Star. — London, England, 1814-07-20 00:00:00

. vaned in-his behalf...when helho.bn4 the fhisleLned 'of the ere.% the House should recollect the person making the most solemn assev! : tons 1., the fete of on ve.ose u taunt the appeal was m ode, and whether • Goo and the coUntre, in it tie ' ..ri net hid a ;roper he had net hilien • from the eminence on which he .opportuttity of defending himself, and enure sting the Smits by his off , PM. lithe pillory might to he abo- House to go into a Committee, lie ee r toot, :te t t he' Wird,' let the Perliement of En g land abolish it ; but • felt still ,. t h at the House were net justifi ci i i refilling , not address the Crown to set aside the punishment in that Committee. As to the Noble teed ! e *tercet? favour of en iedividttal. occ leo. s to mit Hoese, *sides, Gentlemen should Knew him, and on many it !recollect that there was another House of Perlia had hen his fortune to J ffer fr en hint ; but he; mente and thti; 'lie lase of England cannot be al. thought that it was his beld a' d neat i feeling which , weed by the House et Commons alone. The Learned, led olten•made him stand ftirward there, though; Cee,teeisti then • proceeded to .comment on other ealten not very discteetly, :std he was of opinion th it ati evations made by Lent Cochrane relative to there was SW men in that House, however he might tee complaitit of his Lnicldtip that he could not 'differ from that No Lord in political opinion, who get a new trial, because all the defendants were not would not put his hand on his heart and say, that he in e.truri. go considered the answer of the Judge to hegretted that pelt of the sentence whidt formed the he Wise and legal, ehen he informed Lord Cochrane 'Object of the metion. *et he had stated no grounds to authorise the grant . The b 01.1 0 .1 OR GENERAL disclaimed all ing •4 the rule. It was a rule founded in leer and personality or prejudice towards Lord Cochrane, nor wisdom, any aberration from which would lead to had he any reason of any sort, private or otherwise, the most serious consequences; as every criminal to influence Lifts in the vote he should oive, beyond would thenceforward conceive he had nothing to do, iris duty as a Member of Parliament. But his duty when convicted, but to try the experiment of a new dictated to him to give his decided negative to the trial. On the whole,. he was of opinion that that oaten. The Noble Lord had beenitlPP 'sed to be House was not the proper jurisdiction, if he might so a victim to polltical pers. cutione hut never was any say, to execute judgment on the subject now before opinion hss founded. Nobody lamented more sin- it, and he would add, that he neither tholteht it wise, cerely than himself, that Uman of his Noble birth, right, car eveu cenvitutienal, for them to interfere in who hid perlbented such exploits in s profession which favour of the Noble Lord. But he was mire that destroys, even in ignoble minds, all sordid motives; whether the punishment were or were net Wiped, that a man, by the ctimmiseien of a crime so sordid any thing which he had deemed it his duty to sae en as this, shoeld have fallen from his high raok, and this occasion would not weigh as one feather with have made .himself the subject of an ignominious pu. those who could advise the Crown to remit it. The nisement, was much to be depleted ; • but he woteld Learned Gentleman concluded with repeating that not say that he was more an object for the interfe. all the arguments he had advanced, had no other ob. rence of that House than any of the other delin. jest than to convince the House, that there was no. quenis. There was no excuse or palliation on the thing in Lord Cochrane's case which ought to call part o: his Lordship for the commission of a fraud for their interference. He should therefore vote which, it true, corhbined meanness and infamy. The against the motion for the Address. comparison of the Noble Lerd, who had quoted a Mr. BARHAM disapproved of the speech of the suppesiteeus case of a soldier and his Captain, in re- Sorcitor•General, which he thought unnecessarily re probation of the sentence, was most extraordinary. vere. The tracing of De &tenger to Lord Coch- But why should not the superior officer be brought to rane's house, did not seem fully proved. It was not ignominious punishment, if he deserved it, as well as clear that Lord Cochrane saw De Berenger's dress, ere common soldier ? Only because the military law who might have been meted with his great. coat.— did not adMit of it. But in a case of fraud, tried by It was not sufficiently proved that Lord Cochrane saw the civil lam, would any man say that the punish- him in the dress described. He (Mr. Barham) had ment of the meanest private, or the officer of the felt an insurmountable desire to go and see Lord highest rank, ought to be different, or that while the Cochrane atter what had passed; and he could sets , lamer was punished, the latter should be allowed honestly that hebelieved in his innocence, when he went to temper with mercy ? The one would be blamed, to impart to his Lordship his opinion respecting his because his situation andrank ought tohave placed him case. When he told him that be wished to ask two or above the temptation of committing such a crime ; three questions, Lord Cochrane answered that nobody while the other might be instigated by povertyorother 'could oblige him more than by doing so. That was reasons, which would render him an object of pity.— his first and only acquaintanceship with Lord Coch- The opinions should rather operate the other way, or nine ; and the opinions he formed he should retain as at least, that if mercy be extended by the Crown, long as he lived. He concluded by moving an amend the Noble Lord has TIO greater right to it than any menu to omit the reasons for remitting part of the one of the individuals in the same situation as him- sentence, which, he thought, would give more means -self. The Noble Lord, in his Address to the liciuse, to Members, who had shades of difference in their had asserted, that a part of his evidence had been opinions, to give their votes to the address. seppresod. He was sorry to be called upon to state, Mr. WROTTESLEY having taken some part in that it was his duty, as an individual Member of Par- the matter previously, wished to explain himself. He Lament, and en Offic e of the Court, to declare, was not satisfied with what Lord Cochrane had said most solemnly, that he had endeavoured, as much as respecting the Judge having stated what was not in possible, to inform himself on the subject, by reading evidence; particulatly as it regarded De Berenger's attentively all that had transpired, both as evidence, appearance and dress. An attentive re-perusal of the and the comments of the Noble Judge who summed trial had confirmed his opinion of Lord Cochrane's it up ; and he would declare before Goo and die conduct. Up to the time oi De Berenger's quitting !House, that' if he had been on the Jury, he could the posechase at Dartford, every witness proved the not, in his conscience, have returned any other verdict chess.' The waterman did not swear to the star, but than that which was given, even if the Noble Lord the .hackney-coachmendWore to the red coat when De had been his brother. The evidence was in his mind Berenger went to his Lordship's house. Lord Code. most clear and convincing. -When he found De Be- rane rather exaggerated in hisremat ks on theevidence. renger traced into the house of Lord Cochrane, with The Honourable Member made various observations the coat of imposit:un on his back, going there at the on the evidence produced in Court ; and said that had chance of, and hazard of meeting his Lordship , no- he been upon the Jury, he coul d have done nothing thing should persuade him that Lord Cochrane had else than what the Jury had done ; namely, to give a not been povy to the purpose of his -- visit, and the verdict against Lord Cochrane. As to the present object it had to answer. If this had not been the motion, the case on which it was founded was not case lei's Lordship's house would have been the last such as to jestify the House in intending by way of place in the world to which he would have gone with an address. . that coat on his back. Besides, belied been correctly Lord A. HAMILTON thought it impossible not traced from Dover, and proved by a series of wit- to decide for innocence, where guilt was not corn messes to have been dressed in the very same dress in pletely preyed : he respected the opinions of those at which he goes to Lord Cochrane's. The most im- the same time who thought that the record of the portant fact therefore arose out of this circumstance. verdict was sufficient. But things were very strong He had been traced into the coach with this coat on on the other side. The point of Lord Cochrane's his back, and by mere accident his identity was indu. seeing De Berenger in his dress was not perfectly bitably proved ; for the coachman, in answer to the made out. 'He believed Lord Cochrane incapable inorrogatories, said, that although he could not re- of making such affidavits as he had made, falsely ; member the dress of every person who got into his and could net do him the injustice of even giving a coach, 'yet he remembered his, because his coat was silent vote. . red. For what but to escape detection would De Mr. M. A. TAYLOR.—A Court of Justice was Be, diger have put himself under the protection of the only place where innocence or guilt could, be de. Lord Cochrane, and endeavour to find a place of re- cided. It was painful to give a vote against one' . fitge in his ship ? And it was impossible for the who had performed great naval deeds; but that Noble Lord to have seen him in this situation with- House ought nut to stretch its power beyond consti 'out having been privy to the transaction. The Jury tutional limits. • When it did so, the consequences Lid been told these facts by the Noble Judge; but were always mischievous. If the verdict of a jury be lett them to consider whether from these facts they was not respected, into what a labyrinth would they could or could ion trace the connection. But there not plunge theinselves ? Mercy was seated in the were other gniunda why the Noble Lord (Cochrane) breast of the Crown ; and to that quarter the appli was not entitled to the protection of the House: be cation should be made. Grating as the idea of the bad attempted to mislead the House by misrepresen- pillory was, remission should be sought for where the sing the transaction ; for if the Noble Lord's state- constitution placed the power of remission. went were well foueded, a gang of conspirators must Mr. C. W. W YNNE asserted, that there was no have been presumed to exist to the Jury, and all who prerogative of the Crown with which the House appeared in evidence against him, whose solemn oaths might not interfere by way of advice. The only would be invalidated by a full credence in this state. questicn was as to the wisdom of the interference.— ment. It was therefore necessary, when talking of Lord flue interference ougia not to be trifling or frequent ; Cochrane's oath, to recollect that these persons were but the privilege ought not to be shorn away. (Hear, on their oaths also. When he SAW the names of men hear.) It was the duty of that House, on some oc. of the fi rst talent at the bar, men who, he was sure, casions, to advise the remission of particular punish. I if political persecutions could exist, would not lend ments. The Commons were the Great Council, the themselves to its influence, even from party spleen, Ministers only the Privy Council of the State. The accused of improper conduct, he could not restrain particular merits of the present case gave room for Iris indignation. The solicitors of Lord Cochrane different opinions. It was said, that De Berenger were as honoutable men as any in the profession ;. and might have changed his coat in the coach ; but then even those were supposed by Lord Cochrane to have the coachman's evidence was against that. De Be.! been guilty of a gross dereliction of duty. The tenger must then have taken clothes with him, in Noble Lord had complained of an omission in the which he could not appear in London. This brief; but he had been informed that that brief was matter was decided by a jury on their oaths. As to drawn up from the instructions of his Lordship him- that being decisive with the House, there were two self ; it was teed by the Noble Lord . himself— precedents, Walsh's and another ; but there the case (Hear, hear,) —tor his approbation. The examina- was undoubted. He was not disposed to quarrel with Lions of his tour servants were read to him, and a the trial or sentence. Though he regretted the latter, part of one of these examinations was corrected by he did not wish a vote which would inculpate the the Noble Lord himself, and yet the Noble Lord gets Judge and Jury. But were not the services of Lord up in his place, and says he was careless about this Cochrane such as to justify the House in interfering ? evidence. Indeed the whole of the circurestances He was not in favour of the amendment ;—but ap arising from the Noble Lord's conduct, were such as proved of the address, as stating distinctly the to prevent the Crown from ext ending the mercy to grounds of the application. It had been said, that Lim that was solicited, if the other delinquents were the higher the rank, the greater the crime. Yet in to stiller thefull sentence of the law. When those cases of treason, for instance, a Peer was punished who telt for the situation of the Noble Lord, call for 1 less ignominiously than an inferior person. There was this extraordinary interference with the prerogative 1 a case of a Captain in the Navy being seateoced to the 01161 for fraud, and of the sentence being re-' mitted. The services of Lord'Cochrane were not to be all washed away by. this offence, as though they , had never been performed. It would be hard indeed, if, because he had previously merited :public gratitittte, he should on that account be the more severely visited. Mr. HURST denied that the motion now before the House interfered in the smallest. degree with the Royal Prerogative—it merely pledged the House to address the Prince Regent, for the purpose of pro curing pardon or remission of the ignominious part Of Lord Cochrane's sentence. He thought the ob servations of the Learned Gentleman (the Solicitor- General) went to aggravate the case unnecessarily. and were a little too violent. But whatever the Learned Gentleman's view of the subject might be, he (Mr. Hurst) could state that the public feeling was pronounced strongly against the infliction of the pillory on Lord Cochrane—a punishment which every rank of society seemed to think ought to have been spired. He would not utter any expression in the slightest degree disrespectful to the Judges—he re vetenced them —still, however, they were but men, and might have gone beyond what the occasion called fur. Now, if the public and the House felt that they had dime so, it was their dity to exercise the functions with which the Conatituti in vested them, for th • purpose of rectifying the error. One of those functions enabled them, when a sentence was not commensurate w ith the crime, to call upon the Crown to extend ita prerogative of mercy to the person con victed. This was a•caie in which he thought they ought to indulge the public feeling by an Address to the Throne. tended. It was riot (rods the iligheest doubt being entertained, either of the gush of 4 1 se parties, or the propriety of the sentence. The sentence was another th.m what the bench owed it to the 4 the country to pronounte ; but the Croy/64h .ving take* into its consideration the unfreqisency of such cransii, so little known among Englishmen, hoped, that this warning would he sufficient to deter other pets ass from the commission of similar offences. The object of punishment was the prevention of crimes, and as this was a crime which had so rarely occurred, it conceived that it wets not necessary to i! 'het the whole of the sentence. It WAS necessary to state the grounds upon which mercy WAS extended, in order to pre. vent any pc:‘-erted notions of the grounds of it being conceived. • Sir FRANCIS BURDETT said, that if the Noble Lord had been pleased to communicate the information with which he concluded his speech, at an earlier period, it would hive saved the Noble Lord ( Ebi ington )f rom the trouble of making his aro• non, and himself ( Laid C.) from the necessity of a long speech.—He should now consider t e u' e i in there points of view. First, as it regarded the public pi-- secondly, as it regarded the admiaistratinii of justice; and thirdly-, as it regarded the Nnhle Lord. Licked, as to the last point, the Noble Lord himself viewed the m aver with perfect indifference. The Noble Lord relied entirely on his innocence, and merely contended for his character. He b uieveil tile Noble .Lord to be innncent, and th retort to him this part of the question had lbst its interest. It, however. retained great interest, as far as it respected the public. and thst profession which the N hle Lord had so long adorned. The Honotirable and LAM. ed Gentleman (the Solicitor-General) had used many arguments to shake the opinsins of Members as to the innocence of Lord Cochrane. It did ap. pear to him, however, that as being ti-licitor.G_ ne. ral, he could not be considered alto:tether spa along as an independent Member, but must, in some de gree, be coosidered as an advocate on the part of the Crown. Being in this situation towards the f Crown, he came forward in the House with the au. %hark) , of a date, to state his opinion on the case; and he also gave evidence himself as to matters of which the . House had never before heard.— He had stated that Lord Cochrane had not bt.-en neg lig.mt about his defence, and that there had been no want of ability in the conduct of it. He, for his part, always conceived, that in consequence of the public... tions from the' Stock Exchange Committee, Lord Cochrane, was, in fact, prejudged before he was put upon his trial ; and that he was defended by Counsel who were themselves under the same impression that had been made on the public mind. His statement, on his sipplication for a new trial, had great weight with the public, and chat was a circumstance which proved pretty plainly that a better statement might have been made for him at the trial. Knowing Lord Cochrane, as he did, he could well believe that, with his head teeming with other things, the brief might have been read to him without his giving it much attention. He thought that it was impossible that Lord Cochrane, who had published an affidavit that Berenger came to him in a green coat, should have consented that it should be stated in the brief that he was in red. Indeed, legal instruments were generally drawn up in such a manner that few Gentlemen not of the profesup of the law perfectly understood them. He was suKothat he had often signed legal instruments that he did not rightly understand, on the faith of the explanation that was given to him. was said that the trial was now to be seen by every body ; but ne believed the short-hand writer had susnaitted it to the Judge who tried it for his revisal, /mime it was pub. lished. He believed that the charge of the Judge had been revised and corrected by himself, and that he had, in one instance, introduced the word if, which was known to be a great peace.makt r. He did not see what evidence there was of Lord Cochrane seeing lle B.rengtr in a red coat, except the evidence of Crane, the hackney coachman, who swore that he en. tered the house in red. This man, however. wag a man of the worst of characters, and might well be supposed to be influenced by the hope of receiving two hundred and fifty pounds from the Stock Ex. change. As to the evidence of Shilling, that man had been heard to say, that he would swear fur who. ever paid slim best. He conceived that the circuits. stances against Lord Cochrane were not so strong but that his character should have been weighed against them, to determine as to the probability of his being guilty of the meanness imputed to him. As so ten tenderness which the Noble Lord sup td him so have expressed when speaking of this offence, he had only then been speaking of it in a legal point of view. He had, therefore, considered, that as merely a mis demeanour, it should not meet with a punishment as severe as those offences which the law calls crimes.— A thing might be very mean, and very uoworthy of a gentleman or a man of honour, and yet be no crime* at law. He was surprised to hear the grounds upon which the Noble Lord had stated the Crown to have aimed on this occasion. It appeared that frauds at the Stock Exchange were so unfrepwin, tonere, d id things so little known among Englishmen, that it was hoped no other instance would ever occur, and dolt an sum. ple was unnecessary. Now if he were fu maw those grounds in the lobby, he believed that every one would laugh in his face. They would not suppose frauds in the Stock Exvhange to be quite so %infrequent and so rare as the Noble Lord supposed. He felt, how ever, obliged to the Noble Lord for the advice he bad given- to the Crown on this oce +siva, not for the mks of Lord Cochrane, who despised tit at part of the sen tence, but for the sake of the public, and of that gal lant profession of which he was an ornament. The AT FORNEY-GENERAL said, that there were tunes in which the lion. Baronet thought pro per to praise the trial by jury ; but when it was ne. cessary to uphold the character of his colleague, and to inflame the minds of 0:e public against the sacred institutions of our comer), he had not hesitated to talk of picking and paling a jury. He would state most positively, that it was as impossible to pack a jury in the city of London, as it was in the county of York, or any other of the counties that the As. sizes were now going to be held in. It was possible, and not unlikely, that the short-hand writer who took down the trial did send it to the Learned Judge to be revised by him. It was the common prac tices° to do ; and the Term Reports, and other books of equal authority, had been submitted to a sirn:- far review. Every man who had seen a short-hand statement of his own speech must see that it was nut * Lord CASTLEREAGH had ventured to suggest to ihe . Nohle Lord, when he fi.st gave his notice, that al bough it was competent to any Member to submit such a question to the vmsideration of the House, yet few or no instances of such an interference with the prerogative of the Crown ss as to be found, at least in the modern practice of P.oliantent. It was an extre nely delicate dis-retion which the Crown had to exercise in 'his cise ; but it was not usual for the House to interfere with this•discretion, or to presume that it would not be properly exercised. The admi. nistration of justice was now so perfect in all its parts, that the interference of Parliament was rather likely to do prejudice th in service. In th days when the Judges were dependent on the Crown, and remoyeable at pleasure, their excesses might have made the interference of Parliament sometimes ne s:wary. Our courts of justice should have no co. 16nr of political bias ; and considerations which might have some weight in that House, ought to have no influence on their decisions. In t h e present case, he saw no ground for their interference. The Honourable Gentleman who had spoken last (Mr. Hurst) appeared to reprove his Hon. and Learned Friend (the Solicitor• Genet al) for travelling a little out of the regular grounds upon which the motion of this night was brought forward. It must be re collected, however, that there had heen discussion on a former night, MINI the Noble Lord (Coch. rant) had stated circumstances that no one at that time could be prepared to meet, and which produced such an effect on many Members as to make them express a Oulu of his guilt. If loose doubts had arisen,• nobody knew how, respecting the justice of the verdict and the sentence, it did become his Hon. and Learned Friend to come forward with the weight of his great talents and character, and tanove from the House that delusion which had been auernpted. It would certainly be painful to their feelings to be kept in a long state of suspense on.this subject; and it was a considerable relief to his mind to think that this affidavit of Lord Cochrane's, which was now so much relied on, was fully before the consideration of the Jury that tried him, and was even brought for ward in evidence on the part of the prosecution.— Tt was distinctly stated to the _Tory by the Noble Judge who presided at the trial, that if they believed that affidavit they must acquit Lord Cochrane. The Ida/ was now printed, and every member might read it ; and he, for his part, could not see why that House should have doubts where the jury. bad none. It was certainly painful to se., a man of L. , rd Cochrane's rank, and who had rendered distinguished services to the country, placed in a condition so degrading ; but he coula not see any distinction that any privileged 'orders in society had to exempt from those punish rnents which the law had affixed to certain crimes. He had not taken up any such aristocratical notions ; and he thought, that if persons in elevated situations suffered their minds to be so debased as to commit those crimes, which the law considered infamous, there was nothing in their station which exempted them from the punishment which the law affixed to such crimes. It would be a dangerous doctrine to lay it down as an ibitract principle, that the rank and services of Lord Cochrane should exempt him from the punishment which would attach to another offender who should have committed the same crime. There had been at tempts nut of doors to blind one another, and to deceive the public as to the magnitude of the offence. It had beer represented, not as a flagrant crime, but rather as an effort of ingenuity. It was, therefore, neces sary that the country should know that the offence was considered by the law as an infamous crime.— An Honourable Baronet on the other side of the House (Sir Francis Burdett), who, with his advan. cages of education, ought to have clearly perceived the enormity of the offence, spoke of it with a degree of tenderness that did not belong to him. He wet therefore glad that the crime of conspiring to cheat the King's subjects, for the gain of a few individuals, had been marked as a most serious crime. —(Hear.) —He should not now enter into the question, whe. the; the. pillory was or was not a proper mode of punishment i but it was the punishment which the law of the land affixed to infamous offences, and which it was, 'therefore, the duty of the judges to pronounce. In so doing they had upheld the nociealit y of the country, and they had defended the property of his Majesty's subjects from fraud and dishonest conspiracies of this nature in future. The laws had done their duty. in this case, the bench had done its duty, and it now remained for the crown to discharge its duty. He conceived. upon the whole, that it was a dangerousprinciple for the h ouse t o i n t er f ere w i t h the prerogative of the crown. He had now to inform the House, that the crown had taken steps to inter pose its mercy to omit that part of the punishment, not only with respect to Lord Cochrane, but the other two persons who had been sentenced.—(Loa cries e hear, hear).—He must, however, state ex. pressly the grounds on which its mercy was so es-