The Sun. — London, England, 1820-08-28 00:00:00

• , . might possibly have 'been , the c:ausci off much are- sularity cut of doors—might possibly have been tt'l cause of great injury elsewhet. - .Lot;ll , EttSitt-Nv„ tlxought that the utmost indul • ~ ggence should be given to .the Counsel for her Majesty,:because the Honse conld not put them in.the sante' .situation now in which they would. have .beeni r had.they, .as in a case of,lligh Trea son, :been. previously furnished with a list of the witnesses, their professions, and their places of, residence. 'lje.thought that whatever regarded the credibilitY of,. the vvitnesses should be matter of futuFe.cross-exarnin4tiou; Init that every ques tion ought now. to be admitted. which, was prepa ratorily, requisite ..to•enable the, Counsel for her Majesty to make the neces3ary inquiries into that credibility. .". . . • Lord LI REY thought the question proposed did not.oomp..within the limits Prescribed by -their Lordships. - • .-TIWA.ARD CIIANCELI.O,It took the sense of the House on.allawiug the question to be put.:—The non-contents had .it by .a great majority. Mr. gaol:Guam professed his inability to un der stand-- , . loin CitaxcELLort.--Mr. Brougham,. the House cannot permit-Counsel to observe o n what they have done. You may propose another ques tion,. and the. House. will hear you on the pro priety. of its being .put: Mr...BuoutaLts.,---We 'wish for nothing More than..thatthe House. will hear ,us in . support of and decide on the merits of each question we put: We only object with all humility, against being :bound.by any general rule on the subject which we do not, and cannot, with all- the appli cation of our.ntinds to. the snhiect, understand. 'The next question Vpropose should be put to the itness Where dO .yau, live at : present in London ? (MUrmurs throughout the House.); . effect of allowing the question to be put and . .ariswered,, Willrbeto hold the wit ne4s,iout to the.popular indignation. 'the ATTOIIN EY-GENERA , irny Lords,, to. make- a siagl,observation on, the course now about to be. ad.opteiL I understood your Lordships to have distinctly stated,, at the ,out:- set Of the proceedings,- in case my Learned Friends, who. , :are.Counsel for her , *Majesty, shall offer to your Lordships sufficient grounds for hay, in -'this witness, or any other in the same .cir -9.4n25tan..ce5.,.. only cross-examined. in- part, that they should be at liberty so to do, but not to ex ceed. some: reasonable and certain limits. "hit the rule now applied for is not that it shall be li tnited in. this.rnanner, but .that the , cross-exami nation. of all. the, witnesses shall only -take place in.. part,, until. the examination in chief shall have been completed; Surely your Lordships will not give,my:Learned Friends such an, election. If such a course be adopted, I have 'no hesitation in saying_ it- will be subversive of . the .first , and best interests of public justice, and laying down a bad precedent in.all.future proceedings-of this nature. ..What is the hardship complained of on the. other .side ? Why, that they have not had a list - of witnesses.: But,your Lordships have re lieved them..frora that diflicu Ity ; you. have allow , id them to. cross,examine. and, before the. Bill closs they may be re-examined 'twain.— . * (Withdraw.. .Order. Go . on.) . . Easmsz,---IVILY,does not the Interpre ter giVe the viitness.'s answer,? The Loan CliaNeEt.aoa.—Because the House objects to _the.question..b. Lord Livxneo.o.r...—Does the Attorney-G cue- Tel .object.ta the qiestion. - The. kribitNEY. , G EN AL7-4 do object to-it, my Lords: This is, perhaps, the most important questi9 tha t has yet occurred. ; Unless my Learned Friends now cross-examine, the Witness, hew are .we : tO proceed.! . Am I to lay the whole of the evidence in,support of the Bill before your Lordships, . and .that before there is any cross examination at the other side ! Why, my Lords, s;tich , a proceeding was never heard of, in any Other Court of Justice. Is the cross-examination to proceed_inthis , .manner by piece -meal ? If it be, I shall: be. shut out from offering 'any expla nation as to circumstanceS disclosed by the wit ness that may: be, even necessary : and it will be impossihle foryour Lordships, to place those.who are to support the 'Bill in the situation- in which they. ought to. be plat',ed. Why, my Lords, until the whole of the cross-examination and, the re examination be 'closed, there can be no summing up .by Counsel— .They now :cross-examine in part—again they Cross-examine in another part, and when or where is this to end ? Let Ahern either now proceed to the cross-examination of the witness, or defer it till the whole of the evi dence in chief be closed ;- but they should not have the eledion.they,are requiring. They are placed in no difficulties. at 'the other side, but -what your Lordships have agreed to relieve them from. Your. Lordships'.rules are foUnded in jusL tice, but while. you deal out justice to one side, I hope your Lordships will not forget what is dtie on the other, and not place- the parties in support of:this Bill in such a situation as no per sons were ever placed .in before. I hope, my Lords, the rule your Lordships have laid down will, be continued,-aud.that you will oblige them to proceed with their, crOss-eXarninatiou on the •othet side, with the permission-of again cross eiaminiug, if they lay proper grounds b e fore your Lordships... • , Lord Dans.LEY.Nothing has been said of the impropriety, of putting this question. , Mr.. BILOUGHAM.—I shall confine myself to the .simple question before yont"Lordships, and Shall not presume. ; to , dispute the -rule 'you have laid down, The only. - qhestion I have . now to con tend for is, shall or shall not iny - questi'ou pt and answered:? - _ _ Here the Learned Judges seemed in consul tation, and after a pails?, Mr. IlitouanAm resumed. • The question be fore your Lordships, and the • only question Which must be firSt disposed of according to the practice of all other Courk is, whether I am at liberty to ask this witness where she now fives ? The Attorney-General objects to "this, And his ground of objection is , that I ought to put not only this, but all the other questions which I might put. - ins arguinent is riot direct ed against this question, but that I don't put all the.questions in my power to ask. But I won't argue this before your Lordships. I am not called upon to do so. Your Lordships have put me to my election r and I have made it, and with in the narrow limits chalked out to me I shall proceed to the cross-examivation of the witnesses. •I'don't argue against the rule, as laid. down by your Lordships, but I am quite sure) Our Lord ships could not think of laying doWn any rule thrit would bind me one way now, and another way in a few minutes. You cannot all of a sud den change your rules ; I cannot for a moment imagine you would do any thing so monstrous. My question now is, where does this witness now live ? Several NoblePtEas.—ln England. •.: Mr. gam:du ANl—Yes : where does the wit ness. now live in England -? In a case of high trea son we could have had all this in the list of ivit nesses ; we could have had Barbara Crantz, for merly of Carlsruhe, and now of such a place, and such a parish, in London or Middlesex, or where ever she might reside. The LORD CtIANCELLOR.--7-4 feel a great diffi culty on. this, not on account of the importance of the present question, but as 'to the conseqUences likely to result from permitting such ainode of pro cedure: W ith reference to a former Opinion, if I am not out of order in mentioning it, T have to say cir cumstances-have since arisen that have led consider ably to alter it.—(llear.) , ---For myself I object ed to the last question being put, and on the. same grounds I now Object to 'this. If a list of wit-' nesses had been given, the Counsel could not ask this witness, " 'Where she now lives," unless: he proceeded to the whole of his crols-examina tion. The question cannot now be asked with out going :through the cross-examination: If this House has really adopted the right mode, for God's sake . abide by -it. But if it would be doing injustice to one of the parties, and to that one most interested, 'do not let any notions of inconsistency prevent your retracing your steps—k(hear, hear o—and do what is right. It is clear that at present the Counsel for the prosecution cannot be called - on to re-examine; and I apprehend your Lordships cannot call for the summing up until the whole of the cross-examination an the Fe-examination be gone through. I go further and say, when the cross-examination 'is deferred; the re-exami nation must be deferred. Your .Lordships must lay down some-rule beyond . .which you will not go, as.-to what may be the . safest limit you will determine -as to the cross-examination of wit= nesse's, but that it should go 'so far as it has :done this day, would produce a practice most mis chievous to the ends-of justice. Lord GRENvim.E.—Before proceeding further in this case of the most extreme importance, I think it: absolutely necessary : to take into our most serious consideration the question that has now arisen. On this most important and auxi ous inquiry, we, should look to the question of the cross-examination of witnesses, and if any rule has been - suddenly or hastily laid down, to revise and amend it RS soowas possible. The difficulties, my Lords,, arising out .of our pre sent situation are innumerable. When you have examined all the witnesses in .support of the charge—after every question has. been put, can your Lordships proceed in the ordinary way ? Can you call upon the Counsel to sum up the case, they not knowing what might yet ap: pear from a second cross-examination, of their witnesses ? It-therefore, -my Lords, appears to me of the last importance„ that we should con sider this very important Point seriously, that we should then .lay -down a strict., inflexible, inva riable line of'proceeding. Lords, adverting to-the partial cross-examination 'of witnesses by the Counsel for • the defence, there was in my mind great weight in what was urged by .the Counsel who made the objection. It would throw infinite difficulties in the way, 'if' your LordshipS were to admit the examination of all the witnesses in chief without allowing any 'addition to those witnesses, in consequence of what might arise out of the cross-examination. See, my Lords, the length to which this would carry you. Your Lord shipsmust not only defer the cross-examination to 4 future period,but you must reserve to the Coun sel for the Bill a similar right to call new witnesses, in consequence of the cross-examination.NyLords, the adjournment of this day will give us one day, of considering whether we cannot lay down a clear and distinct rule by which to guide our proceed ings on this important subject. Unless this be done now, we shall fmd,that day by day, and hour by hour,,we shall.fiud ourselves involved in new and inextricable difficulties. I would ven ture then to suggest the propriety of turning your Lordships' thoughts to this point at once, and of deferring all other business until it is decided, should therefore suggest that Counsel be order ed to withdraw. Lord ItEoLsnim—Mv Lords, any proceed ings which your Lordships may adopt on this occasion will become ; a_precedent, and, will be come a part of the future bir and usage of Parr liamvnts--it will apply . tocases i to Bills of Pains and Penalties, and, in short, to all cases.bearing any relation to the present Bill. Your Lord ships ought to pause therefore before you de part from the ordinary course of prOceedog. I.f. your Lordships come to.any resolution on the subject, it should be so shaped as to apply. to . the pectiliar -case before you, and not • to any other. My , Lords, I apprehend great danger and; difficulty from the course of proceeding propose d to be adopted. Any departure from the usual course of Courts of Justice must at all times be attended with dilliCulty. It was at first arranged that there should be a departure from that course, andnow your, Lordships are called upon to make ,that departure a . geilerarrtile. - NoW, my Lords, Iconsider.the case, , ,to be this. The .witnesses in this case are perSoris:Coming from different places ; and . respecting whoin the COunSel . for the d'6. fence , are uPable to Make those inquiries which could be in . aile - re4ectiiig - perkmSreSidhig in this country. In cases of treason, a list of wit.. nesses is allowed ; _this gives the a.ccLued an opportunity to inquire into their habits tyntkohat racters. Ills not being. the case on the pre- Sent Bill, time is to be allowed' to the accused to make the necessary inquiries. But, my Lords, consider what the consequences of the pro posed proceeding would be. Your Ldrdships are aware that nothing is more impOrtant to the • ends of justice than that the cross-exarnination should fallow the examination id thief, while the subject is fully before the 'witness, and his mind is freSli in the recollectiOn Of the facts: - Vet it is now proposed to pOstpoue the ,cross - eKamitiatiott of all the evidence for the Bill, until the Coune.l for the defence shall think fit that that cross-ex arnination should take place. This is contrary to the acknowledged praCtic'e of the courts of jus-. tice ; .and, it will be impossible to form an opi nion upon a case so conducted, with the same eel., thinty as if we proceeded in the ordinary way. Whether it be important that some of the wit nesses Should be re-ex.arnined, I'Sa very 'different question.- But I aSk,i - ny Lords, Whether there ever has been a case in which the croSs-exaMitta, tion ivaS postponed to an indefinite period ? See, my Lords, . ; the 'diflicalty this would ,impose -do the Counsel-for the Bill., I know not how the sin-inning up could be 'With propriety laid before your Lordships under such circumstances, be cause Counsel could not know the circumstances which would come out in the cross-examination.i If your Lordships do depart from the 'usual course,' and 'I am of opinioti that you ought not, but if you do,, it ought to be by an express reso- . ; lotion of the House, so framed that it should-not be brought into . a precedent. Any advantage allowed to one side must be equally extended to the other; and this will certainly prodnce innu merable difficulties, as well as much delay. Lord ERSKINE next addressed their Lordships, bitt in so low a tone as to lie for some time in audible below' the bar. agreed with his Noble Pi:iend, that many difficulties' arose in•a case like thiS, where the witnesses Were in . different pahs of the world, and when their resiC:ences Could not be exactly 'aScertaitied, He 'would allow the postponement of the•Cross-ekaMination ; but he would allow' the other party to call additional witnesses' also. He hadt6Ternind their Lordships that they had taken no steps. to prevent the daily publication of the evidente. That evidence, un sifted as it was, had been allowed to go forth to the world, and was it possible•that this wonld hot bias the minds of the public,if not of their Lordships? He agreed with his . Noble Friend that it . was of im portance to have the erOssLekarnination follow the examination in chief without delay, and that the evidenCe ought to be .at once cOinplete, on both sides. All he 'desired was to be placed in 'a 'situation 'to decide impartially on the Case. Notwithstanding the very clear and able' manner in which his Noble Friend on the 'Woolsack had delivered' his - opinion on:. the subject,` 'yet he hoped that though there was - no motion before the house, his Noble Friend below him (Lord Grenville) would make 'one, in order to pre ..ent. their Lordships from being' involved in the diffi culties with which they were threatened, and from which, if once entangled, it would be' im possible to extricate theMSeives. Lord LIVERPOOL—I understand the wish of the Noble Baron to . bey'to take this clay to con sider some measure by which .many difficulties may be avoided innur. future -proceedings.. To this I. do not:object ;- but I wish,. before the mo tion is made, .to say a few words. in reply to the Noble Lord, who spoke last, as ,well as to the Noble ,Lord- (Grenville) under him. I cannot, I confess, consider that .the difficulties attending this proceeding are so great as they -have been represented to be. - The motion alluded to re specting the list of witnesses, would; if granted hi this case, 'have been inconsistent with the ends of . justice. In the lower Courts, the accuser is one party, the defendant is another : the course of proceeding is definite. The instances in which the Court may interfere -are Clearly mark ed out. What is the • case here ? After the accuser and defendant : have stated their case, there exists in your Lordships an unlimited power to examine . not only in chief, as the Counsel on One side do, but also to cross-examine every witness. In short, you possess every power of inquiry kno:vn t , our Courts of Justice. But this is not all ; for it is competent for the' Members of this Ho t•e to call back a witness whom they may think material. And even on .any point of the case- which the Counsel on either- side have omitted to examine theVtitness upon; it is in the power of this House to call the witness again, and examine him or' tier to any of the facts.. I do not see, therefore how , it is possible to assimilate the proceedings , of this Ifouse to those of (Alm. Courts of Justice. If this crime had been committed in England the greater part of the difficulties which now embarrass your proceedings would vanish ; because only a delay s mast could -be necessary for the of 'a few day parties on eith er s ide to .Set themselves right. Out the difficulties here' arise from, the crime al leged having been committed abroad'; • and, there fore, delays in adducing the testimony Must ne cessarily arise frOm the very nature of the case. If the crime had been committed in England; and not high treason, and that the counsel on the . part of the defendant should ask for a short delay, I am sure your Lordships would not feel . disposed to 'refuse any reasonable indulgence of that sort upon 'a fair cause being shown. And f say that in cases of iMpeachinents or at tainder, or in Bills of Pains and Penalties, your LOrdships would not refuse a short delay for the purpose of procuring any testimony which might require but a few days at most. But in , this case there must be disadvantage and incon venience, and . much longer, delay must arise out of the special circumstances' of the case, and I do say, that if the list of' witnesses had been granted, though the inconvenience might be less ened, I do net see how' it could be entirely re moved. • In every fermer case the counsel had an opportunity 'of cross examining the witnesses fully,; and tho Ug h. a re=examination has taken PlaCe, yet, if a SpecialcaSe Was made out to them, that it was necessary for the ends of impartial justice, that - a Witness shotilci fecalled, it Pligh t to be competent for a-Counsel to propose, and your Lordships - ought nut to refusesuch ona reasonable' case being made out, to have a witness called bac k ' But , here the question is, whether there shall bee power vested in Counsel to make his option to close his cross-ekarniiiktion before he has gone to th e full extent with a view to resume it at anothe r time. Your TiOrdships, no doubt, would, upon fair ground beitig shewn, allow a particular wit' ness to. be bilinght back in a particular case ; bet if in the cot,itSe of examination a number of wi t ; netsds should be brought back again, you Ca nn(/ call on the Counsel for the prosecution to sub up his case until the cross-examination has MI/ taken: place. 'Phis iss - a point which 1 take tP 1)6 perfectly clear, and therefore I will move tha,ti the conSideration of this case be deferred tint' Monday morning next, then to receive po t Lordships' decision. Lord GaElsvar.El entirely agree with tb e -Noble Earl that the difficulty here arises fr.t° the peculiar nature of the case itself ; brit th e , reason why I venture to call on your Lordship' attention is, that I feel the necessity for voe r ' Lordships to fix some permanent rule froin you shall not hereafter be .called on to .depar t ' I think, therefore, that what is most desirable • the - present moment is, that we should turn o er minds to consider the subject maturely, awl n' : express any opinion, until we have first called the 'Counsel to state what departure they 1 . 0 to be adopted in this case from the roa r ' , `of examination usual in other Courts .of 3 0 ' tice ; :to hear .their arguments on ;both ,siO 4 ' and then to come to a fixed and definite rule not 'to be _departed from afterwards. .No O le • should be , adopted which could exclude th e . great principle of justice itself. No rule, the' fore, can. be made by your Lordships,, which PI may not he induced to vary upon a special a 5, strong . ground- being made out to show that 0.1 such variation the ends of justice willbebe s l promoted. But your Lordships will do we to- take: as-nearly. as : poisible for your :guidao the mode of proceediug established in our cooly° 'of - Law ; for there is no principle so sa tisf3c r tory to those who are called on to- adminisfO t the justice of the country in those Courts, as tt' s , they have fixed - and established rules Of proce e d :ing ; and that they have not on any„occoion.. ° ; go over a whole ocean of argument, iu search e' rules.and principles-.upon which to act. , I r4tr e . fore it is : my purpose to induce your LordshiP' tolvtlopt some fixed and' definite rule in this cils`i: by which . ta guide your proceedings; And,. wi l l this view, I shall vote for adjourning the llou' o now, in order to give. time for : Noble Lords t consider the subject maturely before MondaY., o The LORD cHANCELLOH consulted With t'j Judges, and said it was their : opinion that, Mr. 'Broti,gharn been furnished -with a list as case of high treason, he could not have been f'; lowed to put the onestien proposed,,, unless went through with the whole of his cross-exat ill ; ) nation. After a debate, a motion was put ire' the Woolsack, " That the Counsel be called' and that.the Counsel against the. Bill be recine; ed to state whether any, and what departure fre o the usual - course of examination 'they consider t t be necessary to- meet-the justice 'of-- the prese% Case ; that her-Majesty's Counsel be.heard the prOpriety of such departure from,that coq o `' e and that the CoUnsel in favour of the JBill ,1) heard against the arguments of the opp lls Counsel." Upon the Counsel. being called in, -- 11 „ r ; Baouoti.tm addressed theJlouse,. and said, t l ';1 he -- was bound; at all tiines, by- his prolessioe r responsibility, to state that which-would be c‘ j , duciye to the interest of his : client.. TheirlAl r ,, ships would see the hardship that was impo,l upon him; being called upon in a moment, 0,11,, without having any opportunity' of consult,'loi his Learned Brothers, and of availing . himselt 6 , their superior wisdom, before he made, his e-l e , tion. If now for the first time their Lordsl „, began to perceive the sad -eousequendes of bi decision preViously come to-if they now beg / to discover the necessity of. retreading their steF e , The Earl 'of LIERPOO.I. said,. the I fouse'." 6o , ready to bear the argument of the Learned C° : _ ge sel then if he chose to go into it ; but if it Ik t r be his intention to. ask for delay,. he thought Learned Gentleman was at that moment or cii !ij ing their Lordships' time unnecessarily, as it cgetto not be for. 'their co:we'll:owe . that they 0 0 e f hear: half the argument 'then, and-hive the 0". half reserved for Monday. rP IV Mr. BROUGHAM said, that he was Ire, I,lr stating the difficulty . in which he was placeutid their Lordships. He would,- however, reg delay. The'proceedings wer , adjourned to -M° 4ll . (this day.) f o r A shilling subscription has been proposed :a b e the purpose of purchasing a piece of plate - a in presented to the QUEEN. This is a nnouac, r e oo o large posting bills,and that Mr. AldermatilY is the Treasurer. t On Thuvsday the Brilomari, to mo an guns, was laU i hed at Portsmouth. 81-I{'l'll'. C r' ~.of I At Will: -place, Ftr;:ham, the Lady of Charles i Eq.. of a .1-.lghter. W illiO On Satir -:- y last. in Wimpoic-street, the Lady of Johnstone, Esv of a eanghter. • 11A11111E1). el r 44 1 1 ; At Paris, on the 19th inst. at -int Hotel of hi' `", s „ c . St e. o f the British Ambassador, Mr. Wil!iam.B. Lees, of ''',t i ter yard, Lipner 'Chantey - street, to ElixaLeth, only 13", the I;it r• Mr. Geoige Alerman. of the former r it Y . ' • 1)1E1). • of I°tl°' On Wednesday, the 2 Id inst. Harriet, the , x)•- r niei Wells, Esq. of Pieere!'eld,Nlotimouthshire• 9 5th Y::,• (In Thursday evening, •in,.Cadoati place,. in ti i c e e el C of his age, .Georr.t. St aitiforilt. E-q. of TrinitY C te flt bridtfe,'eldest. son Of Richard Stainforth. 1 7,4 - 1 33 r L:st he at Liverpool; after a few days L %kite of Sir William 'Barton. p a r At hit h(itlte it Berkeley-sqoare, Th o mas .-. l "' e e' 9.0 O ,' „ A• • LONDON: Printed hy.l. B. CARSTAMS, by • Ornoind-street: (,)m - nni-ssittaie; .and lish Ti 0,10,1 StIIIPPS, of - 0 2 Oifice, No. 1 Strand Sonth where Ativeitise street n ico" , Utters, &c. (post-paid.) must aldressed.