Star. — London, England, 1820-09-07 00:00:00

\ .. ~ THE EVRNING STAR. , • ‘: 't011)0N. . THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 1820. rum' 01 STOCKS THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK : 3 per Cent. Reduced shut-3 per Cent. Cons. 671 1 4 per Cent. shut-5 per Cent. Navy 1031 1 Such. Rigs ss. Is. 2s. pre.—Consols for Acct. 681 68. A letter of Prince METTERNICH, given in our fourth page, and alleged to be circular to all the German Princes, will be read with much interest. It is, in one word, Ike universal panacea, recommended for the cure of the " blue devils"—a malady with which many statesmen are grievously afflicted at the present moment ; and supposed to be both epidemic and con tagious in its nature ! THE QUEEN. A great number of persons assembled yesterday, as usual, in St. James's-square, i❑ expectation of seeing the QUEEN, but they were doomed to disap pointment. Mr. Alderman WOOD arrived in the early part of the day, and announced to the constables, by whom it was communicated to the people, that her AJ ESTY would not, in all probability, be in town before Saturday next. The Proceedings in the House of Lords yesterday,' commenced by Lord KENYON moving for Copies of the Correspondence between Ministers and her MA JEsTY's Legal Advisers; and for an Account of all Sums of Money advanced to her MAJESTY since June last. To this Lott' KING proposed to add, a motion for an account of all the expenses that Go vernment had been at during the whole of the pro ceedings against the QUEEN. To this, however, Lord LlvEnroot. objected, on the ground of public incon venience ; and the motion was carried on a division of 133 to 73. The LORD Citatiocu.oa then pro posed a question to the Judges, with regard to the objection taken by the QUEEN'S Counsel the pre ceding day, to the re-examination of the witness, Sacchi, as to such parts of a certain conversation between him and M. MArtimt, which had not been alluded to in the cioss•examination. The Judges, with the exception of Mr. Justice BEST, determined in favour of the objection, on the ground of the prac tice in the Courts of Law. After the examination of Sacchi, the ATTORNEY GENERAL for the KING applied for time to bring for ward against her MAJESTY a fresh importation of Italian witnesses. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL had rea son to suppose that they be expected here in the course of a few days, during which few days the Learned Gentleman solicited the adjournment of the I louse. This is an odd mode, where everything else also is odd, of carrying on law—of patching up evi &nee piecemeal. If the House of Lords refuses to grant 'this delay in the midst of the prosecution, as is most likely to be the case, then proceedings are closed on what may be called the part of the KING; ' and of the effect they have had on the public mind, a fair criterion may be formed from the daily in creasing numbers and the respectability of the Ad dresses presented to her MAJESTY. The history of the world presents no precedent of a nation flying so unanimously, so zealously, to the feet of the Sove; reign, tp tender the sentiments of love and veneration. Mr. BROUGHAM complained yesterday to the louse of Lords, of an incorrect report which had appeared in a Morning Paper of the preceding day, of that part of Sacchi's evidence which related to the witness's conversation with M. Manirm. The report directly charged Mr. BROUGHAM, his brother, and M. MARIETTI, with having tampered with the witness; and it was to relieve himself, his brother, and the other Gentleman, from so severe an imputa tion, that Mr. BROUGHAM complained yf the circum stance to the House.- At the Learned Gentleman's especial desire the wit ness Sacchi was re-examined upon this point, and his explanation fully exculpated the three Gentlemen from the charge. M. MA RIETTI, jun. was acquainted with Sacchi, and knowing that he was to be brought forward as a witness against the QUEEN, he hoped, without committing himself or the witness, to ob tain through his means that advantage for the QUEEN which the House of Lords had unfortu nately refused, namely, a list of the witnesses and a specification of the charges against her MAJESTY. Sacchi declared his ignorance of both these points,' and to these was the communication between him and M. NI mu Evil strictly limited. This explanation dis appointed some persons who had locked with lively interest to Sacchis answer upon this point. In the course of the - conversation on this subject, Mr. BROUGHAM alluded to a letter received by M. MAaIETTI front his father, the Banker of Milan, in which he is infot meal, cn the authority of Cohntel Brown, that the sympathy he had displayed for the (bus bad rendered him obnoxicus to the British Government, and that it was intended to send him out of England under the provisions of the Alien Act, This intimation threw M. MAntraat into the ut most alarm, and in order to appease the agent of the English Government, he immediately writes the an "'sexed letter'of exhortation to his son, informing him at the same time, that his answer (if sufficiently sub- Missive) will be exhibited to the Colonel : Milan, August 21, 1320. ‘` DEAL Sow—The object of this my letter is only to iaforrr. you that it has been written to CWonel Brown, here, that you behaved yourself 111 relatively to the things which interest the Royal Court and the Princess of Wales; for which reason you are watched to such a degree, that it has been in agitation that a command, called the Alien Bill, should, be signified to you 'to leave the country, and especially' for the express reason—that you have sought to discover, from this Mr... Sacihjni f (Saccbi)i a, Milanpse, what he had deposed against tlselboves t ßisyal Pritkess. I intimated to the Colonel the improbability of ..ybufameddling in such things, as much on account of contrati'ittlinations, as •of your prudent and honourable mode of tlilniting., I,alsoima giried`ihat that must arise from some 'jealousy of your friend . ship with Vassali ; and as I cannot doubt, in the least, that a you should have departed a moment from your wise system, I ad viae you 'to conduct yourself in such a manner, with respect to these Royal diflerences, that no one may have it in his power even to inrgine anything reproachable on your part, whilst, you have not lost sight of the Milanese proverb—' He who serves at Court dies on straw.' Endeavour, rather, that we may be paid what the above Egyal Princessowes us for ber, commission of Turkish articles —paid for by us and not reimbursed to us. I wait your an swer, on that subject, such as'may be exhibited to the above named4.6lOnel, ate. atc. " Your Affectionate Father." Our Readers . will.. remember the horror which Ministers lately •exprtisecton• proposing the renewal of the Alien Bill, ai the bare supposition of the pos sibility of Its being used as a means of injuring the cause of the QUEEN ! It turns out, however, that the 'suspicions expressed on this subject were but too well founded. If the threats of Colonel Brown could fill a man in Mr. MARIETTI'S situation in life with so much alarm, we may easily conceive how much more operative similar threats may have been on persons in inferior situations. We must always bear in mind, that that sort of sturdy inde pendence which is often to be met with in this country, has no existence in despotic countries; and that a very slight hint from a powerful quarter will gene rally be found sufficient to convey alarm to the ap prehensive mind of an Italian. One . word more on the unprecedented demand of the ATTORNEY-GENERAL to be allowed more time to bring forward new witnesses.—lt is impossible to see on what grounds it can be complied with. He had his option to go on with the trial on the 17th of August, with the evidence he had, or to pray for such a delay as might enable him to bring forward other witnesses ; but having made his election, he is not at liberty, after exhausting his evidence, to pray for additional time to procure more. There would never be an end to trials if a prosecutor, whenever be found be had failed to establish his case, were, on one pretext or other ; to be allowed time for procuring fresh evidence. In this case, the ATTORNEY-GENE RAL may not have anticipated the disclosures made by some of the witnesses on their cross-examination ; and he may have given more importance to these witnesses than the result has proved them entitled to, and supposed any additional witnesses superfluous; but if he has made such a miscalculation, the conse quences of it ought not surely to be visited on her MAJESTY.— ‘Ve had written thus far when the first portion of the subjoined report of this day's proceedings reached us. It Will be seen that his _MAJEST Y'S ATTORNEY GENERAL has notified to the House of Peers, that it would require a much longer time to bring forward his new witnesses than he had anticipated yesterday, and that therefore:this me a sure will not be insisted on. HOUSE OF LORDS. NINETEENTH DAYS PROCEEDINGS. At ten o'clock Prayers were read, and the roll having been called over, Counsel were called in. WITHDRAWING or m APPLICATION von. DELAY. The ATTOUNEY-GENERAL rose and said, that he thought it tight and proper to state to their Lord ships that, within the last half hour, he had received dispatches from Milan; from which it appeared that a much longer time than he anticipated yesterday must necessarily elapse before the witnesses he then alluded to could be brought over. He felt it incum• bent upon him to state this fact to their Lordships ; and, under these circumstances, to withdraw the application he had made for delay. The LORD CHANCELLOR., before - the order for considering that application was discharged, thought it but right to observe, that, after the detail which the Attorney-General had given in his opening of the case, and in the state of information on the subject in which the Learned Counsel was yesterday, he would not, in his (the Lord - Chancellor's) opinion, have done his duty to the House, had he not sub mitted the application to their Lordships which he made yesterday—(llear, hear). Mr. BROUGHAM presumed he might now under stand that the Attorney-General had closed his case: that is to say, that they were now in that situation that the case for the prosecution was to be consi dered as closed, unless circumstances might arise out of the renewed cross-examination to induce the At tot ney-General to .all other witnesses. Assuming this to be the state of the case, he would now call back Theodore illajocchi, and ask him one or tw., questions. Mesjocchi was sent for. In the interval some conversation took place re- specting some corrections of the Minutes of EviJence. The corrections were immaterial, and the Gel k of the House, Mr. COWPER, was complimented in very handsome terms by their Lordships, as well as by the Queen's Counsel, on the accuracy with which he had kept the Minutes. • Cna-=amination of ihjoccki. Theodore Alojocchi now made his re-appearance at the Bar, and was examined by Mr. Baondnam. Do you kn." one Jones Color Gavazzi?—l sever heard deb amps othijas Casir Do you know a person of the name of Pavan' 7--I Live heard this name of Gavazzi ; there is one of that name, a jewel ler, at Milan. I never was in his shop, but I have seen him, and he is a fat man. A Pima here wished to ask the Interpreter, whether some words had not fallen from the witness which he had om itted to • • interpret ? It struck his Lordship that the witness had said, ,that he had heard of such a person by name, though he could not tell, of his own knowledge, that there was any such person. The Interpreter answered, that be could not both translate and listen at the same time; that the witness kept dropping words to him while he was giving his answers. ' The LORD CHANCELLOR—lnterpreter, did the witness say that he understood a person of the name of Gavazzi lived at Milan, but thatle did not himself know whether it was true or not.—(Uajocchi said a few words to the Interpreter). The Interpreter.—llere he says that he had heard of one Ga vazzi, by name, but whether or not there really is such a per son he cannot tell. Alc. BROUGHAM—The Gavazzi I speak of is a Gavazzi who lived in Greville-street, Hatton-garden, last February. Do you know any such person ? The witness here paused a moment, and after putting his hand to his head, in a recollecting attitude, exclaimed, with affected liveliness, " Ah, Queato mi ricordo !" This Gavazzi told me he was a relation of the Gavazzi of Milan, for when I came here to London, I met this young man, and he told me he was a re lation of the other Gavazzi at Milan. It is this Gavazzi, Sir, that I was asking you about, and not the Gavazzi of Milan, who you just told us was the only one you ever knew of ?—I only knew this young man the few days I was in Londan. Did not, Sir, you and this Gavazzi dine together, during last winter, for eight or ten days together?—:Jot for eight or ten days. I was not here ten days. But did not you once or twice, or oftener, dine with him ? What I remember is, that I dined twice with him, and we had some rice. Was not this a short time before the death of his late Majesty? —He was already dead. Was it not about that time ?—lt was after the death of the King. Immediately after ?—I think, as far as I can recollect, that I arrived here on the day that they told me the King was already buried. Did you not shew Gavazzi a letter which you told him you had received from some person here?—l sheaved him a letter which came from my wife. lam not speaking, Sir, about that letter at all. lam asking you as to another letter which you told Gavazzi you had re ceived from sonn.body here to carry abroad? Witness.—To Italy ? Interpreter.—No, abroad? Witness.—l remember sheaving him a dispatch I had re ceived to carry out-from England abroad. Was it noto dispatch you were to carry to Lord Stewart?— It was ! Did you not also shew Gavazzi a number of Napoleons, which you had received at the same time you got the letter?--Yes, Napoleons, which I had received for my journey. I counted them ever to him. Now, bow many Napoleons did you so count?—l believe there were 80. Will you swear there were not 150?--(After some hesita tion)--I cannot swear the number I received ; but I received 80. I c:aa swear I received 130 Napoleons in gold. Did you not tell Gavazzi that w'soever gave you this, gave you more than you asked to pay your expenses?—l did not say so ; because I had only told Gavazzi I had got money to make my journey. But will you swear that you did not tell Gavazzi that you got more money than you asked for ?—I cannot swear, for I asked nothing else than the expenses of my journey and voyage; and se can't say so. Then will you swear that you did not tell Gavazzi that what ever you asked for they gave you more than that ?—But I can not swear to have asked for more, nor can he swear that I asked for more; and, as I swore to this before, I cannot swear a hun dred times over and over—if laugh). Will you not swear that you said to Gavazzi that you got more than you asked ?—I never said so. Do you know one Joseph Visette ?—I do not know the name of Finite. Do you know one of the name of Visette ?—I do not recollect, I mean a person who lives near Liquorpond-street ?—That you may say, for I can't remember that I came here ill a sack and I went away in a trunk ; and I do not know the English language, and I cannot remember. You said you knew nothing of Gavazzi, but you recollected him well when I told you the street he lived in ?—I remember it, because I knew the name of Gavazzi, not of the garden. You must recollect Visette before I have done with you.— Do you remember an Italian man who dined in the same place where you and Gavazzi dined ?—There were many Italians who came and dined and ate rice. llid you not know the Italian who met you there and accom panied you frequently up and down London, to spew you the way and explain things to you ?—That's true, because he served nie as a guide. Now what was his name ?—I never asked him the name by which he went. Do you not know that he was a that he was a joiner or carpenter. Do you recollect going with him, the day or the day after the late King's funeral took place, to the west end of the town?-- Where to? ?—it was said To the west end of the town ?—He carried me about, and brought me here and there, and said this place was this, and that Place was that; but I do not knew whether this place was this and that place was that, and bow can I remember? Did not you go somewhere with him, I care not where, either on the day of the King's funeral, or the day after ?—I have been with him at several places on the day the people went to see the King. On that day, when he told you the people were going to see the King's funeral, do you not mean to say he told you on that day that people were going to see the King's funeral? A VELA immediately cried out, that the witness had not said that the people were going to see the King's funeral. Mr. BROUGHAM begged that such interruptions would not be made while he was employed in the cross-examination of a. wit ness. One of the Judges had, he said, made an objection with a load voice to his question. It was impossible for him to pur sue the course of cross-examination he commenced with, if such interruptions were persisted in. Lord EXMOUTH rose, with great warmth, and moved that Counsel should withdraw. Counsel were then ordered to withdraw. Lord EXMOUTH said, that the Queen's Attorney-General had Lxiird at him at the time that he complained of bring in terrupted. lie b a d to assure their Lordships that he was not the Noble Lord who bad made the objection. At the same time, be must declare, that be did not think it decent in a Coon bel at that Bar to stare Noble Lords in the face, and insinuate that they had done what. they bad not done.; Ile (Lord lEx . r mouth) was not there, upon his honour and his oath, to be lec tured by any Counsel whatever.--(lfear, hear). Thr Marquis of LA NSDOWN said, he had risen at the same time with the Noble Lord, to move that Counsel should with draw, with the view of ascertaining whether the witness had said, " the King," or " the King's funeral." Ile wished the question to be put to the witness again. Lord REDESD.ILE said, that several Peers had been jwe lost the word] by the remarks of Counsel. Counsel were then called. Cross-nomination rammed. ..Did you mean to say it was on that day the young man told you the people were going to see the King's funeral?—He told me the people all went to see the funeral twenty-one miles, bt whether that was true or not I do not know. Now did you go with that young man to any particular place? —I remember to have called in some street on some Gentleman I don't know, to carry a letter. His servant told me he was not at home ; for he was gone out to see the burial of the Ling. Was that a large house 2—l do not know whether it was large or small; I went to the door, and was answered that he was not at home, and I went away. ;• Did you go with the young man that day to any other house ? —Yes, because I lad another letter, and even there I could not find the master at home. Do you mean that you called at a place with a letter, and could not find the person at home?—Not on that day, on ano ther day, for on that day we went here and there. Well, on that day, or another day, did you go anywhere to look fur a person in a very large house ?—How am I to know whether the house was large or small? I went to the door, ail was told he was not at borne, and I went away. Did you, on another occasion, go into a house where there was a sentinel standing at the gate ?—Yes. Did you, on any of these occasions, when accompanied by your kviais-deplace, go into any house where there was a sol dier stationed at the door ?..-That was on the first day of my arrival in Englind, when I brought some letters, and I w..s told it was the house of the King. Did you go niore than once to this house ?—Tes, I went back wards and forwards. Do you remember going several times?--I do. Did you go into the house and leave your kquois.dc-place at the door 7--The first time, I left bim at the door. Did you not leave him other times when you went to the house ?—I did once. 1)0 you man to :ay at the other times the &quids-de-place went in with you ?—Whether he came M or not, I do not know. I left him at the door, and told him tv stay there, Did you find him there when you came out of the holm ? What I remember is, I found him waiting when I came out. On one of these occasions did you come nut of that house with a Getitlem2n whom you had found there?—Yes, I did. Did you go from thence with that Gentleman to his Chant. hers?—?Co, no. Pit! you go with that Gentleman anywhere ?—I went with that Gentleman nowhere ! Who was that Gentleman ?—What I remember, he was Mr, Did you not go to Mr. Pow•eli's chambers in Lincoln's bin? —With Mr. Powell I am not go. Did you not make promise to Mr. Powell to go to his chandlers at six o'cloci that evening?—l Did you not go according to you; appointment did. I understand you to say that you went several times to that large house with your laguais-de-place F—Yes, Do you remember on one of these occasions taking a note from Mr. Powell's to that house?—l do. Did you go into the house at that time, and leave your laquav t de place at the door ?—l,believe I left him out of doors, but car.- not say certainly. Was not this great house Carlton House ?—I do not know. I was told that it was the house of the King! Were there any pillars in front of the house?—There was a porter at the door. But did you not see pillars before the house?—l have seen some ancient Grecian columns, but I did not notice them. When you bad passed the outer gate, was there not a court ? Tbece was a courts Had you ever any conversation with Mr. Powell about your expenses, in presence of your lapais-deplace?—Questo fox vii riconiu! Did not Mr. Powell say to you, in the presence of the laquais-. de-gace, that money was no object, and that you might have more if you wanted ?—Xo, no. Will you swear that swear he. never said so. Will you swear that Mr. PoweU never said anything to the same purpose before your laquais-de-eace P—Mr. Powell never talked about this businebs. Perhaps Mr. Powell never talked to you about this business of the Queen ? The Arroawrr-Oasram. objected to the question. What passed between Mr. Powell and witness_could no be evidence. The LORD CHANCELLOR suggested that the question should be differently worded. Mr. Ilitorcitam.--Do you mean to represent you never bad any conversation with Mr. Powell CO the subject of the queen ? —lkw ? What do you mean ? I do not Understand what you say. _ _ 'lle Interpreter said he could never make the witness under stand anything about the couvenation. Has Mr. Powell never spoke to you on this subject ?~bir. Powell spoke to me on this . business at Milan, when I made my deposition, but not since.. . _ Dia you ever see this letter before ?—[Here Mr. Brougham shewed the witness a letter.)—l do not know ; I never knew how to read or write. Do you know a person of the name of Lotte—l am not ac quainted with any such name. Were you ever at the Globe Tavern?• at the tavera where you met Gavazzi and others at dinner?—Yes, but I do not know the name of the place. Do you know the name of the landlord of that house ?—lf I saw him I might know him. After your first examination in this House, have you ever seen Mr. Powell, or his clerk ?—Yes. Have you seen them frequently ?—Yes, I have seen him, 'Air. Powell; sometimes he comes to the place where we are. How long have you been with him at any of these times have seen him come to us, and 1 merely paid my respects to • him. I saw him the other day when he came for my certificate. Mr. Banectuot here introduced a person of the name of Jo seph James Long, and the witness was asked if he knew him? He answered that he did. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, if Mr. Long was to br a witness, it would be improper that he should remain in the house. Mr. Baounnsx said, that Mr. Long bLd but that moment come in, and had heard no more of the proceedings than the witness's answer as to the identity. Mr. Long left the House immediately. \Vas that person, Mr. Long, ever employed by you to write a letter to Mrs. Blackwell?He has written two letters for me, one to Mr. Hyatt, and another to Mrs. Blackwell. Ir A i. R