160,000l.; and Mr. Stanhope for 47,000l. This
report was succeeded by six others, less important. At the end of the
last, the committee declared, that the absence of Knight, who had been
principally entrusted, prevented them from carrying on their inquiries.

The first report was ordered to be printed, and taken into consideration
on the next day but one succeeding. After a very angry and animated
debate, a series of resolutions were agreed to, condemnatory of the
conduct of the directors, of the members of the parliament and of the
administration concerned with them; and declaring that they ought, each
and all, to make satisfaction out of their own estates for the injury they
had done the public. Their practices were declared to be corrupt,
infamous, and dangerous; and a bill was ordered to be brought in for the
relief of the unhappy sufferers.

[Illustration: BONFIRES ON TOWER HILL]

Mr. Charles Stanhope was the first person brought to account for his share
in these transactions. He urged in his defence that, for some years past,
he had lodged all the money he was possessed of in Mr. Knight's hands, and
whatever stock Mr. Knight had taken in for him, he had paid a valuable
consideration for it. As for the stock that had been bought for him by
Turner, Caswall, and Co., he knew nothing about it. Whatever had been done
in that matter was done without his authority, and he could not be
responsible for it. Turner and Co. took the latter charge upon themselves;
but it was notorious to every unbiassed and unprejudiced person that Mr.
Stanhope was a gainer of the 250,000l. which lay in the hands of that firm
to his credit. He was, however, acquitted by a majority of three only. The
greatest exertions were made to screen him. Lord Stanhope, the son of the
Earl of Chesterfield, went round to the wavering members, using all the
eloquence he was possessed of to induce them either to vote for the
acquittal, or to absent themselves from the House. Many weak-headed
country gentlemen were led astray by his persuasions, and the result was
as already stated. The acquittal caused the greatest discontent throughout
the country. Mobs of a menacing character assembled in different parts of
London; fears of riots were generally entertained, especially as the
examination of a still greater delinquent was expected by many to have a
similar termination. Mr. Aislabie, whose high office and deep
responsibilities should have kept him honest, ev