Star. — London, England, 1820-09-08 00:00:00

he hoped he would not be understood as prejudging on the one side or the other. A more unseasonable proposition than that suggested by the Noble Lord t , who first spoke on the other side, he had never heard. No answer that the Noble Earl (Liverpool) could have given could have had the effect of warranting such a proposition—( Hear, hear ! ).--It seemed to him to be a proposition to restrain the Counsel at the Bar within certain limits in their'defence. The clause alluded to in the Bill could be considered only when the whole case was closed, and the Bill came under consideration in a Committee. Now, it was impos sible that any alteration whatever could be produced or made. The defence was, therefore, to be directed against the whole of the Bill, as it stood at present. It was not only a Bill of Pains and Penalties, but a Bill of Divorce. That was the state of the Bill now before their Lordships ; and to that extent it was the .dutf of the Counsel to direct the evidence for the de fence. He agreed with the explanation of the Noble Lord (Liverpool); for it was only the same state ment, somewhat more at length, as on the former occasion referred to ; and he (Earl Grey) had at the same time acquitted him of any such object as that alluded to. Ile was very glad to hear from the No ble Earl now what he had been persuaded of at first, that personal relief was not the object of the high and Illustrious Individual. This was a statement which he received with perfect confidence and satisfaction. Ultimately, without giving any opinion of the result of this proceeding, if the proceeding concluded so ai that her Majesty should incur pains and penalties, degradation from her high and illustri.ms situation, he thought, must , be the necessary consequence. It she should be degraded from the rank, character, and situation of Queen Consort, she ought not to re main the wife of the Sovereign. Not because it would be a personal relief to divorce, but because it was ab- , turd in terms, that one degraded from the rank of Queen should be the consort of the King. A Bill degrading the Queen, who was to remain the wife of the King, must be considered a Bill degrading the' King also—(Hear, hear ! ).—This was not the time for discussi n this subject ; but if such a proposition should hereafter be made, he should state his objec tions to it. At present such a question could not be introduced for any useful purpose; it could lead to no practical conclusion ; it could have no effect what ever on the character of the Bill, but on the course to be pursued by Counsel Lor the defence. He, there fore, must regret that the subject had been intro -timed on the present occasion. Any statements by the Noble Lord (Liverpool) could be viewed but as the declarations of an individual only. The Bill bore its own character on the face of it. Upon that Bill, 'as it now stood, their opinions and observations were to be given on the second reading. The clause al luded to could be considered only in the Committee. They were not to decide on the fate of the Bill as it now stood, without hearing the whole case, and without discussion, examination, and inquiry (Hear). Lord LONSDA LE in explanation stated, that he certainly had no intention of limiting the defence of the Queer, and he concne red with the Noble Earl in thinking that any declaration of the Noble 'Earl's could not effect that object, but he had required no such .deciaration. Earl GREY explained. He had understood his Lordship's object to have been, that Counsel should be instructed not to make any defence against the clause of Divorce. The. Earl of LIVERPOOL said, he had put no such construction on the Noble Lord's meaning. He had only conceived the Noble Lord to have put a question to him before the Counsel shoad be called on to state the course they proposed to pursue. Earl GREY begged the Noble Lord's pardon, for he had misunderstood his object. The Earl of DONOUGHMORE always differed with great regret from his Noble Ft lend, whosoheart and abilities were equally eminent. His Noble Friend's wish always was to do his duty, and he was compe tent to discharge it from the integrity of his heart and the wisdom of his understanding. On this oc casion he had great satisfaction in agreeing with his Noble Friend. He had not risen, however, merely to express his own satisfaction, but his astonishment, at the opposition he could not call it, but the sugges tion of the Noble Lord on the other side. He meant no disrespect; he believed the Noble Lord had con sulted with none upon the subject; but this was a most momentous consideration, and he would ex press freely what he thought in every stage of it. The question now was the proof of the preamble to the Bill : that was, had the Illustrious Person done what was deserving of a Bill of Pains and Penalties, be their amount great or small? Whether the whole or a part of die Bill should be passed was not the question at present. They had only one half of the evidence before them. If the Illustrious Person should not remain Queen—(they had been told a great deal of the public feeling)—what would be the public feeling, if one degraded from the rank of Queen should remain the King's wife. He desired, as a Juror, to be enabled to form his opinion on the whole of the issue. The LORD CHANCELLOR (to Mr. Brougham). —I understand it to be the wish of the House to ask you how you propose to proceed whether you pro pose to proceed to state the defence now, or to take the delay agreed to be allowed ? Mr. Baovottast.—Amid the new and accumu lating difficalties which, every step we proceed, are arising around us—even now we are met witl y s a new Bill—(Order, order). The LORD CHANCELLOR.—When Counsel ate ordered to withdraw, they are understood to be precluded from making any observations on what takes place in the House. If the Counsel act other wise, the order for withdraw ing must be enforced, and you will understand now that it is the pleasure of the House that you make no observation Qll what has been said by any of the Lords. You are asked a question, and you are to confine yourself to the an swering of that question. Mr. Uttetrotimt.—l cannot say " Yea" or " Nay" to that question. I tell what I ask. I speak not of justice, but what I trust your Lordships will in corn- passion concede— The LORD CHANCELLOR.—Mr. Brougham, this House does nothing in compassion. That is a mode of address whicli you ought not to use, Mr. BROUGIIAM.—Then I make no appeal to the compassion of your Lordships. I thought that an appeal to your mercy wads the wore respectful mode, of presenting to you the request I had to make, and therefore I used that mode of address. But now. I stand on my own right. After the great mass of evi dence which has been produced, I throw myself en the justice of your Lordships. I, not having had weeks and months beforehand to make myself ac quainted with the details, as the Counsel on the other side have had, cannot be expected all at once - to be prepared with an answer to the case on the other 'side ; I therefore ask till to-morrow to answer your Lordships' question; and if your Lordships would meet at twelve instead of ten, that would give two hours of time for consideration. The LORD CHANCELLOR.—Does the Learned Counsel mean to open his case to-morrow at twelve, or to give an answer then whether he would ask de lay or not ? Mr. BROUGHAM said, the Counsel for the defence very often changed their plans according to the aspect which the case against them assumed. He appealed to every Judge who had ever presided at Mai Prins (he observed that the Learned Lords were not now present), whether it was not usual to ask a Counsel whether he intended to call witnesses, or to trust to the effect he might produce on the minds of the Jury by observations on the evidence produced by the other party ? The Counsel could reply, " I am not able to- answer the question till I shall be enabled to view and consider the case on the other side." The Counsel fee the defence always feels it of importance to answer, futon pritoton, the castanade against him : and if he was not able to do so, he made up his mind, and called evidence. He (Mr. Brougham) should be wanting in candour, he should be wanting in the candour and fairness which he owed their Lordships, if he did not state his presenti ment, and what he foresaw. He had not received— he did not say the comniands of her Majesty—but lie would disclose that he had not received the per mission of her Majesty to ask for any delay at all.— Standing in the peculiar situation in which her Ma jesty now stood, having so horrible a prospect before her, and finding it attempted to prove charges of such a character by evidence of such a description as this, she must feel extremely unwilling to let the case re main so, with all the weight of the opening, and all the elucidation of his Learned Friend• who had last addressed them. In justice only, if not in compassion, their Lordships must see that it was impossible to forego the right of defence in such circumstances for two or three months. There was only one other alternative. If, indeed, his mouth were to be stop ped—if he were not allowed to exercise what he con sidered a right, by replying to the case on the other side—he must be content, and reserve himself for that oppor unfit) , of ex planation that would be afforded elsewhere, and to which he need not now further allude. Ile had been taken by surprise, in some re spect, in being thus called upon to make his election. When he had preferred to-day to proceed instanter with the cross-examinations, his most powerful mo tive had been that he should thereby enable the Soli citor-General to sum up his case, and so far prevent the necessity, which might be absolutely fatal, of allowing two or three months to elapse before the defence was begun. If he had entertained a notion that it was intended in any quarter to interfere with his explanation, he should have thought twice before he came to a determination under that delusion. The LORD CHANCELLOR hoped that he had not been guilty of the injustice, as well as presump tuousness, of giving from the chair any hint of what might be the decision of the House. He meant sim ply to ask what the Couisel for the Queen proposed? and, when that was known, it would remain for their Lordships to determine. He did not mean to call upon the Counsel at this moment to make their elec tion, unless they preferred it : they might defer their answer till to-morrow morning. Mr. BROUGHAM begged to be allowed to state that he had a most anxious duty to discharge. Ail that he and his friends had hitherto done was mere trifling, mere nibbling at the corners of the case, compared with what he had yet to go through. " Suppose," he continued, " it should be your Lordships' pleasure, at twelve to-morrow, that I should proceed—gracious Gon !am Ito go on at a moment's warning Am I, in a case like this, not to have a single hour for reflection and consultation ? To-morrow, at twelve, _ I am to be called in to say how we wish to proceed ; and is it too much that I should then ask you for a delay until Saturday, to make some sort of prepara tion ? Is it not, then, better for your Lordships to take my present answer, and to declare whether, to morrow, you will, or will not, hear me ? If your Lordships say that you will, then tc-morrow, at twelve, I shall be ready to open my case ; but you will readily perceive that there is a grc-1 distinction' between a state of certainty and of uncertainty—be tween knowing that I am to proceed, and a doubt whether lam merely to answer a question, upon which I am now prepared. I should wish to know whether, to-morrow, I am or I am not to go on with my statement ? In a common case, ignorance upon this point would be embarrassing and disagreeable, but in this instance it amounts to absolute injustice." The LORD CHANCELLOR remarked, that the question so stated had many bearings, and was of in finite importance, and could not be properly discussed in the time yet remaining for the business of the day ; it must be postponed until to-morrow. It was not to be understood that Counsel would be obliged to pro ceed to-morrow, at twelve; for, if further delay was necesiary, GOD forbid it should not be granted! The Earl of DONOUGHMORE wondered the' Learned Counsel could feel any difficulty—sure he was, that none was thrown in his way by the ques tion from the Chair—(Hear!). —.He did not ap prove of its being left to the discretion of the Coun sel, whether he would go on with the case. Lord ERSKINE thought it the best_ course that Counsel should attend to-morrow morning, when the question of to-day might be repeated to them. He was sure that they might rely with confidence on the House, aud that no such disgusting injustice would be dune as to compel them to proceed without alb due preparation—(Hear, hear). —They had most anxious and onerous duties cast upon them, and every indulgence ought to be extended to them. Mr. BROUGHAM entreated the House not to adjourn for one day unnecessarily, as, if it was now decided that he should proceed, he could be just as well pre pared to-morrow as on Saturday, He could not, however, be prepared to-morrow, unless theit Lord ships at once decided now that he was to be heard. Some fir they conversation toot place, the result of which was, an understanding that Mr. BII9I . IOHAM would-be first called upon to state the course which he was desirous of,pursuins, and that then the House would take into consideration the propriety of agree log or not to that proposed course of proceeding. Adjourned till to-morrow (this) morning, the Lords to be called over at half-past eleven o'clock. THE EVENING STAR. LONDON. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1820. PRICK Of STOCKS TIIIS DAY AT owl o'cLocc 8 3 per Cent. Redticed ahnt—S per Cent. Cons. 671 Se per Cent. 77-4 per Cent. shut-5 per Cent. Navy - 1033 * Imperial I per Cent. 67*—India Bonds pie. Rack. Bills is. Si. ls. pre.—Ouminnt 13 pre. Consols for Aect. 683. THE QUEEN. The case against the Qualm was closed yesterday, and, as our Readers will see from our Parliamentary Report, her MAJESTY'S Counsel are this day to be called upon to inform the House what course they now propose to pursue. What the House wish particularly to extract from the Learned Counsel is, whether, should they com mence the defence of her MAJESTY to day, they intend to go through with it at once, or only to pro ceed with it in part, and then crave a delay of some weeks or months, to procure further evidence.— Now why is it that they wish to extract this infor mation? Is any such thing usual in ordinary cases? Or has such a thing ever been heard of in any case? Where shall we find a precedent for a Judge asking a defendant, when on the point of entering upon his defence—" Do you think, defendant, you will get through with your defence? Do you expect that you will have any occasion to ask us for delay? Are you sure all the witnesses you have subpoenaed will be in waiting to answer your call? Because, if you think you will not get through with your defence, you had better not begin it; if you expect to have hereafter occasion to ask for delay, you had better ask for it before you want it ; if you are not sure all your witnesses are in readiness, you bad better wait till you have got them all under lock and key, in same high walled garden, or other sure place of cus tody!" We say, unhesitatingly, that such language from aJudge to a defendant was never heard within the walls of a British Court of Justice, and should it ever chance to be heard, would either be scouted as the blundering officiousness of one who ought never to have been raised to the justice seat, or the drivelling garrulity of one who had survived the faculties which do it honour. The obvious answer of a defendant to any such questions would -be—" These, my Lord, are my mat ters—if I cannot go through with my defence, the harm is mine: when I want delay, it will be then time enough to talk about it: if I cannot produce all my witnesses, I shall doubtless be able to chew your Lordship good reasons for it, and either obtain a delay, or lose my cause. But all these are things with which your Lordship has nothing to do at pre sent. lam ready to go on with my defence, and it is your Lordship's duty to be ready to hear me." Such, we say, would be the answer in any ordi nary case to questions so irregular and extraordi nary : and why, we ask, ought it not to be the an swer of her MAJESTY'S Counsel to the question which is this day to be put to them by the House -Much has been said on all sides, of the great pro priety of assimilating, as far as possible, the pro ceedings of the House of Peers in this case, to the ordinary proceedings in the Courts of Law ; and why not observe that analogy in a case so ob viously admitting it as the present? The truth is, that the. House know and feel that they have, by their own acts of refusal, placed the Illustrious Defendant in this case in a situation to which no other defend ant was ever subjected ; they are conscicus that they have thrown such obstacles in her path, that she cannot get through with her defence without some delay being interjected; they know that they have made it next to impossible that she should have all her witnesses in readiness ; and therefore it is that they want her to ask for a long delay, to make up for the unprecedented inconveniences and difficulties to which they have subjected her; leaving her character, in the meanwhile, to suf- fer all the injury which the load of calumny heaped upon it by the case for the prosecution can and must inevitably do to it. But are the House entitled to act on that consciousness? Are they entitled to an ticipate what the defendant may, possibly, be com pelled to solicit, to demand from them ? We think not. We conceive her Man:sin% Counsel are en ' titled to put themselves on their right, and to decline sa)i.lg a word more than that they are ready to go on with their defence. When they feel it necessary to ask for any delay, in consequence of the refusal by their Lordships of a list of the witnesses and a speci fication of the times and places of the alleged acts of .criminality, it will be then time enough to talk • - about it, but not till then. FROM TIM TIMES. " At length the case against the QtrZEN is of neeesshy closed; for the Arroanar-Grantaax, asst being able to bring forward his rashly but auxiliary evidence by the time he had at first ex pected, declined pressing his requrst for [lards,: delay. This is :probably the most singular cause that aver was, or ever Will be, banded down to posterity : among the seeming witnesses of a Quxtv--of the Qualm of EsoLaina--there is not one that is not of the inwest meanest, most . purchaseal4e occur:Mon in human life--not oat whine character has borne the test of a cross-cr, nithadim, even from those slight materials which fprung up fr,, n , casual knowledge, or were supplied by the examination in third_ the names and designations of the witnesses being, u i n d e , 4 they well might be, studiously concealed, till the momm their production !—We, of course, except the two BritiA tains, whose evidence proved advantageous to her MA/ MT. " Wu 'ever suck a Bill of Divorce thought of? flow thv ! how unholy ! Other DIU of this kind are opened vt::4 evident as to the happiness of the parties before the sedrcu:s took place : their union in holy church is attested ; the vritce::,, of the marriage—the friends, the relatives, of the parrf ts __. c painfully brought forward to testify to these and sialiinr Tears are the usual ct•ncornitants of such evidence. There : sanctity even in the dissolution of a sacred tie; but this ur.',.r, noblest in its motives--unblest in ha celebration —i n its et:: i. nuance--unblest in its fruits—la now, when tie parties are fa.: approaching to she term af life, frigidly presented to the n; then to be rent asunder, without ling of those preliminarie s whirl_ ~f necessity precede the Sisal separation of those whom it is Lr. bidden to man rsi separate. Bat the divorce, it appears, via not now be attempted. Lord Lorrnists. an adherent of Miters, himself proposed the removal of that clause from tt, Bill, and Lord laves oat pertly aequiesced, disputing only to the state in which the ehange was to be made. We wei.ld not recal contemplated injuries or menaced injustices againn tar Queen by shelving drat it is more difficult to retire than to pro. teed; but does not every one see that, if a husband mimic obtain a divorce against his wife, a Bill of rain:; and Penaltir•, even if justly carried. can have no other effect than to prt.i., that the parties are en a level ? and is it for such a cause .11 this that the tranquillity of England is to be shaken to its faundation Sorely, if there Is anywhere a husband who seeks in vain fora divorce against a wife whom he charges with profligacy, is for his credit, as well arthe wife's, that the cause of fah:' !. should rather be found in her purity thaw in Lu unworthier. To fail of a divorce, because the wife is innocent, is no great disgrace; but to be declared . unworthy of separation trim A woman. who, as a wife, is debased and tainted by Set of serene, is such a state of ignoinihy as cannot easily be descriho.:. We are sure, therefore, the divorce being given up, that tic KVIG must now wish that the Qtrastr may escape the rienaltic in order that the lustre of her virtue, thus tried, may be reflected upon him whom it is not thought proper to separate from hi In this view of the subject, therefore, the KiNG'S friends to be glad that the evidence for the prosecution has failed." FROM THE MORNLNO CHRONICLE. " Our readers will not fail to remark the important observe. tions on the subject of the Divorce part of the Bill, to wbird , A question of the Earl of Lonsnatn gave rise. The Earl of Ir- ViIIPOOL stated, if there was a strong feeling in that House, or or the country, from religious or other considerations, against the Divorce, he had no objection to abandon that part of the mea sure; and he assured the House, that personal relief did not en ter into the wishes of his Mammy. We observed, some days ago, that a majority of the thshops had determined against the Divorce, and that Ministers were satisfied they could not carry it; and the result has proved that our information was coma. This abandonment, be it remarked, is at the closing of their own case, and before a word of the Queen's has gone forth to the world ; and we leave our readers to draw their oa , a conclusions from this circumstance. The Divorce is a =tar of per feet indifference to Ministers ; they now treat it with tte utmost nenchafanee. But was it always thus? Does this indif ference proceed from a conviction that they have Failed in 'anklet out their case? or have they outraged the religious and mord feelings of the country, by demanding that for their Monarch which no private individual similarly circumstanced could have demanded, and which demand was, more than any other part of the proceedings, calculated to deprive that Monarch of the regard of his subjects, while all the time both themselves and their Royal Master set no value whatever on the Divorce?" HOUSE OF LORDS. TWENTIETH DAY'S PROCEEDINGS. The House met, pursuant to adjournment, at half past eleven o'clock ; after. Prayers were read, the roll was called over, and some Peers excused attendance. The Earl of DERBY presented a Petition from the Inhabi tants of Liverpool, complaining of the oppressive nature of the Poore Rates, and praying tbartheir Lordships would take the subject iqto their Co isidemtlon.—.Ordered to lie on the table. About three minutes Issfore twelve o'clock, Counsel were called in. The LORD CRANCELLOR.—Mr. Brougham, you are desired by the House to state whether yea are ready to com mence the defence now, and follow it by evidences, or only opcn it now and then ask a delay before you examine any witnesses. Mr. Buouonax rem, and ins very low tone of voice, which was scarcely audible, addressed their Lordships. We under stood him to say that he was prepared to commence the defence of her Majesty now, and should be feel it necessary to call evi dence, that he might be allowed to do so, or possess the option of calling witnesses u a future period. The Earl of LAUDERDALE moved that Counsel do with draw. This being done, the Noble Lord said he was sure that their Lordships would grant the Learned Counsel for the Queen every indulgence necessary for the ends of justice, at consistent with the dignity of the House; and, that if they required time for defence, it would readily be granted. Lord ERSKINE did not wish the Counsel for her Majesty to be fettered in the defences but that they should be allowed to commence now, without being called on to say whether tlu y intended to call witnesses and continue it to its conclusion or not. The Learned Counsel might make such an impression on the House, as to render it unnecessary to call any witnesses. In the ordinary Courts of Law—and the nearer the proceedings of their Lordships were assimilated to the Courts-of Law the bet ter—when a prosecution was commenced, the Counsel could either begin the cause, or, if be wished to delay it, he could dv so, by withdrawing the record, or specially moving the Court for that purpose; but when a cause was ogee begun, he must go through with it ; and the Counsel for the defence must also go oa with it, because be is supposed ro have barn fully prepared. Should, however, any circumstances afterwards transpire which are important and of which he could not have the Le nefit at the time, he has still a remedy in a new trill, which.. on a statement of the circumstances, is not refused. I C4 such remedy, however, was left to a defendant bettor. their Lordships, who could not graht any new triaL Tbe preamble of the Bill he considered like an indictment in common law; and if their Lordships bad given the same advantages as are given in cases of indictment, a list of the . witnesses, and the times and places where the crime was alleged to have been committed, they would not have ed themselves in the predicament In which they now stood. o individual ever came to a Bar situated as her Majesty; she Ignorant of the charges against her; and could not even pre pare fur her defence until the case for the prosecution was closed. Her Counsel could not cross-examine the witnesses, because they had never known even their names until placed at the Bar of their Lordships. What were now the conse quences ; the evidence that had been adduced was not "ll'