Star. — London, England, 1820-07-06 00:00:00

e •e A % that. He would, as a PeeT, he ashamed of himself , it he did not do what the meanest Juryman in th country could do, discharge from his mind a erevioui impression—it happened every dry. He would put a c:lse. Suppose a man, charged with a crime, made a full conte.sion, and was afterwards received as a witness for the Crown, but did not give that full and f:-ana evidence which was the condition on which he was admitted, and was afterwards put on his trial, bat would not then confess his guilt ; in that case the Jury would know how to discharge from their minds all precious impressions, and the man could not be found guilty unless there was sufficient evidence of-- In ed on the trial to prove his former confession. The House would not be consulting the great functions which it had to perform, if it heard Counsel to pre vent the introduction of a Bill of which nothing yet was known. It was one of the most extraordinary propositions he had ever heard, and could not be ac quiesced in, Wale House consulted its duties and its Fivileges. • The Marquis of LANSDOWN—" My Lords, the difficulty and embarrassment which I previously felt with regard to this question, have been materially in creased by the speech of the Noble and Learned Lord, because, after your Lordships agreed to hear Coun sel on behalf of her Majesty in the former instance, when, in 'point M fact, what was petitioned against was merely a proceeding within the House it s elf, and did not amount to a charge agai:ist the Queen; I cannot see upon what pAticiple it is that your Lord ships can now refuse to'hearher Majesty's Counsel when a heavy and serious charge is, actually laid upon the table against her MajeStO There may be doubts as to the course of proceeding fit to be adopted, but when your Lordships hive already adopted the course of hearing Counsel in a stage of the proceeding where the motives for it were by no means so strong as in the preamt instance, I do not see upon what grounds, in the absence of all prece dent, you can consistently refuse to comply with the prayer of the Petition." Lord RE DESDALE said, that the chief argument which he had heard to receiving the Queens propo sition, amounted to this, that the House had done wraia , before in acceding to a similar request, and now ought to do wrong again. He repeated the ar gument that her Petition was not against any mea sure which had been taken by the House, but was intended to oppose some measure about to be taken, and said thit, if Counsel were admitted on such a proposition to the Bar, there could be no restraint upon, then', they might talk on anything or every thi.ig they pleased, as by the terms of the Petition there was no particular subject or limitation. Lord HOLLAND teinarked, that the Noble and Learned laOtil seemed to misunderstand the prayer of the Petition. It had two distinct objects, one of which was, to be heard against the allegations in the Report, and the other to communicate certain weighty matters which might be of importance to her future defence. It was said that it would put the House'in an extraordinary situation; but the House had been put in an extraordinary situation by the proceedings which led to it; now, indeed, thine was a great deal of talk about forms; but was this a case: uhich, after breaking through all regularity, all r of proceeding, could now allow them to envellt:peolem selves in technical Niceties, and look cautiously about for precedents? It was no-argument, in a case like this, to talk of the impossibility of the proceedings of ' the House being known to her Majesty. It would be a waste of words to dwell upon it. He was as much ' attached to foreas as any man; but in a case like this ' forms were of ao consequence whatever. The Noble Lord then proceeded to chew, that the very measure which the Committee recommended took the case out of a/Übe ordinary course of proceeding, and made the Howse institute a criminal proceeding con trary to all precedent In one instance, indeed, a criminal diarge had been laid on the table by Lord Worcester; but it was declared illegal and unconsti tutional, and he was obliged to withdraw it. This, he contended, was therefore a case unexampled and anomaious. The Noble Lord(Ellenbarough).says he would do equal and impartial justice, the same to the , Queen as to the lowest individual ; but can he adduce an instance of a Secret Committee having Papers re fei red to them respecting the conduct of any humble individual, and laying a direct and positive charge against that individual upon the üble of this House? Where, then, is the analogy, and how can the case of the Queeu be disposed of by such ar argument?— The Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, with regard to the charge of our prejudging the case through the medium of that Report, says, that Jury men are in the habit of divesting their minds of what they have heard, when a prisoner is to be tried who has previously confessed his guilt. But will. the No ble and Law-lied Lord assert, that the same Jurymen try the prisoner who heard his confession of guilt? And is it not a valid objection to a Juryman that he had already investigated the,case of the prisoner whose trial is called on? I cannot, therefore, see, under all the circumstances of this estraordinarY case, what objection there is to the hearing Counsel on be ll ill of her Majesty, as prayed by this Petition. The Marquis of BUCKINGHAM concurred with his Noble Friend, that the House had placed itself in a situation of some difficulty, by agreeing, in the for mer instance, to hear Counsel at the Bar. But there was this difference between the present case, and that in which the Petition was assented to, that then there was a proceeding pending, whereas now there was none. In the present instance their Lordships had appointed a Secret Committee, they had suspended the sitting of that Committee, and in the interval her :Majesty had applied to be heard by Counsel against the prcteeding. It was possible that their Lordships might, after the argnmeats of Counsel, have prevented the meeting of the Secret Committee, and voted that they should proceed no further. But what was their situation now? The Committee had-made their He pert, and the Noble Earl had given notice of a Bill founded on that Report ; in the interval there *as no proceeding. Suppose, then, that they were permitted to plead, on what proceeding could the House divjde alter having heard the arguments ? They would not determine that ale Noble Lord should not bring in his Bill. What then couid they do the moment after Counsel had withdrawn, which they could not have" dune without bearing one word of the argument ? Her Majesty did not pray to be heard against the proceeding. There was none before the Rouse. When the proceeding was instituted, then was the time to ... . make any application connected with her and GOD forbid that he, or any one, should grant anything which might he nspwry fence, or, if possible, heriustifiCatieb: 's The Earl of DAIINI I P: contended,; ghat port of the CommitteeNeas a proceedini the most serious nature, on Which her Mai right, to present a Petition. The situation they stood was one in which they had no analogy guide them, and they were placed in that situp by a series r measures Which appeared to him a. his Noble Friends objectionable in many respects. — But how did they stand at present.? After referring the case of the Queen to a Secret Conimittee, a Com mittee, he would admit, of the most honourable men, of men who were incapable of bringing in any Re port hut what the evidence would seem to justify, her Majesty had petitioned to be heard by Counsel. lie knew nothing of the facts ; he wishes much that it Was possible for him to know no more ; kit if they refused the request of the Queen in the present in stance, it would seem as if they had not granted her all the advantages which her defence required, and which were granted to other petitioners. He trusted, therefore, that the House would not be induced, by the arguments of the Noble Marquis, to refuse the application to be heard by Counsel on the present occasion. Lord DACRE said, that her Majesty having heard, no matter by what means, that distinct charges were preferred against her, was naturally anxious, and pre pared to defend herself as far as it was 'possible to proceed at present, and to state weighty matters, which in justice to her further defence required to be stated in this stage of the. proceedings. Ile trusted that the• House('would feel the propriety of acqui escing in such a request. • The question for proceeding to call in Counsel was then put from the Woolsack, and negatived ( without a division. BILL OF PAINS AND PENALTIES. The Earl of LIVERPOOL then said—" My Lords, in the discharge of a most painful duty, I rise to present the 13111 which I now hold in my hand. In doing so I feel that I shall best consult your wishes, my own inclinations, and the delicacy which is due to all patties concerned, by abstaining in the present stage from any details respecting the important matter re ferred to in the preamble of the Bill. That pre amble will speak tor itself, and it will be for those who are officially employed in this distressing case, to prove at your Lordships' bar the allegations con tained in the preamble. Under these circumstances your Lordships would no doubt be impressed with the deepest regret, if anything should take place that could have a tendency to create more prejudice than seems to arise necessarily out of every case of accusation. Neither am I disposed to revive former .. discussions by what I shall offer this night ; but I must say with my Noble Friend on the Woolsack, that after the best considerittion I could give the question, I still remain of opinion, that if we were . to retrace our steps again, I know not how the House could move in any other manner. I know, that the course of impeachment was suggested, but I stated before the difficulties to which that proceed ill% was liable. Without arguing the objections over again, or undervaluing the arguments opposed on . the other side, I must still assert that the course adopted was that which recommended itself upon every ground of constitutional principle and analogy. It was at least doubtful whether an impeachment could be sustained under all the circumstances of the case. My Noble Friend on the Woolsack doubted it. Another Noble Lord (Erskine), who has also sat on the Woolsack, and who was equally conspicuous for his talents and his knowledge of the criminal jaws of this country, doubted it ; so that lookinjg at it as a question of doubt alone, I ask your Lordships whether we should be justified in commencing any proceeding with an uncertainty before our eyes as to whether we should be able to bring it to any con clusion or not? That being the state of the course of Impeachment, the Bill which I now present was the only one open to your Lordships upon this sub ject. You know that the case could not be tried in the Ecclesiastical Courts, or in the Courts of Law.-, A legislative proceeding was-all that remained, and the only question then was, in which of the two Houses of Parliament the proceeding ought to com mence ? I stated on a former occasion, that it was competent to either House of Parliament to com mence it, but that it was more peculiarly fit for this House to do so in the present instance, because the forms of the House, and the power it possesses to examine evidence Upoa - oath, afford a better chance that justice shall be done to both parties ; I stated further, that this was not in the ordinary sense a Bill of Divorce, that it was not ucase between two indivi duals, that it was not a mere question of injury between the King and the Queen, but between the Queen and the State also. Yet as it must refer in some degree to the marriage between the illustrious persons, I thought, and I still think it better that the proceed ing should originate with this House.• The only question that remains is, whether the Bill ought to have been brought forward in the first instance on the responsibility of Ministers, or whether a Secret Committee ought to have been interposed ? I have considered this point maturely, I have considered it both with reference to precedent and to principle, and upon either ground I conclude that the course which we have adopted is correct. Your Lordships will not find that any legislative measure of this kind has ever been adopted -without previous inquiry.— It was not that the Executive Government shrunk from the responsibility, but that it was necessary to avoid the adoption of such a measure on .the mere apse disit of the Minister of the day, and to re quire the interposition of some intermediate •body. It was not merely the question whether the evidence was sufficient, that the Committee had to determine, but all the various considerations connected with the nature of the evidence, arnd the dangers of disclosure, and whether these considerations were such as to warrant or discountenance the adoption of any pro ceeding. There is no mode of shaping an accusation so as to avoid the excitement of some prejudice against the accused. The mere commitment of an individual by a Magistrate, excites a prejudice against r that individual to a certain extent. It is an evil, but an evil that cannot be avoided; it is an imperfection, but one that is inseparable from.the administration of justice; and all that remains for us is, to choose be 0/veil t h e. a u criat iev, w hich si t ecessity imposes,, either the justify _ tions can be proved, in depriving her Majesty afa, her rights and prerogatives as .Queen Consort, and dissolving the marriage as a necessary consequence. This is the full extent of the Bill—there are no other penal consequences in its enactments, which a re framed in such a manner as not to bear with any se veri?y that could be avoided against the. Illustrious Individual who is the object of them: As to the question of the provision which it may be proper to make for her Majesty, in case the charges should be substantiated by evidence, that will more properly become the subject of cans 3 deration hereafter in ano ther place. The essence of the charge is founded in the preamble. 4 ,0 n that ground, when the Bill pro ceeds to the second reading, it will be necessary that we should go to the proof. Your Lordships will, no doubt, aischarge this duty as you have done every other in which you have been engaged, in such a manner as to entitle you to the respect and confi tidence of the country. It. is my intention to move, 'if your Lordships should consent to the first reading of this Bill, that a copy of it shall.be furnished to the' , Illustrious Person • whose station and privileges it affects. I am indifferent whether I now appoint a day for the second reading, subject to any postpone ment which her Majesty's convenience may re quire, or leave it, without fixing any period, for a few days, until her determination is known as to the course of proceeding which she may think proper to adopt. Perhaps it is as well that I should formally fix this day fortnight, leaving it to be determined in the interval what further postponement shall take place. '1 The subject, I can assure your Lordships, gives me, in common with every other man in the country, the greatest. pain. We all feel deeply on the occasion; but if there is any one class of persons who may be' supposed to feel more than others, it is natural to think that those who are entrusted by his Majesty with the Executive Government, and who, in the performance of their duty, came forward on this painful occasion, should be the persons to feel the most. It has been our endeavour to - discharge our duty with all justice and lenity towards the Illustrious Person, and it is a satisfaction to reflect that there are no precedents for the last two hundred years, ex cept in the case of one individual, who never came to this country, or appeared as Queen, in which even a whisper has been known to circulate against the cha- lacter of the Queen Consort. It is a satisfaction to reflect also upon the benefit which the country has experienced during the last sixty years from the ex ample of the Illustrious Individual who filled the Throne, and reflected by her conduct such purity on the public morals. It would have been a fortunate circumstance, I shall alw - a.ys contend, if the shame and scandal which must attend such an investigation, ';whatever theresult may be, could have been.avoided;, but we are placed in a situation which leaves us no alternative. The question is not the impunity of guilt, but the trial of guilt. GOD grant that the ao: cused may be able to disprove the charges ; but how ever that may be, there remains but one straight-for ward course for you, my Lords. lam confident you will adopt it; I am confident you will do your duty ; and whatever momentary clamour may exist, the country in the end will do you justice." The Bill, of which the following is a literal copy, was then read by the Clerk: 4, A BILL Tib deprive her Majesty, CA ROLM' Alum*. F..sissarni, of the . Title, Prerogatives, Rights, Privileges, and Pretensions of Queen Consort of this Realm, and to dissolve the Marriage between his MA, ICSTY and the said Qurras. • /Where*, in the year 1814, her Majesty, Careline Amelia Elizabeth. then Princess of Wales, and mow Queen Consort of this realm, being at Milan, in Italy. engaged in her service, in a menial situation, one Bartolomo Pergami, otherwise Bartolomo Brugami, a foreigner of low station, who had before served in a similar capa c ity " And whereas, after the said Bartolomo Person* other wise Bartolomo Beriami, bad so entered the service of her Royal Highness, the said Princess of Wales, a most unbecoming and disgusting intimacy commenced between her Royal High neis and the said Bartolomo Pergami, otherwise Bartolomo Bergami : “ And whereas her Royal Higb,ness not only advanced the said Bartolomo Pergatni, otherwise Bartolonao Bergami, to a high situation in her Royal Highness's Household, and received him into her service, and that in bigh and confidential situations about her Royal Highness's person, but bestowed upon hini other great and extraordinary marks of favour and distinction, obtained for him Orders of Knighthood and Titles of Honour, and conferred upon him a pretended Order of Knighthood, which her Royal Highness had taken upon herself to institute, without any just er lawful authority : " And whereas lier said Royal Highness, whilst the said Bar tolomo Pergami, otherwise Bartolomo Bergami, was in her said set vice, further unmindful of her exalted , rank and station, and of her duty to your Majesty, and wholly regardless of her own honour and character, conducted herself towards the said Bartolomo Pergami, otherwiae Bartolomo Bergami, and* lo other respects, both in public and private, and in the various places and countries which her Royal Highness visited, with in -1 decent and offensive familiarity and freedom, and carried on al licentious, disgraceful, and adulterous intercourse with the said Bartolomo Pergami, otherwise Bartolomo Bergami, which con tinued for a long period of time, during her Royal Highness's residence abnrad, by which conduct of her said Royal Highness, .great scandal and dishonour have been brought upon your Ma jesty's Family and this Kingdom. " Therefore, to manifest our deep sense of such scandalous, disgraceful, and vicious conduct on tire part of her said Majesty. .by which sh • has violated the duty she'owed to your Majesty, and has rendered herself unworthy of tl e exalted oak and sta tion of Queen Consort of this Realm, and to evince our just re gard for the dignity of the Crown and the honour of this Na tion, we, your Majesty's most dutiful - and loyal subjects, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons. in Parliament assembled, do hereby entreat your M.,jesty that it may be enacted, and be it enacted by the King's Most Excellent Majesty.. by and with the adsice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, u. this present rarliapoi.ot amietubleti, qni by the authority of the same, that her said Majesty, Caro line Amelia Elizabeth, from and after thr passing of. this Act, hereby, deprived of the title of Queen, and c. , 7 41! _As, privileges, and exempzians appprtaini-: Consort of this Realm ; and that her said after the passing of this Act, for eva- be rendered incapable of using, exercising, and eniot_ of them ; and moreover, that the matrirge and the said Caroline Anhlia Elizabeth be, heteby from lienrtellrth for ever•wholly and made void, to 41 intents cor.structions, whatsoever." - - .._.. After - the Bill was read a first time, The gad of'Ll'ii%R.POOL moved, "That Cee's•A should be sent to her Majesty, and her NlajeAy't ‘t torney-General, and also to the King's Attorney. General;" which was agreed to. Earl GREY said he rose for the purpose of poi nt _ ing out the necessity of having the Bill drawn nut in that form, and of pursuing such a course as (( m kt enable the Queen to Make every necessary pteparaa tion for her defence. In every case of a Bill of I L .: dictment being' preferred before Grand time and plate at which the crime laid in the indict ment was alleged to be committed, as specifically mentioned therein. But such was not the ease in the present Bill ; the Queen wa'• merely stated to have proceeded in a course of criminality ; but the legal description of that criminality was mit accurately given, so as to enable her Majesty prepare for her defence. He therefore wished to ko.,w, whether the Noble Earl intended to adopt any other mode of pro ceeding subsequently, with a vie.v io suppiy hat (in fect? He wished also to ask, whe,her coitriz was in contemplation for supplying her with the names of the witnesses which ate to be produced against her ? The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, that the second reading of the Bill would be the proper time to en ter into the discussion. He had no difficulty, how ever, in stating, that the specification in the pream ble was as particular as any other to which they could refer, and was in all respects sufficient to guide her Majesty's defence. With regard to the names of the witnesses, it was unprecedented in the history of Parliamentary proceedings to furnish them, while a Bill-of Pains and Penalties was depending. It was unusual in all proceedings, except in trials for Treason; but as her Majesty had claims to the ut most indulgence, sufficient time would be allowed her to collect her evidence, and this would do away the only plausible grouild. that existed for demand ing a list of the witnesses. • • • - Lord DACRE moved, " Thather Majesty's Counsel should now be called to the Bar, in order to state prints which were necessaryio •her defence." He did this upon information whithhe had received wry recently. The Earl of LIVERPOOL suggested that the Noble. Lord Might obtain his object without re.orting to a course which was contrary to the whole analogy of their proceedings, and promised that if a Petitants was presented to-morrow, the Bill being in progress, he would not then object to it. Lord DACRE assented, and did not press the motion. Earl GREY thought, that whatever course was taken under the present proceedin4, it must be at tended with great disadvantage. The commence ment of a proseCution, grounded upon evidetic_t which could not be met for a considerable time after the evidence had prodticed its impression, WAN 1111; . 4.• vourable to the ends of justice. It would be mote conducive to that end if the w hole could be I.ost potted until there was an opportunity for peacee.i;re with the accusation and defence together. In ad Divorce Bills, the accused party had the advantage of the knowledge to be derived from previous pro. ceedirigs, in which everything was specified dis tinctly, so that she was aware cf all that could be urged against•her. The Noble Earl had alluded to the management of the case at the Bar; bat he wished to know by what authority, or at whose di rectibn any person could appear at that Bar to con duct the prosecution ? The 'Earl of LIVERPOOL said, that the Attorrey- General might be called upon by the authority cf the House, either to appear himself, "or to provide some person to conduct it. Earl GREY observed, that from the Noble Lord's stateinent it would appear as if the House itself had assumed the character of a prosecutor in the ca.e which it was about to try. The Earl of LIVERPOOL stated, that the House had actually appointed Counsel in other cases, and there could be no doubt that they would see justice done between the parties. Earl GREY said he was aware that the House had appointed Counsel in other case, in that for instance of the Berkeley case, but here was a case of prose cution for which he had not heard any precedent.— He was as faf as the Noble Lord from suspecting the justice of the House; but, as he hxdsaid upon former occasions, it was not only necessary that they should 'be just, but 'that they should appear above suspicion. The Earl of LIVERPOOL maintained; that if fair issue was joined, it was impossible that they could beat a loss to try the case. It could not be the vet -:ti of hny one that guilt shotn go unpunished,. or th 4: justice should not be done. • Darl GREY repeated hit objection, and wished to protect the Hotise against being placed in a situatitia in which it must exert se conjointly the functions t.f a Public Prosecutor, L islator, and Judge. _ The LORD CHAN CE LLOR 'defended the pre needing by a Bill of Pains and Penalties originating .in that Houke, and justified the interposition of a Se cret Committee. The Attorney-General was one ci the legal assistants of that House, in which capaeits,- he was liable to be called on to conduct tbepmceediag • Lord HOLLAND remarked, that the Attornt.;,- General as a Member of another House, wad migits therefore be objected to as the manager of a prote;- cutien ill the House of Lords, upon which he woula have to pronounce hereafter in the House of Con: mons. He expected that the Noble Lord would liir:r stated. some reasons, after so many professions of 07e laborious consideration he had' given to the subjec . 'but he had not stated distinctly on what precedc-r he wished the House to act. He hoped that tl" wpuld be done before any direction was given to the A tte - rney• General. . The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, that though the order was given to the Attoraey.General, he wou:a; not be obliged to appear personally, but might sett' %tune other person, as had occurred in. many cries.. • The Il.,use then adjutnned. , s ter, defence : to abandon investigation altogether, or t0_4405 it shall be, and is herd)! • - ild objeceto under a disadvantage from which rise $4O/Witower I the prerogatives, righi y to her de- to separate vit.. Ilut.*.,is noipa ,thntion rtspikctini !to her as Queen Cons _ Individual only, ghat late quoirffiou,'44 ley shall, from and that the Re- do not-feel that the catirse t we have adOPted, in idisstoted and renders! and one of any degree inconsistent *kit-those principles ofjps=l ing t ihe same, or any ajesty had a tics which we have all an equalipterep. in maintaining. I hatween his Majes.y ; M in which The preamble states as much, particularly with re- and the same is her; ) analogy to, spect to the number and nature of the offences, as wired, annulled, ant tat situation' will justjfy Parlianner.t, I presume, if the allega- and purposes abloom ~'