COGNIZANCE TAKEN OF FRAUDULENT ENDORSEMENTS OF EXCHEQUER BILLS.

The commons having discussed the ways and means for raising the supplies of the ensuing year, which rose almost to five millions, took cognizance of some fraudulent endorsements of exchequer bills, a species of forgery which had been practised by a confederacy, consisting of Charles Duncomb, receiver-general of the excise, Bartholomew Burton, who possessed a place in that branch of the revenue, John Knight, treasurer of the customs, and Reginald Marriot, a deputy-teller of the exchequer. This last became evidence, and the proof turning out very strong and full, the house resolved to make examples of the delinquents. Duncomb and Knight, both members of parliament, were expelled and committed to the Tower; Burton was sent to Newgate; and bills of pains and penalties were ordered to be brought in against them. The first, levelled at Duncomb, passed the lower house, though not without great opposition, but was rejected in the house of lords by the majority of one voice. Duncomb, who was extremely rich, is said to have paid dear for his escape. The other two bills met with the same fate. The peers discharged Duncomb from his confinement; but he was recommitted by the commons, and remained in custody till the end of the session. While the commons were employed on ways and means, some of the members in the opposition proposed, that one fourth part of the money arising from improper grants of the crown, should be appropriated to the service of the public; but this was a very unpalatable expedient, as it affected not only the whigs of king William’s reign, but also the tories who had been gratified by Charles II. and his brother. A great number of petitions were presented against this measure, and so many difficulties raised, that both parties agreed to lay it aside. In the course of this inquiry, they discovered that one Railton held a grant in trust for Mr. Montague, chancellor of the exchequer. A motion was immediately made, that he should withdraw; but passed in the negative by a great majority. Far from prosecuting this minister, the house voted it was their opinion, That Mr. Montague, for his good services to the government, did deserve his majesty’s favour.