The Sun. — London, England, 1820-08-25 00:00:00

PARLIAMENT, HOUSE OF LORDS, Ave. 24. THE QUEEN. Their Lordships assembled this morning at a little before ten o'clock, The Lord Bishop of- Llarniatl, as usual, -read Divine Service. The •I'yeYs were then called 'over . ; and at ten minutes aftt:T ten the COUnsel and Agents Were called in. TIM ATTORNEY-;GENERAL, SOLI6ITOII-GEIIE. and the other Counsel in support of the Bill, ehtered the House•by the folding doors at the Bar. "The Queen's - Connsel did not make their appearance until a few minutes afterwards.— They , then-entered by. the side door. The Lo an' CIIINCELLOR.—Mr. Attorney-Ge siY.ral,'you will proCeed. , • The ATrouNEV-GENtaAL.—We go on with a fresh witness this morning, My. Lord, who 'is sent for. • . The witness Vince n:-.0 Guai:gilo," now entered, and took his station at the Bar. . After he had b4... , n sworn in the usual• Way, • ' • Mr. Iv\rutiAms said, that before the witness Should .be examined, he wished to know their Lordships' - decision on a particular point which he was about to' submit. lie did not wish to re new disCussion on any subject already decided. upon br their Lordships,. ,but he Wasantious to knew from their Lordships, if the point which he had to subMit had been decided by their Lord . - ships 'in any . other ease; in the case before the House it had not been mentioned, much less argued upon. He would not attempt to call up day question wherein he found the larger body Of authorities against hint ; but he apprehended that his opinions were fortified by 'all known pre be. dents which were acted upon in determining Stich- a point. He "was anxious to know if he ..n ht be allowed to put a question to -the witness atS' to the importance 'of the oath which he had taken in binding "his conscience: He knew that lie had no right-to inquire" of 'a witness believ in,i; in• the existence of a' God and a future. state roSp'ecting his belief. He was perfectly ready to could 'be no question—that had been Betided several times. But although that was perfectly true, it was equally certain 'that every person adduced in a Court of Justice as a wit-, Jit6S,.ought to be Sivorn according to, that form or sacrarnerital 'ceremony which Wetild be the Mast' binding on his conscience. It was not on slight grounds that he Maintained that opinion. Their Lordships' would find by the case of Omeston acid Parker, in' Cooker, and by cases which had occurred since, in which that case was referred toOliat such was the' `general :decision of the authoritieS. The 'question "person in the first Case Was, 'Whether or not - a: person being not of the CatbOlic or'any known reliffion, not believing lithe faith, but being perfecdy a heathen, could be admitted as a witness, or _could ' be held res , , ponsible for his oath, -if taken according to, the* ordinary form. A long discussion took place, on that occasion it.was determined by all the Budges, and their decisionwas,reCgVeditS antho ritfin all subsequent cases, that the 'person to be sworn should be swurn_by the ceremony most binding on his conscience, according, to his own acknow led gement.—[llere the, Learned, counsel, recited the several opinions ,of the Judges.] Now, : suppose a c;hinese„ to appear as ,a witness, which had since been the case ; or, suppose a IVishemetan to . appear as a witness, which had since ,been_ the case ; if. they ,had taken the oath usually administered to them, and no further pledge had been required of them as to the bond of conscience, there would in no res pect be any binding obligation at all. The oath would have been only, good in. form--,in effect it would have been, useless, A Gentoo might be sworn in a British Court of Justice.;, it had been done. But the. Court referring to the decision of , the 'first case, required him to be,, sworn by the, ceremony: which he ,considered the ,most binding, on his, conscience. - ...• • - - The LORD cIIANDELLOR said, that there could be no., doubt as to the point of law. If a witness believed . in, no 'God, and had . no belief in a ,future stale, he could l c no witness. . A'tr. WILLIAMS; was ready_ to ,admit that, and he would accede ; ;that no,such question ,could be put—hut.he.maintainecLthat, supposing the wit ness ,t,p; bp. a Roman catholic, they had a right to . inqlire of. hina, : jf . form of swearing and ot Jaw in ,-,JAts . country there were not p.artigniap, fortps,of ceremonies which ,he deem od essential ; to the sanctity and binding of an, oath,. lf,there were such ceremonies, a4d,,they were., tabe left Out, in swearing Ihn,..the witness wo.uldbe.in the same condition:as the Gentop or Mahpuketan, to, whose, cases . he had referred, sup posing thew, to have.heetisworn by the forms of the Christian Yaith withoOthe bond which their own Iteligin. imposed for the same purpose.-7 lie wished 'to. ask :the witness: if there were ..any forniszwaUting in the eath which he had just taken. • whiclk:,,would. be used in.his own . country on' a like . AcGasiUn, ayd which be deemed necessary to binding conscience.. He,did not questicrn the veracitx.nithe.iwitness, but he-wished to know if he ita.f,l6. , the language of- the L Judges to: whose, be ; , had referred been ",most solemnly swOr4ttnil•by that ceremony which he ;admitted. to benost•binding on his consience,"N , IV.lNakiro P otam mentioned the. case . of Cooper, in l 7,6 4 4 . i.a1ti1. dwelt. upon a remarkable expression of tiordAk.fat.sfield in the proceedings upon. that case, Ail* referring to the other case. of Omeston v. Parker;, His Lordship said, that as the pur pose:wE to bind , the . Witness's conscience,. he should be sworn by that form which had ihe most peWerfu 1. effect upon his conscience. This lie sup pot.te4j y. rAfejsep cc to other ,cases, and, to .sliew the iiitplitalicepra:cting on thiS principle, he . put to th 9 consyAr,giOn Lordships the sith tion . .EngiishSeiman would stand,. who, going to China, should be sworn according telhe , forms of that country.' What effect would the . forin S- there lOh se rVed have on his mind, it he were sworn as a Chinese' bad •be-eit -at the 014 Bailey, in 1806, in a case of murder? The incl.'. vidual who was then sworn had a saucer brought in, which was broken before him, and certain words having beenutterecl„he was considered to be duly sworn, because an oath so taken would have been binding on : hiin in his own country. In the Rase, he had supposed, an English • seaman might admirthe oath tendered to him in China under these forms ; but could it be expected to have the same effect on his mind as that modeof swearing to which he had been accustomed, in his own country, and which he regarded as alone fitted to such a solemnity—as alone competent to impose upon him what was called the obligation of au oath ? To a person so situated, it might with propriety be said, you shall not be sworn in the way which you say you hold to lie bind ing, but in that which you regard -as " the most binding." The LORD CHANCELLOR desired the Learned Counsel to state, for the information of the House, what was the question that he wished to be put to the witness. • Mr. WILLiAms wished to know, first, in what way it was usual for persons to be sworn in his own country---whether any ceremonial was con sidered to be necessary to an oath, which had not been observed here ? - The LORD CHANCELLOR interrupted the Counsel, to request that he would confine himself to one question. Mr. WILLIAMS said, his question came to.this —whether or not any ceremonies were observed in the country to --which he belonged which had not , been attendedl•to here, that he .considered as binding on his. conscience ? The Loan CHANCELLOR gave it as his opinion that the witness might be asked whether the oath now taken was binding on his - conscience ; but the question which-hadbeen 'proposed he thought could not be put. Mr. I.IROUGHAM said they did not &by that the witness might consider the oath which he, had now taken to be binding on his conscience. Lord ERSKINE was of opinion that the witness should be bound by the oath, which had the' most powerful effect upon his mind ; and in-' stanced - a case in which his- Lordship had been concerned, where a- witness, a foreigner, consi dered himself bound by nothing but a ceremony, which was calculated to excite anything rather than a serious' feeling:l—The Noble Lord spoke in• so low a tone, that it was impossible to catch the particular details of this case. Mr. BROUGHAM said their objection was not that the oath was not binding on the witness,`but they contended that if there was a mode of sNyear ing which he held to be more binding, that ought to be had recourse to on the present ben. sion. Lord ERSKINE suntested that Ole witness might he asked whether the oath that he had taken was the most binding on his conscience. (Cries of " No, no," from several of their Lord- ships.) Earl 4'3 REY conceived the witness might be asked if there were any form of swearing known to the witness that would be more binding on his conscience. vv . , Lord REDESD ALE said, if the question sug gested were proper to he put,- every foreign witness that had been examined, since he knew any thing of a Court - of justice, had' been .iMpro perly sworn. The Lon!) CHANCELLOR, thought it would be proper add perhaps most agreeable to their Lord ships, that the Learned Judges, who were then iii the House, should retire to consider the question,' and give their Opinion to the House, Thequestio.ns were thee which the Queen's . Counsel had Wished to put to the witness. Lord EltsKiNE again spoke in favour of the question being put at once. The Lo nn CHANCELLOR. said, he recollected a trial at-the Assizes in a northern county, where a witness, who was a very eccentric man, refused. to take the usual oath. On being asked the rea son why he objected, he replied, beeause he had taken an oath to swear no oath ; but that he swore by his conscience, and . held up his hand. After` some little, hesitation 'he was permitted to swear in this manner. The question for the con . . _ sileration of the'Judges in the present case was, whether a witness having taken ,tbe oath usually adrninistered in that court-of JustiCe in Which he was to be examined without objection onThis part, could be'asked if he , considered that oath to be binding and ftirther,i whether he knew'of any mode of swearing that would be more binding on IM conscience ? The Earl of LTvEnpnor. considered the ques tion which it had been proposed ,to put to the witnesS, might hare, been properly put to him if he had objected to the oath which he had now taken, and said On hi's mind it would not be bind ing. It, was, however, unusual to put such a question - to a.witness who had made no objection to the oath. After a few further remarks from Lord Efts . KINE and the LORD CIIANCELLOR, the Judges retired to consider of the question proposed to them. !Lord DARNLEY, While the Judges' Were' out, reminded their Lordshipsth4t they had decided 'that no "Witness, - who „ had been present during any part of these preceedings,. should be competent to be examined in their progress.. 'The order. that had been made in the case.of one of the parties ought to be enforced with, equal severity under similar . circumstances againsit the other. On a former day Sir 'Who: was one of the witnesses for the defence,' 'had been . Compel led to retire froni below the Bar. The rule.ought to apply eghallY to "the Witnesses for the prose cution, and none of them ought to be allowed to be present during the proceedings: Ile also thought it would be desirable that the witnesses, should not be kept all together, .and those who had alreadi''given " their evidence ought to be precinded from eo - rmnunicating with those, who had, not iilreadY;been examined: The earl of Liv . Enpoobsaid the witnesses had been placed where they now were, because it was - necessary to provide .for their personal safety. With respect-to 'their being together, he did not know how it was possible to preient that. It was natural for persons from the same country to as sociate, , All that could be done was to lay strong injunctions on them not to converse with one another ou the subject of - the evidence that they had given or were to give. s ti\ The Earl f WINCHELSEA thought the sugges tion which h -been thr .out lesterdmorn ing, on te sub ct„ . . t of ,pv.. ring . pla te hg„, houses i ertments, and ships, which her Royal Highness - was described to have been with Ber garei,-ought not to be lost sight of. lie was of opinion that plans would be found extremely use ful, and would be found to shorten the proceed ings very much. A sketch of the deck of the polacca for instance would give their Lordships a better idea of the situation of the tent than could be obtained from a long examination of the witness. Lord DARNLEY again spoke of the importance of keeping the witnesses apart. The Earl of LIVERPOOL shewed that this was impracticable, and appealed to the experience of any person at all accustomed to the Assizes, if the inconvenience complained of, was not of con stant occurrence in all ordinary cases in this country. Persons coming from the same town to the same place on a particular occasion, might be expected to converse together, and were likely to establish themselves at the same inn. It was to be supposed that strangers coming to this coun try would act in a similar manner, and he saw no way- of preventing it. He knew of nothing that could be done but to lay strong injunctions on the parties not to converse on the subject of their evidence. _ The Earl of HARROWDY spoke to a similar ef fect, and sheaved the in - conveniences actually ex perienced to be unavoidable. Lord DARNLEY was 'of opinion, that all that could be done ought to be done to keep the wit nesses apart. It would, for instance, be highly improper that Theodore Majocci,,who had given his evidence; should have a free connection with Mademoiselle Dumont, who had yet to be exa mined.—(A Laugh !) The proceedings were here suspended a con siderable time,•during the absence of the Judges, who had retired to deliberate upon the points urged by Counsel at the bar. The LORD CHANCELLOR at length rose and proposed a Resolution, of which he had given notice on the former day, to the following effect : "' Resolved, That if any prosecution should hereafter be had in any Court of Justice, touch ing the evidence, or any part thereof, given before this House, in the proceedings upon the Bill of Pains and Penalties against the Queen, this House will, notwithstanding any privilege to the con irary, give to the Court below, if it shall be de sired therein, all the evidence which may be re quired in the case, and which may be in their Lordships' possession." On the motion of the Noble and Learned Lord, this Resolution was agreed to, " notwith standings any privilege to the contrary." The Judges then re-entered, and the Chief Justice ABBOTT delivered their Lordships' opi nion upon the point submitted to them by the House. _ _ The CHIEF JUSTICE said, that the Judges now present had Considered the point proposed for their conside'ratioil by their Lordships, and had sent for books of authority to consult before they pronounced their decision, which circumstance had led to the delay that had unavoidably oC- Vtirred.—(The Judges were out upwards of half an hour.)—The Judges were then first of opinion, that the fit and proper ' time . to ask about the witness's belief of the influence of an oath as ad ministered to him, was before his evidence was entered upon. But in as much as the adminis tering the oath ill the - usual form, might take place'before the witness's belief was inquired in to, still, the witness may afterwards' be asked 'whether he considered the form of the adminis tration of that oath binding. If the answer of the witness be in the affirmative, then the Judges were of opinion that' the witness could not be ask ed respecting any other mode of administering an oath, which may be deemed by some more bind ing. If the witness says, he thinks the manner in which the oath has been, ,or is about to be ad ministered to him binding, then in effect, he so lemnly swears to the truth of what he is about to say, and of course imprecates the Divine ven geance upon himself if he swerves from the truth. —(Hear.) Vincenzo Guerguilo, examined by the SOLICITOR- GENERAL. Q. Was the witness a master of a vessel de nominated a polacca, and called the Industry ? A. Yes. Was he also the owner ?—Yes; but she is no longer called the Industry, but the Abramo, as she is now made a brigantine. Was that vessel used for the purpose of con veying her Royal Highness from Augusta to Tu nis and into Greece'?—The polacca was hired at Messina, where she was armed, and ,at Augusta her. Royal Highness embarked for Tunis and Greece. Before her Royal Highness embarked at Au gusta had an arrangement of the cabins been made by the witness ?—Yes ; it was made at Messina. Whether the Princess and Bergami came on board the vessel at Augusta before they embark ed, for the purpose of seeing the disposition of the cabins ? The last question was afterwards separated in the following manner : Did the Princess, attended by Bergami, come on board at Augusta ?—Yes. Did she. view the arrangement of the cabins made by the witness ?—She did ; she ordered a door in the diming-room to be' closed. Before that' door was Closed how many doors were there from the body of the vessel into the dining room?—Two ; one on the right,' another on the left. 'Which of the two doors was directed to be closed ?---The door to the' left. Does the mitness mean on the left as you look to the prow of the vessel'?-Yes. in 'what way was that door closed; was it only locked up, or was it so fastened as not to be opened during the voyag e ?—lt die nailed up, so as not to be opened during voyage. Wa3 there any cabin contiguous, to the dining-, room on - 41at side of the vessel, wte s re the 0 00 v nailed' vp ?—There was. ernbared„cq.board\he vss f ieJs Apo Ttfpied that cabin neare st the door 56 closed up ?—Mademoiselle_ Duvont and Made moiselle Brunet. Who occupied the cabin on the opposite , sick of the dining wow, where the door was left open ?' —J3ergami: Will you ask the witness whether the ladder from the deck came directly down to the . ctining roam ; or if there was a door shutting on the bot tom of the stairs led directly to the dining.- room, but at the top was a hatchway which at night might be shut up to stop the communication. When that was closed was there any other communication than the hatchway ?—No. Beyond the dining-room towards 'the stern, how many cabins were there ?—Two ; on the right hand was the bed of the Princess, and on the left hand that of the Dame d'ffonneur. What sort of bed did the Princess occupy, a single or a double bet! ?—lt was about six and a half feet in breadth ; he says " palms," seven of which are about equal to six feet English. Did Bergami occupy the cabin assigned to him during the voyage, or did he afterwards change the place of his sleeping ?—A few nights he slept in his own cabin, and then he passed to the dining- . room on to another sofa. Where was that sofa situated ?-onthe right hand. Was it so situated that a person occupying the bed of the Princess could be seen by a person in Bergami's bed, or was it not ?—lf the door of the Princess's room was open tilt-1 4 y could. Does he know how much an English foot is Yes. How many English feet asunder were' the beds of Bergami and the Princess ?—Tets or twelve: feet. Did any person sleep in the dining roomy or within or beyond the dining 'room, towards the stern, except Bergatni, the ,Princess, and the Countess of Oldi ?—No ; Bergatni slept in the dining room, the Princess in the room on the stern at the right hand, and'the dame d'honneur in the room on the left hand. Did this 'occupation continue during a great part of the voyage ? Mr. WILLIAMS objected to this question being' so put, as it might lead the witness. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said he was ex' tremely anxious not to put any thing that might he considered as leading where it was material ; but their Lordships would'easily perceive w hen it was unimportant or when it was of consequence" The question was then varied as follows : How long did that occupation of the - cab in" continue ?—From the middle of March to June ; but afterwards the Princess changed to sleep no the deck under a tent. After we were from Jaffa, whet.e we took on board seven horses and 0 7 asses, the Princess always slept on deck undo . , tent. _ _ What bed or beds were placed on deck under the tent ?—A sofa bed and a travelling bed of the Princess's ryas put up. The witness has told us that the Princess al Bergami slept below, but that after they lef t Jaffa, the Princess slept in a tent on deck : DP W • where did Bergamf sleep after they left Jaffa Under the, tent together with the Princess, I D . different beds. Mr. WILLIAMS objected that the interpretatio n was not sufficiently literal.—(Order.) 'The SOLICITOR-GENERAL desired that th e i might have no interruption by conversation at the bar. Mr. BROUGHAM observed , that if their Loll' ships did not wish to have the best interpretatio n ? , they would take the course they Were then I'u r ' suing. But if they did, on the contrary, the ! must perceive that from the very order of the ir Lordships' House on this occasion, it was al) s°-. . lutely necessary that the interpreters should ha s.° a private conversation between themselves; befor e. the result could be made known to the IIoase•. lie hOped and trusted, their Lordships vreu t . allow business to be done in the only waf could be done. • The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—" Marquess, v o i, the Interpreter) repeat, in Italian, the answer ° the witness." The Interpreter accordingly did, .as follor s t i; cc Sottola tenta unito a la Principessa." Belle° 0 . the tent, together with the Princesi ; and ur n , asking witness, he said, by together, he meant two beds not joined. Flow long did Bergarui continue to sleep in this manner Until they landed at the Porto Auto. it Ask whether at night the tent was open, or wheth er was closed all round ?—During the night the tent//, closed. • lO C ' Who generally closed the tent ?—I was aciminalidcd to c ' it, and I commanded to others. in to Was it completely stopped that no one could seg o f it ?—I stopped it always as well as. I could w ith pie`es canvas. 'Was the tent closed ?'—He pinned it down. Did witness often see the Princess when th e te" t ''.3 open ?-7Yes. bed.- •: . ' Was her Boltil Highness in bed at, suc h times ?I" for the most part. - • ei , i " Where was Bergami when the witness sa w the l i r"' c . bed ?—Geuerally in the tent. . , . il itigt• Did he see Bergami come out of the ten t on a inui when he first made his appearance?—Yes, generally. liwaYs c"' Was he always dressed at such time, or not ?..--,-- - tirely dressed. • ' , it ?... When the tent was closed, was there any light witlt blo ° If there was light, it rmist come from without ; and if - strong, the light was carried away. ' o ink to tint Who was in the habit of taking the light, belong:• - ;',o p" tent, away, when it was litinded out ?—The wtt" nerally. • /...... Who handed out the light?—Bergami. t i . JO • Did the Princess lie down on the bed, during : Often. ,• • • Did she do so sometimes after dinner ?—Yes-; Has witness seen'iletimmi there at the same "• Has witness closed th e tent when her Royal 141 .' ,Bergaoii were there, as he has described ?—Y"' c e' 4 Was that after dinner I—Sometimes. li the Prin When the tent has been so closed down, w' t v. - d jowl' :and • Bergami in it, .how long did it remain el°“' r D C 'About hall an boor, or a quarter, or an h our. w" The witness has said, he has seen the Princess Wb Sul, I Ati; io„ tun I