The Sun. — London, England, 1820-08-29 00:00:00

e to tain !'d t ould their pro ; :ii oL per.- that ch he ion of iatiol) ,vhose Ile tt' houla hear DII . t" Urret/ reCoit their e rude' d ad' ?eCiiiC tatioof co, Tic` 01114 ye al l ' ettliv; bail 1 1, ful 4 t.ll , e 0 1 ) 6 i jo 0). -0 OUg° irge °lce : {,,tat 1 1 ' 01 0.1 Asir , I ri "; .exan" le6 collo o.3 9 ,f je ir a s t oat nine' Ile .1e tHo ` vii ; OP" pr!' s j i l lP pcet b 0 O. I ce' To [PO ka kneW that tire printiple acted upon In all Coats of Jus tice was, that the Counsel for the defence should make his speech immediately, if that were physically possit l ie ; and the reason „ fit was clear, that the interval eve?' of twelve hours Pliottltt lint he allowed to afford the opportunity of getting up - a 0 1Am .let e n ce. H e then stated the argument oil both sides, 1"" 1 gave it as his opinion, that the delay to lie allowed be 'Keen the evidence fur the prosecution and that for the de. fra te was witch more than equivalent to any advantage that the Queen could have hoped to derive from being indulged a list of the witnesses. He she wed that a great advan-- ''gc W 3% thus afforded to her Majesty's, Defenders ; and pro to argue, that if the claim for delay were admitted,. c "eY could never hope•to arrive at the conclusion of these prii 4`di"e.s. If eight or ten weeks were allowed to prepare tar c. cro ss - examination, cont.! their Lordships in fairness refuse iihilulgence to the Officers of the Crown ? It might t heta appear necessary, in consequence of what came out lhe cross-examinations, to cal new witnesses, and then a e s il-e.rl d elay might he c a ll e d f o r t o cr o s s - e xa m i ne th em , an d sub -I,,,attili)e.ittly a still further delay preparato ry to their re-exarni per- ''• Acting thus, it was impossible for them to foresee the ji e l q at which the Attorney-tieneral could close his case. c e ,.7 4 % or oriniutt that the cross-examination ought to pro -4s it had •lotte in the former part of the inquiry. • sid i,h r LORD CHANCELLOR having considei ed and re-con ;o 'red the subject, would feel it his duty to give the same . ),: . "'m the questions which had been disposed of relatire to mode of proceeding with the inquiry that he had given .‘s,e,..,rettifore. He Was convinced that tarnishing her Majesty re 11 1... list of the witnesses that were to he . calle , d,. would nut „ mine a f ortieth part of the difficulties wit h which they had contend. He cong ratulated himself and the House that the y had not come to a final determination on the question '‘" bad been raised on Saturday. A more fatal precedent t c h u 'd 'lot he established thau would have been formed had ,' , s t Norse been taken which !lie House generally srenied •atiiiturdity to think proper. He described the course which d been taken its the examination of a former witness, oil. i' r ving by th e way t h at i t was a m i sta k e to suppose that I T, 4d ing piestions could not be put by their Lordships. At cunclusiott of the cross-examination of Paturzo, he read rein the minutes— t Ale. BROUGrt Ist stated, that not being aware of the at ,"dance of this witness, he trusted their Lordships would oe t a 'eel , tot front putting further questions to him, %well •as the former witness at a future time, .in case of e ieirite information which might render it material to do so. oet-, be Cotiosel were informed, that the liouse would judge 0e,,,0c. application whets it was tliade, with the circ ta numsces ‘i.stoilitt,,s, it." I his applicatioo his . Lordship held to be perfectly 1.1,, . the part of tire Learned Counsel. A distinct ap. aC tt ion had heeit made to the House to allow Theodore the ' ,l4 'ci to b e recalled, in consequence of information which • b ''"rl) , •ti Gentleman had received, and which he regarded s elt .''"g "of very considerable ininneitt." He had pledged him • :" put only one or two questions, but on this he laid no tit petting one question might make it absolutely ne t...a:. l• it ry , put ' another. The witness, however, was brought d r estt , ti ' " the ground which he had'stated. Thus flatters atom,. °wtt to Saturday, when a new application was to defer the cross-examination of a witness till in t!, Y however, be mad e into her character and situation in life. nl '"wever, pot it to their Lordships, if the cross-examina rs. w hich •I I • into did not exceed the limits ai t h : at. Kin sone h.. "I Whiell . the Learned Counsel's questions ought to have „,, - .t t4 confined if a future cross-examination were to be allow lee•He did not say that there was no difficulty in the way of it r „, - l ee ding as it had now been proposed to their Lordships to be er 4, by refusing to attend to the application which had pa rt - . tn ade: but there woold be much more danger in de - „ e ' l l from that rule which hail been handed down from 4 4c, and which had been acted on in all occasions of th4tn'tture. It was essent i a l to t h e i nteres t s o f b o th p ar ti es te., a t he cross.examinations should immediately follow the • iination in chi e f ; that if the integrity of a witness were qeestion, he might have an opportunity of set niniself tight with the Court at once. e showed that the a te , 4 ,:' ) er-General could. not tell whether, or nut it would lie t ."ry to call more witnesses till the cross-examinations tg .„,„'een gone through with. There was another point ot tt.:S.t importance. Was the indulgence as to time that was e";• c laimed to be mutual ? If so, it would be seen whist for "t " delays in s i s t t a k e pl ace w hil e ev id ence was sought setlat Jerusalem, at Tunis, and other places. objected b the defence in the present case being conducted I'l,::,Thinciples never before acted tipon under the benig it t LW of England. Were th ey to destroy all the laud ta ' , wh i r ? of the Coastitittion to avoid meeting the difficulty th I t t face It was impossible for hint a ey loss o . 11 1 , 4 ,PPrOve of any other mode of conducting the defence tat, ' thitt which accorded with the ancient established ll tai l t l l aid down in cases of this sort. He was of opinion ktei n ! cr oss - examination ought immediately to follow the ex e:„-x.s.auutic+ciliiiiiunt chief. This would be the safest cuurse of pro always with an inclination to open ratite!. than r eWhe re d°or against the further examination of a witness, the c : 4 .' ° "ithie ' grounds for doing tht , should be shewn. On that o r, , lie r'ee of an old man he would assure their Lordships kme ' mn 'ideratiott, they would find the practices nctined W • England to lie founded on pi inciples to sa whic o h it r ate i,e_MO.st wise to adhere—that it would nut be well, to W 111,1117 I nconvenience to-day, to depart from that course 'Used the sanction of ages; and that they might be as- Itt,tt t ghat it would be b etter to acquit tett thousand persons & si ve egitt o . those established rules which had hitherto is . ell their preceeditoss. tent 4E tt G REY said it was a ' question whether it was not incum ----(tieP°l•l their Lordships to drop the proceedings altogether. t ies i r : sr s hear!)—He had supposed that the peculiar w hlch her Majesty was placed, by the bringing for by rep.ainst her a n tunber of vague and.indefinite charges, aid d eKt ee t ' s 'ilf; her the list of witnesses, would have been in smite erest co ltinetisated for, by granting her Counsel the power of 14, 4 w e ' ta n'ioing, the evidence against her, undercirctinistances tar ed ° WI' leave no cause of Complaint. If, after haring as. :f t ! . ( attee . O' S COMISeI of this . indulgence,. some reasons 'esteeming thi•ir power, tie would advise their Lord 'etc t(I consider well before they would , withdraw the privi °f the Q - • eat s a liven s Counsel, and hear them urge their argil ti4ekg4,llst such a proceeding. It was not his intention to Ist to the arguments upon the propriety of grantins,• a 1 1 : 14 n u tt e V il lt'stcs;' he should merely allude to them fur the ot of. elucidation. He lamented that the House had If 4 do • tl i ,ted the advice of his Noble Frieud (Lord Erskine). nad „„eirl so One so, those difficulties which now presented 'oe p r - es v_es would no longer exist ; and the consideration Zedi,,,,:nt. question, calculated as it was to protract the pro. e f t, s , • would have been rendered wholly unnecessary.— rti Grey) was the first who had proposed to their 4 111 "IK (0 a'. • ( ti : ,rant a particular specification . of the ch . arges •e urisi de ,C witnesses, and he would ask the i r Lordships to De lla r whether Oleic. was an X i mp upon record of a *ill 4, he . d . . t la almost said a criml, baying been charged ' t o .'e r e se a I thtber of acts without specifical Mil of those s e l es . Jew 'ills Was a departure from the ordinary course hulteeti.altogetliar, as he had before expressed him th Rti the ."e House had thought otherwise. He did pot ar ,tr gr a , l •!tirlgtner i t ot the House; but when be was told that ' h e tet. those advantages which were granted upon all ea 'l it . Was contrary to all precedent, he must dissent hikatittep.Was argued that if the imputed offence had been ' ll Etigland, the charge would have been •one, of :Ne i ; --s °n• How then w uld her Majesty here been eto. 41 4) 4 Kainst ? • ° •byl• • welt h ef 1 ,.. She would have had, tats, a specifi tteliso, charges, a list of witnesses, and all othia ad ,l• !tette a ntcli were now denied to her. If she had been I,,uee vei."te st Fainst in the other road, that of divorce, a ill teu to be eq ua lly utimaintainable with that of e .kg 41 7„ 1 11 K ..Purist her upon a charge of high treason, . as ecl es ,!'"g head of the Church, was not amenahle to 'at a t"ert ',"tial Courts, what would have taken place ? fel t 4 arc ts y koUld be furnished with a distinct specification eu et 4 tivaq . list of witnesses and as much time for tr..4i,ng iu lt cti, 4 ge of all those privileges ' as seas necessary for the co t : t . ° l f the ease. Besides, if any. new matter came out "au i of the investigation, she would be allowed to t at , ealrt d, intl to call wit ne s ses t o supp or t h e r 'argument. teas it then asking too much to request that her N 1.1,4411,4110 permitted ' to cross-examine, under such ti4el ° f t . ; • , 44 's •IS WOlllll in some degree compensate for the re. st,o9'.,e advantages ? Certainly not. It had been dis kip:Nis-547.5' by their Lord:imps that her Majesty should have th e ' y rot those advantages, and could they with ra ite l'urp„,. that winch was the only thin , that ojeild answer fie,,,l,lrr e „Js Oran equivalent As to a preced ent upon which char ged . • a e •i -oef,t, Of th e ei could be shown to e snail. et to sp ss ut s ci ' l4 rges and a list of witnesses, the case of the 1 1 ' 1 11 41'. te o " , lish ' 4' , f ) : ) lls. which had been cited at thei . r Lordships' For i t , ti . le of great force. A divorce having been without an previous proceeding in tker"Pdf - tAsticA t d e e obt air 'named. A list of witnesses was also - applied "d•--(Hear, hear, hear')—'Those advantages ara st grant e d , 1 Tim the special ground of the peculiar „"In eh 4 Otis, t ,. 1 .11 1 Winch the Duchess was said to stand; and Pr Y ..: 1 5%, fit to grant without hesitation, that titled to the Queen of England. Nay, ereti u t ruf es eXamination of the witnesses, for the pur ist 4 tis cer taittii eai nart• • 'I; their places of residence and other bul k 4 -Wars t uti r i . it. d ecisiw + s tiermitted. It was Hot 11 . 13 wish to 4.lt 4it whia of then Lordships; hut having adopted itir ' i lk:Queen would be furnished with an.equi ' • ""Jita S c o Pauli:ll to every body else, they were bound to consider well whether they should take away from her Majesty's Counsel the privileges which they had pro mised ? He had understood that a reservation. of cross-exami nation was to be made. He was aware of the numerous in conveniences resulting froth' this course, but' these inconveni ences amounted to nothing when put its comparison with the injury that must result from a denial Of those privileges.' There was but one of three, courses tube adopted first was, to abandon the prticeedings altogether. The td. was to correct the error into_whiLit they had already falleq, by furnishing a list of witnesses, and a specification of charges; and the third was, to-do that which they had engaged tti do, by allow ing the present Counsel to reserve a cross-examination for a • sub Sequent period. He {mete that an accumulation of diffi culties must necessarily arise out of the last course, but if one of the three were not adopted. a severe' wound would be inflicted upon the character of that House. The question upon which they were now engaged was one upon which the public ''opinion ought t o h are an influence. 'Elie character of that House had suffered already in the public 'opinion, and how much more Would it suffer if their Lordships. consented to depart from their rule at the suggestion of the Counsel for the Crown ? Lord GRENVILLE said, it was not necessary to make any positive rule to allow the Counsel for the Crown to call a wit ness a second time, if any new fact or circumstance arose which wont(' resider such second examination to the interest of their client, since this would be granted in every Court of Justice, and much more so in that House, which would grant, with out reserve and without restriction, liberty for the Counsel to bring every circumstance forward favourable to the de fence. The re-examination of a witness had already been found of great importance; [rut on Saturday their Lordships had adopted a course of proceeding that did nut extend but limit the right of defence. They Lad interrupted Counsel in asking a question, which, if cross-examination was at all to be allowed, he certainly had a right to put. But in that interruption their Lordships looked to the effect the question might have on a future cross-examination. Their Lordships had, unfortunately. set the example of limiting and restrict , ing the cross-examination for the defence, and had thus win ' late(' a rule they had laid down but an hour before. Their Lordships had interrupted the Counsel in a question which, according to the rules of law and the principles of justice, ought to have been permitted.—(Hear, hear!)—Their Lord ships bad now nothing to. do .but to recur to the course they first adopted, which was, nut to restrain the Counsel front putting any question which he considered of import ance to the interests of his client; and as, front a list of wit nesses having been refused, his knowledge of each witness must be imperfect, he should afterwards be allowed to again cross-examine any witness that he thought necessary to be re-examined. Their Lordships ought to listen with the must favour-11)1e ear, and to give greater latitude than in ordinary cases. If they proceeded any further in their pro ceedings, this ought to he the course they should adopt. The only question now was, what was to be communicated to Counsel when they were called in ? If their Lordships adopted any rule of proceeding which the Counsel thought injurious to their client, they must hear that. Counsel. Their Lordships, on Saturday, had acted wrong in asking Counsel what deviation they wished from the ordinary course of ex amination ; for was it ever known that any Court ofJustice, much less the High Court of - Parliament, applied to Counsel for advice? Their Lordships should adopt -their own plan, and, if objectionable, hear Counsel against it. The Earl of LIVERPOOL rose tocorrect an error into whiCh the Noble Marquis (Lansdown) had fallen. When he (Lord Liverpool) wished to offer an equivalent to her Majesty's Counsel for• any disadvantage under which they supposed they laboured, by not having a-list of witnesses, an adjourned cross-examination was never contemplated ; but that if new facts or new circumstances rendered it necessary, the House would feel no hesitation in allowing witnesses to be re examined. He wished particularly to impress on their Lord ships, that there was no understanding in the mind of any iadividual, or in the House collectively, to allow an adjourn ed cross•examittatioo. Earl GREY did understand that the equivalent to the de fence for not giving a list of witnesses was, that the Counsel should choose their own time for the cross examination ; that is, either to make it immediately after the examination in chief, or to defer it altogether. Lord REDESDALE made some remarks, which were inau dible below the Bar. The LORD CHANCELLOR was proceeding to put the Re solution, when The Earl of LIVERPOOL wished it to he understood, that it was only on sonic new fact or circumstance arising that the Counsel for the defence should be entitled to apply for a new examination of any witness.- A long desultory debate ensued as to the form of the com munication to be made to the Counsel ; the speakers were Lord Redesdale, Lord Lauderdale, Lord Donoughmore, Mar quess of Lansflown, Earl Bosslyn, Lord Liverpool, Lord Ers kine, Lord Caernai von, and Lord Ellenborough. It was finally ordered that Counsel should he called in. The Counsel were then called to the bar, and those on the part of her Majesty informed, that the order., in consequence of which the Queen's Attorney-General had been allowed to commence the cross-examination of the last witness pro duced, with the understanding of having the privilege to ad journ the same and resume it at a future time, bad been dis charged; and that it having been proposed that her Majesty's Counsel should tie commanded to proceed with the cross-exa mination of witnesses immediately after the examination in chief, as in ordinary cases, with a full claim of calling back any witness for further cross-examination Ira case facts or cir cumstances not known before should come out in the inter val, the House was ready to hear her Majesty's Counsel against the said proposed mode of conducting the cross-exa mination on behalf of her Majesty. Mr. BROUGHANI proceeded to address their Lordships, and observed, if difficulties had been found in the course of proceeding, even should those difficulties be found insnr mountable, the fault did not rest with him or those who acted with him. .1 he persons who 'patronized this Bill of Pains and Penalties had universally supported the pro positions coming from his opponents, and had never acceded any thing. to him. His Learned Friend now complained of difficulties. but how did they arise ? not out of any one of his requests being denied, but one of his wishes being so fully and promptly granted. Even the last resolu- I come to in this getat national drama,and which their Lot d• ships were now about to abandon. arose out of an Act of his Learned Friend. He had now to contend, that its all cases, even between private individuals, the specification of time and place, though not formally set out ou time record, was so described as to resider it impossible to misunderstand. In all cases an offender was told the county in which the offence was laid. In the present case the Queen was told the acts committed were committed in some ime of three 'quarters of the globe—in Europe, Asia, or Aft ica ; in some part of these countries, inhabited or uninhabited, in some of the seas: rivers, harbours, towns, cities, or villages belonging thereto; and the less they had been in those countries the more diffi cult would be the task of defeating accusation. Uudee all these difficulties, he arid those acting with him, did humbly conceive they understood the meaning of, and that they were, through the,great goodness of their Lordships,to be indulged with certain advantages in consequence of the peculiar situa tion of hardship in which their Lordships' wisdom had placed them. He little dreaMt that when these advantages should come to be sifted they would turn out only to be the indulgence Which •any Court they would he entitled to ask for. — The moment the extraordinary circumstances of his case acre adverted to, and extraordinary courses were asked for to meet it : then their Lordships reverted to Old Bailey pre cedents and practice, which it was said tied their hands; but he denied that they were without precedent; there was the ease of the Duke of Norfolk. Here the Duke gave in a spe cification, but her Grace was not satisfied with it, for the. adultery was !set forth in fire parishes, and the time seven months. Her Grace objected to this specification, and said amend i t s t a t e in what months and what parishes, and the House ordered it; and his Grace gave in the amended speci fication, setting forth the months. In January, at Windsor; in February, in St. Margaret and St. John's ; in March and April, in Saint Martin's, and SO on ; and their Lordships gave four days to enable her to go to Windsor, to sift the truth of the evidence to be produced against her. Now it was not true, that he seas not to call this case in precedent. It was not true, that this was a solitary case. In fact, this was the great case of authority in divorce cases, and was that on which divorce law was founded ; and was a ease parallel, was it not a case founded Ilene without previous proceedings in the Courts below? Were they to say that this, which was the great case of authority, was not to be cited. It was childish to say so. .lug in this case one. witness swore to seeing the parties in bed together ; another swore to seeing them in the very Jet of adultery at Windsor; yet so full was the cross-examination, which, hut for the indulgence given to her 'race, could not have taken place, the whole was answered so fully, that tlre witnesses were discredited, and the Lords threw out the Bill. The sum of the • observations lie was about to make was, that their Lordships had considered it right to retract the extraordinary advantages which they contemplated to. grant on 'Saturday; and it was now said that no cross-examination should take place, unless the Counsel consented to make the witness his own. Whocould look at this, and not see the crying injustice which would arise out of such a proceeding ? He was told." Oh ! hut we must keep to the roles of Courts of Justice." Hs would sa y, fh, so, do so, by all means." It seas what he bad proceeding called fur from the very commencement of this and he only called foe it in What he cousiderA as the Sive!Mt ' hour of this proceeding; for be believed it .was nearexpiring. But be begged of their Lordships not to grant - them in part, not to adhere to them partially, adopting only such as tended to benefit the King,' mid inhere the Queen. Delay was now proposed betweeit the examination of wittiessta' on each side. Let it be so; and ,during that delay, HO from day to day, misrepresentation and falsehood were sure to go abroad. He saw in an Evening Paper of Saturday st•statement, 'that the moment a witness was about to prove the act of adultery committed in' the Queen's bed, she was stopped by the Queieh's Counsel. Now this was false, infamously false; though, to make. it serve the purpose of the writer, who, he believed,. knew it to he false at the time be wrote it, to make it a useful lie, it was mixed up with a certain par tom of truth. With respect to the mode of proceeding, did their Lordships believe that there Was any thing in the dress, education, or habits of a Counsel, which enabled him in an instant, having never seen a witness, or heard Of him before, ou looking in his face, and being told by their Lordships to cross-examine the witness, to .proceed to examination with out further information? Now suppose instances and acts should vane to his knowledge of a witness being bribed, could he call evidence to prove that ? Certainly not, unless he had previously put the question in truss-examination- If their Lordships should think fit to call on them to proceed from day to day, to hear witness after witness examined as to transactions taking place in various parts of the globe, with out having the power of answering them, they would then adhere to those rules which had been adverted to. He shhuld here conclude his address to their Lordships, but for some misconception which app eare d t o h ave gone a broadl on their Lordship?. minds as regarded the calling back Majocci. He was taken as pledging himself not again to call hint back, but what he had said was, that if indulged in the irregularity of calling hien back, then he would nut ask the indulgence again till he came to open his case. Mr. DENMAN followed on the same side, and contended there Was no security for the Queen, for the humblest sub ject in the realm, or for any one of their Lordships' august House being dragged to the bar of criminal j u sti ce , a t th e mercy of any perjured wretch, unless freedom of cross-exa mination in its fullest extent was preserved to Counsel. He demanded nosy, on the part of the King and the subject, the free exercise of this most importantright. He would ask, what would he the situation of any individual brought into Court, charged with crime, if lie might not have the oppor tunity of inquiry, who and what was the character of the witness against him ? Thus in the case of high treason, a list of the witnesses was given in the first instance, and the Crown could afterwards add no witness to the number; thus a party accused of high treason might set up a defence supported by perjury. and the Government might know it, yet no new evi dence could be called to contradict it; this at first might ap pear contrary to justice, but reflection and the wisdom of our ancestors had thought it better to risk the escape of an in dividual, though guilty, than that any man should he sub jected to have witnesses brought against hint by the State, without having the power of 'inquiry as to the evidence to he brought forward to substantiate the charge. He would ask, suppose he should have received information going to impeach the character of a witness, to load him with infamy, but yet such information might not be so clear as to justify him as an advocate or a gentleman in putting questions without further information; if afterwardshe obtained that informa tion, was he not to be allowed to call again for such a wit ness. and to put the questions to him ? Another subject he must advert to; it was apparent front the examination of the witnesses, by some of their Lordships, that they put ques tions on information derived from sources closed to Coauser: this was another subject of hardship, and he must be allowed to say, that sinless they were now indulged in cross-examina tion to the fullest. extent, time best source of her Majesty's defence would be denied to her ; and better a thousand times would it he that they should withdraw from the contest, un der the feeling that time illustrious party concerned was de voted to destruction. He again implored their Lordships, before they adopted this rule, to consider well the conse 'quences; in adopting it they would not only sacrifice the in terest of the party in this case, but of every individual in the country. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, anyone, to hear the speech of his Learned Friend, would be led to believe that their Lordships were now about to depart from some esta !dished rule, for the injury of an individual ; instead of dis cussing; how far they could grant indulgence to the accused, by departing from certain regulations laid down by our an cestors its their wisdom, and whicla had been adhered to for ages, the greater part of his Learned Friend's address had been made up of declamation. Much had been said of the refusal to grant a list of witnesses ; but this boasted advan tage, he was convinced, instead of being an advantage, was a disadvantage to time persists accused since it obliged a prose cutor to give in a swelled list of witnesses to answer all emer gencies ; and frequently a • list of witnesses, amounting to MO, was delivered, when not more than 10 were afterwards found - necessary to prove the Fact, yet the accused had to provide himself to answer every one of these witnesses, though not a tenth of them was afterwards called. Mr. Jus tice Forster, observing on this Law, had lamented that for the•sake of public justice, it was not repealed. His Learned Friend (Mr. B.) had particularly adverted to the case of the Duke of Norfolk. He could not have intended to mislead their Lordships, but he had not stated time case fairly. He could find no list of witnesses in that case, as stated by his Lererned Friend ; and so far front the charge being confined to fire months, it embraced a period of six years. The At torney-General then proceeded to read the elates in the Nor folk , case, to prove his statement correct. His Learned Friend said, the Duke had beets called on by the House to deliver in an amended specification. True, the House lead called on bins to do so, but why was that; why be cause in his first specification he had only stated that the Duchess bad committed adultery, without stating with whom, • when, or where ; and for that reason the House or dered a new specification. The Learned Gentleman then proceeded to comment on what bad fallen from the Counsel on the other side, as to the mode of cross-examination; the time which would be given at the conclusion. of the evidence on the part of the Bill, would afford abundant time for in vestigatioa into time character of the evidence. It was his Learned Friend who, at time twelfth hour, wished to alter his course of examination. He contended that the best time to cross-examine a witness, with a view to elicit truth and promote:the ends of justice, would he to take time examination immediately after the examination in chief.— His Learned Friend had complained of observations in flme Public Prints on the evidence, as reflecting on the Queen. If his Learned Friend read . the. Papers, he would soon discover that the witnesses and their Lordships had much greater reason to complain than the Queen had. He contended that all the advantage of cross-examination was given to the Queen's Counsel, and their Lordships were now called On to depart from the established rules for taking evidence on the assumption, they were to adopt a course which would render this proceeding almost indefinite. With respect to the decision of the case, no one could look at their Lordships' proceeding through the last week, and not see how anxious they were to do justice to the illustrious parties concerned. Restin g on this conviction, be should conclude his Address, assured that whatever decision they might come to, their Lordships would only be actuated by a view of eliciting the truth' nut only in this case, but in every case which might come befor e them. • The SOLICITOR GENERAL said, the Queen's Attorney General had, in the course of his Address, brought charges against himself and the King's Attorney General, as to the manlier in which they had conducted these proceedings. If the have r a g n u s I , : e e r nt ed s o f ie Mr. Brougham had been intended only f o r their Lordships. he should not have colisidered it neces s ary t o but as they appeared to be intended for other purposes, he must advert to them himself, a n d th e At torney. Genera l had been directed by their Lordships to lay before them the evidence in support of this Bill; and in time discharge of the duty thus imposed on them, they had endea stuffed to inform, themselves of the evidence, and had laid it before their Lordships with no other view, than a view to o so motejustiCe. He trusted their Lordships would hear tes timony to this fact. His Learned Friend had complained of reflections in the public prints, on the Queen. Could his Learned Friend ever take up a paper and not perceive that see tenfold. He would one nextco concerned in o w c h a p d r o b c e e e e n d i s t a l d s the lib e l s on th e i r L or d s hi ps ' H o • use, on time w i tnesses, on the hat i‘C:',;e'srisle:i'thholding the list of witnesses; he was bold to say, that there was no criminal c h arge kn o wn toour laws , althou g h th e c harge ' night go to effect the life of the indivival, i n w hi c h a list O f witnesses was given, He denied. that the supporters of the Bill desired to depart from the regular course of jus tics ; un time contrary, it was his Learned Friend and his co adjutors who w e r e Desirous of departing from that course which would be pursued on any similar occasion. T he Solicitor General proceeded to cowries!, that the other side could have no claim to the list of witnesses: the argue»euts of the Counsel were unfounded ; but his Friend seized every argument founded or unfounded to make out the shadow of a case. - His Learned Friend had said h e , mild not examine the wit ness of yesterday,_Why could l ie not That witness spoke to a fact at s . visich the Quern wa s present, and could he most, on consulting with his illustrious client, cross-examine her, and it any new facts should come to his knowledge as related to this witness, she might he re-examined on application to their Lordships. He had on more than one occasion had reason to admire the ex cellent examinations of souse of their Lordships, If the cross exaMination tt•as to be postponed, so mast these questions on . the part of their Lordships, and though it might be said their Lordships could put them hereafter, yet he denied that they could ever be put with the same degree of spirit and effect, and the examinations to forward the great object in their Lordships' d, justice, must all take place again. The examinations most be conducted, as he contended, in the usual course. Cross-examination was not •only•necessary to disci edit a witaess, but it went also to corrs►borate and , give strength to his testimouy. Another objection to this made of proceeding would be, that if this indulgence was given to the Queen's Counsel, the Counsel in support of the Hill would have a right to ask delay as regarded the opposioglestiniony. The Attorney-General would have a light to contend - that tilt the evidence was entirely-closed he ought not to- be called out to sum up. He must also object to this mode of proceeding, as regarded the witness himself. If cross-examination :fol lowed examination in chief immediately, a witness might he able to explain any thing which appeared contradictory ir► his testimonv, but if it was to be delayed for the time mentioned, it would be impossible for him to do so. The Solieitor-Geoe ral then proceeded to advert to sonic inconveniences which such a course wools! entail on the Queen. If ion cross-exami nation took place after, witnesses . might be examined, and state facts without contradiction, till contradiction became insp.,. sible. He contended that it would be impossible to gran tlion application of his Friend without entirely defeating the object of the present inquiry. Mr. BROUGHAM, in reply, denied that he had misquoted. the Not folk case. The Counsel on the other sine assumed all the law and all the talent on the present occasion ; those me the Queen's side had only a book or two to depend upon. His Learned Friends quoted from the octavo volume of Cnbhca's State Trials, whilst he (Mr. B.) hid only the folio edition of the Journals of their Lordships' House; and-in page 46 and 47 of the 15th volume of their Lordships' Journals he had read the record of the Norfolk case, which he had stated to their Lordsbips. God forbid be should triumph over his Learned Friends, 'though they had been too apt to triumph over hint. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to read extracts (rotation evidence of the several witnesses examined in that case, to shew the extent to which their Lordships suffered cross examinations to go in that case. Next as to a list of 'witnesses being given; here again his Learned Friends had the advantage of Cobliett's labours ; he was sorry he bait not that valuable hook. His Learned Friend, looking to hie authority, said, there was no list of witnesses given: but their Lordships' Journals again misleading, said there was a list of witnesses. with their residence given, and other particulars. So also the specification of times and places, for they were all set out in their Lordships' _Journals. Now, came the King's Solicitor-General, and of him lie stood still more in awe ; for besides his acknowledged sone/int-it y of talent as a lawyer, be was continually saying," You go along ; you are only the • Queen's Solicitor, whilst I am the King's Solicitor. - Now thi s was cruel; it would be sufficient sure that lie should de pend on his talent, without thus crushing his adversary with the weight of his rank ! Surely his Learned Friend might sa tiate his ambition with the laurels he was daily gaining by his • talents ; latirels, to which no triliort; of applause he could pay, could add a single leaf. He should now contend again, that the person accused bad a right to such a specification of time and place, as could leave him no room to doubt. This specifica tion was even given in an action for debt, and in an action of covenant the breaches would be assigned ; and he was ready to contend, that in nn civil action was a defep:la•A left in ig norance how, when, and where the cause of action arose. In an indictment, a matt was not tried for any felonious inter course, for a • long life of criminal acts; but he was tried rita some specific charge. Mitch had also been said of adhering to precedents, and their , , Lordships were now about to lay down a rule as related to Pains and Penalties. Was it likely then that Bills of this description should come so commons that it was necessary to lay down a rule never to be departed. from? Was it necessary that their Lordship , should now lay down a rule never to he departed from, let who would he eon victed, guilty or innocent, by adhering to it. ? Was it likely that at any early day another Bill of Pains and Penalties would be introduced against a Queen? It was-now said. that better that 10 persons should be convicted, than the es tablished rule broke down. He would say, better ten escape who were guilty, than their Lordships forfeit their characterfor justice. :tiro lied seen, in. the course of these examination., the facilities with which hfs Learned. Friends could get their witnesses o►er. If they did not come willingly—if bribes could nut induce them—they were forced by their Govern ments to come over. Would the saute aid be given to the Queen ? Would she have assistance to find her witnesses; and when found, would they be forced to come over ? On the contrary, had he not reason to doubt that those Govern ments which forced the witnesses for the King to come over would be ready to prevent the Queen's witnesses leaving the places where they resided ? Under all the circumstances of the case, he implored their Lordships not to suffer themselves to be confined by precedents and rules of Law Courts, but to adopt the only course which could do_ her Majesty justice. Lord LIVERPOOL said, it being now five o'clock, he shooki move that their Lordships do adjourn, thus taking till to morrow to-deliver their opinion ; and previous to their doing so, he must say a word or two, in answer to what had fallen from the Learned Counsel on the subject of witnesses heist:- brought over. It was right that their Lordships should know her Majesty's Legal Advisers had the power of drawing an unlimited amount for the purpose of enabling her Majesty to provide for her defence, firing over witnesses, and all other purposes connected with these proceedings. As to witnesses being forced to come over where bribes would not operate ; be must declare he knew of no installed where bribes had been offered. Some Governments had the poww•er to force their sub jects over, others had nut that power ; but he moist he per mitted to say, that in those countries where the Government had the power it r oilld he equally exerted to aid the Queen •in bringing over her witnesses as it load been to send over those who came to support the Bill. It was only on condition that each party should possess equal advantages that he would be a party in such a proceeding as the present.—(Hear!) Lord V.R.SKINE said, be certainly did not rise to ohjectto the adjournment, though he was convinced it was utterly itn— possible their Lordships should ever accede to the rule of law now contended for by the Counsel for the Co•oml. It would l►e most expedient, however, that their Lordships should take time until to-morrow to consider the arguments they had heard, and now adjourn, and lie trusted they would now Ile disposed to do at last what should hare formed part of their preliminary proceedings, namely, grant to her Majesty a list of those witnesses which yet remained to be examined, with a specification of the times and places where the alleged of— fences are said to have been committed. The House then adjourned at a quarter past fire o'clock. SOMRESET ASSIZES.—At these Assizes a cause was tried, BINGHAM Y. GARDENER., which ex cited much interest. Our readers will recol lect, that in Mavlast, it was stated in the News papers that a lady (Mrs. Bingham, the plaintiff,) was charged with having stolen a ,1. note from a box which was held by k person for a charita ble collection, at the door of the Octagon Chapel, Bath; it appearing that the articles in the News papers which charged the lady with this offence were written by Dr. Gardener, (who 'preached at the Chapel on the 'occasion) the lady brought an action against the Doctor, for what she con sidered a libel on her character ; the cause was tried before Mr. Justice Burrough and a Special Jury ; after the evidence had been gone through on both sides, the Judge summed up ; he de sired the Jury to place themselves in the same situation as if the circumstances had been brought before them on a criminal indictment as a Graced Jury. If the evidence was sufficient to warrant their considering the act as one of a felonious na ture, they must find for the defendant; but if they deemed the defendant's evidence not com pletely sustantiated, then must they find damages against him. The Jury, by their Foreman, Sir T. B. Lethbridge, Bart. M. P. after consulting twenty minutes, returned n verdict for defendant. Mr. Serjeant Pell was employed for the lady, and wept profusely (as did many others in Court) while • making his reply.—Both partieS move In the first circles in Bath; the plaintiff is a maiden lady, 70 years of age. A Monument to..the memory of the late la- Theiard Duke of KENT is proposed to be erected by subscrip lion; and we understand that a committee is,about to be formed here, of those friends of his itortl Highness to whoin in his life time he was endeared hy numerous acts of kindness . , and those si,turs which shed a lustre un,his exalted mks- 4 (Plyin6ulle . and Dock Telegraph.)