The National Register.
London, England, 1820-07-23 00:00:00

COMMON COUNCIL.

PROCEEDINGS AGNIINST THE QUEEN.
On Monday a Court of Cum COUI)CII was held,in
pursuance of a Requisition piesented to the Lord Nlayor,
for the purpose of taking into consideration the expe-
diency of addressing his Majesty, or petitioning the two
Houses of Parliament, on the subject of the pending
proceedings against her Majesty.
'Cließequisition having been read—
Mr. FAVELL rose to address the Court. lie com-
menced by adverting to the great and momentous con-
sepience of the topic to which he was about to call their
attention. The privileges belonging to that Court en-
titled them, on the present occasion, to approach the
Sovereign himself; hut be ►bought it more favourable to
apply themselves to the two Houses of Parliament, and,
if possible, through their means, to avert an evil which
might be productive of consequences, the bare anticipa-
tion of which was calculated to excite well founded
alarm. Those to whom he ILA the honour of addressing
himself were all aware of the manner in which the ac-
cusatiora against her gracious Majesty had beer intro.
timed into the two Houses of Parliament. NVitile io
one House the green bag had been kept shut, in the
other it had heels opened, and upon its secret contents,
unsupported by open, fair testimony, a Bill of Pains and
Penalties had been brought in against her Majtsty, upon
proofs of which the world knew nothing, and of the
credibility of which the Secret Committee, by which the
Bill had been recommended, must have beets themselves
totally ignorant. Hcr Majesty was broadly accused of
an adulterous interceurse with a foreigner, and with an
unremitting course of licentious conduct for a period of
six years. No opportunity had been offered for examin-
ing the character and testimony of the witnesses by
which imputations so proved had been supported; nor
had her Majesty the advantage of knowing the places
where, nor the precise time when, she was supposed
thus to have sacrificed her own honour, and the dignity
of the nation, with which she was closely connected.—
He would ask any fair, candid, or honourable mind,
whether such a proceeding was consistent with princi-
ples of justice in this country? Was it not a departure
from the common and ordinary mode of administering
the law of England. Such a course had never been
resorted to since the days of that tyrant and butcher
towards his wives, Henry the Eightli.—(Hear.)—The
Hon. Gentleman concluded with moving a series of
resolutions in unison with his speech.
Mr. HURCOMUE seconded the resolutions. _

Mr. BROWN tru,ted lie should not be accused or in-
consistency it he opposed the Lsolotions, but he con-
tended that a Bill of Pains and Penalties was the
only mode of proceeding that could meet the case.—lie
concluded by moving the previous question.
Mr. DixoN supported the motion of Mr. Brown.
Mr. ilukcomue spoke at considerable length in fa-
vour of the original motion, and in reply to Mr. Brown.
lie recapitulated the various Bills of Attainder mat kid
been passed, and said they were only resorted to by bad
men and at bad times.

Mr. JAMES said, he could not by any means tinder-
stand how her Majesty or her friends could complain of
the cootie of proceeeding in the House of Lords. Four-
teen years ago he admitted the Queen had been traduced,
and had great reason to com Plain, but now her own
wishes for a fair and open trial were agreed to, and jus-
tice would certainly be administered. Ile concluded
with saying he should vote for the previous question.
Alderman WAITHMAN strongly supported the reso-
ludons. The people should guard their own privileges,
and he trn,ted (lie City of London would shew their
spirit, in constitutionally asserting distir rights, which
were, in the person of the Queen, about to be infringed.
Her Majesty's case was one which called fur sympathy,
hut the public were iii this case to look to themseives, as
their liberties were deeply implicated in the cm isiderai ion
of the question. 'fbere was, amongst the distressing
dillicultses that presented theinselvs-s, that of his Ma-
jesty bring obliged to sit in judgment upon his own
wile. Aldermaa NVaithinan concluded an animated
speech, by ctflin Oil the Court to be unanimous oil tins
subject.
Mr. T. N. WILLIAMS said, the course adopted by
Ministers was certainly the beia, and justice would un-
questionably be done by the Lords. 11cr Majesty could
nut base refused the very noble oiler of Ministers. (A
laugh, and continued ridicule.)
Mr. BLADES contended that the Bill of Pains and
Penalties was against all law.
Mr. FAVELL briefly replied, and the previous question
was negatived, alter which the Resolutions were agreed
to without a division.

Petitions were read and agreed to, and the Sheriffs
directed to wait on a Lord in Parliament to request hint
to present the Petition to the House of Lords, end to
present the other Petition to the House of Commons in
the usual manner.

An article in the German papers dated Vienna,
July 2, says—" Their Alajesties the Emperor and
Empress, and the Archduchess of Parma, have been
tint some days at Persenberg, on the left bank of the
Danube. They arc expected to return to this city
in a few days. The Archduchess Clementina, Prin-
cess of Salerno, arrived here on the 27th ult., having
come from Lia 4 by water, ou the Danube."

245

HIGH TREASON.
SPECIAL COMMISSION ODYER AND TERMINER.

STIRLING, JULY 13.
The Court at nine o'clock recommenced their Sit-
tings at Stirling.
'foe whole of the prisoners svizP(l at iliiiiiiymiiir (18
in number) were bron:zlit trout the Casklc, under au
escort of the 13th Foat, and placed at tile bar.
Mr. cy, as Counsel for the prisoners, addressed
the Court, and !Laud d Obi:C.6oll to Mr. Sergeant
liullock appearing on the part of the prosecution, as he
was entitied to plead only in English Courts.
The Lint President said, that by the Articles of Union
the law was the saute in Scotland as hi England. There
was no difference whatever, and if Mr. Jeffrey thought
proper he could claim a ri4ht to plead for the traitors at
the approaching Court of Oyer and Terminer, at York.
The list of Jurymen, consisting of 153 names, was
then called over.

Hardie was then informed that he was to be put eta
his trial.

Sevtral of the Gentlemen called for this trial were
challenged by the prisoner's Counsel.
The Clerk of the Arraigns read the Indictment against
Hardie, all the prisoners remaining at the bar.
The Lord Advocate opened the case t,n the part of
the Grown, and proceeded to call witnesses, who con-
firmed the statements already before the public. Mr.
Jeffrey delivered a long speech for his client, but called
no exculpatory proof. The Solicitor-General replied.
and concluded by expressing his firm conviction that
the Jury would find tile prisontr guilty. The Rigi r
Hon. the Lord President charged the Jury in a very able
manner, who afterwards, retiring for a few minutes, at
a quarter east one o'clock in the morning of the 14th,
returned a verdict of Guilty on the ed and 4th counts of
the indictment.

The counts and overt acts are the same in all the in.
dictments brought before the Special Commission.

STIRLING:, JULY 14.
The Court met this forenoon, at ten o'clock and pro.
ceeded to the trial of.rohn Baird, weaver in Condorrat,
the leader at the battle of Bonnymuir. He is a stout
smart-looking little man.
The whole of the other prisoners with the exception
of Hardie, who was tried and convicted yesterday, were
at the bar.

The Solicitor-General brought the ease against Baird
before the Jury in a speech of considerable length.
A number of witnesses were then called for the pur-
pose of proving the publication of the treasonable
address; that a conspiracy was formed against the life of
of his Majesty ; that the persons seized at the skirmi►h of
Bonnymuir were levying war against the King; and
that the prisoner was one of the number concerned
in these treasonable proceedings.
Mr. Jeffrey addressed the Jury for the prisoner in a
very eloquent and iugenious speech. He did not deny
that the evidence went the length of proving the prisoner
to have been present at ihe affair of Bottnyntitir, but con.
tended that there was nothing in that affair to constitute
the crime oft treasonable levying of war.
The Lord Justice Clerk charged the Jury
•TIRLING, JULY 15.
This morning, at two o'clock. the Jury returned into
Cow t, with a verdict of—Guilty.
It is thought probable that the sittings at Stirling may
be shortened by some of the prisoners concerned in the
affair at Bonnymuir throwing themselves on the mercy
of their country.

Li the Court of Justiciary atEdinburgh, on Friday last.
John Sharp was convicted of firing a loaded pistol at the
county patrol, in Main Street, Bridgeton, Glasgow, ott
the igth January last, and sentenced to be executed at
Glasgow on the 16th of August.
Although the Court did not adjourn till three o'clock
ibis morning, the Commissioners entered the Hall at
ten.
When the prisoners were placed at the bar, Junes
Cleland, smith, of Glasgow was named for trial.
Mr. Jeffrey stated, that seeing the i4tte of the trials
of Baird and Hardy, notwithstanding the struggle of
their Counsel, he thought it his duty to advise the pri-
soners, if they were conscious of their guilt, to with-
draw their plea of Not guilty, and to throw themselves
on the mercy of their country.
The Lord Advocate addre.ised the Court. lie wished
it to be distinctly understood, that this line of conduct
was adopted by the prisutiers without any bargain being
made fur them. Ile had no doubt they might receive
the mercy of the Crown; but he consid.red it his duty
to intimate the possibility, nay, the probability, that the
prisoners tot2ht, notwithstanding theit pleading Guilty,
suffer capitally.
Mr. Jeffrey acknowledged that there had been no
compromise.
prisoners then severally pleaded guilty. They
were taken from the bar and scot back to the Castle.
The Lord Advocate said, that there were different
shades of guilt; and it would certainly give bins great
personal pleasure to see the royal clemency extended.
The Petit Jury were discharged for the time; but
they, as well as the Gr,aid Jury, were directed to Amid
on Monday, the 31st July, when the Court will resume
its sittings.

The Bel for establishing Express Posts at a
double rate of postage, has nearly gone through all
its stages. What will the pubic think if this ex-
periment degenerates into mere tax on correspon-
dence, by sending all letters, in this way, and
increasing the rate of the present postage, the
increased expences affording a pretext fur the
advanee ?

EDWARDS THE SPY !—This notorious character
is revelling on the produce of his villanies at Carrick,
and the citizens of Dublin anticipate a visit. from
him.

cB6

PAOCEEDINGS AGAINST TIIE QUErN.

~.

How every principle of English jnriFprodence
seems to be inverted the progress of the proceed-

ings against the Queen ! The meanest offender
against the laws is Confronted with his accusers
before commitment, he hears the time and place

definitively stated at which he is charged with the
offence ; he hears the depositions of the witnesses
against him, and he is at liberty to question them.
Being thus fully acquainted with the evidence in-
tended to be brought against him, he has every op-
partunity (if falsely accused) of proving his
innocence. The time when the alleged crime was
committed being distinctly painted out in the
indictment against him, he is prepared, probably, to
prove a complete and satisfactory alibi—or knowing
the whole charge to be a base and wicked conspiracy,
founded on the depositions of perjured and worthless
wretches, he is able to shew that their testimony
is wholly unworthy of belief. But in the case of
the Queen there is nothing resembling all this.
She knows neither the, time nor place where she is
charged with guilt. It may be any time in the
space of six years: it may be in Italy, or Greece, or
Constantinople. Then, the witnesses against her,
who and what are they ? That she is expressly for-
bidden to know. Report certainly does not speak
very favourably of them, and she may be able to
shew that they are suborned and perjured villains;
but bow is she to do this while kept in ignorance
even of their names, until the very moment they are
called into Court? Coming from a country where
daggers are to be hired, such evidence should be
looked upon with some suspicion ; at any rate the
person who is to be tried upon such testimony ought
to have (and according to the principles of English
law she has) a right to sift into their characters;
and if they are the viprous and loathsome spawn of
Sir John Leach's Milan Commission—if the 23,0001.
has been expended in teaching these reptiles their
lesson, and in making it worth their while to come to
England, nothing but a full conviction that their
testimony would not bear examination, and that
their characters would not stand the test of inquiry,
could have urged Ministers to the desperate act of
refusing Lord Erskine's constitutional and just
demand—that the Queen be allowed to know who
are the witnesses against her.
The base conduct of the ministerial press was never
snore fully developed than on this occasion. The
Italian gang call forth their loudest expressions of
commiseration—any attempt to question the purity
of their motives or the correctness of their testimony
strikes them with horror.-6' Why," exclaims
the Courier, " does the law sleep? Why does
not the Attorney General prosecute the calumnia-
tors of these injured men? " But towards the
Queen they scruple not to use the most atrocious
language. The Morning Post calls her "an Alien
" and unworthy Object, a person not 'of sufficient
importance to create division," and recommends " as
" she alone stands in the way of arrangement, that
"• she should yield to the universal good, whether
" as a Cravat/at or a Martyr." It is pretty well
known who and what are the supporters of tl►is
Paper, and the source whence this most unparal-
hailed and atrocious paragraph must have proceeded.
NOW suppose any man had written such a paragraph
of the King—would he, we ask, have been out of
prison twenty-four hours after its publication? If
these words have any meaning, they compass and
imagine the Queen's death. We therefore, in our
turn, say " Why dots the law sleep?" Why does
not the Attorney General discharge his duty ? "It
is equally Treason" says Blackstone, by the statute
25th Eawarl 111. to compass or imagine the
Queen's death, as that If the King himeelf." Now
if any man had asserted that the King was "an
unworthy object"—that he was " not essential to
our national interest...that he stood 'in• the way of
our happiness, and that ho ought to yield to the