswain that is 
turned out? — ^Boatswain Goi^h; it does not 
appear in the minutes of the House, that ha 
was turned out for that offence ; but that was 
the ground of his dismission, though he had 
never been complained of in the course of 
eight years before. 

Whom did you refer to, that struck the 
officer ? And what is his name ? — ^Mr. Mylne^ 
the clerk of the works; I believe it was be- 
cause he gave a favourable evidence on my 
account. Mr. Morgan said his evidence vns 
a libel. I have in my hand the declaration of 
lieutenant Lefevre, which he signed on his 
death-bed, that was refused to be read by tli» 
committee. I beg to observe, that the present 
lieutenant-governor took a very active part in 
complaining against me, though he aauA not 
seen the pnnted Case beforehand, except for a 
short time. Whenever I produced a witness 
before the committee of directors, the council 
books were searched, to look into their cha^ 
racters for a number of years back, before 
they were permitted to give evidence. I must 
beg leave to observe, 1 had all the depositions 
in my hand that were prepared for my de- 
fence, in the court of King's-bench, I tendered 
them to tiie general court ; they were refused^ 
and the answer was, they were not come ' to 
hear evidence upon oath, but to receive the 
report of the committee ; and many papers 
which I had applied for, to the general court 
and board of directors, were refused to me ; 
though the contracting butcher was furnished 
with every thing he thought necessary for his 
defence, in the action instituted against him 
for fraud. 

Whether you were ever called upon, by that 
committee of directors, to prove your book ? — 
There is a letter on your lordships' table, 
which I wrote to the committee of directors^ 
as they were to investigate the grounds of the 
several complaints made by me, that I might 
be permitted to prove them, in the order in 
which ihey were in the printed Case. 

Did you desire to prove your book befbie 
that committee ? — ^I desired to prove the Case,. 
from the beginning to the end, before the 
committee. 

Did they grant that request? — They did 
not; for my witnesses were refused to ba 
heard ; where they thought there was matter 
to be collected for the King's-bench, they 
were inclined to go on, they seemed to regard 
nothing else. 

You were prevented in proving the nounds 
of your complaint, by that committee? — ^In a 
vanetv of instances. 

Did you desire to call witnesses that were 
refused?— Yes, Mr. Charles Lefevre; wheo 
he was called into the room, the rev. Mr, 
Cooke was fHghtened ; he thou^t he was at 
sea; he started up, objected to nis evidence^ 
and Mr. Lefevre was ordered oit of th* 
room. 



S65] retpedhg ihe Roj^ 



ai Gremnoich. A. D. 1778. 



[S69f 



Who wu dttirman at that time?— Mr. 
Bttker; it was the last day of the enquiry. 

You wdre not sufiered to produce hiin as a 
witness ? — I was not ; and fus fother's dechir- 
ntum on his death-bed was refused to be 
bcaid. Captun Allwricht carried it a second 
time, and it was refused. There were a num- 
ber of blind men ready to give evidence ; it 
was said the labouring men wore out their 
flboes and stockings at hard labour; I thought 
the hiiiid men proper evidence^ as there 
ooaid not be that objection to them ; they at- 
tended seven days, their evidence was at last 
lefusod. 

You ofiiered to call them, and they were r^ 
fused? — Yes ; in a variety of instances, boat- 
swain Cough's was also refused ; the whole 
WIS conducted as Mr. Morgan thought pro- 
per. Mr. Cost told me I should b« heard 
whoi he had done; but the witnesses were 
never heard. 

Mr. Gust told you, as chairman, that you 
should be heard when Mr. Morgan was done ? 
-Yes. 

Did you remind the court of his promise ? 
—Yes; there was not the least attention paid 
to it 

When the enquiry commenced, did you 
kid it, to prove your Case ? Or did Mr. Mor- 
^ beein it with any thing else ?— Mr. Mor- 
gui ha3 it prepared and drawn out into a book, 
and went on as he pleased ; sometimes he 
opened my Case at the beginning, sometimes 
Jabe middle and where he pleased. I asked 
who he was? Thev said a counsellor^ broujght 
down there to lead the enquiry and direct it. 

Who told ;^ou so ?^Mr. Cust said so ; no- 
body contradicted it. 

You objected to it ? — ^Yes ; there was a gen- 
tieman at my house ; I desired he might be 
present, which was granted ; but this man at 
my elbow, the short-hand writer, came down 
to take minutes ; he was turned out 

Did the court call first upK>n you, or Mr. 
Moivan, to examine the witnesses? — They 
wooU read a passage, and say to me, Prove 
that 

Wben a witness was called, who was first 
to eiamine him, you or Mr. Morgan ? — There 
was nothing but a scene of confiuion ; when 
1 asked a question it was generally objected to. 

When a witness was called^ was Mr. Mor- 
gan called upon first to escamme that witness, 
or you ? — ^I cannot say as to that. 

Was your book regularlv read through ? — 
Not a word of it ; onfy such passages as they 
Hjoiffiht fit to pitch upon. 

I oenre to ask, if he recollects, what reasons 
were ^ven for turning Lefevre out of the 
room? — ^I know of no other reason than that 
the rev. Mr. Cooke raot up and objected to 
his evidence ; he said ne had been under exa- 

imDati<Mi before, and he was not to be ad- 

nutted afterwards ; though, on a similar case, 

Mr. Myhie {iroduced a witness, a Mr. Adams. 

who gave evidence, thouzh, I believe, he had 

never seen tbainfinnaryDefore; he sud he 



could not attend another day, and his evidence 
was admitted on several pomts. 

Had Lefevre been examined before ? — He 
had not been examined, he having been at 
sea ; he was very abruptly turned out of the 
room. 

You said Mr. Cooke went about the Hos- 
pital encouraging people to sign complaints 
against you ; now uo you know that ?— I was 
told so by some of the people that refused *to 
sign it. 

You said a Mr. Morean, a lawyer, was em* 
ployed against you ? — ^i es. 

Had you any lawyer? — ^No; nw was I in- 
formed of their intention. 

Who was that ^tleman that was at your 
house ? — ^A clerk m the stamp-office. 

He never practised the law?-— No ; I believe 

fkOX, 

How4o you know that captain Maplesden 
had never read your book, when he signed 
the paper? — There were very few delivered 
out; I oelieve the Case that was produced aa 
the council of Greenwich Hospital^ was the 
very Case I delivered to lord Sandwich ; cap* 
tain Maplesden produced it; I believe the 
rev. Mr. Cooke g^ve it to him : how he, Mr. 
Cooke, came by it, I cannot tell. Maplesden 
took it from under his coat, and said it was a 
book lately pubUshed by the lieutenant go- 
vernor ; I was surprised to see, unknown te 
me, that a full council of the officers of the 
house had been got together, and captain Ma- 
plesden attempted to select passages out of 
my book that were obnoidous to tne officers 
ofAirreenwich Hospital ; but he could not 

How do you know that captain Maplesden 
had not seen the book but a few minutes be- 
fore he signed the paper ? — ^I believe so, be- 
cause he could not pitch upon a passage ob- 
noxious to the naval officers of that Hospital ; 
a^r that Mr. Cooke took it, and he could not 
find a passage ; then Mr. Godby took it, and 
pitchea upon a passage about removing a sink 
at his door. 

You have said that several persons were 
stirred up against you, how do you know that? 
— From what the people told me. 

You said that the boatswam was turned out 
for not pulling his hat off to the rev. Mr. 
Cooke ?— I si^ I verily believed, that that 
was the man's ofience. 

What reason have you to believe that? 
You said that was the only reason of his being 
turned out, what did you ground your judg- 
ment upon? — ^I know this man was several 
days waiting to give evidence ; I attempted 
to get him in, Mr. Cooke saw him there ; be 
would not be turned awav firom siving evi- 
dence ; as he was waiting, he asked a brother 
boatswain why he pulledhis hat off so often 
to Mr. Cooke, and said, " I pulled my hat off 
at first, and I don't choose to repeat it;'' 
upon that this man was complained of by Mr. 
Cooke, to captiun Chads, ana he put him on 
tiie complaint-book. He came to me and 
told lus story; I advised the man to go ta 



96r] 



IS^GEORGE m. The Case of Captain Tkanuu BaUSe^ [S68 



Ifo. Cooke, and ask his pardon for any offence I 
be had given him ; he said. No, he vfoa\d 
Qot forgive him, he should he tried by the 
council of the house. I believe that intimi- 
dated the pensioners very much ; the com- 
mittee were then sitting. 

Was the complaint tor not pulling his hat 
off? — ^That is not the complaint put down, 
but that is the ground of it. 

Have you heard any other complaint? — 
Only I believe fur not paying proper respect 
to the rev. Mr. Cooke. There is not a more 
respectable character of a seaman in Green- 
wich Hospital, or in England, than this poor 
man. 

• You say there was encouragement given or 
offered to persons that would sign a paper 
against you; how do you know that? — ^I 
know that Mr. Cooke went about telling the 
officers, that the book was obnoxious to my 
lord Sandwich and the directors. 

That is not an answer to the question ; you 
8aid, in your evidence, that enoouraeements 
were given to the people that would sign a 
paper against you ; I want' to know how you 
know that? — ^The rev. Mr. Cooke went to 
lieutenant Gordon, and said, Here is a letter 
abusing lord Sandwich ; the man himself told 
me of It. 

That is not evidence ? — ^I cannot have other 
evidence ; Mr. Cooke would not tell me that 
himself. 

I want you to confine yourself to things of 
your own knowledge. — ^I can tell your lordships 
one very strong instance of preferment which 
has been given since, and probably might 
have been offered before ; there is one Cook, 
(not the rev. Mr. Cooke) clerk to the late 
committee ; that man, since this, (for his good 
flervices upon that occasion. I cannot conceive 
it was for any thing else) his son. who had 
been at sea two years and an half, or three 
years at most, upon coming home he was 
made a lieutenant. 

The Earl of Sandzoich, Does captain Baillie 
say this man had been but three years at sea, 
and was made a lieutenant; what is his 
name ? — A, Cook. 

Had he been but three years at sea ? — He 
was at school in Greenwich ; he might be put 
on the books of a yacht, but that is not ac- 
tually being at sea, nor fs h* above 17 years 
of age, though the instructions say they shall 
be 20 years of age. My lords, there are other 
instances of favours granted to people who 
complained against me. 

How do you know that this man's bemg 
made a lieutenant, was as a j^tification to 
Cook for his services in this affiiir of the 
Hospital ? — Because I verily believe no such 
irregular appointment would otherwise have 
taken place. 

How do you know that this was an irregu- 
lar appointment? — Because in 40 years ser- 
vice, I never knew an instance before of a 
person who had been only three years actually 
mt sea being appointed to a lieutenancy ; be- 



sides, he is not above 17 years of age, and he 
oueht to be 20 ; he is but 17 or 18 at the out- 
sit. I beg to say, I am now upon my oath^ 
I don't wish to conceal one circumstance of 
my conduct in Greenwich Hospital. 

[Captain Baillie withdrew.} 

Mr. Cosoley called in. 

I beg to know what employment you astt^ 
in ? — I am clerk to the stamp-office. . 

What trade are you ? — I am a stationer. 

Were you ever bred to the law ? — ^I never 
was at the bar; I had never any kmd of 
knowledge of the law but what was acci* 
dental. 

Inform the House whether you attended 
the committee of enquiry at Greenwich Hos> 
pital, that were to enquire into captain. Bai)^ 
lie's complaint? — ^I did. 

What day? — ^It is so great a distance oS 
time I cannot remember the dates ^ I have 
minutes I can refresh my memory with [loo^a 
at his minutes] it was the 18th of April, 1778. 

Was that the first day the committee met ^ 
— ^It was the first day. 

Give an account of the proceedings of that 
committee.— They are exceedingly volumi- 
nous ; I could be glad to answer any pointed 
question. 

Did the committee first call upon captaixi 
BailUe to make good the charges in his bookf 
— At the first opening of the committee, there 
were very long and disagreeable altercations \. 
there was a deal of personal animosity to cap* 
tain Baillie ; the matter was very much dis- 
puted in what manner they should eo on; 
captain Baillie produced a letter, and read^ 
directing in whiat manner he thought they 
should proceed ; and it was proposed to the 
committee, either to take the Case fairly from, 
the beginning to the end, or to take that 
letter, in which I believe there were eighteen 
charges drawn up. The chairman s^d. We 
will direct the enquiry in what manner we 
think proper, and desired Mr. Morgan to ga 
on; Mr. Morgan produced a number of 
charges. 

Did they determine that tliey would pro- 
ceed in eitiicr of those ways? — The only an- 
swer we had was, we will not take direction, 
from you, we will conduct it in what manner 
we think proper • any thing proposed by cap- 
tain Bailhe was immediately rejected. 
Who began the enquiry ? — Mr. Morgan. 

What did they begin with?— The first en- 
quiry was under a number of chaiges Mr. 
Morgan had strung together, which he called- 
charges against the surveyor. Mr. Morgan 
called himself counsel there, in consequence 
of a number of complaints made at the Ad- 
miralty against captam Baillie ; that the com- 
plaints at the Aamiralty were the ground of 
the proceedings. 

When Mr. Morgan said he had collected 
charges a^inst. captain Baillie, were any co- 
pies of those charges delivered to captain 
Baillie ?^No; he did afterwards let the 



fBS] rapec&ig the Royal HotpUtd at Greemath. A. D. 1778, 



P7« 



Dimes ofthe persons be taken down. Copies 
of tbe compiamls agunst captain Bdillie were 
fieqoently reauesm by captain BailHe, but 
always refiisea. 

Dtd they proceed on cajptain Baillie^s com- 
pkints as conducted by himself, or on com- 
pkuols against captain Baillie, or captain 
BailUe's complaints taken and conducted by 
Mr. Morgan ? — There were continual disputes 
ir^ Mr. Moi^an and captain BaiUie on the 
manner in which he earned it on ; he col- 
lected those ]^sages he thought most advan- 
tagBoos to his dtents ; the^ were generally 
those ag^vating expressions that they 
tboi^ht might found an action in the KingV 
bencA ; the question, whether the pensioners 
were well fed, orwhether landmen were there. 
Has no part of the enquiry at all. 

The nrst thing they called a charge against 
the sarveyoT; did Mr. Morgan state what 
that charge was? — ^No; he turned, as far as 
my memory goes, to pa^ 9, and said. Prove 
ikal ; captain BailUe said, " I did not know 
what you was going to enquire on, if you will 
, permit me either to follow the order of the 
nook, or the letter which he had drawn up by 
the advice of counsel ; ih that case he would 
take care the witnesses should be read^ when 
caDed upon, but that it was impossible for 
tarn to be provided for what Mr. Morgan 
might ask nim;" and wherever we were 
pret^ well prepared^ that was not called for. 

Did that irrc^ulant^ continue ? — ^Yes, it en- 
creased at the conclusion. The evidence in a 
|;reat vaiie^ of cases was refused ; the first 
mstance was the business of the infirmary. 
Captain Baillie was astonished that they 
should dispute the account of the infirmary. 
I believe the officers of the infirmaxy had 
made complaints of their apartments ; Mr. 
Mylne acknowledged he had those letters* in 
his pocket ; captam Baillie desired those let- 
ters m^ht be produced; Mr. Morgan said, I 
won't suffer my clients to produce evidence 
against themselves ; the matter was pressed 
& the committee to visit the infirmary. 

Did the committee refuse to see the in- 
firmary ?-^Yes. 

How &r is the infirmary firom where they 
nt? — ^About a hundred yards; Mr. Mylne 
acknowledged he had the letters in his 
pocket ofthe complaints ofthe officers ; capt. 
BflULUie desired him to produce them^ Mr. 
Mylne would not admit it. 

Did Mr. Morgan call Mr. Mylne his client ? 
«— Tea, he did ; all the persons that complain- 
ed naajosA capt. Baillie were his clients. 

who was the chairman ofthe committee ? — 
Mr. Cust the first six days, Mr. Barker the 
last day. 

Was he meaent at any of the other meet- 
aogs ? — OiUT one of the meetings : I believe 
IhcthinL 

At the last meeting, what was determined ? 
•^Nothing determine ; there was a scene of 
cobfinion and altercation. 

Did h^ at the last meetings zefiise to hear 



the evidence capt Baillie produced ?•— Almost 
in every instance ; one was the blind men, 
who had been affected by the removal of some 
posts and rails round the Hos|>ita], by which 
they were liable to many accidents ; he de« 
sir^ they might be called in; Mr. Barker 
would not let them ; he said it was of no Idnd 
of consequence. 

Were all the members ofthe committeo 
directors ofthe Hospital ? — ^As far as I under-* 
stood. « 

Who attended on the first day ? — ^Mr. Cust^ 
Mr. Wells, Mr. Savary, and Mr. Reynolds. 
On the second day, I believe, the same mem- 
bers were present. On the third day, Mr. 
Cust, Mr. Barker, and Mr. Reynolds; that 
was the day on which Mr. Barker attended^ 
I believe, rather more than an hour; he came 
in late. On the fourth dav, Mr. Cust, Mr. 
Wells, and Mr. James, the Mtter of whom at- 
tended then for the first time. On the fifUt 
day, Mr. Cust, sir Merrick Burrell, Mr. James, 
and Mr. Reynolds; capt. Baillie seemed to 
suffer a ^at loss in the want of the attend- 
ance of sir Merrick Burrell. The sixth meet- 
ing, Mr. Cust, Mr. Wells, and Mr. Reynolds. 
The seventh meeting, Mr. Barker, Mr. James, 
and Mr. Wells ; but no one member attended 
the whole seven meeting. 

Do you speak that with certainty ?-— Yes ; 
Mr. Cust was present at six, not at the 
seventh. 

Did capt. Baillie approve of the mode of 
the directors enquiring into their own con- 
duct? — It was the constant matter of dispute ; 
he said their enquiry was as improper as their 
conduct. 

Did they enquire whether landmen were 
appointed contrary to the charter ? — ^That was 
a subject of altercation * Mr. Cust said it was 
not a subject referred to them, and they 
would not enquire into it. Capt. Bailhe 
urged that it was the chief matter of com- 
plaint, and that if the landmen were removed, 
that would, he thought, remedy all the other 
complaints ; and as they would not enquire 
into that, he took up his hat, and was going 
out of the room, but did not go. 

Whether they made an enquiry whether tha 
landmen were appointed contrary to the char- 
ter ? — After about an hour's altercation, when 
c&uX. Baillie insisted on the point as a mate- 
risu object of the enquiry by the committee, 
Mr. Cust in particular said, that it did not ap- 
pear that it was any matter referred to them ; 
though it was proper for tiie consideration of 
parliament, it was none of their business ; it 
was vei^ much urged, that it was a charge in 
capt. Baillie's book, and they ought to nave 
enciuired into the ground of it. 

Whether there was any enquiry concerning 
wards taken firom the pensioners to convert 
into lodg|ings for landmen? — It came in only 
collatersdly ; the committee did view the gaU 
lery in Mr. Ibbetson's apartments, to see how^ 
&r Mr. Ibbetson had gained of the gallery ; 
on viewing the gallery and reading tm Ca^ 



«71J 



18 GEORGE ni. The Case qfCapkdn Thmoi BmOief \9fl9 



I thought it was as it is described in captain 
Baillie*s book. 

Did the committee enquire into the parti- 
culars of taking off the wards as described in 
the book ? — ^They were frequently mentioned 
collaterally; there was no enquiry into it. 
. Did they enquire respecting the bull beef? 
— ^It was mentioned ; I unoerstdod that all 
tile facts ^specting the bull beef were ad- 
mitted. 

Did they enquire into the conduct 4)f the 
, j^eward and the clerk of the cheque^ in receiv- 
ing the bull beeC? — They said that the steward 
and clerk of the cheque said it was good beef^ 
and seemed to say the charge was not true ; 
I can read the facts at length as taken at the 
time of the committee; we sat down while it 
was fresh in our memory, and took the &cts 
down in order to assist capt. Baillie's counsel; 
if the House wish it, I can read that or any 
Other parts from the minutes. 
. Was it stated that it was the duty of the 
steward and clerk of the cheque to teke care 
that bull beef was not delivered ; was it en- 
quired whether thev were to blame or not in 
not attending to that? — Capt. Baillie urged 
the fact; fhe clerks seemed to urge, that if it 
nras true, they had been deceived. 

Was there any enquiry into their conduct ? 
— ^Into the steward's conduct there was, pretty 
warmly. 

As to capt. Baillie's complaints? — Com- 
plaints that Mr. Morgan thought proper; 
capt Baillie and I were passive, as Mr. Cust 
allowed, after Mr. ]Vf organ had gone through 
his points, we should oe at liberty to tale 
it up. 

Was there any enquiry into the conduct of 
the clerk of the cheque and steward whv they 
suffered bull beef so long to be imposed upon 
the men ?'^There were a great many ques- 
tions of that sort; I can turn to it in the mi- 
Butes. 

Mr. Cowley, the Witness, reads as follows: 

** The paranaph at the bottom of page 53, 
in the prmted Case, viz. << The case is now 
greatly altered ; and though almost every ne- 
cessary had beien tor several years growing 
worse, it was not till the appointment of the 
late and present steward, tnat the grievances 
arrived at such a height, which makes an v 
longer acquiescence under fraud and impost- 
tion impossible.'^ 

Mr. Morgan then desired the lieutenant go- 
vernor to prove this general charge, who said 
he would prove it by a number of facts, and 
that if the committee would call in any of the 
pensioners, they would all say the same thing ; 
to which Mr. Morgan said, that particular in- 
stances did not prove a general charge; and 
Mr. Cust said the t»en»oners would say any 
thing they were bid. 

• It was therefore determined, that there was 
BO proof of the general charge. 

The charjge in page 56 was then read, and 
opL Allwiight called in^ to whom it was also 



I read; he said that he was the captain of the 
week there mentioned ; that he had observed 
the meat to be bad, and proceeded, as stated 
in the Case. That when the steward first re- 
fiised to consent to a survev on the meat, 
Godby said that there should be no survev, 
as he did not send for the captain of the week. 
This idea of the steward's, and the whole 
matter on which it was grounded, caft. AUr 
wright said had been the cause of many dis- 
agreeable disputes in the Hosf>ital : that there 
was a clause m the contract, in whidi it was 
agreed, that if the steward thought any meat 
delivered was not agreeable to the terms of 
the contract, he should send to Uie aq|ytain 
and lieutenant of the week, that a survey 
should be taken bv them and the derk of the 
cheque, and on due examination, the meat 
rejected ; but the steward, who probably read 
noUiing but his contracts and accounts, did 
not seem to know that none of the parties 
who made these contracts had any authoritj 
over the naval officers of the establishment 
andthatthey certainly could not place then 
under the command of the steward, or entitle 
him to send for them whenever he thought 

E roper. That the nftval offwers were ordered 
y thdr commission and instructions to at- 
tend to compkdnts of the pensioners, and that 
they are to apply the proper resaoAj on the 
spot without delay; or if tms is not in their 
power, or the power of the coundl of the 
House, they are to lay the same before the 
lordsof the Admiral^, having nothing what- 
ever to do with the board of directors. 

Whether there was any enquiry made into 
the conduct of the officers of the house why 
they suffered this abuse to subsbt so long a 
time ? — One of the master cooks of the Hos- 
pital (not Moore) said that the meat when it 
was objected to was better tlum what was 
usually bought in the markets ; the general 
impression on my mind, as £ur as I recollect 
at this distance of time, was, that the clerics 
of the steward and cheque seemed to dispute 
every thing said of the meat, and insisted it 
was better than what could be bought in the 
town ; but in general the clerks seemed te be 
of one opinicm, the naval officers of another; 
the clerks said it was good, the naval officeia 
said it was bad. 

Was the contract renewed with the same 
contractor?— It was; they said bbbcsi^ con* 
victed of firaud was no reason why be uioold 
not be dealt with again. 

Did they enquire whether there was bad 
and sour small beer mixed with water, turned 
into the pensioners' dining room for their use ? 
^There was no particular enquiry ; the &cts 
in the printed Case were mostly admitted to 
be true; they were in fidl as strong terms in 
the minutes of the Hospital as in the printed 
Case ; they allowed Ihe ftcts were true, onljr 
thev were carried too far. 

Was there any enquiry whethef bad shoes 
and stockings were deUvered to the p^ 
sioQ€Ka}-«Tliere. ivas a good deal of enqiuij 

§ 



frS] fupedingtke Eoyal HatpUal at Grernxoich. A* D. 177S. 



[274 



inlo tiie finen, bat no evidencey 1 believe^ fln 
the shoes and stockings ; the facts respectinr 
the linen were admitted to be true, thoueh 
moch a^iravated ; it appeared to me to oe 
the most fraudulent busmess that ever was, a 
scandalous fiaud of maoy thousand yards of 

JDMO. 

Was there any decision of the court that 
thit diai^ge was well founded ? — The court al- 
injrs ordered us to intiidraw^ when they came 
to any resohitkm; nor would they read it 
afterwards ; every thins, I found, a&nost was 
denied ; and the facts that wera proved, were 
aid not to be proved* 

Did capt Baillie desire the witnesaes to be 
cdleduiP — ^Yes. 

Did they receive tiie report of the persoQfi 
that measured the linen } — I believe I could 
venture to say, that they were not admitted 
er md any attention to. 

Did capt. Baillie desire the committee to 
etamine the sheets and shirts in the wards f 
^A good deal was said of that ; capt. Baillie, 
after haiin^ examined the sheets and the 
shirta^ sud it might be supposed that he had 
bean culling the shirts and sheets ; go and 
enmine the wards, go into any of the wards 
af the Hospital, I don't care where it is, you 
aay have an opportuni^ of examining the 
ifairts on the pensioners^ backs. 

Was there any en<{uiTy about the washing 
4)f the linen f — ^There was a good deal men- 
tkmed about washing the linen ; that was xthe 
dqr air Merrick Burrell was tiiere; it was 
voy&irly enquired into upon the whole; the 
Banes were produced; Mr. Momn, when- 
ever we produced evidence, woulanot permit 
tMpL Baillie to go on, but somebody was to 
controvert that evidence; but, upon the 
whole, it was proved, by the evidence of three 
or four nurses, and by the evidence of some 
ti the pensioners, tlmt the linen was in a 
shocking state, some of it mere filth, such as 
BO man could put on. 

Was there any enquiry about the sink com- 
pktned of as a nuisance .' — There was no e&- 
mnrv upon it ; it was oi\en mentioned ; capt. 
Baillie «aid the evidences had been wBdting 
several days ; but it was constantly refused or 
e?aded; and they were never heard during 
theaeven days. It was on that account boot- 
awunGough waited, when he incurred the 
aflence on which he was turned out. 

Was there any enquiry into the state of the 
inirxnarv? — Except the e\idence of Mr. 
Mylne himself, L believe there was no other 
evidence; the letters were refused; I exa» 
Bsned the infirmaiy; I thought it was in a 
wofse state than the printed Case represents ; 
4fae windows were Ruling in ; the appearsinee 
was so remarkable, it must strike any body 
tet went into it; some of the silk of the 
windows, two or three, were quite rotten. 

tHd you attend in the court of King's- 
tafcb? — ^l was present. 

What was done with the rule ?" What was 
the determinatiim of the court?—- I under* 

VOL. XM. 



stood tlie rule was dismissed with costs. I 
imdirstand nothing of the niatter technically. 

Was there any enquiry about removing of 
the posts and rails round the Hospital f — No; 
that was one of the points not enquired into; 
there was a great deal of altercation about it ; 
but it was tefused ; capt Baillie desired the 
witnesses to go away ; ne said there was no 
justice for them; they might break thelr 
necka, or legs, or anv thing ; they would not 
have redress there ; he desired the pensioners 
to be peaceable. 

Was there any enquiry respecting the di- 
rectors having summoned a captain of the 
house before them ? — ^That was an admitted 
fact ; but there was no enquiry, as I recollects 

Was there any enquiry into the director^ 
conduct, in giving to a tnouaand men money 
in lieu of provisions ? — That was not enquked 
into. 

Did Mr. Cust promise that that should be 
enquired into ? — He desired that they might 
go through what they were about, and tmit 
any tiling that capt. &illie desired should b# 
enouired into afterwards ; but that promise, 
ana all the hopes we had about it, came to 
nothing. 

Did the committee make any enqmry into 
the danger of fire in the taylors' shop' over the 
chapel ? — ^No ; capt. Baillie mentioned it, and 
desired they would enquire into that business; 
but his chief concern about the danger of fire 
was a new chimney in Mr. tbbetson's apart* 
ment. 

Did capt Baillie desire to enquire into that f 
Is it stated in the book ? — ^Yes. 

Did they enquire into it ? — ^No. 

When Mr. Gust made the declaration, that 
every thing should be enquired into that capt. 
Baillie desired, was it in conversation, or as 
sitting in the chair ? — There were some gowns 
shewn to Mr. Gust, and the difference was so 
striking, that Mr. Gust seemed hurt at it, and 
seemea to say, if there were things of that 
sort, it was right they should enquire into it ; 
and said, as soon as Mr. Morgan nad finished 
his charges, every thing should be enquired 
into. 

Was the court sitting then ? — ^He mentkmed 
it first when there was nobody, I believe, 
there but himself; but I think he repeated it 
frequently afterwards ; we were glaa of th^ 
promise, and wished to clinch it. 

Gan you turn to your minutes to establish 
that hct ; whether he did say it wliiie the 
committee were sitting ? — It was on the sixth 
daiy, previous to the meetiiig of the commit- 
tee, tnat the gOwns were shewn to Mr. Gust, 
and a cloak made out of their old gowns. 

Gan you turn to your minutes, to see whe- 
ther that promise was made during the sitting 
of the committee? — If I could findit, it would 
be by reading a great deal ; it presses on my 
mind that he did repeat the promise. 

Was there any enquiry made respecting tho ' 
government of the boys and their guardians f 
— ^It is difficult to answer these questions^ tiio 

T 



S75] IS GEORGE m. The Case ofCaflea» Tkmn BoaBk^ [S70 

iR^ier caaaeiasoccilktaniij; Kr 
hadbeentfae laans of tunaog okI the 

dian of the boys, as captdn Baillie suggested, 
because of his huzzaing under his window ; 
the guardian of the bovs was not called ; the 
matter was not enqiured into. 

Was there any charge enquired into, that 
jthe barber, and clerk of the council, the 
porter, and one of the cook's niates, made si- 
necures of their respective offices ? — ^It was no 
part of the regular enquiry ; it was admitted 
that the barber had not attended man^ years. 
. Was Lefevre's evidence heard or received by 
the committee ? — When Lefevre entered the 
room, Mr. Barker asked who he was ; he said 
Jie was called to jgive evidence ; the lieute- 
nant-governor desu^ the evidence might be 
heard. Mr. Cooke sud he, (meaning him- 
self) had been under examination several 
hours, and he could not be heard ; and he was 
ordered out of the room. Captain AHwright 
was called in ; Mr. Barker asked him what he 
.came there for ; he said he supposed to prove 
^e truth of a paper delivered to him by cap- 
tain Baillie ^ and he was turned out of the 
pommittee m an abrupt manner ; Mr. Barker 
said it had been objected to before, and be 
ivould hear no more about it 

Did the committee enquire whether the 
chaplains acquired the chaplaincies by grant- 
ing annuities, or by being sea officers ? — Mr. 
Mor^n, I believe, delivered a message from 
lord Sandwich, that the committee would not 
attend to any matter that immediately re- 
spec^d him ; that he would take care of it 
himself; I cannot charge my memory with 
the words ; that was the substance of the 
message*, lord Sandwich requested that the 
committee would not attend to any part that 
might affect him ; he would take care of himr 
selh 

The Earl of Sandwich, Did he say he 
broueht that message from me ? — A, I under- 
sjtooasp, from his words ; I believe that is the 
p^jrport of the words. 

Have you made any minute or memorandum 
pf that ?— Certsunly, it is here; I believe it 
was the second day, I am not very certain of 
^t; if it will save time, I will apply to Mr. 
Morgan ; I dare say he wijl acknpwfedge the 
jnessage. 

Js it in the affidavit pf the oourtof KineV 
bench stating what passed from day to day I — 
There is but a small part in that affidavit ; I 
drew the affidavit up m a hurry^ and had not 
time to put down every thing that passed. 

[Reads his Minutes as follows :] ^ The 
Case was then opened, at page 1 1, in the first 
para^ph of the charge asainst the chaplain, 
m which it is said, tlmt Mr. Copke had bar- 
g^ed and paid money for a seat at the board 
of directors; Mr. Morgan said, that he was 
instructed to acquipnt the directors, that lord 
Sandwich would take care of all those parts 
which concerned himself, and therefore de- 
(nred the committee to pass over them.'' % 

]S|j[r. Q, I could menUoD,iaanswer to the ge- 



_ ^ifiBi pttBsea, th6 
mannef in which the standard measure of the 
linen arose, quite in a different way from what 
has been represented since. At the meeting, 
when sir Merrick Burrell was present, when 
the business of the linen was investigated, Mr. 
Godby, the steward, seemed to controvert, 
that there was no standard for the linen, 
though he had said before, the standard was 
three yards and a half for a shirt, and five 
yards for a sheet; in consequence of that, ^, 
general Order was given by captain Baillie, 
throughout the Hospital, for the boatswains 
to measure the sheets and shirts, which they 
accordingly did measure; they were not, I 
find, very accurate, for they did not allow 
thumbs ; notwithstanding which, some of the 
shirts had only three yards ; and there were a 
great many thousand yards deficient upoo 
shirts and sheets, taking Mr. Godby's declaim 
ration, that there was a standard. Mr. Godby 
Stated that he had since discovered, at the 
last meeting, one hundred and forty-five 
yards deficient ; he stated it, I think, as an 
accidental deficiency; but how will onehun* 
dred and fortv-five yards account for several 
thousand yards } Upon that seneral ground, 
captain Baillie, as I tooklhe liberty to advise 
him, made a positive charge of fhtud, and de- 
sired the directors to cause an immediate exac 
mination into the state^f the linen, as it then 
stood ; but they did not then make an exa> 
mination. 

The manner in which the minutes con- 
cluded may attract the attention of your lord- 
ships ; th(p whole will give your lorddiips ^itf 
strongest impression how the iKisiness was 
conducted ; tne last day, I confess, was most 
the object of attention and complaint, re* 
specting captain Baillie. 

Mr. Cowley reads, by order of the Houses 
his Minutes, as follows : 

" It beins now near eleven o'clock, Mr. 
James (who nad been expected witii gnat im- 
patience some time) coming in, the committee 
was opened, and consisted of Mr. Barker, 
chairman, Mr. James, Mr. Wells. 

^ There was never perhaps more pains taken 
to maintain the dignity of anv chair, than 
was taken by Mr. Barker on this occasion; 
he was almost continuailv speaking himself^ 
and was always in a violent passion, if any 
thing happened to interrupt him ; he seemed 
sometimes not to^ be inclined to distinguish 
his friends ; and Mr. Morgan, who had oeen 
treated with great deference and attention by 
Mr. Cust, was frequently reprehended by Mr. 
Barker, in a very rude stile ; and when told 
that he asked his pardon, replied, *^ That was 
not sufficient'' Mr. Barker repeated, num- 
berless times, that all that was complained of 
had been done and approved of by three and 
twenty gentlemen; and it was a great and 
strange piece of impudence and presumptioo 
for me lieutenant-governor, who was only^ 
one man, to oppose the opinion of so many | 



S77] rupecting the Royai Hoipital at Greenmch. A. D« 1778. 



[S78 



ud, on all the subsequent matters, #ould 
hear nothixig further than that they had. been 
approved ofby the directors. It was in vain 
tiiat he was toid^ the lieutenani-govemor con- 
sidered himself as bound by his integrity, as 
aa honest man and an officer, to make good 
the several charges, which he had deliberately 
laid befoiv the general court; and that he was 
DOW read^^, notwithstanding the prejudice and 
passion with which he was treated, to produce 
aodientic evidence of facts, the nature of 
which could not be controverted, whatever 
sanction they mieht have received from the 
approbation of thoso directors, who usually 
attended the business of the Hospital, roost of 
whom were not in independent situations ; 
that it was too late now to pay compliments 
to any roan ; that he had taken up tne com- 
plaints of the pensioners, which really existed : 
and was ready to stand or fall by the proof, 
before anyleged or impartial tribunal— neither 
of which titles the committee had the smallest 
pretensions to. 

^ Nothing however, could interrupt Mr. 
Barker in his career ; and, compared with him, 
Mr. Cust was a gentleman ana a man of busi- 
ness, though a more dangerous opponent 
than the present chairman. 

** He now ordered the minutes of the last 
committee to be read; without which, he 
said, thev were no committee. The clerk 
then read only the evidence which had been 
l^ven under the head of Mr. Mylne, at the 
conclusion of the last committee ; wherein, 
among several other omissions, were the 
question and answer of Mr. Skeene, the 
0Utler*s mate, '' What ship he had served in ?'' 
To which he said, '' That he had never been 
at sea." The Ueutenant-govemor asked the 
derk, why he had omitted this ? He said, 
** that he put down nothing but what he was 
ordered by the chairman.'' Mr. Barker 
echoed, to be sure, and over-ruled all farther 
argument about it. All Mr. Mylne's opinions 
were taken down, very circumstantially, par- 
ticularly where he denied the authority of the 
naval officers. 

**• Folio 39 of the printed Case was then read, 
ooQceming the cows kept in the store-yard, by 
the clerk of the works, ** That it was prcs 
paring for a garden, and another store-yard 

*^ Mr. Mylne again seated himself at the table 
with the committee. To this tlie lieutenant- 

Svenior objected, and told the committee, 
it the insults he had recdved from the 
clerk of the works were so gross, that he 
oiuht not to sit at the same table with him. 
Atler some altercation, in which Mr. Mylne 
b^ved more calmly than the preceding da^, 
the committee determined he shouKl sit 
where he was ; though Mr. Godby, and others, 
bad sat at the other table, and stood whilst 
they spoke. The Ueutenant-govemor told 
the committee, that he was satisfied with 
having mude the objection ; that he had al- 
Rady recaived mucn unworthy treatment^ 



which he expected would be continued ; and 
h^ believed that Mr. Mylne would find still 
more favour for havine insulted him.*' 

My lords, when there was an attempt Ur 
prove any thing, it was asked if it had oeen 
approved of by the directors ; if it was said 
yes, Mr. Barker then said, I will hear no evi- 
dence of it ; when evidence was attempted to 
be produced, he said it was firivolous, and they 
were ordered out of the room. If captain 
Baillie attempted to say any thing, it was ge- 
nerally objected to. Captain BaQhe was de- 
sired to withdraw, and the proceedings of the 
committee finished in a hasty confu^ man- 
ner. 

Have you taken any minutes concerning 
the conclusion of the committee ? — I have. 

I desire you will refer to them. 

[Reads nis Minutes.] '' An altercation en- 
sued in consequence of Mr. Barker's telHng 
him, the witness, that he was very impudent 
in interfering or speaking on the subject; in 
answer to which, it was said that he had a&* 
cidentally appeared in this business, in con- 
sequence or Mr. Morgan's appearing before 
the committee, without any notice being 
given to the Ueutenant-govemor; that if the 
committee meant to support the least appear- 
ance of fairness in the proceedings, they must 
admit that he had the same right to debate 
every stage of this business as Mr. Morgan 
had; tiiat Mr. Morgan had carried the pnvi- 
leges of a counsel to a vei^ extraordinary 
length in several instances. On the contrary, 
that he, as an assistant to the Ueutenant-go- 
vemor, had frequently been desired to sp^ik 
to manv points, as he had always confined 
himself to the subject within the bounds pre- 
scribed by the committee, and that he had 
been heard by Mr. Cust in all the iformer 
committees, and that sir Merrick Burrell, on 
the day in which he was present, had fre- 
quently desired that he might be heard; and 
matin his present situation, he certainly ought 
to be allowed to speak on tne several subjects 
before the committee, without being insulted 
by the chairman. The chairman and Mr. 
Wells then told him, they would hear him no 
further, and that he must retire. 

" The lieutenant governor then told them, 
that if Uiey would not allow him a person as 
an assistant, and also to take notes, and be a 
witness of what passed, he must retire also ; 
the committee, who had frequently expressed 
a desire to proceed without tne lieutenant-go- 
vernor, seized on this opportunity with great 
readiness, and told him, that he also must re- 
tire, and they both retired accordingly. 

" Two lar^e flaskets were then ordered out 
of the room oy the lieutenanUgovernor, con- 
taining sundry necessaries, which the cofii- 
mittee could not be prevailed upon to inspect, 
consisting of sheets, shirts, pillow-cas^f, 
towels, shoes and stockings, aU of which 
were ^eatly deficient in Quantity or quality^ 
and had been deUvered to him by the nursea 
and pensioners in the different wards of the* 



«79] 



18 GEORGE IIL The Case of Captain Thomas BaUtie^ [980 



Hospital; and also specimens of some ar? 
tides which had been delivered since the 
sitting of the committee, whidi were much 
supenorto those which had been delivered 
before, particidarly the stockings and piUow 
cases, the last of which were near twice the 
size. It was now near two o'clock, and the 
carriages had been ordered at .that hour; 
there was no appearance when the lieutenant- 
governor lefl the committee-room, that any 
lurther business would be done on that day. 
But he was afterwards informed, that the of- 
ficers of the coimcil, who had ail retired on 
the order of the chairman, were sent for 
again; the enquiry resumed^ and their evi- 
dence taken gainst him in his absence. 

<<As Mr. Wells drove off in his carria^,the 
lieutenant-governor, who was walking m the 
square, asked him if the committee were to 
have any more meetings? He said, they were 
to meet on Tuesday next for the last time, to 
enquire into the cliarges against the directors, 
but that they should want nobody but them- 
selves. / 

'^ Thus the committee finished their enquiry 
in the same irregular, arbitrary, and illeg^ 
manner, as they had begun and conducted it. 
Mr. Morgan was, in the oeginning, permitted 
to Dull the whole Case in pieces, and put it to- 
gether in what manner he bought proper, 
under the head of charges against particular 
persons, all of whom he called his chents, and 
hy this manoeuvre, defeated every purpose of 
fair and impartial enquiry. 

*^ It was hardly possible to urge any thing in 
what he or the committee woiud allow to be 
the proper time, if it did not strictlv relate to 
the Case as Mr. Moi^an had classed it, so that 
the lieutenant-governor was no4 to prove his 
own Case, but Mr. Morgan's. 

*^ Mr. Cust had, on a mat many occasions, 
promised that the several things wnich should 
not appear to have been etiquired into, when 
Mr. Morgan had eone throu^ the sev^ul 
charses, under the nead of particular persons, 
shoidd be enquired into under the general 
head of charges agidnst the directors ; and he 
had particularly promised, that the compkiint 
of the nurses' gowns should be heard, though 
Bot charged in the Case ; but as the enquiry 
is now to be finished in his absence, all tnese 
promises are dexterously got rid oV* 

Whether captain BaiUie reminded the com- 
mittee the last day of Mr. Cust's promise, that 
he should be heard at fiill length ?«— It was 
repeatedly mentbned; the ftcts seemed to 
make impressions on Mr. Cusfs mind; we 
were in hopes he would attend to it. 

Was it admitted by any of the conmiittee, 
that such a promise had been made ? — ^I don't 
feeoUect that it was admitted ; it was not dis- 
puted ; it might be supposed that no promise 
made was binding upon them. 

Was it admitted by any gentleman of the 
committee the last day, that such a promise 
had been made ? — I cannot say that it was. 

Was there any gentleman present the last 



day of the committee, that was present wiwi 
the promise was made? — ^From the general 
complexion of the .business, I suppose Mr. 
Ibbetson was present, I cannot say that he 
was. 

When it was urged to Mr. Barker, did any 
body deny it ? — ^I cannot say it was denied; I 
beg to refer to Mr. Cust himself, I am sure he 
will acknowledge it. 

[Mr. Cowley withdrew.] 

Mr. Lefevrt called in. 

Give an account to the House, in what 
manner you was treated before the com- 
mittee ? — r was called in to give my declara- 
tion ; immediately on my entering the room, 
Mr. Barker observed something in a particular 
manner; I cannot remember what it was. 
The Rev. Mr. Cooke started up, and said, I 
should not be heard ; Mr. Barker got up, and 
said, I should not be heard ; we want to hear 
nothing you have to say, you shan't be heard. 

[Mr. Lefevre withdrew.] 

Captain Allwright called in. 

I desire captain Allwright may be asked^ 
whether all his evidence was heard before the 
committee of enquiry, or any part objected 
to ? — There was a question put to me by die 
lieutenant-governor, which Mr. Barker re- 
fused to hear an answer to ; it was respecting 
the broth of the pensioners ; whether I knew 
any persons who were not entitled to it send 
for it ; it was refused ; I asked the committee 
whether I was to answer ; Mr. Barker said no. 

Whether you, at the request of captain Bail-^ 
lie, offered to carry lieutenant Lefevre's evi* 
dence in writing, wno was not able to appear ? 
— ^I had a writing of Lefevre's delivered to 
me ; I carried it in ; the chairman said it had 
be^ already objected to, and they could not 
hear it. Mr. Barker was the chairman ; cap- 
tain BaUlie asked me, if it had been read; I 
said no ; it had been objected to before, wad 
could not be heard. Lefevre, who had been 
at the bar, said, I believe there is a mistake ; 
they think it is mine, it is not, it is my ^ 
ther's ; upon which I went in again and of> 
fered it, but was refused. 

Were the officers of the council examined 
before captain Baillie, or behind his back ? — 
I believe afler he was withdrawn. I was sent 
for, and I and most of the officers were called 
and examined ; captain Baillie was not pro^ 
sent. 

You were examined? — I answered somt 
questions. 

Were you present when any of the otheiji 
were examined? — Yes. 

Was there az^ examination ? — ^Yea ; warn 
kind of examination questions were put. 

Did you sign any complaint against captain 
Baillie?— No. 

Did they read any complaint against caplatB 
BailUe?— No. 

Was there any application to sign a paper 
against captain Bailhe?— At the council, * ~ 



M] iwqwettNf <Ac Royal Hotpialat Greenwch. A. D. 1778. 



im 



tbttproerwasbrou^fitwasput^ whether it 
shouki be read ; I said I thought the council 
kad nothiDsto do with it; I wished to have 
notfaing to do with it ; I wished to go to the 
oneral court ; the printed Case was product 
by captain Ms^^lesden. After the business of 
tne Hospital was over, captain Baillie said, I 
believe the business is over, let them ask if 
anv body else wants the council ; that was 
published at the door ; somebody said to cap- 
tain Maplesden, have you nothing to offer ^ 

Who was that somebody ? — I don't remem- 
ber; captain Maplesden put his hand in his 
bosom and pulled out the Case, and desired it 
to be read; he pointed out nothine himself; 
it passed through the hands of Mr. Cooke and 
Mr. Godby ; they proposed to go out and form 
a committee against the lieutenant-governor ; 
I said the kind of attack I had seen that day on 
the lieutenant-sovemor was very extraordi- 
naiy, such as I bad never seen before ; it was 
very unusual ; I was answered that it had been 
done before, a day or two ago, at Salters' Hall, 
I believe they said ; I said I dare say it was 
not done, I presumed not on the chair ; if 
they made that attack upon him, I said, I 
thought it would have been much more de- 
cent, if they intended to attack the lieutenant- 
governor, to desire the governor's attendance 
m the chair ; th^ said thea they would not 
make it an act or council. i 

Have you ever known any of the landmen 
behave ul to the lieutenant-govemar when he 
was presiding in the. council? — ^The heute- 
nant^ovemor stated some matters to tlie 
council to be carried to the Admiralty-board ; 
they said it would not avail to carry it there ; 
the lieutenantrgovernor. said there were no 
directions in the bye-laws of the Hospital, to 
have recourse to the board of directors ; that 
they had made several applications to that 
boud to have grievances redressed, which 
were not redressed, and he desired to lay the 
matters before the Admiralty; that redress, 
he apprehended, would be had there ; but as 
they would not make it a matter of council, 
he said he should present it b^self ; they 
aud it would not be received, as it did not 
come properly. 

Do you attend the coundl constantly ? — I 
do not. 

What 'is your reason for not attending ?^I 
have seen, in my idea, things violent v ear- 
ned ; I Uunk we are rather over-ruled by a 
body, that seemed to me an improper body to 
nife the Hospital. 

Lord putuesf. If you and the other military 
efioers did attend^ would not you be a majo- 
rity against the civil list? — ft we were con- 
Huitiy to attoid, we should. 

When you attended the committee with the 
deposition of L^vre, was there anv reason 
pvvn why they rejected it ?— 'Hiat it had been 
fctsenled before^ and had been rejected. 

Could you authenticate it ?— No, I could not. 

Did you not offer it yomi^lf by way of au- 
thenticaiitiiig it ^^No. 



Was there any objection of that kind made ? 
■—No. 

Did you see him write it? — By no means; 
it was put into my hands by the lieutenant- 
governor. 

As you, as I think, declared, that youf 
reason for not.attending so often as youother-> 
wise would have done, was it, that you were 
over-ruled in these coimcils ? I think that was 
what you said, or to that purpose ; I should 
be glad to know who were tnose particular 
persons who presided chiefly at those boards, 
who over-ruled the military officers? — ^The 
council is not attended fully; it is looked 
upon, if the lieutenant-governor attends, or if 
there is a captain there, and two naval officers 
of the house, as the lieutenant of the week, 
or the captain of the week, that is thought 
sufficient, without there is a particular busi- 
ness, then other people drop in; when there is 
particular business, the civil officers attend. 

You said vou did not care to attend so often 
as you should have done, because you were 
over-ruled ; who were the persons that took 
the principal share in the over-ruling? — ^The 

Particular matter was a case respecting die 
eer; the lieutenantrgovernor was strenuous 
about several things that he thousht were 
not taken that notice of he wished; he en- 
deavoured to get it laid before the Admiralty; 
in that he was over-ruled. I have seen un- 
pleasant altercations, ^d wished to keep 
from them, as far as my duty would permit. 

I .should be glad, to know who were the 
principal persons that were concerned in over- 
ruling?— -The junior members, in matters of 
that Kind, when it came to a matter of divi- 
sion, arc the civil officers. I have observed 
when that lead has been taken, the chair has 
been over-ruled. 

[Captain Allwright withdrew.] 

Mr. Cowley called in again. 

Whether you could have authenticated that 
paper delivered in from Lefevre ? — I attended 
Lefevre, who was on his death-bed ; I had a 
good deal of conversation with Mr. Lefevre 
on the matter; he said he had some doubts 
how far he ought to go in respect to the lieu- 
tenantrjgovemor on account of his own f^ 
mily ; but he said, as he was on his death- 
bed, he must discharge his conscience; he 
said he knew captain baillie to be a very wor- 
thy man, and he could not withhold his testi- 
mony. I held the paper, and he signed it: 
it is a warm encomium on captain Baillie and 
his conduct. 

Did you hear that any body, when Mr. Le- 
fevre (who I understand was a lieutenant in 
the Hospital) was dyin», was there any body 
that went to persuade Mr. Jjefevre to retract^ 
the opinion he had been of before ? — ^No ; I 
had some conversation with him on this 
paper, and he desired me to write down what 
tie said ; he signed it; it was as nearly as pos- 
sible his expressions; I am fully persuadeo he 
felt much in favour of captain Baillie. 



S83] 



18 GEORGE IIL The Case of Captain Thomas BaSlie^ [2S4 



Did he dictate the poper^ «nd y< 
)wn what came from him ? — ^I had i 



s. 



Jou write 
adcalof 

oonveraation with him, to see what his mind 
was ; I took it down after half an hour's con- 
versation; I wrote down what I thought 
would please him ; I read it deliberately over ; 
he declared himself well pleased, and signed it 
Was he in a very feeble state at that time ? 
— Very feeble; his mind seeined very sound, 
but his body very much emaciated. 

How long did he live after that?— -I believe 
a month ; he was in a dying state ; I beUeve 
he felt himself in a dying state. 

[Mr. Cowley withdrew,] 

lieutenant Smith called in. 

Give an account of what Mr. Morean scud 
to you, relative to your evidence b^ore the 
committee of enquuy ?r-When I was called 
in, I begged to be excused speaking, and 
begged to refer to a paper; that mdul- 
eence was granted; upon my reading a few 
Bncs (I have the paper here), Mr. Morgan 
called out to me, and to the gentlemen there, 
I beg to stop you; I cannot suffer such a 
thing to go on against my client ; it is a libel. 
Mr. Cust, Mr. Savary, and Mr. Weils, seemed 
to differ firom him ; afler Mr. Morgan's ob- 
jection, I was permitted to go on reading 
the paper. May I be permittMl to read that 
paper r 

You may. — Reads a paper, in which he had 
made a number of reflections concerning the 
disagreeable disputes and altercations which 
had for some years subsisted in the Hospital, 
which had prevented his enjoying that ease 
and tranquillity which he expected to have 
found in Greenwich Hospital ; that fn his 
opinion, the appointment of the chaplain to a 
seat at the board of directors, had been the 
cause of great inconvenience ; and tliat there 
had, in the course of many disputes, appeared 
a spirit of malevolence that he was exceeding- 
ly sorry for; he wished, for private reasons, 
that the complaints in the Case had not been 
so public and general, as it would alarm many 
people in the Hospital ; but that he could not 
avoid taking this opportunity of giving it as 
his opinion, that the lieutenant-governor had, 
on all occasions, appeared to be the poor sea- 
m'bn's friend ; that he had always stood up 
for the pensioners ; and that he had remedied 
many abuses ; and believed that he had pre- 
vented others, which otherwise would have 
been very hard upon the men ; this paper Mr. 
Morgan thought proper to call a libel. 

[Lieutenant Smith withdrew.} 

Thomas Rapley, a blind pensioner, called in. 

I desire you will inform the House, if you 
attended every day during the committee, in 
order to give evidence ?-- Yes ; I attended 
every day. 

Have you any thing to say of any grievance 
you labour under? — Yes; the pulhngdown 
the Dosts and rails is a great grievance to the 
hlina and lapie; a taian since has had his 
thigh broke ; another blind man bad his hands 



crushed against the wall, by which he was 
laid up a fortnight; and I had like to have 
been run over by a stone horse, had not a per- 
son pulled me out of the way. I an^ another 
man were going in to give evidence ; we were 
not permitted ; captun Baillie said, '* My lads, 
go nome; you vrill have no redress here; 
you may break your necks, or legs, or arms ; 
you will have no redress here.'' My stockings 
will n6t last one half the time ; and my shoes 
burst out almost as soon as I put them on. 
The washing is so bad, the shirts stink very 
badly; they stick to my skin; your lordships 
would not suffer your hunting dogs to put such 
linen on ; a shirt was brouglit to me all over 
mud; it had been trod in the dirt; I stuck 
two pins in the inside of the collar, and gave 
it to the nurse to put in the wash ; the next 
week I had it returned just as bad as it was 
before, with the pins in the same place. 
There are a parcel of does kept opposite, that 
make a noise all night, wat I cannot sleep. 

How did captain Baillie behave to the pen-* 
sioners ? — ^He nas behaved like a father, a go- 
vernor, and a man, that would do us all the 
good he could. 

Lord Dudley, Was the cravat you have on 
washed at the Hospital ? — ^No ; it is a cravat 
of my own; I pay for washing it myself. 

[Thomas Rapley withdrew.] 

Johft Martom called upon by Captain Baillie. 

A short debate here arose respecting the 
propriety of his giving evidence, as he had not 
been summoned, but seen accidentally at the 
bar by captain Baillie, taking their lordships' 
minutes m the room of ^{r. Gumey. Re- 
solved, that he should be sworn, and examin- 
ed as an evidence. 

Mr. Marsom, will you give an account to the 
House in what maimer you was treated at 
the committee at Greenwich Hospital ? — My 
lords, I was taken down to Greenwich to at- 
tend a committee, to take notes ror captain 
Baillie ; when I came into the room, I was 
asked who I was, and upon my informing 
them I was a short-hand writer come to take 
notes, I was ordered out of the room. 

* 

Mr. Morgan called in. 

Give an account of what lord Sandwich di- 
rected you to say to the committee. — ^I don't 
recollect I had any instructions firom niy lord 
Sandwich ; I never saw my lord Sandwich ; 
nor was I, as I believe, mstructed by any 
other person to deliver such a niessage from 
my lord Sandwich. The conunittee was to 
enquire into tlie conduct of some of the gen- 
tlemen of the committee who were not in the 
direction. Memorials were given in to the 
Admiralty, mentioning captam Baillie's pub- 
lication, and praying redress; a court was 
called, and an enquiry directed. As to ai^ 
thing that could affect lord ^Sandwich, I, as 
coumd, might go as far, as to say, it would b« 
taking up uie time of the committee to aor 



885] respecting the Royal Hospital at Gretnmkh. A. D. 1778. |1^ 

purpose, because I thought that enquhy bad | ranged in fhe book; I myself arranged them ; 
not to do with my lord Sandwich. and I affirm, that of all the enquiries I ever 

By whom were you employed ? — ^By the so- 



licitor of the Hospital. I wish the House to 
permit me to say a few words on the subject. 
A book was laid before me, by the solicitor of 
the Hospital ; I was counsel in the complaint 
of the beef; and afler having examined into a 
variety of charges, and knowing the allega- 
tions about the meat were false, I being ac- 
^usinted with some of the gentlemen men- 
tiooed in that book, I thought the publication 
was malicious ; it was put into the hands of 
these gentlemen, and, I believe, into the 
haods of a lady of quality ; and they were 
advised to seek for redress. The motions 
were made in the court of King's-bench ; they 
were made at ail events before the committee 



({umes 
saw, none was ever conducted with more so- 
lemnity, justice, or impartiality. 

You say Mr. Adams gave great approbatioR 
of every thing done by Mr. Mylne; did you 
ever observe m Westminster-hall that archi- 
tects were willing to support architects .? ^I 

don't remember tSat they nave veiy warmly. 

Have you ever known Uiem find fkult with 
one another ? — ^I think I have. 

Did you go into the infirmary with the 
committee? — ^I did not go into the infirmary, 
nor do I believe the committee went ; butAn*^ 
Stuart, Mr. Mylne, and I think the physician 
and surgeon, and perhaps another person at- 
tending, made very full enquiry uito the man- 
ner in which the infirmary was. built; and 



deteimined; I had then a book laid before they said every thing was done that could be 
me by the Admiralty, directing an enquiry; ^ i— -i-- -i-^ii 
upon which I took a large folio Book; captain 
BuUie having arranged his matter according 
to bis own method, sometimes taking up one 
part, then another, I took and arranged the 
sevoal charges under the names of the per- 
sons charged { I arran^d all the matters 
against the directors, as directors ; I attended 
as ootmsel, not fw the diirectors, but the gen- 
tlemen concerned in that book; and, my 
lords, I do say, there never was an enquiry 
made with more solemnity, justice, and im- 
partiality ; all the chaiges captain Baillie had 
made in his book were taken one after ano- 
ther ; the charges were read, sometimes by the 
cbaiiiiian, sometimes by the clerk ; captain 
fiaillie was called upon to produce his evi^ 
dcncc to every part ot the charge ; there never 
vas an evidence offered by captun Baillie pro- 
per to the point in question ; Uiere never was 
a witness called by captaui Baillie to support 
the charges by legal evidence, that was refus- 
ed; but when captain Baillie could not make 
oot his charges, the eternal clamotu-was about 
bull beef and bad small beer. Captain Baillie 
^^pramised to be heard; and he was heard in 
every charge, but was not able to substantiate 
one piece of evidence against the gentlemen ; 
I told the g^tlemen for whom I was concern- 
ed, that if any of the charges should come out 
d{^8t them, I would never attend again; 
but I said 1 would not admit evidence that 
^as illegal ; when captain BaiUie had not es- 
tablisheo -his charges, they would sometimes 
ento' into a defence, before a charge was es- 
tablished; Mr. Adaons having gone through 
the most part of the Hospital, and inspected 
every thii^, he said, had he been clerk of the 
works, and been to advise, he should have ad- 
"vised to be done what had been done ; the 
coounittee went throu^ every part of the 
complaiBts ; they ezanuned the wards of the 
HosDitai; they examined the staurs; I donl 
recollect that there was a thing in the Hospi- 
tal that they did not examine, m>m the foun- 
dalioQ to the top of the Hospital, and even 
went out upon Uie roof, I myself attending 
Ibem ; thm was not a cb^e but was ar- 



done by the skill of man ; in fiict there was a 
place where some idle people had trundled 
their mops, and there was some damage done 
to the walls and the floor. 

Then vou made a mistake in saying they 
examined every place, and that you attended; 
you must except that } — ^I am very ready so 
to do. 

Whether the^ were desired to go to the in- 
firmary } — ^I believe not. 

Did they read the letters of complaints from 
the officers of the infirmary to Mr. Mylne ? — 
I don't recollect any evidence of complaints 
made by the officers to Mr. Mylne. 

This committee you say was carried on 
with the greatest oraer; do you recollect any 
case enquired into in any court of justice, 
where the plaintiff's matter was arranged into 
evidence by the counsel on the other side ?-— 
All the arrangement was putting the charge 
against every person under his name regu- 
larly, as captain Baillie had stated them; uie 
charge agunst Mr. Mylne tmder his name, 
and against every gentleman for whom I at- 
tended. 

Whether in your practice in Westminster- 
hall you ever knew that a complainant's 
complaint was ever arranged by the counsel 
oh the other side ? — I conceive no case ever 
came before a court of justice similar to this ; 
and I think it would be much to the advan- 
tage and ease of courts of justice to arrange 
the evidence on both sides : I have seen the 
judges at the Old-Bailey much at a loss in 
calling witnesses, because there was nobody 
to arrange them. 

Suppose Mr. Morgan was called upon as 
counsel on one side, and Mr. Dimning on the 
other, would Mr. Morgan advise that Mr. 
Dunning should arrange his client's evidence ? 
— Certainly not. 

Suppose an enquiry into the conduct of 
Greenwich Hospital, would Mr. Morgan ad- 
vise his client to submit his case, to be ar- 
ranged into evidence by the counsel on the 
.other side ? — Certainly not ; but I submitted 
it to the directors. 

If you had been counsel for captam BaiUioi 



18 GJBORGE IIL The Can i^Captmn Thcmas BaUUe, [888 

down what he had said ; and the clerk said 
he set down nothine but what he was direct^ 
cd } — Much was said that was not proper evi- 
dence ; and I directed what was evidence to 
be set down, and not what was not legal tevv 
dence. . ** 

Do you recollect the circumstance of the 
witness savins; that he had given evidence 
of a man that nad not been at sea^ and it was 
not put down ? — I don't recollect Uiat. 

Tnere was mention made that some person 
offered in evidence at the court, that a person 
had not been at sea ; captain Baillie observed, 
when he came to hear it a^ain, that that was 
not set down ? — There might be an observe^ 
tion of that kind ; but whether an officer had 
been at sea or no, was not a part of the en- 
({uiry before the committee, and I might ob- 
ject to it. 

Was there any evidence (that landmen had 

{)laces in the Hospital) objected to? — Thut 
andmen had places in the. Hospital was a 
subject of complaint in captain Baillie's book; 
but this enquiry was directed on the conduct 
of individuals and the conduct of the di- 
rectors, and not whether landmen were in the 
Hospital. 

From whence did you take the business of 
the court of enquiry to arise ? — From the com- 
plaints made ; I understood a memorbd. came 
from Mr. Stuart, Mr. Cooke, Mr. MyLae, and 
others, to the Admiral^, saying, that captaia 
Baillie had published a book impeaching their 
conduct, and befl^^ng an enquiry might be set 
on foot, and their conduct examined into; 
that the council of the house, whose conduct 
was called in question, had likewise sent up 
to the Admiralty a memorial, requesting the 
same enquiry respecting them. I believe 
those two memorials, and those only, were 
the foundation of that enquiry. 

Did Mr. Morgan never liappen to read the 
order by which the committee was appcHUted ? 
— ^I beheve I did. 

Do you recollect the substance of the order ? 
— ^I do not. 

Have you been directinjg the manner of 
proceedings, without knowmg the substance 
of the order ? — If I read the oraer, it cannot be 
supposed I could advise Uie committee to pass 
over any subject they ou^ht to enquire into ; 
I desired they should go mto every enquiry 
thejr could l^ally go into, on that order ; aa I 
originally said, complaints came to the AdhoK 
ralty, and an enquiry was directed ; and, I 
apprehend, the committee had no right to en- 
amre into any thing, but only what respeded 
the persons making the complaiDt. 

Do you understud, that the grounds of it 
was the complaint agunst ca|&in BaiUief 
You don't mead the matter of which he com- 
plains ? — ^The House is examining me to an 
order that I have not read many months^ that 
I have no remembrance of; my jiidf^nent 
was, that they had no right to make anyotber 
enquiry than what th^ did. 

Then, 1 think, you my, the committee coo- 



187] 

would you have advised him to have it 
ranged by the counsel on the other ' side ? — 
Suppose I was counsel on the other side, and 
the counsel for jny clients had arranged the 
evidence as I did, I would have looked at the 
arrangement, but would not have <A)jected to 
it Captain Baillie was shewn the names, 
and the order of Ule persons, and told, the 
chaises are taken from your own book. 

WheUier if you had been counsel for cap- 
tain Baillie, you would have thought justice 
had been done him, if the counsel on the 
other side had arranged his accusation con- 
irary to his opinion? — If the counsel on the 
other side had arranged the charges in such a 
manner that the end of the enquiry could not 
be obtained, I should object to it. 

You directed the rules against captain Bail- 
lie va Westminster-hall ? — Yes. 

The event was not lucky, I believe, to your 
clients } — ^The rule was discharged with costs ; 
it came out that no books were delivered but 
to the governors and commissioners. 

You were employed by individual*— Whom? 
— ^The solicitor of the Hospital employed me 

fenerally ; when I came to look into the book, 
took the names of the individuals, and con-' 
sidered myself as their counsel. 

With regard to the practice of courts, did 
Mr. Morsan ever know any courts of justice 
that shoiud make a report when no one of the 
members attended every day? — I am glad I 
am reminded of that circumstance ; it is said 
we attended seven days ; I think Mr. Cust 
attended six out of the seven days. There was 
not a piece of evidence ^iven (and I will bee 
to say the committee received evidence, which 
I knew not to be legal evidence agsdnst my 
clients, which I did not object to, knowins the 
uprightness of their intentions ;) no evidence 
was given, but what was put down, and it was 
read over to the witness, smd he was not per- 
mitted to go out till it stood in his own words. 

Whether you ever knew a court of justice 
or enquiry making a renort where no one 
member attended every day? — My lords, the 
king's justices have given their opinion in a 
case where the rest of the judges haa not heard 
all the argument; but it has been delivered 
to thein trom the other judges. 

It has been mentioned that Mr. Cust should 
say that captain Baillie should be heard at the 
end of the enquiry ? — I believe I can explain 
that observation ; when we were enquiring in 
a charge against Mr. Stuart, he would be talk- 
ing of the charge against Mr. Cooke ; it was 
said, do be so kind to keep to the point before 
the committee; we will hear you to that 
char ft when we come to his case. 

Did you hear captain Baillie at the end of 
the enquiry, when he desired to be heard? — 
J believe he did reauire to be heard sev^al 
times at the end, out it was to charges that 
they had done with, and made their resolution. 

As every thing was set down in the words 
of the witnesses, did it not appear that one 
witoess stated that you had omitted to set 



239] retpeciing the Royal Hospital at Greentoich. A. D. 1778. 



[290 



ducted themselves right ; I ask, in particular, 

whether if the order was to enouire into the 
{;rouDds-of the complaint made hy captain 
BiilHe, whether it was not to enquire into the 
principal points? — I should think not; the 
compkint was by persons who complained of 
being attacked by captain Baillie. ^ 

If the order of the committee had been to 
enquire into matters of complaints, of par- 
ticular persons, you might be right ; but the 
order was gpnerail ; do you recollect that ? — If 
Tou axe asking my judgment, I apprehend the 
lords of the Amnuulty had not a right to 
order a conunitt^ to enquire into that matter. 

But suppose they did, whether it was right 
or no f— Then I don't think the committee 
had power to enquire into it. I said before, 
there were two memorials came up to the 
Admiralty; the body of the directors were 
reflected on ; there were two bodies ; one of 
the bodies contained some of the directors ; 
ail the charges respecting the directors, I be- 
Here, were arranged and enquired into.* 

Where would nave been tne illegality of it, 
if the court had enquired into and reported, 
that according to the charter, no persons but 
aea&ring men had a right to such and such 
employments? — ^I apprehend two answers 
nay tie given to it, that the appointment of 
knamen is rieht^ according to the charter; 
and if they haa given an authority to a com- 
n^ttee to enquire into it, they would have eh- 
qmred into a nugatory act. 

It is not what the committee had a right to 
doL but what they were ordered to do ? — My 
judgment then was, and now is, that what- 
ever the board of Admiralty directed to en- 
quire into, ihe app<nntment of landmen would 
have been an improper direction; and my 
opinba is, they had not a power to enquire 
intoit 

If the Admirahv had given an order, would 
they not have haid power? — ^I apprehcsod not 

Boat you recollect the order? — ^No, I do 
nyt; I ulDulerstood that the memorials sent to 
the AdauraJty were read, and when the com- 
mittee was appointed, the substance of the 
complaint, mentioning those who had com- 
pbi&edy was meatkmed in the order; and 
these persons were appointed to enquire. 

The following resolution of the general 
court, of the 14th of April, 1778, read by Jdr. 
Moi^: << Resolved^ Thai a committee be 
appointed to enquire mto the grounds of the 
Kveral charees contained in captain BaiUie's 
hook.'' While I am reading ttie ord^r, the 
Bouse will ftrnut me to obt^rve, that I con- 
flder these wofds, ^ the several charges con^ 
^led in captain Baillie's book,'' to be a rela^ 
tive^and the antecedoit to be the two me^ 
aunab sent up to the Admiralty. 

Do tmi mean the chaiged agamst captain 
wlis f— I meant no such thuag, in the evi^ 



* TWehtinMa of tin oonBiillM;«id or 

MMi *Mtr Boae of the ohufaa agsinir tN dirao- 
t«tw«iaM|aiN4iirto. Otig^MHU , 

VOL XXL 



dence; complaints came to the Admiralty, 
from certain specific persons ; they say charges 
are made a^iinst tnem in captain Baillie*» 
book ; the order is, to enquire into charges ; 
what charges ? The charges against the per- 
sons complaining ; and, at their particular re- 
quest, this committee was established ; not to 
enquire if lord Sandwich put landmen into 
the office, but the charges against those men; 
we beg you will direct an enquiry into the 
charges made against us. 

Is there any word said of that in the order ? 
— That is my judgment. 

Do you understand the order? — ^I thought 
I did. 

You do now? — ^I think I do. ♦ 

Does that order say any thing about your . 
judgment or memorials delivered to the Ad« 
miralty ? — ^That I cannot tell, that memorials 
are mentioned. [Reads the order again tl 
<< Resolved, That a committee be appointed 
tOu enquire into the grounds of the several 
charges contained in captain Baillie's book.*' 

" The several complaints ;** those are the 
words you rested upon ? — I did. 

Does the several complaints mean the se- 
veral charges containeci in captain Baillie's 
book? — ^I understand Uie complaints; the 
complaints of those that appliea to the Ad- 
mirsdty. 

Do you understand the several charges in 
captain Baillie*s book to mean all the charges ; 
or that it means partial charges, to be inter- 
preted by you ? — In this j^ace, I understand, 
It only means the charges made against the 
persons complaining to the Admiralty, on 
this occasion ; I conceive, under different cir- 
cumstances, different constructions may be 
put upon the same words ; if the order was 
made by this House, I should . suppose the 
words would mean the charges in general ; 
but in an order from the A&iralty, not un- 
derstanding the law, they meant only the 
charges against the persons complaining. 

Then it was a mistake in the Admiralty ? — 
No ; I think there was no mistake^ 

What then; was it ignorance ?— -Neither 
mistake nor ignorance ; I think the words ex* 
tremely improper ; and think the committee 
would have oone very wrong, to enter into 
any other inquiry than they did. 

You talk of your clients;* do you mean 
those who sat at the committee ? — Certainly 
not. 

.Whether you were the counsel employed, 
with regard to the first prosecution against 
captain Baillie, at Westnunster-hall ?— 3 was 
in that : I advised a motion and information; 

In what year and month was it you advised 
the carryiin on this prosecution ? — ^I don't re- 
membor; I believe the application was made 
to the court of King's-b^h, soon after the 
book came out. [Mr. Morgan withdrew.] 

Mr. Ibbetton called in. 

I want to have the report of the committee ; 
by what wims is il signed?— By Mr, Oust 
U 



S91] 



IS GEORGE III. The Case of Captain Thomas BaOUe^ [392 



and Mr. Barker, who acted as chairmen of 
the committee, with their names only. [The 
report was produced.] 

[Mr. Ibbetson withdrew.] 
Adjourned to Monday week. 



Monday, May 3, 1779. 

JLieutenant Gordon, First Lieutenant of the 
Hospital, called in. 

Had the rev. Mr. Cooke any conversation 
with you ? — ^The answer I must give is this, 
that the rev. Mr. Cooke came to my apart- 
ment o;i Thursday the 25th of March, 1778, 
and informed me, that there was a book 
printed, which was rather defamatory to the 
officers of the royal foundation and the navy. 
My lords, I begged leave to give him for an- 
swer, that I could say nothing to it. It was 
the first of my receiving the intelligence of 
any such book, and therefore could give no 
answer to it; he told me further, that there 
was an intention to form a memorial against 
the lieutenant governor of the house, which I 
told him, I thought was not right; I there- 
fore told him further, I could say nothing to 
the book, until such time as I had seen it and 
read it, and read what the book narrated to : 
this was my answer ; he said, that he, and 
' some more of the officers, proposed to present 
a memorial against the late lieutenant gover- 
nor (captain Sailhe) of the' house : 1 told him 
I thousnt he did wron^ ; I should certainlv, 
when f came to hear it, if it did not coincide 
with my opinion, I should give my negative 
to it; this was my answer, and my positive 
answer. 

Whether Mr. Cooke represented that book 
as injurious to lord Sandwich, and to the 
paval officers of the Hospital ? — He did repre- 
sent it as iniurious to the first noble lord of 
the Admiralty, and as injurious to the naval 
officers ; this upon my oam I declare. 

Did you ask Mr. Cooke to shew you that 
book ? — ^I did, and he positively denied it ; he 
had a letter in his hand, and wrapped it round 
his finder ; he said, he had it from the noble 
lord, the first lord of the Admiralty ; I begged 
the fJEtvour to see it ; he said he could not let 
me see it. 

Were you solicited to join in complaint 
•gainst the book, at the same time that Mr. 
Cooke refused to shew you the book ? — I was 
solicited; I told him I woukl do no such 
thing ; I thought it rather a nugatory and de- 
^unatoiy thing, with remd to the aeoond 
officer commanding that Royal Hospital. 

Did Mr. Cooke make use of any means to 
induce you to come into his proposals of sisn- 
ing this? — ^He did solicit me to come into nis 
oropoaals, and I absolutely refused it; I told 
him 1 thoug^ht it a wrong method, mA. wrong 
system in him, as a clergyman, to promote 
such a thing to be introduced against a second, 
•nd chief commanding officer at the time. 
. Did he say any tmng of captain fiaillie's 



having any intention of turning ^ou out of 
your apartments? — He did mention such a 
thing, out I told him I did not believe it, be- 
cause I had never seen the book, nor knew 
nothing of what the book contained. 

With what view did it appear to you, that 
^r. Cooke did mention to you, that captain 
Baillie had intended to turn you out of your 
apartments ? — lie told me it was to make 
room for more wards for the pensioners ; I 
said, Mr. Cooke, in regard to that, I have 
nothing to say ; whatever the lords conunis^ 
sionersof the Admiralty's pleasure is, I, as an 
officer in that house, must comoly with. 

Did Mr. Cooke say he had oeen round to 
all the officers, to complain against captain 
Baiilie ? — Yes ; excepting obtain Allwri^ht, 
lieutenant Lefevre, lieutenant Kerr, and heu- 
tenant Ansell. 

Wheti the complaint was proposed at the 
council, did you sign it or object to it ? — ^I ob- 
jected positively to it, and I said, it was a 
wrong system and method in them to crimi- 
nate a commanding officer, without any just 
offence ; I told them all so at the time. 

By whom vras the book produced ? — Bjr 



captain Maplesden, the now lieutenant go«- 

of 3ie 
house. 



s — 1 » 

vemor, who was then first ^^p»«m 



Was the complaint made an act of council 
of the house, or made an entry in the minute 
book? — I ODJected to it; they proposed to 
make it a minute of council^ but Mr. Cooke 
the night before said, that it should not be 
made an act of council, but brought in afVer 
the council was over ; I told him at the same 
time, Sir, I think you are wrong, you are to 
do as you please. 

Was any attempt made to put captain 

Baillie out of the chair at the council ? — -Yes ; 

Mr. Godby, the steward, and the rev. Mr. 

j Maule, second chaplain, made the attempt to 

• put him out of the chair ; I opposed it with 

I all my might and main, nobody else seconded 

it, therefore it dropped. 

1 Was that seconded by any of the aava) 
officers ? — ^Not one. 

Is there any party or faction of Um^lna^tf 
existing in the council of the Hospital? — A 
very great faction and party ; may I presume 
to mention them ? 

Certainly. — ^In the first place, John Ibbet* 
son, secretary to the board of directors, and a 
clerk of the Admiralty ; there is John Cooke» 
the first chaplain, John Godby, the steward, 
and the rev. John Maule the second chaplain, 
Francis Cook, the deputy 8ecretaiy,and many 
others of the land faction. 

Do you observe that these gentlemen act 
together, and in opposition to what comes 
from the naval d^Nurtment? — ^I do ofW. 

Do you constantly attend the council ? — ^I 
do not ; the reason is, there is such a land 
faction got into the council now, whenever 
they have any point to carry, they take care 
to have fdl their friends there ; and it is ous* 
ternary, my lords^ .in that council, tba4 the 



S9S) relucting ^ Royal Ho^nioi oi Gremnich. A. D. 1778. 



[394 



JDoioroflicen) as at comrts martial, give their 

voice first; myreasofn for not attemling the 

eooDcil is, hecnise ^at land faction makes a 

party; and let all the naval department do 

what thej please, they over-rule us. 
Has captain Bailhe appeared a friend to the 

aaval establishment?— There never was a 
fctfaer of a family more tender of pensioners 
than he has been. 

Has he acted with diligence and propriety 
m his office as lieutenant governor ? — ^Aiways 
SDte I had the honour to be in the council, 
viyi great diligence and propriety, and as a 
figilaiit active officer. 

Are the men's shoes and stockings ade- 
(joate to the purpose of three pair to last two 
years ?— They are not adequate to the appoint- 
nient. 

Have you read captain Bullie's book? — 
No, I have not ; I have never seen it. 

Whether in the coimcil of the house the 
fflifitaiy officers out-number what you call 
theftcbon, or whether the^ do not? — ^They 
do out-number the land faction, but the huid 
Action woriE over the military officers to 
their side of the question. 

Are there more military officers in -the 
council of the house than land officers ? — 
There are more military than land, but the 
hod officers of late have got such a superin-^ 
Vsukujj that they over-rule all the military 
oioers, for we are thought nothing of in the 
bouse, but the land officers. 

If the military officers attended, would not 
diey out-vote the land faction ? — I don't know 
that they would. 

How nuuoy military officers are there of the 
ttwncil?— Tlic governor, lieutenant governor, 
four captains, and eight lieutenants ; these 
are all the military officers that I know of^ 
the rest are all land officers. 

How many are there of the civil interest; 
what YOU call the land faction? — The secre- 
tary of the board of directors, two chaplains, 
the ste?rard, and several others of the land 
Action. 

Go on to name them all ; you have named 
but four.— The clerk of the cheque has, I be- 
Here, been a seafiuing man ; and then^ is the 
physkian, he is of the council, a civil officer ; 
the auditor is likewise a civil officer ; he is of 
the council. 

Is the clerk of the cheque of the council ? 
—No, he is not. 

There are fourteen of the council, if I un- 
derstand you right, that are military officers ? 
—I cannot charge my memory exactly. 

You have named fourteen. — ^I named the 
g^emor, lieutenant governor, four captains, 
>ad eight lieutenants. 

They are fourteen military officers; who 
vt there that are not milit^ officers, that 
y o f the council? — ^Mn Godby one, the 
J"P»aid ; Mr. Ibbetson two ; Mr. Cooke, the 
Wl claplain, three ; Mr. Maule, the second 
^^hapbm, four; the auditor five. Theysocon- 
wve it when they have any method to cacry . 



Go on to mention the names ; is the clerk 
of the cheque of the council? — ^No. 

There are in the council, 14 military officers, 
and five of the land faction ; how is it possi- 
ble then, that the land faction should prepon-- 
derate in council, if the military officers would 
attend ? — Because the land gentry, as I call 
them, that is what is called the civil interests, 
but I know no such interests at Greenwich 
Hospital, nor ever understood there was any 
such interest at Greenwich Hospital, as a civil 
interest ; that, by their party and faction, they 
cajole the naval officers over to their side. 

That is to say, the land faction, with their 
friends, carry every thing. — They do. 

Is it looked upon in Greenwich Hospital, 
that an officer is most likely to get preferment 
by siding with the naval officers, or the land 
faction ? — ^I believe with the land faction ; be- 
cause they carry so much weight with the 
noble lord who presides so much at the Ad- 
miralty board ; there they have great weight. 

The Earl of Sandwich, What reason have 
you to suppose, that any of those gentlemen 
carry great weight with the first lord of the 
Admiralty ; do you know any thing of that, 
of your own knowledgie ? I oesire you to an- 
swer that question, upon your oath. Do you 
know, of your own knowledge, whether any 
of the land &ction of the council, have ai^y 
influence with the first lord of the Admiralty ? 
— I cannot say, upon.my oath, that I can say 
so ; but I have often heard it said so. I can* 
not say, I know it of my own knowledge ; 
but I luLve oflen heard it said so ; and, by the 
manoeuvres that have been made in the house, 
I do think it is so. 

Do you think it is so imagined in the 
houise? — ^It is so imagined in the house; 
greaUy so. [Lieutenant Gordon withdrew.] 

William Gough called in. 

What is your station in Greenwich Hos« 
pitai? — I ma a boatswain there some time 
ago. 

What are you now ? — A common pensioner. 

What is the reason that you were a boat- 
swain before, and are now no longer so? — ^At 
a committee held at Greenwich Hospital some 
time ago, T was sent fi^r there by lieutenant- 
governor Baillie, to answer some questions 
which might be asked me ; in waiting on the 
outside, I saw a brother pensioner there, very 
officious in taking his hat off every five or six 
minutes to people that passed and repassed ; 
in a free way, I said^ " If I was in his place, 
I would not take off my hat so often to every 
gentleman, for no jgentleman required a poor 
man to take off his hat^ but at his first ap- 
proaching, or while talking to him.'' A pub- 
lican, that was standing by, went and ac- 
quainted the rev. Mr. Ck)oke of what passed ; 
he came, beckoned with his finger " You. 
you.*' I asked him If he meant me ? He sua 
he did ; we withdrew a little way firom the 
place; he said, << I understand vou have 
spokoi some disrespectful words of me.'* I 



295] 



1 8 GEORGE III. The Case of Captain Thmas BaOke, [296 



said, I did not. Said he, « What did you say 
to such a man {" (one White). I said, I told 
him if I was in his place, I would not take off 
my hat so often to any body as he did. He 
said, ^ I was an impudent old scoundrel, and 
was guUty of faults.'^ And that was what I 
was dismissed for. 

What happened in consequence of this? 
Who were you brousht before? — At six o'clock 
the same evening, I was sent for before cap- 
tain Chads, the captain of the week, and 
this White, and one Herbert, a publican ; they 
^vere there as witnesses to what I had said ; I 
was ordered to be put upon the complaint- 
book for being disooedient to the rev. Mr. 
Cooke, and the Friday following I was dis- 
missed irom my bread. 

By whom ? — ^The council. 

What enquiry did the council make into 
this business? — They made no further en- 
quiry than heard wfciat was laid against me, 
upon the complaint. 

Did you state to them, that you had sadd 
not'hinjg more than this? — I said no more than 
that; but I meant no harm nor disrespect to 
any gentleman whatever. 
. \Vas nothing more than that stated against 
you ? — Not to my knowledge. 

How long had you been at sea? — Forty 
years; twenty-eight years in his majesty's 
service. 

Have you been in any engs^ements ? — Yes ; 
in May and October engagements, 1747, with 
commissioner Hanway; he was a captain 
-then; aiid I was at the taking of Thurot, at 
Carrickfergus, on the North of Ireland, and 
the Courageux ; I was in the Brilliant frigate 
at that titne^ and have been at sea ever since, 
till I came into Greenwich Hospital. 

Is there any nuisance in your ward at Green- 
wich Hospital ? — There was a nuisance, it is 
there I suppose still, that proceeded ^m a 
pipe that was laid down from the top of the 
nouse, into a pipe that was erected to lead 
the rain water into the common sewer ; and, 
through the means of a pipe being laid into 
it, from one of the officer's apartments, it oc- 
casioned a nuisance there. 
' Has captain Baillie supported the rights of 
the pensioners ? Is he a friend to the pen- 
sioners ?>^No man can be more a fnend to 
them, as far as I see, than what he has been. 

What ward do you belong to at present ? — 
The Namur ward at present. 

Is the pipe offensive in the Namur ward ? 
— ^No ; in the Jennings ward, when I was a 
boatswain in that place. 

Which ward is the pipe a nuisance to? — 
To the Jennings ward, and the Royal George 
Jlikewise ; it lays down through both. 

[William Gough withdrew.] 

Alexander Moore called in. 

What employment have you in Greenwich 
Hospital ? — Cook, in one part of the Hospital, 
lit present. . 
i \Yere.you the person tliat made the first 



discovery about the pensioners being served 
with bull beef? — ^Yes, I was. 

Did you take much pains to discover that 
fraud ? — Yes, a great d«d. 

In what way? — I often spoke to the 
butcher's men to stop it; and niade enquiries 
«what the contract was for the meat, as it was 
bad from September to June. I then went 
to Captain Baillie, and enquired about the 
contract for the meat, finding it to go on in 
so bad proceedings ; he said the contract was 
for good fat ox beef and wether mutton. 
After I had stopped the proceedings of it on 
the first of June, as I observed to your lord- 
ships, when 1 had the honour to be at your 
lordships* bar some time ago, I was entreated 
by several of the officers to deny there had 
been bull beef in the Hospital ; and after that, 
the steward went to the governor, on the ISth 
of June, 1775, on purpose to get the governor 
to threaten to stop the proceedings. I went 
to the governor, sir Charles Hardy ; he took 
me into the parlour^ he said he found 1 had 
known the meat -to be bad some time ; I said 
it had been bad ever since I had been in the 
Hospital ; he said I did not act the part of an 
honest man, not to inform the House before ; 
I told him I did not know any thing what the 
contract was, but as soon as I did kaow what 
it was, I discovered it ; he asked me who told 
me a^ut the contract, I said the lieutenant- 
governor; I said there were no instructions 
for me in my office ; he then gave me ill lan- 
guage; he said he would discharge me from 
the office, for being a busy fellow^ I said it 
would be hard for my fiimily, if he did any 
thing of the kind. Coming through the pas- 
sage I made an excuse ; I told his honour I 
should be glad if he excused me from any 
duty of that kind ; he then said, I must tea 
the steward and clerk of the check, and take 
(iare of myself, for I should not be long there. 
I made application tothe lords of the Admi- 
ralty on benalfof myself and family; I have 
a copy of the letter in my {Kjcket; lord Sand- 
wich bid me make myself easy, and |things 
should be enquired into ; I apprehend, if csu>. 
tain Baillie had not taken tne, very steps he 
did, that there never would have been a pro- 
secution against the butcher, or any thing 
else; it seemcxi that party in the Hospital 
were carrying on such proceedings, and would 
to this day. I was employed by the solicitor 
of the house for two years, on purpose to 
bring the contractor to trial ; I took all the 
pains I could ; I believe in two years, I went 
near 3,000 miles upon account of it. 

Did sir Charles Hardy reprimand you, and 
tell you, you woidd be dismissed, if you did 
not take care of yourself, for being or not 
being a busy fellow ?-^For being a busy ^- 
low, and troubling myself about the butcher'* 
meat ; those were the very words. 

Had you any • conversation with the rev. 
Mr. Cooke upon this subject? — ^In August, 
I think, 1777, I had been in great distress, 
the ^liciter of the house had told me, I must 



93T] respecting tie Royal Hospital at GreenbAch. A. D. 1778. 



[298 



find money for my expcnces, he could not 

g've me any money : it would be called 
ibery^ but when the trial was over I should 
be paid. I had a family ; I made applications; 
I eot naoney, and bore all ray own expeiices ; 
when the first trial was over, the solicitor paid 
me 10 out of 19/. I applied to the board 
for money ; I was distressed and troubled se- 
veral times by the people I borrowed the mo- 
ney of; I got no redress. About the 14th of 
August, 1777, 1 happened to meet Mr. Ibbet- 
son upon the walks ; I asked him in what 
method I was to apply to get my money ; he 
was upon that account affronted. About the 
15th, the rev. Mr. Cooke sent for me. and said 
I had affronted Mr. Ibbetson; and if I did 
not go and ask his pardon, I should get no 
recompence at a:ll ; I did go. In the course 
of the discourse, Mr. Cooke happened to say, 
that Mr. Baillie had been a, very troublesome 
fidlow in the Hospital, and he himself had 
taken care tliat he had lost his best friend, 
and he might get him as he could, mentioning 
lord Sandwich. 

Were your bills of expences ever paid you ? 
—Not all. 

How much did the whole amount to ? — For 
the two years to about 45/. 
. Had not you a bill of .19/. paid you ? Did 
you never receive any thine by way of re- 
wwd? — I had 10/. paid me, iSler I had made 
an affidavit before justice Russell, a justice 
of the peace. [Alexander Moore withdrew.] 

Mr. Cust called in. 

Whether you were present at the meeting 
of the general court of Greenwich HospitaH 
(the first meeting I think it was) that ordered 
the odurt of enqmry in last spring ; in April 
I think it was? — ^Upon my word, I don't 
know; )S I knew what business was done 
at the meeting, I could tell whether I- was 
there. 

When the court of enquiry was ordered ? — I 
believe I was at that general court 

Whether you were not the person that 
made a motion there, in order for a committee 
to enquire into the several charges contained 
in captain Bflillie's printed Case, concerning 
Greenwich Hospital ? — Yes, I was. 

What did you propose by that motion, and 
understand to be the purport of that order? — 
I understood the purport of that order to be to 
enquire into all the cnarges contained in Mr. 
]^i}lie*s book ; and I' understood that those 
charges consisted of three parts, as they ap- 
peared to me upon reading over Mr. Baillie*s 
book ; the first part was s3>uses in the Hospi- 
tal, from three to ten years, that had a great 
many of them been remedied ; the second 
was abuses subsisting in the Hospital, that 
Mr. Baillie thought wanted a remedy; and 
the third was, what appeared to me, on read- 
ing over the book, libels against the directors, 
and the several officers of the house ; and as 
the court of enquiry was founded upon peti- 
IkxDS presented by the Erectors, and the se- 



veral officers of the house complaining that 
their characters were uniustly attacked, I did 
think, when we had the honour to be appoint- 
ed the committee, that it was our duty, first 
to go and examine into those charges relative 
to the officers of the house ; because, in re- 
spect to the directors, Mr. Baillie protested 
against the committee, and I thought very 
properly,' for sitting upon charges in which 
they themselves were concerned; and there- 
fore I did not think we were competent to go 
into chaises in which the directors were con- 
cerned; m consequence of this, before we - 
went into the enqmry, Mr. Morgan, the coun- 
sel, called upon me, to know \t\ had any ob- 
jection to his being counsel to the several 
parties that had presented petitions to the Ad- 
miralty ; I told him I had not ; and I told 
him I thought the plan would be, for us to 
take out of Mr. Baillie's book all the charges ; 
what I call the libellous charges first, against 
the officers of the house, and examine into 
them first, and desired he would put them 
down ; he did accordingly put them down in 
a book, and he ^ve me a copy ; I compared 
it with Mr. Bailne's book, in tne best manner 
I could, and it appeared to me, that the several 
charges that related to those parts of the con- 
duct of the officers, were veiy fairly put down ; 
and when we met Mr. Baillie the first time, 
I told him the mode in which we intended to 
proceed ; he objected in general to the mode, 
as he had done before. He objected, that we 
were improper people to enquire; I told him, 
I thought, with respect to the several officers, 
that we were very impartial, and competent 
to enquire into it, ana that was the mode we 
determined to proceed in ; if he chose it, he 
might produce his evidence ; we should call 
upon him to support his charges^ then we 
should calLup the other persons, to shew that 
the charges were not true ; this was the mode 
we had pointed out. 

Were not the persons named to form the 
committee all directors ? — They were" all di- 
rectors, because there was something that ap- 
peared to me very fur in the proposal ; and 
I did not know indeed who could oe the per- 
sons to be named, because I had no idea^ that 
the general court of commissioners, consisting 
of the great officers of state, if they had been 
proposed, I had no idea they would attend 
to this enquiry ; when that matter was pro- 
posed, I was at the Admiralty, at the general 
court ; the first lord called upon Mr. Baillie ; 
he said, Mr. Baillie, you have in your book 
said, that there are a great many men of re- 
putation, wealth, and honour, that attend 
of\en at the board ;* will you point them out, 
because if you will, I shall- move this court, 
that they be the persons that shall make this 
enquiry. Mr. Baillie refused to do that ; then 

* The words in captain Baillie** book are, '* Men 
of worth and honor do aometimes attend the board ;" 
bat he' has never said they were snflBcient in number 
to constitute a oonrt (Mg* lScift« 



»9J 



18 GEORGE IIL The Case of Captain Thomas BaUUe, [90(T 



the committiee was appcdnted, leaving out all 
those persons against whom Mr. Baulie had 
made the particular charges. 

Did you name the committee? — ^I did not. 

Who then did ? — The red book* was called 
for by the first lord of the Admiralty, who 
read the names of the directors, and sud he 
was of opinion, to form a committee out of 
the directors; we will exclude those that can- 
not attend, and those that are particularly 
charged in Mr. Baillie's book; and as the 
names were read, the rev. Mr. Cooke being 
particularly charged, he therefore was not 
one ; then severafadmirals and captains that 
were at sea, they were left out ; the only peo- 
ple that could be aflerwards found, were the 
seven or eight that were left for the en- 
quiry ; if there were none others, how could 
capt. Baillie chuse his men ? Mr. Fonnereau 
declined afterwards, he said his health would 
not permit. 

Then were the persons that formed this 
committee named by the earl of Sandwich? — 
My lord Sandwich said, I think, my opinion 
is, the book should be called for, containing 
the names of the directors ; and those that 
cannot attend should be left out ; and those 
against whom there are particular charges 
should be left out ; and the rest should be me 
committee ; and the general court agreed to it. 

Was the committee so pointed out by the 
directions of lord Sandwicn ? — ^It was the ge- 
neral court did it. 

Did lord Sandwich point out to the general 
court the persons to be of that committee ?— * 
Yes, I think he did. , 

Were you chairman of that committee ? — 
Yes, I was. When I say I was chairman, I 
was chairman for the time I could attend ; I 
attended from the 18th of April to the 8th of 
June ; we had six or seven meetings in that 
time ; I think I went into LancaSiire ; the 
committee met afterwards, and then appoint^ 
another chairman. 

For how many days were you chairman?— 
I believe six or seven times ; but the report 
will shew it ; because it is Uiere particularly 
marked. 

Whom did you look upon, in that enquiry, 
to be the plaintiff, and wno the defendant? — I 
don't know whetner I can answer that ques- 
tion, not being a Judge of law ; but it was an 
enj^uiry, I conceive. I will shew your lord- 
siiips the mode we endeavoured to go on 
with ; it was this ; these charges being so set 
down, we took Mr. Baillie's book, and we 
read a charge; the first charge, for instance, 
against the surveyor was, f " Uiat he had built 

* Court Register. 

t The words of oapL Bftillie's book are, "Hie 
arehiteet of tJie new infirmery, who, instead of eon- 
•tamcting it as originally intended, principally for 
tJie sick aad helpless pensioners, bnill it rather as a 
palaoe for olBcers than an infirmary for siok ; the aa- 
tnial ooBseqnenoe of which is, that there is not room 
raHcient for the belplesi men.' Orig, Edit^ 



an infirmary as a palace for officers;" wo 
called upon Mr. Baillie to prove this charge^ 
and then called upon the surveyor to give an 
answer to the charge; that is the way we 
proceeded ; I did not know that there was a 
plaintiff or defendant in the case ; the com- 
mittee were summoned to enquire into the 
charges contained in Mr. BaiUie's book; tl|e 
officers, bavins oresented the petition, may 
be properly callea the complainants, and Mr. 
Baulie the defendant ; we called upon Mr. 
Baillie to give proof in his book of that fact * 
and then upon t;he others ; to shew whether 
they were ^Ity of it or not ', that was the 
mode in which we proceeded. 

I think you say they called upon captain 
Baillie to prove his book ; in that respect, he 
was the complainant : at another time, vou 
say they called upon the gentlemen who had 
complained, as complainants? — ^We read a 
charge in the book, and having read that 
charge, we called upon Mr. Baillie to ^ve his 
proof of that chai^ which Mr. Baillie, in 
some cases, did ; in some cases he did not ; 
then we called upon the person charged, to 
shew that it was not true ; and when we had 
done that, and had examined through the 
whole of the charges against this man, then 
we desired the court to retire, and the com- 
mittee, among themselves, while it was fresh 
in their memory, came to a resolution, whe^ 
ther they thought the charges well founded 
or not. 

Was any counsel permitted to attend? — 
Mr. Morgan attendee ; Mr. Baillie first ob- 
jected violently against counsel ; I told him 
that the gentlemen charsed thought it right 
to have counsel, and that He might nave coun^ 
sel if he pleased ; I think his answer was, he 
could not afford to pay for it ; but he des^r^ 
he might have a firiend ; we said he might ; 
he did produce a gentleman, a Mr. Cowley, I 
thought a moderate, sensible man ; I thought 
him, then, a gentleman of the law, by his abi- 
lity in the business ; but since understand he 
was not. 

Then Mr. Cowley was permitted to assist 
Mr. Baillie, in the same manner as Mr. Mor- 
gan assisted the others ? — Yes. 

Were any motions made by Mr. Cowley, in 
consequence of his being looked upon as 
counsel, and as a friend for capt. Baillie ? Did 
he make any motions to ask any questions ? 
—Several times; I wish he had asked more ; 
for - Mr. Baillie was very troublesome in the 
committee, and, at some times, behaved so 
rude, I thought the committee- would not go 
on : I appealed to Mr. Cowlev as a moderate 
man, and said, you are brought here to assist 
Mr. Bullie ; I wish he would let yon go on ; 
you understand the matter ; we slyall go on 
with greater ease ; but Mr. Baillie woum not 
permit that; he took upon himself to exsi- 
mine the witnesses ; and would not let Mr. 
Cowley go on. 

Whether Mr. Morgan did not arrange the 
manner in which captain BaiUie^s com^aini* 



501] mpeding the Royd HoipHal at Greemonch. A. D. 177S. 



[308. 



were to be examined? — ^Yes; but it was aft 
my request. 

Bid not Mr. Baillie object to Mr. Morgan's 
arrangement? — Yes; and said, I think, that 
we ought to go on with the enquiry, beginning 
bis book, and reading it through ; I think I 
told him, but I cannot be answerable for 
efery word so long ago, I told him, Mr. Bail- 
lie, you have, by a letter you have presented 
to the court, (for he had presented a letter, in 
which he objected to the committee as an il- 
le^ tiibunal) ; when Mr. Baillie wished us 
to go on, I said, we the committee cannot 
proceed in that manner ; we will go on in 
what way we think the right way ofproceed- 
ing ; we cannot go on in your way ; because 
if we do, there are charges must OHne against 
the directors ; you object to our sittine where 
there are cfaarges against ourselves, therefore 
we cannot go on in the way you prescribe ; 
we have thought this the best mode; and we 
think right to go on in our own mode ; we 
will not agree to it. 

I understand Mr. Cowley was looked upon 
as counsel for Mr. Baillie? — ^They both, I 
think, said he was not a counsel, but a friend. 

But in the same situation to Mr. Baillie, as 
llr. Morgan to the others ? — ^Yes. 

Do you remember Mr. Cowley's asking Mr. 
Adam, the architect, whether all the itera- 
tions appeared to be necessaiy repairs ?— I 
don't remember that ; I remember Mr. Adam's 
attending. 

And recollect his giving his general appro- 
bation? — ^I do; but Duit is all stated in the 
report. 

The report is stated in a different manner 
from what I wish to examine you to.-^! don't 
recollect, particularly, what passed, relative to 
BIr. Adam; I remember his being there. - 

I will put a question may bring it to your 
recollection ; do you remember that Mr. Cow- 
ley was, at any time, ordered out of the room ? 
' — I don't remember that, indeed. 

That he should withdraw ? — ^I don't recol- 
lect that ; and rather think that did not hap- 
pen, becmjse there was a committee appoint- 
ed, I remember, to eo and view some apart- 
ments, and Mr. Cowley attended Mr. Baillie : 
I don't recollect his being order^ to with- 
draw. 

Did captain Baillie introduce a short-hand 
writer to take minutes of the proceedings? — 
Yes, he did. 

Was not that writer ordered to withdraw ? — 
Yes, he was ; I would not permit a short- 
hand writer; at least the committee would 
not ; I gave mv opinion ; I did not tiiink pro- 
per to have a shortrhand writer. 

What was the reason you objected to him ? 
—I thought it improper ; I did not think it 
proper to have a shortrbaed writer to publish, 
peinaps in the newspapers, very unfairly, 
every thing that passea ; in the m^t place, I 
4id not know the ^entiemao ; I did not know 
whether he. would take the minutes down 
fiuriyornot; ap^ as there was a clerk tg take 



the minutes down, I did not think it right to 
have a short-hand writer. 

Who was that clerk that did take the mi- 
nutes down? — Mr. Ibbetson, the secretary's 
clerk ; he attends at the board of directors ; 
he is the under secretary. 

Was not Mr. Ibbetson concerned in the 
charges? — Certainly. 

I Uiink you saia it was his clerk that took 
minutes ? — ^Yes. 

You said you did not think it proper to allow 
the short-luind writer to take notes; dont 
you recollect Mr. Everest took notes ? — Mr.- 
Everest and Mr. Ibbetson both were at the 
table ; likely tiiey did take notes. 

Will you explain why you permitted per^ 
sons concerned on one side to take notes, and 
not permit Mr. Baillie to take notes on the 
other ? — Mr. Cowley was permitted and did 
take notes ; I understood one person was suf- 
ficient to take notes. 

There were two persons did take notes on 
one side ? — ^They were writing at the desk ; 
but I don't know what use they made of their 
notes; I have never seen them. 

Why did you refiise Mr. Baillie to have a 
person to take notes for him, and permit two 
on the oUier side to take notes? — I saw Mr. 
Cowley take notes for Mr. Baillie; I thought 
one person sufficient to take notes; I permit- 
ted the gentlemen belonging to the Hospital, 
Mr. Ibbetson, and Mr. Everest, the solicitor ; 
and they had been used to be in the room 
when I attended the directors ; therefore I 
did not choose to turn them out : I did not 
order them to stay. 

I beg you will mention whether the com- 
mittee examined into the infirmai^ of the 
Hospital ?— They did not ; and I will tell the 
House why they did not; Mr. Baillie would 
fain hkve had that matter enquired into, and 
come in as a charge against the surveyor, for 
building the infimiary improperly ; the first 
thing we enquired into was, to know by what 
authority the surveyor built it; we found that 
he had built it by a plan approved of by t^e 
directors, and recommendea to the general 
court, and ordered by the general court to 
build it according to that plan, in a masterly 
manner ; therefore I told Mr. Baillie if there 
was any fault in the infirmary itself, it was a 
fault in the directors, and not in the builder ; 
and that he had saia that it was improper for 
us to enauire into charees against tne di- 
rectors; therefore I would not permit it to be 
visited. 

Was Mr. Mylne examined relative to the 
state of the infirmary? — ^Yes, he was, but 
a^inst my inclination ; for I would not per* 
mit his bemg examined ; the committee were 
for it, but I was against it ; for I thought it to 
no purpose to enquire into the state of tiie in« 
firmary; if any thing was wrong, it was a 
charge against the directors, and not against 
him. 

The committee, then, did enquire intoH^ 
•«^^bey examined Mr. Mylne. 



L 



3051 



18 G£ORGE III. The Case of Captain Thomas Baillie, [304 



But did thby go to examine, themselves, 
the state of the infirmary? — ^They did not. 

How far was .the infirmary from the place 
where they were sitting? — ^Two hundred 
yards, perhaps. 

Did captain Baiilie desire that they would ? 
— ^He frequently desired it. 

Was not Mr. Mylne, as he was examined, 
one of thQ. persons that had complained 
against captain Baiilie ? — Yes, he was. 

Could Mr. Cust think him an impartial evi- 
dence? — ^No; I said I was against it; the 
committee ordered it ; hut certainly he was a 
person having charges against him ; therefore, 
with respect to myself, I did not think him a 
proper evidence. 

'nien, in that respect, your opinion is, the 
committee did not do right? — I did not think 
it relative to the point the committee were to 
enquire into ; and therefore I did not think it 
rinit to enquire at all into it. 

is thefe a report in the committee that cap- 
tain Baillie's charee relative to the infirmary 
is not well found^? — Yes, there is such a re- 
port ; and the report is against the surveyor, 
that it is not well foundecJ^as far as relates to 
him. 

And that without eoing to examine the 
place upon the spot ? — -Yes. 

And taking the examination only of the 
person himself concerned? — The charge 
against the surveyor was. that he had built it 
lumself, as if he alone haa undertaken to build 
h ; when it came to be enquired into, the plan 
vi^as ordered by the general court ; therefore 
we thought it no charge aeainst the surveyor. 

Had not the committee tne plans of the in- 
firmary before them ? — No, I think, not Uie 
iofirmary ; we had the plans of the Hospital 
'before us ; and I am prettv sure wc never had 
the plan of the infirmary Defore us '; because, 
findmg it was ordered by the general court, 
upon a plan, we were of opinion, that the sur- 
veyor was not answerable, if the plan was a 
wrong one, if he had built it acconling to the 
plan. 

But was not that plan before the court ? — ^I 
don't recollect whether it was or not. 

It is [qu. not] a great distance of tim&; be 
so ffood as to recollect — I cannot be sure ; I 
rather think it was not; I am not sure, whe- 
ther there was not something pointed out as if 
the works were different from the plan ; I 
think I remember something of that ; but it is 
at such a distance of time I don't now remem- 
ber it. 

That the works were different from the 
plan?»Some of the apartments different from 
the plan ; it is a lone while ago since this in- 
firmary has been buUt; it has been built ten 
Years ; there being no complaint before of its 
being bad, and one of the things made us not 
examine so much, b this, there are articles of 
instruction ; the lieutenant-governor, when he 
sees any thing wrong, is to call a council to 
make his complaint; and' it is to eo to the 
proper place to be remedied ; * I b^eve the 

t 



Admiralty ; - this infirmary having been built 
ten years ago, and it appearing to us that it 
was built by order of the plan, from the Hos- 
pital, we thought we were not to enquire into 
it. 

But there was some complaint, ^'ou say, 
that the building was somewnat different? — 
Yes. 

How were the committee to know that^ 
without going upon the spot to verify it ? — I 
think I remember somethmg of a plan being 
laid before us, because the objection being 
made, that there was something nuide* that 
was not according to the plan, therefore, I 
thought if we saw the plan it would be the 
same as goine to the place. 

Don't you know there are large places al- 
lowed for the officers of the infirmary that do 
not appear in the plans ? — ^No, I don% I did 
not particularly enquire into that. 

When you exammed into it. who were the 
persons that Mr. Morgan called to disprove 
the parts in captain Baillie's book? Were 
they the persons concerned in it? — ^Yes, I be- 
lieve they were in general ; unless your lord- 
ship will state any thine particular, I cannot 
tell ; in a general way they were csdled upon. 

I don't mean merely to deny the fact, but 
were not they called upon to give evidence in 
the case? — They were called upon to know, 
whether the facts were true, and then brought 
evidence to support their assertion. 

Was not their own evidence taken down in 
the minutes? — ^Yes; I am rather apt to 
think, that what they said was taken down in 
the minutes. 

Was captain Baiilie heard as an evidence in 
his own cause?— I forget; he was called 
upon to prove the charges, but I fancy he was 
to produce evidence to prove them, but Mr. 
Baillie's conduct upon many occasions was so 
very irregular, I will give you one instance ; 1 
remember there was a charge against the rev, 
Mr. Cooke, that he had bought his place, I 
think under the sanction of the first lord of 
the Admiralty ; we thou^t this a veiy heavy 
cham ; we cadled upon Mr. Baiilie to prove 
it. Mr. Baiilie, in a rude manner, said^ yoa 
are an illegal tribunal, I will have nothms to 
say to you ; I will give just what proofs I 
please, and vnll examine into it in another 
place ; I will give you no proof of it here; 
then we set it down as not proved ; and he 
often refiised to give proofs, but wanted to go 
into the abuses of the Hospital, and not to 
enquire into the several charges contained in 
his book against the several officers, as far as 
they related to the officers ; we went into the 
abuses : there were a great number of abuses 
entered into ; under the head of Mr. Godby, 
all the abuses were examined into; where 
the directors were concerned, there we tokl 
him we were not proper persons to examine 
into it. 

I understand Mr. Baiilie was not admitted 
an evidence in his own cause? — ^I think aot^ 
we heard what he had lo say^ but whether il 



905] reipecHng the Royal Hospital at Greenwich. A* D. 1778. 



[305 



ms put down in his evidence or no, I cannot 
ay. 

Bui on the other side, tlie other gentle- 
men's evidence was taken in their own cause ? 
—I will not say always, it was sometimes 
taken, I think. 

Do you recollect that captain Baillie de- 
sired some letters complaining of the state of 
the Infinnaiy might be read, and Mr. Morgan 
c^JMted to ity sayine, he would not suffer nis 
dientstoproduce evidence against themselves? 
—It is very likely it might he so, I don't re- 
Qollect it particularly ; Iremember something 
4>f an objection made by Mr. Mor^n, of his 
dients not producing evidence against them- 
•fielves, but I am not sure whether it was there 
wnot. 

Do you recollect whether those were letters 
addressed to the directors, by the physician 
and surgeon, and referred to Mr. Mylne for 
his opimon ? — ^I don't recollect that. 

Do not you recollect any letters addressed 
to the directors, by the physician and sur- 
geon? — ^No; I don't recollect it; I don*t say 
It was not ; it is likely there might be, but I 
don't recollect it. 

Did not the committee refuse to hear the 
evidence of pensioners upon a great many 
points, when produced by Mr. Baillie? — ^Yes; 
and I believe I was the person that objected 
to it ; the pensioners were exanuned upon two 
or three occasions ; I think there were four, 
five or six of them, as well pensioners as 
nurses, upon some occasion, and the account 
they gave, was so very contradictory, and 
there appeared so much ill nature on both 
sides, so much party prejudice in the Hospital^ 
that I myself was ot opinion, they were not 
proper to be called upon anv more', and I did 
object, I think, to some of them ; and I be- 
lieve some of the committee were of a dif- 
frrent opinion ; they thought they ought to 
be called. 

You were of opinion then, that the pen- 
loners were not the proper persons to give 
evidence of grievances ? — I do not know wnat 
it was for, but if it had been to grievances, I 
think I should have thought them proper per- 
sons to be examined to that; but as I said be^ 
fi>re, their accounts were so contradictory, I 
thought it to no purpose to call upon them ; 
if your lordship will tell me any particular fact 
to which they were to be called, I may recol- 
lect it. 

Don't you recollect, that the evidence of the 
men, complaining of a great nuisance of a 
drain runmng throush their wards, were re- 
vised to be heard K— I believe they were; 
this ward is in* Mr. Ibbetson's apartment ; if I 
lemember right, it appeared to us, thai this 
apartment was ordered by the directors and 
the general court of commissioners, and there- 
fore it was a charge, if any, against the direc- 
tors, which Mr. Baillie had protested we could 
not go into ; besides that, I think that captain 
Allwright, if I remember right, was one of 
the evidences thit was produced, either upon 

VOL, XXIi 



that or some other occasions, and it appeared, 
that this drain, whatever it was, was a thing 
that had lasted ten years ; I asked him, whe« 
ther by the fourth article of his instructions, 
if he met with any nuisance, he was not to 
complain of it to the council, he said yes ;-^ 
whv then have you complained of it ? no, he 
had not; why then, how can you come to 
complain to us, of a thing that happened ten 
years before, whereas, if you had laia it before 
the coimcil, it might have been remedied, and 
by your instructions you ought to have done 
it 

Mv question is, Were the pensioners re- 
fused to be called in upon that occasion ? — I 
think it likely they were, for the reason, be- 
cause the directors were concerned, we did 
not enquire where they were concerned, not 
tliinkin^ ourselves competent. 

Did It not appear to the committee, that 
one of the witnesses was punished, for the 
trifling offence of not taking off his hat to Mr. 
Cooke, the chaplain ? — ^No, I don't recollect 
that. 

One Goiich, a pensioner ? — I don't recollect 
that, indeed; I don't remeihber at all that it- 
came before me. 

Don't you recollect having said any thing; 
upon that subject yourself in the committee? 
— I don't recollect it, indeed. 

Don't you recollect having said that it had 
a very disagreeable appearance to be done at 
so particular a time, and that you were sonj 
it had happened ? — ^No, I don't ; it is possible 
I might say so, but I don't remember it : I 
remember there was some complaint of Mr. 
Baillie's, that the evidence was brow-beat; 
perhaps it was upon this occasion that this 
man was punished, and it was said that he 
was punished for some other offence : and I 
remember, at Mr. Baillie's request, several 
people were called in, several of the officers, 
and told, that if there was any brow-beating 
of the evidence, or threatening, or menacing, 
that the committee would take particular 
notice of it; for we desired all the evidence 
might be firee and fur ; I remember that was 
done at Mr. Baillie's own request; I think I 
might take notice of it, but will not pretend 
to say. 

Do you recollect a proposal of calling in 
twenty of the men then on guard, as a fair 
and expeditious mode of ascertaining whether 
the complaints stated really existed? — ^Against 
which of the officers was the complaint made ; 
because, if it was against the airectors, we 
thought it wiong to enquire. I told Mr. Bail- 
lie, don't interrupt us in our mode of proceed- 
ing, and when the committee has done with 
that mode of proceeding, if there are anv 
grievances that still remam, I, for one, think 
they ou^ht to be redressed ; and I shall, if I sit 
till Chnstmas, I shall certainly give my vote 
for the committee sitting to repress all the 
grievances, but don't interrupt us now in our 
mode of proceeding ; it is likely that might 
be one ot those things timt I thought it better 
X 



307] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case of Captain Thomas BaiUie, [908 



to postpone till we had gone through our 
mode of proceeding; I cannot pretend to 
say. 

If I understand you right, you said you 
thought all these complaints were to he exa^ 
mined into, though the committee should be 
obliged to sit till Christmas ? — ^Not his com- 
plaints; I did not think the committee could 
examine into his complaints ; but I thought 
all the grievances then snbsistine ought to be 
examined into and redressed, ^eth^ made 
\)y lif r. BailHe, or any body else ; and I would 
mve sat till Christmas for redressing them, 
if the committee had thought prop^ so 
to do. 

Do you not recollect a proposal to take 
twenty men that happened that day to be 
upon gusuxl, as a ^ur and expeditious mode of 
ascertaining whether the complaints stated 
really existed ? — I think it is very likely to be 
so ; and if I objected;^ it was to the time ; that 
this was an improper time, and interrupted 
our proceedings. 

I am not a^ing as to the time, but whether 
such a proposal was made? — I think I re- 
member something of it. 

Was it not pretty strongly uiged by Mr. 
BaiUie ? — I dare say, if it was made, it was 
strongly urged by Mr. Bailiie; I have no 
doubt of it. 

Did vou object to it? — ^Veiy likely; I ob- 
jected ror one : I remember some proposal was 
made ; sir William James thougnt we ought 
to enquire into it then, and was of opinion we 
should take six, eight, or ten pensioners that 
were passing by to exaimne into it; that was 
his o[>inion ; and if I' differed, it was as to the 
propriety of the time. 

You thought it ought to have been done ? 
-—If it was an abuse. 

Whether it was an abuse or not, would turn 
out upon the examination? — ^I thought en- 
quiry mto all abuses were to be made. 

And the proposal that was made by some 
gentleman, and strongly urged by captain 
Saillie, that the twenty men u^n guard should 
be taken and examined as mdinerent men, 
and that you objected to that proposal only as 
to time ? — >I cannot say that, unless I knew 
when it was ; what day, I cannot take upon 
me to say at this (^stance of time : I remem- 
ber some proposal made by Mr. Biullie to exa- 
mine men, and my objecting to it, and sir 
William James differing in opmion with me. 

Was that ever done ? — ^No, never was. 

Was there any enouiry into the state of the 
linen ?-^Ycs ; I thint a very full enquiry into 
the state of the linen, and we sat upon it, I 
think, two or three days. 

What was the result of that enquiry ? Was 
it tliat the enlarge was made out? — May I 
refer to the report? I cannot take upon me to 
say what the result of it was ; it is stated in 
the report. 

Did it not appear to the committee that a 
great number of shirts and sheets then in 
wev were sboitof tlie standard allowed by the 



establbhment; and that the whole deficiency 
amounted to a great quantity of linen? — I be- 
lieve it did not appear that there was any de- 
ficiency, because 1 understand, fi^m the mode 
of doing it, every shirt oiay not be o# the 
same size ; but there was no loss to the Hos* 
pital by it; there were a great many of them 
appeared to be very old linen ; and it did not 
appear to me, that this linen might not be 
cut since taken off the beds. Mr. Bailhe pro- 
duced it all himself; they were not taken off 
by order of the committee. 

Were there any men taken promisbuouslj 
to examine it ?-7-A great many were examined 
of the new linen, and all appeared of the pro- 
per sizes ; this was a basket of old linen . 

Would it not have been a fair method. t9 
have taken the first 20 men upon euara t« 
examine into this ?<— I cannot pretend to say, 
whether the 30 men upon guard were to that 

rint; I beg leave to refer to the report, fox- 
cannot pretend to carry all that in my 
head : I know the linen was enquired into 
very fully. 

Did it appear tliat the steward was altowed- 
to cut the Imen of the pensioners shorter or 
less than the standard allowed?— I beg to 
refer to the report. 

I believe the report states shortly, that the 
charge was groundless. But I ask, did it not 
appear that the steward had cut the linen 
shorter than the standard allowed? — I bc^ 
that the report may be referred to; your 
lordships have it upon the table. 

Did It not appear to the committee, that 
there was no standard adhered to in making 
up the linen ? — ^Your lordship has the report 
upon the table ; I could soon turn to it, if I 
had the report ; because I cannot recollect it. 
[The report shewn to Mr. Cust.] 

Did It appear that there had been any 
standard, by which the shirts and linen had 
been measured, previous to the enquiry? — 
That I don't recollect; I know there is a 
standard in the books. 

I do not doubt that, tha{ it is in the books ; 
but was that standard ever adhered to ?— That 
I will not pretend to say. 

Did it not appear, that- the standard was not 
adhered to? — ^I should think it did, in some 
instances; because their shirts were under 
the standard certainly. 

Why, in the report, could the committee 
say that that part of captain Baillie's assertion, 
that the standard was not adhered to, was 
fttl?e ? — It is unfairly stated ; the report says, 
unrkirly stated by captain Bailiie ; and then 
they say, it appeal^ that the linen cloth is cut 
up by the civ?l officers' clerks' wives; that 
seemed to be the charge ; that, we said, was 
not true ; because we htated mat there is a 
standard. 

Whether there was any enmiiry made into 
the state of the shoes ? — I think there was ; I 
will look. (Refers to the report.) Here is 
another thing that is stated in the report 
'< If, however|8iiy complaints had been ooade 



309} rmfecHfig the Roj/a Hospbat at GrientiM. A. D. 177B4 



[310 



lo capteia Bailiie^ of the sbprtnees of the 
ihirts aad sheets^ of bad washug, &c. it does 
Bot appear that he has taken the proper no- 
lice of them, by laying them befose the coun- 
cil, agreeable lo the 17 th article of the printed 
orders, for the regulating and better governing 
of the pemiooerSy &c. Which it was his ia- 
di^nsible duty to have done.'' 

I want to see if aay thing is said about the 
shoes? — I am sure the shoes were examined 
intOy but i don't see any thine in the report 
lelalive to it ; I don^t see any thing in it rela^ 
Ihre to shoes; I know we examined into the 
shoes, and examined relative tp the nurses' 
clothes, and found they were not so good as 
they ueed to be. 

is there any report made about these 
clothes? — I don't find it in the report; I 
kaow we examined into the shoes ; and some 
that were produced were found to be very 
bad. 

Does that appear to you to be an impaitial 
leport, that does not take notice of several 
nouDds of complaint that were proved? — I 
don*t know how that is ; I know we examin- 
ed into the shoes. 

Does that appear then to be an implrtial 
report ? — I see that shoes and women*s clothes 
are omitted. 

That report then, as far as that goes, is defec- 
tive and oartial ? — It is defective, as far as it 
spes, witn regard to them ; they ought to have 
Men put in. 

Was there any enquiry into the state of the 
brewhouse ? — Yes ; I think there were enqui- 
ries made ; but it appeared they were griev- 
ances that had been remedr^, ^d no com- 
plaints made afterwards ; I tiiink I remembo* 
It; I don't know where to look for it in the 
report, or else, i dare say, it would be found 
lobe there. 

Was there any enquirymade into the abuses 
of the charity stock, as charged in the printed 
Case ? — I am not sure wheUier it was in my 
time made, or no ; I think not while I sat. 

Was there any enquiry into the danger of 
fire, from the tailors' shop?— No; there was 
Botimig said about the dajoger of fire. 

It is in the printed Case.—I am sure it was 
not enquired into, while I was there. 

You, I think, attended six meetings ? — ^Yes ; 
I did. 

And the seventh you did not ? — ^The seventh 
I did not. 

In the course of these meetings you stud, 
that the committee roieht sit till Christmas ; 
that you thoueht it ou^t to do so, to enquire 
into abuses that were then existing ?— Yes, 
that were then existing ; if Mr. BaiUie had 
any thing to say, afler we had gone through. 

Did you attend at the seventh meeting ? — 
I did not. 

Did you expect that, at that meeting, the 
eommittee would be concludeid P — I did not ; I 
was obhsed to go upon business in the coun- 
tiy, as I told your lordships before; when I 
relumed, I waited upon, 1 forget who, I think 



Mr. IbbetsoQ, and first heard from him, that 
the committee was put an end to ; I was sur- 
prised at it ; I waited then upon Mr. Barker, 
sir William James, and Mr. Wells, and they 
told me the reasons of it; and they have 
fiven me ver^ satisfactoiy reasons why tliey^ 
aid not act unproperly m putting an end 
to it 

You did not expect it would be over in one 
day ? — I did not. 

Do you recollect, that you premised to cap- 
tain Baillie, when Mr. Morjgan haid jgone 
through the charges which he had pomted 
out as against his clients, that captain Baillie 
should proceed to call evidence on matters 
which had not been investigated, which had 
not been fully entered into?-* I don't recollect 
any promise ; I did not think myself authoris- 
ed to make any promise to Mr. UaiUie ; when 
Mr. Baillie wanted to produce evidence, and 
hinder our proceedings, in what we thought 
the proper, regulaur mode of proceeding, I said» 
don't interrupt our proceedings, when we are 
done, if there are any zrievances, if you have 
any thing to say, I diall be for sittmg upon 
them ; I don't recollect making any promise 
in the way it is stated .there. 

You said it as chairman ? — I said it sitting 
there. 

Was that contradicted by any one ?— No ; 
Mr. Baillie seemed satisfied with that, and 
then went on with the business. 

Do you imagine that Mr. Baillie r^iedupon 
what ^ou hacTsaid, that he was to produce 
his evidence } — I suppose he did ; he relied 
only upon me as one ; I was only one in the 
committee; he did not desire to have the 
sense of the committee taken. 

Was any objection made to it by any body, 
at the time you said so ? — ^None at all. 

Do not you particidarly remember having 
repeated this promise, or whatever you pleaae 
to call it, wnen the «>wns of uie nurses 
were shewn to you ?— -I think it is likely ; 
I said, several tunes, Mr. Baillie, do not in- 
terfere in our proceedings now, we are exam- 
ining into the Complaints agsunst you; and 
when we have done, though you protest 
sygainst us as an illegal tribunal, yet if there 
are any abuses in the Hospital after that, we 
shall dunk it right to enqjuire into them. 

Do you remember, that the protection of 
the committee was claimed for the nurses 
who had been threatened ?^Yes. 

To have the protection of the committee, 
upon some suggestion, that the nurses were 
browbeat or menaced? — I reme^nber tha 
committee was exceeding an^ about it, and 
said, they would not admit ot any such thing; 
and desired, if any threats had been used, 
none were proved, they should have every 
protection to give their evidehce; and the 
nurses were tora they should. 

Did the committee say that, without hav- 
ing any authority for imagining there had 
been some menaces ? — ^No other authority, I 
believe^ but what Mr. Baillie said. 



SU] 



18 GEORGfE III. The Case 6f Captain Thomas SoUitf 1319 



Was that denied by the people of whom it 
was said? — I don't recollect; the committee 
said, the nurses ought to know that they were 
protected by the committee. 

Do you recollect any instances of improper 
or insulting behaviour, to the lieutenant-go- 
vernor, before the committee? — There were 
two instances ; particularly, I remember, the 
rev. Mr. Cooke and Mr. Mylnc^ there were 

auarrels among them constantly m the room; 
bey behaved very indecentlv to the com- 
mittee, on all sicies ; we could hardly keep 
them quiet; they abused Mr. Baillie, and he 
them. Mr. Cooke, I recollect, abused him ; 
and Mr. Milne thought himself ill used, by 
the charges brought against him, and he did 
abuse him, in the committee, several times. 
There were ereat indecencies on all sides; 
we could haraly go on with the business.' 

Where did that originate? — ^I remember 
Mr. Cooke called Mr. &dllie blackguard, or 
raacal. 

Mr. Cooke, the chaplain ? — Yes. 

Calling the lieutenant-governor black- 

Suard? — ^Yes; blackguard, rascal, or scoun- 
rel, or some expression that was very inde- 
cent; and I thought so at the time. 

With regard to Mr. Mylne; what did he 
say ? — ^There was some expression of the same 
sort in Mr. Mylne, that 1 thought he ought 
not to have made use of in the committee, 
and something of the same kind ; then Mr. 
Baillie made use of insulting expressions to 
them, at the same time ; in short, they quar- 
rellea among themselves. 

That is what I enquire after; with whom 
did that originate?—! don't recollect; Ire- 
member tellm^ the rev. Mr. Cooke, that he 
behaved very indecently to the committee. 

But should you have been angry with Mr. 
Cooke, if Mr. Baillie was the aggressor ? — He 
behaved very indecent to us ; he said we were 
a partial committee, an ille^ tribunal, he 
would have nothing to do with us, we were 
partial; I could hardly be restrained from 
turning him out of the room, he behaved so 
rude at particular times; I appealed to Mr. 
Cowley ; I said, you, Sir, are a moderate man, 
let Mr. Baillie put his affiiirs into your handfi, 
we shall then go on with our enquiry, and 
soon get rid of it ; I must do Mr. Cowley that 
justice lO aay, that he behaved properly. 

Did those words, illegal or partial, seem to 
apply to the committee, as to their coiKluct 
in the enquiry, or to their being directors ? — 
To their conduct .in the enqcury. I will do 
Mr. Cowley the justice to say, that he did 
never, while I was chabman, make use of 
any indecent expressions whatever, but be- 
haved very moderately, and with great pro- 
priety during the whole time. 

Whether, as a director of the Hospital, and 
as a member of the committee, you don't 
know, that many of the charges contained in 
the C^tse of the Hospital, as laid before the 
general court, are substantially true ? — That 
18 a question; I am sure, I cannot answer, that 



they are substantially true ; they maybe sub- 
stantially, true many of them, and be remo- 
died ; I am sure the charge about the meat 
is remedied ; so many of tnem might be true^ 
and be remedied since. 

I do not mean those that have been re* 
medied since, but those that then existed?— 
We did not examine properly into them. 

The linen ? — I don't think the charges or 
the linen at all. proved. 

The shoes?— Nor the shoes; the &alt did 
not lie there, it lay with the directors, if there 
were any fault in their contracts, therefore we 
could not enquire properly into it, we did not 
think ourselves authorized to do it 

Whether the complaint that the abuse ex- 
isted is not substantially true ?— -I do not think 
we enquired fully enough Into it, to say there 
was, some enquiry about shoes I remember. 

Did I understand you right or wrong? — We 
made enquiry into the shoes, and some of 
them appeared to be very bad, but there were 
reasons given for the badness of the shoes ;. 
they were satisfactory reasons, but I dcm't 
now remember what they were. 

What could be the satisfactory reasons that 
could be given, why the shoes were bad ?— 
That I cannot tell ; there were very few that 
were bad ; I don't remember what the reasons 
were now. 

Do you conceive there can be a saUs&ctorj 
reason siven, why some of the shoes of the 
Hospital should be bad?— If complaints were 
madfe and not redressed, to be sure that is 
wrong, but I know that they were bad. 

And the gowns of the women?— They were 
not so good as they had been formerly ; but 
then, that must have been the fault, I should 
think, of the directors, in treating for these 
gowns, or not giving the same price ; I cannot 
tell how that was, mey were not so good as 
the others. 

Do you think that it is true, that there 
have been several landmen admitted into the 
Hospital ?— Certainly. 

Do you look upon that to be contrary to 
the chapter, or what? — That is in the report 
that came under the head of the charge 
against Mr. Godby, the steward; the charee 
against him was, that he had been illegaAjr 
appointed, being a landman; .the comnuttee 
have reported what appeared to them upon 
that head. I believe, I am sure we reported 
this ; when captain Baillie stated it, we were 
of opinion we were not judges, what ¥ras legal 
or illegal, and we did report it; it stands in 
some part of the report, that we dkl not think 
ourselves competent to enquire into that, be« 
cause it was stated as an illegal thing. I don't 
pretend to judge of charters ; if I was to judee^ 
I should much doubt, whether many of Uie 
^ntlemcn said to be oiBcers, are officers with- 
in the charter ; but that there may be land- 
men appointed to offices ; but tiiat I am not 
competent to judge of; it is a matter of law. 

Whether women have not been appointed 
matrons, that are not widows of officers?— 



515] retpeaifig ike Ro^ HoipUal ai 

Yes; I think that did appear; one in the 
time of lord Egmont, and one in the time of 
lord Hawke. 

Did that appear to be contraty to the charter 
or not? — ^That I will not pretend to judge of; 
that is a matter proper for your lordships to 
judge of; I beg not to give an opinion about it 

I ask your opinion, what you judged as a 
director of Greenwich Hospital, whemer you 
did judge? — Not havine the apjwintment of 
them, we formed no juc^^nent or it. 

Did you ever read the charier ? — ^No, never 
read it an^ further than as contained in cap- 
lain Bailhe^s book ; I never saw the charter.* 

Whether there has not been a great deal of 
money spent in making ornamental altera- 
tions ana improvements in the Hospital, and 
in cleaning of pictures ? — There has oeen none 
made but what was by the order of the gene- 
ral court; we looked upon the act of parlia- 
ment that gave the Derwentwatcr estate, 
gave it, in the firstinstance, for improvements 
f^ the Hospital, and to complete it according 
to its first plan, and then should go to the 
tnes of the charity ; and that mone v nas been 
laid out every year for a number of years, but 
it is not yet completed. 

Whether the' price for the shoe^ and stock- 
ings' of the pensioners has not been reduced ? 
—3 don't recollect, that will appear from the 
minutes of the committee. 

Do not you know that the price now given 
for shoes and stockings has been less lately 
than formerly ? — ^I doirt recollect ; it is in the 
proceedings of the directors, if it b so. 

Would vou think it proper for the direc- 
tors to reduce the price of snoes and stockings 
for the pensioners, at the time they were lay- 
ing out great sums of money for cleaning 
pi^ores, and for ornaments ? — ^I don't think 
they oi^ht, so as to make the shoes and 
stockings bad. 

Do not you know that the men have com- 
plained of their shoes and stockings ? — There 
are complaints, and always wiU be in such a 
number of men ; ' but the generality of the 
pensioners don't think, I believe, tljat they 
are worse than they used to be. 

Was any enquiry made into that regu- 
larly? — ^I don't recollect whether there was 
or not. 

But the shoes you remember ? — ^I remember 
something being done about the shoes, and 
some were bad, one or two pair that were 
brought. 

Was there but one or two pair brought ? — 
I don't think that theie were more than half 
a -dozen complained of. 

Was that examined into anv further? Were 
any number of pensioners called to examine> 

* Mr. Cost Itts been many jean a direoior of the 
Hos|pitaJ, and bis warrant ai soohp aajs, " You are 
to gorem jovrvelf according to the charter," which 
•vwjr director i» or ooght to be in posiession of; 
yet it appeari he never had the cnrioiilj to read or 
ensure aftor it. Orig, Ed, 



A. D. ms. 



[31^ 



to see if Cere were any more ? — ^I remember, 
by the examination that was made into it, it 
appeared, that a few pairs were brought in 
as bad, out of a great number that weie 
brought in. 

Did not captain BailUe propose to bring in 
30 men out of the guard, to examine into 
that? — I know it was proposed to take so 
men out of the guard, but whether it was for * 
the shoes or no I cannot say. 

Don't you know, that it was principally by 
the means and activity of captain Baillie, that 
the butcher's man was transported for stealing 
the meat ?~ Possibly it might; Mr. Baillie, 
in that business, was very active, and the di- 
rectors were very active likewise in it; but 
that is an old thing, of long standing, and I 
don't remember it without referring to the 
books. 

Do not yoa know, that captain Baillie was 
active and instrumental in convicting tiie con- 
tracting butcher ? — I have heard he was in- 
strumental in it, and so were the directors ; 
he was instrumental in it as a dbrector; 
I understand the moment the complaint was 
made of the butcher, the directors ordered 
their solicitor to prosecute. 

Was not the contract renewed with that 
butcher during the pendenc^^ of that prosecu- 
tion, and after he was convicted ? — I beheve 
it was; we have great difficulties to know 
what to do in these cases ; the same thing 
has happened since this enquiry ; there has 
been a contract made, at which I happened 
to attend ; at the board we were under diffi- 
culties, we did not what to do, and agreed 
with this contracting butcher again. The of- 
ficers of the Hospiul may prevent bad meat 
by the contract ; they may return it back, and 
go to market and buv fresh meat ; we are 
obhged to contract with the lowest that ofiers; 
an(L in consequence of that, any person under 
a feigned name may come, and bid; if 
he is the lowest price, we must take him ; 
we don't know the person ; we were under 
difficulty how to act; the last time there 
was an advertisement put in for three 
weeks or a month, to serve us for six months 
or twelve ; I happened to be at the board, 
there were only two persons put in, and the 
difference was a saving to the Hospital, in the 
year, 350/. We could not consent to contract 
with a maiK and give him 350/. more than 
another. I was not at the board when that 
was executed ; but I was at the board when 
the contract was made with this man, who I 
understand to be the son ; that was made the 
other day, and if we had not done it, we must 
have given 350/. from the Hospital. I do not 
know now we can act otherwise, unless we 
had a discretionary power to take other per- 
sons ; and that would be attended, in my opi- 
nion, with more mischief. 

Do you think the directors have not a dis- 
cretionary power? — They never exercised that 
discretion out once, and that was in the 
Painted-hall; if they took the bwest bidder^ 



81S\ 



U GEORGE III. 



ifCofUdi 



[SIS 



H nugtt be fll done, and ^ley jrould not 
have an opportunity of finding it out; but 
with respect to the meat, it is the officers' 
duty to. see the meat ia ^ood, and we 
could not find it out in the Painted-hall; 
and therefore, I was one of those that, with 
respect to the Painted-hall, thought it not 
rient to advertise when that matter was 
tsScen up ; but it was not done in any other 
instance. 

Am I to understand from you, that there is 
a discretion in the directors, not to advertise 
to take Ihe lowest bidder, and in the case of 
the Painted-hall they used that discretion? — 
I donH know whether we did not take that 
matter wrong upon ourselves. 

What restrains you from having that dis- 
cretion ? Do you know of any law or usage to 
the contrary ? — I know of no law ; the fear of 
having ereater jobs in the Hospital, have al- 
ways mduced them to take the lowest bidder. 

Nothing has restrained them but discretion? 
—Nothing but discretion. 

The reason you have ^ven why the Paints 
ed-hall was not advertised, was, that being 
done at the lowest price, it might be done by 
dishonest persons ? — ^Yes. 

In what light did you look upon Mr. Mel- 
lish after having been convictea ? — ^In an im- 

E roper lijght ; but I don't know how one can 
dp taking him ; if Mr. Mellish had substi- 
tuted any person else, and he had been the 
lowest bidder, we miist have took him ; so it 
^^peared to me. 

I understood you that it was in the discre- 
tion of the directors ? — I should have thought 
that a very improper thing for discretion ; 
because it is in the power of the officers to 
prevent any abuse, because they may return 
It, and gt) to market for fresh. 

But dkl not that abuse exist for a lone 
time ?— It did. 

Then that guard was not sufficient for the 
purpose ? — ^But I hope it will be in fiiture, or 
some others found out, but I don't know of 

Don't you know there were many com- 
plaints and disturbances amon^ the men '. 
about the beer? — I said before, I thousht that 
an old ai&ur that vns taken up by the civil 
officers ; it was their business to do it, and it 
was remedied. I forget whether we went 
into it or not, perhaps we read some of the 
minutes. 

Do you mean to say, that the complaints 
contained in captain BaiUic's book, that had 
been remedied, were admitted to be true ? — 
Yes, I should suppose they were. 

Do you recollect having said, at the com- 
mittee, that though captam BaiUic's zeal for 
the pensioners might sometimes carry him 
too rar, yet, upon we whole, his conduct was 
meritorious, and ought to be considered? — 
Not meritorious, ana ought to be considered ; 
I never was of that opinion ; I am pretty sure 
I never said that. 

Do you tiiink it b meritorious ?— In what 
respect think so f 



As having done justice .to Ibe peniuoners. — 
I believe ml Mr. foiMie has done a gret* 
many good things in the Hospital ; and, io> 
many instances, has done his duty as a very 
gcx)d officer; and so have oth^ people aa- 
good officers ; I have no doubt about that ; £ 
never heard any complaint against Mr. Bail- 
lie; I have been sixteen or seventeen years in 
the Hospital ; I have nOt attended so often a» 
I ought to do; my business was so much, I 
have not attended my duty so nouchas I- 
ought to do ; but whenever I, have, I have- 
never seen any thing, on the part of Mr. 
Baillie, that was reprehen»ble, any more than 
one of the rest; so much did I conceive Mr. 
Baillie a good officer, that when this book 
came out, I own I never was so much asto- 
nished in my life ; when I saw all these vint- 
lent complaints against those officers with 
whom he seemed to sit in such friendship ^ 
I have often been in hib company ; I never 
heard him complain of them ; and I was asto- 
nished when I read this book ; but as an of^ 
ficer in the Hospital, I never heard any com- 
plaint against him. 

Recollect, whether you did not say,, at thaC 
committee, that baptain Baillie, though his> 
zeal for the pensioners might sometimes 
carry him too far, yet upon the whole, hi» 
conduct was meritorious, and ought to be con- 
sidered? — I could not say that, when I con- 
sider aU these charges as ui\|ust and maJiciousy 
in thenaselves, against the officers^ as they ap- 
pear to me to be. 

Did you say so ?— I think not ; I don't re- 
collect that I did. 

What were the proceedings, after this re* 
port, in August, at tne genenu court? — ^Atthe 
general court ; we met, and I was chairmaa 
of the committee ; having delivered the re- 
port, I though it my duty to suggest to the 
court, that I thought there ought to be some 
proceedings upon it; and acconlinglyl stated 
to the court what appeared to me upon the 
report; and I made a motion, that the 
charges against the several officers, were ia 
my opinion, in gjeneral, malicious and void of 
founoation ; and that report was agreed to by 
the general court ; then another gentiemaa ia 
the court made a motion for the removal of 
captain Baillie ; which I agreed to. 

What gentieman? — Mr. Hicks was the 
gentleman that made that motion. 

I think you said you were not present at the 
last day ? — I was not. 

Then how could you sign a report of a com- 
mittee, and aftenwds make a motion to re- 
move captain BailUe, for complaints which^ 
you say, were malicious and ill-roimded, when 
you bad not yourself attended at the proceed- 
ings of the last day ? — Both of us signed ; 
therefore I consider my name as only going 
to the six days that I attended ; and in those 
six days thiat I attended, there appeared 
to me sufficient ground to say, tnat the 
charges against those genUemen were mali- 
cious and void of foundation; indeed I thougfal 
so, and think so still. 



317] riipecHng the Royal HospHal at Grehimch. A. D. 1778. 



[318 



Hkd jour signinsj does not go to the seventh 
day?— No; I considered it only as to the six 
mys in which I attended. 

Then you did not take upon you to sav, 
tfaatoo tKe seventh dav the charges were mafi- 
doos ind ill-founded ?— No ; I only consi- 
dered it as confined to the sis days. 

What was the motion made afterwards bv 
Mr. Hicks?— 'A motion to remove Mr. Bail- 
lie; and it vras agreed to by the court ; the 
I lords of the Admiralty afterwards did not re- 
I more him, but suspeiKied him ; and I under- 
ftood it to be, because there was a trial de- 
peodiDg in a court of law; and when that 
trial was over, and nothing in it appearing to 
vindicate captain Baillie's character ; for we 
Qoderstood tne trial (but I was not present at 
it) that it was improperly brought; first, be- 
ouse the book itself was not a published 
Iftel, bat a memorial, complsuning of abuses; 
but I was not present at the trial ; after that 
was over, there vras a meeting of the Hospital , 
ad at that meeting it appeared to me, at least 
in the debates upon it, that the Hospital suf- 
fered very much for want of a lieutenant-go- 
venior; \t is an office of very great impor- 
tance in the Hospital, and therefore we agreed 
upon another letter or memorial to the Admi- 
ralty, to desire, that now the trial was over, if 
that had been the cause of the suspension of 
Mr. Baillie, we desired Mr. Baillie might be 
lemoved, and another lieutenant-govemor^p- 
pointed. 

I think you said, that when captain Baillie 
protested against the court of enauiry, he did 
It because they were directors r — Directors 
improper to enauire into their own conduct. 

1 think you nave stated, that you agreed 
with him in that, that they ought not to en- 
quire into their own conduct? — I did. 

And therefore nothing relative to that was 
enquired into ? — Nothing was enquired into ; 
but there is a report upon it. [Reads.] ** In 
Rgard to what concerns the directors, your 
conunittee found themselves in a verv delicate 
situation, to have referred to them the consi- 
deraUon of matters in which they themselves 
vere supposed to be interested ; they, there- 
fore, thought it necessary to convene all the 
Erectors they possibly could, captain Baillie 
excepted, wno^ by way of answer to the 
charges, have resolved.'' So these are to be 
Qonaidered onty as answers to Mr. Baillie's 
book, without proof on either side; the reso- 
lulioa made by thtoiselves as an answer to 
the charges. 

Then, though the board of Admiralty di- 
'Mted that the several charges in captain 
Baittie'sbook should be enquired into, that 
committee did not enquire into those tiiat 
concerned the directors ? — Certainly, they did 
not 

Am I to infer from thence, that as far a» 
*PP«rs by that report, that there is no dis- 
pioval of any thing captain Bsullie has said 
'^five to the directors r— Certainly ; unless 
wc answers they have given is a refutation of " 
a, certainly aoproQf at all, * 



Then, upon the other point, a letter was 
written to the board of Admiralty to desire 
captain Baillie to be removed ?— Yes, it was. 

Whom vras that letter signed by?— I be- 
lieve by all the directors ; I know I signed it 
for one. 

Did not the committee also refuse to ex*- 
mine into any thinz that concerned the ap- 
pomtments of the Admiralty, or of tlie first 
lord of the Admiralty .?-— They did ; they did 
not choose to do it ; they thought it too high a 
court to enquire into ; and they are not en- 
quired into. 

Therefore any thing stated relative to them 
may be true ? — It appears to me to be rather, 
though a very small one ; but it is a small 
libel against all the great officers of state, for 
not attending their duty as commissioners; 
that was not enquired into ; there were some 
libellous charges a^inst the governor, that 
were not enquired into; and against the first 
lord of the Admiralty, and all tne other lords 
of the Admiralty.' 

None of those matters that respect a com- 
plaint against the court of directors, the Ad- 
miralty, or first lord of the Admiralty, the 
general court, and governor, were enquired 
into ? — ^They were not. 

I think you have said, in answer to a ques- 
tion that was asked you, that there were ma^ 
trons appointed, that were not properly ap- 
pointed, not being the daughters or wives of 
seamen ? — So I have understood. 

Whether it appears that any of those were 
appointed by the person who is now first lord 
of the Admiralty r — It does not ; I said I un- 
derstood lord Egmont was one, and lord 
Hawke the other. 

Viscount Dudley, I would wish to know of 
you, whether vou do not think nicture-clean- 
ms is a very delicate and nice business ? — A, 
I do. 

If you had pictures to clean, whether you 
would not enquire for men of the greatest note 
in this country; or whether you would em- 
ploy those that should offer to do it cheapest ? 
Don't you think that a man that ofiered to do 
it cheap, might probably spoil your picture ? 
— I do think so. 

If the Painted-hall had been spoiled, do 
you think they would have got mucn by hav- 
me it done by a cheap hand 1— I don't. 

Whether aJl the evidence befojre the com- 
mittee was taken down in writing ?— I think 
it was ; we had a clerk that attended ; and 
whenever I found that he did not take it 
down, I went on slow, and desired him to 
take it down ; but I will not answer for the 
clerk's having taken any thing down. 

Af^er you had gone' through, was it not 
frequently read over again ?— Sometimes; not 
always. 

Was it not, if any member, or the witness 
himself, desired it?---Certainly ; but I am not 
sure tbat it was dbne in all cases. 

You were at the appointment of the com- 
mittee; as a membei of the general court; it 



919] - 18 GEORGE III; The Case of Captain Thomas BaUUe^ 



[380 



is mentioned that the first lord of the Admi- 
ralty named the committee, now I desire to 
know, whether they were named by him, or 
proposed to the committee, and chosen by 
them as proper persons ? — ^As far as I remem- 
ber of that matter, I have stated before, that 
your lordship (lord Sandwich) did ask Mr. 
Baillie ; Mr. Bailhe, you iiave said there are 
men of worth and honour attend at the board ; 
will you point them out, because I shall pro- 
pose to tne general court, that they shoula be 
the men. Mr. Baillie said, I dislike your pro- 
ceedings, or something of that kind, and will 
have nothing to do wiSi it ; upon which your 
lordship desired the list of directors to be read, 
and seemed very desirous that those directors 
only should be taken against whom there 
could be no objection ; that I take to be the 
case* 

Was not Mr. Baillie offered to leave out 
any of those, if he had any objection ? — ^Yes ; 
certainly. 

The Earl of Sandwich. This that I have in 
my hand is a letter, lying upon the table, 
written by captain Bailue to the general court: 
this is a paragraph in it : ^ I meant to appeal 
to a court of all the great and noble person- 
ages who are named in the charter as gover- 
nors and commissioners of the Hospitsu ; in- 
stead of which, I was informed by lord &md- 
wich at the court, that no^e were summoned 
at the general courts, but those whom he 
thinks proper.'' This is in the letter ; I de- 
sire to know from you, whether you heard 
any such words as those come out of my 
mouth, that non^ should be summoned, but 
those I thought proper. — A, I certainly did 
not; it is now a great while since, that I 
should not depend upon my memory, but your 
lordship did call upon me at the next general 
courts and then I said there were no such 
words. 

Did I call upon any other persons besides 
yourself, to ask whether that assertion, of 
captain BailUe's was true or false ? — ^Yes, you 
did. 
Upon how many ?— I cannot tell how many. 
Did I call upon all the members present ? 
— ^I think you called upon all the members 
present. 

What was their answer? — ^The same as 
mine ; that they never heard your lordship 
make use of any such expression. 

Did, at that meeting, captain Baillie own 
himself to be the writer of that printed Me- 
morial? — ^Yes; adding, at the same time, 
"tiiat he had not published it, I think ; and 
that it was only meant as a Memorial to the 
• commissioners. 

H6 owned himself the author of it?— Yes; 
he said he was the author of it. 

Whether you ever read the list of the go- 
vernors and commissioners of the Hospital ? 
— No; i never read it; but I understand 
that the great officers of state, not by name, 
but those that are great officers of state, are 
•onunidsioQers of t& HospitaL 



I suppose you don't* understand that there 
are a number of officers who are not officers 
of state? — ^Yes; there arc commissioners of 
the navy ; there are two or three of the Tri- 
nity-house, I believe, that do attend now and 
then at the board that I have seen there ; but 
I don't know who compose the whole court. 

The Duke of BoUon. Whether you don't 
think that it was an easy matter to have 
found seven persons, who were governors and 
commissioners of the Hospital, that were not 
directors, to have formed a committee of en-* 
quiry, without going to those whom you call 
the great officers of state?— I very much 
doubt it; I will not speak positively to that 
point : I don't think that seven people could 
nave been found who would have attend^ 
that would have made a part in that en- 
quiry. 

Don't you know that all the admirals of his 
majesty's fleet are commissioners of Green- 
wich Hospital?—-! don't know; I dkl not 
spesJc of tne admirals ; I did not know that 
they were cotnmissioners. 

Suppose they all are ; don't you imagine it 
an easy matter to have found seven oi them 
to compose a committee of enquiry ?^-Ana- 
ther thmg is, would the^r have attended ? that 
is a mere matter of opinion. 

Was there any obligation upon you to at- 
tend ?— None in the world ; I did not deure 
to be appointed. 

Before that happened, who could have an- 
swered for you ? Is it not a similar case be- 
tween you and another person ? Who, before 
it happened, could be certain they would ob- 
ject to attend? — We that were appointed 
were all present ; and were asked if we would 
undertake it ; we said yes, and were ready to 
undertake it now ; if you had appointed seven 
admirals that were not present, (for I don*t 
recollect there was any one there) and they 
would not have attended, the committee 
would not have been formed. 

Do you know that any others were sum- 
moned ? — ^No. 

What was your summons? — ^A particular 
summons to meet at a general court at the 
Admiralty. 

Did you understand that those that were 
absent^ were not sunmioned? — So I under- 
stood. 

I understand from you, that after the fraud 
was committed by the butcher, he was em- 
ployed a^n ; tell me, if I am wrong ? — ^1 un- 
derstood It so. 

And that there was no authority sufficient 
to authorise the turning of that man out, if 
he would undertake to (K> it for less than ano- 
ther; do I understand you right? — I don't 
clearly understand your lordship. 

You said, I apprehend, that there was no 
authority for the removal of the man, though 
you have acknowledged he had been guilty of 
a fraud ? — I did not say that. 

« So in Oi%. 



SSt] rapecHt^ Ae Ro^l Hospital at Greevianeh. A. D. 1778. 



ISSX 



I understood you, that he had served the 
Hospital improperly ? — Y^s. 
. Tnat is a fraud ? — It b. 

But he offering to do it for less than any 
other person, there wa« an obligation upon 
the commissionecs and the managers of the 
Hospital to employ that man so convicted? 
^-Yes ; I think there was. 

Follow me, and I will give you time to anr 
swer to me ; if thb answer ot your's tends to 
any aigument at all, here it lies, that whether 
the Hospital b well or ill served, if a man 
offers to do it for less than apother, he is to 
be employed ; now is there no such thing as 
piUisnin^ in a gazette, a contract to supply 
the Ho^ital, excepting such a person ? — ^Yes ; 
there is. 

Then that man might have been excepted? 
— Qy name he might. 

- And, of course, could not have been em- 
l^ed? — ^You might have excepted him by 
name ; but if he luid put in the name of John 
aNoaks,i>r any common name, and that man 
had been the lowest, you would have taken 
in that man ; therefore you could not have 
excluded him from the benefit of it, though 
.you would have excluded him by name. 

Whether or not a man of substance, offer- 
ing a contract, will not always bear down any 
o£er man who attempts to offer against him ; 
hb name would have such weight, that an in- 
ferior butcher would not offer against that 
man ; and for this reason ; because, says this 
inao, if you offer to serve the Hospital with 
beef aft a penny a pound, I will serve them for 
an half-penny ; as long as that man's name 
continues, you must be seqsible that np other 
inferior butcher could offer against a man of 
aidistance.^ — ^I don't know what to say to 
that; we put in an advertisement; there 
seems to me to be but two modes ; either to 
. lake the lowest person that offers, or to have 
it in our power to give a higher price to a 
man that we can trust ; now if that power is 
planted to the directors, m^ idea is, the dl- 
lectors would make a great job of it. 

Why do you think so ? — Because they would 
pieier a friend ; and, perhaps, some of them be 
concerned in it ; it is openmg a door for a job . 

Then, according to your mode of reasonmg, 
if a man is ever so mat & villain, you must 
employ that man?— -Yes; the officers are to 
do their duty to prevent it. 

I tlunk you said, Mr. Hicks moved for the 
iismisfiion of captain Baillie? — ^Yes» 

Was Mr. Hicks one of the persons that ap- 
peared as prosecutor of captam Baillie, at the 
committee ? — ^Yes ; I understood it so. 

Was Mr. Hicka one of the committee at 
that time?-— No; he was not of the com- 
mittee.* [Mr. Cust withdrew.] 

* Mr. Hidis is a ietTMii to tlie Hofpiul, u six- 
yoBj receirer ; and a Blaster, aa a director, gover- 
nor, tod ooamiuaioBer. Tliia ia one of the absurdi- 
tiei oo«plaine4 of in captain Baillie'* book,-T-Urv. 

VOL XXI. 



Mr. Barker called in. 

Were you appointed of the committee to 
enquire into captain Baillie's book ? — I was . 
one of the directors nohiinated, at the general 
court, to be o^the committee. 

Bid you attend that committee ? — I did at« 
tend it twice ; the first time I attended it waa 
the first day of May; and when I was last 
Wednesday, upon this examination, it was 
sworn at vour lordships' bar, that I attended 
there one nour only ; therefore a very impro- 
per iud^e to give an opinion ; the-person tliat 
made that aifidavit and declaration, at your 
lordships' bar, was in my company from ten 
o'clock that day till seven at night*, at Green- 
wich, upon the committee, except the short 
dinner we made to return a^in to dispatch 
the business; Mr, Cowley I mean; I can 
bring ten gentlemen now here that were pre- 
sent at the time. 

This was the third meeting ? — The second 
meeting I believe it was ; the first of May, I 
was there the whole day ; and I was there 
the 19th of June, when we finished the eor 
quiry. 

Then, I am to understand, you attended 
only two days out of the seven ? — \ es ; it did 
not suit me ; I came out of the country on 
puTDOse to attend ; Mr. Cust was gone ; I 
maae it my business to attend the second or 
third meeting, from ten in the morning to 
seven in the evening; we retired one singlo 
hour to dinner, and returned again to busi* 
ness. 

Was there any consideration given to the 
gentlemen that attended that meeting ? — No 
other consideration than spending their own 
money, and giving up their own time. 

Were you desired to attend by any body ? 
—No ; I thought it my duty, when my busi* 
ness would permit me, or my absence from 
the country. 

You were not desired to attend by any 
body ? — ^No ; only a general desire to attend 
as often as we could, to get through the busi- 
ness. 

Was that a desire from any particular per- 
son? — ^No; a general conversation among 
the directors. 

And was there no promise given, that the 
expences should be borne ?•— I never heard 
any such thing, nor nobody ever thought of 
it ; if your lordships mean to know the ad- 
vantages of bemg a director of Greenwich 
Hospital, I have been one 11 years; some- 
times I have received 5/. sometimes 3/. for 
the whole year. 

Do you recollect being present at a meet* 
ing of the Trinity, at I^ptford, on the 15th 
ofjune ? — ^If it was a Trinity Monday,! then I 
always attend ; that -is our annual day ; we 
go then to choose our master^ deputy^ and 
wardens. 

You don't remember having said any thing 
there about Greenwich Hospital ? — I cannot 
charge my memory, that Greenwich Hospital 
was mentioned there. 

Y 



se^ 



li GEOUGE III. Tiie Case ofCapiam Thmas BaiOie, [SH 



You did not tell any body there, that your 
cxpences were to be borne r — No ; it was in 
ft morning I was there ; if it had been in the 
afternoon^ after one bad Ind two or three 
bottles, one might have ^d such a thins ; 
but I never heard of it, nor ever thought 
of it. 

Inform the House what you thought to be 
the proper business of the committee? — I 
presume, to enquire into the charges captain 
Baillie made in his book, against 'the civil 
officers of Greenwich Hospital ; we thought 
that was the duty of the committee; as there , 
'Were charges made by captain Baillie, in his 
book, to sundiy gentlemen of Greenwich 
Hospital, the civil officers, and some of the 
directors, we thought it the duty of the com- 
mittee to enquire into those charges, to see 
whether they were right or wrong. 

Did you understand that the committee 
were to enmiire into the charges, made by 
icaptain Baillie, asainst the directors ? — No ; 
that was impossible, to enquire into a charge 
-against ourselves ; we mi^t have been very 
partial in our own judgment. 

You did not enquire into that ? — Certainly 
not. 

Did you enquire into complaints against 
the lor& of the Admiralty ? — More improper 
still, to enquire into complaints against our 
masters. 

Did you think you should be partial in ihat 
teBpcct ? — ^I hope not partial in any. . 

Did you think it your duty to enquire into 
anv thmg charged against the first lord of the 
Admiralty ?— Certainly not. 

Any thing against ihe commis^oners in 
general ? — Surely not. 

Were there any points, in captain Bafllie's 
book, that ailected those persons ? — ^If there 
was any charge that affiected any single direc- 
tor, we should have enquired into it : he did 
make some such, we enquired into tnem^ and 
found them very wrong charges. 

But respecting the c&ectors in general, you 
did not enquire into ? — Generals is nothing ; 
when he made them against any particular 
persons, captain Baillie's charge was read to 
them, tneir answers were received, and to the 
best of my judgment, we gave our opinion 
after the committee was over, and ihe report 
made, which your lordships may see in the 
report I had the honour to sign. 

Did you permit captain Baillie to make his 
-charged in a regular way^ and to support 
them ? — ^He had as much liberty as any per- 
son could have ; we never stopped him out 
when the gentlemen differed among them- 
selves, and made use of language very dis- 
agreeable ; we were sometimes obliged to 
order the house to be cleared, a^id to desire 
them to be more steady when they returned. 

Was captain Baillie permitted to arrange 
his complaint in the manner he thought pro- 
per ? — ne had while I was there, ana I oare 
say he had the whole time. 

Did a Mr. Morgan attend the court tiiere ? 



^He dkl for the ^ntlemeai against ivfaom 
Mr. Baillie alleged this charee. 

Did Mr. Morgan arrange his complain^ or 
Mr. Baillie himself ?*-4 c&nH know; I know 
Mr. Morgan talked a great deal, and so did 
Mr. Cowley, captain BsiNie's fHend, and pi«- 
vented business goi^g on, when it'mi^ 
have gone on much better. 

Dia Mr. Morgan arrange Mr. BaiUie't eom- 
plaints, or did Mr. Baillie make them in the 
manner he thought proper ? — I know nothiDj|r 
about their arrangement; I Wver saw their 
minutes; I heard their questions, and the le- 
plies to them, and gave our report accordinglj. 

Did you never hear captain Baillie object ti> 
the manner in which the enquiry was carried 
on ? — I was not at the first meeting ; when I 
came to the seoond meeting, I was surprized 
to see gentlemen who were strangers tnere; 
I asked who the v were, they said, one was 
counsel for several officers, and the other geo- 
tleman. Mr. Baillie's firiend, which we sup- 
posed then of the law, was counsel for him ; I 
did say, liiat if I had been, at the first meet- 
ing, I would have objected to counsel ; wt 
wanted so law, but to come at truth only. 

Did you hear captain Bailtie mak« any ob- 
jection to the court not permitting him to 
prove- his book irsm the beginning to tlie 
end? — ^No, never; captain &iUie gave tlie 
committee a great deal of trouble, by sundij 
improper questions, or the business miglit 
have been^one in half the time, and muoh 
better. 

Did yott permit captain Bcullie to call 
witnesses to prove the charges?— *A11 
charges I knew of. 

Did you permit him to call them, in tfae 
order he thought proper ? — ^I don't know ai^ 
thing to the contrary when I was in the chair. 

Do you recollect several of the blind meii 
were refiised to be called, concerning the w* 
moval of the posts and rails? — I remember 
the complunt tiiat captain Baillie made^ that 
the posts and rails being removed, that it waa 
a prejudice to the fwA men, that one bad 
been nm over by it ; I told them we admitted 
it to be true, and timefore they need not call 
witnesses to it. 

Did you feportthat you admitted it te be 
true ^— I cannot remeiriber «ight or ten 
months ago<; If I mistake in my memoiy, I 
submit to your lordshij^'s -goodness to comet 



Your memoty serves you to teO us, ^at 
-upon the reraovd of the nosts and ndls, you 
refused to call in ^e blina ^ men, tellii^ ca^ 
tain Baillie you admitted 4t? — There was ^ 
reasea given for it ; the ^me they were r&* 
moved, the accident happened ; we told bSAk 
we had heard the accident had happened, and 
we acumeieQi it* 

Then does not yoat memory seive you to 
tell, whether you stated that in the report ?-^*~ 
I donH .recollect; the report is on your lord- 
ships' table ; there was an accident happened ; 
we admitted ity I don't say we adoittea that 1ft 



ap^ rafeahg tke Boyttl HatfittilttGreemach. A. D. 1778k 



L3a^ 



wrangto lake the post» wad nils awrajr^ 
and jNit others ia the loom of them ; I daat 
•aj It was so; we upon the epquiiy and the 
coaunittee were satisfied with it, we admitted 
the man had received the accident. 

I>id ^Fou enquire whether it wasa gpeTUice 
•ubastmg? — Certunly we did examine, and 
it was not then subsisting, but rectified, and 
in a more safe order than before.* 

But did you refuse to hear the evidence of 
a Uind man, on the subject, ave or no ? — ^A 
blind man could not be an evidErace, whether 
the posts were removed^ aye or no ; we ad- 
mitted the &ct 

Did jou admit the evidence of the blind 
van, aye or no ? — It strikes me now, I believe 
we oidered the counsel to withdraw, and some 
centlemen came in with a report of ci^>tain 
Bailiie's behaviour at the door, in order to set 
tbcan aniast the court and civil officers ; I 
helieve 1 have that in wiitii^ if your lord- 
ships will permit me to read it ; the time the 
committee was debating upon it after the 
loom was cleared, the counsel for the 'civil of- 
ficers, Mr. Mor^ui, and the sentleman that 
attended Mr. Baillie as his inend iq[K>n the 
eaanunation; their language was very extras 
oidinai^r, their behaviour prevented tM busU 
aess goutt on; they were desired to with- 
diaw, and the court to be cleared. Captain 
Bullie asked if he was to return again ; we 
toU him directlv, he might do as he i>leased ; 
when we were debating this upon their going 
ottL the following extraordinary speech, which 
baa been just made in the room uyoining 
wdiere the committee sat^ by captain Bullie 
te two blind pensioners m the presence of 
most of the officers, and in the hearing of a 
aumber of pensioners and nurses, which se- 
veral of the officers were ready to attest, and 
which captain Bailhe, upon its being reao, did 
not mateiially dinvow ; ^ Go my ladsy you 
win not be hurdy-you mav break vour necks 
and be damn'd ; you. the utme and the bUnd, 
may do what you will for the committee, for 
you will meet with no redress here." I sub- 
mit to your lordships, whether after such an 
affiur as this, any gentleman would sit there 
%o do business. 

Was this after the committee was finished 
er not? — ^No; whai the gentlemen were de- 
aired to withdraw, that the committee might 
tidce into consideration, and &o over the evi- 
dence, and see if the clerk had entered it pro- 
Then I beg to know, whether you did re- 
fose to admit the evidence of the blind men, 
concerning the posts and rails? — ^Afterthat, 
we thought it proper to break up the commit- 
tee, but we Ittd before gpne through ever^ 
complaint but thi^; we wled in eveiy civil 



tUt diy, not 
oat off 



Orig.Ed, 



oiitnordiiiarj aVermsDt ; for, to 
ywdl of pott ood railing are pot op 
than twelTo hondrad jords ; jet, 
to tki tttto purport 



officer; befiwe we finished the enquiy, we 
asked them separately if they had an^r com* 
plaints to make, and your lordships will see 
their answer in the report 

You called the persons accused, to know if 
thev had any complaints ; did you call in Mr. 
Baulie ? — ^He went away after this. 

The blind men were not called? — They 
were not. 

You refused to call them in? — ^Afterthe 
captain had made this public declaration, what 
could we say ? 

Did captain Baillie desire the blind men 
mieht be called in to be examined aye or 
no r — He sent for the blind men, and after 
the behaviour of some of the gentlemen| 
when we were obliged to clear the room, and 
was going to take into con»deration what was 
necessary fia the examination of those people, 
we admitted the posts had been removed, and 
an accidenthad happened, and then when the 
report was brought m, of what captain Baillie 
had said, it was all over. 

I must have an answer, yea or no ; did cap- 
tain Baillie apply to the committee to have 
these blind men called in ? — ^I believe he sent 
for the blind men without applying to th^ 
committee. 

I ask, did he apply to the committee to send 
for them in to hear them? — I cannot charge 
my memory ; if he did, I believe it will appear 
in the minutes of the committee. 

Was the evidence of Mr. Charles Lefevre 
refiisedto be admitted ? — ^I believe Mr. Charles 
Lefevre had come before the committee, that 
sat once or twice before ; his name was men* 
tioned; the answer was, as the committee 
before had enquired into that afiair, we did 
not know it was the business of this commit* 
tee, to take into consideration what had been 
before the committee before, and under their 
consideration. 

Do yqu rec<^ect expressing yourself, that it 
was very impudent for one maa to find iauk 
with the conduct of so many gentlemen as the 
directors? — ^No, it never entered into my 
thoughts ; captain Baillie will do me the jus^ 
tice I hope to say, that I took hia part in one 
thkiff tl&t luippeitted there. 

what was that ? — I believe the rev. Mr. 
Cooke ; his affiih-s were under oonsideratioi^ 
and captain Baillie said very extraordinary 
thines against him, and I believe the other 
told nim he did not speak truth. 

Was there any body ebe? — There was 
Mr. Mylne, the clerk df the works ; he was 
charsed with something very indiscreet, and 
the huagpa^ was very disasreeable, and I be* 
lieve he imght return it wiu a proper resent* 
ment, but perhaps made use of a word, but I 
forget it; these thinss I wish to forget; the 
other struck me much, as coming firom ader*- 
gyman. 

Recollect the b^pmung of that conversa- 
tion?-^! would if i could, they were often 
loud, and contradicted on^ another too muc^ 
for a proper enquiry. 



327] 



18 GEORGE III. The Case of Captain Thomas BaUlie, \3SS 



I thought you said there was one instance, 
m which you said you took captain Baillie's 
^art ; what was that ? — ^In the instance of the 
rev. Mr. Cooke. 

Did you take his part against Mr. Cooke ? 
—Yes; I said Mr. Cooke had not behaved 
properly. 

who began in that business of Mr. Cooke; 
did captain Baillie? — Captain Baillie brought 
it up '/ he brought Mr. Cfooke from the other 
end of the room; he said some things that 
Mr. Cooke knew in his own mind he thought 
were not tnie. 

So captain Baillie's attack upon Mr. Cooke, 
was charging him with some things ? — The 
charge was always read, the person charged 
replied to it, and brought proper evidence to 
support his reply. 

Did captain Baillie make use of any other 
words to Mr. Cooke, than what he had said 
In his book ? — I don't know that he did. 

Do you suppose that the captdn's asserting 
the truth of his charges, was an insult? — I 
don't believe that captain Baillie's charges 
were true, nor one tenth part of them. 

Did he make use of any other word^, than 
asserting the truth of his charge ?-rI don't 
know, possibly he might. 

What were they then ? — I don't recollect. 

Do you recollect preventing captain All- 
"wright from answering a question concerning 
the quantity of broth token by people who had 
no nght to it? — There was a charge about 
some veal ; they iVere also asked, if there 
was any application from them to the board, 
that is the council; the civil officers were 
called in, all their names are down, to the 
number of 14 ; after a particular enquiry into 
the complaints of the Hospital, they were also 
asked, whether their application to the board 
of directors had not been duly attended to, 
and every grievance redressed ; they all saia 
they knew of none, except captain Allwright, 
who said he thought due regard had not been 
paid to a complaint made to coimcil respecting 
some bad veal which had been issued to the 
infirmary ; but it appeared by the minutes of 
the directors^ that proper notice had been 
taken of it by thcmj notwithstanding the 
proceeding therein was irregular; as aoctor 
Hossack, the physician, dec&red to the com- 
mittee he was not acquainted with it, not- 
withstanding it was inserted in the minute 
book, that he complained of it, nor did he 
. know any thing of tne matter. 

My question is, whether you prevented 
captain Allwright from answering a question 
concerning the quantity of broSi that was 
taken from the men, by officers who claimed 
it as a privilege or perquisite? — I don't re- 
member ever hcaringof such alhing ; if 1 did, it 
vill be in the minutes, which are very Correct. 

Do you remember whether you ordered 
captain Baillie to withdraw from the commits 
tee-room? — I mentioned that before; upon 
this extraordinary riot, I might call it, be- 
tween the lawyer and the people^ I ordered 



the room to be cleared ; I said we had dontf 
with law, you are to withdraw, and *have no 
occasion to return again ; c^pt. Baillie said, 
must I go too; just as you please. Sir; you 
may returnagsun, if you please. 

Did you tell capt. Baillie he might return if 
he pleased? — Yes; he might return if he 
pleased ; after we examined the witnesses, we 
went into consideration of the charges for and 
ajgainst, that we might draw them out clear ; 
then we ordered the room to be cleared be- 
cause we thoueht it not a proper place to do 
business in, wnen we come upon that, with 
20 people in it. 

Did capt. Baillie make any remonstrance at 
th^t time against being ordered to withdraw ? 
— ^Not a single word about it^ that I know of; 
certainly not. 

Did not capt. Baillie say he had more 
things to ur^ nefore the committee, he wish- 
ed to enter into proof of ? — ^When capt. Baillie 
offered any thing before the committee, it 
was entered into; there were some shirts 
that were not washed clean ; I proceeded ; 
we did not go there* as washermen, but to en- 
quire into the truth and regulation of the cha- 
nty ; we did not look'^at them ; we thought It 
not our duty to look at them; we paid 1], 
1% 140D/. a year, for washing of linen ;' they 
have the proper officers there, to take care of 
it; we suppose they do; it is their duty and 
interest; they can get nothing by not do- 



mgit. 



And therefore, when the complaint wis 
made, you did not chuse to enquire into it ? — 
We could not judge of washing a whole year, 
by a few shirts brought in upon a particular * 
occasion. 

What other way could you judge of it ? — 
Not by half a dozen shirts brought in. 

Could not you judge of it by hearing the 
evidence of the people ? — We had the people 
that washed them ; the reason we did not go 
into those particular thinp here, I have the 
honour to be one of the directors, every com- 
plaint of washing, meat, brewing, every thing, 
when complaint has been made to the direc- 
tors, the witnesses have been called; they 
have been examined, and the directors have 
taken it into consideration, and given proper 
orders to the proper officers to see it properly 
done ; therefore, I did not think there, as a 
member of the committee, that we were to 
repeat that there again ; every charge that is 
made, every complaint, let it 1)e ot what n&. 
ture it will, the persons are summoned to 
meet at the next court of directors ; they are 
to bring the proof with them, and the people 
charged to attend : that capt Baillie knows { 
he has been there hundreds of times. 

Then you are to examine the persons that 
washed the linen, and not those that wore 
them ? — ^We brought the proper people to at** 
test they were weil or ill done. 

Did you send for the pensioners that woro 
them ?— No ; it was not our business to seiMl 
tor the pensioners. 



^29]' mpe^ing ike Royal Hospital at Greenxoich. A. D. 1778. 



[380 



Not upon enquiries that concerned them^ 
— There are civil officers appo'mted for the 
purpose. 

Was it not your business to enquire into the 
complaints of the pensioners f — ^if they com- 
plained, we did. 

Did not cap! Baillie comphun? — I don't 
call him a penaoner. 

Did he not complain in his book ? — Excuse 
me about capt. Baillie's book ; people that 
know Greenwich Hospital, and read that 
book, will not be sunpnsed at an^ thing ; I 
believe the linen had been looked mto. 
• But did the committee look into it ? — I be- 
lieve they might; I did not, as chairman of 
the committee; we did every thing that was 
«ur duty ; every thing that was required of us. 
But you don't know that it was done ? — ^I 
dont 

' When you came to sign the report, did you 
mean to sign to the report of tne days you 
were present only, and the days you were 
not present also f — I signed to the whole re- 
port 

Without beinjg present yourself? — ^I pre- 
sume the committee did, when I was absent, 
as when I was present, they were very acai- 
rate in their enquiries ; they were very mi- 
nute in every article ; thc^ cleared the room 
four or five times, and reacl over the minutes. 
How do you know that, when you were not 
present? — ^I know it was so when I was there; 
I know it could not be otherwise by men of 
business. 

Though you were not there yourself, you 
are now telling us upon your oath, it could 
not be otherwise ; that the gentlemen of the 
committee, when you were not present, could 
not possibly do otherwise than be regular? — I 
ilo upon my oath declare, that I believe what 
i signed there to be exactly true. 
' But do you know it ? — I could not when I 
was not there. 

But you signed it? — ^Yes, I believe I did, 
ftnd I believe we all signed it.* 

Do you recollect having been ^ewn pat^ 
terns of cloth, to prove that the Hospital nad 
been served with articles of a bad qualitv ? — 
If your lordships will permit me, I will go 
into the particulars of what we purchase of 
the different people for the use ot the Hospi- 
tal ; when any thing is wanting, we advertise 
IB the public papers, that at such and such a 
^y, we will contract for such and such thines. 
Confine yourself to what was done at the 
committee; and whether you recollect there 
being shewn to you, at the committee, any 
patterns of cloth? — I don't recollect it. 

You don*t recollect being a little warm upon 
the occasion ? — I might be warm, but I don't 
recollect any tlung particular about it ; but I 
lecoUect I had reason enough to be warm, 
with the behaviour of the people about me. 
When you w^nt down the last day ,the seventh 

' * III ptfo 516 it appears by the report Ui^t it was 
Wfwd bj Mr. Buker and Mr. Cast only, ^Orig, Ed. 



day, how long did you imagine the committee 
would sit?— They told me the conunittee, be- 
fore, that they certainly should get through 
the next day ; they thought they should have 
done it the day before ; I saw by the minutet 
who had been examined ; I saw by the exa- 
minations who were gone through, and ther« 
were only two or three things to do the last 
day of the committee^ and as I mentioned 
before, after we had gone through all the en- 
quiries, I thought it necessary to call all the 
civil ofiiccrs in, to ask them a genecal ques- 
tion; if they had any complaints; if there 
was any ill behaviour ; if there was any thing 
that had not been redressed; they all d^ 
clared, which your lordships will see in the 
rqK)rt'(thei!'own words very strongly express- 
ed) no ; after that we asked every gentleman 
separately, by himself, had they any com- 
plaints; they all said no; the committee 
thought that it was necessary to adjourn to 
Salters? Hall, the usual place of our meeting 
in London, to summon all the directors to 
read the minutes of the committee, in order 
to form a report to the lords of the Admi- 
ralty. 

Had you no particular reason for putting an 
end to the committee that day? — ^No, only 
because we had gone through every thing. 

Was there no reason because of the pro- 
ceedings against capt. Baillie in Westminster- 
hall ? — I (fid not know any thing about it ; I 
did not know that there was a trial in West- 
minster-hall, till it was over. 

You said you asked every body, whether 
they had any thing fiirther to say ?--Certainly. 
y Did you ask capt. Baillie that?- He sat 
next to me on my right hand. 

Did you ask him that ? — ^Not in particular ; 
I asked if any gentleman had. 

And did not capt. Baillie say he had some- 
thing to say ?--€ertainly, nothing more than 
about the blind men; and his ^oing out 
making such a declaration as he did, I sup- 
posed he meant to put an end to the com- 
mittee. 

Did not capt. Baillie say he had more wit- 
nesses ^ to call, and begged to have them 
heard ?~No; not that 1 recollect; I would 
have sat four or five hours, to have paid capt. 
Baillie any compliments. 

[Mr. Barker withdrew.] 

Mr. Cowley called in. 

You attended this committee at the desire 
of capt. Baillie ?— I did. 

Had you any interest one way or other ? — 
None, but the prejudices of friendship; I had 
a great pleasure in attending a gentleman 
whom I conceive to be engaged in the cause 
of humanity. 

When the committee closed, did captain 
Baillie Acquiesce to its being closed in the 
manner it was ? — ^The whole was a scene of 
confusion ; Mr. Barker's conduct was every 
thin^, I conceive, to be arbitrary and tyran- 
nical through the whole course of the pro- 



$91] 



18 GEORGfe III. The Case of Captain Thomas JBaiOie, [3S9 



ceedings; captun Baillie declared thebusi* 
ness was not gone throush, nor one half 
through ; for we had relief durixiz the last 
two or tnree days, much upon Mr. Gust's pro- 
mises^ which we did not doubt he intended to 
perform. When Mr. Barker had gpne 
trough a mode of business, which I was not 
able to understand then, nor even now, what 
the distinctions were, they seemed calculated 
to puzzle, which they did me exceedingly, 
Mr. Barker desired we would withdraw; we 
pleaded the benefit of Mr. Gust's promises; 
some comphunts were madeof my behaviour; 
t wished to pay proper respect to the com^ 
mittee, though not to tneir proceedings. 
Captain Bailhc said, unless they would allow 
somebody to attend him, he could not attend 
at aJl ; it appeared to me the committee 
caught at that declaration with great eager- 
ness; then I desire you will withdraw too; 
be did immediatelvy and never received any 
other message to be called in ; several other 
gentlemen were called in, in his absence^and 
we understood the proceedings were resumed; 
the order for him to withdraw was peremp- 
tory ; we were told by Mr. Wells, as be was 
db-ivin^ off, that the committee would meet 
again to enquire into the matters concerning 
the direqtors ; but they would want nobody 
hut themselves. 

When captain Bsullie was ordered to with- 
draw, did he object to the closing the com- 
mittee ? — ^Yes; and that he considered it as a 
violent arbitrary proceeding, to order him to 
withdraw; the whole was a very confused 
proceeding, and rather auarrel than argument, 
throughout the whole. Gaptain Bailhe 
found that his evidence was generally refused 
to be called in ; he pressed much the business 
6f the blind men; that their minds were 
greatly disturbed : that it was a strbns charge 
m his Gase ; ana as he told Mr. Barker, that 
as he could not be allowed to call evidence, it 
was ridiculous to say they sat there to enquire 
into charges, and not hear evidence through ; 
the men were at the door ; the reasons given 
eeemed to be excuses why they should not be 
called in ; that the committee determined not 
to hear them ; the expressions that have been 
stated to this committee were not made use of 
^1 after they were repeatedly and peremptorily 
refused to l>e heard. Mr. Baillie's mind was 
a good deal heated, by finding his evidences 
were not to be heard, and the words he made 
use of were the complaints of a man in a 
passion. 

Upon what ground did you imagine that 
Mr. Barker was only half an hour, or an hour, 
in the committee the third day ? — I have re- 
collected a good deal since; I heard what 
Mr. Barker said ujpon that subject ; he did 
not make much impression on mv mind; 
when he attended, I believe, the third day, he 
might be longer there than an hour ; it did not 
press much upon my mind; I mentioned it 
96 a thing that happened half a year ago ; 
Mr. Barker might attend earlier; but the 



committee, in point of form, did not open till 
there were a proper number assembled; Mr. 
Barker might be present before. The mem- 
bers of the committee afterwards went tft 
diimer ; they staid a considerable time, and I 
recollect that Mr. Gust took notice of it after- 
wards ; he said this method of staying dinner 
will not do : we must not think ot dining any 
more ; so that I am pretty clear, in pomt of 
fact, that a greatdeaiof that time was short 
of actual business; how long Mr. Barker 
might be in Greenwich Hospital, or in the 
room, I am not competent to say, but that he 
was a short time in the room upon business, 
and therefore J did not impress my mind. 

What is your profession ? — ^I was bred in 
my father's shop in the country, a bookseller 
and stationer. 

What business do you follow ? — ^I am ni» 
other business than that; I don't follow the 
business. 

What business do vou follow? — ^I don't 
follow particularly any business. 

You are not a country gentleman of a landed 
estate, are you ? — No. 

Then vou follow some business for your 
livelihood ? — ^Yes. 

What is that? — ^I have the good fortune to 
,have some benefit from the stage, from mj 
wife's writings. 

What profession do you follow? — ^I was 
bred in my father's shop. 

Are you a writer yourself? — ^I certainlj- 
do write. [Mr. Gowley withdrew.] 



Tueidojf, Moty 4, 1779. 
The Rev. Mr. Cooke called in. 

Whether you were present at any conversa- 
tion that parsed between the earl of Sand- 
wich, Mr. Murphy, and Mr. Butler, in D^:em* 
her last ? — ^I was. 

Relate what passed at that conversation ? — 
I was present with Mr. Murphy, Mr. Butler^ 
and i^y lord Sandwich ; Mr. Murphy came 
there with proposals from Mr. Baillie ; and I 
recollect that Mr. Baillie' s proposals ¥rere for 
an equivalent to be made him, that he might 
quit Greenwich Hospital; the proposals^ as I 
recollect, were, that his suspension should be 
taken ofif ; that he should stay in the Hospital 
a given tune ; that an equivalent sboukl be 
nuule : I think these were the proposals that 
were made ; when my lord Sandwich heard 
those proposals, he gave little attention to 
them; Mr. Baillie said he would bum his 
papers, and give up his books and those sort 
of things in the presence of any body; ford 
Sandwich said, I care not at all for your 
books and papers: Mr. BuUie has done as 
much mischief as he can ; he can do no more ; 
I don't wish to ruin Mr. Baillie nor his ia- 
milv ; I should wish to have nothing to do 
with him ; as to his family, I should iMtve no 
objection, out of compassion sake, to do for 
them J I have nothing Iq tiie worla to say I9 



SSS\ retpeeUi^ the Ro^ H^tpUal at GrtettMch. A. D. 177S. 



[S» 



captain Baillie as to fais proposals about his 
books ; he has done as much misehief as he 
can; it was mentioDed itscoming into parlia- 
ment ; his lordship said he was roeidy to meet 
jt in parliament, or any where else ; that is 
pretty much wKat passed ; tficre were suhse- 

?ucnt meeting I believe, that I was not at; 
am clearly of opinion, that lord Sandwich 
never couldf or would have listened to it, if it 
had not been out of mere compasaion to his 
&mily; he did not consider the manhiniself 
in any respect, nor did he wish that it micht 
not be brought forward ; he rather wished that 
it might ; and as to any office or employment 
thatne should a^ for, his lordship said he 
was very unfit for any ; and I am sure he was 
moved to it by nothing but mere motives of 
kindness to his familjr. 

Have you done giving an account of what 
passed? — ^Yes; that is, as I believe, as much 
as I recollect of the matter. 

Do you know how Mr. Murphy came to 
that meeting ? — ^No ; that I do not know. 

Do you recollect nothing else that passed 
at that conversation ?— No ; I don't recollect 
at present ; there might be something more 
pass, but I don't recollect any thing more at 
present ; that is the substance of it, as much 
as I recollect, nor have I thought much upon 
it since. 

Do you recollect nothing passing relative to 
m Mr. Devisme? — Yes; that was what I 
meant with respect to his fiimily, or any 
part of his family, out of compassion, that he 
mio;ht wish to serve, in case captain Baillie 
qmtted the Hospital^ resigned^ gave it up, or 
went away. 

Relate to the committee the particular 
conversation, as near as vou can recollect, 
the words that passed, wiUiout making your 
comment upon them ? — I cannot do that ; I 
<an give you the substance of it; which I 
have done ; lord Sandwich was very ready to 
meet the enquiry; he had done every thine 
he coudd do ; luul nothing to give up ; he had 
got it into parliament, and he could not get it 
out of paruament. 

Did lord Sandwich say he had seen captain 
Kirke? — ^I think lord ^sindwich did say he 
had seen captain Kirke. 

What did he say he had said to captain 
Kirke ? — I do not remember. 

What did lord Sandwich say cs4)tain Kirke 
had said to him?— I did not hear lord Sand^ 
wich sav ; it was a message I was much in- 
disposed to listen to. for I did not like it at 
all. 

I am asldng you what lord Sandwich said, 
not what you were inclined to ? — I wsh to 
keep nothwg from the House that I know. 

Do you say that you did not hear lord 
Sandwich say, that he had spoke to captain 
Kirke; and that captain Kirke haa no 
thoughts of Greenwich Hospital ? — I do not 
recoflect that. 

You did recollect that lord Sandmch had 
i^ke to captain Kirke?— He said he had 



seen captain Kirke, and had rooke to htm ; 
but I do not recollect what lord Sandwich 
said had passed between them. 

It is extraordinary that you should recol- 
lect that lord Sandwich had said he spoke to 
captain Kirke, and yet you should not recol* 
lect what he said had passed between them f 
— ^I do not recollect that. 

Do you recollect, whether lord Sandwidi 
said tAe directors of Greenwich Hospital had 
said, they would not act with captain BaillicT 
— ^I did not hear lord Sandwicn say that; I 
can answer for one, as a director, that I would 
not; I did not hear lord Sandwich say that; 
he might say it ; but I did not hear him. 

Did""^you hear lord Sandwich say, he must 

<luarrel with them, or captain Baillie? I 

did not hear lord Sandwich say the least lik* 
that. 

Did you hear lord Sandwich s?w, that thert 
was in captsun Baillie a great deal of ri^t and 
a great deal of virrongP-No; I have heard 
lord Sandwich say there was a great deal of 
wrong in him. 

But you never heard him say there was a 
great deal of right ?— No ; I never have. 

What did lord Sandwich say he would do, 
out of compassion to captain Baillie and his 
family ?— That he did not wish to ruin captain 
Baillie; to send him into the world a beggar, 
and in want ; I believe lord Sandwich's com- 
passion and goodness would have gone so &r 
as to do something for his family. 

I am not asking what vou ijiink lord 
Sandwich would do Tor hislamily; but what 
did lord Sandwich say he would dfo for his fa- 
mily? — ^I believe lord Sandwich would do 
something for his family. 

Did lord Sandwich, by any words, express a 
disposition to do any thing for captain Baillie ? 
— Not for captain Baijhe; but for lus far% 
mUy. 

What to do for his family ?— That he wi^- 
ed to serve Mr. Devisme. * • 

How ? — It was his proposition, as coining 
from captain Baillie himself, through Mr. 
Murphy ; I have always understood it ca^e 
from him, that he wished Mr. Devisme might 
be made a commissioner of victualling. In the 
room of captain Kirke. 

What did lord Sandwich say to that sub« 
ject ?— I don't recollect what he sadd to that 
subject. 

Do vou recollect whether lord Sandwich 
said, that if captain Baillie would resign, 
that he would make his half pay 600/. a year? 
I never heard him say any such thing. Cap« 
tain Baillie said, he thought his pla^ e worth 
600/. a year. 

Captain Baillie was not there. — I am. 
speaking of the proposal th^t came from cap« 
tain B^tie ; for I look upon ^ose proposals 
to come from him, through his counsel and 
through his-agent. 

Give ■ an account of what the ag^nt saU 
then.r-Tbe agent said captun Bailue looked 
upon his place to be worth 600/. a year; bu^ 



JI3] in GEORG£ nL Tie Case of Captain Thmas BaillUf [339 



itiitttt i«' j:**'*^ -™* **'*'^ * ""^ 

^j^ ' JwH «iiiii FBas^ I« ionl Saodwicb 
^^ ^ UuBRt^tm Mr. Mivpiij's saying, be 
iSttautiL ai |tfi« ««rth 600/. a year? 
Viae di£ iirc ^am^mkh ay to that? — I do 




"i. 



Xu «ac tttt lycn you to say, that lord 
^0io«3dt 'M. mA, m tint conversation, say he 
^muit BBiAK o^ hts place 600/. a year, if cap- 
ttta e«ialiir viMki xv^ign his employment? — I 
toti nat aa^esstud lord Sandwich to say any 

iKuI VIM tiike upon yourself to say he did 
ttiit :»/ ao? — ^1 will not take upon myself to 

^ ^*; I did zK>t understand him to say so. 

VVui vou undertake to sav he did not say 
ao ^ — I io not recollect it; but I will under- 
tikx to say I did not understand lord Sand- 
wkii lo say, that he would give equal to 600/. 
a year. 

Did you hear lord Sandwich say, he 
tbov^t that the valuation of Mr. Murphy a 
£ur valuation of captain Baillie's place ? — ^No; 
I did not hear him say that. 

You did not hear lord Sandwich say, he 
thought Mr. Murphy, in stating captain Bail- 
lie's place worth 600/. a year, stated it a fair 
valuation ? — I did not ; lord Sandwich knows 
the value of the place. ^ 

I am not asking you what lord Sandwich 
knows ; but what you heard in that conver- 
^ sation. Whetheiyou did not say, at that con- 
versation, that it must be expected that the 
report of the committee should be printed 
without any replv ? — I did say that; I thought 
that the report should be printed, in case any 
thing was settled with respect to that negocia^ 
tion ; that on the part of the directors, on the 
part of the individuals, and the officers of the 
jhouse, that it should be printed, as a justifica- 
tion of their characters. 

And did you not say, that it must be printed 
without a reply from captain B^lhe? — ^I said 
no such thing as without any reply. 

Then, of course, as you did not say that, 
you do not recollect, whether Mr. Murphy, in 
' answer to that^ said, that the report was al- 
ready printed, in two columns ; that therefore 
it might be depended upon thiait captain Bail- 
lie would print a third column? — ^I remember 
no such thmg. 

Do you recollect, whether lord Sandwich 
•aid that if captain Baillie did not resign 
his office, he should look upon it as a flag of 
defiance ^ — I never heard lord Sandwich say 
any such words. 

That he would turn him out, and he must 
take the consequence? — ^I never heard him 
fay such wdhis. [Rev. Mr. Cooke withdrew.] 

Mr. Bcrteh called in. 

, ' What profession art you of ?-'A p«at«r and 
a picture-cleantr. 

t 



Have you much business in the way of 
cleaning pictures ? — ^I do a peaX deal. 

Do you know the paintmgs of Greenwich 
Hospital ? — ^I do. 

It they had been advertised to have been 
cleaned, for what sum would you have done 
it ?-^For about 400/. 

If you had been, required to give security 
for doing it in a proper manner, so as not to 
have hurt, or damaged the pictures, would 
you have undertaken to give security for so 
doing?— I would. [Mr. Bertels withdrew.} 

John Glass called in. 

What is your station in Greenwich Hospi- 
tal ? — I am in none at present; I am turned 
out of the house for life. 

What ¥^ere you in Greenwich Hospital? — A 
boatswain of the Painted-hall. 

What were 3'ou turned out for? — The 
greatest reason that I think is, I had two sum- 
monses from your lordships; the first was 
from the rev. Mr. Cooke, as I was told, thera* 
fore I was certain that I could say nothing 
with regard to that side, but captain Baillle's.; 
as I had given my affidavit of the expcnce of 
cleaning the Painted-hall, concenung the 
workmen's wages, I had given an account of 
that, and attended this House. Mr. Picton, 
the boatswain of the infirmary, brought mc a 
summons firom the House of Lords; he said 
it came from the rev. Mr. Cooke; I was 
amazed I should have a summons from him'; 
that was on the 24th. On t^ie 25th I had 
another ; that was brought by the messenger 
belonging to Greenwich Hospital; when I 
came from dinner, I had the summons given 
me by one of. my partners ; he said, it came 
from Mr. Herbert, the messenger of the hou^ 
at Greenwich ; that summons coming, as X 
imagined, from captain Baillie, I thouglit I was 
to attend to strictly ; and, because I attended 
to that, it was one of the reasons why I was 
turned out of the Hospital for life ; upon the 
account that I did not attend to the rev. Mr. 
Cooke's summons. 

Are you turned out? — ^I am. 

What was the complaint, that was entered 
into the complaint book, against .\ou ? — ^After 
not attending to Mr. Cooke's summons, IVIr. 
Mylne, the clerk of the works, happened to 
come in, upon the 6th of March ; the Painted- 
hall had been cleaned for the Sunday's ser- 
vice; it is made into a temporary chapel 
since the fire ; a strange dos came m, I did 
not know it was Mr. M^lne s dog, he came 
in ailer Mr. Mylne, I did not suppose it was 
Mr. Mylne's dog, or I would not nave turned 
him oui ; it was my order to keep dogs out, 
because it had been cleaned for tlie Sunday 
service. Mr. Mylne was swearing, in a vior 
lent manner, at the workmen, that were doinc 
the curtain to stop the sound of the echo ; X 
went in, at the same time, and I took my 
great coat, and went to hunch the dog out; 
upon that, Mr. Mylne left off his conversatioa 
with the workmen^ aad said to me, thati* 



337] respeetusg the Royal ilo$pHal at Gretnmch. k. D. 1778< 



[SSS 



IDT dog, I will have my dog taken care of as 
well as myself ; he doubled his fist at me, 
and advanced two steps towards me, and call- 
ed me a son of a bitch, and, more than that, 
said I was a damned impertinent scoundrel ; I 
said it was more than any gentleman in ^e 
Hospital would say ; Mr. Myme was not satis- 
fied with that, but went out and returned 
again in a few minutes ; I was standing with 
my back to the northwa^ ; he came up, with 
a frown u|>on his brow, and an^er in his coun- 
tenance ; he said to me, what is your name ? 
I said, John Glass ; he said, I know it well, 
and doubled hb fist at me again. A little 
after that, on the 10th of the month, I hap- 
pened to be upon my dutjr at the Painted- 
hall, Mr. Fortye, the last lieutenant appoint- 
ed, came in with a youn^ lady to play the 
oigan, an<^ some more gentlefolks with them ; 
the sound of my voice, when I was giving the 
explanation of the paintings to the company, 
drowned the oi^an ; if I hm known they were 
upon a party of pleasure for music, I would 
not have begun upon that dut;^ ; Mr. Fortye 
said, leave oIT; I left off immediately; I obey- 
ed him as being a lieutenant There i.s a rule, 
when a stranger comes, to shut the upper-hall 
door ; for if &at door is open, a stranger will 
go up to see the paintiuss there ; I pulled to 
the Qoor and shut it, as I had done before ; in 
so doing, the rev. Mr. Maule, who was in the 
.ball at the same time, said to me, what is 
that for? I said, it was mv orders. That 
your orders ? I said yes ; and I have received 
it from different gentlemen in tiiis House, and 
therefore I do no more than I have done be- 
fore. I locked the door, as I often have done ; 
but one fault I did, in taking the key out and 
putting it in my pocket ; I acknowledge that 
as a fault The rev. Mr. Maule said to me, 
open the door; I own I disobeyed him the 
urst time; but the second time I took the 
key out of my pocket, and opened the door; 
then I obeyed the rev. Mr. Maule. Tlie next 
day following, I came up to attend your lord- 
ships, according to my summons; captain 
Alaplesden came into the Painted-hall ; my 
poor wife came to take ifty two quarts of beer, 
and she heard the noise. Where is John 
Glass ? They told him, I was attending at 
the liouse of Lords, according to my sum- 
mons ; he said, I was to do no more business 
there as boatswain. When I came home, my 
wife gave me that joy. Poor woman, she 
kept up her spirits. Biit if he is broke, says 
she, it IS for no harm. When she told me of 
it, I said I could not help it ; perhaps some- 
thins else w<)uld come by and by. I went to 
Mr. Xane^ the porter that hires us to shew 
the paintings^ and pays our wages ; I said, I 
understood I had been broke, since I had 
been tip at the House of Lords ; he said, I am 
aorry for it, for you are partlv my main beam ; 
I entrusted you, and found you honest. I 
came up again, on Friday, to attend the 
House of Lords ; I was sworn that day at the 
\ax, I went on Satuniay to captain Maples- 
VOL. XXI. 



den, our new lieutenant-governor's house. 
WHat do you want ? I am John Glass ; I 
came to know whether you have broke me as 
being boatswain ; he said he had; and it is 
my positive orders that vou shall do no duty 
there. I said, sir Charles Hardy made me, 
and I have been told it depends on him to 
break me. The next day, when the people 
came up here, to see your lordships going to 
the House, myself and my brother pensioners 
said it was a great sight; I came up, and 
thought it was a noble one; some of the 
nurses clapped their hands together, and said, 
God Aln}ighty bless your lordships! God 
bless captain Baillie! Captain Baillie for 
ever ! Truth and justice, and no alteration 
of the charter ! These were the words they 
said. When I saw his royal highness the 
duke of Cumberland, I pulled off my hat, and 
gave thrcK? cheers, as I knew the livery ; that 
was another great offence. On the Saturday 
following, I was sent for to captain Maples- 
den's apartments, where I found captaii^ 
Chads, captain Xynn, and lieutenant Besson. 
I was acaised then 5 there was a person to 
write against us as rioters, and we were ac- 
cused of that which I will do again ; when I 
see any of the princes of the blood, I will give 
them three cheSrs, or any lord. Lieutenant 
Besson said, he did not see that I was to 
blame, for that I was no duty boatswain, nor 
mate ; I said, I was summoned to be there^ 
that there was no mob, but only a collection 
of poor old geese, as we are stiled at Green- 
wich, come to see your lordships come to the 
House, and we were very well pleased. Cap- 
tain Maplesden said, wny did I not disperse 
the mob r Was it supposed that I could dis- 
perse the mob, when six boatswains could not 
do it ; they went into their ranks again, and 
stood just as if they were to face the French. 
I was reckoned a bad man, and a riotous per- 
son ; that was another great part of my of^ 
fence. At present, I have neither victuals, 
nor drink,'nor money ; I have the air to look 
at, and a wife to support. 

How long have you been at sea ? — ^Nine- 
teen years ; and 1 should have been at 
sea nmeteen years more if I had not lost 
the use of my right hand (holding up his 
hand). I have been up the Streights with 
the auke of York ; I have been five years in 
the Hospital, and was never complained of 
before. 

Did you keep an account of the cleaning 
and repairing 01 the paintings ? — I did. 

What did it amount to? — About 170^ with 
regard to the workmen's wages. 

How do you know what their wages were ? 
— The people employed, told me, and Mr. 
Davis's sons have told me themselves. 

Did you keep an account of that time ? — I 
did. 

And fifom the accounts of their time, and 
the wages that Mr. Davis's people told you 
they worked at, how much do you say it 
amounted to ?— One hundred and seventy odd 

Z 



S39] 



18 GEORGB in. The Case of Captain Thomas BaittU^ [340 



pounds, letting alone materials, only bare 
wages to different workmen. 

Were you desired to keep such an account ? 
— No, not at all; I kept it for my own satis- 
faction, as I heard 1,000/. was to be paid for 
it; the workmen, and several gentlemen that 
came in, said it was a vexy fine job. 

What did they mean, by saying it was a 
fine job? — For Mr. Davis to clear so much 
money a&they supposed he did; they looked 
upon It, it mieht be done for about 400i. a 
geut!eman said he was a judge of painting. 

What was it supposed Mr. Davis was to 
receive? — ^A thousand pounds. 

Aim), by your account of the workmen, how 
much did' vou say it cost ? — One hundred and 
seventy oJd pounds. 

Did any body find fault with you, for taking 
diis account? — ^Nobody at all. 

And are you now quite turned out of Green- 
wich Hospital? — Yes; I am entirely. 

Was it by the council ? — Yes, I was pre- 
sent; I was dismissed ten days oefore I was 
tried with regard to the dog, and opening the 
door with an air of impertinence, as it was 
called, and leaving ofi" the explanation when 
I was desired. 

And the other time ^'as for attending this 
House ? — ^Yes ; I went to the coimcil to answer 
charges alleged against me ; I stood an hour 
and naif; lieutenant Fortye gave his evidence 
against me, that I had behaved in an insolent 
manner; and he owned, at the same time, 
that I lefi off when he desired me ; therefore, 
I think, I obeyed him. The rev. Mr. Maule 
was the next evidence against me ; he said^ I 
would not open the door the first time he de- 
sired me ; wnich I own was a fiuilt. I was 
ordered then to speak in my own defence; 
but I am before my story ; captain Maplesden 
said. What did he say? What was his iniper- 
tinence ? What was his bad behaviour ? lieu- 
tenant Fortye said, I said nothing, but mut- 
tered. I leave that to your lordships whether 
that is saying any thing. I was ordered, by 
the council, to beg pudon, which I would 
have done willingly : I was to be broke from 
my place, as being ooatswain of the Painted 
Half; but that was not thought sufficient; 
that would not do; but I must stand three 
meat days in tlie pillory, before the body of 
the pensioners. 

Is it usual in Greenwich Hospital, to put 
eople in the pillory for the first offence r — 
'he first ofience is always forgiven by the 
council. 

Was this your first offence ?— Yes, it was, 
and yet I was ordered to be in the pillory 
three meat days, besides begging pardon, and 
being broke fronx being a boatswain. 

Did you refuse that?— The pillory I did; 
the rest I agreed to ; 1 would not stand in the 
pillory, as I was ordered to give evidence the 
next day at your lordships' bar ; because I 
thought the pillory a thing for a rogue; that 
was my great objection against it 
c Who were at the council ?— Captain Mar 



^ 



plesden, captain Lynn, captain Chads, lieute- 
nant Fortye, lieutenant Kerr, the reverend 
Mr. Cooke, the reverend Mr. Maule, and I 
believe Mr. Godby came in now and then, to 

give his approbation. I would not do that ; 
len said captain Maplesden, you must take 
the consequence ; then said I, so I will; he 
said t^e consequence is, you* will be turned 
out of the House ; I said, I am sorry for it. 
I was ordered to come to the council next 
week ; lieutenant Moyle came out, and said, 
I am lieutenant of the week; he sdd, will 
you agree to what the council have ordered ? 
W ill you beg pardon in that manner ? I said 
I would do every thing but stand in the pil- 
loty; lieutenant Moyle sent for the regii^ 
latmg boatswain, who came presently afier, 
with a couple of centinels with . halberts, and 
the mate of the ^uard ; I said to one White^ 
What is this for? Have I been guilty of any 
thefl or misdemeanor, that I am to be ranked 
out between himdreds of men ? Two or three 
men that had been so guilty, had not been 
ranked out in that manner, but went out vo» 
luntaiy. Captain Maplesden came out and 
said^ it is our pleasure you should be ranked 
out m that manner, for not doing as we de- 
sired you; captain Lynn came out, and said 
very kindly to me, * Were it in my power I 
would hang you.' 

You Deed not go on with that part of the 
story; you were entirely turned out of the 
Hospital? — ^Yes; ever since the 20th of lust 
month. 

Is at usual for boatswains ever standing in 
the pillory ? — I never knew an instance of a 
boatswain's standing in the pillory ^ce I 
have been in the house. 

How came you to go to take the advica 
of counsel, that the governor, admiral Hardy, 
was the only person that could turn you out 
of your place? — ^If those gentlemen that sat 
at the council took that power out of sir 
Charles's hand, I cannot answer for that. 

How came you to ask counsel's advice ?-— 
By order of the lieutenant of the week. 

When was that ?— The i22nd of last month. 

And vou mentioned, upon a former occa- 
sion, that you applied to counsel, to know 
whether any body hut admiral Hardy could' 
turn you out? — Before I was on the Painted 
Hall duty, I was a white frock man; and 
some of the pensioners would sometimes 
come, when the beer was bad. and would find 
fault with us ; we used to tell them we could 
not redress it, but they must go to the officers 
belonging to the House ; I was at the council 
with re^rd to that, and eave my evidence 
at the council with regard to the beer; the 
beer was very bad. 

You meant the council of the Hospital * 
did you ? — Yes. [John Glass withdrew.] 

Charles Butler, esq. called in. 

Whether you were present at any conver«> 
sation between lord Sandwich and Mr. Mur«> 
phy, upon the subject of captain BaiUie ? — ^I 



r 



Sil] rttpeetuig the Roj/al Hotpital oi Grteimdu A. D. 1778. 



tS4« 



i 

I 



bcj^ leave to submit to your lordships, that it 
n impossible for me to answer that question. 
I know nothing at all on this subject, but 
what I know as counsel for lord Sandwich ; 
and therefore, I conceive it would be improper 
lor me to answer that question ; at the same 
time, I beg leave to observe, that it does not 
proceed from the least want of respect to this 
House, but from what I have been told is a 
professional duty. 

^ Earl of Santkoieh, I am exceedingly de- 
aiious that Mr. Butler should answer; and if 
it is out of any delicacy to me, that he re- 
iieesto answer, I totally absolve him from 
any such obligation ; and it is my desire he 
wiu suffer himself to be examined ; I absolve 
him from any engagement of secrecy he may 
have to me. — A. I am very sorry to be so ex- 
ceeding troublesome to your lordships ; but, 
as in the course of this business of which I 
am now called upon to give an account, the 
greatest part of what I know, I also know 
nom a communication with the counsel of 
captain Baillie ; I conceive I am not at liberty 
to speak, unless I have also the consent of 
captain Baillie. 

I beg to know whether you are of the pro- 
fesaon of the law ? — I am. 

Have you taken the oaths ? — That^ I should 
apprehend, is a question which this House 
wul have the humanity not to ask of me, be- 
cause it leads to an explanation rather incon- 
venient to myself. 

Captain BaiUie called in. 

Have you any objections to Mr. Butler de- 
danng any thmg he knows concerning the 
tnmsaction between lord Sandwich and you ? 
—I have no secrets in this business. 

Are you desirous that both Mr., Butler and 
Wr. Murphy should be examined? — I wish 
eiDeedingty they may be both examined. 

Mr. Butler sworn at the bar. 

Mr. Butler. I hope your lordships will ex- 
cuse me in mentioning, that as 1 have now 
the express consent to be examined of lord 
Sandwich and captain Baillie, whether I am 
to be called counsel or attorney, I wish to 
wave, because it is waved by the parties. 

Were you present at any conversation be- 
tween lord Sandwich and Mr. Murphy on the 
subject of captain Baillie } — I was present at a 
conversation between lord Sandwich and Mr. 
Murphy on the occasion ; but I believe it will be 
diffiailt to explain that conversation, unless I 
aslo explain the steps preceding it ; and if your 
lordships will nve me leave, I shall be glad to 
mention all I know upon the subject. About 
the beginning of the mouth of last December, 
being at Serle's coffee-house, in lincoln's-inn, 
(a coffee-house much frequented by lawyers) 
Mr. Murphy came in ; we discoursed together 
€D Various subjects ; and, at length, upon the 
'subject of Greenwich Hospital; but which 
first mentioned that subject, I am at present 
at a loss to recoQect ; I beheve your lordship 
recollect a topic of conversation that was^ 



about that time, very frequent even amon j 
your lordships, the very great display of abi- 
lities that a voung gentleman of the profes- 
sion of the law had made on the argument * 
concerning Greenwich Hospital, in the court 
of King's-bench ; as far as my recollection 
now serves me, it began by a conversation re- 
lative to tha^ gentleman ; I had not been 
present at the argument, and therefore it is 
probable I might ask Mr. Murphy, whether 
that gentleman was entitled to the great re- ^ 
putation he had acquired ; it is exceedingly ' 
probable the conversation might begin upon 
that subject, though I do not recollect it 
exactly, and that it migjht go on to the case 
of Greenwich Hospital ; in the course of that 
business, Mr. Murphy said he was exceeding- 
ly surprised that lord Sandwich did not ac 
cept captain Baillie*s offer of retiring for an / 
equivalent provision ; that to ruin captain 
Baillie would be beneath lord Sandwich ; to 
make a provision for him would be generous ; 
and he wondered his lordship did not do it. 
I asked him if captain Baillie was in earnest 
in that proposal. Mr. Murphy's answer was, 
that to be consistent with himself, he must 
be so. I told him that I frequently had the 
honour of seeing lord Sandwicn^ and, if it was 
his desire, that I should mention what had 
passed between us to his lordship, I would do 
so ; he accordingly not only consented, but 
desired that I should do it; I wrote to his 
lordship, that I had some particular bu^ess 
to communicate to him, and begged he would 
appoint a time when I should wait upon him ; 
his lordship appointed me to breakfast with 
him the next day ; and I accordingly waited 
upon him ; I cannot immediately recollect 
the day of the month > and though I have 
taken some pains to find it, I have not been 
able ; but I should imagine it *vas about the 
10th, 11th, or isth (but I maybe wrong as 
to two or three days) of the mouth of De- 
cember. In consequence of this desire, I 
waited upon his lordship ; he heard me relate 
the conversation which had passed between 
Mr. Murphy and myself the preceding day; . 
it is impossible to be more ayerse tmm his 
lordship was to proceed at all upon the busi- 
ness ; put upon my representing to him, that 
Mr. Murphy was a man of a very respectable ' 
character, his lordship consented to give him. 
through me, an answer to what had passed 
the day before between us ; his lordship said, 
however disrespectful, ungrateful, or ungene- 
rous, captain Baillie's conduct might nave 
been, he really did not wish to ruin him, or 
to add to his distresses ; but captain Baillie 
had made himself so exceeding odious to 
every person in the Hospital, and his stay 
there would be such an infinite source of di^ 
content and division, and was so directly 
contrary and incompatible with the peace and 
welfare of the Hospital, that it was impossi- 

* Se0 JMr. finikio0*8 (Bout powwfbl ipeoQli, wf. 
p. 31. 



343] 



18 GEORGE UI. The Case of Captain Thomas BaillU, [344 



ble to continue him in the Hospital any 
longec; if, therefore, he would consult the 
peace and welfare of the Hospital so much, 
as to retire immediately, and resign all his of- 
fices end employments there, that he had no 
objection to make him some provision ; he 
said he would not see captain BailUe on any 
account or pretence whatever ; but that* he 
had no objection to see Mr. Murphy. Lcom- 
municated these proposals to Mr. Murphy the 
same day ; and, at the same meeting, the fol- 
lowing proposals were dictated to me, by Mr. 
Murphy. 

How did you communicate to Mr. Murphy 
"^yhat lord Sandwich said ? — By word of mouth; 
when I came into Mr. Murphy's chambers, 
captain Baillie and his brother fas Mr. Mur- 
phy has since told me) happenea, by accident, 
to be at Mr. Murphy's chambers ; when I 
came into Mr. Murphy's chambers, those two 
gentlemen retired into another apartment ; I 
told Mr. Murphy what hafl passed between 
Xdrd Sandwich and myself; and this proposal 
was immediately dictated to me by Mr. Mur- 
phy : '* Captain Baillie, upon havmg his sus- 
pension taken off, and receiving the interme- 
diate profits, and being permitted to stay in 
the Hospital for a given time, will then resign 
his office, an equivalent provision being to be 
made for him ; he considers'his place in the 
Hospital at 600/. per annum ; being desired 
to point out a mode, he thinks it may be 
done in the following manner: he under- 
stands captain Kirke, a commissioner of the 
vie tualling-oflice, would prefer to be the lieute- 
nant jgpvemor of Greenwich Hospital ; he 
therefore may be appointed in captain Bail- 
lie's room ; and captain Baillie will be con- 
tent to retire on his half-pay, if his son-in-law, 
Mr. Devisme, is appointed a commissioner, in 
the room of Mr. Kirke ; or a commissioner's 
place, at Minorca, for himself ;— in this case, 
he will do whatever is in his power to prevent 
^y farther disturbance on the subject ; and 
the remaining copies of the printed Case shall 
be destroyed m the presence of any person 
that will attend for that purpose. He hopes 
there will be no more printing on either side." 
This proposal was dictated to me by Mr. 
Murphy, and which I communicated to his 
lordship. 

Is that paper in your hand-writing, or in 
Mr. Murphy's ? — In my hand-writing ; it is 
what Mr. Murphy immediately dictated ; I 
;am at present at a loss to say whether it was 
taken from a paper I copied immediately 
under his eye, or wliether he dictated it ; I 
believe it w^ partly the one, afad partly the 
other ; but as soon as X copied it, I read it : 
there is also in this paper some words, which 
1 should mention to your lordships, which 
jare as follows : " Memorandum, to explain 

to " (which was lord Sandwich) " the 

purport of the first and last article." That is 
a memorandum which I made at tlie time, 
enly for my own observatiotfi, as this was not 
the tiling nieaQt to be immediately delivenxl 



in to his lordship. I immediately sent t^at 
proposal to my lord Sandwich. I received, 
the same day, a letter from him, desiring that 
Mr. Murphy and myself would attend, at his 
lordship's house, the Sunday following ; I be- 
lieve it was the next day but one following ; 
but, however, I recollect it was the Sunday 
following ; accordingly, Mr. Murphy and my- 
self waited upon his lordship. 

Did you send a copy of that letter to my 
lord Sandwich ?— This is the direct paper 
which I sent to his lordship ; in consequence 
of this, Mr. Murphy and I waited upon his 
lordship, Mr. Cooke was also present; his 
lordship told Mr. Murphy, that captain Baillie 
was a man with whom he could have no con- 
nection, or transact any business, but that he 
had formerly been concerned in business, in 
which Mr. Murphy had been employed ; he 
also said' he knew him very well from his 
character, and therefore considered him as a 
man, on "whose honour and integrity he could 
rely ; he also Said, that whatever motives of 
complaint he might have against captain 
Baillie, these motives really hs^ at that time 
no kind of weight with him ; that his pre- 
sence in the Hospital was grown to be such 
a great, obstacle to the peace, welfare, and 
good government of the Hospital, that it was 
impossible he should continue there any 
longer; that he had received formal com^ 
plamts against captain Baillie, from every 
order of men in the Hospital, and thereibre it 
was not in his power to continue him, if he 
meant to act for the welfare and good of the 
Hospital, but he did not wish to ruin him ; if 
captain Baillie would so fkr consider the 
peace and welfare of the Hospital^ as to retire 
immediately, and resign all his ofiSces and 
employments, he had no objection to make 
the provision that was mentioned for Mr. 
Devisme^ or for any of captain Baillie's fa- 
mily ; his lordship then read the proposals, 
which I have had the honour of reading to 
your lordships He said, that with respect 
to what captain BailUe had mentioned of cap- 
tain Kirke, he believed he was much mis- 
informed, as captain Kirke did not wish tlie 
change which was there mentioned, anct, with 
respect to a ^' commissioner's place at Mir 
norca, which captain Baillie mentioned for 
himself, he could not give him that place, or 
give him any place where he would have to 
act in concert with any other person, as he 
knew, from long experience, that captain 
Baillie's temper was so singularly imhappy 
and intemperate, as to make it impossible for 
any mortal to live with him * ;" but with re- 

* This illiberal altack.upon ua officer, whoM 
chanoter is his life and fortone* originating onlj in 
the. mhid of lord Sandwiob, is not oooiirmod bj a 
single instaaoe of niscondoct on Ik9 |mu1 of captaia 
Baillie, in the coune of 40 yean senrio*, asd asuonnts 
to only hearsay evidence at the best, of what Mr. 
l^nrphy and Mr. Butler said Uiey ha^ Lesrd loi4 
Saadwioh say ; yet his lordship was pleased to de- 
clare afterwards in his speech, that he had ^t ^ 



* . • ■ 

315] retpeding the Rotftd HotpUat at Grtemoich. A. D. 1778* 



[546 



sped to the urovisioa for Mr. Devisroe, whom 
he haA heard was a more temperate man, he 
had no ohjection to make some provision for 
Mr. Devisme. Mr. Murphy took occasion to 
say what he thought.-would excuse or recom- 
mend captain Baillie^s conduct, upon his 
mentioning captain Baillie's offer to giv»'the 
copies of his printed Case, and also the use 
of the affidavits ; lord Sandwich said, that 
with respect to Ms printed Case and affidavits, 
and his conduct in every other respect, he 
was quite at liberty to act as he pleased, that 
matters had gone so far, that captain Baillie 
at present had nothing in his nower ; that 
with respect to an enquiry into his adminis- 
tration of Greenwich Hospital, either in nar- 
hament or elsewhere, he rather wishea to 
brii^ it on, than sought to avoid it ; and as 
matters then stood, if captain Baillie was 
ever so desirous of wishing to prevent this 
enquiry, that it was impossible m him to be 
of the least service in dom^ it ; he therefore 
said, he had nothing in his power to offer ; 
however, as he did not wish to ruin him, and 
as getting him immediately from the Hospi- 
tal would be contributing very essentially to 
the good and welfare of the Hospital, if cap- 
tain Baillie would so far co-operate, as to con- 
tribute to that essential advantage, he would 
make hjm the provision whlcn he before 
spoke of for Mr. Devisme, or any of captain 
Baillie's fiunily ; upon this we parted. 

I believe it was the day afler, or the day 
next but one, but 1 cannot immediately say ; 
this proposal is dated the 12th of December^ 
which I mentioned to your lordship ; and the 
conversation, which I am now about to com- 
municate, 'was, I believe, on the 16th, and 
that conversation was held at Mr. Murphy's 
chambers, at which captain Baillie, Mr. Mur- 
phy, captain Baiilie*s brother, and myself, 
were present. Mr. Murphy repeated to cap- 
tain millie what had passed between his lord- 
ship and myself at that meeting; he also 
mentioned to him what had passed between 
us at the meeting at the coffee-house. How- 
ever, from the manner in which he mentioned 
it, I thought that his mentioning what had 
passed between us at the coffee-house, was 
father to have my approbation ; that he re- 
peated it in a more faithful manner, than that 
tt was the first time he had communicated it 
to captain Baillie : it seemed to me that he 
had repeated it before to captain Bailiie, but 

lacked captain Baillie'i chaniotcr as an officer, for 
%t knew nothing of him as racb, (ood or bad ; it 
wottU therefore have been honourable in bit lord- 
ship, to have said so on the spot, when theite assAr- 
tioiM were made.^ Can there be any greater impa- 
tation opon the character of a nan, especially ata 
4iAoer, than the words (marked with .inverted 
tirmmaii), echoed by Mr. BoUer from the lips of lord 
Sandwich ? Upon the whole, it is hoped, the greater 
pirt of this harangne will be considered as extrm- 
JMOns matter, qnite foreign from the purpose^ art- 
follj iotrodaced to injore the character of an officer, 
m9 »ther mode could be devised. Orig. Ed, 



was then repeating it before me, that I might 
contradict any thing, if it was represented 
improperly; there was nothine represented 
improperly by him, therefore. I contradicted 
nothing ; there was a ^reat deal of conversa- 
tion passed between the two Mr. BailJies, Mr. 
Murphy, and myself, respecting the business 
before us ; but, however, it ended in the fol- 
lowing proposal : (I have endeavoured to re- 
collect every thing material ; but I do not re- 
collect there was any thing else material;) 
the whole conversation ended in this second 
proposal, which was also dictated (by Mr. 
Murphy ; whether dictated to me, or copied 
finom a writing he gave me, I do not pretend 
to say ; but after I had written it, I read it 
over to Mr. Murphy, and he approved of it. 

** Captain Baillie, upon having an equiva- 
lent made him, is willing to resi^ his office 
of lieutenant-governor of Greenwich Hospital, 
which provision may be ieither to him or Mr. 
Devisme, as before-mentioned; but the re- 
signation is not to be made till the compen- 
sation is given. Captain Baillie wishes to 
have a ship, though it be but for one cruize, 
in order to go out of the Hospital with credit, 
and to receive the emoluments of his office, 
till the compensation is given, nothing done 
in this business to keep the service from 
being open to capt. Baillie on any occasion.'' 

There is also upon ^is a letter, which I sent 
with the above proposal to my lord Sandwich: 
I don't know whether vour lordship will 
choose it should be read, but if you do, I will 
read it. 

The Eaxi of Sandtoich. Read it, read it. 

Mr. Butler read the Letter as foiloweth s 

** My lord, the above is the proposal deli- 
vered in by captain Baillie to Mr. Murphy and 
myself, and desired by him to be delivered to 
your lordship ; he was particularly solicitous 
that it should not be shewn to Mr. Cooke, or 
Mr.'^Ihbetson ; and that wheivl had the ho- 
nour of waitine again on your lordship to re- 
ceive your lordship's sentiments upon it, that 
Jdr. Cooke shoum not be present. The^ an- 
swer to his book is ready for the press ; I am 
to read it over to Mr. Ibbetson to day, ^d to 
Mr. Cooke to-morrow. — I ha.ve the honour to 
be, with great respect, your lordship's obliged 
and humble servant, Charles Butleji.'^ 

" December 16, 1778." 

In consequence of this letter being sent to 
lord Sandwich, I waited again upon his lord- 
ship ; his discourse was in every respect the . 
same as it had been the day before ; ne said, 
that with respect to his book, and his affida- 
vits, and his conduct in every other respect, 
he was at liberty to act as he pleased ; that 
the present situation of Greenwich Hospital 
was such, that it was impossible to keep capt. 
Baillie any longer in the Hospital, consistent 
with his duty to the Hospital ; that if captain 
Baillie would resign all his employments, and 
retire immediately, it would be doing an es- 
sential service to Uie Hospital ; and he would 



347] 



tS GEORGE IIL The Cote qfCapiam Thomas BaOUe^ [348 



BO far consider it as to make the proviaiooy 
whkh he before spoke of, for Mr. Devisme, 
or his faaiil^ ; that if he did not resien his 
office and his employmenU, he should con- 
sider it as a defiance of his right to remove 
him, ui4 should proceed accormngly ; that at 
all events he should auit the Hospital, where 
his presence was absolutely incompatible with 
the good government of the Hospital, and the 
peace and happiness of ^ose that were in it ; 
the day after, I believe, it was ; (if I should be 
mistaken in a day I am sure I shall be ex- 
cused) I communicated what had passed be- 
tween us to Mr. Murphy, at Mr. Murphy's 
chamber, at which captam Baillie ana Mr. 
Murphy were present ; I also believe (it is 
difficult to remember at this distance of time, 
as I did not immediately attempt to recollect 
myself;) that Mr. Baulie's brother was also 
there at the second meeting ; but whether he 
was, or not, I am at a loss to say ; I believe 
it is immaterial ; but I wish to express myself 
with as much accuracy as I can ; I commu- 
nicated what had j^assed between them to Mr. 
Murphy and omtam Baillie ; a great deal of 
discourse passed udool that subject ; Mr. Mur- 
phy recommendea ca(»tain Baillie to retire on 
the &ith of his lordship's promises, in which 
I also joined him, as I pitied much the case 
of captain Baillie; however, it did not seem 
proper to him to do so ; in consequence of 
which the meeting broke up. Captain Bsdllie 
himself^ and his brother (whether it was this