The Statesman. — London, England, 1814-08-11 00:00:00

THib. STATISMAN: f before .he made such statements in the lioltse of Commons. I hare the honour to In Gentlemen, With great respect, Your most •be ' dient and falthful Servoiiiti COL:IIRANgi * did not state the manner 41 which I apprehend the ullifertnce between the Brief and the Affidavit ori . illinhled, it was limits. 1 could not have stated it grititoot throwing more blame on my Solicitors than i ; • I filt inclined to de. I have been challenged by the %. • Attorwey-General to unseal the lips of my Solicitors ii •.... Counsel. My Solicitors, however, did not wait i - for use to unseal their lips, as is evident by what is i - - walled the Counter-Statement, with which they ; thought proper to furnish Mr. Abercrombie and I . 41,1011; and I think it rather unreasonable to require i 1 site to noses! the lips of my Counsel to qualify them I to give evidence against me, whet! I could not suc- 1 I - weed inttnbeolipg their lips on t 4 trial to speak one without previously can hardly, be supposed, that if they had been on their guard from any previous instructions of mine, that my Solicitors in the common course of examina tion would have obtained from them any evidence which militated against my own statement. I should naturally, too. have felt some anxiety to know the re sult of their examination ; yet the truth is, that I never asked them a flints question on their return from the Solicitor's office. Indeed, if I had questioned them as narrowly as one may suppose a guilty man who had seut Jtis servants on a guilty errand, of so muc► danger and importance, would have questioned them, , I should in all probability have discovered whether - had oot executed that errand to my Rath _ within my income, bet at less eipence than almost any other person of my rank in society. ,On whit grounds, therefore, is the Attorney-General war - routed in representing ma asit person in such des perate circumstances as tube/egged to hare recourse to the lowest knavery. Illt bider to avert absolute Navin ? ~ . • . ' With tespect to the other itstiertlon, that I poillieled a large sate of money, in consequence of the thin‘ octions of thellit of Febru ry, did not the Learned Lawyer - lino* that the St b4 Exchange Couimittee had seized not only 1,700 .of my money, which was nay actual profiting* tbat'day's sale,' bait also 'dieter sum of ___. ',user Oak - t ^ •- _• - ll* , . word in my behalf. ma i _ .01 I di r. Scarlet iiNiiiis ITtillflipiitid %loin . , vs advocate my cause, never spoke in my defence. It sa.yifig this i however:l I cast no blame on those . . entlemen, because I have no doubt that under the. circumstances live knolva to . thent alley act as they owl they had or faction. At all eveats, I should have been anxious to Iceow the result of their examination as entered In tlse Brief ; and if it be trite that it was 'downy yeast tope by my Solicitor, I toast under such ctn. catastances, hare lent too • atteritlve an Wei tillistre St 77000 calculation' or *that profit?, p,od' that tioned 'tom of 8301. Iso4 ditio vsedinp Ciistotieft tfielderned aitilit of 'VA can that hi oothiltibitstiggiiitia ,4*. G; .. •,... 1 , • • TO THE ELECTORS OF WESTMINSTER. thought bet If Dent. e either do I mean to blame Mr. Ser- seared the ruinous w ---- e ° rto rd d ha v e escaped -- ei n e .. jeatit Best (dm Counsel f or M r . J o h nstone ), w h o , o b serva ti on . I must , too, have e shownce rtainsym7 Kiae's Bench, Ave. 10, 1814. contrary to my expectation and direction, defended toms of ghastliness on hearing that "ward which. could ) Gerreeemex,--It is fresh in your recollection that 'my cause in conjunction with that of his own Client. •not have escaped the observation of the reader, par.' when Lord Ebrington, contrary to my opinion, H e m ad e as a bl e a speec h as any advocate could have Ocularly as the contradiction between that word and 'which was conveyed by letter to his Lordship, and at done, with the information he possessed, and under my oath must have been present'to his mind. And arty request read by him to the House, made his motion his then circumstances; but he ' intimated at the lastly, with the knowledge that the Brief contained for a remission of that Past of the sentence, which was time and afterwards authorised me to assert, that be a fiat end fatal contradiction to my own affidavit ant was s not able to do justice to the cause; and it is aof the tootilks of my • .. • King's Reoeh„iats. 25, 13 t 4. to hire been executed this day, Lord Castlereagh was empowered to state that the Prince Regent had just own servants, I should hardly, ground of complaint, that after Mr. Sainte. have suffered it to have gone to my Counsel in that OzeThetee,—in consequenceof what p asse d ig the Muse of Commons, on Tuesiliy !met I feel it already done that which it was the object of Lord Best had been exhausted by r e to ?all ii von Re my SO4iritorS on the A . Ebrington's motion to effect. You will also re- tenths, ,fifteen hours close at- state; and then have pressed, in the why in which I. '"Y dolt .------ u rP" v, , ,,, -- - 4 . i and confinement, he was not allowed a few did press, to have those servants examined on the late '''''' for answers `°.`-` •I ' ll°wlng queslitifilll-1 member that Lord Castlereagh, instead of immedi- hours to recover himself and prepare for the de- trial. i Did I ever give you in *Mime. ally other litstruc4 lately making his communication, and preventing an How my Solicitors could admit so fatal a contra. fence.tions for the brief, than a few observations contained I in one sheet of paper, which was afterwards endorsed unnecessary, and consequently improper discussion, To return •'I do however, accept the daring of diction into, the Brief without drawing my attention ssititheld it from the !louse for a considerable time ; the Attorney-General, and freely release my hone - • • 1 to it immediately by letter, it is for them to explain ; mod thus afforded the Attorney mid Solicitor. Gen- tors and Counsel from every obligation of secrecy. I by t y l;: u s ' ii ‘ o; Wi tls ' e m d te e e sc o r f ipt Ca ion ge o ? f " De Berenger s t drest tat and himself an opportunity of . making a new and might , th is sooner, yet they admit they aver wrote to me on the perhaps, have done this sooner, bit the delay subject . t They very quietly however inserted it, and . ' - - - a -If': as conta i ne d i n those minutes, namely, " g Violent assault upon my character and conduct. Al- has not been occasioned b an doubt fnr in f m t l e nti co nd as . let it remain in the Brief until I should happen to great coat, without any trimming, an d a green Coat, .though many of their arguments had been previously to the propriety of the y y or discover it; Which, as I s have pretty clearly proved, !or a coat with a green cellar under it t" mideretood refuted, and others were well answered at the time, quences. I thought , however, step , after of the statemen t tur never did happen iby yea to have reference-to what could be proved and not to imply a doubt in my mind as to the yet It was impossible for those Honourable Meathers which has been circulated by my Solicitors , that it Pretiele to the trial. It was on the 'second day tlf the triat e ..and not before, the to my I " i y , who entertained a favourable opinion of me to ail s was my duty, in the first place, to put to them certain aureilien4rovere4 ia a newspaper the the ; the r of the under-goat, but merely to intimate Very gr eat swer every accusation which the Solicitor-General questions ; which I was not aware would have ocCso. a d e e ss i oss a my . a cogtraspetion tom y a 5. . ., c witnesses might prey he able to speak to the end others brought forward by surprise. It remains, sinned much delay 1 but after a lapse of nearly a fo r t. . a r a . • ~, ... „ •-. ~ t at , ~......,f t ,. 4,y! the Alf General "there colour of the corn., on account of the body of the therefore, for me to oiler some observations in my eight, they wrote to inform me that th tholightlt 1 etielist seistlte at eo . sterpriee e -if there had, the , coat having been conceded by the great post ? Did not I et your request seed eny sarSitiltSl Own defence, its which my reason will appear for Mould be improper to answer those qeesti :es woo hevetallepensed witb their rule, Jr en d e ' ..Thomas Dcwman and Mary Ter pin, to ow office havieg suffered some delay to occur in the execution now lay them before the public. • ' - c r . le t e r t • of this important duty. . I I particuarly authorise the Counsel employed fici 4 ZZ' so r s a h er ne e w es ti " -l es tbe, r" was nottlng ° • 1 it o be ex am i ne d bY Y o n i me P e r atm r I' lber ' dreivin g In the course of the Solicitor-General .'s speech, the defence to State their reasons fo rdetermining to 1 In whatever weer my Solicitors took the examinee ' • : the brief ? A iel were nett you previtrusly In possess. 1..• asserted, that in my defetice, I had mis-stated the defend me conjointly with Mr. Johnstone, contrary j vsn. u of my servants en the subject of De Berenger's re. Ilion of my affidavit, in which the -coat worn by Do Berenger in Illy p re en the tilt of Febreary, circumstances of the transaction, and had charged my to the opinion of Mr. Adam, expressed on the 6th of i it is indisputable that Diehl% can justify th eir : b sweet to have been ere ' eis ? And weft nee you Solicitors e ith a gross dereliction of duty. I shall May, contrary to their own opinion expressed oe ) d ress , and; neglect in not• immediately drawing my attention to aware that my said servants had alsit glide affivievies show that 1 pare neither mis-stated circumstances, nor the 24th of May, and contrary to my opinion the difference between the reedit of tiiat.examination. that th e offic they saw at my bansa,an that day made any utifoutided accusation. He further as- ditection expressed on the 290 of May ; and I lift i an d , Me statement in my own affidavit s-e-" It never wore a grey great coat, tiuttoned 'ope,erkiti a greet Jetted, that he nould take upon himself to say that particularly authorise them to assign the reason for .. . permitted," said the Solicitor-Geotsral," th at : collar underneath ? the Brief had been drawn up from my own instruc- their opinion that no witnesses ought to be examined for ; be rson accused should try its the first instance how 1 se • Did you not partkultfrly question thforeesetii the tions. The fact is, I have never denied that I gave on my part ; and especially their reasons for not ea- ' - I far be could go without his own witnesses, and then, 'coiner of the under coati , . Did • you: oat . instructions for the Brief. It is true, however, that mining my servants on the subject of De Berenger's ' '' a sk them whether it was aseed coat I . good esisithe r t should the result' pr ove un f avoura bl e , . how far he 1 gave no specific instructions to Counsel, and at- dress, notwithstanding my earnest desire to have them I I could go with them . " How unjust this observation they could swear that it was not a red cote ?' , whisk tended oso consultntion ; but it is obvious that with- examined. lam also willing, nay, lam anx i ous , wn ; jos as applied to me, is well known to my Solicitors out some instructions or some information from me that Mr. Srrjeant Best should state , whether, they could not, because it was worn wider a great to my Solicitors, there could have been no Brief at he admitted that the coat was red, and not green, he I , the Y well know h ow anx i ous I wa s to h ave 'fly coat which was beamed up. Pei instance. — Was it not in copse witnesses brought forward its the all. My Solicitors themselves applied to me for writ- did not imagine that I had sworn falsely by design ? ' nsequence of repeated questions that they were ;educed to admit that the under-coat I Those witnesses would and could conscientionsy: ten infornsation, and I, of course, furnished them I know that in his speech he attributed my descrip- have MOM to the green collar, which would have se s e mighebe red ? Did either of my servants &flout that tiiill such particulars as occurred to me ott the sub- tion of the coat to error only, but I am anxious to as a lifts, i !Wendy corroborated the description in my Atfide e ' say jrct, which are written on one sheet of paper, and know whether he did so from his feelings part which he or'a'te SW of the undete has ! tit, as It never was pretended that De Beringer wore re d S .might have been a teems on one page. This paper is or his sense of duty as an advocate ? Until lam ; a greets collar to his scarlet coat. - ' . see set endorsed by my Solicitors " Lord Cochrane's ?Ai- better informed 1 shall incline to the opinion that he Did you net, in consequence of the esansinatioe It was asked by the Attorney. General, 46 If the of my servants, insert in the h, ief that' the. ender. slates of Case," anti may be seen io my possession. was actuated by the latter feeling only •, because, if I : mervaate could have confirmed the Affidavit, where ! coat worms by De Berenger was a red coat with a I apprehend that it; was the duty of my Solici- he really imagined that he had to defend an innocent Was the Advocate who could have been stupid green collar? . tors to have sent me a Copy of the Brief, which, man, I do think that he would net , without pr....! however, they did not, and t repeat that previous to viously communicating with me on th e s ub j ect, have el n e , eegh-ta hesitate to P rettetel • tbeln ?" it is P °s6- ' Did you ever call my attention to Mei part, of the the trial I saver read it. It appears , that they pod. had recouree to the dangerous expedient of admitting I ale, however, that advocates may he prejudiced, brief by word or letter ? And do you roasts .believe and may be misled by their that I was privy and consenting to the fact of my cularly called my attentive to an unimportant - cies , : that to be red which I bad sworn to be green ; howls l in e a l' b e m i s ta k en ) cunittasice which they had inserted in the Brief, or ever embarrassed be might have been by the coati. I_ Drief. • Counsel being authorised by the brief to admit thet the examinations attached, in consequence of an er- , lion of his Brief, or exhausted by the fatigue and !. I hope that, it will now appear to be satisfactorily i coat to be red, which I uniformly declared to you roneous commuisicatiets from m servant, who had : long confinement which he had undergone. , :proved, not only that I did not see De Berenger in . was green, and which I had sworn to he green? y • i confounded the circumstances of two different occur- : I stated in the House of (emulous thane no I ' bis scarlet coat, but that he did not come to my door, Did you-read. the whole ' of the brief to wee, or lances. This wise the 44 one particular" which the instrections to Counsel, and at t e nd e d no amanita. . nor even enter the hackney-coach in that dress.—(See ' merely detached parts ? Did I peruse .it myself Is I Solicitor-General says that I myself corrected. I time I now see the folly of this negligence •; for ' thiranneted Affidavits.) your presence, or to your knowledge? Did you admit that this error ens expunged by nay authority, 'if I bad personally attended to my interests, and ! In reply to the Solicitor-General's observation, • ever, previous to the trial, foruish me with a copy and opposite the four lines which conta i ne d it, is c onferr e d with m y adverse, on the subject, 1 have that I had sought to establish my own innocence by lof it ? written, 46 Read this to Lord Cochrane," Which I no doubt that I Aerie esse fully couv i nc ed th ere Lrecrimination upon the Judge and Jury, I shall at i Did servants make any alterations in the depositions w h et he r :of the , or in arty part of the brief, relative -think is an argument that the greater part of the sof my innecer.: ~ i, lettere that subsequent to the. Present eterely ask. the Learned Gentleman, Brief wee not read to me ; particularly as there are : trims there is not a single individual, w i t h w h om I . „beis , of ?Otiose that a like sentence for a like of - 1 to w h at the y coulddepose on the important subject 1% lines expunged in another place, opposite t o which i have c o n ferr ed on the sub j ect, who has Dot left me Rice wool have been passed on any Nobleman, or !of De Berenger's dress ? Did I ever desire you to my name does not appear. My Solicitors, however, I with that impression. 'Member of Parliament, on his side of the House ?,, re-examine them on that point ? assert that though I did not read the Brief m y self, ; To c o me now to t he manner in which the error is I Would a punishment which, according to the unfor. I Did I ever, as far as you know and believe, give they read the greater part of it to me ; and on their : the Brief originated, I have no hesitation iu acknow- : teats. admiesion of the Attorney-General, is calcu. : instructions to m y Counsel ? Did I ever attend any consultation ? Was not my defence mixed with Mr. assertion I will iitlinit that they did so, though I i !edging that I am at issue with my Solicitors on that slated 44 . irsa bow dosee,the head. with humiliation ever . have no recollection of the fact. But if it could be I point. Their account is, that two of my servants isaiter," together wile An* taiditnprisonment and the Johnstone's contrary to my orders? and did you lire . shown that they drew my attention to every line of i whom I had •seut to their office to be examinedaa to ,Ortega of *veto ,effice asid honour, have been i form me that Mr. Johnstona's.Counsel, and not my the Brief, except only' to that one most important ; the evidence they could give on the trial, admitted I thought little e pteuele fez a Ministerial Defendant on i own, was to pleadeny cause? point, the description of Ds Berenger ' s dress, I that Ds Berenger wore a red coat with a green al. , such a chatty • Aed ifeelueeitudoureof the Learned I Was I not, as far as you know and believe, ab. which immediately follows the four lines expunged, `tar. My servants, on the c ontrary, assure me that ' Gentleman impels . hiktootteweetn the pegatfve, is I sent from London for near three weeks, previous to - , - I still think that they were guilty of very r e p rehen- i the y did not, and could net admit, that it was a red it not fait to enquire, whether Ise thinks that such an : andup to the Monday preceding the trial? sible negligence. In my affidavit which was before coat ; because, when they saw De Berenger he were' one wouldevea have been convicted on similar evi- Is Did you ever call the attention of the Cestattel, by them, and was introduced into the Brief, the coat' a grant coat buttoned up, and they neither saw the I deace. s , Te s sA tternete g ie n era t o b serve d, 66 th at h e i word or letter, to the difference between the state. worn by De ilerenger is sworn to have been green ; ' body nor the shirts of the ender coat : but the cut- 1 etiptilatlititii.tileperiod had arrived when the trial i meat in the brief and the affidavits of at and and in the examinations attached to the Prier it is , tar and so much of the breast as they saw were t,eir,lall* , rFeaut length, aed.thus do sway the effect i servants ? respecting the dress eel , , De - Serener ? stated to have been red. It is impossible that this : greets.; but they admit that on being questioned by 1.T.A1l Pict etattements which misled the pub. -When del.the fi;omosel, .to thee best , of your belief, most important difference could have escaped t heir ' my S ol i citors, whether the y could swear that it was elle . ...' Hetweringeny remarks on the trial for a discover that difference ? e e l . .. - .s .. observation, and yet it is true that they never called future opportunity, 1 shall at present jest ask the . Did Iseet send smy meant& tivsGoildball on the , not a red coat, they confessed that they could not, ,any attention to it. I may affirm, without fear of i and admitted that it might be red, and that the green i Attorney-General how it comes that he who is so . Bth of Jane ‘ the erg day WO, trial, to be exe being again contradicted, that I did not know that the I, which they saw might be green facings to a military anxious that the public mind should not be misled, : amined ? Duli not send/es a note by them to Ida dress of De Berenger, which I had sworn to be green, ! coat ; but they have constantly declared that no part , should have made the unfounded assertion that I not form you that I had sent them for that purpose? only pocketed a large rum of money by the tried, 1 Did I not send them again on the second day of the was in any part of the Brief, much less in the exa- .`which they saw was red, and they deny that they but put off absolute ruin ?. Such ass assertion le-the I tetal, and dirt I not write to you on that day, para. minations of my servants, described to be red; be- ! ever admitted that they saw any red. •, e , i more inexcusable in the Attorney-General, who had nearly , requesting that they Might be examined? cause it is impossible, unless I had been absolutely I My Solicitors were in possession of their previous facility of obtaining more correct information. Wiser did yob receive myesieond Letter? ' Was it insane, that I should not only have been satisfied with ' Affidavits, describing De Berenger to have worn a 1 every His own Broker could have told him, that the Qm. 'weirdoes to the dose of ery defence? and if subs& a Brief which authorized my Counsel to contradict • grey great coat buttoned up, and a coat with a green j th. I shall not deny that my Solid. : nium which I possessed on the 19th of February, quern, was it set at least several hours pea. to . the . my own affidavit, but have been anxious to send my t collar underneath. when the fraud most have been in agitation, could i close of De Berenger's defence I Had the Counsel, . servants into Court to give evidence against me. , tors considered the admissions of the servants to sold en that day at 27i. The average Ito .youts knowledge, resolved at alt events ;not to If my Solicitors actually read this part of the . amount to an acknowledgment that the coat was jhests been erupt , ? Did you .comintericate tieme Brief to me, it is obvious that I . was not giving that red ; but I shall ever believe that such admissions ! :end was 2 4, so that the whole loss un the 139 ,0001. 1 emir* my It sold on that day, would not have! such their determine:Boa.? Have you any-reason to attention, which a mass cmiscious of guilt naturally : actually went no further than t hat, since the y did !-Dentiiim; would have given. The ward " aen," if I had : not see the body of the coa t , it night, for aught !nlvioa need to above 4001. And when it is considered 'believe that.' bad'ihelesst knowledge, .prier tothe sap . 1 that the result of my previous speculation was again trial being closede that my servants woad lint-beens beard it, must have histantly excited my particular j they knew, be red—and possibly, that they Booker, 4,9301. received,' and 8301. in the hands of my 'had not boon exantined ? . •• , s i ' A • notice. But, " if the difference between red and posed it was red, because the wearer, having a sword . i Boakerehow does the Attorney-General make it out If I had been informed, that the Cower; bad nth green escaped my observation," what did my Solici-i and military cap, they conceived him to be au army • lOW 1 kia J. embarrassed myself by such specula - fused to examine them, might I not have gene into dens " think" of it ? My accusers chiefly depend- I o ffi cer. s, 'as to have no other than fraudulent means of Court, and personally demanded the examination of ed for my conviction on proving that De Berenger The description which my Solicitors introduced i *Pe ruin? Besides, 1 can assure the my wheelie's? -, s' • l ama &e. appeared before me in the red tote in which he cow- into the Brief, in consequence of this examination,' escaping absolute COCHRAN E. ac. [Darned Gentleman, if be is not already apprised of - -; - . - milted the fraud. Is it possible that one of my Soli- namely, a red coat with a green collar, neither • Itenve. Ferrer and Atkinson. the fact, that if I had held the Omnium till the Ist, - • • citors should have read it to me , and not have said, cords with my description, nor with the coat actually L . or 4 th of March; I should have sold it at a Uncolres Ins-Adds 3d Agree, 1814. " You observe, Lord CoChrlino4.lll this is contra- I worn by Do Berenger on his way from Dover,which, j Ns' was either • prat ; and If I had held it till the settling-day, MY Loan , —We were duly honoured with yea dictory to your Affidavit E" To have reedit to me las proved by the witnesses on the trial, leihen I must of necessity have gold it, I should not Lordship's Letter of the 46th ult. requiring our without a pause, and have su ff ered it to pass with- i wholly scarlet, or turned op with yellow. , .• out observation is [think, as negligent as set to 1 If I bad been a party to the fraud, and bad sWorn Itailost one - half of the sum I had previously gained. answers to many questions, telating to the late prose ' , ,But fn n the whole had lost a have read it at all ;nerd is' wholly irrecondleable I falsely as to thecolour of the coat, I doubtless might !i, po , I few hundreds, cation, but after what hat passed, and the cornmuni ea even thousands, how would the Attorney-Gene- cations we have already made, we hope your Lord with the assertion of Mr. Abercrombie, that both also have been wicked enough to have endeavoured . the servants to per j ure t h emse l ves i n my I . tel be justified in inferring my absolute ruin ? It is ship will agree within in thinking that it would be l parts of the Brief were read one to me with the et• to s uborn behalf ; but I should hardly have ventured to send Livell known that I had been more successful at sea highly improper is us now to answer any more ab. I most care. l than almost any other Officer of my standing in the street or partial questions. We have, agreeable to if, in my Mena is the House of Commons, I th em to my Solicitors to be examined on the subject , I eviously instructing them myself: and it navy, and that I have constantly Swed e not _only your uncle's' desire, made out and now beg leave to _ Bill in that business in which ,ou inclose you our Y` wW 6n►cl most of the facts to which your questions wish, stated as shey occurred. We are, 6tcc. WAilikia and Co. mart abiolute The following Affidavits are the voluntary and die. . hat Ipoilleleed Interested acts of the respective Deponents :---- of the Ojina- London (to• wit) at the Learned James Miller, of Ma rah-gate, Westtl►inster-bridge- lge road, in the county of Surrey, botcher, maketh oath money, width and saith, That on thet2ist day of February last, Ile,' but also a between eight and pine o'clock..in the morning, as r exaggerated he was stanclintakhts door In the sold Westminsier- theatoramea. bridge-road, he saw a Dartford chaise and four stop lugh tho,pro- at the coach-Stahl opposite to hl house, when se. strned'Gentle• feral persons assembled and enquired of the past. only . (Assent, boys whom they 'had brooghein the chaise, they an, ontbe subject wend '"'s Messenger from Frame end; the bearer 4). 1 / 4 a;t !•1': • , • • "6•••• ~. . 1 , . -. . 5 .' • . ;.- : .f7•••' a l. , " / ••••••• ' •. • . .••: 1; tl - - • •.: 1 : . ; {/«1: '1 , , i . , ..,. • 4.... .. r. .. ." • . .' V . fj . 1 .! 4 a 3 ...: •.:,p'.' t •—• 1.• t.' • P - .., . • . 1 7- .... : . 4 ` : . . .• . ...• \ •'. •ar 4 a.' - .. I , i '. i i ' ' i .--,.."' ' ne 1 1 - s .-. , 1 • --. . • /.0" ' . Il : ! - y' .. 4 1 i r , , i\ "4 . ' 4 i I ' 1 . ~, . i , - 1 - 1' . , ... 1 .74' .'. t ..-. . .