Thomas Weatherhead, who stated that he had been long acquainted with the last witness, Drake, who had been a shipmate of his. Drake and he called at Mr. Sheridan's, in Somerset Place, on the 19th of February last. He there saw a very motley crew, such as he had never met before, and such as he wished never to meet again. He waited some time in a large room with this company, when Mr. Sheridan came in. Mr. Sheridan adressed himself principally to Drake, with whom he continued in close conversation, elbow to elbow, for above ten minutes. They were at the opposite side of the room from where witness stood. He did not hear any part of their conversation, nor did he think it was audible to any other person in the room. There was a confused noise among the persons present, some of whom stood between him and Mr. Sheridan, and prevented that gentleman from addressing him, as he several times attempted. At length, however, Mr. Sheridan did address him, and talked to him about the motion which he meant to propose in the House of Commons, for postponing the trial of the election, saying, he knew he had rascals to deal with, and would act accordingly. Witness told Mr. Sheridan at this time, that what was said of the letter in possession of Harris, was unfounded, and that Mr. Sheridan was misinformed, for that he was sure William Drake would have nothing to do with a spurious letter. Drake wrote the second letter in the presence of himself and Harris. Witness saw this letter before it was signed, and afterwards, and the words "treasurer of the navy" were attached to the signature. All but the signature was in the hand-writing of Drake. Mr. Sheridan, after finding that he was unemployed, promised him (witness) an appointment at the interview of the 19th of February. He desired him to call at Somersetplace about two o'clock on the next day. He did so call, conceiving it very improper to make an appointment and not keep it (a laugh). In this call he was accompanied by Drake. When they entered the room, they found an old woman in black, an old man also in black, and a young man strutting about the room. By and bye another character appeared, and soon after Drake called him, saying "you are not aware of what suspicious company you are in here: that fellow, who is just come in, is a Bow-street officer" (a laugh). Upon this be, Drake, withdrew

withdrew from the room; but, on their way out, he was met by a man of the name of Burgess, whom he understood afterwards to be Mr. Sheridan's solicitor. This man immediately saluted him with great familiarity, and claimed an acquaintance with him. But, what struck him was, that the man could not point out any place where he had ever met him, and he could not remember to have ever seen the man before in his life (a laugh). While Burgess was in conversation with Drake and himself, Harris came up and joined them; and told Drake that Mr. Sheridan meant to take him up on a charge of forgery. Drake was indignant, and he and witness went away, and at the first convenient tavern Drake took out his pencil and sent a very sharp note of reproach to Mr. Sheridan. Witness received the Speaker's warrant to attend the committee on the 24th of February, and received another summons since. He met Mr. Alexander Johnstone some time about the 12th or 13th of February, at Mrs. Drake's, and heard Johnstone complain of Mr. Drake's misbehaviour towards Mr. Sheridan, and state that Drake was in a carriage with him (Johnstone) the night before.

The witness was ordered to withdraw.

The Attorney General asked the counsel in what manner they meant to apply this man's evidence to the allegations contained in the petition?

Mr. Plumer replied that the object of this testimony was rather to shew the kind of connection which subsisted between the witnesses, and to remove from the parties for whom he appeared any suspicious imputation.

A member called to the recollection of the House, that the counsel were directed to confine themselves strictly to the matters of fact alleged in the petition.

Weatherhead was again called in, and cross-examined by Mr. Sheridan. Witness admitted that he had been discharged by Captain Trollope, under whom he served; but denied that any crime was impted to him. His discharge was merely the result of the captain's pleasure. The first letter for the use of Harris was written by him; but the second, which was much stronger in its terms, was written by Drake himself. The first was objected to by Harris, principally because it had the letters M. P. annexed to Mr. Sheridan's signature. Don't know who wrote these initials; though he wrote the letter he had nothing to do with the insertion of M. P.; when Drake brought him

Gg 2

this

this letter signed by Mr. Sheridan, he saw, for the first time, the letters M. P. and they, as well as the signature, were quite wet. Harris did certainly propose to Drake to give him some money if he would procure him a letter from Sir H. Parker or some other flag officer, recommenda . tory of him in his business of slopselling. He never saw any money paid on this score, but was aware of the con tract. He really did believe the signature to the first letter was that of Mr. Sheridan's, but he thought M. P. quite absurd, as no Parliament existed at the time. He advised Drake to destroy the first letter, and in the presence of a Mrs. Beadle. Drake thanked him for the advice, after he had acted upon it. Never gave this advice under any im pression that the signature was a forgery. He entertained no such uncharitable suspicion. He had no more dispo sition to suspect the genuineness of the second than that of the first letter. It would be inconsistent with his sense of charity to entertain any such suspicious of either.

Witness was asked by Mr. Sheridan, whether there were not four or five witnesses present at the only time that he ever happened to see him? Answered in the affirma tive.

Mr. Sheridan. Did I not say in your presence that I never conversed with any one upon the subject of the Westminster election unless three or four witnesses were present?

A. Something to that effect.

Q. Were you not introduced to me by Drake, upon that the only time I ever spoke to you, as a clergyman? A. No, I am no cushion thumper.

Q. Did not Drake describe you as the Rev. Mr. Wea, therhead?

A. It might be so, but I did not notice it.

Witness further deposed that Drake was to be remune rated in money for his trouble in getting the second letter from Mr. Sheridan; and that Harris promised his vote and interest for Mr. Sheridan at the election. Witness was present at the supper given at the Bath Hotel in Piccadilly, where Harris, Dawes, and Drake were. He heard no conversation about the letter in the possession of Harris. He did not hear any sum of money offered by Drake to Harris, to induce him to give it, nor any request, whatever upon the subject.

A Mr. Powell was offered by the petitioners to Drake's character;

character; but, on the motion of Mr. Adam, the House resolved that they could not permit the petitioners to bring forward any evidence to the character of theiron witness, who stood unimpeached except from the effect of his own Lestimony.

John Pullen was next called, but he being examined to what he knew of Wallace and Burgess,

Sir J. Anstruther observed, that the statement of what this man understood about Burgess and Wallace, and whether they were agents of Mr. Sheridan, was no evidence at all. The counsel for the petitioners contended that they were to make out the agency of Burgess, and that his acts would apply jointly to himself and to Mr. Sheridan.

Mr. Tierney said that the House could not permit the petitioners to proceed merely fishing for any thing that might turn up to affect the character of a member, and that if he had no further evidence to produce against Mr. Sheridan, they should not be permitted to go on in this loose way.

Mr. Adam and Lord Howick spoke to the same effect. At last the House resolved that the counsel should confine themselves in the examination of their witnesses to the acts stated in the petition, and to the subject matter of the petition; and not to general acts of Burgess, &c. relative to the election.

John Richards was then called; he stated that he had been employed in the election by Mr. Downes, and that he had received money from Burgess by recommendation of Downes, for his services and expences. On being crossexamined by Mr. Sheridan, he said he had never seen Mr. Sheridan with Mr. Burgess. He had not written a threat. ening letter to Mr. Downes, but he as obliged to acknowledge that he had since the election written a letter to Mr. Thomas Sheridan, complaining that he had not been sufficiently remunerated, and threatening to go to Paull's side, and to do every thing in his power against Mr. Sheridan, unless his demands were complied with. Being examined by the petitioning counsel, stated, that he had been present at conversations in which Wallace had stated, that the warrants of the Speaker would be out when the consideration of the petition was postponed, and those who chose might go out of the way, and would receive money to that purpose,

Jeremiah

Jeremiah James likewise spoke to different meetings at the Peacock, and afterwards at the Barley Mow, Druryiane, where Pullen, Richards, and Sperring, had met Wallace, who, he said, had treated them with a dinner at the Barley Mow, and allowed them money for their loss of time in meeting him on the days mentioned. Wallace had told them that the warrants would be out in consequence of the petition being postponed, and that those who went out of the way would get money to do so. Wallace had asked him what he meant to do; but he would not tell him. Wallace said, every one in danger might go away. Witness being asked what he meant by that? He said that he imagined the danger referred to was of those who had voted being bad votes. The first conversation, in which Wallace had used expressions to the above effect, was about the 20th of January.

Daniel Richards spoke to the same circumstances, of Wallace talking about those who were in danger going out of the way. Witness said, however, that he himself had no occasion to go out of the way. The witness was pressed to explain what he meant by that danger; or, why it should have been proposed that any should go out of the way. He gave no precise answer. At last he dropped down overcome with fatigue or agitation, and was carried out.

Mrs. Richards or Richardson, the wife of the preceding witness, spoke to the conversation of Wallace, at the Peacock and the Barle, Mow. She added, that he said money to the extent of six or seven guincas would be given to those who would go out of the way. Wallace had given five shillings a day to her husband, James, &c. for the loss of their time the days they met him; but at last he declined making them any more allowances, as, he said, he had lost seven pounds in the lottery. She denied that she had seen any agent or attorney of Mr. Paull.

J. Bell said he had seen Wallace on the 8th of January, who, he said, had requested him to speek to Sperring to keep out of the way, and that Mr. Sheridan would find the money. He had been at the house of Burgess with Wallace, Pullen, and Sperring; that Burgess gave him five pounds for his loss of time. Sperring had told him, that he (Sperring) had voted for Paull and Hood, on the first day in his own name, and on a subsequent day

had