The Sun. — London, England, 1820-10-06 00:00:00

5 on he 01:7 O li te • rst "la re i) "re e the y r voce t c ' e 0 5 to ! trill e oh .iro 01 1C e ) Lire v itnesses coming to speak to her Majesty's cha racter. if suc h a foul and odious i nt e r f erence had been exercised, he did not know what course to t ight be p ursue d i n ot h er C ourts o f J us tice, but he thought it would be quite sufficient grounds for their Lordships to put an end at once to a r a °ceedin g w hi c h h a d ne i t h er t h e ap p eara nce of w or j J ustice. These obs erva tions he made as a ~u d ge, sitting th ere t o d o j us ti ce , an d he hoped their Lordships would not consider it unnecessary to move that the Counsel be called upon to know Is ' l lether p roo f s cou ld b e a dd uce d i n su pp or t of their assertions, and if so, that they be directed to Proceed.—(Hear, hear !)--The Noble Lord co ncluded by mov i ng t h at t h e C ounse l b e called t° t he Bar, and as k e d if th e y h a d proofs to pro duce in in supp or t o f th e a ll ega ti ons th e y had made kith respect to the obstruction of her Majesty's witnesses. aLord LIV ERPOOL per f ec tly a gr e ed with the °hie Lord, that if such an interference did : 4 1 " place, it was most unjust. But he felt it tY he owed himself, a duty he owed his J,esty's Governm en t, an d p ar ticularly that part 1 , - ; the Government (th e Secretary of State for °re ign Affairs,) to mention, that it was their -ca d c ,re disposition to afford precisely the same fa 'ties to one as the other. And he would ap teal to t wo Honourable Gentlemen, D r. L us h- tj ' , gt°n and Mr. Vizard, for they were the Gen :hi:a"' who principally had the communication, 0 ether they did not give this assurance on the t 4t r t ; and that copies of all the instructions () -°re ign States had been shewn to them, and told I,'e, : . ` e ved, delivered to them, and were also du that should they appoint any agent to con cirtettythe affairs of her Majesty, that every fa should be afforded them.—(Hear, hear !) C o n n ( ' "e assur e d th e House that had the Learned ' o b; i n s el for th e Q uee n, when they met these ta r - ,,, ac es, applied to the Office of the Secre .staJo°l State for Foreign Affairs, that those ob -11,-es,Prould be removed as well as they could. in th -a t" then, that every thing that could be done and . e . c ase had been done b> this Governmeut ; nod:`, a ny special difficulty had arisen, he would if h-, r taLile to say, as lie had before notified, that r e i: r majesty's Counsel had applied to the Fo tliftrii?ce, stating that they had met with any tat e c ,„ t Y in getting witnesses to come over, not t o , '"°ment would have been lost in taking steps I le ' en 'nve that difficulty.--(hear, hear !)—And li d "dertook to say now, that if any of the indi- Nc a als wh o had been mentioned should he thought ti k , s !arY by her Majesty's Counsel for their case, N v 2, 'lad only to say so, and he (Lord Liverpool) tvit. ' l i tak e care that not two hours should elapse of "onto messenger being sent off for the purpose li, a cau „sing him to come to this country.—(Hear, Ajj' )--- -if no requisition should be made by her ''" t Y's Counsel, it would appear thatthey had pt re ason to c om pl a i n o f these witnesses being 3 "ented f rom com i n g ; an d if they had no rea koll l int the complaint, their Lordships would it. ° v i-,1" o w to judge of the motives which dictated tri o k r 'nis, however, he repeated, that if they did hour e the requisition, in the course of two h ear s h a messenger should be sent off—(Hear, tio u - respect to the individual in ques hav-e (General Pino), and what was alleged to ass -„,ak, taken place in the North of Italy, he must his ll l , - the House, that from circumstances within h e ' ll eblvledge, connected with the transaction, rof Q. -°4l d not believe what was put in the mouth ro u e ; "rat Pino. He had seen a correspondence il o -n g to the subject, and he could inform the q o ' s e that th e on l y o bj ec t w hich the Austrian ho o veril rnent had in view in giving orders that itsiq f its officers should appear in this country fr oi . h uniform, was to prevent that uniform had " L ei ng exposed to insult. That Government tar, 'Ought this precaution the more neces t4kJe after becoming acquainted with what had 4. 14„ P la ce on the landing of some foreigners aPpr, - ,:, er • The rule which had been laid down 016 - " as much to one side as the other; but the ligh - t er ,in question might have taken it up in the ap pe °I something derogatory from his dignity to had al ; i n a private dress. But their Lordships t hat i t s -en two British Naval Officers appear at ( lid a t without being in uniform, which to them h. not b ei appear dishonourable. He declared it as tnl od lei that no such reason operated on the tol l O f General Pino. He had some other rea orne es t known to himself for not choosing to Bess ( : k ve r• As to Baron Eden, or the other wit the 'c'e Chamberlain, he could only say that if re%lnset persisted in stating that their case quited they "' s elf that should come over, he pledged st eps t not an hour should be lost in taking T hp ° that effect.—(Hear, hear!), exp,„ i 'Juke of W ELLINGTON said, he knew from ttental Governments that th e A us t r i a n and other Conti likeer - / - overntoe n t s were extremely averse to of thi s appearing in uniform upon any occasion thei r kind• They wished them to appear in 4 thecravate Capacity, from an apprehension that did kt ' n ' n et with any insult while in uniform, or vlh cer Y thin g d erogatory to t h e s it ua ti on o f an • the se ' it would be considered as reflecting on 1.1 1 rv . r ice to which they belonged.—(Hear !) i t e t i F t r: h C e IIANCELLOR stated to the Counsel wish of the House to know whe f the y were prepared with proofs in support ftr ene assertions just now alluded to, with re (lett a : d to ,the Chamberlain of the Duke of Ba- M r. - B "eneral Pino. RouGIIAM did not imagine that he should parti otlb called on to produce his witnesses, amid 1 ,1 ar r 'Y as it w as ou t o f th e course which he ad opt. "..earned Colleagues had thought fit to Set t ho h lie stat e d t h at many o f t h e w it ne sses hN b e produced were still at Milan. But that spe ak so me witnesses w h o c ou ld be called to th eir 1 ° S ome of those facts which occupied Pli ed .'ordships' attention. They had not ap -11,14 g e : t ° ita h g 's Majesty's Government for assistance 011 over their witnesses, although they Wave one over his Majesty's Government would co rn (Fle y h ,e forward in a bona fide manner; for (l e'ver u a ol ' i s een with what willingness foreign 1 ' 0 4 4 ents had come forward to help over the made for the Bill, and wh a t exer ti ons they re sgain to obstruct The comin g o f those who tThey had ; therefore ; just rea son to suspect that that aid would prove nuga tory to them, whilst it made the prosecutors ac quainted a long time before with the names of the persons they meant to call for the defence ; and he should be prepared to she w, at a future time, that attempts had been made to tamper with witnesses, who were ascertained to be in their favour. In the mean time he was prepared to bring proof of all that had been said with re spect to the Chamberlain of the Grand Duke of Baden. The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, that no imputa tion was meant to be thrown on the Counsel at the bar. At the same time, it was to be observed they admitted that no requisitions to Government had been made. With respect to the inference of the Learned Counsel, that for certain reasons which he stated, they had reason to doubt the efficiency of the aid of Government, he must say that it was worth nothing ; for they might at least have tried it, and then that reflection might with some show of reason be made. He repeated his offer on the part of his Majesty's Government, to afford every assistance possible in the event of its being wanted. Earl GREY explained. The Loan CuA.NctcLon thought that Counsel having declared that they thought that part of their case material, which was to be proved by the Chamberlain of the Grand Duke of Baden, they ought to be called in to prove by evidence at the Bar, the allegations they had made with respect to that individual. But even if they should prove all that had been advanced with re spect to the Chamberlain, and still maintain that his evidence was material, he should not think it sufficient to warrant the suspension of these pro ceedings. Although they had no means of sum moning foreign witnesses, by any thing which could have the power or force of a subpoena, yet it appeared there was a mode to be made use of by applying for the interposition of our own Go vernment. This was a point that should not be forgotten ; and as that was the only means that could be used, and as her Majesty's Counsel had not made use of, or applied for those means, he could not see what claim they could have to the indulgence of their Lordships. Earl GREY observed, that as an application to his Majesty's Government would have all the effect, he should not move for the suspension of these proceedings. Lord DONOUGHMORE thought that their Lord ships ought not to pass over the charge which had been brought against his Majesty's Government by the Counsel at the Bar. The statement went as far as to say that witnesses had been com pelled by the Executive Power to come in sup port of this Bill, and that compulsion had been used by Foreign Powers unresisted by our own Government, to prevent witnesses from coming. If this was not the impression intended to be conveyed, he did not understand words and gestures which were the most significant. There was much of inflammation, and there had been much of misrepresentation in this affair, and he hoped their Lordships would resist such conduct in lintine. It had gone too far already. If the Queen wanted witnesses, whose fault was it ? Her Majesty's Counsel had not made that appli cation which alone could ensure them the atten dance of those witnesses. This complaint about the obstruction of witnesses made a very good finale to the statement of the Counsel for the Queen. Lord HOLLAND defended the conduct of the Queen's Counsel, and contended that his Noble Friend (the Earl of Donoughmore) was not per fectly consistent when he complained of them. The Queen's Counsel complained, that the arm of power had prevented their being able to pro duce their witnesses. It was not for the Counsel to explain the motives which had led to the ex ercise of that power. If the Counsel in the exer cise of their talents thought it for the advantage of their cause to raise particular ideas in the minds of the Judges, they had a right to do so, and it was for the Judges to hear them ; but if they exceeded the bounds within which they ought to confine themselves, it was their Lord ships' duty to tell them they were going too far, and must direct their attention to other points. But he would ask if it were worthy of their cha racter, or if it were consistent with their dignity and duty, to enter into an altercation with Coun sel, and descend to answer any insinuations that might have been throw►. out, or to comment on the statements that had been made. The Earl of DONOUGHMORE explained. He had no intention to impute any improper motive to her Majesty's Counsel, and he would not suf fer any Noble Lord to cast an imputation upon him without repelling and entering his protest against it. At the same time, he was well assur ed that his Noble Friend (Lord Holland) did not intend to use any unkind expression, altho' he had appeared to accuse him (Lord Donough more) of inconsistency. He had not entered in to an altercation with the Counsel ; he had merely argued upon their own expressions. The LORD CHANCELLOR begged their Lord ships would indulge him with the hearing of a very few words. He fully concurred in opinion with the Noble Lord who spoke last but one, that the House should not enter into altercation with any Counsel at their Lordships' Bar. Indeed, he should have to apologize to the House if any Counsel had made use of an improper expression, and he (the Lord Chancellor) had not interposed. But their Lordships were aware of the duties which fell to his lot to discharge, and were aware how difficult it was to discharge them. A Judge interrupted proceedings at great hazard, when he took upon himself to state what would or would not be of importance to the proceedings. Looking at the course which the Learned Counsel had been taking , he did not see that there was any cause for interrupting him. The Counsel had argued, that, under the cir cumstances of the case, her Majesty ought not to be called upon to produce witnesses at all, and urged the peculiar difficulties which they stated had been thrown in the way of their producing evi dence. They stated also that letters had been addressed to the Cbaraberlaia of the Duke of Baden, and to the Duke himself ; that the Chamberlain was willing to come, but that he was forbidden by his Court. There appeared here, he thought, nothing to call for interposition. Something too had been said about Gen. Pino and his uniform ; but nothing, he conceived, to call for the displeasure of the House. If, any insi nuation had been thrown out by the Learned Counsel, it was to be found in what he did not say, and not in what he did, for he had observed " the Lawyers too were kept away, and any body may judge why." Lord HOLLAND explain i. JAMES LE MANN was then called in and examined by Mr. DENMAN. Q. Are you Clerk to Mr. Vizard, Solicitor to her Majesty ?—A. Yes. Were you sent by the Queen to Carlsruhe was. On what day did you lease England fur that purpose ?—On the Ist September. On what day did you arrive at Carlsrube ?—On the 14th September. Were yoir provided with a letter from the Queen addressed tr, any person at Carlsruhe ?—.l had a letter from her Majesty directed to the Chamberlain of the Grand Duke of Baden. Did you report to the Chamberlain that he was required to attend in England witness on the part of her Ma jesty ?—Yes. Du you recollect on what day you did so ?—lt was on the 17th that I first saw him. Did you on that day make the communication in question ? —I did. Did you then take any deposition, with a view of etiablinz Counsel to examine him as a witness at the bar of the House ? —The first time I saw him he was on the road between Baden and Carlsruhe—l met him on the 17th. _ . You first saw hint on the 17th on the road between Baden and Carlsruhe. What did you then tell him ?—I told him that he was required to attend here as a witness. Did you take his deposition at any time I—Yes c on the 20th. Do you know if, at that time, he bad any opportunity of consulting his minutes ?—He had an opportunity of referring to his journals, which be kept every day. Was the Grand Duke at Carlsruhe when you arrived there ? —He was not. When did he return ?—On the 21st. After you had taken his deposition, did the Chamberlain make any objection to going to England ?—No ; not till he had seen the Grand Duke, who objected to it. Did he objtct to come to England, after seeing the Grand Duke ?—Yes. Did he state any conditron on which alone be could come to England ?—He said he could nut come to England without t hr consent of the Grand Duke. _ . . After the return of the Grand Duke, did he make any state ment on the subject of his coming to England ?—He told me, tbat on the 23d he had applied to the Grand Duke, who had refused to grant him permission to come. Will you be so good as to state what were his precise words ?—He said the Grand Duke would not permit him to come, nor allow him to sign his deposition. The ATTORNEY•GENERAL was going to interrupt the exa mination, but he apprehended that what had been told to the witness could not be received as evidence on the case. The LORD CHANCELLOR thought what the Grand Duke had said might be stated. The ATTORNEY7E:sfET6,I. submitted that it could not be received as evidence. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, it would not be evidence. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL remarked, that what they wanted was, that this should be clearly understood. Examination resumed. Q. Did be state any thing else as a reason for not coming to England ?—A. lam not aware that he did. He said that he enjoyed his estate in Hanover through the King of Eng• land, but that would not prevent his coming over, as be was satisfied that his Majesty would not think the worse of him for so doing. Did you have any other corhmunication with him ?—I did ; I wrote a letter to him. Did he do what you required ?—He did not. Did he ever give you any reason for not coating over, other than that which you have mentioned ?—Nu; he said he could nut come without the consent of the Grand Duke. Was there a Mr. Mandeville there ?—He was. Were you in company with him ?—No. At no time ?—Nu. Did he know that you were there ?—He did. Did you communicate to him that you were there on the part of the Queen ?—I did not. When did you return to this country ?—The day before yesterday. Do you know whether during your abode at Carlsruhe any other person arrived on the part of the Queen ?—Yes. Mr. Siccard came. Do you know of any application made by him ? Do you know whether he wrote this letter ?—I know it, because I saw him write it. Yon returned to this country the day before yesterday ? Yes. You left it the Ist of September, and arrived at Carlsruhe on the 14th ?—so that if you had applied to the Govern ',tient immediately, twelve days must have passed before your communication on the subject could have been received —Yes. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL. had no questions to ask this witness. Examined by Lord GRANTUANI. In what langnage did you converse with the Chamber lain ?—Principally in English; he speaks English very well. In what other language did you converse w►th him ?—lia French.--Witness then withdrew. Colonel ANTHONY BUTLER ST.' LEGER Exa- mined. Q. Were you Chamberlain to • her Majesty the Quern ? A. I had that honour. How long did you continue in that office ?—About eleven years. From what period ?—From 1808 to October 1819. Did you go abroad with her Majesty in 1814 ?—I did. I went as far as Brunswick; the cause of my not going further, was my ill health, and she was good enough to dispense with my further attendance, and to consent that I should accom pany her on her tour no further than Brunswick. Where was the Queen's tour to be ?-111 Germany and Italy, as I understood. Was it so arranged before ♦ou left England ?—lt was. Accordingly did you leave her Royal Highness when she at rived at Brunswick?—Accordingly I left her at Brunswick, when her Royal Highness was good enough to say that I might retire where 1 chose. In the course of last year, 1819, did you receive any com munication from her Majesty?-1 received a communication in July or August, I cannot say which, in which her Majesty stated it to be her intention to arrive in England in Septeu►- ber 1819. • You received a communication from her Royal Highness. In consequence of that communication, did you niake any preparations ?—ln consequencce of that communication, I prepared to go and meet her Royal Highness, as desired, at Dover. Has your health, which prevented you from accompanying her Majesty beyond Brunswick, continued bad from that time to the present ?—I was obliged to go to the South. I have been fur five years in Devonshire, where I have been en tirely confined all the evenings of the winter mouths. On the Queen's return did you pay your respects to her ? I immediately paid my respects to her. In consequence of the state of your health, did you resign your office ?—ln consequence of the state of my health alone, I communicated to her Majesty that I could be of no use to her a s Chamberlain through the winter months, and requested that she would be pleased to dispense with my services. Lord GUILDFORD was 'the next Witness called. Bring a Peer, he was sworn by the LORD CHANCELLOR, and e xamined in his place by Mr. Wit.i.tmus. Does your Lordship recollect hying at NaPles.—l recollect coming to Naples Was her Majesty there at that time ?—She was already there when I arrived. Does yOur Lordship recollect when?—ln the beginning of March, 1815. Do you know who composed the suite of her Majesty at that time ?—I remember the Hon. Keppel Craven, Sir Wm. Gell, Doctor Holland, her physician—l cannot remember all. Po you recollect seeing at that time a person of the name of Bergami I—l do, DO you know in what situation lie was ?—As far as I under stood, he was courier. How tong did you remain there ?—Only three or four days —three days. Was Lady Charlotte Lindsay there whilst you were there, or did she come afterwards ?---She Citaic with me i we wept together from Trieste to Mph.. hid Lady Charlotte Lindsay remain at Naples when yea came away.?--No ; I left Naples before her. Where did pin next see her Majesty ?—.At ROme. " • Was that long after you saw her at Naples ?—Three or four days only. - - How long did 'you remain at Rome with her Majesty ?—A very short time, two or three dnys. During that time did you dine with her Majesty.-4 think not, Did you dine with her at Naples ?-oc.ce, I believe. Do you remember who dined there, or whether any of the Nobility of Naples were there ?-1 cannot recollect ex &et ly. Did Lady Lindsay dine there ?-:She did. And Mrs. Falconer ?-I,cannot tell. Did you see Mrs. Calverly at any other time ?—Yes. Where did you nrxt see the Queen ?—At Civita Vec chia. Did she leave Rome for that place ?-.-She did. How long did she stay there ?—rive or six days. Did you and Lady C.,form part of her society ?—We lived is the same house. _ . You dined with her Majesty ?—Every day. 'Who else ?—Once the Marquis of —, the master of the house, and others whom I do nut recollect. Was there the same suite as at Naples ?— , ,No, except Dr Holland. _ • Was Mrs. Falconer there ?—.She was. • , Had Mrs. Falconer any daughters ?—She had two young daughters. • ' Did pm previously know her ?--Sfist-Tss the wife of a most respectable banker at Naples. A considerable banker F—Yee. Did he visit people of rank in that country?—As much as respectable mercantile persons of rank generally. Did he mix with the nobility of the first class who visited. Naples ?—I cannot answer that. Was one of his daughters married to a Gentleman of con siderable estate in Sicily I—l believe two of the daughters of Mrs. Falconer niarried persons of respectability ; one was married to an American Gentleman named Middleton; and the other to a person named Portalis. You mean Portalis, a considerable banker and proprietor in Switzerland ?—1 am not positive. These Ladies you met at Ci vita Vecchia ?—Yes. They dined at the table with her Majesty ?—They did. They embarked on board the Clorinde ?—Yes; and Dr. Holland also, with their mother, and Lady C. Linsisay. Where did they disembark ?—At Leghorn. It was some time before your Lordship saw her Majesty again ?—Yes, it was ; not till the month of November, itt 1815, at the Villa d'Este on the Lake of Como. Was your Lordship accompanied by Lady C. Lindsay then? —No I was not with Lady Charliute Lindsay then. :Now I recollect I first saw her Royal Highness on the Lake of Como. Where was Lady C. Lindsay ?-L-In England. Did your Lordship dine with her Royal Highness at the Villa d'Este ?L-I did. At that time was liergami sitting at table I—He was. Had you seen him before I—Never. How long did yon stay ?—Not long. I slept at Como that night, and went off to Milan. Did you dine with her Royal Highness at Milan ? dined with her on the Monday following. When you visited her Royal Highness the first time at the Villa d'Este, did you intend paying her a longer visit ?—I do not recollect that I had any intention of staying longer. I came to pay my respects to her Majesty, and did not mean to remain more than the day. Was Bergami at table when you dined with her Majesty on the second occasion at Milan ?—He was. From that time you have had no opportunity of seeing her Majesty ?—I hate not seen het since. The LORD CHANCELLOR apologized for not having in formed the House that the questions put by the Counsel ought to be put, in strictness, through him ; he also apologized tie the Noble Lord himself, but if the House or his Lordship did not object to it, the ezamination might as well continue in its present course. Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL. Q. When your Lordship dined with tier Majesty at Naples, was Bergami at table I—A. I do riot recollect whether be dined at Naples. Did you see him dine on board the Clorinde du not 're collect seeing him on board the Clorinde, but I know that be dined there. What situation did Lady Charlotte Lindsay hold in her Ma jesty's Household ?—She was Lady of the Bed-chamber. At what time did she leave her service 1-1 think in the month of May, - 1817. Did she never join her Majesty after leaving her in Italy ? —Never, after she left her at Leghorn, to the best of my knowledge. When your Lordship visited the Villa d'Este, did you see any Lady I—l dined there with the Corintess of Oldi. Did you converse with the Countess?—Very little. From the conversation which you bad with her, can you say whether she spoke the common Patois, or pure Italian ? —She spoke very intelligible Italian, with a small accent of Lombardy, but nothing remarkable. When you were with her Majesty, did you see her grounds —I did. —.— Do you remember having a Greek or Albauian servant with you?-1 had a Greek servant with me. Did her Majesty accompany you ?—She spewed me a great part of her garden, and afterwards lekt me her donkey to ride upon.—(Laughter.) What kind of donkey ?—lt was a jack-ass,—(Laughter.) Does your Lordship recollect at what part of the garden you mounted her Majesty's donkey ?—Near ber own door, ,and. afterwards I went through the olice•grounds. Did you set her Royal Highness walk through the grounds after she had left you ?—I saw her Koyal Highness when I walked with her, but not after. Do you recollect seeing your servant walk through the grounds ?—No, I do not recollect ; I might have seen him walk about the grounds, but I do not remember. You did not see your servant walk through the grounds ?-- No; I cannot charge my memory with that. Do you recollect seeing your servant walk with her Royal Highness through the grounds ?—Not with her Royal High ness, certainly. Am I to understand that your Lordship never saw him walk with her Royal Highness ?—1 never recollect I did. Do you recollect her Royal Highness walking with your servant ?—I never recollect seeing her Royal Highness walk ing with him. Do you not recollect seeing her Royal Highness with your servant near the Grotto ?—No ; never. Did you never state to any one that you had seen them walking together ?—I never stated to any person that I bad seen her Majesty walking with my servant in the grotto, near it, or lit the grounds, though she might have walked without my seeing it. The walking might have taken place ?—lt might, certainly, but I never saw them. Your Lordship might have seen them if they had so walked ? I might, if they bad done it. And that being something remarkable, your Lordship would 110 doubt have noticed it ?—Certainly. Then you do not recollect ever seeing them walk together ? —I do not. Is your Lordship accustomed to ride ?—I have never been a meat rider, but I then rode the donkey. Round the grounds ?—Yas. Where was your Lordship's servant at the time the house, or about the place. How long did that servant remain with your Lordship ? He remained with me till May, Itil7, and left the at Venice. When your sister resigned her situation, had your Lordship any conversation with her 1-1 bad a correspondence with her. Did you recommend to her to resign her situation ? I did. Mr. Bacitmiumkt objected to this question, as he bad been prevented from putting similar oit.es in cross-exaniinatkou. The question and the answer were then expunged. Re-examined by Mr. TYNDALL. Does your Lordship recollect the size of the garden ?—lt was not very large, but of a good size. Can your Lordship recollect the number of acres ?-0b ! dear use. no. At different times when you saw ker Royal Highness and Bergami together, did you perceive any impropsiety in their conduct ?—None whatever. The Arroasisv-Gesiettat, objected to this question. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that it ought to have been put during the examination in chief. Mr. Raoormass contends* that it arose from a question put by the Attorney-General in his cross-examinations. The question and answer were understood to be eapungee. Mr. TYNDALL—I have nothing more to ask. Cross-examined by Lord Rous. When your Lordship saw her Royal Highness on the Lake of Como, Wl5 Ulric any other palms with her its the boil ? Yes, Bergami. Were there any other persons beside ?—Nu. By Earl GREY. Q. 'Menem your Lordship bas been at her Rapt Wit,- nos's, and has seen the Princess and ILrgamilit4aprpssati t „