Star. — London, England, 1820-08-29 00:00:00

f ,~ ti • %. • % *a 41% N "...VI, 09. .% .• t• • st esyglter -meabk they snould have of meeting it, but by a cross-exami . e e nier, r afteir theyislti -been enabled to ascertain the character of the witnesses against them ? The Learned Gentleman agreed that the moment the examination in chief was fi nished, was the meet proper for cross-examination ; but he knew also, that he was standing do grounds from which justice woald never remove him, when he demanded a full and unre slrieted elms-examination, after he had the means of making the necessary enquiries. He contended, that in an ordinary Court of Law, where the evidence was concluded on both sides, if the Jucige ha d delivered hie charge, and the Jury were deli 'l.:rating on a verdict, yet, if the Counsel for the defence, then heard of important facts which would impeach the evidence of a single witness, then the proceedings would be stayed, and the .iev evidence produced. There was one important topic, and he thought it was the only one to which his Learned Friend had net adverted, namely, that her Majesty's Counsel had not been furnished with copies of those depositions and papers, on which a Committee of their Lordships had made a report, recommend ing the institution of some proceeding against her Majesty. He (\rr. Denman) hati,distinctly made application to their Lord - ships for teinse papers t and that application had been refused. It Ivas by having an opportunity on a former occasion when her Majesty's character was assailed, of contrasting the prepara tory affidavits of certain persons with their subsequent deposi firms before the Lords Commissioners, and by that means alone that her Majesty had then been able to establish her innocence in the eyes of the world. But of that advantage her Majesty is now wholly deprived. It was impossible not to perceive that seven' of their Lordships who bad been in the Committee before alluded t t, had put questions to witnesses from information which they acquired from other sources than the public proceedings conse quent on this Bill—from sources to which the Counsel of her Majesty had been refused, and had no access—but to which they ought to leave the freest access, were it intended to do justice to her Majesty—(Hear, pear, hear). — This was one strong reason, in addition to the many which had been stated, why her Majesty's Counsel should not be deprived of the most full, ample, and complete right of cross examination, or of any opportunity of bringing forward, at any time, any information which might throw light on the case, or cast infamy on those who bring infamous charges. How ever painful it might be, it would be better for the interests of the Public that her Majesty's Counsel should at once with draw from the Inquiry, than give their sanction to a course of proceeding by which no real justice could be done to the ac cused party. It would, indeed, be painful, but not so painful as to concur in a proceeding by which, in the person of her Majesty, the safety of every person in England would be compromised, and to which any of their Lordships might themselves fall vic. tints hereafter. It did seem to him as if her Majesty, by every fair means of defence being withdrawn from her, were devoted to destruction—that her destruction, at all haza rds, was vowed and resolved upon. Ile never would cease to insist for the most full and unreserved right of cross-examination on all occasions. It would be better, a thousand times, that all the summer months of the next ten years should be occupied in the inquiry, than that the least injustice should be done to the Illustrious Party in the case by any difficulty in the way of proceeding, of which their Lordships were themselves the cause. The Learned Gen tkman criteluseed a most impressive speech, by conjuring their Lordships to he guided alone by those great principles—not of written, but of unwritten law—principles which were engraven can the hearts of all mini, and by winch every cultivated mind was regulated. 1 (The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then commenced his reply which contained nearly the repetition of some of the favourite arguments of the friends to the proceeding. lle denied the ap plicability of the case of the Duchess of Norfolk to the present case, and in fact declared that there was not a syllable of argu recut in the speeches of Mr. Brotieham and Mr. Denman. IL took occasion to observe, that the Public Press which spoke ir. condemnation of the proceedings, was daily in the habit w: latching their Lordships, his Majesty's Attorney and Sohci re: General, and the witnesses for the Bill. The SOLiCITOR- GENERAL followed on the same side. Mr. BROUGHALI 'spoke in reply.—He said hit Learned Friends bad misquoted th.: case of the Duke of Norfolk, al though they had assumed to themselves such high pretensions f..r a superior knowledge of the law on this occasion. His Learned Friends bad quoted their law on this subject from Cob bees &ate Trials; but be had now in his hand the original copy of the case alluded to—he had the old authentic folio edition of a work which would alone be received as evidence in a Court of Justice; and be submitted, that this folio edition, belonging to the Parliament, ought to the book quoted on this occasion, when it would appear that the Learned Attorney-General was wrong, and that he (Mr. Brougham) was right. In thus re- 1 futing his Learned Friend's argument, Con forbid he should feel any inclination to triumph over him, as his Learned Friend wished to triumph over him. By good fortune, he happened just an hour before to lay his hand on this book. In the 47th page of the 15th volume of their Journals, their Lordships 'would find that the Proctor of the Duchess had examined Ann Burton, a maid -servant, who lived in Chancery-lane, and who six years before had lived as servant with the Duke of Norfolk for the space of a whole year : she stated, that she lived by her service, at her own charge. Twenty witnesses were examined altogether by this Proctor, in the same way as Ann Burton had teen examined; and it would appear, on the authority, not of Cobbett's hook, which his Learned Friend had quoted, but of their Lordships' books, that after the witness just alluded to bad been examined, a petition was sent in praying for delay, and it was ordered by the lionte of Lords that the Duchess's Proc tor should have a copy of the statements given by the witnesses, and that time 'should be allowed for their cross-examination. Now as he could nut enter into competition with his Learned Friends on points of hew, in which they were so vastly superior to him, it happened by good providence that he came across this authority, which gave so complete an answer to their argument. Not a word, however, that he could say would add a leaf to the laurels which the Attorney-General had gained there; but it was odd, that a man possessing so superior a knowledge of the law, should have recourse to mistating authorities in support of his argument. Thus it happened that the most exalted men were found at times to have a little of the frailties of their nature about them. Ilis Learned Friend was wrong in supposing that he (Mr. Brougham) had stated, that in a civil case a defendant had a list of witnesses. Ile had said no such thing; all be said was, that when a man came into Court to defend himself, he had a right to have the means of being prepared for his defence. If a man were sued on a civil contract, he had a right to know the nature of the debt, the time when it was contracted, and the amount of the same. Ile had seen the application made for a knowledge of this kind ; and he contended, if an action was brought, of a nature so vague that it had passed over six years, and a doubt rested as to the validity of the grounds on which it was brought, the defendant, on application to the Court, would be entitled to have a specific knowledge of every circumstance connected with the claim made upon him. The case was much strorger in criminal proceedings. If a man was taken up for at. offence, he knew he must be tried in the county where it was alleged to have been committed. That was enough to give him information where the crime was alleged to be committed. There the defendant would have an opportunity of recollecting all he had done in that country, and would be able to make out a defence. In like manner, an indictment did not run over a whole man's life, or charge him with a multitude of crimes committed in the course of six or seven years, in different parts of the world; but he must be tried for a specific act, committed in a particular place specified in the indictment; and no man tees ever yet put on his trial who did not know the nature of the charge against him, so as to be able to make a defence.— Their Lordships were now about to lay down a new rule with respect to a Bill of Pains and Penalties; and he wished to know whether those rules, which were the greatest possible exceptions to law, were hereafter to become habitual to that House? and whether it was meant to say that it were better an individual should be punished, than that such rules should not he Lid down? What chalice was there that such a measure as the present was ever likely to be brought forward again? and why should a general rule he rendered applicable to a solitary case? Ile might as well ask their Lordships to lay down a rule which would tie favourable to the defence. Why was all the onus of making an inflexible rule of positive injustice to he applicable alone to the case of her Majesty, and not that of her prosecu tors? The law, in a spirit of justice and humanity, said that it was better ten guilty men should escape, than that one innocent man should suffer. But in the present case, it seemed to have been laid down as a maxim that it would be better to find ten innocent guilty, than that their Lordships should not have an inflexible rule to assist them in trying and convicting her Ma jesty. See then what the injustice of this sort of proceeding eves. If the present Bill should be thrown out, her Majesty valid not then be said to be acquitted; because the pro pounders of the Bill might still bring in new Bills toties wires, until some Bill should at last be passed against her. This was no slight difference ; and anotliet important distinction had heel) demonstrated already by the evidence, that the Qttecu's accusers had a power of procuring witnesses which she could not enjoy. Not only were large sums at their conunand, not only was force used where bribery failed, but thi foreign force (for the conclusion was irresistil*) used to bring the King's vitnesies would not be employed to make those of the Queen 'tome. Further, the same force found ineffectual in driving the King's witnesses over, would be exerted to keep the Queen's witnesses back. He did not profess to be so deeply skilled in tuman nature as his Learned Friends, but he guessed that the same power which said to one man, " Go over to give evidence against the Queen," was not likely to tell another, " Go you to give evidence in her favour." He might assume even more; the Government which told the King's witnesses to stay away from England at their peril, would warn those of the Queen to go to England at their peril. Upon these grounds he left the case with the House, without at all pretending to be able to estimate either the importance of new impending difficulties, or of those in which it was already involved. He had of course no right to offer any advice or suggestion to their Lordships, and perhaps Should they wade no more, 0 Returning were as tedious as go o'er." _ _ _ - Mr. BaorcuAm having concluded, Lord LIVERPOOL then moved that the House should ad journ.—Adjourned accordingly at five minutes past five. THE EVENING STAR. LONDON. NO RESERVE OF TICKETS—THE PUBLIC MAY BUY THE TWO £20,000 PRIZES AND ALL THE OTHER CAPITALS—To iis DRAWN TO-MORROW. TUESDAY. AUGUST 29, Mo. THE QUEEN. Her M AJESTY went down to the House of Lords yesterday at half-past two o'clock. She did not ar rive in town till half-past twelve, as she naturally expected that the greater part of the day would be spent in debating, and that her attendance would be unnecessary at an early hour. The period between her MAJESTY'S arrival in St. James's-square, and her departure for the House of Lords, was occupied in receiving Addresses. The scene which St. James's square and neighbourhood presented yesterday was extremely exhilarating. The crowds that assembled a: a very early hour were immense; and at ten o'clock it was almost impossible to walk along Pall-mall, Cockspur-street, &c. in the direction of Craring cross, so thronged were the flag-ways with persons of both sexes, and of the most respectable appear ance, moving towards St. James's-square. All the other avenues leading to her MAJESTY'S residence had a similar appearance, but not in the same degree. In St. James's-square, the steps up to all the hall doors were filled with Ladies, and a line of waggons, furniture -carts, &c. in some parts two, in others three deep, was drawn up before Lady FRANCIS'S house, and filled with well-dressed females. The street leading from Charing-cross down to Westminster was also choaked up with people, particularly that part of it next the barrier; the steps, railings, walls, &c. were covered with persons anxiously expecting to catch a sight of their QUEEN as she passed along. Her MAJESTY left St. James's-square a little before two o'clock, accompanied by Lady CHARLOTTE LINDSAY, and followed, in a coach and four, by her Chamberlains, Sir W. Goer. and the Hon. KEPPEL CRAVEN. During her progress to the House her MAJESTY was received with the most unbounded ac clamations by all ranks of people. The Ladies in the windows of the different streets through which she passed waved their handkerchiefs, and poured forth their benedictions on her head ; and the Gen tlemen followed, with energy, the example of their fair companions. Her MAJostr left the House of Lords at half-past four o'clock, and on her return was hailed with greetings as energetic and as general as those which pursued her course to the House. —At five o'clock, the Deputation from the Ward of Cripplegate, in twenty-eight open carriages, with four horses each, brought up the Address voted at a Vestry Meeting last week. The Deputation were all dressed in black, with the exception of the Common Councilmen, who wore their violet silk gowns ; and every individual wore a large white favour on his breast. They were attended by the Ward Officers in their liveries, bearing their various insignia. Her MAJESTY received them in the drawing-room, when Mr.Srzmans, the seconder of the Address, read it to her MAJESTY, who returned a very gracious reply. —Her MAJESTY immediately set out for Branden burgh House, and in less than ten minutes after her departure, the immense multitude had dispersed. Our Readers will recollect, that the House of Lords, agreeing, on Saturday, that the Counsel for her MAJESTY should be allowed to elicit from witnesses their places of residence, occupation, &c. in order to enable them to make inquiries, and to reserve Mk main cross-examination for a future period—and that some of their Lordships began to think they had con cede 4 too much ! Such a concession, however, goes a very short way towards relieving her MAJESTY from the hardship she suffers from the refusal of a list of witnesses in the outset. It may, indeed, enable the Counsel to cross-question more effectually than they could do without any previous inquiry ; but in the interval be tween the examination in chief and the cross-ques tioning, the evidence against the QUEEN is allowed to operate to her prejudice in the public mind. Her )MAJESTY, therefore, has but a choice of evils. The debate was resumed yesterday, and Coun el were called in a little past one o'clock ; The eloquent speeches of Messrs. BROUGHAM and DENSIAN, on this point, cannot fail to be read with the deepest interest, and to carry conviction to every unprejudiced mind. The Lords continue the discussion this day. From the indelicate nature of this investigation, the Conductor of a Journal is frequently obliged, for the sake of the morals of the country, to suppress many details. In doing so, he is aware that he is often injuring the cause of her MAJESTY; because, what is thus suppressed, may be supposed to bear unfavourably against the QUEEN, while it in fact does not. The Prints which calumniate the QUEEN were not slow to perceive the advantages which might be derived from the nature of the evidence. Every now and then they suppress part of it, and then pro ceed to describe what is so suppressed in a manner highly injurious to her MAJESTY'S character. They' avail themselves often of this pri v ilege of suppressioriat times when the evidence is perfectly harmless, in order to have an opportunity of attacking her MAJESTY. HOUSE OF LORDS. ELEVENTH DAY'S PROCEEDINGS. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat at within ten minutes to ten. Prayers having been read by the Bishop of WIN CHESTER, the names were read over, and the follow ing Peers were excused on account of ill health, and for other causes, viz. Lord ENNISKILLEN, Lord AYLESBURY, Marquis Of BUCKINGHAM, and Lord RIVERS.—At a quarter past ten, Lord LIVERPOOL rose and stated, that at the same time that he had agreed in the motion for hearing her Majesty's Counsel upon the subject of cross-examination of witnesses, he had not pledged himself to adopt the course suggested by them upon this very important subject—( Hear).—Upon the most mature consideration of the subject, he had formed an opinion that the course advised by those in whose views he generally concurred, was that which would be of most substantial benefit to the cause of the Queen, as well as attended with less in conveniencies to the House, and less danger to esta blished authorities. Iler Majesty's Counsel bad thought differently, and, under the impression that a cross-examination at a future period would not answer the purposes of benefiting their Client ex cept an introductory examination as to particular points were permitted, they had applied to their Lordships for the indulgence. It was true, that in an earlier stage of those proceedings, her Ma jesty's Counsel had received an intimation that the course they now wished to see the House proceed in, should be adopted. A misunderstanding had certainly taken place upon this subject, but the Learned Counsel having concluded that a double cross-examination was to be substituted in the place of that course, which could not, consistently with the principles of the Constitution, be followed, it would, in his view, be a hardship to withdraw an advantage which, though not promised, was certainly expected. Under these circumstances, the House, he trusted, would not hesitate to continue to the Counsel the op tion, either to cross-examine in full at the present moment, or to proceed in the usual course, by a pre sent cross-examination upon particular points, and a reservation for the subsequent proceedings. He could not, he confessed, see much difference between the course suggested by the Queen's Counsel, and what must necessarily arise in the event of a special case arising in the process of the investigation. The Noble Lord concluded, amidst loud cries of " Hear, hear!" by moving that Counsel should be called in, and in formed that they were at liberty to proceed in the usual manner with the cross-examination. This mo tion he meant to take place of the motion of yester day, which had not yet been decided upon, and which he purposed to withdraw. Lord LAUDERDALE rose and said, he would not consent to the proposal to withdraw the former motion. Lord GREY wished to know upon what ground his Noble Friend (Lord Lauderdale) wished to resist the proposition of the Noble Lord (Liverpool) ? Lord LIVERPOOL said, that as the Noble Lord objected to the course he had proposed to adopt, he should move what would appear perhaps less excep tionable. He should submit the Motion, as an Amend• ' ment to that of yesterday, which was— .. That the Counsel should be called in, and that they should be informed of the rule proposed by their Lordships to regulate the future cross-examination of witnesses, in lieu of that laid down on Saturday; namely, that such cross-exansination should, as usual, be gone into immediately after the examination in chief , with a full claim, however, to apply for the permission of the House to have any witness called back again for cross-examina tion, if any new facts or circumstances respecting such witnesses should come to their knowledge." Lord LAUDERDALE said, he had thought it sore to the convenience of the House that he should postpone his reasons for objecting to the proposition to withdraw his motion ; but, as he had been called upon, he felt it to be his duty to state those objections. Lord ERSKINE was happy to see Ministers come forward to amend their own ill-judged speculations —(A laugh).—He, at the same time, thought it most extraordinary to see the President of the Coun cil correcting the errors of the First Lord of the Treasury !---(A laugh, and cries of Hear, hear). Lord HARROWBY had arisen at this moment to propose the Amendment, an expression of surprise having been uttered at the idea of a Minister having risen to move an amendment to his own proposition. Loid HARROWBY then moved the Amendment. Lord LAUDERDALE said it was incumbent upon the Noble Mover of the Amendment to explain the nature and bearing of his amendment. Diffi culties presented themselves which the amendment was rather calculated, in his opinion, to increase than to diminish, and before the House adopted any new course. they ought to be fully informed Qi benefits likely to arise from it. The Earl of LIVERPOOL rose to complain of the tone and temper of. the speech made by the Noble Earl who had just sat down, not as directed against himself individually, but to the House generally.— So far from disregarding the arguments of Counsel, which the Noble Lord seemed to think derogatory to the dignity of the llouse, he contended that it was the conscientious duty of their Lordships to attend to the arguments of Counsel, to hold themselves opc to conviction, and not pertinaciously to adhere to previous opinions, when the relinquishment of them was essential to the ends of justice. In the suggestic a he made on Saturday, he did not wish to bind the Noble Lord, nor did he conceive himself bound by them ; but that when the Counsel on both sidts had been heard, then their Lordships should decide, He had never urged that the mode of proceeding offered yesterday to the Counsel for the Queen, and that which he now thought it right to concede, were the same, but he thought that her Majesty would derive the same advantages from either. What was offered yesterday went further than is allowed in the Courts of Law ; but the ground on which he now acceded to the wish of the Counsel was, that the in dulgence having already been granted, perhaps im properly, it ought not now to be withheld, and that expectations had been held out, perhaps improperly also, yet they ought not now to be disappointed. 11-e Noble Lord concluded by declaring that he felt, ard would continue to feel during the whole of these pro ceedings, that their Lordships ought to listen to Counsel, and whatever pre-conceived opinions they might have formed, that they should never hesita ,, to yield those opinions when it is shewn that th , f ought no longer to be entertained. The Earl of LAUDERDALE explained. lie sa:d he was as much open to the arguments of Counse!, and as anxious to obtain justice, as any man. Ile did not differ from the Noble Lord (Liverpool) for changing his opinion ; but that he had abandont.,l the very arguments he had formerly adopted. Lord ERSKINE wished the amended Motion to be read, as it appeared to be misunderstood by some of their Lordships. TheLORD CHANCELLOR read the amendment. Lord ERSKINE resumed.—lf, when the Counsel were called in, and they declared themselves satisfied with the mode of proceedings now to be offered to them, he would be silent for ever ; but if they said that they were not satisfied, then he (Lord Erskine'„ would move an adjournment of the House. lle wished that Counsel should be called in, and it should be ascertained from them what they required of their Lordships. The House did not seem to be fully aware of what the Counsel asked. They asked that evidence should not go forth to poison the public mind without the best antidote they could give at the same time—that they should proceed as far in the crow-examination as they were enabled by their limited knowledge of the witnes', and that the bane and antido:e should go together. GOD forbid that this House should refuse a request so just and so moderate. The Noble Lord wished distinctly to know if their Lordships meant that the Counsel for the Queen should, after the adjournment, call the witnesses again and crass-examine them. The Earl of LIVERPOOL had no objection that the Counsel for the defence should cross-examine witnesses as far as they could, and that they should possess the right of calling them again for a second, or a renewed cross-examination ; but on this condi tion, that his Majesty's Attorney and Solicitor-Gene ral should not be called on to close their case until the cross-examination was concluded. Lord ERSKINE was glad that their Lordships were now doing like Gil Blas—going back, when they could do no better Lord REDESDALE said a few words, which we understood to be in favour of the motion of yester day, for Counsel not to possess the privilege of a se cond cross-examination, unless on special case stated, and with leave of the House. The Earl of DONOUG HMORE felthimself bound to state, that the option given to the Counsel for the Queen was, to take the whole cross-examination at the time, or defer the whole to their defence. There were now three questions before the House—l st, The examination of the Lords-2d, The postponement of the Cross-examination—and 3d, The time of sun'• ming up. He would take the last first, as it scarcely required a word, since it was impossible to close the case until the evidence was finished on both side!. As to the examination by their Lordships, from which much good had already arisen, he contended there was nothing in the nature of these proceedings, no thing in law, to prevent it. Their Lordships were the Judges in this case; and was it ever known that a Judge had not a right to ask a question of a wit ness at any period of the case? He wished the House to come to a clear understanding, that their Lord shirr should ask any questions of a witness, after the Counsel for the Queen had cross-examined as much as they wished at the time. He understood, alsr, that Counsel were to have the same privilege which was given to them in the beginning, in lieu of the list of witnesses, 'which had been refused. Lord ELLENBOROUGH was of opinion, that if the course proposed was pursued—if the Counsel fcr her Majesty had it in their option to proceed or not with their cross-examination of witnesses--they would