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

evidence that Regent; was employed as an agent iu conjunction with Rastelli. Every person em ployed in the Milan Commission was an agent, and he was at liberty to prove their acts. If he established the acts of agents, he was not obliged to call principals. The opposition to this ques tion should not be added to the many difficulties with which her Majesty's cause was surrounded, by prosecutors who had not yet dared to exhibit themselves in any visible shape or form. It would appear as if the prosecution was sustained by-a Joint Stock Company. Whether it was un dertaken by the order of your Lordships, or of *;evernment, it was evident to all men of corn ' soon sense that the acts of the agents should un dergo investigation ; that the eondtect . of all the Commissioners, and all those who were employed under them in collecting evidence, should be sifted to the bottom. In what state is the Queen likely to be placed if evidence of this kind were refused ? India:duals might go through all Italy suborning perjury. What hope of justice cenlil exist if the acts of those persons, who he could aecove were -gniity of the vilest acts, were not to ise inquired into ?. • Mr. Desimais said, although this was admit ' ted to be a criminal prosecirtion, it was also Divorce Bill ; a Bill of Pains and Pe uoltiee, and a proceeding going forward for the sni•.e of substantial justice. He asked - whether SUbSteential justice could be an .swered if there tied been an extensive sub . • otestion of .perjury in the North of Italy, and the - fact was to be excluded by a refusal to 'hear ,evidence proving the fact. The witnesses, Ras t± lsi itaganti, it was said, were not paid for canning before their, ‘ Lordshins ; they were only employed to appear before Colonel Brown and Advocate Ragaoti was in this coun 'taies-he came over with Rastelli, but whether he bad returned with him or not to qoiet the appre hrisioris of the witnesses who remained, he did not know, bet whether he was in the country or not, they could not . well put into the box a per run Whom they considered to be stained with crimes. The very attempt to ask a question from a man like this, was fixing ,a disgrace on her Majesty:' He'did not know whether he was jus 'titied in e aying.Rastelli had b een smu gg l e d awa y, but he he.d - been sent away in defiance of an otisler given by the Noble Lord at the head of .his Majesty's Government. He did not know whether he should he permitted to enter into the qUestion, butunless his lips were sealed, the de fence of his illustrious client would be, that the chant malignant conspiracy ever entered into againsaan unfortunate individual, was the ground of the prosecution. It was to meet that conspiracy that he claimed on the part of the Royal. De feridant in this most criminal prosecution .proof against one of the agents who acted with Ras telli on the occasion. There could be no doubt - unless he was to be told by the Attorney-Ge- • tieral that in a criminal prosecution nothing could , lici'iaroved by acts of agency, that they ought to I:e.Ye all the facts before them. On that ground teasytendered the 'evidence then offered out of tSe• month •of the witness. Unless they were neisnitted 'to enter into that line of defence they vrculti be' excluded from the defence which tLe . mode of proceeding more than any other fitrnished. - Had' this been a proceeding by im peachmept, .the LOrds might have considered sehother the acts. of agents could be admitted in evidence, but in a . proceeding hy a Bill of Pains and' Penalties, and. a Bill of Divorce, he should littve thought it was open to the Queen's Counsel to inquiee whit means had been resorted to, in or al& - to lay the evidence before that House. Admitting the Milan CommisSion to be suspended iu July, 1819, they were going on before that, apd the mischief was, that when it was known the prosecution against the Queen Consort of Eng land was to take place, all that money and in terust could do was to be done. They asked the -Halite,- however, to allow them to prove, not what theommittee had done, butthe acts of their agent. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, he had reason to complain of the manner in which the Milan Gortienisston was spoken of.—" I will tell my Learned Friend (said the Attorney-General), Mita fql the time ce:nes for inquiring into their con duct, which they most ardently desire to have in vestigated, not only be justified, but it will . stand 'higher in. your Lordships' judgment and that - of the public., and that nothing was done there ivh4coUld'refect the slightest diScredit on'those G-entlerrien.' This question, however, had niatlaiiig . :to•do with the Milan Cemmissione bis'Learned Friend having exhausted all his in vective against Rastelli, and commenced an attack on the .:Milan• Committee and Raganti. The Lban CHANCELLOR here interposed, 'and deOared his opinion that it was impossible to al loWthe question to be put. Whether the pro sectitor was visible or invisible, the Houie would never:stiffer the question to stand.—(Here there vas A cry of " Cio on,': and," at ourn!" • ' The ,question. was accordingly over-ruled. Mr. DessaDits then said he had to subinit an application' , to.. their Lordships;ibefOre they ad journed. , It was, that their 'Lord:lips 'should . ascertain from -the parties conducting the prose cution, whether Raganti yeses in this country. The, King's ,Rolicitor" General said, that the Learned Counsef had no right to inquire,into the course the Counsel for the Bill meant to pursue. Whether ; or notthe'y wotild call him at a witness to contradict any statements that might be made, it was - far them' to determine. e: . Mr. DEttmAra said, that he had not asked whe ther it was theii intention to examine Ritanti for the purpose of obtaining a contradiction •to any thing which - had been said. He merely wished to knots - whether that person was or was not in the country. The. LORD CHANCELLOR said, that it was not in the power of the House to ask that question ; but it was in their power to deCide .whether 'in any courseof the proceedings Oli t y!;hOuld themselves call this avitness.(Heatihear l) TheArroastay-GOttnaideclined his cross- . examination of the''Yitnedats it was near four o'clock.. It - -was understoOd his , intention was to cross-examine ok'Mondaynirning.--Adjourned. I 110U3T OF LORDS-THIS DAY. THE QUEEN. The Counsel were called in at 20 minutes pas ten. Earl GREY immediately rose, and referrity,t,.to William Carrington's evidence, moved that Sir John Beresford be called in. Both the Earl of, LIVERPOOL and the ATTOR► NEY-GENERAL had no objection to the motion of the Noble Earl, and Sir J oHN BERESPORD was immediately sworn. Examined by Earl GREY.—Q. Are you an 'Ad miral in his Majesty's service ?—A. lam a Rear- Admiral. Did you command his Majesty's ship Poictiers ? I did. Do you remember a person of the name of William Carrington on board that ship ?—I do. In what capacity was he ?—He was quarter master. 'Was he never required to act in any other No. Did he leave the Poictiers ?—Yes he quitted that ship at the request of Sir William Gell, who wanted to engage him. I procured -him his dis charge, and he was discharged as a midshipman by Captain Jones. At I to understand you to say, that Capttiu Jones rated him as a midshipman, when he was discharged ?—He was rated as a midshipman in order to proezre his discharge. Was this done at Sir Wm. 4l's request ?- 7 -f At his repeated request. • • Did you give him a certificate of his conduct while on board ?—I did, for he was a very good. man while I commanded the ship. Was there. any irregularity in his discharge ? While I was on board the ship, there n e ver was a man who behaved better; and as to any irregu. larity in his discharge, it was my fault and not his, there was no fault in William Carrington whatever. By 1 17 7:5:0unt MEtvILL . E.—Are we to under stand, from what Sir John Beresford has said, that William Carrington, in point of fact, was never rated as, a Midshipman while you coin- - manded the Poictiers ?—Never. Do you recollect, any conversation with Carring ton, at any time about rating him as a midshipman, or saying that he was to be brought?—No. Do you recollect his complaining to you, that he disliked the sea service; and wished, to be discharged on that account ?—I wish you would let me tell what did happen, my Lord. After Sir William Gell had asked me the favour to sanction this man's discharge ; I called to see him, and asked him if he wished to leave the service. He said that he had been pressed into the service, and did not like it. • Do you recollect of your having any correspon dence with the Admiralty on the subject of Wil liam Carrington's- discharge ?—I never had any such correspondence, nor did I know of any. If I had, I certainly should not have given him his discharge ; because it was an improper thing in Captain Jones, in discharging Carrington at my request. If there was any blame in this, I hope it will attach to me. a iky the Earl of LAUDERDALE.—WaS it under stood that William Carrington was rated as 'a Midshipman when he came on board your ship ? No ; he was drafted, from another ship, on board • the Poictiers. Was there any engagement or understanding as to his being a Midshipman there, or did any such engagement come to your knowledge from the acting Captain ?—I do not know of any. Mr. BROUGHAM here objected to the question. Did it ever come to your knowledge, as Com mander of the ship, that any kind of engagement on that subject had been made by the acting Captain ? The LORD CalscELLoß.—Did William Car rington leave his Majesty's service in 1811 ? Yes. Had he never been a midshipman before he left the service ?--No, never to my knowledge. Do you know whether or not Carrington re ceived a midshipman's pay during the last twelve months I—f don't exactly know, but the ship's-books will best tell that. • The LORD CHANcELLon.---Certainly, the ship's-books should be produced, as the best an swer to that question. Did you not have any conversation with Car rington respecting the Thisbe, and at the same time ask him for his papeTs ?-11 don't. remember that, but I got him put oa the Thisbe's„books, in order to get him his pay, and therefore I think it probable. At what period was it that Carrington was put on the .Thisbe's books ?-11e was discharged from the Poictiers to the Thisbe in. June or JUly, 1811, in order to get his pay. • Are you quite certain that you never gave `►irrn Carrington hories of his promotion as a Mid shipman, while he was in the situational Quarte'•- Master. ?-No. Did.Carrington ever state to you any difficulty' he was under, as to dressing and maintaining .him self ?—No ; for if ,he,. had done so, I should have maintained him as I have done others, till he could repay the.. Mr. Bitou6nikx here referred ; to Wm.. Car rington's Opt' evidence, ..who himself had stated that he Iva! not certain as to ,whether he was rated as a Midshipman or not. Ay the Earl of LIVERPOOL.—COUM•WiIIiaM Carringto n have understood that he was a Mid shipman previons to his leaving the ship?----/ should think: not. • Did Sir John Beresford so act towards William Carria gton, or William Carrington towards Sir John, as . for Carrington to under s tand th a t h e was a Midshipman ? Mr. BaouonAN objected to the questi on b e ing sout Sr jonN. BERE3FOR D.-My Lords, I should like William Carrington. to be called in, when ever it shall be your pleasure' to answer the Earl of Liverpool's last question. . • The 134 RD CHANCELLO 4.—lt appears in evi dence, Sir John Beresford, that .Carrington ha s twice sworn ppiitively, that •he was a Midshipf man. It is an error, to .RS the least, into which, I own, even an honest man might be led . . But it is necessary for their Lordships to know what was really the fact. Did Wm. Carrington at any time act as a Mid shipman ?—He never did. Was he ever led to expect to be promoted to that rank ?—lie was never led to expect that from me. lam going to give only an opinion, which I think cannot be taken down as evidence from me. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL here objected to the giving an opinion by the witness at the Bar. Mr. BROUGHAM, on the other side, observed, that the question was whether Carrington bad been given to understand by any one that he was likely to become a Midshipman. In answer to this, Sir John Beresford said, Carrington was never given to understand so from him, and then the witness was proceeding to offer an opinion, which, perhaps, if heard, might clear up the points. Earl GREY hoped that their Lordships would hear what Sir J. Beresford had to say. The LORD CHANCELLOR then observed, that if what the witness was going to say was not evi dence, it could never be permitted to remain on the minutes of the House. But although not evi dence, it might certainly be heard. Sir John Beresford had sat on Court Martials, and if he thought that what be was going to advance might further the ends of truth, he left it at his discre tion to speak or not. Sir JOHN BERESFORD.—My Lord, I was going to say that the first Lieutenant had so good au opinion of Wm. Carrington that it is impossible for me to know what expectations he might have held out to him, while I, was absent. but I never held out any, nor do I personally know that the Lieutenant ever did. Examination resumed by the Earl of LAUDER DALE.—Did you ever tell Win. Carrington that he was to be on the quarter-deck, when he re plied that he had neither friends nor money to support him there ?—He never told me any such thing ; when he told me that he was going to be Sir W. Gell's servant, - it was very unlikely that I should propose' to him to be an Officer in his Majesty's service. This never past, then, before he went to Sir William Gell ?--?ever. Was Carrington ever on the quarter-deck ? He never was on the quarter-deck in any other capacity than as quarter-master. Did he ever apply to you after he left the ser vice P—Yes, he met me about 3 or 4 years ado in the street, and told me that he never could get his wages ; when I replied that I would get it for him, or I would furnish him with the Means of its being procured. • Did you go to Somerset-House in consequence of this, or .write a letter for him ?--I do not re= collect now, whether I went to Somerset House, cr whether I wrote a letter for him, but I was the means of getting his pay. Did you never at any time reproach him with quitting the service previous to his discharge from the Poictiers ?—I remember once having in some way reproached him, and expressed my astonish ment at his quitting his ship. He replied that he had been pressed into the service, had never liked the sea, and was anxious to quit. By Earl GREY.—Was there any thing pact at any time, between you and Carrington, with regard to his expences at sea ?—Never. Viscount EXMOUTH here wished to know whether Car• rington knew tormfile what he wag. Mr. BROUGHAM here remit; ked, that the answer would not amount to evidence unless the %sinless were asked as to the fact being to his own knowledge. The LORD CHANCELLOR.—I apprehend that the Noble Viscount's question should stand thus;—" Does Sir J. Beres_ ford know whether Carrington did or did not know how be was rated on board the Poictiers ?" By the PEENS.—Does Sir J. Beresford, from any fact or circumstance, know whether Carrington knew how he wag rated on hoard the latter strip?—Every man and officer knew respectively how they were rated. But nut of 00 men, and at a distance of ten years, it is impossible for we to recollect the rating of them.. Is Sir J. B. certain that Carrington did nut know' that he was rated as a quarter master ?—I should. think he knew it, as he alwi.rs did the duty of a quarter master. By the I)uke of CLARENCE.—Did Carrington ever mess with the Midshipmen ?—He never did. During your stay on board the Puictiers, was Carrington particularly recommended to your notice by the first Lieute nant ?--Not that I know of ; but he was a great favourite wth hint because lie was a good man, and he was very loth to part with hint. Where was the Poictiers during her first 12 months ?—The first port wns Brest, we then went to Lisbon, and afterwards to the North Seas. Did Carrington come on hoard orißinally with a draft of men, or when the ship was first commissioned?—ile waQ 'drafted to the Poictiers from the Majestic. Was the Poictiers, while Carrington was on board of tier, in the course of payment ?-1 think she was. Will the ship's 'books spew that fact ?—Of course, your Royal Highness is aware of that. Where is the first Lieutenant of pile Poictiers now?-4 un derstand he iv at, or near Carmarthen. Here the Duke of CLARENCE moved, that the books of the Puictiers should he produced, as they were easy to he got ; ;• hut Viscount NI ELVILLE thought that a certificate from the Navy Office would answer the object their Lordships had in view, and this opinion was coincided in by Lord GREY. Witness did not know where Captain Jones lived at present. Sir Jons; 13s.aesvoito was then directed to withdraw, but leave was given lino to attend front day to day. Mt. Rat lUGHANI said, that before Filippo Poole was caljed in, he wished to ohser , e, If their I..oidships Were not already wearied with questions as to bribery, that it wag his intention to submit a few more queries to the cutiseiCntious consideration of ii witness Riganti, ant he most devotedly hoped, Ow the iityewacriot distant, Wen her Majesty's Defend, rs WOOH beinfornied who the adverse party was, because as the quern) at present stood, it would other -wise br quite impossible for him to proceed as he wished. Viscount CA LI'HOI'PE said, that as the matter had been mooted by the Learned Counsel at the liar, lie wished it to lie now stated to their Lordships who the prosecuting party - was to the present case. he considered the Crown, as the Head of tie State, in a constitutional and legal point of View, to he the prosecuting party. In saying this, he •wished to pay due achkowlertg,ment to the 'lite rality shewn by the' Noble Hail opposite (Liverpool), which had deservedly drawn forth, even in this instance, the approval of his political opponents; and flirt efore he hoped :bat that Nothe Earl would avow who the prusrcnl or yvas• He was induced to hope this, because the Nold e Eat! had exemplified in his own eundoct, the great distihe tint+ to • be drawn between a Minister of the Crown, as Head of the State, and a Minister of the King as an indiri. dual. At the same time lie begged leave to observe, that no party had so little reason to complftin of their want of infor mation on this subject as,the Learned Counsel for the Queen; for %Odle- representing the prosecution as an invisible amf undefinable tbirnr, they took all advantages of exposing the artifices of aSecret Commi.tsion, and thus workino, on the psih lic mind. The subject was 1111 W Su fairly brought b, fare the House, :hat he hoped fur some explanation from the Noble 1 Earl. The Earl of LIVERPOOL said that he certainly felt called upon - for some explanation in consequence of what had billun from the Noble Lord ; but be was surprized that the sohject had not been started at firi.t. He bad no difficulty in stating how the matter stood with regard to the }Lute, thui be ]ililLutt to Ttndnce tltt antiLly f r() ; - „tfP Courts ; L o t he would iippeal to their Lorihthips, lrctrd the beginning of this eventful cause. It W B '' tbt licved, on the 7th of June. that lie laid certain pal' e ', l „ ‘. o table o f th e H ouse by hi s M a j esty ' s command, re'3,o the conduct of the (inert), while Ptincess of Wid es t :, tit reign parts. Th e ver y fi rst quest i on then was, s cdt l papers were to he dealt with ?—He himself then pr 0 . 0,, rater them to a Secr e t Corn/Mitre for their considerati,b report, which m a ny N o bl e Lords objected to, and thoug ht hr himself shot:rid have introduced a bill, on his ow" r n ir sibility, to originate th e cause . After some time these ' c oo were referred to a S ecre t C omm i t t ee , who made their ITeP i u po . them and the very day a ft er h e laid a cer t a in ns ib he tah!e, for which he considered he was rese,b still. Hight or wrong, inquiry was institu te d o r ` as to th e prepriety of introduci ng th e Bill, et it asked from wh a t quarter it came. On the intr od° of that Bill the Attorney-Goneral was, as in such case'c,o,! tiered .by t ite I imse t o proceed. This their Lordshir testily was the course that had been taken, ;1 si was conformable to practic e i n other cases. For that 131,;,,, doubt caly he had no obj ec ti on t o th e most tr ying l°4 s d i t i It was his fair belief at the time, that its preamble 1 1 1 ,1 proved, and whether it seas proved, was eyertna' i 'd,e , qwestior i for their Lordships to consid e r. He trust"thi was uo mystery Is t a ll thi s , an d at present h e h a d n' more to add. We left the Marquess of LANSDOWN on his legs. Two ,Cto,ood,—TWocl,oon,—AND VARIOUS CAPITALS—ALL SIERLING MONEY.—ALL HOURS,—ALL ON WEDNESDAY NEXT. 'Wznitle RETRosrecr, To-morrow. ERRATUM.—III the Article respecting Mr. CooRE• Ji r o- SuN of Saturday last, instead of 4/antlered worth, s/,,Adered. PRICE OF STOCKS THIS DAY AT ONE O . CLOCK. 10 1 Bank Stock .3 prr trist. Red., P:tl ! Bank Long Ann— • 173 , 2 7 ,,c r. ..i dyer Crut.Cutas 674i 1 India Bonds ....if;'• - l ii 3i per Cent. 7si ; Ex. Bilk, U. ...... 4 4 •40, 4 per Cent.. twi ) Cons. for ?Account • • t' —.a-- -dr. II[GII WATER Lusi)oN BRIDGE. TolgOg g° ;;'' lslori,lll4, ississutts sacs 9. Evessisisz, 23 rswitatt4 ‘311_,/, THE StILEM QVIS DICERE FALSUM .iuDir..4i • LONDON, MOSDAY, OCTOBEJZ 16, 1S0• We have often expressed our censure of conduct of the Public Prints in commenting tig a be the Trial of THE QUEEN. and particularly ° f Opposition Journals, in their imputation of , Conspiracy on those who were absolutel y obllg et ; by the demand of th e Q UEEN , t o b r i ng her t" open Trial. However these writers may atte llfr i to cover this accusati on , it can on l y b e direct e against the Government, even including his J ESTI% Nothing can be more foul, unjust, or probable than such an accusation. Never 011 4 forgotten, that if the QUEEN had remained a ill or had, when she fevisited this country, rein's ° quiet, no Trial, mos t p ro b a bl y, woul d ha V e 4 1 . f k ' e ; place, rather than the State should be exposed t e party zeal and commotion. But it was impoisb`f to resist the demand of a public investigatiO her conduct, which we -aro willing to hope 4cll prompted by the consciouness of her inuoc' ° : and we earn e stly h o p e that it will s o a pp e ar 03 tl ' s final result. But when we find that certain L9 r ot echo the charge of C ons pi racy , an d t h at it 1 5 resolutely repelitA, and indignantly spurnei , i? t Ministers, though we are fully persuaded tli t the charge is utterly false, yet we cannot feel great surprise that they should submit to with silent indiff e r ence , f or th ey may be as: cured that such i n diff erence w ill not b e P te. : preted into the proud contempt of collS'' innocence. Boston Papers of the 14th Sept. arrive- morning. Captain HUNT is arrived from Sivanilla• reports, that Admiral BRION'S squadron vo' s ,.s: , ting for an attack o:1 the Spanish City °' l „ : e Martha ; that a Cor res p on d ence h a d ta k e n 2 , : 1 ; : e between the Spanish G enera l MoalLco Governor of St. Martha, also General To r ' v 6 Governor of Carthagena, and General LTMA, of the New Granadian army, with ifi, f t,e ral MENTILLO, of the Independent army'• nature of the Correspondence had not tranP ire tu A flag of trace has been sent from St. Mart°, General BOLIVAR at Barauguilia. t 0 An honest Hibernian, hearing that / 30 "; r slept under HEit MAJESTY'S tent; to prevt-'':‘ iE from rolling, inquired with great simplicitY he were Master of the Rots BO' .Sorliebody asking " with what intent GAMI was first hired Ocli! botherati°o,lll said PAT, " dont you hear that he was ig upon HER ALOESTY'S 'Preservation ?" r D iV A wag, hearing of 1 - 3z - tuAim's ladder . 0 ( 0 rn motion, asked "if it . w as an accoow l r i ladder ?" 00 1 A Noble Lord asked i f the QUEEN bad 3 C r OP pardon to the hatchway--wh e n a plain watt e. o - 0' t fact-man said that perhaps she thought ouP pardon under the tent sAincicral if of _Cous-Excu-ANGE ; OCT. 16.—The Wheat was rather larce this morning from Ess" et the best , ft, , dy sa le, I 10f .„e nest r u ns .r,u these C o unties met ready • f iilvanee of tr oll y Is. to :).s. quartrr on the prig°. Nloutlay, hut the omit, wag de.iter than un Fli d3 ";,;l1 i e Purley is fill! per tpartur ;:ttti the inferior ge alitie6, tf per q uarter cheal,r, the su pp ly' bein g much larger " 3 0 1 re demawl ; Oats 3111.! 5. per o tiaiter {liner, and s ale : 3r ter Itea , y at that abatement ; New Beaus are also Is• Pc' 1,, 0 , cheaper ;in Pea,. :tml her Sti icles I bete is Nio alterat' orr MAP.K.v.:::" OCT. 16.--Th is 11) . • 7 i o n Marliet was e),c,•euini...ly ccell supplied w ith • a': rjpl Cattle . ,.ttmonest 'vete a g reat number 01 r J scriptimis ; prime Beal, inaisitaiii last we eh'S .3 r o l o rtt° The I-I ay-Nlarket remains as per list weeles prices 0 0 (Am e r Ce His MAJESTY left Carlton-house Pa .a , Friday night, for his Cottage at Windsor. is expect e d sho r tly a t Brighton, an d protract his stay, it is said, for some w*el's° Printed by J. B. CAt:3lAtas, 112, Strand. I T I--( • :'emo;i, 7-, • z kott rr f v Iht INu.c t A; kthi, Pr u I s la % , Thy 16111 Al 4, ~h~ Et;itii AR sd E 'act ei . Ast Latt3, u t i i)x buitit 10r4 at euell t asr , rlo) %tit tie yl b,!‘ kn,l; ci ai De r t ilt lie 4 4 til t hat !'e i tl g 14 , 4 411 t et ilii i sttc,