The National Register.
London, England, 1814-06-26 00:00:00

LORD CeCIIR,INE.

Mr. Buo elAn rote and said, that a person from the Court of
Kim's Bench iiitooding with i copy ref the record hi the indict- I
meot of the liioe aeaima Ilereneer and others, and moved that he he
admitted, which was ordered ; and when the record Was brought up, it
was ordered to be laid no:the table and printed.
Mr. Betas uu o then moved that the copy of the record be taken ► I
it a consideration this day sennight.—Ordered. 1
He then moved. that Lord Cochrane do attend in his place on
Friday, July t ;---that the Marshal of the King's Bench do bring Lord
Cochrane to this House, if .Lord Cochrane should desire it ; that the f•
Speaker do issue his warrant to that effect. All which were ordered.
Ile concluded that a copy of all the said orders should be sent to Lord
Cochrane.—Ordered.
Mr. Hots, t s said, he had received a letter from Lord Cochrane, de-
sirine that he would move for " a Copy of the Report of the Trial I
the Court of Kong's Bench on the indictment against bird Cochrane,
and his statement, and any affidavits lie bad put in respecting the '
sane." He seid, it was his with to do env thing in his tine er to aid
end assist any person who stood charged with matters so nearly con•
nected with his honour and eh wacter, end who, from the particular
circumttances of Lis situation, could not be present to act for himself.—
lie concluded by moving for the pipets above-mentioned.
Mr. Brow et: seconded the motion.
The 1 TORN ev-G ENFRA T. thought it incumbent on him to ask the
H. n-e if it would think fit to sit in tippeal upon that nem important
and most constitutionul ribunal known to this conntry—the verdict of
a Jury. If the House should be induced to do this, might it nut he
called on to permit the prosecutors to amend the evidence already ad-
&reed, by an addition of fresh witnesses? The Hon. and Learned
Cient:e man then went into a recepitulnnon of all the leading feateres
of the trial, which had been brought cn nearly a fortnight snorter thee
It would have been in reanilar coulee of proceeding, at the express de-.
wire of the par:ties who had ninda a special application to the Court for
that purpose. In the course of the trial, they had all, and each of
them, been aided by Gentlemen of the first talents in the profession of
the law, who had, one and all, exerted every faculty in favour of their
respective clients. Since the trial, one of the defenbots had moved an
arrest of
,indgeient, in which he had been supported by the eminent
talents of a Learned Serielart, who was a Member of the House, and
an ornament to hiq profession. If that t.ertion (Mr. Mitt) had sue-
.ceeded, and the judement had been reversed as to him, it must have
I,een reversed xis to all ; but the Gnat, rifler the most patient and at-
tentive hearing, had inienimonsly pronounced that there were no
virourds for disturbing the verdict. Lord Cnchrnne had instructed his
Counsel not to move in arrest of juegtuent, but had by himself applied
to the Court to be heard in person against the &cation of the Jury, and
had offered to put it affidavits of mutters which had not been before
the Jury. The Court informed him, that by a rule of the Court tl ey
conldie,t hear him by himself, for that all that had been found guilty
must be present, and no one of could.he heard alone. He slmuld
now state to the House something of these affidavits. One of them
was the affidavit of a servant who had been examined as a witness at
the trial, and who, in the shape of an sffidavit, offered evidence that
he had not given at the trial. He should not only appeal to his Learn-
ed Friends of the profession of the law, but to almost every man who
had ever been in riCourt of Justice, whether such an affidavit could
be admitted as a ground •of a new trial. Two other affidavits were
from persons who might have been produced at the trial, and who were
not produced. How was it possible that a new trial should be granted
on such affidavits ? The parties, being acquainted with their awn case,
choosing their tide 6f trial, and putting their cause into the hands of
Counsel as able and discreet as any in the profession, must be supposed
to have called such witnesses, anti asked such questions, as were mate•
vial to their defence. If, in any case, tipsily could show that he was
really Olken by surprise at a trial, by the production of some evidence
which was unexpected, and that he was net then prepared to meet, the
• Court would givethe opportunity of a new. trial : but when there was
1110thini like surprise; and wheltibtrpersoas:who *Wore those- aidavits