13th September 1817: The Secretary for the Colonies authorises Blackburn & Burton's emigration to Canada

Downing Street 13th September 1817.

Mr Lord,

I have had the honor of receiving your Lordship’s letter recommending to my particular Consideration John Blackburn & William Burton who are desirous to become Settlers in His Majesty’s Provinces in North America, and I have in reply to acquaint your Lordship that I shall feel great pleasure in recommending them to the protection of the Governor General Sir John Sherbrooke in order that each of them may receive a Grant of one Hundred Acres of the Crown Reserves in Canada;―that being the most valuable portion of the Lands at the disposal of the Crown, & being therefore, in my opinion best calculated to mark the sense entertained of the merits which have procured for them your Lordship’s recommendation.

I shall further give directions for allowing them Rations during the first twelve months, until some part of the lands allotted to them shall be brought into Cultivation;―altho’ Government have not charged themselves with this expence in any of the recent Emigrations.

As the Season during which Settlers were forwarded to the Province by this Department has long since elapsed, I trust Your Lordship will take the necessary measures for providing messieurs Blackburn & Burton with a Conveyance.

I have [etc]

Bathurst

[To] Viscount Sidmouth
&c &c &c

12th July 1817: The Treasury Solicitor authorizes payment of the legal bills for the final Luddite trials

[Lincoln’s] Inn

12th July 1817.

Sir.

The King agt: Towle & ors

Same agt: Savage & ors.

I have the honor to inclose the Bills of Costs charges and Expences incurred in these Prosecutions by Messrs: Ward Lockett & Balguy of Derby amounting in the first Case to Seven hundred and ninety two Pounds fifteen Shillings & nine Pence and in the latter Case to Fourteen Hundred and Seventy five Pounds and nine Pence together with Abstracts thereof―These Accounts have been examined in the usual manner, and deductions made of those charges which are not ordinarily allowed, but the principal part of those deductions arising from an Extra charge for a managing Clerk in the course of this business, which considering the nature & Extent of these prosecutions & the various places, at which the business was going on at the same time, may not be deemed unreasonable or improper to be allowed. I should submit that with the deduction of fifteen Shillings from the first Bill and Six Pounds one Shilling from the Second, the remainder which will then amount to Two thousand two hundred and Sixty one Pounds x x x x x x v and six Pence may be allowed and paid to Messrs: Ward Lockett & Balguy in full discharge of these Bills―

I am
Sir
Your very faithfull
and obedient Servant

H. C. Litchfield

[To] H. Hobhouse Esqr
&c &c &c

13th December 1816: The Home Office responds to Louis Allsopp's letter

Whitehall
Decr: 13th 1816.

Sir,

I am much obliged to you for your Letter of 9th: inst, and the two Inclosures. The Purpose of enforcing the Provisions of the Watch and Ward Act at Nottingham appears to be accomplish’d.

Towle’s last Confession is very curious, and interesting, but the Particulars which he stated in it was but it was not likely that to be confirm’d by Corroborating Evidence, could have been procured: which it would have been possible to procure and his own unsupported Testimony, as King’s Evidence would have answer’d little [illegible] Purpose.

I remain therefore perfectly satisfied that the good done by the Execution of this Man is far greater, than any which could reasonably have been hoped for by sparing his Life.

I have directed a Copy to be made of Towle’s Confession, which I receiv’d some weeks since from The High Sheriff, and I hope to send it to you by tomorrow's Post.

It does not appear from any Information, of which I am possessed that there are sufficient Grounds of Suspicion against the Persons, whom it is proposed to apprehend as having been concern’d in the Attacks at Heathcoat’s to justify such a Proceeding: but this is a Point which will be best decided on the Spot.

I have referr’d to Mr: Beckett’s Answer of 26:th of November to Mr: Enfield's Letter of 23:d, and am unable to account for the Impression, which that Answer appears to have made on the Gentlemen of the Committee, whom it has been always my wish to treat with the Attention, and Confidence, to which they are so well entitled.

The good Effects produced and Nottingham by the instantaneous Suppression of the Disturbances in London on Monday se’nnight, gave me great Pleasure, and I am happy to acquaint you that they are not confined to that Place.

I am present much press for Time, Mr: Beckett being out of Town, and my Brother confined to his House by Illness.

I am, Sir,

your most obedient
humble Servt:

[From: J H Addington]

[To] L. Allsopp Esqr.

26th November 1816: The Home Office tells Henry Enfield that his plans to detain suspected Luddites is unlawful

W. 26 Nov. 1816

Sir

I am [directed] by Lord [Sidmouth] to [acknowledge] the [illegible] of yr [letter] of the 23d. inst with its Inclosure & in reply I am to state, what in practice must occurred to you, & the Magistrates, in the Course of Proceeding to be adopted in similar Cases—viz—that before a [Warrant] can be issued for the purpose of apprehending an Individual & binding Him over to keep the Peace, certain affidavits must be made in order to justify and support such Caption; these affidavits should, of course, set forth the Grounds upon which the Deponent believes that such danger exists; and the Party threatened should be able to make an affidavit that He verily believes His life is in danger, before a [Warrant] can be properly be issued for the apprehension of any Individual in order that Sureties of the Peace may be demanded against Him. You will of course apply these observations to the cases before You

It does not appear from any Communication from Mr. Lockett received at this Office, whether any & what Confessions have lately been made by Towle.

At present there does not seem to be sufficient Grounds for apprehending the Individuals alluded to in Your Letter, as being concerned in the Felony at Loughborough for which Towle was executed.

I have

J. Beckett

[To] H. Enfield Esqr.
Nottingham

14th November 1816: The Home Secretary informs the Sheriff of Leicestershire about James Towle's appeal

Whitehall
Novr 14th: 1816.

Sir,

I think it right to acquaint you that the Judges have unanimously decided, that the Objections taken against to the Indictment against William Towle [sic], upon his Trial, at the last Assizes for Leicester, cannot be supported, and that his Conviction upon that Indictment is good.

It is accordingly determined, after a full Consideration of all the Circumstances of this Case that the Sentence of the Law shall be carried into Effect on the Day, to which the Execution of this unhappy Man was respited by Mr. Baron Graham: viz. the 20th Day of this instant November.

I have the Honor to be,
Yr
Sidmouth.

[To] C. W. Pochin Esqr.
&c &c &c

28th October 1816: The Home Office closes the case on the Luddite Thomas Pickup

Whitehall
28 Octr 1816.

Dear Sir,

Many thanks to you for the Communication respecting Pickup, & for the trouble that you have taken in your Enquiries, the result of which appears to be so far satisfactory as to preclude the necessity of taking any further steps about him

In haste
Faithfully yours
JH Addington

[To] Sir Robt Peel [MP]

22nd October 1816: William Playfair's 'Proposal Relative to the Prevention of Frame Breaking'

In October 1816, the Home Secretary was approached by a William Playfair, who claimed he had devised a plan to bring an end to framebreaking. Playfair was evasive about what his plan constituted, and sought guarantees that he would be remunerated. The Home Office papers contain copies of the letters he wrote, plus correspondence and a brief report by Sir Nathaniel Conant, the Bow Street magistrate who was tasked to correspond with Playfair.

Although I cannot yet verify it, it's possible that Playfair was the Scottish engineer and political economist, best known for inventing the bar chart. Playfair's ODNB entry notes that in 1816 he attempted extortion on at least two occasions, and this may well be another attempt that failed. But as his attempts to entice the government to pay him for his 'plan' foundered, we'll never know what the substance of it was.

The documents below appear in the order they appear in the Home Office files:

24th Oct. 1816

Report

I wrote to Mr Playfair that in Consequence of his Letter to Lord Sidmouth I had his Lordships directions to see him—And I should be glad if he could do me the favour to call at my home before 11 in the morning the following day, or if more convenient on wednesday between 11 & 2 [o'clock.]

He sent me the enclosed note & the annexed paper yesterday.

N Conant
24th Oct. 1816

- - - - - -

London 22d October 1816

The Offer which W: Playfair has the honour now to make and which he before made to the Right Honourable Lord Viscount Sidmouth is as follows—

That he will deliver in writing to his Lordship a Plan by which at a very Small Expense without any Bloodshed or Severity of Punishment An End will be put intirely or very nearly to the Practice of Frame Breaking or the destroying of other machinery employed in Manufacturing but more Particularly Knitting Frames on the Condition that if the Plan succeeds he shall Receive such a Reward as to every two Gentlemen shall be thought proper proportioned to the service performed

The Principle on which the Plan aluded to proceeds is one that will not only prevent crimes in Respect to Breaking Machinery but will produce a Beneficial Effect by Increasing the Reputation & ameliorating the quantity of various British Manufacturers

William Playfair

[on the reverse]
Proposal Relative to
The Prevention of Frame Breaking
For
The Right Honorable
Lord Viscount Sidmouth
&c &c &c

- - - - - -

16 Union Court Holborn Hall
22d October 1816

Sir

I was last night favoured with your letter at the Request of Lord Sidmouth

I must have explained myself very badly to his Lordship otherwise he could not have taken that way of answering my letter

I however could not wish for any person more proper to Explain the Business to his Lordship than one Who’s Integrity, Intelligence and zeal for Public good stands so high as yours do

I beg therefore, that you will be so obliging since his Lordship has Employed you in this business, to Read the Inclosed Paper & deliver it to his Lordship—It only contains more Explicitly & Greater length the Offer I already had the Honour of making to his Lordship & to Mr Beckett before I knew that he was absent

Were I to have the Honour of waiting on you I should only have the same thing to communicate & it so happens that at the very times you mention tho’ you had the goodness to mention two I am obliged to be Elsewhere by Previous Engagement

You will have the goodness to say to his Lordship that the Plan I have is no Loose desultory one and that it is not because it is not Ready that I do not communicate it but for the Reason given in the Paper. I am now no longer young & I have a daughter who is Blind & unprovided for & I cannot think but that if I Prevent Expense & bloodshed I shall derive some Remuneration

Twenty years & Upwards & his Lordship knows its have I to the best of my abilities supporrted the measures of government without asking or receiving any Reward and as I know the Frank and Honourable nature of his Lordship I think it Right to say—"That if I had not heard from him I did not mean to press the matter but that the object being a very vital one I intended to get the same proposal made to Parliament when it meets"—So well am I convinced that I can accomplish what I have in view

I have the Honour to be
Sir
your most obedient
& most humble Servant

William Playfair

[To] Sir Nathaniel Conant Rt
&c &c &c

- - - - - -

16 Union Court Holborn
11th October 1816

My Lord

Not knowing that Mr Beckett was out of Town (which I find he I wrote to him to say that I had thought of a mode by which without Expence or any disagreeable proceedings a stop maybe put to Frame Breaking or the destruction of every sort of Machinery for manufacturing—I Requested Mr Beckett to inform your Lordship & it was only on Receiving no answer that I inquired & found he w not in Town—I mentioned to him that if on trial it succeeded I should Expect such Remuneration as your Lordship & he might think deserving and of course nothing without [illegible]

I have the Honour to Repeat the same offer to your Lordship I am

with great Respect
My Lord
Your Lordship’s most obedient
& most humble Servant

William Playfair

[To] The Right Honble
Lord Visct Sidmouth
&c &c &c

- - - - - -

11 Portland Place
24th Oct. 1816

Sir

I should have been glad to have seen you on the subject you proposed to the Secretary of State; but my directions being chiefly to say to you that if you thought proper to communicate the Remedy you name, and it should be found effectual to the Public; Lord Sidmouth would take care that you should receive an adequate recompence; but his Lordship must reserve to himself the entire right of judging what the recompence should be.

I am Sir
Your most obedient
Servant

N Conant

To
W. Playfair Esqr

18th October 1816: Henry Hobhouse sends a furious response to Benjamin Walker's supporter

Hadspen
Oct. 18 1816

Dear Sir,

The inclosed Application on behalf of Benjm. Walker is not the first of the kind which has been addressed to the Secretary of State. He was one of the murderers of Mr. Horsfall, & deserved a Halter just as much as his Colleagues, who were executed at York in January 1813. But he had the good fortune to turn King’s Evidence, by which he saved his Neck. Thus the Promise held out to him by the Crown has been fulfilled. The pecuniary Reward was promised not by Government, but by an Anti-Luddite Committee, which then existed at Huddersfield: and if Walker were by the strict Letter of their Promise entitled to the Reward, it is to them, & not the Secretary of State, that he must look for payment; and certainly he has no merit, which calls for the Interference of Government on his behalf. But if I recollect rightly, Walker is not entitled to the Reward, because his Information was not given until after he & his fellow-murderers were apprehended upon other Evidence. I believe too I am correct in stating that Walker after the Trial was supplied with money through Mr. Lloyd of Stockport to enable him to find an Asylum in some distant part of the Kingdom, I believe in Wales.

I have [etc]
H. Hobhouse

9th October 1816: The Under Secretary of State for the Home Office tells Sir Robert Peel that a freed Luddite is involved in reform activities in Lancashire

The Bolton magistrate Colonel Ralph Fletcher had written to the Home Office in late September informing them, amongst other things, that his informers were telling him that a freed Luddite, Thomas Pickup, was involved in the reform movement in Lancashire. JH Addington wrote to Sir Robert Peel, who had lobbied for Pickup to be freed, informing him of this information, starting some interesting correspondence on the matter:

Private

Whitehall 9th October 1816

Dear Sir,

As you interested yourself very strongly in favor of a Convict named "Thomas Pickup" who was tried and convicted at the Special Assizes held at Lancaster in May 1812, and sentenced to be transported, but who after three years confinement on board the Hulks, was liberated, principally on your intercession—I think it right that you should be informed that this man appears by a letter which has been received from an intelligent magistrate in Lancashire who is in Confidential communication with this office, to have been active in promoting a General Meeting, the tendency of which there is reason to suppose was of a mischievous nature.—From the interest you talk in obtaining “Pickups” release from the Hulks, I have felt it proper to apprize you of this Circumstance.—

I have [etc]

J. H. Addington.

[To] Sir Robert Peel [Esq]

20th May 1816: The Chief Secretary to the Treasury writes to Captain Francis Raynes

Treasury-Chambers, 20th May, 1816.

SIR,

I have received your letter of the 1st inst. in reply to which, you must allow me to assure you, that if every individual with whom I am in habits of correspondence, were to be out of humour with me for not immediately attending to their letters, it would be utterly impossible for me to get through the business which I have to do. I certainly did hope to have it in my power to write to your sooner; but my whole time has been engrossed by the Civil List Committee, and I have been unable to command time for that purpose. I communicated, however, the result of our interview to Lord Sidmouth, who was well pleased to hear of its amicable nature. I am now on the watch for a situation such as your wishes to have pointed to, and, when a vacancy of the sort comes to my knowledge, you may be assured that I will not fail to mention your name to Lord Liverpool. At the same time, I wish you to understand, that, as I am the only channel through which your wishes are to be submitted to the head of Government, and, as I have not personally the disposal of the patronage, it is impossible for me to pledge myself to the moment when the realization of your hopes my take place.

I am, Sir,

Your most faithful humble Servant,

C. ARBUTHNOT.

[To] Capt. Raynes.

28th February 1816: The Home Office replies to John Allison about the recent Luddite attack

28th Feby 1816

Jos: Allison Esqr
Huddersfield

I am directed by Lord Sidmouth to acknowledge the Rect of your letter of the 26 last stating by [direction] of Sir Jos: Radcliffe the particulars of an Act of outrage which has lately been committed near Huddersfield – similar to what happened several years ago in that neighbourhood—His Lordship is much concerned to find Symptoms of the same mischievous Spirit which prevailed [previously] should having again manifested itself and there does not seem to be [given] your Letter [sufficient] reason for supposing that a new System of disturbance

His Lordship is inclined to hope though that this Statement does not warrant the Conclusion that a new System of disturbance & outrage again exists — at the Same time He is much concerned to find that any Symptom and His [Lordship] thinks it of the utmost Consequence that it should be understood not only that the public attention is drawn to this Individual act of outrage — but that the Persons whose property is likely to Suffer in the Event of a renewal of the Framebreaking System – are determined to defend their property agt any Attack that may be made upon it – and to render material Assistance to each other for this important object of it should be necessary—

—Lord S. relies with the greatest Confidence in the Active [Exertions] of Sir Jos: Radcliffe in the Services of a local Magistrate [should] again become requisite - and He has no doubt that both Mr. Cartwright of Rawfolds & yourself will be zealously employed at all times in rendering Him Support

22nd January 1816: The Chief Secretary to the Treasury replies again to Francis Raynes

Treasury-Chambers, 22d January, 1816.

SIR,

I have received your letter of the 5th inst. and I am induced to trouble you with this in reply to it, rather to satisfy your fears of your letter being thrown aside, than because I have any information to communicate. When you wrote to me in November, I was absent from this country, which was the cause of my not writing to you. Since my return, I was at first very unwell, and since then, I have been so much occupied by my official duties, that I have not had one moment of leisure to give to applications such as yours: but I can now assure you, that I will take an early opportunity of speaking to Lord Sidmouth about you, and that, when I have any intelligence that may be agreeable to communicate, you may depend upon hearing from me.

I am, Sir,

Your faithful humble Servant,

C. ARBUTHNOT.

10th January 1816: The Duke of Montrose continues to stall Francis Raynes' hopes

Windsor, 10th Jan. 1816.

SIR,

I have received your letter of the 5th January. I informed you I was acquainted with the existing difficulty to your remuneration being obtained, namely—the difficulty of the Secretary of State to find a situation for you. This you do not seem to give credit to; but this I believe, and was convinced from the beginning, that to reward was the intention of Lord Sidmouth or he would not have said so. I shall again mention your name to his Lordship, and should have sent your letter to him, but that I thought the last part of it looked so like a threat, that I conceived it might do you an injury.

I remain, with esteem, Sir,

Your obedient Servant,

MONTROSE.

Capt. Raynes.

21st August 1815: Francis Raynes receives a letter from the Home Secretary

Three days after his meeting with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Francis Raynes received a disappointing letter from the Home Secretary:

Whitehall, 21st Aug. 1815.

SIR,

I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 10th August, with several enclosures, which I herewith return to you, according to your request, together with the letter of 8th March last, addressed to you by the magistrates acting for the division of Stockport. These documents contain strong proof of your meritorious services at a very important period. They had, however, been previously rendered unquestionable, by the opinion expressed of them by Sir Thomas Maitland. The mode of remuneration which you have suggested, by granting you the allowance of a Major or a Captain on retirement, would, as I understand, be irregular and impracticable. It has been, and continues to be my earnest wish, that Sir Thomas Maitland’s recommendation of you to the favor of Government, should be rendered effectual, and I sincerely regret that no suitable means have yet been found for the accomplishment of this object.

I am, Sir,
Your obedient humble Servant,

SIDMOUTH

[To] Francis, Raynes, Esq.

18th August 1815: Francis Raynes is called to meet the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Charles Arbuthnot

Francis Raynes' persistence in the pursuit of a reward seemed, at last, to have paid off. His memoir relates the events that led to an important meeting that took place on Friday 18th August 1815:

“Who waits the reward of services, must ever deprecate the danger of delay,” and perceiving my cause had suffered too much from this already, I resolved to make one more effort, and again addressed myself to Lord Sidmouth. Some little time after, I received the following note from the Secretary of the Treasury:-- 

Mr. Arbuthnot presents his compliments to Captain Raynes, and would be glad to see him, if he would call upon him at the Treasury, on Friday, about One o’clock.
Treasury, 16th August, 1815. 

On calling, I was informed by Mr. Arbuthnot, he sent for me by desire of Lords Liverpool and Sidmouth, to assure me their Lordships were fully sensible of the services I had rendered, and that they regretted an opportunity had not occurred of rewarding them. Finding I was still destined to receive nothing but compliment, and that I had been sent for only to hear repeated, what I had so often before been assured of, and that I still had to wait an indefinite time for what I had, on the outset of the business, been led to expect would be immediate, I could not help shewing my astonishment and vexation. Perceiving which, Mr. Arbuthnot observed I did not seem satisfied; but assured me, as all appointments went through his hands, I might rely on an opportunity not escaping his notice, and being made known to the head of the Government: but, added Mr. Arbuthnot, “you are not, perhaps, aware, Captain Raynes, that a rule exists which prevents any person obtaining an appointment under the Government, after the age of forty-five.” My reply was, “I am not thirty-nine;” and feeling myself mortified and irritated at the remark, after the length of time I had been waiting, I said I could not help calling to mind the words of Sir Thomas Maitland, that if I did not get something at first, I never might. I have been thus minute in relating the particulars of this interview, as, some time afterwards, on mentioning that Mr. Arbuthnot told me appointments were not to be given to any body more than forty-five years old, I was told by the Duke of Montrose, he did not say so; and it has, likewise, been made the grounds of much displeasure against me, in another quarter, from the unfortunate repetition of the words of Sir Thomas Maitland...

21st July 1815: The Duke of Montrose accepts Francis Raynes' resignation

Buchanan, near Dumbarton, 21st July, 1815.

SIR,

I received your letter of the 11th July, and really did not feel myself hurt at your expression, and only thought hat you were going to injure yourself from talking about publishing, which, if you did, might prevent, I feared, those rewards which I expected, and do expect, as the acknowledgement of your good services. What I have communicate to you, was from friendly motives to you, through the whole of the business; and, from an apprehension that not being capable of understanding the difficulty a minister had, in finding an opportunity of serving you, and that you conceived Lord Sidmouth was not sincere in his desire of serving you. With regard to your resignation, I must now accept it, and consider the regiment loses much in withdrawing your zeal and experience from  it; and I beg to return you my thanks for your services, in the name of the Prince Regent, on behalf of His Majesty.

With great esteem, I remain, Sir,
Your obedient Servant,

MONTROSE.

[To] Capt. Raynes.

6th July 1815: The Duke of Montrose sends a stinging reply to Francis Raynes' threat

London, 6th July, 1815.

SIR,

I have just received your letter, and think you have written hastily, and, therefore, till you confirm it, will not understand that you threaten an appeal to the public. Under this impression, I shall not even accept your resignation till I hear again from you and beg leave to state that my communications which I have made to you, of the applications I have made to obtain for you, reward for your services, I considered as done confidentially; and that you have not any consent of mine, to make any communication that has passed through me to you public.

This letter is written entirely on your account, as an appeal to the public would only destroy the obligation ministers may feel to reward your services, and, in my opinion, be very injurious to you in all respects.

I remain, Sir,

Your obedient Servant,

MONTROSE.

[To] Capt. Raynes.

24th June 1815: The Duke of Montrose tells Francis Raynes he has misunderstood an offer of employment

On Tuesday the 20th June 1815, the Duke of Montrose had written to Franics Raynes, inviting him to call at his residence in Grosvenor Square on any morning after 11.00 a.m. Raynes duly called on him shortly afterwards, and later recorded his thoughts about the meeting, which he followed with a copy of the Duke's next letter to him of Saturday 24th June:

The purport of the visit thus desired by the Duke, was for his Grace to inform me he had seen Lord Liverpool and Sidmouth, and it was their intention to give me the appointment of a Barrack-master. This, though far different from what, in the first instance, I had been led to expect, nevertheless, from the difficulties which had been thrown in the way of giving me any thing, I thought it best to accept. The propriety of thanking Lord Sidmouth, was suggested by the Duke; which I did, sending a copy of the letter to his Grace.

London, 24th June, 1815.

SIR,

I have received your letter, and a copy of that sent to Lord Sidmouth, which is very proper; but I must observe, that Lord Sidmouth has only applied in your favour, and that I stated to you, the difficulties of obtaining the situation of Barrack-Master, from the just pretensions of old Barrack-Masters, deprived of their appointments by the peace establishment, &c. That you may obtain your reward, I earnestly wish, and so, I believe, does Lord Sidmouth; though there always a great difference, in my opinion, in what is to be done, and what is actually accomplished.

I remain, with esteem, Sir,
Your’s, &c.
MONTROSE.

[To] Captain Raynes.

19th June 1815: John Beckett cautions George Coldham about raiding the home of Gravenor Henson

Copy
Private

Whitehall
June 19, 1815.

Dear Sir,

I received yours of [the] 17[th] by this mornings Post together with the Enclosure which I return according to your desire.—

— As far as one can judge from the Paper itself Lord Sidmouth, to whom I have shewn it and your letter – is of opinion with me that the Communication is much to be a friendly one.—You seem however to have taken all the Precautions possible respecting the Arms of the militias that are alluded to and having done so, I hope no very vicious mischief is to be apprehended — Your future operations will depend probably upon what takes place at Leicester of which you will I take for granted be accurately informed.

Upon the material question in your Letter, viz. as to searching Houses—I have as you desired held a Consultation — and it is clearly Opinion here that unless you can lay before a magistrate such Information of a Treasonable nature as will indeed induce him to grant a Search Warrant — it would be unwise to take such a Step — whether your Information will enable you to go that length of course the Secret Committee will be the best judges―

I shall be glad to hear from you if any thing material takes place in the Course of this week or the next.—I own however that I think your precautionary Steps will shew that you are prepared — and that therefore nothing will happen nothing will happen of consequence.—

I am &c

J Beckett

[To] Geo: Coldham Esqr

5th June 1815: The Duke of Montrose replies to Francis Raynes

Grosvenor-Square, 5th June, 1815.

SIR,

I have received your letter, and regret very much that some method has not been contrived to remunerate your acknowledged services; though I knew the difficulty, and I thought I knew the intention and desire of Lord Sidmouth to find the opportunity. I shall again mention the subject to Lord Sidmouth; but will not make myself responsible for its producing any effect. The letter you allude to, from Captain Campbell, originates in the intimation I have received, that the militia will be again called out, which makes it the duty of the officers having charge of the militia, to inform themselves what officers propose again to join the regiment, on its being ordered to assemble, and to endeavour to fill the places properly, if possible, of those whose convenience it does not suit to again join the regiment, which is my own case. Feeling that my health would not allow me to take the field, should the services of the militia be called for in Ireland or elsewhere, in that manner, I have , therefore, appointed Colonel Russel to succeed me in the command.

I remain, with esteem, Sir,
Your obedient Servant,
MONTROSE.

[To] Capt. Raynes.

The Duke of Montrose will be glad to see Captain Raynes, any morning about eleven o’clock, in Grosvenor Square.