The Sun. — London, England, 1820-10-16 00:00:00

PARLIA.AIENT, - OUSE OF LORDS-SATURDAY. THE QUEEN'S DEFENCE. • [Continuation. of Saturcirw'i Proteedings.] Lord AUCKLANFII said the question now before .here was simply ths, whether or not, when an at torney in a- ctrusehas cOinniittol an act in violation or d- - lav of public justice, fhe Court can exa ',line him as to matters vy hiA. he Aleetares he can . not! disclose Without a 4, 2 iOtation , of private' conti • . t.ence. CHAN:2I:I.ot; fepit4 in a very low tone, in'antlible belo , :v the bar. • . • ;, • Earl GI r' L tlieti wished Mr. PO ELL to be That.. Gentleman being re- Cact•ci at the bar, Eacl.Greyresumed his exa ,.l4itutt,icin. e• naderstanft r00,..,t0 . ,,?:ta,te that you have in ybnc• . possession a copy , of the letter which you "roseCdtotrel,BroWn, $41:011g au account of It ~~telli's object, Crcu .yourlfir'O'dnce that copy ? - ; -1•Oe--thJ: whole' .of the letter, btit that part ?--- A., I coceivoll. • qorrlninnications made by me to •Caonel BroWu confidential communications usade. - ,by iniN.; as an'agent for this Bill; and, con the agent; or .one of the agents for I . ebitsct to :the predlction of all my -cCorreYpoEderue relating to that subject.. Or - to any ['art of it ?—,lf d . pbject to the pro . • unction of• the whole, I oiPrpict, of con' rse, 'ter ~...pro!loct4?n of •a - 'You have also received a letter from Colonel Brown, do you objet t to the production of tha t ? I object,' , in 'the character ill which I stand, to -the pros uctiyn..of any letters to ór.frbm Colonel • :Brown. • . • I understand' you to say, that. Ton gave Ras . .telli a positive injunction to return before the re, .sumptiou of these -proceedings ? If he could, I, s:iated to Ra-stelli, that he. was to be, back on or before tlze 3d of October, .or as soon as he pos ..;il.ilV could. • Did you State to him your reason for wishing ..A`ot his speedy return ?-4 don't recollect stating .air particular reason. understood you to say yeSterday, that you did not -expect ltastetti svrould be 7,vanted before this bUsiness would be proceeded upon in the iiouse of Corm-nous ?—Of course. On what account then did you give him such a poitive injunction'?—:-Because I expected kim to return with the papers whiph I sent, and which I considered I: might want to use on the recoth.meddernentof4he - proceedings on the 3d of .octaber. - • hell it was only in tirdt view, and ,not with‘the -expectation of his being wanted as a witness; that .Toi2 desired b•i's return?-4 did n6t conceive his 'return essential in any Other tight, as the Coun-, .sel.'for the prosecution had stated that the had had :no further questions to .put to the witnesses. • Tet.you are aware that the House had express,' its opinion, and 47,ivfn 'instructions, that the Wilnesses should he forthcoming ?-1 do not re ....oliectt that. *ere Earl Gnu' repeated . the question.—.l certainly understood that, during the progress of - :tbe.,prasecntion upon the Bill, the witnesses were, it.L”be dcept in attendance. . • °gut you' have heard• it, o. , ediared , in the House , thatAhe'witnesses should be taken care of? Yes. L-L . nd - did you not know, therefore, when you :sentltastelli away that you were . violating the in.-itnictions of the House ?—The Circumstance certainly did not strike me at the time I seat lims,tefli away. If- die . witatesses who returned home again had .been desired to give information to the families-of the witnesses here, could they not haVe done so as nuell as Rastelli ? —As R.aste:fli had been with the party at Dover', _'acid was well .acquainted•• with ' the finiiiies Of the witnesses who had been mal treated, I lhOught him the Most proper person to • • "Wu' **ere 'then desirous that Rastelli should ,have-dpersonal communication with Cie families 'of the Witneses wh'z.,.are here?---As far as was his'Obwer . . Yeti cens'ide'red him then'as the ,best .agent whotn - pill could employ to have persenaL.com-, munication with those families - thought: him,. the best'person to have communication . with the Jfamities. Of those persons for that purpose. • ria.son yoir sending Rastelli back then ;was, Ahat he should have. such . cornmunication With thri4e-faniilies ?—,l wished him to see them, ';and deliver letteis fromthe witnesses here. Can frt state of yoUr'own }:nowledge, szagent in thiinus,e, whether any' of the witnesses who . ,have been examined in this cause, have' their fa residing at Milan panse . ensued, ahcl the .qnisti . 3ri was . then read over, to - - Mr . Powell 'by this.' short-h a nd writer.[=-N,ever having ; seen aup 'of•thcAr families, of 'had' any communication with erem,l do not know where they may reside.'. Ha:it:they . not'all been 'examined here, and in bifirninalion'stated. the..reSidences ,of their cannot , recollect where they stated Allen] to reside. " • Did - Yon not know that ail the witnesses, *with the . ex.tOfioti of *•Majocci, stated the residence of -theirliantilies• to be in 'other places than Milan do net recollect where theystated . them to .reside::;':. . Then you meant him to have.personal comma .- • nikation ivitli their- fainilieS , ?—,Yes. You have state that a 'courier to Milan might makfr.. the joutney in ex or seven days ?—ln six .days and•nights. Is that'the most 'expeditious - rate of performing .the jouKfey ?—lt is riGt an extritOrolinary rate of ,goin.; ; t i fOra•courter. Do yoit.think a emirier could go to Milan aid return. in fourteen days ?L--I think he might. Did you expect, geste . .li would return,Ki that time ?--'I 'say what E expected •I have known Courier . ; perforth the journey to :Milan in six or seven days. ' is that the leafit: time required for going and i..•00::5.! -E—l•4o not sty-the least time,. . What time did you think was necessary for him to execute the commission ofsommunicating with the families of the witnesses ?—Supposing him to leave town:on the evening of the 14th, hei would arrive at Milan on the `?oth, allowing six days for his return, seven days would be left fOr . the purpose of that communication. Did Colonel - Brown iii his letter 'state the, .date Rasielli's arrival at Milan ?—I do not recollect- If .you refer to the letter and find the. date, have you any objection to communicate it ? None-, except a general objectiOn to the produc tionof a confidential correspondence. Then do you object to state that date ?—I do not object to that, except as it form's part of a communication 'confidentially made to me by Col. Brown,in consequence of my situation. By Lord DE Cr.trvonn—Have any of the per sons who arrived at`Dover with Rastelli returned toltaly ?-1 7 :es: Are any of theM in England ?—One man who was injured remained till he recovered. Wa; there not a woman among them ?L---Yes.. is that woman returned or is she in England ? She is in England.: • ' Were any of those persons very 111 used ? Yes, and one has never recovered ; he is deaf to this. day. By Lord liztkrYoN.—Did Rastelli bring over more than one Set of witnesses to thiS country"? Do you mean besides those who came to*Dover. Any ?—I cannot recollect. Can_yo,vt tell. the names, of those Ile brought I do noirecollett them.. Cap yort by . any toea'tts ascertain their names ? Ves 4 upon referring. 4 , What is ;the greatest distance from Milani to the plices.at which an of the witnesses live whom Rnqelli brought over do nol.recollect the names of all the witnesses. Could Rastelli conveniently communicate with all the.faroiliesOf .I.ie.witnesses whom he brought over.?—Commuuicate:COnveniently, certainly. Lord you not knol,v that you would lose all control over Rastelli after he left this country ,?—y and - 1 bad not any control overlim when he,was in fi'fk country. - Earl of LtVER.PO9I: here interposed, and ob served, that there cedld not be the least difficulty in communicating to the House the nag& of the witte-sses, , the avlaym of whose families his jour ney to Milan ,was, meant to allay=as well as the dates of the letters Which Were written fot the purpose of biinging himhack, whatever difficAlty the witness might make, iin communicating these facts in his character of _agent. Lord I(O4Ni-oN,- . ---Xrri I. to iiriderstrind that • there is an7,othei'difficalty in_your answering these questions,Arin that which arises from your character as agent? Lord LALTM:RDA/Lt said, that this course of proceeding,if persisted in, would be fatal do the judicial inquiry in which they were engaged., They had called air agent to their bar, as a wit *s7s, who had beerithirnself instrumental to brinff ing •witneses to support this biTI; 'he 'begged. only to - ask, what would be their situation, if: froth that confidential agent a •contradietion was extracted to the witnesses Whern he 'had himself produced ? thought the whole of his testi mony shotrktbeirentoved from their minutes. - Mr. BR orroHAS.—I understand I am to beper mitted to suggest some questions to' the witness. The LoaD CHANCELZOit.—The Lords have not yet 'done. Mr. Powell, who had withdrawn from the Bar, • was called back. ' Examined by Lord DARNLEY. . In answer to the last question, the•witnasS has stated that Rastei and the s rest of tire wit nesses, are not under his directions or controul— I beg to know under whose they 'are ?-1 . can scarcely say : under whom, _but I conceive -them to be under the controul of Government. Who is the person immediately authorized by. Governrdentto see after these witnesses ? do you know whom ?—There are . several persons. who reside in the place with them, Linder whose im mediate direCtion ihey are—wkether they. are under their contreul or not I do not knoW. I am not able to reconcile the answer with the . admission .that Rastelli,.one of. the witnesses, was sent by you to Milan. In point of fact, are persons admitted to see the.witnesse:s, or in point of fact refused by Mr: Pops ell's orders have g-iven directions. that persons should be admitted to-see. the witnesses—(A pause)—and certainly I have given directions that strangers should be excluded ;- I have given directions that any per son who might wish to see them should not be .admitted, becauSe I thought it inconsistent. The Earl of.. DEKUY.—Q. I understand Mr. Powell to say; that Rastelli was not under his controul; I :wish to know by what. authority he sent him out.-A. I conceived if otecessa.ry that Iliad a right to do it. Did you send.him out on your own responsibi __ litY, without communica!ting with any other agent in this cause.?-:---I do not recolk'ct. • I made no secret of it. I do not want to knew whether it war, a secret or not. I want to know if you sent him of your own accord Lord litNyON wished that the witness should be ordered to furnish a list of the witnesses brought over by Rastelli. The Earl of WINtHEL9C - A.—Had you any power to compel Rastelli to go to Milan if he had re - fued certainly had no power to enforce his going, or to prevent it if he wished. I considered him at liberty to go, 'and that I could not stop him. I thought him under no legal restraint. Mr. BROUGHAM.—With the permissic,n of your Lordships, I wish to ask the witness who is .his employer or agent in this cause. Some objection was made to the question. Mr. BitOuousm.—" My Lords, I consider it essential to the great principles of justice that this question should be put. It is, my Lords, important, essentially important, to enable us, her Majesty's Counsel, to conduct the cause. This is the - first witness that has been called who can give us that important information which I now seek, it is important that ste should know to 'whom we are opposed, that we may make that evidence which we otherwise could not do; for,. if we knew the power by which the machinery has been put in motion, we can identify them with their agents, by- the acts and declarations of the party. When we are acquainted with the unknown, the interesting .unknown, we may trace its actittps and its conduct,Nd bring Sibmits ikwn. mouth, If it has arpoutfr,.who- What he is. -I know nothing of this shapeless being, if shape it can be called. I know nothing of it, ,whether it basa head or a body, or is a mere shadow—an airy ,bein, without a local habitation or a name.' Now I want to know from this witness, who is an avowed agent of this ideal personage, who and what this airy being is ?" The Loan C,UANCELLOR interrupted the,Learn ed Counsel and said, that questions of the nature alluded to could not be put to the witness, un less•he appeared as a witness in this Bill. Mr: BROUGHAM wished to ask another ques tion of the witness, which was, how many wit neAsses against the Queen had arrived previous to the I.7th of August ? The Lona) CHANCELLOR objected to the question. Mr. Powell was recalled. Mr. BROUGSIAM. - How many witnesses, brought over for the Bill, had left the country before the 14th of September ? The Earl of LAUDERDALE objected to the question. The Earl of CARNARYON spoke in favour of it. Mr. BROUGHAM.--Previous. to Rastelli going to Italy, how many witnesses had returnvi'to the North of Italy ?—I do not know of any. To the best of my knowledge 1 believe there were Will you swear, to the best of your belief, that when Rastelli was sent back, you did not knou; and believe that any other person had returned to the North of Italy ?—To the best of my know ledge there was none. I have no recollection of any—no belief of any being so sent back. If I fiave a list of witnesses, I may speak more posi tively. There - were so many persons that A can not speak positively. I cannot recollect. Some of the witnesses I have not seen. , Will you then swear, that when Rastelli was sent back, no person employed as an agent or courier to the Milan Commission, had been sent over to Italy sufosequent to theDovef rioe—Some couriers have been sent over, but not wider the Milan Commission, which I consider to have ceased.. Mr. CoOke and I. left Milan in May, Igl9, but the functions of the. CommissiOn had ceased in March ; I do. not consider myself as now acting under the Milan Commission, The question relates to any person who had teen employed as a courier in this Bill ? 7 —Cer. tainly, couriers have been so employed,. Will you give us their names—l mean down to the departure of Rastelli know as a courier, Crouse. • Mad Crouse brought over some witnesses in this cause ?--Nes. Has any other person brought witnesses ?—Yes Who are they do not know their names. Did you know the other persons who had gone out ,as couriers ?—I did. Did you send any other persons to comfOrt the families of the witnesses ?—Letters' were written by all the persoirs here to their friends, and sent to Colonel Brown. Were any of these couriers, , besides Rastelli, tai go round to the families of these persons ? When Crouse was sent, I considered that Col. Brown would make use of Crouse to give the fa milies information. Did you give Crouse any instructions to that effect ?—Not to my recollection. Did you give the other couriers any instruc tions of that nature ?—The persons sent letters by them. But I received information from Milan that the families were not satisfied ; and that ac , counts were circulated that the letters which had been sent, had been forced from the witnesses, and they had been obliged to write statements of their safety. Who gave you that information ?—Colonel Brown. Can 'you name any family who heard such reports ?—ColOnel Brown's inforthation was ge neral; but I can name.one individual who had been told that her hUsband had received great perso nal injury; it is the wife of Langarti. Have you or the agents of this Bill not read or heard the evidence of Rastelli ?—I have. And did you not hear Rastelli swear that 11 of the witnesses that came over he never saw or knew any thing of ?—I did. And did you not swear that the reason for charging Rastelli was, that he was. acquainted With the families of those persons ? The Lotto CHANCELLOR thought that that part of Rastelli's evidence which referred to this pojut should be read. Mr. BROUGHAM then read that part of the evi dence, where he said he knew some of the wit nesses, some he did not.—A. I was not present when the whole of Rastelli's examination was going forward. But I wish to state that sending Ras telli had not merely a reference to those families who had come over. Then does witness mean to swear that Rastelli had to go to round to all the families of those who had come, and those who might come ?—He was to go the families of those who came under the directions of Col. Brown. - He had no instructions as to those who might come. Will the witness tell as nearly As possible how many witnesses have come over in support of this cannot tell exactly: • Will you swear there were not 40? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL olljected to this question. I wish to ask whether Rastelli remained here the whole time between the riot at Dover and the time of his examination cannot say. Will you swear that he did nut return to Milan. after the riot at Dover ?-4 have not seen * . him since. Will Mr. Powell state precisely the language and terms be used to Rastelli in sending him out of this country ?—I mentioned before the difeci tions I gave him. , • Did Rastelli say any thing about returning said he would come back as soon as he could' jo knew he would be a most important witn ess 1 ( 1 the House of litimmons, in case the Billie go down there. The Arroptcspx-QEsk,n4A\begged si ' to . ask Mr. Powella few questions. eo Q. Was Mr. Powell-pres4nt in this HouSe ',71. that the Attorney-General for the Queen state,. -;„ he had no other questions to ask Mr. Rastel li he A. I was, and had ,not the least idea that • would call him. the Has any communication been made rbY „J Queen's Counsel or Attorney, that they 111 ';',1 want to call Rastelli?—Certainlrnot, if AnY o p communication had been made, no consider would induce me to send him away. , Lord LAUDERDALE.—Q. Was not Rasteii; ° of the witnesses of the riot at Dover ?—A.- 1 un derstood he was. Lord liEtyro-,t thought that any thing that he t j understood from • another could not be admitte' as evidence. The LORD CHANCELLOR thought it might. no , Q. Was not Rastelli himself maltreated at Y d , ver ?—A. I understood they were all maltreats The witness then withdrew. 00 0 0 Lord LAUDERDALE then rose for the p „ 5, -= , of moving that the evidence of Mr. Powell sh°ll.s„ be printed separately from the rest of the min g ' e v Lord ERSKrNE thought that the House not now- to• declare an. act which they hau.r e i f i e mitted to be used by printing it separately. he , object of calling . Mr. Powell was to examine o ' ll , l 'titer, having committed an act of a serious na tti fe l be deserved to be punished. The Noble 11 ° 1 was anxious that the examination of Mr. Po re ol should •be expunged, because it had not bee° d the issue of this proceeding. He. (Lord ErS l ‘ lll to was of opinion that the same rule would applyj most of the questions asked by his Noble 311 Learned Friend. for Lord LAUDERDALE said that • his • reason keeping this examination separatit . Was,' that sine the commencement of this proceeding, this 11°``0l had endeavoured to assimilate it to a court 0 law ; but he conceived that all the :rules' of 09d of law had been violated. Here the • case , ea been'opened . by four of the Noble, Lords, `vto were Judges in this case. And According all the knowledge - he had of, the-proceeding s 11, courts of law, the case was opened by the Ce' v " l sel. • Here the case - was directly opposite. et Earl -GREY observed that he was not ao l whether he was one-of the four Noble Lords ` .4. 1 : had come under the displeasure of his N°,„ Friend for their conduct of yesterday; but "- certainly should not attempt to mimic the univ e . t r i; sal forbearance and extraordinary mildness 10 a which that' Noble Lord had always conductec himself, and especially in the course of the presO it proceeding(a laugh.)—The Noble Lord hs called their Lordships judges in this eas e; but he (Earl G.) knew not by what 133 ' . 1e they could Le called wish. justice. , a trusted, - howev'er, that their Lordships vve u ' r endeavour to do justice between those* I*' , ties, add satisfy the minds -.of the pub lic ; let the capacity which their. Lordships filled " to whatever it might. If, however, they were be called the Judges,.he contended that the e: 4 : mination of Mr. Powell had been perfectly re . gular, and perfectly consistent with that otlic t ; for it was universally known, that in the Cult r beloW s if, in the course of a judicial proceediri; before those Courts, it appeared that any per se er had, by withdrawing the witnesses, or any et' h e act, attempted to prevent the course of just i .; -itwas the constant practice.of the Courts . telfi o 1P" that person brought before them, and ex 0 . examine him on-the subject. o ur Lord REDESDALE said a few words in fa" - of the examination remaining on the minutes. Earl DONOUGHMORE said, that so far fr ° , considering that this examination ought to be eft punged, he thought it was a most. material P a d 'of .the case which their Lordships were ca l ' e d, upon to decide. The present prosecution ll or he admitted, been justly called anomalous ; it was the proceeding of the Government one individual ; and he conceived that the u„ 4 vernment had only done their duty in institu t 7 i e the prosecution. 'But it was but fair, op , t lie other hand, to make some consideration for ' lit accused, exposed as she was to the whole we t . o r of the Government influence;' and, in--that 1 .1 0 ,t of the case, he should most 'readily agree whatever benefit she could deriVe from the , r i a ting this examination on the minutes, she slic u receive. • 00 The Earl of CARNARVON was also of 0 1 ) °,, 5 , that the evidence should ternain'on the LIAOv and he pointed out the abStirdity into which I: , House would 'fall, if, after having ca11ec1,.%,. Counsel to the bar , and heard them on the clu e l3 e, lion, their Lordships should declare that I . :' had passed should form no part of the proceedifist; • The Loan CHANCELLOR made a few obser,,j, tions as to the facility with which their P` c i, ships might .be able to obtain the printe d hid deuce, and referring to the remarks, w hich, ho fallen from the,four .Noble Lords yesterdaY; sc o f had been particularly alluded to by the Ea r ; oi l Lauderdale, his Lordship observed, that he it yesterday heard a species of noise which, `t er , were called eloquence, be would defy an ri ureter of the House to explain it. The question whether the examination sheitliot. stand upon the minutes was then putand. agree‘ la , ' JOSEPH PLANTA, Esq. w as then called ill, examiner( by Lord CAR!. ARVON. Calf Q. Are you Under Secretary in Lor d C4s` reagh's Office ?—A. I am. ". Too Do you remember an application ma de I {or by Mr. Powell, in September, fora passP° r ; ' ti it Rastelli ?—Mr. Powell came to me an d 6ci as had been determined to send Rastelli al:nT a te ps a courier, and desired.me to take tire Offici 9l ,too for that purpose. I consequently ortiE' reL ' b passport, it was signed by L or d C a stler e tv but signed passports are kept in the office/ for such occasions ; and the passport for itAL o ta was one of those, I made no application to 'Cast/ ord ( ;,, Pract tiolls toll , 1 Ils tizL e r,HWs, Lai a Qf tt• I tive