Memoirs of the Reign of King George the Second, Volume 3 (of 3)Walpole, Horace
History
Memoirs of the Reign of King George the Second, Volume 3 (of 3)
Walpole, Horace
Great Britain -- History -- George II, 1727-1760
Accordingly, November 1st, a Commission of Inquiry was directed,
composed of the Duke of Marlborough, Lord George Sackville, and
General Waldegrave: a Court that could not be called unprecedented,
for one of the very same nature had been held in the foregoing year,
but most unconstitutional and dangerous; nay, absurd, for they had
neither power to acquit nor condemn. As the Ministers selected whom
they pleased, if the criminal was to be saved, a favourable report
from this Board would exclude a legal trial; if to be condemned,
was not such a preparatory inquisition likely to influence future
judgment? The present Board was indeed artfully constituted. Two of
the Commissioners were attached to Fox; if their majority acquitted,
the odium would fall on Mr. Pitt’s antagonist--and to them he had
joined Lord George Sackville, as much devoted to himself, and more
than a balance to the other two in abilities. But another step Pitt
took, still more novel, and as pernicious for the precedent. He sent
Mr. Blair of the Secretary’s office to the Lord Mayor of London, to
inform the City that an inquiry was appointed. What right the City of
London had to such notification above all other towns in the kingdom
could not well be told. What use they will make of such admission
into the executive part of Government can easily be conceived; and
what confusion may follow from incorporating the mob of London
with the other parts of the Legislature, where they are already
represented, and where they have no title to be more than represented.
The inquiry began on the 12th. The Generals, and Knowles, and
Broderick, utterly disavowing Sir Edward Hawke’s minutes, Lord George
took them to pieces severely, and censured Hay, the composer of them.
The Duke of Marlborough asked many questions, with appearance of
thinking ill of the conduct of the Generals. Waldegrave took no part
at all. Sir John Mordaunt defended himself weakly; Conway most ably;
exposed Clarke; and at last producing his own narrative, it silenced
all further inquiry; yet the resolutions of the Court, which were
not explicit, seemed to say, that they thought more might have been
performed; or at least that there had not been sufficient reasons for
desisting from the attempt. The report of these opinions was made to
the King on the 21st, who, on the 30th, ordered a Court-Martial on
Sir John Mordaunt alone.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account