The Sun. — London, England, 1820-10-24 00:00:00

ei ;ter t° 0 1 , opt, 4 c be t ~, roe ; oil P" bt rer is w ' t Mit t t li ot WWI but a-s° A id 01 __ 1 o f le10! Ue Co e be di,tlo e evict ° : va s clea t eonsitiel ting of issibie hips 1; tics of 0011 11- 4 c d 171 k ; s o 'taen , . cred it ' 11 be e :ar, ,bll I thou' . ' k 0 01 int p. rooPi ii as B°4 tbl aboo s 10 4 d sbe h tb . efe— th°- t r itll I , to rat Olt 1 bee t t i t v bog, of :bas titl b , l to r ° Dere' oi riitu hal; cot 1;:d old r''" yo b° tint , tr a epcsitfri )n at c voi le we in )f APB toirri.' 6l "Cu cit.' circ° .' rapt 0 )et Off , tool `lt If i t ° :CM -II e ser time° gew i ' '' t good '1 Al e , r oCeu IMO gr low b` ) :1 [rig/ s' Ivo 6° root Uter i -‘P It lifi c°l DO Olt craw ads °°i' Ista "I; d 0 0 t o f P 3r. o se bgo - tha t Wet°o beca tsle . / 3 3 01; )/ isbal l to s . (1 has "; rorgeo vir these se ". I O C tS le bun' 0 i tle t r o g 0 to t o 7,0 i --Yc* e rlingd 1;11" rrb° l6 ; ft 6e. er 0, 7 1, ° 0 6 t !XP eCg latid" I base vit' r ; I Mc- je 11 '1 her i f s t n h ! rat' f Jac • 01, 1 co"'" fOl convvrsation having taken place;' be did not ask what that conversation was. b T he LORD CHA NC E LLOR said, the question could not t Put. Put Mr. WIL LI AMS.—Then we have no further questions to At the suggestion of one of the Peers the witness was now tcoiun io dated with a sea t. , The Earl of DARLINGTON.—Q. Ask if Mademoiselle Du "tit is a cquainted with her husband ?—A. No, not at all. L, T he Ea r l o f HARROWBY.—Iii her conversation with ' L-.ademoiselle Dumont, did the witness ask any question re- P' : Cting th e manner i n which t he Princess received the tidings -• t he death of her daughter, the Princess Charlotte I—Yes. - What answer did ftladetuoiselle Dumont make I—She told that her Royal Highness was extremely affected, and said e had l ost all that was most dear to her. th lll e Earl o f LIMERICK.—From the acquaintance which i wit ness has h a d w i t h M a d emo i se ll e D umont, d oes s h e nk her word is to be trusted ? was the sugg estion, of the SOLICITOR - GENERAL this q uestio n ^AS withdraw n. The Earl of LAUDERDALE.—Did you discover, in your -°,lversation with Dumont, that she was with her Royal High 41t e p when the h Princess it Charlotte died 1-1 believe tha re t t , but - 1 not ask e r , about . I asked her if she would urn, ea ti llt e laid yes. She said she was on leave of absence, be a'lol suite of her R o y a l Hi g h ness were i n mutuning . ile sli t say sh e ' was present whet. the Princess received the ;fiW6 Gi her daughter's death I—No, she did not say that. le witne-s here withdrew. therelr, BROUGHAM addressed their Lordships, remindin i g of a statement lie had made on Saturday last, previous y s r ,'"eir Lordships adjourning, of the obstacles thrown in the • cif her Majesty's defence. He carefully abstained then, A g u. ..lid at present, from imputing blame to the Government t,me wn 12s country. H e allowed that every thing had been i 11,4 tue ir Part, and his illustrious clitrlit had only to l ament it, unfortunate part of her case. In order to have the mr llZVlances relating to the difficulty thrown in the way of the el i i WEnde coining over to this country, on their Lord -1,,,Pt Mi nutes as evidence, he should beg to call back James D nns clerk to Mr. Vizard. rs,'AXIEs LEMA NN was the n put to the Bar. SOLICITOR-GENERAL observed, that he h h- o ad s een this individual in Court during the whole t p f „ e re-examination of the witness ; and he ap nLhrided, th a t in compliance with the rules U thei r L or d s hi ps had laid down, this wit hes.o • co uld not be examined. 13R ouonAm admitted that the witness had been in the is erthrough ou t th e w h o l e procee di ng ; b ut conten d e d th at l ' 4 la e l a r :; i t° Mr. Vizard, lie came within the exception to the thei r - c i r or d , ovn 'by their Lordships, of Counsel, Atturnies, and Th e . lil t ,s'fitness was allowed to proceed. ttteei; .tike did you arrive at Carlsrhue B W,.'" t e 13th and 14th of September. 4, ax 1;:ne Baron d'Ende then at Carlsrhue ?—I was informed • ~I t' as at Baden, and would return on t 'are set out for Badeu in the hopes offi nd i n g hi▪ mbe - $s ; c attle back ?—I did, on Sunday. '•••1 4 ,." wure on the road to Baden, did you meet the Baron k i . En i i . ` 4 carriage which I thought might be that of . Baro d t hat ; t e r and after it had passed me, I asked, and was informe d wh W as him. 14 u.'•. 4 d id You do then I—l overtook him, and gave him the l etter. !,"u speak t o hi m ?—Yes. "▪ eitl4 -, did you say I—l sa id, I b e li eve I h ave th e honour of tke e l u i !g in the Baron d ' Ende , and he replied, yes; I t h en bi d ZI I the letter. bi d ;i'e open the letter ?—Yes tat o He read it ?—Yes ; and he . then invited me into his car. T o . and drove the back to Carlsrhue. ll uti "at house did he drive at Carlsrhue?—To his own po P r ,; 'ad some conversation with him on the road I—Yes. hti 7 4 ' the conversation you had have you any doubt that k til e ,jl speaking with the Barou d'Ende ?—Not the slightest. • C" 011 g did b he remain at Carlsrulie?—iie infortn ! !d ~'e gle's would detain him till fuesday—that his minutes , '.Ut k „ - • Baden, arid that, without consulting them, he could bi d gtvrer any questions accutately. hto remain at Carlsruhe I—l went to d'Armstadt, and on Tuesday. 'oak I ," did yo u nex t see th e B aron I—O n W e d nes d a y ; he t rer l i - ri e in his carriage to Baden, where we arrived in tho tuat,„4 You arrived at Baden, what dill you do there ?--H e li int 1 4 4 ' 1 , 1 4s journal or di ar y, and 1 took down Isis d e p os i- Yeskwilling 'it sliew.you any letters he received from her Majesty ? duo 4.4everal that he had received from her Majesty direct irt 4th Baron d'Ende. did you remain at Baden that time ?—I lef t i t at 1 2v1 4 ,,.;°eK on 'Thursday evenin g . 0 1 .410 is left, had the Baron . said any thing about com ii. t tu England I—Yes ;he said, that . as . the information 'eari,i,, ° give was in his o ffi cial capacity, his friends thought 1 )• id i ,". not o , *tl ut the consent of the Grand Dke. Rite! vi r i l t the Grand Duke for the purpose of wlyk i i - t i g i i nfort i i7a 4 ti o ( as to o his coming to England ?—Yes; and 'NI 'le had bad news,'for that he was nut permitted to go, ltd l he h ti c -ad asked permission, to do. u_iera eon afterwards go to his house ?—Yes ; and he s aid . c olli e my heart beats, from my agitation at not being ~ , id ..e g 0 .,, t o (,9n make any other application afterwards l ?.---es;l 4„ ., _ta tal i t tn . a letter, of which I have a copy here; t i ntended out 0%4 1 ' 4 hitti, and went to his house tor Oa purp ,• b 1 ,, 4 „ 1 he might possibly he from home, I bad s l e tter h wa ' l e ". He was out, and I left the letter. Liu td letter addressed to the Baron ?—Yes. b l ',Ut to % receive an answer ?—Yes; a verbal answer by a Al lts Who wa s then in the Life Guards of the Grand tkr,‘Vlll:tti remember his name ?—Yes ; Lieut. Schweitzer. tt,/ dep It ?Ls that answer ?—That the Baron could not make t t ilt l it :titian without the consent of the Grand Duke, and _ttr. de liked sending a written answer to her Majesty's landlai),it'a t o v ERPOOL.-.-After you had prevailed upon the et,,Z. did ttlit c on Grand Duke for permission to come to ng ti:e ,),:uu sider it vs ry important that the Baron should ;: i he (11 ; 1 ' 6 country ? I Th i lop was objected to by several Noble Peers, and l liti t t 'l3l,"„ lo oL coniented to withdraw it. !‘s th. , :uGHAM-,-In the Courts below; it would be re 'V° til t "' an affidavit of the principal should he produced ts 4; Vi t 4 Ma teriality o f a w it ness , an d I a m rea dy t o pr o duce: in„,,d imself, who will swear that the Baron d k.nde k, iniportalit witness. Otfeet'HIANCELLOR.—Did Baron d'Ende aear to on d Ate alth ?—Y es . pp y t o l qr. ,1 11. pose Isis age is ?—About forty. the r,4°UGIUM-" I attribute not any blame 4, NA ilre °ve rnment for the difficulties with which %di, s surrounded ; it is the nature of the pro °lstrigs a gainst my Illustrious Client which e a n ti • • k, r, ls (1 impossible to proceed one step fur c4,,,rou equal . justice to both parties. The ' u e, if not. kept away,• is at least not e d tri a l to come, and his testimony is most may t° my cause. He is, indeed, told that . I" • ask this is doubtful 1 . 5 r 4s e for his co n e; but , 4 1‘ it dreadful indeed to the ears of a courtier; t so °4ld not only mean leave to go, but would t U n, P I Y that he had permission never to re th the Baron Berghstedt to Ba g d'E r ide c (I I- Wo you wish to go you may go ;' but °Ub CO t • "ge, this word of foul omen was no ow , still operating upon the mind of d'Ende. to Lords, h 5 th e 1 yield the most implicit cre ow 4 4 assertion of Baron d'Ende, that he h i tr ot ," l . I have no doubt that, to use his t tt Nti v , 4 t 's, his heart did really palpitate, at the 4 h e hti otit ° , l the dismal term conge,w hid' had been I r t 4 stti, fr u , and which probably produced a t o 'ed. it'tn which he may not yet have reco the:4 th a l t ., was owin g to the Hanoverian Govern tre w, "le Von Grimms, and all the rest of •111 t th e Procured the attendance of Kresse, 444 4 I), Procured d'Ende was not brought forward. kirti°Ple were labouring in their vocation, t o r°ll yoursti.ers were labouring in theirs. I call liaNdep tktiordships seriously and solemnly to tZ t or t ueS e circumstances, which are of no Ye t tour i a llin g nature. Witnesses r you pe 4 be compelled to attend on the part of the prosecution, but not in behalf of my Il lustrious Client. I attach no blame, as I before said, to any particular person or persons; but does it not now appear that this case cannot con tinue with justice to the Queen; and if the King be the other party in this cause, I am sure that that august Monarch would be the last man in the world who would wish it to continue with out the fair and full administration of justice to his Consort." Lord HOLLAND requested that the minutes of Barbara Kresse's evidence might be referred to at pages 192 and 202 ; some part of her evi dence was accordingly read to the House, respect ing what had been stated by Kresse, concerning the compensation she was to receive. Lord LIVERPOOL now moved, that the corre spondence between Baron Bergstedt and Baron d'Ende should be read. In consequence of this motion a letter was read to the House, but in so low a tone of voice, that we cannot attempt to give any thing approaching to a verbatim report of it. The substance of it, however, was, that although private individuals might have been prevailed upon by the British Government to come to this country, for the purpose of giving their evidence in this cause, that no individual having any connection whatever with the Government there, would have been permitted to come to England for such a purpose. Mr. BROUGHAM felt it absolutely impossible, under such overwhelming and still accumulating difficulties, to proceed further in the examination of witnesses. The LORD CHANCELLOR.—The Counsel for the Queen cannot be called upon to sum up the evidence they have adduced, until the Counsel for the prosecution have brought forward their witnesses to answer*that evidence. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated that it was his intention to produce evidence in answer to the depositions which had been made on the other side, endeavouring to establish the Milan con spiracy. Mr. Brougham had said that he did not mean to assert there was such a conspiracy, but their Lordships would recollect that at a most critical period of her Majesty's defence, witnesses had been called upon to prove the existence of that conspiracy. " I immediately (continued the Attorney-General) felt Um) , duty to apprize Colonel Brown, and to require his at tendance ; the distance, however, has rendered it impossible to produce him at your Lordships' Bar. Your Lordships, I am confident, would not have forgiven me, if, before the production of this very material witness, I had called other witnesses of less importance. As Col. Brown's name has been mentioned, as inquiry relating to his conduct has been permitted, it would ob viously be the greatest injustice not to allow us to answer those statements respecting the trans actions in which Colonel Brown's name has been implicated. As, however, Colonel Brown is hot here, I humbly entreat your Lordships to allow me some time to repel the insinuations against, and to explain the conduct of Colonel Brown and the Milan Commission. A short time being granted for this purpose, which I feel it my duty to request from the justice of your Lordships, we should be enabled to close the case." Mr. BROUGIIAM (with much vehemence)— " And now, my Lords, I ask your Lordships whether this is not a Court of Justice ?"—(Cries of " Order, order!" from the Peers.) The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, before Mr. Brougham replies to the observations 'of my Learned Friend the Attorney-General, I must state that we feel it necessary to call Colonel Brown to repel the charges which have been made against him. If Mr. Brougham had stated specifically in his address to your Lordships the facts which he afterwards attempted to prove in evidence, we should have been prepared ; we should have had Colonel Brown here to answer that evidence ; as it is, we are taken by surprise, and we claim, not from your Lordships' indul gencO, but from your Lordships' justice, a suffi cient time to enable us to procure the attendance of Colonel Brown. Mr. BROUGnAm.—Nothing, my Lords, has fallen from my Learned Friends on the other side which alters my opinion. I again ask, is not this House now to be considered a Court of Justice ? Whenever it suits the purpose of the Counsel for the prosecution—when they gain any advantage by binding me round with the nine fold technicalities of the Courts below—when by any possibility the interests of my client can suffer by such restriaions, then I am told that we must be guided by the form of judicial proceed ings. But when my Learned Friends think that by flying in the face of all the principles which guide the Courts below their case can be benefited, then, and then only, we hear that your Lord ships, as a House of Parliament, have more ex tensive power, and that you are not to be guided by the rules of inferior Courts. I ask your Lordships whether this is not an unheard-of, a monstrous proposition ? The Queen is on her defence; and for the purpose of clearing the cha racter of Colonel Brown, who forms no principal party in this case, a delay is asked. The Queen is to be forgotten—no, not forgotten—she is to be positively injured to save this Lieutenant- Colonel Brown of I know not what hazards. For what purpose, my Lords —why is this mon strous application made to your Lordships ; be cause, forsooth, the character of on e o f th e fa vourite agents of the prosecution has come into jeopardy. Let us, my Lords, first do justice to the Queen ; the case of Colonel Brown may, with much propriety, wait to be disposed of at a sub sequent period. The Counsel for the prosecu tion assert that they have been taken by surp r i se ; if this really were the case, they have no right to delay, in order that they may have an oppor tunity of mending their case. If, however, I am called upon to argue this part of their statement, I distinctly answer, that it is not true they h ave been taken by surprise. If, in my address to your Lordships, I made no specific charge of conspiracy against any particular individual, still by the remarks I offered upost the manner in which a conspiracy had been carried on, I gave a general notice of that which I after wards proved. But can any man believe, who heard the defence for the Queen, that the Counsel for the prosecution imagined that they could steer through the whole of this case, without any investigation being entered into respecting the conduct of Colonel Brown ? My Lords, the Counsel for the Prosecution have not been taken by surprise, even as to the indi vidual witness they mention. The very moment that the name of one of the witnesses, Ormati, was mentioned, they took from their ample re positories a brief, by which they were enabled to cross-examine this witness. And to rebut his evidence they sent to Milan. They had the boldness to say Colonel Brown had not due no tice of the charges against him, and that he was not furnished with the means of defence. He called upon the House not to grant the applica tion. Would they protract the proceeding longer while her Majesty's mind was in a state of anxiety and irritation which he never before saw in human form—irritati on , to be considered most natural, when th e i r Lordships called to re collection the unparalleled sacrifices of its Illus trious Victim ? Would the Lords continue the state of torment In which her Majesty was placed ? If they did, they would depart from all the rules of the Courts below—rules they themselves had laid down. When they refused the applications made by her Majesty's Counsel, their Lordships adhered to the rules of the Courts below, but were they to grant the delay then required, their Lordships would plunge into a depth out of all regularity. They would sanction a proceeding unknown to the laws of the country. Would they do all this after hav ing kept the Illustrious Person under such tor ture and irritation, that they might enable the other side to obtain evidence to amend a cause already rotten ? Their Lordships might reject the application, and terminate the whole scene of oppressien,—the anomaly composed of guilty details, destructive to morals and public justice. Mr. DENMtN said, he should desert his duty if be did not strongly oppose this proceeding, unexampled he might say, and not only fatal to the cause of his Illustrious Client, but unknown to the Courts of Justice. The application was made on the ground that Colonel Brown was not in England, but Milan ; that was the cause of complaint made by the Queen's Counsel. Why was Colonel Brown absent ? He ought to have been in England. The Milan Commission had been the means of bringing witnesses to the Bar of that House, and why were the Commissioners not present to explain their conduct ? The House and the country were in ignorance of the process by which her Majesty had been brought to trial, unless it was founded on the evidence procured by. the Milan Commission and the agency of the Hanoverian Government. It was no longer doubtful that the evidence had been obtained from those sources ; and was it not monstrous that Counsel for the Queen should have been so long in the dark contending against the acts of those Powers ? The Commissioners were not present to explain the means by which the evi dence had been collected. Their attendance had been considered unnecessary; and when charges of improper conduct were made, the whole pro. ceed.ing was to be delayed, merely to enable the supporters of the Bill to get up a new case. They ought to blush when the name of justice was mentioned. A person brought to trial in the Courts of Justice well knew that the depositions were taken by a responsible Magistrate, and that the same were fairly submitted to a Grand Jury. On that evidence the accused was tried ; but who ever heard of a criminal proceeding being delayed after the defence had been made, to enable the prosecutor to bring up fresh wit nesses ? So far from Colonel Brown being ab sent, he ought to have been in the list of wit nesses in support of the Bill. It seemed that Colonel Brown was to he brought forward in vindication of his character. The characters of all persons supporting the Bill were treated with tenderness, but the feelings of the Queen of England were totally disregarded. He had, however, said nothing about Colonel Brown's character, though it might be necessary in the defence to charge the Commissioners one after the other with gross misconduct. Before he could make those charges, he had to encounter numberless panegyrics on all the Commissioners. The delay was asked for with no more regard to the feelings of her Majesty, than if she was the inanimate object of some rash experiment. It was but just that Colonel Brown should be heard, but why was he not ready to be heard ? He did not condemn him unheard, but surely the House of Lords would not deprive the Queen of the fair opportunity 'of bringing her defence to a close, merely because the cha racter of an individual was to be vindicated If the proceeding was to be delayed to an indefinite period, which it would be if de layed at all, the louse would inflict the se verest punishment on her Majesty. What pre tence was there for delay? The Bill was a Divorce Bill, and as the Divorce part of it had been given up, perhaps the Lords, in their utmost severity, would be satisfied with giving an opinion on this Illustrious Lady's conduct. Yet whatever might be the result, their Lordships would not travel out of the preamble of the Bill, but come to a conclusion upon the evidence before them. If delay was granted, it must be reciprocal, and this momentous process, too much tot any pro fessional man to grapple with, would never be brought to an end. The Queen's defenc e h a d a rrived, and h er C o unsel thought it thei r d uty to bring it to a close. Were they not to be per mitted to do so ? Why was not the Attorney- General prepared with Colonel Brown as a wit ness? The Mil an C om mission had been esta blished three years, and it was easonable to suppose, from the complaints against their acts made in examination of almost every witness, that those Commissioners would have be en rea d y to defend themselves. If they were not ready, was the Queen to suffer all the anguish of de lay ? He might repeat the question of his Learned Friend, Mr. Brougham, and ask whe ther that tribunal was a Court of Justice or not ? If , it was, would any man say, it could make the, character of an individual the ground for delay ing the defence of the accused ? In calling upon the Lords not to grant the application, the Queen's Counsel did not ask indulgence, but right. The Learned Counsel then contended, that her Majesty had been taken by surprise, and that their Lordships were requested to grant de lay on the alleged necessity of producing wit nesses, which Mr. Denman named fictitious wit nesses. Having got over the prejudice occasion ed by the delay which occurred when the At torney-General closed his case, they were to be again baffled, for the vindication of the character of a person who ought to have been present among the witnesses. Upon every principle of justice the application could not be granted. The ATTORNEY-GENEnar, addressed their Lord ships in reply with great animation. It was, he believed, the twentieth time he was told by her Majesty's Counsel that the Queen had met with no indulgence from the House. The fact was, and the House knew it, that she had met with more indulgence than had ever been granted to any other individual whatever. She had received no list of witnesses, but her Majesty's Counsel had. been allowed to hear all the witnesses examined. at the bar, and then they had the option to post pone her defence. No other accused person had ever had the same advantage. His Learned Friends had not been ingenuous to •him. They never expressed, in the early stage of the de fence, their intention to proceed upon the points of subornation of witnesses, and conspiracy. It was not until they had called those important witnesses, Lieutenant Flinn and Lieutenant Hownam, that they took another course, and. went into a collateral charge of a conspiracy, which only existed in the minds of his Learned Friends. On a former occasion he objected to the mode of examination pursued by the Queen's Counsel, and it would have been candid in his Learned Friends to have said—We have a right to follow the course which leads to a charge of conspiracy, and we mean to pursue that charge. They did not do that. They did not tell him to prepare for that line of defence, and was it then too much to say the Counsel for the Bill should have an opportunity of bringing witnesses to the Bar to defend the character of Colonel Brown ? His Learned Friend (Mr. Denman) had said, he would prove, one by one, that the Milan Com mission had been guilty of gross misconduct. Mr. DENMAN.—I said no such thing. I said I was at libertyto do so, if my case rendered it necessary. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then asked if he was to understand his Learned Friend reserved the right of entering into a new arse? No-man hav ing heard the evidence up to Pomarti, would. doubt it was the intention of his Learned Friends to impeach the character of Colonel Brown. He was only asking for time to call Colonel Brown, and then his very Learned Friend. said he had been instructed to make the ap plication. "I do say here, said the Attorney- General, I make it on my own view of the neces sity of such an application. I do it after con. sultation with those who are able to give ad.. vice." His Learned Friend appeared to doubt his word when he was charged with making an application on the ground of bringing fictitious witnesses from Lugano. Those 'witnesses had been seen at Lugano by Colonel Julie. He could not suffer such an attack without repelling it ; no man could expect to be received in society who could endeavour to impose on their Lordships by bringing forward a statement of fictitious names. In justice to the case, he had a right to call Co lonel Brown to the bar to contradict the testi mony of Pomarti and Majoni. Ile had no other motive than a desire to do justice to the task im posed upon him by their Lordships, and nothing should deter him from doing his duty. The LORD'CHANCELLOR.---They were come now to the most important part of the case, and if no regular application had been made for delay, the Counsel for the prosecution had a right to call witnesses to disprove the parti cular facts whieh had been deposed against them. The Learned Counsel had done their duty in asking for the delay, and their Lordships would remernbQr that they had allowed the Counsel for the Queen to enter into the collateral evidence of a conspiracy upon the express understanding that Colonel Brown might be called afterwards. The Counsel for the Queen had also done their duty in opposing the application for delay, and it would be for their Lordships to decide upon this application. There were two grounds for it, the character of Colonel Brown, and the weight which his evidence might have in bearing updn this case. .In the ordinary Courts of J us tic e th e proceedings must be carried on from day to day ; but that rule had been departed from, and it was customary for Parliament to adjourn from time to time. For own his part, he was anxious to have a short delay himself, in order to go home and look through the whole of the evi dence this evening, that he might form an opi nion as to whether the delay required by the Counsel ought to be granted. It wanted only forty minutes to four o'clock, and, therefore the delay was not important. Any person who suffered reason to prevail in his head and heart would say, unless there is a necessity for this delay it should not be permitted. lie should take on himself the task of looking closely to the evi dence, with a view to form his opinion whether it was consistent with justice that their Lord ships should grant this delay. The Noble and Learned LoM concluded by proposing that the consideration and determination of the question be deferred till to-morrow morning, to afford him an opportunity of delivering his opinion. Earl GREY concurred with the Lord Chancel lor, and said it was highly important, when they took this case into consideration, to say whether the delay, if granted to Counsel, should b e granted now, or after the Attorney-General had. called his other witnesses ; fcoarnrreiiefwd witnesses,2lo e n e il u a i lowed the delay now, he might not only call d at Colonel Brown, but have time to reconsider th e case,Th, Adjournment u p n : e i n t t i , t ra u s up by moved, calling a n after three.—Adjourned tilt to-morrow at ten o'clock. 71. ‘ ...... _ __ ~,