Mr. DUNCOMB's CASE.  
MR. Duncomb is Accused by Bill in the following Words; And whereas it appears, as well by Proof, as by the Voluntary Confession of Charles Duncomb Esq; late Cashier of His Majesty's Revenue of Excise openly made in the House of Commons, That the said Charles Duncomb is guilty of Contriving and Advising 〈◊〉 making of false Endorsements of several of the said Bills, and paying the same into the Receipt of Exchequer, as if Received for Excise, whereas he well knew that the said bills had not been Received for the said Duty, in great Deceit of His Majesty, and corruptly making an Unlawful Gain to himself. B● it therefore Enacted by the King's Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons in this present Parliament Assembled, and by the Authority of the same; That be the said Charles Duncomb, shall as a just Punishment for such his High Crimes and Misdemeanours, forfeit to His Majesty His Heirs and Successors, Two Third Parts of all his Manors, Lands, Tenements and Hereditaments, which he, or 〈◊〉 Person or Persons in trust for him, was, or more seized of upon the 25th Day of January, 1697. or any time since; and Two Third Parts of all his Goods and Chattels, which be, or any other for him was or were possessed of, or to which he had Right the said 25th Day of January, or at any time since, and shall be for ever hereafter uncapable of having or holding any Office or Place of Profit or Trust under His Majesty His Heirs, or Successors.  
The Accusation consisting of Facts ●apable of Proof, he humbly hopes, That a Bill of this extraordinary Nature with such high Penaties, will not pass in the House of Peers, unless the Crimes and Facts alleged can be fully made 〈◊〉.  
As to the Voluntary Confession, upon which the Bill is founded, he hopes as an English-Man, and a Freeholder in this Kingdom, That he shall have the Right done him to have this Allegation in the Bill fairly examined, and well proved; for, according to the best Recollection he is able to make, he doth not believe that any Concern he might be in at that time, could so deprive him of his Reason, as to acknowledge himself Guilty of That which is neither true in itself, nor supported by any Proof.  
And, as an Inducement to pass the Bill, and as an Aggravation of his Crime, he was Accused at the Bar of the House of Commons, to have been the first who brought a Disreputation upon Exchequer Bills.  
But when the Facts alleged against him shall be thoroughly looked into, and when the Witnesses both for and against him, shall be Examined upon Oath, he hopes there will appear sufficient Reasons not to pass the Bill.  
As to his being the first who brought Discredit upon the Exchequer Bills, the contrary will be evident to such as consider, that before the Fact of which he is Accused, viz. about the end of March last, The Treasury had Con●●●cted with Mr. D' Acosta and others, to remit Fifty Thousand Pound Sterling to Flanders, for which they Received Fifty Thousand Pound in Exchequer Bills, taking the Bills of Mr. D' Acosta, and ●hose concerned with him, at double Usance, and at Nine Guilders Ten Stivers for the Pound St●rling, which will be found to be a Discompt of about Sixteen per Cent. And they who understand the Exchange know, that this was the first Wound that was given to Exchequer Bills: And when Mr. D' Acosta could part with Exchequer Bills at 5 per Cent. Discompt, he gave his Bills in Flanders for Ten Guilders Eight Stivers, which was 9 per Cent. more than he gave before, and so much was clearly saved to the Public. The Transactions of Private Men, could not hurt the Credits of Exchequer Bills so much, as what was done by Authority, and upon Inquiry the Lords may be satisfied that the Fifty Thousand Pound about the latter end of March, was so Remitted, though the Act appropriates the first Two Hundred Thousand Pound for Payment of Quarters in England, which Bills for Quarters were not issued out till the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 of May  
The Fact in Mr. Duncomb's Case plainly stands thus.  
He was Receiver-General or Cashier of the Excise; and on the 7th of May last, he was Dismissed from his Employment at which time there remained in his Hands Sixteen Thousand Four Hundred and Twenty Six Pounds, Four Shillings and Six Pence Halfpenny, and no more, 〈◊〉 was paid thus.  
 l. s. d. At the Excise-Office in Money— 4120 16 11 May 8th. At the Exchequer by Orders in Course at Mr. Palmes' Office— 3022 13 06 12th. At the Exchequer 

in Bills received in the Excise— 1397 l. 09 s. 5 d.  
In Bills had of Mr. D' Acosta— 7884l. 09 s. 6 d.  
In Money— 0000 l. 15 s. 2 d.   9282 14 01 Total— 16426 04 06  
Mr. Duncomb took it, That the Law did sufficiently warrant him to Pay the Balance of his Account, which was to be paid into the Exchequer in Exchequer Bills; And in his Proceedings he was guided by the written Letter of the Law, and by the Act Entitled, An Act for making good the Deficiencies of several Funds therein mentioned and for enlarging the Capital Stock of the Bank of England, and for raising the Public Credit which Act is recited in a Proclamation bearing Date the 23d of April, the Words of the Act are as follows.  
To the End the said Bills may be of more general Use, as well for the Occasions of the War, as for the Public Commerce and Trade, It is Enacted, That the said Bills shall be Received and Taken, not only by Receivers or Collectors of the Taxes or Supplies granted, or to be granted for the War for the Year 1697. but shall also pass, and be current to all and every the Commissioners, Receivers, or Collectors of any Revenue, Aid, Tax, or Supply whatsoever already granted, or that shall or may be granted during this present S●ssion of Parliament, either for the War or any other Use; and also at the Receipt of the Exchequer from the said Commissioners, Receivers, or Collectors, or from any other Person whatsoever, making any Payments there to His Majesty upon any Account whatsoever.  
Which Clause in the Act and Proclamation, Mr. Duncomb believed did, and would justify him, in paying the Balance of his Account with those Bills; And upon the 12th of May, when he went to Mr. Peter's at the Exchequer to make his Payment of Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Two Pounds, Fourteen Shillings and a Penny, he told him the Difference of those Bills, viz. Tax. One Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety Seven Pounds, Nine Shillings and Five Pence, had actually passed the Revenue, as did appear by their Endorsement; and that the other Seven Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty Four Pounds, Nine Shillings and Six Pence, had not passed the Revenue, being not Endors'd in the same manner, and having only a Name; whereupon Mr. Peter's did Receive them, and gave Mr. Duncomb Tallies of Discharge for the whole Sum of Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Two Pounds, Fourteen Shillings and a Penny: At the same time Mr. Peter's told Mr. Duncomb, the trusties had not settled any Method for the Endorsement of the Exchequer Bills, and afterwards came and desired him that those Bills which had not passed the Revenue, might be changed into Money, which Mr. Duncomb refused, he thinking himself no ways obliged to do it, as having made a Legal Payment.  
He thought himself not only justified by Law, but by the Actual Practice of the Excise Office; for before his Payment in Exchequer Bills was made, there were Directions from above given to the Excise-Office, to receive Exchequer Bills in Payment of Bills of Exchange, which were drawn payable in New Money or Gold, which Bills of Exchange many of ●●em were given for New Money Received out of the Country Mints: And 'tis apparent these Bills were procured by the Merchants for that purp●●e, and with a certain View of profit, and being taken in the Revenues by Public Authority, he thought it no Crime i● him to do what was done by others in the same Circumstance with himself.  
And his Proceeding in this Matter, as well as that of other persons, seems justified by the Honourable the House of Commons, which by a Printed Vote of February the 22d has declared, That the receiving Exchequer Bills in the Revenue of Excise upon Bills of Exchange, drawn Payable in Mined Money and Gold, was not contrary to Law, and not a Loss to the Public.  
He hopes his Case, in some Circumstances, is parallel with theirs whom this Vote has Cleared; and in other circumstances, a great deal more Favourable of his side. The Balance due from him, and paid in Exchequer Bills, was for Money received at the Tower; part of the Bills of Exchange sent up, were for Money Coined at the Country Mints; the Officers of Excise in L●ndon were in the King's Service, the Merchants on whom they were drawn, were not, and Mr. Duncomb was out of his Employment when the Payment was made; his Payment in Exchequer Bills was but of Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty Four Pounds Nine Shillings Six Pence; theirs was for upwards of One Hundred Thirty Thousand Pounds. His Bills paid in were Signed only with a Name Blank. Theirs were Endors'd as if they had been paid in for Duty to the King, and as if they had Passed the Revenue, which was not so. The trusties were not Obliged by their Contract to Exchange Mr. Duncomb's Bills for Money, but they were Obliged to Exchange the Bills for upwards of One Hundred Thirty Thousand Pounds, by which the Public lost Ten Pound per Cent. The King had a Remedy against Mr. Duncomb, if his Payment was not good 〈◊〉 ●●●fident in Law, but he has no Remedy against what was thus Transacted between the Excise Office and the Merchants, as being in a manner concluded by the Act of his own Officers. For which Reasons he humbly hopes, that as others, whose Case in Appeara●●● is not so favourable, have been publicly Justified, so, that upon due Consideration, his Payment will not be judged illegal.  
As to what is pretended to be a False Endorsement.  
The Endorsement that the Law requires is the day of the Month and Year when paid, and upon what the same was paid, to be attested by the Name of the Person who paid the same.  
Mr. Duncomb's was no such Endorsement, for when some of these Bills were carried to the trusties to be exchanged, they refused them, declaring such a Name was no Endorsement: And the false Endorsements of which others are accused, are Fraudulently filled up entirely, and the Names Counterfeited, and took Effect as if they had been really paid into some Part of the Revenue: 'tis indeed alleged, That one Presgrave a Clerk, some Months afterwards, when Mr. Peter was out, finding some of these Bills in the Office, filled them up with a Day, Month, and Year, etc. as paid into the Excise, which made it a false Endorsement, but this was the Act of Presgrave, and 'tis not pretended to have been done with the least Privity of Mr. Duncomb.  
As to his Transaction with Mr. D' Acosta, he doubts not but to prove manifestly That it was in the following manner:  
Upon his Dismission, being to Pay in the Balance of his Account, he dealt with Mr. D'Acosta partly in Money, and partly for some Orders of Course, due in the Exchequer, but not then paid, for Seven Thousands Eight Hundred Eighty Four Pounds Nine Shillings Six Pence in Exchequer Bills. When these Bills were brought to him, Mr. Duncomb, in order to know who he had them of (it being commonly apprehended at that time, that Exchequer Bills might be Counterfeited) did desire Mr. D' Acosta to set his Name to the Bills, which he did to some of them; and of his own accord, Mr. D' Acosta, (without being thereunto induced by any Persuasion of Mr. Duncomb's, as he himself must own when he comes to be Examined upon Oath) did put the Names of his Packer and others, whose Names he made use of upon other Occasions, saying, He feared it would disoblige the Lords of the Treasury, if his Name should appear to so many Bills at that time.  
Note, That Mr. D' Acosta owned at the Bar of the House of Commons, That he set the Names of his Packer and others upon those Exchequer Bills, it being, as he there said, customary for Merchants to Sign Bills of Exchange, Bills of Lading, Envoices, and other Bills in that manner.  
It being evident that Mr. Duncomb had no Contrivance with Mr. D' Acosta, it remains for him 〈◊〉 show that he could have no Intention to make these Bills Pass upon Mr. Peter's for other than what they were.  
If he had designed to ●●pose on the Exchequer, he might have put upon these Bills the Names of such Brewers as were w●●t to make Payments into the Excise Off●●●, and not the Name of a Foreigner, who was publicly known to have no Dealings there.  
There are Reasons to ●elieve Mr. Peter knew the Man and his Profession, at least that he was no Brewer. Mr. Duncomb did prove the One Thousand Three Hundred Ninety Seven Pounds Nine Shill. Five Pence to be fully endors'●, and that he declared at the Payment, that the others were not paid into the Excise; not does Mr. Peter's say, that Mr. Duncomb declared that the other Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty Four Pounds Nine Shillings Six Pence had passed through the Revenue, but Mr. Peter's pretends, that because there were Names on them, he imagined they might be Received 〈◊〉 the Excise: But this Assertion of his seems altogether impossible, because,  
First, The One Thousand Three Hundred Ninety Seven Pounds Nine Shillings Five Pence Bills were fully Endors'd, and he being to cast up the Interest of every Bill, must take them up in his hands one by one, and consequently see the difference that was between them.  
Secondly, They are se● down in Peters's own Book in two distinct Articles, viz. In Exchequer Bills One Thousand Three Hundred Ninety Seven Pounds Nine Shillings and Five Pence. In Exchequer Bills Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty Four Pounds, Nine Shillings and Six Pence, which separate Way of keeping this Account, must of necessity proceed from his making the aforesaid Distinction between th● Bills.  
Besides, it can be proved, That Mr. Peter had Three Thousand Pounds in Bills of the like Nature of his own, refused at another Office; and the Reason assigned to him for the Refusal was, That it was impossible so many Bills should so soon come through the Excise from whence may be justly argued That there is no manner of likelihood (that within four Days after his own Bills had been refused for so plain a Reason) Mr. Peter should Receive almost Ten Thousand Pounds, without ask this Obvious Question: Whether all these Bills had passed the Revenue, or no?  
This being the true state of his Case in relation to the Confession alleged to have been made in the House of Commons, and concerning his Transactions, first with Mr. D' Acosta, and then with Mr. Peter's, he hopes it will appear,  
First, That he has not made any Voluntary Confession of being Guilty of Contriving and Advising the making of False Endorsements.  
Secondly, That he was far from being the first who brought a Discredit upon Exchequer Bills.  
Thirdly, That the Payment of his Balance in Exchequer Bills was, and is justifiable by the Law, declared in the King's Proclamation, by the practice of the Excise-Office, since his Dismission and by the Similitude his Case bears with their Case, who have been lately cleared by a Vote of the House of Commons.  
Fourthly, That the Bills paid by him, can in no sense be interpreted to have a false Endorsement upon ●hem  
Fifthly, That Mr. D' Acosta did set the Names of his Packer and others upon the Bills of his own Accord, and not at the Instance or Persuasion of Mr. Duncomb.  
Sixthly, That he never intended to impose these Bills on the Exchequer, as having gone through the Excise; And that Mr. Peter's, as well by Mr. Duncomb's Declaration at the time, as by other Circumstances, must of Necessity know that part of these Bills had, and part had not passed through the Revenue, which of itself clears Mr. Duncomb of any Fraudulent Intention.  
And when the Premises shall be duly considered, and all Matters examined upon Oath, he doubts not but that his Innocence will be made apparent, and that the Lords, upon whose Justice with all Humility he throws himself, will see good Reasons not to pass the Bill now brought against him.