|
Professional Research & Maritime Historian, Author, & Conservator |
|
Webpage designed by Baylus C. Brooks—Copyright 2015-2017 Baylus C. Brooks All Rights Reserved |
|
Baylus’ Blog: |
|
Lord Archibald Hamilton’s Acquittal part 2 —2 Oct 1717 |
|
Board of Trade – Decision on Lord Hamilton - 2 Oct 1717 |
|
Sixth article. 6. To the sixth article, alledging, "That at the instigation of a party, one Page, Deputy-Secretary of Jamaica, a person unqualified, of an ill character, and whom his lordship had therefore refused to admit into that office, till he received express commands for so doing, deserted his office, and left the island, contrary to law, without the governors licence or privity"; his lordship produced and read a letter under Mr. Page's own hand, dated on board the Diamond Man of War, the 6th of March, 1715, whereof a copy was annexed to his memorial, desiring his lordship's favourable opinion, and excuse for departing the island, without his lordship's leave. My lord likewise produced a letter from Mr. Bernard, Chief Justice, and one of the present Council of Jamaica, wherein he says, That turning over the patent-book one day in the Secretary's office, he was astonished to see the entry of a ticket from Lord Archibald Hamilton to Samuel Page to go off the island. Whereupon my lord observed, that Mr. Page must either have forged his lordships name to a ticket, or, contrary to the trust reposed in him, and unknown to his lordship, have filled up with his own name one of the blank tickets, which multiplicity of business obliged his lordship to leave in his hands ready signed. That Mr. Page had, with the letter he wrote to his lordship, after his leaving the island, sent a certificate of his indisposition, as an excuse for his leaving the island, but that his lordship could not look upon that as a just reason for his going off so abruptly, and without leave. His lordship further referred to the minutes of the Council of Jamaica, of the 9th March, 1715–16, upon this subject, which were read. In relation to Mr. Page's not being qualified, his lordship alledged that some of the members of the Council were always obliged to take the minutes of what passed at that Board, where the said Page acted as clerk; and as to his ill character, his lordship thought the same would more manifestly appear by the proof of the following article of his lordships memorial.
Seventh article. 7. The Seventh article alledging "That the said Page, with one Adlington, arriving in Great Britain, defrayed out of the sub-scription money aforesaid, made affidavits, chiefly rehearsing what they had heard the Lord Archibald Hamilton's enemies say concerning the robberies committed on the Spaniards; in which affidavits the said persons now appear to be wilfully and corruptly perjured." To prove the same, his lordship first observing that Mr. Page, in his affidavit of 15th May, 1716, has made Oath, That he, the deponent heard from Leonard Barton, a person of a fair character, who was dispatched to the Leeward part of Jamaica, where this deponent was on the 9th of March, that the said Spanish sloop, with her whole cargo, was condemned in the said Barton's presence, the 7th of March last, &c. To contradict which affidavit his lordship produced an original affidavit of the said Leonard Barton taken before Mr. Bernard, Chief Justice of Jamaica, the 17th of August, 1716, which was read, wherein the said Barton deposeth in the words following, vizt. And this deponent further saith, that he neither knoweth Dr. Samuel Page, nor ever had any communication or discourse with him, touching or concerning the Spanish sloop formerly called the Kensington taken by Captain Francis Fernando, &c., which affidavit of Mr. Barton his lordship took notice, must have been true, and consequently Page's false, because the condemnation of the Spanish sloop was not till the 16th of March, as appeared by a copy of the sentence under the seal of the Admiralty produced by his lordship, whereas the said Page had been several days at sea before that time, and yet he pretends to have been informed of this condemnation by the said Barton, so long before it happened, as the 7th of that month, his lordship further observed that the said Page had deposed in the words following vizt. To which said memorials the said Don Juan could receive no other answer from the governor than that the Florida Shoar was part of the king of England's dominions, and that as the Spaniards had seized on some English vessels since the peace, the said governor believed the said Spaniards were indebted to the English more than those Spanish effects would answer; to disprove which assertion his lordship produced and read a minute of Council of the said island, dated the 9th of February, 1715, and signed by Mr. Page himself, by which it appears that several answers were given to Don Juan del Valle, upon his memorial, by his lordship, and the Council of Jamaica, who offered it to the consideration of the said Don Juan del Valle, whether the prosecuting the officers and mariners of the two vessels complained of, and the issuing such a proclamation as desired, might not deter others, then out, from returning to Jamaica, and be a means of putting them upon such desperate attempts as might be of more pernicious consequence to the Crown of Spain, &c. Whereupon the said Don Juan del Valle declined insisting on any criminal prosecution, lest such consequences happening, as might justly be feared, the blame thereof might be imputed to him. And that the said Page had been corruptly perjured, his lordship inferred from his having received part of the forementioned subscription-money, as his lordship was credibly informed; as also that upon his return to Jamaica he had complained of not having received enough. The Lord Hamilton further took notice, upon this article, of a petition from several merchants of Jamaica, mentioned in the minutes of ye Council of that island, of the 25th June, 1714, which was now read, praying that upon the departure of the men of war, his lordship would take proper methods for the protection of the trade of the island then in danger from pirates; whereupon his lordship said, he granted several commissions to commanders of vessels to go in quest of the said pirates, giving them proper instructions, and taking security for the due observance thereof, which commission and instructions, as his lordship affirmed, were the same that had been formerly given by his predecessors on like occasions, copies of which he promised to transmit to the Board. That upon complaints against some of the commanders of the vessels, he issued a proclamation for recalling them. His lordship likewise observed that Mr. Blair and Mr. Chaplin, two persons concerned in the complaint against him, were security for some of the commanders of these vessels.
Eighth article. 8. Upon the eighth article, relating to "his lordship's removing Mr. Hey wood (now Commander in Chief of Jamaica)" from the place of Chief Justice, and from the Council there; his lordship referred to the minute of Council of the 14th February, 1715–16, whereby it appeared that his lordship, conformable to his instructions, had not only the majority, but the unanimous advice of the Council in that proceeding.
Ninth article. 9. As to the ninth article, alledging "That some of the new councillors whom the king was pleased to appoint with Mr. Hey wood, the new governor, were some of them the same persons whom his Majesty had before thought fit to displace, and who had continued their opposition to his service; and that others of the new councillors had been the most violent men in the Assembly, in opposing the several matters recommended by his Majesty's letters, and had most largely subscribed to the sum remitted as aforesaid;" his lordship named Mr. Blair and Mr. Chaplin as the former, and Mr. Risby, Mr. Thomas Beckford and Mr. Bennett as the latter.
Tenth, eleventh and twelfth articles. 10, 11, 12. As to the tenth, eleventh and twelfth articles relating to "the instruction sent Mr. Heywood and his Council for seizing the Lord Hamilton's person, sending him prisoner to England with proper proofs in case they should find him concerned in the priacy laid to his charge; and to the unjustifiable manner in which they put this instruction in execution against the said Lord Hamilton, and screening offenders;" he averred, that having sent to desire a copy of the whole charge against him, and repeated that message, he could obtained no answer, as Mr. Cockburn, his lordship's secretary, whom he sent for such copy, was now ready to testify upon oath. That even Mr. Broderick and Mr. Bernard, two of the members of that Council, were denied copies of what passed at that Board, to prevent his lordship's knowing the full substance of his accusation, whereby his lordship had not the opportunity of cross-examining witnesses, as aforesaid. That the majority of the said Council, acted very partially in adjourning to the house of one of the members of that Board, of their party, who was indisposed, and refusing to adjourn to another member's house on the like occasion, whereas if they had done it in this last case, the votes for his lordship's commitment had been equally divided. His lordship being asked what steps were taken by Col. Heywood and the government of Jamaica, to answer the intent of his Majesty's forementioned instructions; his lordship said, he was unacquainted therewith; that he was not taken into custody till a few days before he was sent away and that no cause of commitment was specified in the warrant for that purpose, which was signed only by an underclerk of the Council. His lordship acknowledged he was interested in the sloop Bennett, but being sensible that the commander thereof had exceeded his commission, and broken his instructions, by the seizure he had made of Spanish goods, his lordship was far from intending to reap any advantage from so unlawful a proceeding: and he appealed to the minutes of the Council of Jamaica, of the 9th June, 1716, for a proof of his integrity upon this occasion. His lordship likewise further affirmed, that above a month before that Council was held, and before Don Juan de Valle had made any complaint against the ship his lordship was concerned in, he had communicated his intention upon this subject to Mr. Bernard and Mr. Broderick, two of the Council, who were of opinion that his lordship would do well to temporize with Bendysh, and receive his own share of the profit arising from the foresaid capture from the Spaniards, in order to fix the proportion of the several owners and thereby to discover and secure as many effects as possible for the use of the persons from whom the same had been illegally taken, and accordingly his lordship did receive his share of the capture, and deposited the same in the hands of the Provost Marshall, subject to his Majesty's orders, where the same now lies.. Upon this occasion, his lordship further observed, that he had the rather chose to conduct himself in this transaction by the advice of the aforesaid Mr. Bernard and Mr. Broderick, because they were both of them persons learned in the law, the first being Chief Justice, and the latter at that time his Majesty's Attorney General of Jamaica; and as they were perfectly informed with what intention it was, that his lordship did receive his share of the said prize. When Mr. Heywood and his Council were afterwards deliberating whether they should be justified by his Majesty's instructions in securing the said Lord Hamilton's person, the said Mr. Bernard and Mr. Broderick did make oath of the truth of the forementioned facts, which they declared in their opinion to be a sufficient proof that the said Lord Hamilton was not concerned in the piracy, and for that reason they and two other members of the Council refused to consent to the question for his lordship's commitment, which was carried only by one voice, as may appear by the minutes of Council, of the 13th September, 1716. As a further proof of his lordship's intention to do justice to the Spaniards, he referred to the minutes of Council of the 21st June, 1716, by which it appeared how desirous he was that the appeal offered by the Spanish agents from the sentence of the Court of Admiralty, tho' not proper in point of form, should have its effect.
Thirteenth article. 13. As to the thirteenth article, his lordship alledged, that Mr. Heywood having, contrary to his Majesty's instructions, sent no evidence to support the charge against him; he had, since his arrival here, continued many months under bail, and not only petitioned for a hearing but given publick advertisements at the Exchange in London, that he was ready to answer whatever any persons might have to object to him; but that nobody had appeared: and Mr. Bendysh, who was sent over in order to be the chief evidence against his lordship, had declared to some of ye Ministers, as his lordship has been informed, that he had nothing to say against him. And his lordship observed, that this Mr. Bendysh was one of the persons concerned in the ship that had committed piracy, and the very same that had brought him his share of the capture, and who, by his lordship's Order in Council, had given security to return such part of the Spanish effects as had come to his hands; notwithstanding which, the said Bendysh had obtained from Mr. Heywood a Noli Prosequi, contrary to the intention of his Majesty's instructions for discovering and punishing all persons concerned in the piracies complained of.
Fourteenth article. 14. Upon the fourtheenth article, importing "that the present Mr. Heywood and councillors of Jamaica had dropt their charge on this subject"; his lordship observed that this Board was well acquainted what endeavours were used to oblige Mr. Page and Adlington to appear to what they had alledged against his lordship: so that upon the whole, his lordship hoped, his innocence might now plainly appear; and that those of the Council who had so notoriously misbehaved themselves might not be continued of the Council, nor Mr. Page in the post of deputy-secretary. Escheated estate, W. Kupius, Pennant and Swymmer. The Lord Archibald Hamilton being then desired to acquaint the Board with the state of the matter relating to the escheated estate of Williamina Kupius of Jamaica, upon which Mr. Pennant and Symmer have lately petitioned the king: his lordship referred himself to the papers undermentioned upon that subject, vizt.
Papers. Mr. Secretary Stanhope's letter to the Lord Archibald Hamilton, of the 28th November, 1715, with his Majesty's mandamus or warrant for a grant of the said estate to Edward Nicholls, Esqr. dated the 30th of April, 1715. Copy of the Lord Archibald Hamilton's letter to Mr. Secretary Stanhope of the 10th February, 1715–16. Copy of his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales's warrant for a speedy grant of the said estate to Edward Nicholls, Esqr. dated the 17th July, 1716. Copy of Mr. Baron's plea in support of the excheat patent to Pennant and Swymmer. Memorandum from the Lord Archibald Hamilton relating to the said escheat. |