special COLLeCXiONS t)ouqlas LibKAKy queen's UNlveusiiy AT klnqsron Presented by klnqston ONTARiO CANADA

Transcription

1

2 special COLLeCXiONS t)ouqlas LibKAKy queen's UNlveusiiy AT klnqsron Presented by klnqston ONTARiO CANADA

3

4

5 REMARKS, A On a Pamphlet, entitled MIRROR, ^c. (Written by C S L -S, M. D.) Dfawn, from tlie PROCEEDINGS of a General Court Martialj N The T R I A L of an APPEAL^ Brought before Them by DJFID BLAKE NET, Matrofs. ALSO, AN APPENDIX, CONTAINING, DEPOSITIONS,, &c. The Copies of feveral The whok, defigned as an ANSWER, to the many faife and groundlels Affertions, impofed on the Public as Fafts, by that Candid Author. BE JUST, AND FEAR NOT. Printed, ^^ fold ^ DUBLIN: Shakespkarb. by the Bookfellers and Hawkers, MDCCLXVIII.

6 /^ /-fo 5, C fe^

7 ; ^. 5 ] REMARKS, &c. THE D r begins, by endeavouring to prejudice his Readers againft the Mode of Trials by Courts Martial and attempts to prove, that Officers are not properly qualified to fit as Judges, becaufe, fays he " There is qo Clafs " of Men in the State fo likely to be unacquainted with the '" Liberties and Rights of the Subjeft, or the Laws on which " they are founded, and by which they are fended and fe- " cured, as the Gentlemen of the Army ; for they feldom read " aoy other Law Book but the Articles of War." Allowing all due weight to the D r's Objedlion, his Argument may be thus fairly ftated. The Articles of War contain all the Laws relative to Trials by Courts Martial. The Gentlemen of the Army feldom. read any other Law Book but the Articles of W^ar: r Therefore they are not properly qualified to try Delinquents by thofe Articles. I wifli the D r would read feme Books of {uogic, as this might prevent his rcafoning fo weakly for the Futtfre' He might as well fay, that a Phyfician was not properly qualified to prefcribe, becaufe he feldom read any other Books but fuch as fuited his Profefiion. _ If the D r means to infinuate, by their not reading any other Law Books, that they do "^ not ftudy thofe Authors who treat of the Gonftitution and Government of their Country, ^ and of thofe Privileges which are the peculiar Rights of free "^ Subjefts, he only Hiews how little he is converfant with the. -3^ Gentlemen of the Army. A Knowledge, limited to thefe Points, is a proper Accomplifhment for every Gentleman, "^ and in which. Officers are not at all defe tive; many of them are Men of Abilities, and moll of them have received a liberal Education. But I muft confefs they feldom read Coke upon Lyttleion ; and I believe the D r is the firft, who ever found fault with the Jurifdi6tion of Courts Martial, becaufe - the Members were not Lawyers. Befidcs <^ ^

8 Befides, fays the D r [ 6 ] " They are feldom called on in the ** Miniftration of Juflice." That is, becaufe they are not Refidents, and are every Moment liable to be called on a different Service; fo the D- r concludes (in his ufual way) that becaufe they feldom fit on petty Juries, or ferve their Country as Conftables, Directors of the Watch, or Church- Wardens, they are therefore unqualified to adminifler Juflice on a Court Martial. After fuch a Preface, v/e fliould not be furprlzed at the P r*s Stri lures on the Proceedings of fome late Courts Martial. But, it fhould be confider'd that Lord George Sackville was difgraced, in Confequence of Duke Ferdinand''^ Orders, immediately after the Battle of Min~ den. It was from the Tenour of thofc Orders he was condemned, in the Opinion of every one in England, before his Arrival. It was in Confequence of thefe Orders, he v/as ftripped of his Military Employments by the King. Could Lord George pay a higher Compliment to the Integrity of the Army, than by repeatedly applying for a Court Martial, after he had been difmiiled the Service? Had he been afraid of the Injufticeof one, would he haye confenied to bfe tried by it ; would he not rather have protefted, as the D r h^s done, againft the Legality of it, contrary to the Opinion of the mofi; eminent of the Law, who agreed, that a Court Martial jiad a Right to try him? Beiides, it is more than probable, notwithftanding the D r's Cenfure on this Court Martial, that Lord George^ who was the Subjecl of it, thought he had not fufficient Reafon to call theii Judgment in Qnedion. For we can hardly fuppofe that a Perfon of his Abilities, and powerful Connexions, would ha;ve remained quiet, under the Ignominy of fuch a Sentenctj had he deemed it unjoil. And it does not appear that he ever brought any Anions or Plaint againfl his Judges, The fuppofed Criminal, " faysthed r, was attended with this, among other aggravating Circumllances, that he was tried by a Court of OiTicers, whofe Tenure of their Commifilons, flood on the fame fragil Footing, with that of his LordOiip. He had an undoubted Right to difmifs any Soldier jiis Service, what then was the Court to try? Nothing lefs than whether the Sentence of the great Commander was jufl or not." Here we fee what an Opinion the D r entertains of the late King, and the Court Martial, v.hich.tried Lord George.

9 [ 7 ] It is evident he would be underftood to mean, that the Members, tho' on Oath, would not do Juftice to Lord George, as they were apprehenfive of lofing their Commiflions, if they deviated from that Sentence, already paffed on him, by the King. And alfo, that his late Majefty, would Tider this Remark, as an Apology for thed r, and not cherifli certainly have difmifled them his Service, if they preu med to aft from the Dictates of Horxour and Confcience, I hope the Members of Blakeneyh Court Martial wijlcon- too contemptible an Opinion of him, for his iliiberal Abufe of them. It is really his Nature, the poor Man can't help it; he only treats them in the fame way he has done iheir Superors, and they fhould efleem it a Compliment. If fome of the Members on Mr. Bytig's Trial (^efired to be releafed from their Oaths of Secrefy, it was in Compliance with the Clamours of the Nation, that wanted to know the Circumftances, which induced them, to recommend him to the Royal Mercy. As to the Trial of Colonel Lambert, I have never feen it, but can not help doubting the Truth of the Circumtlances the D r fets forth, as it is arraigning the Juflice and Judgment of his late Majefly, in appointing Colonel diry one of his Aids du Camp. It would have been more to the D r's Purpofe, if he could have produced an Inftance of a General Court Martial being cenfured by a Court of Law ; thofe he has mentioned, the one, a Regimental Court Martial, the Members of which, were not fworn, the other, held by the Navy Officers, not being applicable to the Cafe before us. I am alfo really concerned, to fee the D r defcend fo much from that grave and fenientious Style, which lias always characterized his Writings, to fet up for a Man of Humour, and facetioufly obferve, that the Britljb Admiral was Ihot, as a Frenchman humouroufly exprefted it, pour encourager les autres. Again, in his Obfervations on Colonel Lambert''^ Trial, he fays " Colonel Cary confefted the Truth, apologizing, no doubt, very properly, knocked him down, for a confiderable time." Thefe Flights are really unbecoming the D I's Gravity, and I wifh he would fupprefs them for the future. As he feems fo fond of Fables and idle Stories, I would recommend to his perufal, the old Apologue, of the Afs's attempting to raimick the Tricks and Gambols of the Lap- Dog. that the Wind of a Cannon Shot had

10 [ 8 ] 0og. The poor Afs's Performance, indeed, was very awkward, he was cudgelled for his Pains. I leave the Application to the D r's Sagacity. All his Declamation about Courts-MartlaT, only proves, thaf (hey are not infallible ; a Point, I believe, that wa:s never contefted. The Articles of War, Se6t. 21, allow any Officer of Sbldier tried by a Court-Martial, to bring Adions, Bills, Plaints and Suits againft any Member or Minifter of ihecourr, in refpefl of any Sentence of fuch Court, or of any thingdone by virtue, or in purfuahce of fuch Sentence. " But this the D rj'uttly obferves, does not argue a particular Diffidence in Courts-Martial. The Wifdom of out Laws has ordained a like watchful Eye to be held Over all the y^." Common Lav*^ Courts, Here, by the D r's own ConfeiTion, Cbj^rts Martial are put on the fame Footing, in Refpeft of Appeals-;,' J/With the That, Appeals have been fometimie-s'mad^, afl^' Civil Courts. the Proceedings of Courts Martial cenfured, fixes' no particular Stigma on them. We fee therfam^ thitlg happen ever^ Day in tlie Civil Coiirifs; and even the Decrees of Chancery are often reverfed, by thai fiipreme Court of Judicature, the' Houfe of Lords. I am obliged to lake Notice of a flfaiige Aflertion in the D r's next Paragraph, where he fays " That Officers are often the Judges and Profecutors of thofe Soldiers v^ho arc fo much their Inferiors, y^." The D-r-r would fain perfuade the Public, that art Officef may profecute a Soldier at a Court Martial, and at the famd Time fit as one of his Judges. Now, this is a grofs Mifreprefentation, as every one in the leafl: informed of the Mode of Trials by Courts Martial, knows I would' rather afcribe this Error to his Ignorance than Malice, but as he has given fo many Inftances of both, I am at a Lofs how to determine. *' While I have the Honour of a Seat in the Legiflature, fays this Patriot, I fhall think it my Duty to give the beft Attention I can, to thofe Matters, in Order to ufe my beft Means to procure an Amendment of the Martial Laws." By this, the D r would inform us, that he will endeavour to get an A6: pafted in the Parliament of Ireland, to correal' thofe Errors, which his Penetration has difcovered in the Mutiny Aft. An AS:, pafied by the Legiflature of Greaf Britain. Excellent Politician! V Let"

11 f 9 ] Let us now obferve how candidly he Introduces BJakene/*^ Cafe to the Public. *' The Reports that (hocked my Ears were, that a Matrofs for complaining of Grievances and Hardfliips, inftead of receiving Redrefs, was himfelf punifhed for complaining, and ordered to receive five Hundred Laflies from a Number of the mofi able bodied Drummers in the Barracks, from that very Court wherein he appeared as a Profecutor, not as a Delinquent. Vide Sentence App. p. 56. The D r fhould have faid, that he was punifhed by the Sentence of a General Court Martial, agreeable to the Articles of War, becaufe it appeiired to them that his Complaint was vexatious and groundlefs. Whether this Sentence was juft or not, is I think the whole Matter in Debate? If the D r had confined himfelf to difcufs this Point with Candour and Impartiality^ nobody could have blamed him. But till he was acquainted wiih the Proceedings of the Court Martial, and the whole Evidence on which their Sentence was founded, it was impoflible for him even to do this: His attempting it (without fuch Information as that alone could give) (hews an intemperate Zeal, and a Forwardnefs to cenfure the Condu l of a Set of Gentlemen on Oath, merely from the Accounts he received from David Blakeney. He might as well pay a Vifit to Newgate^ pick up a melancholy Story from one of the Convids, and without making any further Inquiries, fit down, and write a virulent Inventive againft the Judge and Jury that condemned him. It is remarkable, that the D r, the better to convey fome fcandalous Hint to the prejudice of Military Gentlemeny always prefaces it with an affeflcd Compliment; for Inflance, " However confident I might have been in the Honour and f lumanitv ot' the OfRcers of the Army in general, I judged this Story dcmandf-d Attention, and I ftrait' way refolved to lenin the Truiln" Fn another Place he fays, " I hold the Gentlemen of the Army in general, ;n high Honour and Eftimation, being perfedly fenfibic of the manv Obligations we owe their Virtue and Vn]oinf ^.^witvith/htnding the numbfcrlefs violent Outrages upon the Civil Power, all over the Kingdom, and particularly in this Capital, committed by the Soldiery," He ufes this Art to varnifli his Scurrility, and make it more palatable to his Readers. 1 fuppofe he borrowed!>his Device, from feeing poiloned Balls thrown to Dogs, B which «r

12 [ 10 ] which are fmeared with Greafe that they may be more rea» dily fwallowed. The D r aflures us, he ftraitway refolved to learn the Truth 1 can only fay, that it is a Pity he broke fo good a Refolution. To avoid the Penalty of Mutiny, fays he, which muft follow a Complaint of a Number of the Men, they unanimoufly pitched on David Blakeney, a Matrofs, to make the Complaint in his own Name, which he readily undertook, confcious of Truth and his own Innocence. Here the D r, to make a Falfehood more plaufible, runs into an Abfurdity. He would alfo have us believe that the Regiment chofe David Blakeney as their Reprefentative, and that he only fpoke the Senfe of his Conftituents in his Complaints. But it unfortunately happens, that David was Jingle^ and not feconded on the Occafion, tho' like the D r, he ftill perfifted in his Motion, and bid Defiance to Shame and ConviQ:ion. But, it could not be for the Reafon the D r mentions, that ihey pitched on the Complainant: For it was never known that a Number of Men, merely by complaining, and refpeoifully informing the Commanding Officer, of their Grievances, were punifliable for this, by the Mutiny Aft. I hope the D r will allow Blakeneyh Evidence to be valid on this Occafion. When the General Court Martial had gone thro' the Evidence on both Sides, and had ordered the Court to be cleared, that they might proceed to give their Opinion on the Cafe before them, the Matrofs David Blakeney, returned from the Door, and defired Permifilon of the Court, to fay fomething, which being granted. He did in the mofl: folemn Manner, laying his right Hand on his Breaft, declare by Virtue of the Oath which he had taken, That not a Man of the Regiment of Artillery, was concerned with him, in the Complaint he had made, or had joined him in the Profecution of that Complaint. It is now fubmitted to the Public, whether the D r's Aflertion or Blakeneyh Oath is to be credited. The Complainant alfo added an earnefl Requefi, that if the Court ordered him a Punifliment,.it might extend to his Life. From this, we may naturally conclude. That confcious how weakly he had fupported his Complaints, he was already aipprehenfiveoftheconlequenceof hisappeal. Vide Dep.No.3. I heartily wiih the D r had taken fome Pains to underhand the Subjeft he writes on, for it is very difagreeable to trace him thro' all his Blunders. If he had even condefcended to

13 [ " ], to read the Articles of War with fome Attention, it would have been of infinite Service to him. It is obfervable, fays the D r, *' that the Regimental Court Martial, which was appoinied to determine ilie Rights and Property of a Soldier, was not fworn. It was therefore obje6led to, by the Complainant, but to no eflfect; his Objection was over ruled, and thpy proceeded to Senien(.e." In the firfl Place, there was no luch Objection made by the Complainant ; even if there had, it muff have been deemed impertinent. For there is no Oath required from the Members of a Regimental Court Martial. An Oath is prefcribed for the Members of a General One, by the 5 Se6l. of thr Mutiny AQ.. ** Provided always. That in a'l Trials of Offenders bj Gener-'I Courts Martial, to be held by Virtue of this Att, every Member aitiifing at fuch Trial, before any Proceedings be had thereupon, fhall be fworn btfore the Court and Judge Advocate, or his Deputy (who are hereby authorized to adminifler an Oath) in the following Words, i^c'" By this, the D r might have feen, that there is no Oath fpecified for the Member of a Regimental Court Martial, nor any Perfon authorized toadminifler one. Thus it is evident, that the Legiflature has thought proper Now follows the D r's Inference. *' to inveff them with a Jurifdi lion (not extending to Life or Limb, A. 3. P. 1 1) without the San6.ion of an Oath. It was apprehended, fays he, that if the Court was not legally qualified, It could have no competent Jurifdi6fion. But, us I have proved that it was legally qualified, it confequently had a- compctcuf Jur;fdi tion, and fo the D r muff give up this Part of the Argument, even on his own Principle. Let us now examine the feveral Articles of Complaint given in, by David Blaketiey. T fliall fet :hem down in his own Words, as delivered to the Rcgiintntnl..nd General Court Martial. It will then appear evideiu, that the D r has added to fome, and drelted up others, as might beft fuit his Purpofe. For, thro' every Part of his Pamphici, he has o.nitted no Opportunity of mifreprefenting, and exaggerating blatters. Confcious of the weak and bad Caufe he had undertook, he was afhamed and afraid to acquaint the Public with the whole Truth. ifl Article. " That tliere has been the Deuucfion of one Halfpenny per Week made out of his Pay, he having never received more than five Shillings and Sixpence, and that by the Marquis of KUdare's, recruiting Inftruflions, he fhould B 2 receive

14 [ 12 ] receive five Shillings and Sixpence Halfpenny, and that he never been paid or accounted with for the odd Halfpenny. }ias Col. Cbenevix depofed, that this Stoppage was made, a- greeable to an order from the Lords Jufticcs, dated the 2$th Julyy 1757, fignifying his Majefty's Pieafure, that & Stoppage of 2 d. for every 28 Days Pay, (hould be made from each Man in the Regiment of Artillery, on the hijh Ettablifhment, to be paid Monthly to the Royal Infirmary. Now, every Order of Government is conftantly inferted in the Regimental Books, and read to the Men of each Company; of Courfe, Blakeney might have known by what Authority this Stoppage was made. The D r may allege, that the Complainant was not in the Regiment when t+ie Order was given out ; but the' he was not a Soldier at the Time, there mull: have been many in the Regiment whq were, and who would have informed him, if he had chofe to enquire. This is an additional Proof, that Blakeney modelled his Complaints himfelf, without the Concurrence of his Comrades; for if he had a6ted in concert with them, hemuft have been better informed, and would not have complained of his Officers, when they only a ted in Obedience to his JMajefly's Orders, As another corroborating Circumftance, I iball quote the Opinion of the Regimental Court Martial, on this Article. *' The Court hav ng taken into Confideration, the Charges made by David Blakeney^ do admit the firft Charge to be true, being in Confequence of his Majefty's Order for Medicine Monty." Here, the Appellant was told the Reafon of this Stoppage, and muft have known that it was agreeable to the Articles of War ; yet not t'lfisfied with that, he ftill perllfts in his Obflinacy, and complains of this very Article again^ before ^ General Court M.irtial, and D- r L s exclaims againft them, tor finding this Part of his Complaint, vexatious and groundlefs! Where elfe, could the D r have found fuch a Client, or the Client inch a Patron and Advocate? 2d Article. ** That tho' he has ferved near three Years, he never received either Money, or any Value, for Utenfil Money. Novv, it appeared before the General Court Martial, that Blakeney had never complained to the Commanding OfBcer, for not receiving Utenfil Money; and that when Major Stratten knew that he made it an Aiticie of Complaint, before the Regifijental Court Martial, he ordered him immediate Payment,

15 [»5 ] ment, even for the Year 1765, tho' he was not intitled to it, as he had only ferved eight Months of that Year, and the Man he fucceeded had received it. See Depofit. No. 18, 19. It was alfo proved, that there was two Years Utenfil Money due to the Regiment, but not yet iflued by the Board of Ordnance. Let the Difpaflionate and Unprejudiced judge, whether the D r has Realon to call this, an ex poft fa6to Payment, when it is evident, that the Commanding Officer gave the Complainant Redrefs, even for an imaginary Grievance. I call it imaginary, becaufe he was not entitled to any Utenfil Money for the Year This is a ftriking Inftance of the Generpfity and Indulgence with which Blakeney was treated. Even fuppofing it a Grievance, he (liould have firft applied to the Commanding Officer for Redrefs, before he rnade it 9 Charge at a Court Martial. But as he did not choofe to follow this proper Method, was the Commanding Officer, by the Impudence and Neglefl of the Complainant, to be precluded from redrefling a Grievance, when he was firft apprized of it? and is the D r juflified in calling this hu(h Money, and throwing an Odium on a General Court Martial, for finding this Article of Complaint groundlefs? N. B. The Allowance for Utenfil Money is about nmc Pence Halfpenny /)fr Annum. For my Part, I am convinced, that the D r's Attachment to this David Blakeney^ fprings from a fimilar and feditious Turn of Mind in them both. Their Tempers are congenial, and it is no Wonder the D r fympathizes with his Friend, who has afled on thofe Principles which have always diftinguiflied himfelf. It is therefore, as natural for him 10 fupport fo promifing a Pupil, as it is for a Snail to fiick clofe own Slime. 3d Article. " That on his coming or entering into the to its I^egiment, he received an old bad Coat, and in fome time after, ^ new Waiftcoat and Breeches, for which Breeches he was forced to pay fix Shillings and fix Pence, by two Shillings a Week, flopped out of his Subfiftence. The Complainant declared before the Court, that he was fatisfied in refpefl to the Coat. Col. Cbenevix admitted the Charge as to the Breeches. It being the Cuftom, to provide Recruits with uniform Breeches, when they join the Regiment, the Board of Ordnance not allowing new Breeches for them ; and the Men difcharged are allowed to take away the old ones. We

16 :; [ 14 3 We fee that even David Blakeney was convinced that his Complaint for not receiving a new Coat, immediately on joining the Regiment was unreafonable, and as a Proof of ConviSion, declared he was thoroughly fatisfied in regard to it. As the Board of Ordnance does not allow new Breeches for the Recruits, I believe few People will think it unreafonable, that a Commanding Officer (hould oblige them to for otherwife they muft go without them furnifh themfelves ; 'Iheir being uniform, exclufive of Appearance, is alfo an Advantage to the Men, as a Urge Quantity of Cloth, particularly provided for this Purpofe, is always bought at a cheaper Rate, ferve himfelf. than if each Man was to buy juft what was fufficient to I have rtated the Appellant's Complaint in his own Words I fhall now do the fame for D r L /'s ; for his Articles do not always coincide with his Client's. ** That inftead o{full Chathing appointed by his Majejly^ this Complainant got but an old bad Coat, ^c. Now, many People have been weak enough to believe the D r, and imagine, that every Recruit is intitled to new Cloathing on his joining the Regiment ; But that the Colonel takes Advantage of his Ignorance, gives him an old fhabby Coat, and fo makes a Perquifite of the new one. It is proper therefore to explain this: There is Cloathing furniftied for every Regiment once a Year. When any Soldiers die, or are difcharged, and the Vacancies filled up, before the next Cloathing becomes due, the Recruits can only be fupplied with the old Coats of the former Men, which are kept in Store for that Purpofe. What Trouble would it have faved the D r if he had been acquainted with this, and fome other Particulars, before he wrote the M r for Courts-Martial! I hope he will be candid enough in his next Edition, to take Example from David Blakeney^ and make an Apology for his Miftake : His great Abilities lead him aftray, he thinks he can fhew moft Ingenuity by defending a bad Caufe, and for that Reafon generally choofes one. I really pity him, and am not one of thofe who allow him no Merit. For I am convinced, that if he would take fome Pains to underftand the Subje<El he writes on, pay a pi oper Regard to Truth, ftudy his Grammar and corres his Style, he would not be fo totally unqualified for an Author, as fome prejudiced People imagine. 4th Article. ** That there has been the Deduction of one Halfpenny /if-r Week made in his Pay, from May 1765, until

17 f «5 ] until 'July I7 66, which was faid to be for the Ufe of the Infirmary, Col. Chenevix depofed, that this was done by the Duke of Leittjletf then Mafter General of the Ordnance, who eftablilhed an Infirmary, and on the 6th oi February, 1765, gave out an Order, that one Halfpenny per Week Ihould be flopped from each Man, and paid the Surgeon of the Regiment, to provide the Sick with Wine, Sugar and Spices, and fuch other additional Medicines as might be proper, which Order was given out pubhckly, and this Stoppage was difcontinued when the Infirmary was laid afide in September y I J 66. Here, we fee a trifling Stoppage was made from the Men, to enable the Surgeon to keep up a Regimental Infirmary; to have the Soldiers conftantly under his own Care, and fupply them with fuch coftly, but neceffary Medicines, as they muft otherwife have wanted. ' Surely an Eftablifhment of this Sort, mufl: be acknowleged to be particularly calculated for the Sake of the Men, and inftead of being a Grievance, fhews the Humanity, Tendernefs and Care of the Colonel who ordered it. 5th Article, *' That he received no Half Mounting Money, in Money, Goods, or any Sort of Value, until he was a Year in the Regiment, and then he only received five Shillings, tho' he got the Cloaths above mentioned, and another Suit. Col. Chenevix admitted the above Article, and depofed that (with the Approbation of the Duke of Leirjler, then Mafter of the Ordnance) he had made it a Regulation, fome time in the Year 1762, that every Man who had been one Year in the Regiment from the 14th of Auguji (which was the Day of Cloathing) fhould be entitled to full Half Mounting Money, and as ten Shillings, is the full Sum, the Complainant received five Shillings, which was his Proportion, the other five, being paid to the Man that he fucceeded. Now, what could be more equitable than fuch a Regulation, that proportions the Half Mounting Money to the time of each Man's Service? If a Soldier had only ferved Half a Year, and was then difcharged, he was advanced five Shillings of the Half Mounting Money, (which was not paid to the Regiment, 'till the next Cloathing,) and confequently the Perfon who fucceeded him, could onlv be entitled to the remaining five. The

18 r [ i6 ] 1 he whole Sum, which is an annual Bounty, being equally divided between the two, who had completed a Year's Service. 6th Article. " That there has been the ideduftion of one Pound two Shillings and nine Penpe, made in his Pay, in the Year 1765, for a Pair of Leather Breeches, and the Dedudion of thirteen Shillings and fix Pence in the Year 1766, for another Pair of Leather Breeches. The Grievance here complained of is this:-^' As Experience fhewed, that the Blue Cloth Regimental Breecht* would not laft a Year, the Men were neceflarily obliged to buy Breeches for themfeives. The Colonel ordered Leather ones to be bought, as he knew they were the n)oft laftlng, and confequentl^' cheapeft. The Reafon why the Complainant was flopped one Pound two Shillings and nine Pence the firft Year, was, becaufe he chofe Buckfkin. The Colonel having entirely left the Choice to the Men themfeives, as the Complainant acknowledged. Now it is very well known to every Body in the leaft converfant with Military Matters, that the Officers are obliged t provide the Men with Shirts, Shoes, Stockings, i^c. and often advance large Sums for this Purpofe, and the only Way they can be reimburfed, is by putting the Soldiers under weekly Stoppages. Without this, few of them would be prudent enough to provide themfeives. It is very troublefome to the Officers to do fo, and certainly can be of no Advantage. Yet even this is not pra<5tifed indifcriminately : For as there are fome of the Soldiers in every Regiment, who can be depended on, their Subfiftcnce is always paid them without any Dedu6tlon. I fhall give a convincing Proof of the Officers Difintereftednefs on this Subjeft. It is a known PraSice in every Regiment ordered for America^ to buy a large Quantity of Linen, feveral hundred Pair of Shoes, Stockings, ^c. as they are almoft Cent, per Cent, cheaper here, than they could be provided there. By this Means, the Men are furnifhed with thefe Artrdes, at firfl Cod. This ihews that Generofity and Love ot the Soldiers, which has become the Chara6leriftic of /i;////z» Officers. They are not obliged to advance Money ior thefe NecefTaries, and nothing could induce them to ir, but a Regard for the brave Men mtrufted to their Care. Suppofing thev did not chool'e to do fo,- neither the D

19 [ 17 } D r or David Blakeney could complain of it as a Grievance, tho' they were forced to pay the current Price of the Country, for what they wanted. Such is the conduct of thofe Gentlemen whom the D ^r in general, reprefents as Tyrants and Oppreflbrs! 7th Article, That there has been the Deduction of Eight Shilhngs and nine Pence, ftopt for a Buff coloured Waiftcoat. The Court, fays ihe D r, in their Sentence, admit the Charge of the Buff colour'd Waillcoat to be a Grievance in the ftrongeft Terms, to wit. " The Court finds that with Refpeft to the Seventh Article of the Charge, the (loppage^ made from the Complainant on the faid Article, was a Grievance, as being unneceffary ; the Cloathing of the Royal Regiment of Artillery being afcertained by his Majefty, and thought fuffcient." Then follows this pithy Obfervation. *' Hence, it is eafy to Judge whether or not Jurtice is done to the Corps in general, or to the Complainant in particular. And whether the Complaint can be judged vexatious or' groundlefs, which alone can bring the Complainant or Appellant under the Cenfure of the Court-Martial, according to the 12th, Seftion of the Articles of War." Now this Remark, which the D r undoubtedly fuppofes unanfwerat^le, is the ftrongeft Proof of the Juftice and Impartiality of the Court-Martial. Their confirming this Article of bis Complaint, clearly fhows how well inclined they were to redrefs any of his Grievances, and from this very Circumftance, we may reafonably conclude, that if the other Articles of his Charge had been equally fupported, they would have been treated with the fame Candour and Equity. But becaufe this Article is allowed, the D r triumphantly alks, whether the Conriplaini can be judged vexatious and.groundlefs? He attempts to confound this Article with the others, and woulj infinuate, as if the Court had included it in their Sentence, and confidered it as vexatious and groundlefs. Tho' indeed the Diftin tion was fo very obvious, that I am furprized how he could overlook it? perhaps he riieans, that becaufe the Appellant made good one Article, that it was th«fefore unjurt to ftjgmatize the others as vexatious and ground^fs, and punilh the Complainant for his Appeal, C He

20 [ i8 ] He mufl: either have one of thefe Meanings or none at all. Bui I have too good an ophiion of his Parts to fuppofe the latter. I fhall therefore beg leave to afk him one Queftion, which is applicable to the prefent Subjedl. Suppofe a Perfon tried in a Civil Court for three different Crimes, and only convi6i:ed of two of them ; would it be unjuft and illegal to punifh him for thofe two, becaufe he was acquitted of the Third. But as the D r has difplayed all his Oratory on thi;i Topic, let us again liften to him in his own ftrain. ** Therefore the pronouncing the Complaint vexatious and groundlefs, became a fuperlative additional Grievance, repugnant to the Spirit of the Military Law, a' d to every Principle of Common Law and Juflice." The D r fhould have confidcred, that every Article was equally a Part of the Appellant's Complaint ; and if it did not appear that he had fufficient Reafon for each one, it mud be deemed vexatious and groundlefs, and confeqvrently punifhable by the very Words and Spirit of the Military Law. ** But, continues the D r, while any Part of the Complaint was confefited to be true, and well founded, the Appeal could not jufliy be faid to be vexatious and groundlefs, confequently the Cenfure muft be arbitrary and illegal." The Fallacy of hi«argument confifts in this, he would have his Readers confider the Appeal, without refle ling on the feveral Charges that compofed it ; and To by quibbling on a Word, would confine every Article of the Complaint to that fmgle one^^ which the Court judged to be a Grievance. To {hew the Abfurd^ity of this Argument, in a (Ironger Light, let us fuppofe the Court-Martial had been of thefame Sentiments with the D r. Their Sentence muft have run thus. The Court finds, that with refpeft to the feventh Article of the Charge, the Stoppage made from the Complainant was a Grievance, as being unneceffary, bic. And therefore, in Confideration of his having proved this, they likewife admit all the other Articles of his Complaint to be Grievances : For tho' it appeared by Evidence produced before Us, that he had no juft Caufe of Complaint as to thofe Articles, yet his having proved the Seventh, alters the Nature of the reft, and tho' they are undoubtedly vexatious and

21 [ ^9 1 9nd groundlefs ; yet we can by no Means admit them to b?; fo ; for it is our Opinion that the Seventh Article contains in itfeif, the Ejfence of all the reft. We therefore include 'Tall the Complainant's unjuft Charges in the Seventh Article, and as We find tiiat one to be a Grievance, We think all the others muft be equally fo. BuJ:, fays the D r, if this and other Confefilons of Stoppages and Alterations of Pay and Cloathing want further Proof, let it be remembered, that it was proved by the Adjutant of the Regiment, < n the Floor of the Houfe of Commons, that the whole Corps was under Stoppages, at two Shillings a Week out of their Subfillence. Let it alfo be remembered, that the Subfiftence of a Matrofs is five Shillings and fix Pence Halfpenny, which wants but five Pence Halfpenny to be double the Subfiflence of a private Centinei in a Marching Regiment, jconfequently fuch a Stoppage when NeceiTity requires it, which leaves (ix Pence Halfpenny per Week more than what the Legiflature has deemed fufficient for the Subfiilence of another Part of the Forces, cannot be looked upon as unreafonable. 8th Article. That there has been a DeduSion of two Shillings for ^ Hat, and alfo two Penc? for Ferstting tu tie the fam,e. It appeared to the Court that the Complainant had a plain Hat of his own, which he faid was bad ; that it was the Cuftom ol the Regiment formerly, to wear the Hat the fijft Year, with the Lace on, the next year to take it off, clean the Hat, and wear it plain. But as Col. Chejievix found that a plain Hat was a difadvantage to the Appearance of the Regiment, and too bad to be wore by a Soldier, at the latter End of the Year, and thought that the laced Hats which were then in Store, would be very much abuled by the Jong Gun and Howitzer I xercife, which the Regiment was then carrying on in the Park, and intending for the future to have a full Suit of Hats and Cloathing in Store lor the Men ; He therefore (by the approbation of Lord Shannon) ordered frnall coarfe Hats to be bought for the Regin^ent, by which Means they would, for the future, always haye laced Hats to wear. Befide, the Complainant had no Hat due to him as he. alleges, it ixot being his Pwe till the 14th of Avgujl following. ' I will willingly refer it to tlie judicious and impartial, whether a fraall Expense of this Kind, dcfigned for the Ap- C 2 pearance

22 ' r 20 ] pearance and Credit of the Regiment (and which was only to laft for one Year) could be reckoned a Grievance. One Part of the Complainants Evidence was proved to be falfe, as he had not a Hat due to him at that Time. Further, as the King's Letter, fixing the Cloathing of the Royal Irijh Regiment of Artillery, mentions nothing of Hats, this Point of Drefs is confequently left to be regulated at th? Difcretion of the Commanding Officer, gth Article. That the Deduction of one Half-penny per Month, has been made in the like Manner, which was faid to be for cleaning the little Houfe. It appeared to the Court, that a Number of the Men of the Regiment, in the Name of the Whole, had applied to the Adjutant, to requeil that Col. Chfnevix would confent to allow the above vstoppage to be made, in order to pay a Man to keep the NecelTary Houfe clean, which the Col. allowed. As the Man then became the Servant of the Regiment, of courfe it was their Bufinefs to make him do that Part of his Duty. The Regiment never complained to Col. Cbenevix that the Neceffary Houfe was not kept clean, till O^ober laft, at which time the Col. defired, that the Man fliould be difcharged, and the Stoppage difcontinued, which was accordingly done. The Complainant acknowleged, that he thought this was a very fufficient Reafon for the Stoppage, and defifed > leave to fubmit it to the Court, he not knowing that the Men of the Regiment had applied to the Col. for that Purpofe, nor was he in the Regiment at the Time the Application was made. I believe even the D r will agree with the Appellant, and allow, that ' this was a very fufficient Reafon for the Stoppage." I fhall only take Notice of the Improbability that the Complainant could be fo long ignorant of this, as it wa? done at the Requefl: of the whole Regiment. And how litigious, foolifh and obftinate was it for him, to trouble both a Regimental and a General Couft-Martial with iuch a frivilous Charge. ' i th Article. That there has been the Dedu61;ion pf two Shillings per Week, made fince the 26th of September 1767, which was all for a Frock, except two Shillings and (even Pence for the making of Regimental Breeqhes, and one Shilling for Ribband to tie his Hair. Col.

23 t 21 ] Col. Chevenix acknowleged, that having obferved for a Year, or two pad, that moft of the Regiments on this Eftabliinment, were furnilhed with Frock Coats, to fave their Regimental Cloathing, was of Opinion, that fo ufeful a Method fhould be adopted for the Regiment of Artillery, that they rflighl always appear to the fame Advantage with other Corps; he therefore ordered cheap Frock Coars to be bought for. the Regiment, and the J\'Ien to be put under Stoppages for them. Now it appeared to the Court, that Col. Chenevix when he h^d heard, that the Men of Capt. Betjivorth's Company, had objefted to the Frock Coats, defired they might choofe three of their Comrades, and fend them to him, that he might acquaint them why he thought it expedient, and for the good of the Regiment. After he had explained his Reafons to them, they appeared perfe<ftly fatisfied, and only objeded to the Manner in which they were to be made up. The Col. to indulge "them, left it intirely to their own Option, whether they would choofe long or fhort Skirts. Surely their Obje6tlon to the Manner of having them confenting to have the Frocks, other- made up, proves their wife there would have been ncfdifpute about it. Mr. Blakeney was infolent enough on this Occafion, to objeft to {hort Skirts, becauie the Gentleman imagined it would make him look like a Foot Soldier. And for this Reafon, the Queftion was carried by a great Majority for long Skirts, tho' it was an additional Expence of three Shillings and nine Pence to each Man, A Regimental Order was produced to the Court, which direfited the Men to bring their old Coats to be examined, that if found proper, they might be converted into Frocks. By this it appears, that \yhatever Grievance Blakeney fuffered by rhe coft of the Frock, he might have avoided it, by paying that Obedience which the Law requires, to the Orders of his Commanding Officer, inllead of prefuming, in the moft impudent lyianner, tia explain that Order, quite different from the Meaning of the Officer who gave it out, and quite different from the Manner in which it was underdood and obeyed by the other Men of the Regiment ; a prefumption which juftly rendered him liable to a fevere Punifhment ; and fliews the very great Indulgence and Tendernefs of his OfHcers in not inflifting it. ith Article. I

24 [ 21 ] ihli Article. That the Cloathing which became ^ae in Augufiy was not permitted to be worn above two Days, when they were taken from the Men, and locked up in the Stores, where they have been kept ever fince from the Complainant and the reft of the Men. I need fay little on this Article, as I fuppofe few will think it unreafonable in the Cloathing clean and in good Orxder^ for the Credit of the Regiment. One might imagine, that the Complainant intended to prove, that there was a Defign to cheat the Soldiers of their a Commanding Officer, to preferve Cloathing. But fo mighty a grievance only Amounts to this, that -they were not permitted to fpoii ami fuhy their new Coats, as foon, and in what manner they pleafed. 1 2th Article. He will prove that there are feveral Men muflered in the Regiment as Soldiers, who at other times wear a Liv«ry, and do not actually do their Duty as fuch ; and that there is a Man muftered by the Name of John Robinfon y who has neither done Duty^ nor appeare<i in Regimentals at Mufter. As this Article is anfwered in the mofl: fatisfaq:ory, fenfible and explicit Manner, by Col. Chcvenix, in his Paper addrefled to the Court Martial, 1 (hall here give an Extra(9; from it. " I come naw. Gentlemen, to the twelfth and laft Article, which is for falfe Mufters, and 1 hope I have fully proved to the Court, that the three firft Men mentioned by the Complainant, were duly enlifted, did all Duties as Soldiers before they were employed by Officers as Servants, and therefore humbly apprehend, they can not come within the Meaning and Intent of falfe Mufters. As to their wearing Liveries, his late Royal Highnefs the Duke of Cumberland ordered, that no Soldier fhould ever work in his Regimental Cloaths, and as this Attendance is confidered as a Sort of Working, the Officers are obliged to furnifh them with Cloaths to wear, when they are thus employed." '* In regard to John Robinfon^ Son of Lieutenant Rolinfon^ Adjutant of the Regiment, complained of, as not being duly enlifted, I hope it will appear to the Court, that it has been the Cuftom of the Army, even beyond the Memory of any Officer now exifting, to allow the Indulgence to Merit and Service, of muftering, as Volunteers, the Sons of Officers, which Cuftom could not be carried on without the Knowledge of every Commander in Chief, who, I prefume, would not have

25 C 23 1 have allowed thefe PraSices, had they been thought detrimental to the Service." The Meaning of the feventh Article of the fourth Sedioit of the Articles of War, was to prevent the muftering of menial Livery Servants, but Blakeney himfelf confefled, that he believed thefe Men were duly enlifted and attefted; and it was proved on Oath, that they were fo, confequently, it was ro Breach of that Article to mufter them as Soldiers. They could not, as if they were merely Servants, by throwing off their Liveries and quitting their Mafters, at the fame Time quit his Majefty's Service, and go away at their PI afure. No; thefe were to all Intents and Purpofes Soldiers; the others, againft whom the Law provides, being only Fagots. The Complainant alfo applied to the Court, in Support of his Charge, to order the Mufter Rolls of the Artillery, for fix Months laft paft, to be laid before them, that he might by them prove his Allegation, that the Men mentioned by him in his Charge for falfe Mufters, were not marked in the Margin, abjent by Leave^ as depofed by Colonel Cbenevix, The Mufter Rolls being accordingly produced, on reading them, it appeared that the feveral Men mentioned by the Complainant, were regularly muftered for the faid fix Months, and properly marked in the Margin, as depofed by Colonel Cbenevix. I think it will be pertinent in this Place, to infert two Anecdotes of this Mr. Blakeney^ as they may give the PfjWjc a little Infight into the real Chara6ter, and Difpofition of the Man. When Lieutenant Robinfun of the Royal Regiment of Artillery, was fent by the Court to the Secretary's Office for the Mufter Rolls, the Complainant requefted, that Major Srrr^ the Judge Advocate, might allow him to fend a Soldier to watch Lieutenant Robin/on^ and take Care that he did not make any Addition or Alteration in the Mufter Rolls, in Order to invalidate his Charge. During the two or three firft Days of the Trial, the Appellant was attended by Counfellor Blajfet, a Gentleman of Eminence in his Profeftion, who appeared as the Appellant's Counfel But David Blakeney behaved fo impudentlv and infolently, e-en to him^ that he refufed to appear any longer in his Caufe, and fo refigned his Client to the humane and generous D r L /. As an Inftance of the very refpeftful Alanner, in which tiic D r fays, the Complainant always applied to his

26 [; 24. ] his Commanding Officer for Redrefs, I fliatl here infert one^ of his Letters to Colonel Cbenevix^ which was produced to the Court, and acknowledged by the Complainant to be his Hand-writing. Honoured Sir, T Beg Leave to remind you of the Promife you made * on Saturday laft, Viz. That you would give me an Anfwer to the Requeft I made at a General Court Martial. It is now eleven Days fince I firfl: required it of Captain Bettefivortb, the Difficulty of gftting one is not fo great ^ but it might have been over in a much fliorter Time, how' ever^ S"' / "wiu wait until! next Friday^ when, if I hear nothing of it, or does not receive an Anfwer, I hope you will not take it amifs, if I then do as my Duty and the Tenor of my Caufe fhall direft," And am. Honoured Sir, Your mofl: obedt humble Serv'- Cbapellzod^ November 4th, 1 "67. David Elakeney ** But, (fays the D r) The Articles in the Charge, and. thofe in the Sentence do not correfpond. How is this to be reconciled? To me it appears, that one or two Articles of Complaint, exhibited in the Regimental Court Martial was fupprefied, and not admitted to come before the General Court Martial." By this, it feems the Complainant had laid before his De^ fender, the D r, a String of Complaints, differing in many Circumftances from thofe inferted in the Paper figned by him, and given in to the Regimental Court Martial. That Paper feemed originally to contain thirteen Articles, one of which was erafed by the Complainant himfelf, as he acknowledged ; fo that only twelve came under the Cognizance of the Court Martial. He never informed the Court why he had done fo. On being aflced how it became erafed, he anfwered, he was fatibfied about it, and never once defired it might be examined. Twelve Articles only, were therefore produced to the Court, and if the D r v/111 refrefli his Memory by perufing their Sentence, he will find they have given their Opinion as to the twelve Articles, beginning with rhofe which feemed moft material. The D r proceeds: " The moft material o( B!akeney'» Complaints, as the moft diftrefsful and intolerable, was his Imprifon-

27 ' [ 25 ] Iriiprifonment by Order of the Regimental Court Martial. This therefore was one of the great and primary Objeds oi his Appeal." Vider^pofition, No. i. " When this was apprehended by his Officers, he was fet at Liberty fome Time before the General Court Martial fat, not out of any Compunftion or Mercy of that Court, that by no Means appears; but on purpofe to elude the Imprifon-' ment's being made an Article of his Appeal." " And we find this had the like Effect with the ex poll fado Payments, for this Imprifonment was not permitted to be entered among the Charges, or in any Sort enquired into, or even to appear in the Notes or Minutes of the Court, as I am informed ; it being alleged, that the Complainant was releafed from his Imprifonment betore the General Court Martial fat, and this Releafe was infifled on, and adjudged by the Court to be a fufficient Bar again!]; every Attempt to introduce or plead the Charge ot Imprifonment." ^ Now it happens that not a Syllable of the Imprifon ment was ever mentioned to the General Court Martial by the Complainant, or any other Perfon, fo that the D r's Reprefentation is a grofs Falfhood. But I fancy the Reader, by this Time, will not be much furprized at it, as it is fo familiar a Cuflom with him thro' his whol^ Performance. " As I am informed," fays this candid Author ; and in another Place, " as it appeared by the Minutes of a Gentleman of Credit taken at the Court Martial." This Gentleman, appears to be a Perfon of as much Credit and Veracity as would fuit his Purpofe, and who probabh" knowing that nothing pleafed. the D r fo well as faife and malignant Hints to the Prejudice of the Court, refolved to feaft and gratify this charitable Writer. He was fureofa gracious Reception and hearty Welcome, as a Thief is always acceptable to the Receiver of fiolen Goods. '* Now let us (continues this Author) take a curfory View of the Propriety, Juftice and Judgment of this Sentence. It begins for Regularity, with the feventh Article,' which corre-. fponds with the ninth in thecom.plaint, (that is in thed -r's Complaint) the fupernumerary unneceffary Buff Waiftcoat, which is confefled to be a Grievance, but attempted to be conftrued away by Value given." What determined the Judgment of the Court on that Article was this: As the Cloathing of the Royal Regiment of D Artillerv

28 . [ 26 ] Artillery was alccrtalned by his Majefly, thej^found the Aiticle of the BulY-coloured V/aiftcoat to be a Grievance. But what other Redrefs than tliat contained in the Sentence could they award him? They found it a Grievance, they condemned it as fuch, they ordered he fhould keep it, as the full Value of the Stoppage made on that Account, They did not tind any Officer guilty of a Breach of the Mi\ Se lion of the Mutiny Act, bccaufe it did not appear that the Man had been defrauded of any Part of his Pay; nor could they comprehend that what the Commanding Officer (however he might be millalcen) thought neceffary for the Matrofs, and which was deemed a fufficient Value for the Pay ilopped, could be conftrued into a detaining or with-holding any Part of the Soldier's Pay, or come within the Meaning of the Mutiny A f. " But (Aiys the D r) the Number of the Articles in the Charge, and thofe in the Sentence of the Court Martial, do not.correfpond. How is this to be reconciled? To me it appears, that one or two of the Articles of Complaint exhibited in the Regimental Court Martial were fuppreffed, and not admitted to come before the General Court Martial." " For as I am informed, when the Commanding Officer gave the Complainant no Redrefs, and he refolutely, yet re*- fpeisffully infifted upon his Complaints beitig judged by a Regimental Court Martial ; the Adjutant in the Morning this Court fat, put fome Money into the Complainant's Hand, in liea of tlie Farthings flopped for the unheard of Carriage of his t'ay. And though this \y\s and fhould have been taken as a Confeflion of Guilt, and the ftrongefl: Proof that could be- given of the Truth of the Complaint; yet this Article was Itruck out of the Charge, and not admitted to come before the Court, but new modelled, as the Judges thought proper, regardlefs of the Soldier's unqueflionable Right to make this an Article of his Corriplaint, before both the Regimental and General Court Martial." As a Reply to thefe two groundlefs, and falfe Accufations, Vid. Depofitions, No. i, 2, 3, of the Appendix, *' But it is no Wonder (lays the D r) if fome material Articles were permitted to be fuppreffed and denied the jufl Adjudication in Appeal; that Blakeney^ Complaints fhould be found vexatious and groundlefs." What

29 ! : [ - ] Wiiat conclunve Realbnir.gi even granting what the D -r advances to be true, tho' it is abfolutely falfe. See Affidavit, I^o. I. The Purport of the D rs Logic is this It is no Wonder that the Complaints which came before the Court Ivlartial were deemed vexatious and groundlets, as feveral others were fuppreffed: But if thofe fuppreitcd ones had been fairly produced, it v/ould have jgcn impofiible for the Court to have found tiie other Articles vexatious and groundlefs. For tho' there was no Connexion between the feveral Articles of Complaint, as they were each, independent of the other, yet notwithftanding this, thofe fuppreffed Articles would have clearly ilievvn the Truth and Juifice of the other Charges, as they were endued with a furprizing Power of intuitivrly convincing every Body, not only of the Grievances contained in them, bat alfo of every Grievance in all the other Articles Such a puzzje-brained Author lliould never affert a Falll"iood, even out of Policy, as it gives one a double Advantage of both queftioning his IntellecEts and Morals, *' But feveral Articles, (the D r fays) befides thofe that were fuppreffed, appear well grounded, and inconteftiblc Proof of all the reft has been, and 7io'jj is ready to be offered. Therefore they are neither groundlefs nor malicious, much iefs are they a Breach of the I2th Section of the Articles of War ; fuch a Breach can only be made by Ofticers, and thofe of the higher Rank." To begin with the firft part of this inconfiftent Paragraph, *' Incontellible Proof was, and now is ready to be offered of all the reft.'' By this he would infinuate, that the Court refufed the Evidence offered, to be produced, and that they pronounced Sentence, without liftening to fuch Evidence. Even David Blaksney would have too much Senfe and Modefty to join his Advocate in this Affertion Every Queftion that he propofed to have alked, v,'as affented to by the Court. Every Man he called in as a Witnefs, was examined in the Manner he himfelf chofe. What could be more jii.ft? What more candid? ' But inconteftibje Evidence is now ready to be produced." A Criminal might as well allege, after he v.'as fairly tryed by the moft open and impartial i^roceedings, and convi<^ed on undoubted Evidence, that he could then produce fufh-, cient Prool^ of his Innocence, and fo exclaim againft the Judge and Jury for condemning him We come now to the Conclufion of this moft extraordinarv Paragraph. D 2 ' " There-

30 [ 2S ] '' Therefore fuch Complaints are neither grouridlefe nor maliciou?, much lefs are they a Breach of the i2th Settion of the Articles of War. Such a Breach can only be made by Officers, and thofe of the higher Rank." I (hould be i;lad to know if a groundlefs and vexatious Complaint is not to be eilecmcd a Breach of the i2th Section, as it is puniiiiabie by that very Article. If not, hv what Authority does a Couri-Martial prefume to punifh 3 Complainant for his groundlefs Appeal? I imagine the Spirit of this Lav/ fufticiently explains the Letter of it. The Meaning, indeed is clear to any Man of common Undcrflianding, but dark to the D r. For, like People who have fore Eyes, he is blinded by too much hght. But then, fays he, *' Such a Breach can'only be made by Officers, and thofe of the higher Rank," And yet a punilhment is allotted by this very Article of War for Soldiers! TheD r's Comments on the Articles of War are admirable. Let us now pay a little Attention to that Precifion, which peculiarly diflinguifxies this Author's Arguments. ** The 1 2th Section of the Articles of War (fays he) provides a Remedy for any inferior Officer or Soldier who thinks himfelf wronged by his Colonel or Captain. It' points out v/here the injured is to complain, gives him a Title to a Trial by a Regimental Gourt-Martial ; and proyides, that if upon the fecond Hearing, the Appeal (hall apr pear to be vexatious and groundlefs, the Appellant fhall be punifhed at the Difcretion of the faid General Court- Martial." Does not the Law exprefbly, in this Cafe, lodge 3 Power in the General Court-Martial, to punifli the Appellant, if the Complaint appears vexatious and groundlefs? Yet the D r feems to have forgot himfelf, when he thus exclaims, *' If any Crime appeared in the Appellant, it could not be cognizable, in a Court appointed only to try the Truth of his Appeal. For fuch a Crime, another Court fhould have been appointed, v/here the Officers compofing this Court, might appear as WitnefTcs, not as Judges." Now this Cenfure, inftead of affeding the Court, falls on the Legiflature, for veiling them with this Power. For the D r firll: allows, they have fuch a Power by the Laws of their Country, and then blames them for exercifmg it, tho; they were obliged to do fo, in the Execution of their Duty. Indeed, his Ingenuity in this Point is admirable. What a Happintfs is it to carry on a Controverfy with an Author, whc^

31 [ 29 1 who faves one the Trouble of confuting him, by kindly con-- Iradicting himfelf in the Progrefs of his Argument. I cannot help comparing him to a certain Animal, called a Pig, which by attempting to Iwim, will cut it's own Throat. " Befides, (fays this judicious Author) the Appellant was confidered in a different Light from a Complainant, under the J 2th Seftionof the Articles of War, and arraigned without any Evidence, for Crimes which came not before this Tribunal. '^v The Complaint is faid to be malicious, and he is arraigned as a feditious and litigious Man, and therefore fentenced to receive five hundred Lafhes. This is another pregnant Proof of the Author's Ignorance and Sophiflry. As to rhe Court's declaring in their Sentence, that they thought the Complaint malicious, they only ufed the Word as more explanatory, tho' already implied in the Words vexatious and groundlcfs : As the Articles were proved to be fo, was it any Impropriety to term them alfo malicious, as it appeared he had fwelled his Complaint with eleven unjufl Articles, merely to afperfe and vilify the Character of his Officers? He was alfo termed a feditious and litigious Man, as the Tendency of his Appeal was to inflame the Minds of his Comrades, to make them confider their Officers as Knaves, who by extending their Authority in a mofl: arbitrary and illegal Manner, cheated and impofed on them. This Sentence was to be publickly read to the Garrifon, it therefore became neceftary for the Court to explain their Sentiments in the l^rongefl and mofl explicit. Terms. The Complainant's Punilhment was to be confidered by every Soldier, as an Enforcem.ent of the Laws, for a fcandalous Infringement of Order and Difciplinc. A general Court-Martial, by mentioning him in their Sentence, as a litigious and feditious Fellow, characterized a Man who was to be confidered by the Soldiery as a troublefome Incendiary. It became their Duty to fix this Brand of Infamy on him, as it would warn his Comrades, and probably fave them from being feduced by his malignant and falfe Infinuations. Perhaps he means it was improper to ufe the Words litigious and feditious, becaufe they are not inferted in the i2tfi Seflion of the Articles of War, for a Breach of which he was punifhed. He might as wellfay, that it would be an Impropriety for a Judge in his Sentence, to term a convifted Pick Pocket a Thief, becaufe the Word Thief was not particularly mentioned in the Indidment, on which he was tried. Imuft

32 [ 30 ) I mufi: alfo inform this corre^ Author, that the Word arraifrn^ means to bring a Prifoner to his trial, and was never applied by any one but himfelf, to the Terms ufed by a Court in their Sentence. The very.etymology of the Word might have taught him this. '* There was alfo a Circumftance attended the General Court-Martial, v/hich would have had a different Effect in a Court of Law, from what appeared in that Court. For as I am informed, a new Prefident was appointed, who was not before a Member of the Court, and with this new and uninflrufted Prefident, the Cburt proceeded to the Judgment and Sentence which has been before related." For an Anfwer to this. Vide Depofition, No. 3. But, fays the D r, " He who was in Law and Faft the Proi'ecutor, became the Profecutcd." So far trom Blakcney''s being confidered by the Court as the Refpondent, or ever looked upon in the light of the Perfon profecuted, that when Lieutenant Col. Williamfon (of whom the Author, with the greateft Judice, draws a moft defervedly amiable Character) called him the Frijoner^ he was immediately fet right by the Court ; and after,- \*ljen he happened to repeat his Error, inftantly corretsted himfelf, and even aflccd, Pardon of Blakeney for his Miliake. " Bui (fays the D r) Blakeney the Appellant, was foon converted into Blakeney the Culprit. His very Name, as well as his Character and Station, were changed. He was fpoken of by fomeof his Judges, not only as a feditious and litigious Man, but as a Defertcr from the Britijh Regiment of Artillery. He was frequently, and confidently, and publickly cajled Cunningham, and ^ Deferter, and as fuch he was treated. *' No Evidence it is true was called to thefe new Accufations, nor indeed was any Evidence neceitary, for the Charges were readily taken tor granted. In vain therefore did this innocent late Appellant, by military Force, I cannot fay by what Law^, transformed into a Criminal, and mifnamed : in vain did he plead his Innocence, and offer to call Perfons to his Character, as a Soldier and as a Man^ and to prove where he was born and bred, and that he never was out of the Kingdom. Such an Appeal was feckoned no iefs audacious or criminal than the firft. And therefore aggrieved, innocent, hijh Blakeney^ the Appellant, thus transformed into Cunningham^ a malicious, feditious, litigious, Englifj Deferter, wad denyed the ordinary Means of Juftification allowed to Criminals

33 [ 31 ] Crinvinals of the deepeft Dye ; and in the Court In which he fued for Redrefs of Grievances, fentenced to receive five Hundred Lailies," Here the D r would have us believe, that David Blakeney was tried by the Couri-Martial, as if he had been one Cunningham^ a Deferter. Yet the Name of Cunningham^ or of Blakenry's being a Deferter, was never once mentioned, either to the Court, or by any Member of the Court. Vide Depofition, No. 3, 4, 5, 6. " It cannot be imagined, (continues the D r) with any Degree of Judice or Propriety, that any of the Corps of ( fficers who lately tried, and condemned, and imprifoned him, in the Regimental Court Alartial, fhould have been appointed to try his Complaints again^ from an Appeal from their oixn yyrifd/cliojt, to that of a General Court- Martial, a Court in which the Majority of ^ oices was to determine. And one of rhefe it was, who afterwards charged Blakeney vnxh. being an EngUflj Deferter/' Here the D r advances no lefs thnn three malignant Fahhoods in a few Lines, >No Officer of the Artillery who fat on the Regimental Court-Martial, v/as a Member of the General One. It will be a fufficient Proof juft: to mention the Officers Names of the Artillery, who fat on both. Regimental Court-Martial. Capt. Rifbard Betttju'orth^ Prefident. I/ieut. brady, Senr. 7 ^^^^^^^^^ Lieut. Buchanan^ j ' \ Lieut. Craddock^ C Lieut. Atkinfon. On the General Court Martial. Capt. Thomas Dejbrifay, 1 jv ^._,. ^ f Lieut. Brady, Junr. Lieut. Tbcma! Burgb, ] '-^^^"^^^'^ \ UexxX. John Handsock. Further, Blakeney was never confined by Order of the Regimental Court-Martial. Vide Depofition, No. i. It is true, the Appellant objected to having any Officer of the Pegiment of Artillery on the General Court-Martial, but this was over ruled by the Court, as thev were appointed to fitby the Lord Lieutenant's Warrant. It will alfo appear, that it was a particular Indulgence, inflead of being a Grievance,

34 ( 30 a Grievance, to have any Officer j^ but thofe bf his own Cor^s on the General Court-Martial. To authorize this Aflerti^)!!, I beg Leave to quote the 2cl Article of the 1 8th Se6l. (^ the Articles of War, w^hich only relates to the Artillery. " For Differences arifing among themfelves, or in Matters relating to their own Corps^ the Courts-Martial may be compofed of'their own Officers. But where a Number fuflicient of fuch Officers cannot be altembled, or in Matters wherein other Corps are interefted, the Officers of Artillery fhall fit in Courts-Martial, with the Officers of our othec Corps, taking their Ranks according to the Dates of their refpective Commiflions." The D r confeffes that the Sentence of this arbitrary Court-Martial "might flill have been executed, in it'sutmoft Latitude, unobferved and unnoticed, had not the moft prpvoking and unheard of Severity been fliewn preparatory to, and at the time of Execution." " Upon the Day appointed for the Execution, a Guard was fent to conduct him in Iron Manacles from the Prifon to the place of Execution, at the Barracks. The unfortunate Sufferer expoftulated with the Officer on difgracing a Soldier, who never did any thing contrary to Law, with Marching him loaded with Irons like a Thief or a Robber to Execution ; declared his willing Submiffion to fuffer agreeable to the Sentence, and his Refolution to go peaceably under the Condu l of the weakefl Drummer in the Corps. " This Officer had Humanity enough to be touched with fuch Remonflrances and Declarations, and therefore led him to the Place of Execution without the Manacles, which were only carried with the Guard, for which the humane and generous Officer was blamed and reprimanded^ but he, bravely exonerated himfelf, by producing the fuppofed Criminal agreeable to Law, See Depofition, No. 17. But the poor Matrofs had no fooner reached the place of Execution, than he was aflailed with cruel Scoffs and infolent and wanton abufe ; fuch as " Oh, ho, Mr. Blakeney^ have we got you? You have efcaped the Gallows, but damn me if you ffiall efcape us : You Villain, we will have your Blood. Another fays D n ye, you Scoundrel, you fhall now pay for all your Impudence and Villainy." Come you Dog, fays a third, ftrip, flrip, and fo lays hold on his Cloaths to drag them off." Here are feveral Officers pointed at, for behaving in a Manner

35 ( 33 ) Manner that would be a Difgrace to the mofl: inhuman Planter, who after being tranfported, had arrived to the Dignity of exercifing his Tyranny over a Negro Slave. Now fuppofing all this laboured and very circumftantial Account to be utterly falfe, what fhould we think of the Author of it? fhould any Man offer this to the Public as an indifputable Faft, without firfl: taking the only proper Method of learning ihe Truth, by the Teflimony of fome Perfons of Credit, whofe Veracity might be depended on. I fancy the D r imagined, that People would believe him, becaufe they could not fuppofe any Man profligate enough to report fuch a Story without being convinced of its Truth, Thus, becaufe few could conceive he would fo totally give up gu Pretenfions to Modefly, Truth, and Ho- ^efly, he wifely refolved to take advantage of this, and forfeit the Character of a Gentleman, a Man of Honour, and a good Subjeft, on the noble Prefumption that it would not be iiifpected that he could be baje enough to do fo! He has treated his Fellow Citizens as if a Favourite Servant, in the confidence of his Mailer, fhould cheat and defraud him, and hope to efcape Detection merely from the kind Opinion his generous and good natured Mafter entertained of his Probity. As a Proof of my not running into the fame Fault which I blame fo much in the D r, I refer to Depofitions, No; 7, 8, 9, lo, II, 13, 16, 17, in the Appendix, alfo to the Affidavit of a Gentleman and Citizen, No, 12. Let me now exclaim in my turn, and afk, // this Politic P h it luife. Is it juji P Are thefe the Morals of a Patriot, a Legiflator, and a Citizen? Is this the Man who is to be the Penlioner of the City, to be fed at the public Cofl, and a Revenue appointed for him, as there formerly was at Athens, for thofe worthy and virtuous Citizens, who had grown hoary in the Service of their Country, and were revered for their Poverty and Virtue, Sir TVilUatn Temple tells us, that it was formerly a Cuflom for the Gentry in this Kingdom to keep a Story-teller in their Houfes, to divert the Family by flrange and improbable Lies, Some of the C s have, perhaps, heard of this, and refolved to revive tl" e Cuflom in the Perfon of their worthy Reprefentative ; and indeed they could not fix on a more proper Perfon to ferve them in this Capacity, It is to be hoped they will oblige him to wear a Badge^ and I E think

36 ( 34 ) ' :. think, Mendax^ will be a proper Infcription for it, as it wiil at once, contain his Chara ter, and their Reafons for conferring that Dignity on him. *' I murt beg leave (fays this candid Gentleman) to explain my Conduct, and the Motives of my Conducl, on the Occafion. Shocked vv^ith the Story of the DiftrefTes of tlie Man, tho' an entire Stranger to me, I could not be at Peace till I faw him and learned the affecting Circumllances of his Cafe Jrid yet before I prejumed to take a Step Jor bis Reliefs I colle^ed Evidence enough to convince me of the Truth of the Injormation 1 had received.'''' Slight Evidence J it feems, is fufficient to convince him, that a Set of Gentlemen would behave like Villains! But this is always the Cafe, a Cheat is eafily perfuaded that any Perfon is diflioneft, for he draws the Proof from his own Bofom. Happily, the D r's Abilities do not qualify him to do much Mifchief. His Oratory, like the Harangues of a Quack Do6tor, is adapted to the Ears and Underifanding of a Mob. He pleafes them becaufe his Sentiments and Stile is fo confonant to their own. If he had been endued with a Genius to fecond his evil Intention, he would certainly have been a Firebrand. But luckilv for the Public, he is defe(etive in all the requifite Qualifications of an Incendiary, except Inclination. He refembles a Viper, that will attempt to bite when it's Teeth are drawn, tho' it can't do any Harm. Nature, we may obferve, has wifely deprived many Animals of the Power, who feem to have the flrongeft bent to be mifchievous. Thus we fee Cabin Currs always barking and fnapping, whilfl: the fierce Bull Dog is peaceable and quiet, 'till provoked to exert his Strength and Spirit. " Confidering it as a delicate Point, continues the cautious and prudent D r, to call the Judgment of any Court in Queftion, I thought it beft to lay this poor Man's Cafe before Government, in the affecting Terms it fcemed to me to demand, as far as Time and Circumftances would permit, that by proving the poor Man an Objett of Mercy, his Sentence might be refpited, 'till Time fhould convince Gentlemen of their Error, and prevent the like for the future." This is another Abfurdity, for furcly, laying this Man's Cafe before Government, and demanding a Refpite, till the Circumftances of the Tryal fhould be canvafled, was dire(^ly calling the Judgement of the Court in Queftion, a Doubt

37 d [ 35 ] Doubt of the Juftice of their Sentence, being the Reafon he alleges for his Application. The whole Page (No. 41,) is filled with Bombafl and Panegyrick on himfelf, but his Reafoning is fo well expofed, and placed in fo juft, tho' ridiculous a Light, by the Author of the Obfervations, that I need not fay much on thib Point. But it feems the poor D r was not found of Weight enough to procure any Pardon^ any Mitigation^ any Refpite^ of tte Sentence pajfed upon the gallant^ injured^ brave^ but unfortunate David Blakeney! The important C s L /, M D. was weighed in the Balance and found wanting! Confidering him, as the three hundredth Part, of one Part of the Legiflature, his Application to the L L- t was a moil impertinent and impudent one, and with all due Deference to this great Commoner's Wifdom, I can not help thinking it truly ridiculous. It makes me recolle l a Story of a Lady of Pleafure, who complained to an Officer, of iome Grievances flie had fuffered from the Soldiers, at the fame Time declaring, flie would apply to the Lords of the Admiralty for Redrefs, for (he had undoubted Pretenfions to do fo, as fhe had formerly been W e to a Marine Officer. Again, the D r gives us a Touch of the Pathetic, in this dolorous Strain. *' Let me now appeal to thofe, who are touched with any Senfe of the F^reedom and Rights of the Subje6t, whether Civil or Military, whofe Bofoms are aftuated with Sentiments of Juftice and Humanity, whofe Bowels are moved to Compaflion and jufl: Refentment, by the Sufferings of their fellow Subje<9:s, or who vvifh to Support the Reputation of good Citizens, or Men of Honour, and requeft they will judge in what Inflances, in all thefe Proceedings, my Condu6t is to be impeached?" The Reader <will be able to make a concluftve Anfvjer to this ^leflion^ wlen he ha- read t^e Appendix. "With what Truth, Juftice or S.eafon, the D r has raifed this outrageous Clamour againft the Gentlemen of the Army, the Impanial no-v judge. let He has indeed, in every Part of his Pamphlet, by the Dint of tumid Nonfenfe, and the mofl: bold, falle and impu^ dent Accufations, endeavoured to fupply alldefeds of Truth, Argument and Reafon. He has acted like thofe fcandalous Beggars and Impoftors 1:2 ft

38 ! [ 36 ] fo frequent In our Streets, who by doleful and whining Complaints, and expofing their Jeigned Sores, endeavour to excite CompaiTion in a mbre querulous Strain than the real Objects of Pity. We now come to the D r's modefl: Comparifon between l-iimfelf and the old Roman Citizen. Page 47. What a ftriking Refemblance between the D r and Juniu Brutus! But, leil fome of the Urbicolas may imagine, that yunius r, and had formerly fhook Brutus was fuch a Man as the D the Weavers-Hall with his Eloquence, I beg leave to dwell a. little on this famous Parallel.- Junii.s Brutus coni^emned his Sons to die, for confpiring to reftore a tyrannical Family to the Throne, who were juftly obliged to abdicate for introducing Slavery and Defpotifm. C s L / blames his Son for giving his Opinion, according to the beft of his Judgement, on the Trial of a Soldier, by a Regimental Court Martial. Therefore C s L s is equal, if not fuperior, ioyunius Brutus! The Roman Citizen, as Conful, attended the Execution of his own Sons, faw them publickly lafhed, and afterward? beheaded, and has left the admiring W^orld fuch an Inftance of Juftice and Severity as is not to be parallelled. C s L s defends a feditious, turbulent, and malicious Soldier, compaflionates his Sufferings, ufes every Art to prejudice the Public in his Favour, exclaims againft his Judges, and then has the Impudence to compare himfelf to Junius Brutus The D r would willingly abrogate the Articles of War, and feveral other good Laws, and iupply them, by fuch confufed and impraclicable Whims, as the Vortex of a muddy and difordered Imagination might fling out In this indeed, he ivould refemble C^f:r, wjio, as Suetonius tells us, when he robbed the Capitol of Gold, replaced it with gilt Brafs, The Aim of his political Noflrums, is to throw the Body politic into Spafms and Convulfions. Tlio' Riot, Confufion and Anaixhy, are the natural Confequencer. pf the licentious Principles he preaches up to the People, yet he pretends that in one it is all for the Good of the i'ojr and ijppreijcci -^ and of his juvenile Papers, compares himfelf to the Angel who tifed to trouble the Waters of Bethfaida for ih? Benefit of Cripples and Lazars. "The belf Anfwer I can give to the D r's bafe and falfe Account

39 ^:<' [ 37 ] Account oiblakenefs Punifhment, (Page 44, 45.) is by referring the Reader to the Depofition, No. 12. of a Gentleman and Citizen oi Dublin, alfo Depofitions, No. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. We come now to that Part where the D r attempts Panegyrick His Aukwardnefs, in this Point, puts me in mind of the Poet's witty Allufion ; in a Portrait of fome fuch Panegyrift as the D r, he fays, As if a Fool (hould mean By fpitting on your Face to make it clean. I fnall tranfcribe his own Words on the L d L t's Conuu6:. " He, like the Sacred Perfon he fo truly and worthily reprefents, muft aq: on the Information he receives. It cannot be fuppofed he knew all the Circumftances of this poor Man's Cafe. He mull form his Judgement upon the Scntmn. of the Court Martial, and the Character given by the Officers of the fuppofed Delinquent." That is to lay, L-d T d never examined the Proceedings of the Court Martial, but juft read the Sentence, and fo confirmed it. But the D r aflerts this, perhaps, as an Excufe for himfelf, as it is certain that he never read the Proceedings, he concludes that his E y had not done fo either. By this, he would alfo infinuate, that he knew as much of the Matter as his L at his L p, and therefore was naturally furprized p's refufing toacquiefce to his fuperior Judgment and Sagacity, and pardon the Delinquent, efpecially fince HE condefcended to stoop, and alk a Favour from G 1. For the D r's Inftrutlion, I fliall quote the loth Article of the 15th SeGtion, from that only Latv-Book which Officers read. ** No Sentence of a General Court Martial fhall be put in Execution, till after a Report be made of the whole Proceedings to us, U'c. excepting in Irela?jd, where the Report is to be made to the Lord Lieutenant, and to our Chief Governor or Governors of that Kingdom, and his or their Diredions be had thereupon." I believe his M y would have fcarce ordered the "j.hole Proceedings to be laid before the Lord Lieutenant, if he fuppofed, like the D r, that he would only confider the Sentence. -Is this the D r's Way of complimenting hi^ E -rjf! Would

40 ! [ 38 ] Would It be a Panegyrick on a Judge, to fay that he had paid no Regard to the Evidence produced on a Trial, the' hii Judgment was to be determined by it? Befides his E y, by approving of the Sentence, became a Party concerned, as it Avas a public Teftimony of his being convinced of the Juflice and Impartiality of the Court Martial ; otjierwife he never would have confirmed their Sentence, and confequently it would be of no EfFefl:, as it could not be executed without his Approbation. Thus it unavoidably follows, that all the D r's Reflexions on the Court-Martial alfo glance at his L p. But he artfully drives to feparate him from the Court Martial, as he well knows that the worthy and difinterefted Part of the Citizens, v/ould never liften to any of his bafe Afperfions on the Court, if it was once known, that they could in any manner affect his L p. Let them confider that all the Proceedings of the Court- Martial, were examined by that great Man, whofe Knowledge and Experience in Military ^/lattcrs were never queftioned. A Perfon of his i -y's Penetration and Huirsanity, would never have given his Sanation for a Punifhment, without being thoroughly convinced, that it was abfolutely ncceflary, to preferve that Order, Subordination, and firidt DifcipUne, without which the Military would become a a Nuifance, inflead of a Benefit to Society. I again fay, that if the worthy and difinterefled Part of the Citizens, faw the Aflfair in this juh: and proper.light, they would never enter into Affociations and Subfcriptions to Profecute a General Court-Martial, and fliew by their doing fo, that they no longer had any Confidence in the Juftice of }iis E y's Adminiftration. Is this a grateful Return for his generous and fuccefsful Efforts to ferve the Kingdom, by obtaining an Octennial Bill, fo dcfervedly eileemed a Refloration of Liberty! And fliall it be faid, that the City of Dublin fet an Example of Ingratitude to the Nation, by attempting to fix a ftain on his E y's Juflice and Judgement. Indeed, the D r's Panegyrick oh his L p,has turned out the higheft Compliment in one refped'. For how excellent mufl that Picture be in itfelf, which his aukward Daubing could not Spoil To prevent any Mifconfl:ru libn on what has been faid, the Gentlemen cf the Court Martial (by whofe Opinion the Author

41 [ 39 ] Author was governed in writing thefe Remarks) defired the following Addrefs might be made, in their Name, to the Public. " That they fhould be extremely forry it was underflood as if they meant to introduce L--d T d, as a Party concerned in the Court Martial, in order to (helter themfelves under his Name from the threatned Profecution, and, by this paultry Art, aim to obtain the Citizens Favour, and divert the Refolution they have entered into, of commencing a Suit in Favour of David Blakeney. No: They wifh to bring their Condud; to that public Tefl: ; confident ic will bear the ftri tefl: Scrutiny, as it was founded on the Dictates of Tuftice and Honour, In a Court of Equity, Calumtiy and Falfebood will neither be hftened to, nor believed. They glory in that Privilege which the late Complainant is entitled to, of having the Juflice of his Appeal, and their Proceedings determined by thofe Laws, which the Spirit of Liberty, that breathes thro' every Part of our Conftitution, has provided for the Proteftion. Security and Happinefs of the meaneft Subjefl They only mention L d T ci's Name, as his Approbation of their Judgement, gives them the ftrongeft Reafon to think it was candid and equitable. As to the D r, I really think him incorrigible, and am far from being fo vain, as to think any Thing I have faid, will teach him to behave with more Senfe or Modefty for the future. Tho' he v/ere defpicable to every Body, yet his Arrogance and Self-conceit would flill buoy him up ; fo Naturalifts tells us, that a fmall Quantity of Air is furniihed with an Elafticity, that exerts itfelf with fuch Force, as to bear the incumbent Weight of the whole Atmofphere. I know fome people think, it is owing to Fire and Spirit, that he could never be confined within the Bounds of Decency and good Manners, On the contrary, I afcribe this, to a natural Defefl m his Intellects ; for it is remarkable, that the beft made Curb, can not rellrain a Horfe that has a bad Mouth. " But, while I am willing, fa^ s he, to do Juftice to all, and render unto Cajar the Things that are Cafar^ ; I hope 1 fhall not be denied the like Judgement and Juflice to my own Chara6ter, and my Conduct in this interefting Affair." VVe have already feen how he has rendered Cafar hi:. Due. The D r, undoubtedly, interfered moft impudently and

42 L 40 J and officioufly, where he had no manner of Concern, invented a Parcel of malicious and grofs Falfehoods, and impofed them on the Public as Truths. His Excufe is, that it was the only way he had ** of doing Jufice to his own Chara^er:'' This puts me in mind of a Tinker's Apology, who was brought before a Juftice for coining Raps ; he begged it might be confidered, that he lay under an abfolute Neccffityof coining and pafling them for good Half-pence, otherwife, he could neither pay his Debts, or fupport the Character of an honeji Man. But to conclude ferioufly, on a very ferious Subject. The Gentlemen of the Army are, doubtlefs, greatly obliged to the D r for his very great Humanity, after accufmg them as guilty of the moft infamous Actions, fuch as Perjury^ Cruelty, Opprejfion^ Inhumanity^ dec. he is tender of mentioning their Names^ left hjs immortal Writings Ihould convey them to Pofterity. See Mirror, Page 46. It is now left to the candid and decifive Voice of the Public, to determine, whether the Gentlemen of the Army or the D r, are blameable, ^c. They have ftill fo much Charity for him, as to wifh, he could aflign/z^c/?? fatisfa^ory Reafons as might exculpate him for aflerting eighteen or twenty Falfehoods, in about forty Pages, to blaft the Characters of Men, who have always a ted with Integrity, and ferved their Country v/ith Honour. APPENDIX

43 [ 41 3 APPENDIX. No. I. R County of Dublin, ") "TT""^ Ichard Bettesworth, to wit. j I B Efq; Captain in the Royal /r//5> Regiment of Artillery, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That he was Prefident of the Regimental Court Martial held on David Blakemy^ Matrofs in faid Regiment j and that faid Blake?iey was not confined by Order of faid Court at any Time ; nor was any Article of Blakeneyh Complaint obliterated by faid Court Martial ; nor was any Money ordered to be paid him by the Court. Sworn before me this 6th Day April, Richard Bettefwortb, Robert JVillcoth, No. 2. County of Dublin, \ T leu TENANT David Robin/on, to wit. S \ J Adjutant of the Royal Irijh Regiment of Artillery, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That he did not pay any Money on Account of Carriage of Halfpence, or on any other Account whatfoever, to David Blahney, Matrofs in faid Regiment, during his Confinement ; that in Confequence of faid Blakene/s having applied to the Commanding Officer of faid Regiment, relative to his having paid one Penny for his Share of Carriage of Halfpence from the Treafury to Cbapelizod, for four Months Subfiftance of the Regiment] the faid Commanding Officer F ordered

44 4s APPENDIX. ordered the faid Halfpence, fo flopped, (hould be repaid ; and that Deponent did accordingly return faid Blakeney the four Farthings iiopped as aforefaid, for four Months Carriage of the Halfpence received to fubfift the Regiment j which was all the Money he returned to faid Blakeney, Sworn before me this 6th of Aprils D. Robin/on. Robert Willcocks. No. 3. County of Dz/M«, I rri H I S Day Lieutenant Colonel to wit. 3 X Alexander Duncan^ of the Fiftyfifth Regiment and Major Sirr^ of Dublin^ came before me, one of his Majefty's Jufcices of the Peace for faid County, and made Oath, That faid Lieutenant Colonel was appointed Prefident of a General Court Martial, by a Warrant from his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant, bearing Date the loth oi December laft, in the Room of the late Lieutenant Colonel Williamfon^ who died on the 7th of faid Month ; that the Court met on the \i\h.oi December^ and the Prefident, and all the i\i embers, were regularly fworn, and proceeded to Trial, on an Appeal from the Determination of a Regimental Court Martial, held by the Officers of the Royal hijh Regiment of Artillery, upon twelve Articles of Complaint, figned David Blakeney, a Matrofs in faid Regiment, and which had been exhibited before the faid Regimental Court Martial ; that the General Court Martial, with the new Prefident, be^un the Proceedings afrejj) ; that they heard and examined all Evidences produced to them, upon Oath ; and that fevera! Alterations were made in the Courfe of the Trial, from the former Procedings ; and that the Court Was held from the Day of their Meeting, by feveral Adjournrr)ents, to the 18th of Dccanber laft, in order to examine iriorc minutely into the faid Articles of Complaint. 1 hey further deprie. That in the Paper figned David Blokcney^ there appeared to have been thirteen Articles, one of which was erafed; and that Blakeney declared upon Oath, That he had dene it himfelf, not intending to carry it before the Court ; that after the Trial v*as over, and the Proceedings

45 . to APPENDIX. 43 ings clofed, the faid David Blakeney voluntarily, and in the moft folemn Manner, declared upon Oath, before the Court, That as it had been reported that feverai Men of the Royal. Reginrent of Artillery had been concerned with him in making faid Complaints, he took that Opportunity of acquitting his Brother Soldiers of faid Charge, not one of whom had been in any Way concerned with him in making faid Complaints. They alfo depofe. That they never heard any Member of the Court Martial, or any other Perfon, call faid Blakeney by the Name of Cunningham^ or tell him he was a Deferter. Sworn before me, in Aprils Dublin Cajile^ this 4th Day of ^ Alexander Duncan. n- 7 j n r ^'^'''^ ^^«>- Jofeph Slrr. No. 4. County Dublin, ) T leutenant John Handco.ck, of to wit. ) 1 J the Royal Iri/lj Regiment of Artillery, came this Day before me, and made Oath on the Holy Evangelifts, That he was Member of a late General Court Martial, held on David Blakeney, a Matrois of faid Regiment j that he never called him by the Name of Cu?iningham, or any other than his proper Name ; nor does he recolledl.hearing any other Member of the General Court Martial call him by any other Name than Blakeney. Sworn before me, this 6th Day of April, 1768* John Handccch. Robert IVillcoch. No. 5. T leutenant William Brady, Ju- City of Dublin, ) wit. 3 1^ :"ior, of the Royal /r//?? Regiment of Artillery, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That he never did, at any Time, charge David Blakeney, Matrofs in faid Regiment, with being a Deferter, or ever F z ' called

46 44 APPENDIX. called him by the Name of Cunningham ; nor did he ever hear that any other Perfon had called him Cunningham^ until he faw it fet forth in a Pamphlet, intitled, A Mirror for Courts Martial. Sworn before me, this 7th Day of April, WilUam Brady. J. Taylor. No. 6. County of Dublin, 1 CJ^HOMJS BURGH, Firft Lieuteto wit. \ nant in the Royal Irijh Regiment of Artillery, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That he never did, at any Time, charge, or accufe David Blakeney with being a Deferter, or ever called him by the Name of Cunningham ; nor did he ever hear that any other Perfon had called him Cunningham, until he faw it fet forth in a Pamphlet, intitled, J Mirror for Courts Martial. Sworn before me, this 7th Day of April, Thomas Burgh., Robert PFilkods. No. 7. County of the City 7 T leutenant Rcbi^rt Gary, of of Dublin. 5 I y the Thirty-ninth Regiment of Foot, came before me this Day, and i":ude Oath, upon the Ho!y Evangelifts, That on the 4th farniory laft he was ordered, with a Party of faid Regiment, from the Barracks \\\ this City, to the Provoft in the Loioer Caftle Yard, to efcort David Blakeney, a Prifoner, from thence to the Barracks ; that when he arrived at the Provoft's, there was fuch a Croud there, that he thought it would not he fafe to march the Prifoner through the Streets, without being Hand-cuii''d, and therefore afk'd the Provoft Marihal for a Pair of Handcuffs, which were iicccrding brought ; but at the eanieft fkntreaty of the Prifoner, and on his promifing to march qiii- «tly, they were not put on. lie

47 APPENDIX. 45 He further fayeth. That no Perfon whatever ordered him to march Blakeney in Irons, or tied, or reprimanded him for not doing fo, as is fet forth in a Pamphlet, lately publilhed, in titled, y/ Mirror for Courts Martial. He further faith. That he was very nigh the Place where David Blakeney was going to be puniftied, and verily believes he heard all the Converfation that pafled between the Prifoner and the Officers, who were to fuperintend the Punifliment ; and that he did not hear fuch Language pafs as is alfo fet forth in faid Pamphlet ; viz. " Oh, ho, Alr> Blakeneyy have we got you? You have efcaped the Gallows, but d me if you fhall efcape us. You Villain, we will have your Blood. D ye, you Scoundrel, you fhall now pay for all your Impudence and Villainy. Come, ye Dog, ftrip, drip, G d d n you, ftrip." Nor did he fee any one lay hold on his Cloaths, to drag them off. Sworn before me, this 4th Day of Aprils Lieutenant Robert Gary, ^^^. -^ ^^^^^^^ 39th Regiment. No. 8. County of the City? "]% /TAJOR Otho Himihon^ of his oi Dublifi, towit. 3 J,Vx Majeily's Fortieth Regiment of Foot, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That he was Field-Officer for the Day, viz. the 4tii Day of January^ 17&8, when the Punidiment of David Bkke?ie\\ a Matrofs, in the Royal Irijh Regiment of Artillerv, was firft intended to be put in Execution, on which Day, thi?^ Deponent received from Lieutenant Colonel Cbftieinx, the Lord Lieutenar.t's Warrant for that Purpofe. That on the ftid 4th Day of January., this Deponent fent Lieutenant C- ry of the Thirty-ninth Regiment, with n, Party to the Pro'oft for lad Blakeney., the Prifoner : That this Deponent did not in any wife whatfoever, find fau?r with, biame or reprimand the faid Lieutenant Cary^ oraay other Perfon for any Lenity (hewn to Blakeney. That after the Prifoner was brought to ti.e Parade, this Deponent gave the Warrant to Lieutenant Sutdholme., of the Forticih Regiment, who v,a.s Adiutant of the Day, and deiired thai he

48 APPENDIX. 4^ might read it diftin6uy to the Prifonerj that the whole Garrifon who were then under Arms might alfo hear it, which was accordingly done, in the moft regular Manner, in the Deponent's Prefence, and in his hearing ; that the Deponent del:red the Prifoner might be marched from the Centre of the Parade to the Poft, where Puniihments are ufually in. Aided, and there the Deponent took off his Hat, and addrefled himfelf to the Pri Toner, in the Words following, Bkkency you have heard ^ our Sentence, pleafe to take off your Cloaths : That the Deponent then tuny-d round from the Prifoner, and on again turning his Eyes towards him, faw him throw a Pen-knife to the Ground, and at the fame Inftant heard Captain Ctithbertfon of the Fifth Regiment, fay, Major Hamilton^ he (meaning the Prifoner) has itabb'd himfelf, on which they both went up to the Prifoner, and on Captain Cuthhertfon offering to open the Prifoner's Waiftcoat, to look at the Wound ; this Deponent heard the Prifoner fay to Captain Cuthhertfon^ in a feeming angry Tone of Voice, " Sir, I can open my W^iftcoat myfelf," to which the Captain replied, " don't be foolifli Blakeney^ what Matter is it who opens your Waiftcoat," and raifing up the Flap of the Prifoner's Waiftcoat, and alfo his Shirt, Captain Cuthhertfon immediately turned to this Deponent, faymg, he (the Prifoner) has certainly woutided himfelf in two or three Places. Whereupon this Deponent inftantly reported to Colonel Chenevix, who was at feme Diftance, and who was Commanding Officer of the Parade, what had happened, and defired the Surgeons of *the Garrifon to be immediately called to examine the Prifoner's Wounds, which was accordingly done in one of the Barrack Rooms, but the Surgeons not coming out with a Report of the Prifoner's Condition as foon as might be expefted, this Deponent (by defne of Colonel Chenevis) went to the Room where the Prifoner was examining, and was informed by the Surgeons, that the Wounds were of little Confc- «}uence, but were of Opinion, that they thought it proper to have the Prifoner fent to the Intirmary, upon which, this Deponent ordered the Infirmary Chair to i^e fent for, and turning to the Prifoner, faid, ^ir. Blakeney^ I am forry \o fee, tliat you who have been foine Time a Soldier, fhould behave in fo daftardjy a Manner, to which BMeney replied, Sir, I am farry for what I have done, but as the Court Martial has called me a vexatious and litigious Man, my Spirit is too great to be overcome :" Whereupcn, this Dcp^ ncnt

49 ' APPENDIX. 47 ponent then reported to Colonel Chevenix, the Prifoner's State, who difmifled the Garrilbn, and the Prifoner was accordingly fent to the Hofpital in a Chair, efcorted by- Lieutenant Cary, and a Party of the Thirty -ninth Regiment. Deponent further depofeth, that neither this Deponent nor any other Perfon. in his hearing, or to his Knowledge^ or Belief, made ufe of any Expreffion to the Prifoner, otherwife than as above related, nor would this Deponent have allowed any fuch indecent Behaviour to have been ufed towards the Prifoner, as he was under his particular Diredion, until the Sentence was executed, fuch barbarous^ inhuman, and fcurrilous Language to Prifoners, being inconfiftent, and very unufual with the Character of Officers, and contrary to the prefent known Cuftom of the Army. Otho Hamihon. Ham Bailie, No. 9. County of the City 7 T leutenant Gil/red Stud^ of Dublin, to wit. 5 l y holme, of his Majefty's Fortieth Regiment of Foot, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That he was Adjutant of the Day, viz. the 4th Day of January laft, 1768, when the Punifhment of David Blahncy, a Matrofs, in the Royal /rij/j Regiment of Artillery, was intended, that this Deponent did receive the Lord Lieutenant's Warrant for inoifiing faid Punifb-. ment, from Major Otho Hamilton^ (on the Parade in the Royal-Square) and read it to the Prifoner and Garrifon, as fet forth in Major Hamilton's Depofition, taken this Day before Hans Bailie, Efqu're, v.hich the Deponent has feen, carefully re'^.d, and believes to be trise, and in particular, the Deponent not having heard the leaji ahufive Language given to Blakeney by any one, Vv'hich he certainly muft have done, had any fuch Indecency been offered, for that this Deponent was not, as he believes, above Five Yards Diftance from the Prifoner, the faid David Blakeney, from the Time of his coming on the Parade, until after he was examined by the Surgeons. Gil/red Studholme. Hans Bailie, No. 10.

50 APPENDIX, No. lo. County of the City ) T leutenant Robert Martin of Dublin^ viz. J jlv Seymour, of the Fortieth Regimen^ of Foot, Lieutenant 7"Z'(?7;2^;Cz//)/^^^ of the Thirty-ninth Regiment, and Lieutenant Lancelet Hill, of Fifty-tifth Regiment of Foot, came tliis Day before me, and feveraliy made Oath on the Holy Evangehfts, That they were fo very ni^h David Blahney, of the Royal IriJJ) Artillery, on the Fourth Day of January laft, when the Sentence of a Genera! Court Martial was going to be infli6ted on him,> (in the Royal-Square of the Barracks in this City) that they verily believe they muft have heard all the Converfation th^t paited between the Prifoner Blakeney, arid the Officers, whefe Duty it was to fuperintend the Punifliment, and that they did not hear fuch Words made ufe of as are fet forth in a Pamphlet, intitled, A Mirror for Courts\Martial, viz. ** oh, ho, Mr. Blakeney have we got you, you have efcaped the Gallows, but d me you fhall not efcape us, you Villain we will have your Blood, d ye, you Scoundrel, you fhall now pay for all your Impudence and Villainy. Come you Dog, ftrip, ftrip, G d n you ftrip," nor did they fee any Perfon lay hold on his Cloathsto drag them off, they only heard his being defired toftiip once, in as mild Words as poftible, after the Sentence of the General Court Martial was read, to hirn, upon which he ftab'd himfelf with a Knife. Sworn before me this 4th Day of April, iy6s. Be?ijamin Barton. Rchr-t Afarfin Seymour, 40th Regiment. Lfincdet Hiil, Lieutenant, 55th Regiment. ^l:i?tra! Cuppage, Lieutenant, 3gth Regiment. No. II. Ccurfy of tj>e City? ^APTAIN Bcun-^^t Cuthberffon, of his Majefty's Fifth Regi- ox Dubliri. 10 v^\t. 1 v>* ment ai Foot, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That

51 ^ APPENDIX. 49 Th^ having read over the Depofition of Major HamUtcn^ of the Fortieth Regiment of Foot, relative to the Tranfaftions which paffed on the 4th of January lart, on the Parade in the Royal-Square, when the Punifhment of Blakeney\ the Matrofs, was intended to be put in xecutionj he is pofitive of the Truth of every Particular mentioned by the Major in faid Depofitions, as far as relates to the Manner in which Blahnefs, Sentence was read to him, the Major's Addrefs about taking off his Clcaihs, and the Circumftances which happened after Blakeney ftabbed himfelf : And further defpofes, that being clofe to Blakeney ix m the Time he came into the Royal-Square, on faid 4th of Jannai'yf until he was led off to have his Wounds examined by the Surgeons ; he did not hear M.zpx Hamilton or any other Perfon tofpeakhim in any other Words, than what Major Hamilton has fet forth in his Depofition ; Captain Cuthhertjon alfo depofes, that he faw Blakeney on the faid 4th of January^ immediately after Major Hamilton defired him to take off his Cloaths, pull his left Hand from the left Pocket of his Waiftcoat, and inftantly ftrike the lower Part of the left Side of his Belly three or four Times, before this Deponent was aware of Blakeney^ Defign ; nor was he perfedly affured of it, until he faw him throw a Pen-knife on the Ground. Sworn before me this 6th of JpriJ^ Bennei Cuihbertfon. Ham Bailie. No. i%> County of Dublin, l^yohn JFH IT E,oi the Cliy to wit. Sj of Dublin, Gentleman, came this Day before me, and made Oath, Thar he was prefent on the 7th Day of March laft paft, in the Barrnck-yard of the City of Dublin, when Ddvid hlakeney, the Matrofs, in the Royal /;7/7j Regiment of Artiller}', received his Puniflimept, by Order of a General Court Aiartial, and fayeth, that before faid y^m^wj received faid Pnnilhment, he was defired by his Adjutant to take off his Hat, which as Deponent believes, is ufual for all Soldiers to have off that aie receiving Punifliment, which the faid tlakeney peremptorily refufed doing, and in a very infolent Manner told the Ad- G jutant

52 50 APPENDIX. jutant, that he would k3ep on his Hat, and that it was lufficient if he kept up his Hair, orwords to that Eifed ; and fayeth, that after the faid Bhkeney had received his Punifhment, he was informed hy John Straton, Efq; Major of faid Regiment, that he was to go to his Quarters to Chapelizod, as the Surgeon had reported that he was well-able to'do fo, upon which the faid Blakeney replyed, that he politively would not go to Chapel-lzody but would return to the Infirmary, and alfo faid, that as he payed for the Infirmary he would go there, and no Place elfe, or Words to that or the like EfFe<5l : and that this Deponent fayeth, That the whole Behaviour of faid Blakeney^ on the Parade that Morning, was intirely infolent and unbecoming a Soldier to his Officers, as this Deponent, and feveral other Perfons who were then prefent imagined, as they informed Deponent j and fayeth, that the faid Major Straton behaved with a great deal of Tendernefs towards the faid Blakeney, and ordered the Officer who commanded the Party which guarded him, to march extremely flow, and alfo, for the laid Blakeney, to be fupported by two Men if requifite : This Deponent further fayeth, That he was alfo prefent in the Barrack-yard aforefaid, on the 4th Day of January laft paft, when the faid Blakeney was going to be puniflied, and wasfo near him as to hear any Converfation that could have paited between him and the Officers round him, and fayeth, that there was not the leall influlting or opprobrious Language ufed by any Perfon or Perfons whatfoever, to the faid Blakeney, on either of the faid Days, but on the contrary fayeth, that the greateft Decency and Regularity was kept up ; and fayeth, that on the faid 4th of January laft, no Perfon whatfoever gave the faid Hlakeney any Knife, or other Inftrument, after he was ordered to be puniftied, but on the contrary, this Deponent fayeth, the faid Blakeney '^uwd.z.k.mio. out off his own Pocket, and ftabbed himfelf. Sworn before me, this nth Day of Jpril, Jskn IPYite. IV. Rcfehgrave, No. i3»

53 APPENDIX. 51 No. 13. County of Dublin,! ^ R T HU R WINTER, Surto wit. 5 geon, of the Royal Irijh Regiment of Artillery, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That on the ift Day David Blaketiey, Matrofs, in faid Regiment, was brought to the Parade to receive the Sentence of a General Court Martial, he did not hear any abufive Expreflions made ufe of to faid Bkkefiey, before he wounded himfelf, nor fee any Perfon attempt to drag oif his Cloaths, nor did he hear any Orders given for proceeding to inflift his Punifhment, after he had wounded himfelf: Sayeth, that on the Day his Sentence was executed, he did not hear any Orders given to the Drummer to inflid the Puidiment with Rigour or Severity, nor did he fee any Protradion or Delay in the Execution thereof, or hear any abufive or fcoffing Expreflions made ufe of to him ; and further fayeth, that as no Attempt was made to pickle his Back, there was no Neceflity to refcue him from it, no fuch Practice having ever been made ufe of in the Regiment, Deponent having been Surgeon to it ever fince it was raifed. Sworn before me, this 7th Day of Jpril, Arthur Winter. Robert Wikoch. No. 14. QoMnij oi Dublin^ 'yohn STRJTON, Efq; Major TO wit. 5 ^ of the Royal IriJh Regiment of Artillery, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That en the 7th Day of laft March, as foon as David Blahney had received his Punifliment, Deponent ordered the Surgeon to fee if Blakeney was able to walk to Chapelizod ; that upon hearing that Blakeney declared he would not go to Chapelizod, but to the Infirmary, Deponent defired all the Surgeons of i)«m>/'garrifon might aflift the Artillery Surgeons to examine if faid Blakeney was able to go to Chapclizcd ; that the Surgeons, after ftriq: Examination of David Blake- G 2 ne^,^

54 52 APPENDIX. ney^ did iinanlmoufly declare, that as the Punifliment was fo lightly infli6ted, it was their Opinion Blakeney was very well able to walk to Chapelizod; and feme of the Surgeons moreover faid, that if Neceflity required it, Blakeney might be put on Duty the next Day ; Deponent did then order David ^lakeney to march to Quarters at Chapelizod. Sworn before me, this 7th Day of Jprily John Stratoju Robert WilUocks, No. 15. County of Dublin, 7 jrrllliam GRANT, Drum-Mato wit. 3 jor to the Royal IriJI) Regiment of Artillery, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That on Monday the 7th of March laft, the Day appointed for!nfli ling the Punifliment of David Blakeney, a Matrofs in the Royal Irijl) Regiment of Artillery, on the Adjutant's having read a Paper to him, proceeded in the ufual Way to fee the Sentence executed, with this Difference, that he did not order the Drummers to take off their Coats, Swords, or Belts, which is the ufual and general Cuftom ; nor did he utter one Syllable to the Drummers, previous to, or during the Punifl^.ment, or protract it unufually ; nor did he receive from the Major or Adjutant of the Regiment any Orders for that Purpofe. Deponent further faith. That faid Blake-^ ney^ for a While, refufed being dealt with as all other Prifoners ever were, by faying, '* He would not be tied up, or put a Cap on to keep his Hair out of the Way," or to that EfFe t, infifting to wear his Hat : And further faith. It was his Duty to be quite near the Prifoner ; and that nothing abufive, dire^lly or indirectly, was offered him, before, or^ during his Punifliment ; nor did he hear Doctor Lucas's Name once mentioned : He further adds, That one of the Drummers, who inflided the Punilhment, was a fickly I.ad, and the other a Boy; and that no Means whatfoever, to his ' Knowledge or Belief, was ufed towards infliisting faid Puniihment with Severity. Sworn before me, this 6th Day of April, ijos. JFilUam Grant. Robert IFillcocks. Countv

55 APPENDIX. 53 County Dublin, -) No JLEXANDER LINDSAY, Surgeon's -^ to wit. 3 Mate to the Royal Jnjh Regiment of Artillery, came this Day before me, anl made Oath, That he attended on both Days, that David Biakeney, Matrofs, was brought out to receive the Punilhment ordered by the Sentence of the General Court Martial ; that he did not hear any abufive or fcoffing Language made ufe of on either Day, nor the Prifoner called Scoundrel, Villain, Rafcal, or any other Name; that after izxd Blaketiey woun^qa himfelf the firll Day, he did not hear any one order him to be tucked up and whipped ; that as it was his Dutv to be very near the Prifoner, if any fuch Thing happened, or any Abufe offered, he thinks he muft have heard it ; that he did not hear any Orders given to infli6i: the Punifhmcnt with Rigitur or Severity ; nor did he obferve any Protraction or Delay in the Execution thereof ; nor, to his Knowledge, was any Attempt made to pickle him, after the Punifliment was over, no fuch Method having ever been pra lifed in faid Regiment, fince he belonged to it ; nor did he ever hear of fuch a Tranfa tion in it before his Time. Sworn before me this 6th Day of April, Alexander Lindfay. Robert TVillcoih. No. 17. CoMXxXy Dublin,-^ '^AMES COULSON, Bombardier, to with. k ^ U'Wiam ^nnti, JVilliam Anderfon, George Hajkim, and William James, MatrolTes in the Royal Iri/h Regiment of Artil.'ery, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That they were a Guard over David Blakeney, Matrofs, the firft Day he was brought to the Grand Parade in the Barracks, to receive the Punilhment ordered by the General Court Martial ; that they did not hear any abufive Language given, or faid Prifoner called Dog, Villain, or Scoundrel, or any other Name ; nor was he ordered to be tucked up or whipped after he wounded himfelf j and as thev

56 54 APPENDIX, they furrounded the Prifoner, if any Thing of the Kind mentioned had happened^ they are almoft certain they muft have heard it ; that the faid Blakeney was clean and well dreiled, had nothing (habby in his Apparel ; and faith. That no Perfon could have handed him a Knife without their Knowledge j and that they are pofitive he did not afk for one, but brought it with him, and faw him fearch for it, on being ordered to ftrip. Sworn before me this 5th Day of Aprils ; 'James Cotilfon^ IVilliam ^.ititiy William AnderfoTiy George. HaJkinSy IVilliam JameSy Robert Willcoch. No. 18. County of ^ rfohisr AUTON, Serjeant-Major of the Dublin. ]J Royz\ Irijh Regiment of Artillery, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That the Sum he paid David Blakeney, by Order of Major Straton, was Ninepence Halfpenny, one Year's Allowance of Utenfil-money, which he did not think at the Time he had a Right to pay nor did he pay any Sum whatever to faid Blakeney ^ except faid Nine-pence Halfpenny, lince his having exhibited his Complaints to the late Regimental and General Court Martial. Sworn before me, this 7th Day of April, i-jb^. 'John Auton, Robert JVillcocks. County of Dublin, 7 No. 19. "^OHN STR.ATON, Efq; Major of the Royal Iri^fh Regiment ot Ar- to wit. S J tillery, came this Day before me, and made Oath, That no Complaint was made to him, by David blakeney, cifnonpayment of Utenfil-money, previous to the Sitting of the Regijiiental

57 . quite ; APPENDIX. 55 Regimental Court Martial ; nor was fuch a Complaint conveyed to Deponent by Blakeney'% Captain, or any other Perfon, or in any other Manner, than by hearing Llakeney's Articles of Complaint read before Regimental Court M.irtial ; and as it could be but Nire-pencc Halfpenny, for one Year's Utenfil-money, that the Regiment could ovseijmfney (two Years Utenul-money bcmg then very near due to the Regiment of Artilleiy, by the Board of Ordnance) Major Stratoii, through a Deflre of doing ftrici Juftice to F>lake~ fiey^ did order the Serjeant Major to pay Itlakeney one Year's Utenfil-money, being Nine-pence Halfpenny : And Deponent further faith. That upon Examination of faid Article before the General Court Marual, faid Court feemed to think that Blakemy was not entitled to the Nine-pence Halfpenny, which Deponent had ordered to be paid to him. Sworn before me, this 7th Day of April, yohn Straton. Robert JViilcoch. TH E Do61or, Page 43, fays, " I am well informed, that, during this Time, many Applications and Offers were made him by different Perfons, fome oi dijhnguljhei St/itio?js in Life, who all pretended Friendfhip for him blamed him for taking my Advice, as they unjuftly termed my interpofing for Mercy; prefled him to be guided "by them, and they would infure him, what I had not Intereit to obtain, his Pardon." As the Doctor had fome Foundation for this, he is not fo bl-ameable as in other Parts ; but left the Reader fnould imagine he was refolved to fpeak Truth for onct\ I (hall infert a Letter v^^hich I received from a Gentleman v/hofe humane Interpofition gave Birth to this Story. S i R, DuBLiK, ^/r;7 10, 176S. T Think it neceifary to inform you, that when 1 heard that Blahney had wounded himfelf, I did, out of Compaffion, requeft a Medical Gentleman, wlio attended the Infirmary, to advife him to make out a Memorial to the Lord Lieutenant, acknowledging his Error, &c. and that I would take Care it fliould be given in to his Excellency.

58 50 APPENDIX. L T ^'s known Humanity encouraged me to take this Step i for I thought if Blakeney confeffed his Fault, and made a proper Submifficn, it might prevent the Neceflity, which muil otherwife enfue, of punioiing him, for an Example to others. I alfo declare, that no Perfons of dijfinguijhed Stations of I/.fe, or otherwife, ever fpoke to me on this Head ; and that iiiy only Motive was Compaflion. But when I heard he was vifited by Docl:or Lucas, I re- «- uel'ted the faid Medical Gentleman, by no Means, to fpeak to him, as I then apprehended it would be to no Purpofe : Nor v\ as he fpok.e to from the Time of the Dodor's vifiting hmi, till he was punifvied ; nor any Advice given him to make a "-ubmiflion, by my Directions : Nor do I believe he was rffered a Pardon, on any particular Terms (as the Doctor infinuates) or any Advice given him by any other Perfon whatever. JOSEPH SIRR. P. S. The Above I am ready depofe, on Oath. JOSEPH SIRR. ExtraB from the Sentence of the General Court Martial. THE Court are of Opinion, That the Appeal on the faid Nine Articles is Vexatious, Groundlefs, &c. They therefore fentence him to receive Five Hundred Lalhes, at the Head of the Garrifon of Dublin. Joseph Sirr, Deputy Judge Advocate. N. B. The Dstofitions referred tc in the Remarks, are noiv lodged, and may be feen, 7/ Mr. Dillon Chamberiaine's, Bookfeller, in Danie-ftrcet.

59

60

61

62