The Sun. — London, England, 1820-10-27 00:00:00

PARLIAMENT, HOUSE OF tORDS---YESTERDAY: THE QUEEN'S DEFENCE: The following• is the conclusion of Dr. Ltrsx rsGsroN_'S Speech in defence of her MA \ J ESTY Where would he the safety . of , any _ inan - Vilere one, two, three, four or five - of the charges preferred, ! beitig ihewai to rest-on perjury, it should . be saisi, go on -to seventh and eighth, and yonlaVve a verdict ? By the wisdom and-goodness of Providence Men were enabled to detect conspiracies, by dragging to light hidden circumstances and nstives.aetaiating- the parties; brit it not given to',ittan lofollow beyond the bounds of necessity -,aryd to elucidate every, parti cular. They could only tlis . prove general charges by fixing upon thOse poims whiCh lay open, to contradiction. Upon, the present occasion Ow burden. of the proof lay-upon the prosecutor,- and there was not one of their Lordships,' who was ever so little cognizatit of the laW,bukt knew that the plaintiff, in, every rase, was bound to esta-, biiibi his case by unquestionable proof.. That principle should ever be held .inssicred retnem , brante, which required . t vat he . who. sought to fake 4.iiay the life or kon nir of another should . , snalse good the charge he.p-eferred s by the most uns - nspected and onsuspectable evidence.Ve could nOt be a.lloWed to limit him Self when . he set him self op in the odious character of au accuser, and Say," $o far will I go and no further." He must make out the whole of the charges. The failure of the accuser to dtl this was the jus titiivation of the accused. Never since.. the dirk ages, had it been put upon the accused to prove innocence, where the accuser failed toestablisbguilt—never since those times when the accused was subjected to the ordeal of walking over the burning ploughshares, had. a defendant .been called upon to.prove innocence, where. the accuser had failed in the first instance. He came now to the first head of the case against her Majesty, as stated by his Learned •rriend, the Attorney-General—the conduct of the Queen towards Bergami. His Learned Friend had Com mented with considerable ingenuity on the prin ciples of human nature, and said he would shew from the conduct Of the Queen, that guilt was a necessary inference s and then, said he, " prove that intercourSes of great familiarity had taken place, which .Only could have arisen from the last favour having been granted, and that the conduct of Bergami was observed to be presump tuous -and overbearing, the natural consequence of that familiarity which had taken plaCe." He (Dr. Loshington) undertook to prove from the evidence given, that' no part of what the -Attor ney-General had so stated was made out, but the direct contrary. He then proceeded to examine the evidence. Foremost they had that memor able witness Majocci, and what did he swear ? That " Bergami had more authority than the Other persons of the household ;"----that there was ",rather a familiarity between her Royal High ness and Bergami." Good God! what a phrase after such an opening of the case—there was " ratites •a familiarity" between them---What a phrase from so chosen a - witness ; from one who had been so nurtured to the task of ruining his Royal Mistress; from one whom he might call' the elite of the prosecu tion !—What an answer to give, when they consi deted that the Attorney-General .put all his ques= tiens so ingeniously, that the witness could in no instance help understanding fully how much was expected from him, and how far he was hired to gO. After all this, what a sum total of evi denco !—." Thera was rather a .familiarity be tween them!"—They came next to the evidence Of . Madernoiselle Dumont. She says that, on no. one occasion, they were " very faMiliar ;" and that, on another, she " made no observations." Their Lordships would perhaps agree with him, that if ever there was a witness more likely or More disposed than another to observe any thing which might operate to the prejudice of her Ma jesty, it was this woman. in fact, except in the evidence Of the two masons, who were working at the Villa d'Este, most admirable judges truly of the conduct which a Queen ought to observe towards her ,chaniberlain„ and who. swore that they walked together, like two friends, like hus band and wife, their Lordships would not find in tho whole body of the evidence, one single assertion of this existing familiarity. But -he would now turn to the other side of the evi dence. He had there to present to their:Lord ships twelve witnesses, whose testimony went not only over the whole period of the imputed criminality, but it extended to the time of her last departure from Rome. He would make no con parisoos,; he *mild not so far dishonour the respectable names he was about to quote, as to compare theis credibility with that of the wit nesses for the prosecution. What, then, did the first of these witnesses, (Lord Guildford) swear ? That he " Saw nothing particular in the mariner of the Queen towards Bergami"—" nothing in the conduct of Bergami towards the Queen but what wasrespeetful." Lord Glenbervie, in like manner stated,lhat he saw" nothing like disrespect" in 13er garni's behaviour to the Queen. Lady C. Lindsay, awitneis Whose testimony was given in the fairest and most honourable manner, and who, he could not help saying, Was harshly treated on the oppo site side, says that Bergami conducted himself in all things towards the Queen 44 as a -person in his situation ought naturally to do." 'Their 'Lord ships would observe, too, that this Lady, was with Iser Majesty in . I.larch and April, 1815, when the .adultermisintercourse; (if it took place at all),' must have been in the days of its first enjoyment and eO-avagance. Could their Lordships. be lieve that 'Lady Charlotte Lind Say was a person , so destitute,of all Ordinary powers of observation, .asto allow any circumstances calculated to justify the suspicion of such an intercourse to pass unno ticed ? Could their Lordsliips believe this, who saw the talent which this . Lady exhibited - when under examination at their bar ? The same Lady VWOre farther, that " the Queen behav r ed towards Bergami 'al a mistress should towards hey ser vant;". that 'she .'shewed " the lame to war& Bergami as she' id. to SiCard and edsherie" Lord Istandaff said, he 'saW nothing improper in the ooncitict of the Qiteen . " nothing to reflect disgr'aCe on the • chiracter of the country.". II e would next call their attention to the evidence of the Hort. - KeppelCraven, the Chanibei.lain of her Royal Highness; He saw " no impropei 'eons duct" in her Royal Highness - , " no degrading familiarity ;" . and " no. sort of impropriety of conduct," either when Bergami -stock' behind the chair of her: Royal Highness as a servant; or after wards when he sat as a finest at the . sanie Sir W. Gel!, another of her Majesty's Chamber lairiSs declared that he saw " nothing im proper in the conduct of the parties ;" • and that Bergami acted as " a person in his situation ought . to do." To this witness another question was put i such as he verily believed never. was put any Court of Justice befOre, to ascers taro the guilt or innocence of an accused party. —L .He did . not complain of the question, for he felt, throughout the whole of this inquiry, that, only. giVe h'►iu honest witness, one who had a cha racter to loSe, and he cared not what they might ask him. The question to which-he had alluded was this," Did you observe any thing in the demeanour, manner, or conversation of her Ma jesty which-could induce volt as a man of the world to enterta'n an idea that an atitiltermis tercourse subsisted between the Queen and Ber gami ?" He-called upon their Lordships to look at the severe ordeal to.which the conduct of 11. 1 .`s Illustrious Client was subjected. If, iii the whole course of the time that Sir William Gell had an opportunity of - witnessing the conduct of the Queen, one single-act of iudiicretion, one loose expression, had. escaped her Majesty in the wan tonness of joy,.or in the 'innocence of overflowing gaiety-if there was •One, wordsone action, one loOk,-Which could for a moment fill the mind , of this ";man of the world" with only a suspicion that an improper intercourse subsisted, it was to be brought forwardras an e,videnceof guilt on the part of her Majesty. Not by facts was she sought to be convicted, but by possibilities ; not by evi-• hence of what- did actually pass, but by suspi cions of vOnst might have passed—suspicions ex-- cited by -such indications as might have been ga thered in the confidence of unrestrained intimacy. To have one's COndtiet so tried, was, indeed, se vere ; but to have it by Stich a test acquitted,was indeed a triumph, which the purest might enrVy.! What was the answer of Sir,Wm. Gell to this searching question ? "• I never 'did !" What could' his Learned Friend say to sdch testimony as that? They would say, for it had been said, " Oh, these were individuals of high rank and character. The Queen was on her guard before them !" Suppose for a,moment the fact were so, but he would now introduce to their Lordships a witness of a different description, that they might see how the .comparatively low were supported by the high in rank. There was the evidence of . Sicard, a. man who had been upwards of twenty years in the Queen's, service, and who was placed there by his .Majesty I. lie swore that ‘_A the Queen's manner, of treating her servants was on -commonly 'kind, almost to a fault,' that " Ber garni's conduct was., always molt proper;" and that he was positive that in his presence " no Un s • due familiarity or impropriety ". ever took place between the. Princess and Bergami. He beg. ged to call the attention of the House to the me lancholy situation her Majesty had been placed in—a situation in which all the kindness - of her nature had been turned' against her lib , pour and her peace, and made a matter of accu sation. She had forgiven the ruffian Crede for plotting against her, yet the very disposition which had led her to doithis, was now construed into a proof of guilt. To that disposition he could speak of his own knowledge. Day after day it had beets his painful task to harass the Queen with nauseous inquiries on matters con nected with these proceedings, but at all times he had found on her part the same condescen sion and the same regard for the feelings of each other, for,which the witnesses he had just men tioned had given her credit. Dr. Holland had spoken' tb the conduct of her Royal Highness as being most proper, and. he had never remarked any thing suspicious in her deportment towards Bergami, whose manners were always unpresum ing and respectful. Mr. Mills stated, that he saw 'the Queen and Bergami together frequently, and never observed the smallest impropriety 'of conduct, or, any thing that was in the slightest degree derogatory- to the character Of 'her Ma jesty. If that criminal intimacy, which was charged by the Bill, had ever existed, would not Bergami have been seen, at some period or another, presuming upon that criminal intimacy, and departing froth that respectful line Of con duct which those Gentlemen had invariably wit nessed ? But nothing "of'the kind bad: been - gee/Y . by Mr. Mills, thotigl he had had opportunities of observing their conduct down to the 'present year. Lieutenant Hownam also never observed . any impropriety or indecency in the conduct of the Queen towards him. All the other witnesses had deposed to the same effect : the last of these, Vassali, had,been staying with her Majesty up to her arrival at St. Omer's,and had never witnessed the smallest impropriety. He' trusted he had fully established "the proposition with'which he had set out, that the conduct of the Queen and of this person had been perfectly consistent with their respective situations. The next statement of the Attorney-General was, that the Quessns. having formed this degrading attachment, and be ing conscious of the infamy and disgrace which Would attend its indulgence, by different ingenious contrivances parted with her English srlite. It was his object to show that each and every one Of these charges Were unfounded. Let their LOrdships see how the last fact stood. He then Went through the various causes which had caused the English persons of her suite to quit the service of her Royal Highness. Colo pel 'St. Leger had left on account of the state of his health, 'but in 1-819 had prepared to meet her Majesty at Dover, and subsequently paid his dutiful respects to his 11 o J al Mistress .tadS , C. Lindsay h*d quitted 6 . r Royal in cOnSe luence of previous 'arrangements. Her Royal Highness had sent t 6 Lady C. Lindsay to rejoin her in 1817, at a tine;. when according to his Learned Friend, she was spending It?r days and ilhslas in the indulgence of a guilty Tassicin—itt erCe7sseswhich he, belleYe,d- nAltarhal existence Tut in the prurient imaginations of those with . Whom these charges had originated—at such a time it should seem she had sent for Lidy Char lotte Lindsay, that she might come and bear tes timony to her misconduct. It had been attempt , ed by all possible means to get out of Lady C. Lindsay, that she had at some time or other in the course of her life expressed an opinion dero gatory to the Queen. It was worthy of the pro secutors in this case to act such a part. His Learned Friend had bYett obliged by his instruc tions, to attempt the violation 'of the sacred con fidence which ought to stibsist between man and wife. For his Learned Friend from the bottom of his soul he felt commiseration, but he felt in= dignation, he felt dteStation for him who cotild work upon the indigence of the hunand, to blast the reputation of his wife,.and damn the honour of his Queen. And what came of this exantina tion after all ?--Why it appeared that Lady C. Lindsay had never witnessed the least impropriety in the conduct of her Royal Highness, but she had heard reports to her prejudice. Sir Wikiam Gel) had left her Majesty on account of his health at Naples, and Dr. Holland had quitted her service to go to England. So much for the man ' ner in which the Queen had got rid of the En glish part of the suite. It wasjhen stated, that the Queen, forgetful of I n had kept up no acquaintance with people of rank, but had as sociated with low people. Now it had been proved by Dr. Holland and others, that she had been visited by all the Nobility-- ; that there was hardly a Court in Europ.! or in Africa, to which she did not go, and eve .y where, as Lieutenant Howtsam had described it, her conduct was ma jesty and grace, and she had been received with all the honours due to her exalted rank. He had• forgotten that there was one exception. At k the , Court of .Vienna her Majesty was not re ceived. At that Court my Lord Stewart was Ambassador: At'that Co at the brother of Lord Castlereagh, one of the p..osecutors in this case, resided. And what was my Lord Stewart be side ? He was the foster father of Majocci, the principal dealer in perjury. This was the reason which prevented her Majesty's reception at the Court of Vienna. The Learned Counsel then went over the evidence of Mr. Craven and Sir W. Gell, relative to the recommendation of Ber gami, and his appointment as courier.--He then explained and defended the promotion of Ber gami; and contended that there was nothing im proper in the preference shewn for him by her Majesty. He was only promoted to those offices which became vacant, some of her. Majesty's suite quittiag her service ; and he was not proinotetf to the .office of Chamber lain, until there 'swat 410 probability of get ting an English Nobleman to fill the office ; since to be in favonr *rids the Queen, was to ,be in dis grace at home ; and to passes her patronage, was tp forfeit all hopes,of it here: :With respect to .Bergami sleeping near her Majesty,eirctimstances rendered this extremely necessary. From the day she reached Naples 'she was 'beset with spies, and assailed, he vfrottld not say by whom, but her personal safety was endangered ; it was then that she required some protection ; and who could be selected more properly than that individual whose fidelity and courage had been proved ? Their Lordships had been to!d that Bergatni was omni potent in his controul over her Majesty ; but no one atone of evidence was produced in support of the assertion. If the Queen had been under the influence of the guilty passion that had been re presented, Bergami would indeed have command ed her as a slave at his feet r.he would have had no mercy, for favouritesseldona have much mercy, or much compassion : and, pursuing their own in terest, they forgot all the world beside. He would have owned no duty but that of Command ; he would not have suffered the Queen to quit the luxurious clime of Italy, to go on a perilous ad venture to Jerusalem. Their Lordships must judge of human individuals by the laws of human nature ; they must look at the probabilities of the case ; and, taken as a whole (and so it must be), never Was` anything so improbable. I would ask, (said Dr. L.), where is the individual whose life is so spotless, whose character is so pure, that he would have the courage to go back for six years, and say, " examine every action and thought of my life, and there is not onethat can be tortured to thy disadvantage ?" If there is one individual who-dares to say so, I deem him less honest, less candid, than the ordinary class of mankind.— Armed with assertions so little substantiated, the Attorney-General at length opened the first grand scene of the intercourse, Commencing at Naples. The Learned Couns e l then proceeded to show hOw the evidence to that intercourse had not only been contradicted by the most unim peachable testimony, but it,had failed of itself. The whole scene had been disproved beyond the possibility of doubt, as completely as the journey to Senegaglia or the affair at Trieste. He coin- Metited , on the absurdity of supposing that her Majesty, if she were indeed so completely de voted to the gratification of her passions, with Bergami, would place William Austin in such a situation as that he must haye opportunities of de tecting her and her paramour. She had the dis posal of her own house , and could it be fora mo ment suspected that, when she . was about to cele brate what had been described as the hymeneal rites, she•wOuld place a boy 13 years of age, Who had been, up to that period, in the habit ofsleep ing in her room, in the apartment next to that in which she was to sleep ? The story of Dumont as to what had passed at Naples was refuted. - - The adulterous intercourse charged to have taken place on the second night after the arrival of the Queen at Naples was disproved. Whether it was suppoSed to have taken place on the night her ;Majesty went to the Opera, or on that when she went to the Concert, the witness was contradict . „ - • - col° • • ed, as she had stated. her lqajesty to ha ve the home early, while it appeared that frarao, Opera, where she was accompanied by Si r is Gell, she had not retiirned till one o'clochaiti the morning, and from :the Concert bile. i i e iiiknot return before half- pas! -- e:leven, wheP 11, 'esVaS atkeaaded b Mr. Crave He - now C uts tPligt“itteNtion .e., their LAlT'selis to. Dn a ' i dS ° -statement as to he the arrangement of the -,--. s • Naples. It would be observed, tha t the 'qtiot tor-General had no mercy on his witnesses; itif he whipped and sptirred them, until they °her to their lull career. At first, Dumont, in I , a l examination, said that the large bed in he'r Itcedity. Highness's roomi was without sheets,and aPP er ed to have been occupied by more than one P ad son ; . and three (lays afterwards came in the i, dition of the stains on the , sheets ! New , i ' l „ r • was true that - the Queen had occupied the it".es, bed, she must have done so* under the rrn' s ee e traordinary circumstances. Could such hay the force of her passion, that, though at th.,,irdt of 46, she would sleep for four mouths olitt o a, the - blankets ? It was proved,'that Be r ganii l o c a, for a week of . that time, been confined to his,. ' a in conseqUence of the kick of a horse, anti ,F• the large bed had during that period, t . t''pe pearAnce of being slept in by two persons: . to SOlicitor-General knew that the best witaes7o4; be called upon to prove this part of the Cl'' e „jg, Dtimont. He knew that the maker of the o e a person now in this country, could not ti e lor to the circtimstances to the truth of whic lz ' t 0 11 moat had sworn. He %*as determined to r es or , the prinut Ode evidlence; and to rejec t ti o• which could be, of no service to the prosec n- c' i, He then adverted id the evidence of M,,,,1 where he stated th at the Queen had P',,,i, through his room to the apartment of fie r g 4l j i er It would be riCallected that there was afi n- to passage from. Ler IloYai sight ass's ree'. c. that of Bergami l besides that ttfrotigh 313-I :s 4 • ci's ; and was it proisaMe, that Asolett there Il ,' not the most distant probability of tni.;eting , , e ' l ; person in the other passage, she conid lia%! - ec inl *,ho to expose herself to the observation of e 1,, ell was on the watch for hssr ? And tits liaPP e 'm 1 twice. If there had been no Other passage t , d t iftP, ' roomof Bergami than that whiCh it is s" i , etr 1. had chosen, then it might have been be li o buttas the case stood it was beyond all cret t lc ! tity. It had been stated in evidence thalili',. • Majesty went in an indecent dress ,to the ' to t - ; querade. lie spoke . of this, because the A t o f i ney-General had declared that the indignationot,. I the- people compelled her to a speedy re t o , And what had been proved ? Why, tlot sl' e pl peared in an ugly red dress, and was surf -win c h - it by masks. He was then justified in sayihg , wi ll during the Queen's residence at Naples ther e h i s . not the shadow of a charge ag,ainst het' --t n , t s e at • quitted Naples unspotted. He felt cooat'tio that their ,Lordships would not couple with at' future charges, to which lie should draw the," J!, tention, those refuted accusations. Ile O n , t he ready passed through the great foundatioves to. plot-- - --the evidence of imputed guilt. His L' e j a v ed Friend (the Attorney-General) had cal ° ti t' ed, that if Ire could chew the symptoms of a" of . tacliment between Bergarni and the Qle eu t ot Nales, every thing fax:tumble to the cas e ljj rd follow. But he (Doctor Lushinelon) inlP' i `.‘ol. their Lordships, for the;sake of truth, to o'll ' o . him through the remainder of the evidence's n ' t ',, r s', dome to a decision after an impartial cons i ` - t he tion of all the circumstances. owe 1,:3 ,1 Learned Counsel, on the suggestion o f the, fte of LIVERPOOL, withdrew-fora short tinge. ' t 3 e. , 0 1; an absence of about half an hour, he r ''> ed to the Il•ar, and resumed his speech' ) % lid • According,to the law of the land, ally oV ii :,..ri, had condticted hitwelt in, the way that 44 sots had, would be deemed guilty of perjorY,,r . P rendered utterly incapable of ever giVing a le' deuce in a Court of Law for the time to c: 0 51 Their Lordships must judge of that wi tn iec o as wellas of Dumont, Sacchi, and Rastell i, t he the conviction left on their own minds frr lj to evidence altogether. It was atever vet gi'c'''e' t •; man to detect perjury in all its ramitica tl o iie and, therefore, when it was once detected in j i4 or two instances, the impression of perjarY I ro oi to be marked upon the whole of what 0 1 . ° OO the• lips of the, person so detected. He '''oo' take a specimen of Majocci's evidence, 11' 0 1 to description he gave of her Majesty's c ! 51 0 the Seven Steeples at Jerusalem, which si re sfs' . the polacre to make. In pages 0 2 an. l ' 23 / o r' jocci said that her Royal Ilig-hness slep t „ e ar rounded with a high wall, and 13er.40" i 10 her alone. Lieutenant Ilownatn, in page„ s c ol and 733, on this subject deposed, that her n all Highness had all her suite ronnd her; 11 ' 1 0 0 dined together under the portico of a ? t holl' mosque, and lay down near each other 7 " - ` l . ` l o rd' ceremony as, to place afterwards. Let the ir : i e O f ships look at the palpable contradiction ' te ' io` a statement; which was intended to bea r " 0 15 ference that his Illustrious Client was en o res very occasion indulging in those guilty P lc : ). 114 -0 which were charged against her. The sa ll ,! - Ie O r the case precisely with respect to the 13 0 0 ) Ephesus, - which furnished another spec, iil l e ta tA Majocci's talent for misrepres•entation. Il e a t * in that case, -page 22, that Bergami sleP ,hils t little distance froM her Royal Highness, '''' t • the the rest-of the suite slept in another par t e „alie', house. Now bear how it was stated, by a „" . 0 0 ' witness, p. 710 :—"Bergami's bed N ona ',Yell near that of her Royal Highness ; th ere C oll ie four rooms to pass, and a flight of steps t° l che n to it from the Princess's chamber." t pe t they found evidence like this, they ' 341 ; Wi t only to discredit this single mistaterne" ' tha t every partictilar of evidence cornin g fr o o l 'OC' ai . peron. ilut almost in every i n stance 0 f At the ci's testimony the same might be proved. ow Borotheo he stated that there was a secret coed/ case between the chambers of the parties ` 4c ts lii" but it turned out that, in fact, so far frog), I to t he lug a secret staircase, it was one which lentioislf bed-room of Lieut. Hownam, and ! w as 1 ) , r sar frequented by the servants. He should ' l° Ma- One word with respect to the tent on lan d ' te nt, joccio;ears, that he heard Whispering in the fr ( : ) ,; rid t U:11 1.41; iti V(+ss ti on I ~ 0 ►! ~~~SI h~ to st a it sel ratio 4/ (1 , t 4 i ( til e cg in tir6t t}► e tiol l br. Wa s shot AF'r s . 1 1 31 4is, tlei Wu