The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1820-11-03 00:00:00

THE QUEEN'S TRIAL.

HOUSE OF LORDS, THURSDAY, Nov. 2.

The Lord Chancellor e•trrrd the House • few minntes
berme ten o'clock. Prayers were 'lien read, unit Mr names
call. d over.

Lord Gaze kwin¢ fornserly siirnified kis intention to en.
force thr standing oriier fur ►.Rnlahng the manner of 'slng
the votes upon the question to be put. directed the Clerk to
read it over.

The Standing Order was read ereordinely—it 'winked
Mil Peer to be called upon, lo•gintaing with the lowest io
rank, to say " Content," or " Nut Content."
Lord Holland said, that the strict observing...of the Order
was not usually resorted to. As each Peer knew Isis emu
rank, it was customary to dispense with ilie form of calling
over the names at the table, instead of which the Howie
rose, one after another, in the same order as th y would
have been called over, and declared "Content," ur " Not
Content," to the Bill. The name were thru cast sip, and
the slumbers made known to the House. If any Peer
eltiolite4l the derision.* division must be galled for, as usual.
The Order of the Day was their read for the second read•
lag of the Ball of Pains and Pr•ualties against her Majesty.
The LORD C tog rose and said, that the only slues-
lion to which their Losilships cutild fur the present apply
their attention was, whether or mit the Bill before them
altottld be reed a second (line. In Use ordinary refuse pur-
sued un Bills in some respects like to that before the Hower,
he meant Divorce Bills, the ordinary course was, after hear-
ing all the allegatious in support of, and all the testimony
against the Bill,fer the person who might hive the honour to
fill his station in the House In retire from the Woolsack, and
accordieg to the hest of his ability and judgment set forth
his opinion, and the grounds upon which he entertained it. If
he should he of opinion that the- facia prodetced in evidence
had proved the charges contained ip the Bill, he had to inti-
mate that opinion to the House, and if tiny difference remain.
cal between Isis opinion and that of any part of the noose, a
debate would ensue, and the question won'd Its determined
by a division of the House ,• if no difference of opinion re-
mained, than the rill would he read a second time as mat.
ter of course. It was usual to postpone the preamble of
Balls, particularly in the case of Bills where the proof
of the picamble had liken place elsewhere, before the
introduetiou of the Bill into Parliament. It was nut
always dune iu a Bill of Pates and Penalties, the matter
of charge being tried before the Howse. Their Lordships
might find occasion in messy instauces to amend the
preamble. In 1111111 e it alight be deemed expedient to call
for fresh evidence with respect to the preamble, before pro.
ceeding to deliberate tits the enactment. But this
was rarely done—it (meld never to be done, except
with a view to mitigating the penalties, by mitigating the
character of the facts already proved. After stating the
distress to which he was subjected in performing the
task of his office, lie protested that nothing should
have induced Isms to address their Lordships upon so
painful a subject, bad that he could not coneistently
with the sense of ditty which he owed to the public
retire from that task. Many cimaiderntions would have in.
ductal him to retire from such an undertaking—hut a reuse
of duty, which, be protested to God ! alone swayed him in
this affair, compelled bins to proceed in the discharge of it.
In the first place he wield say, that nu man could vote
hottestly for that Bill, if he were nut conscientiously 'satis-
fied that the Preamble had been proved. He was out bound
to vote fur the Bill, if the evidence bail not convinced him
of the troth of the charges contained in the preamble. He
would stair very shortly his oy.iuloie on the subject; he would
not go into much detail in strewing the grounds of that opi.
taiuss, It was tacit Isis business, as hail been
.errioneminly sup.
posed, and often stated, to state that opinion inn the light of
a Judge summing up evidence in common basis. All he was
bound to do was to state his own opinion, and the roma&
upon whirh he hail formed it. Their lordship, as Judges mud
us Juntas in the cause, were all equal. The avowal of any
one °potion was not to lie taken as a summing up, lint only
38a communication of opulent'. which when conowisiiicated
and compared wills the 111 111 l ions of other Peers, wed after the
[rounds of each should have bean sufficiently discussed,
might give more effect and security to the judgerieut of the
Moue 'slum the Bill. Mis.•ll bad beet, advanced with respect
to that species of proceeding celled a Bill or. I'.liBll and
Penalties. He would offer little on the nature of such
Bills. In a few words he would reply to some of those ob-
aervationa. It had been stated repeatedly, that such Bills
could only be admissible on the ground of great and am.
automat danger to the State, to which such Bills could Moue
impiety ready relief. Niles, !-:alcing hack to the Revolution,
and he would go . r back than the Revolution; since
that pea • • • suit Penalties had been 'owed
over •ii • and as, such occasion of state &Metall),
sops.. ...elite rause for enacting any one cif then,. Ile
I.- 'retood to state in • former plisse 41( these [eructed.
tug., that a Ball of Paine and Penalties, provid. d the pro.
reetlllllZlll were properly conducted, was More GroUrable,
.11d out say more cutastitntiouril, bat more favour.
able to the accused than pruireediug by impeachment.
By tutting the proceedings property, he meant it the
witoe.ses acre examined according to the ordinary rules of
evidence, and the ordinary rules of law were to govern the
decision. By impaction-id the Howie of Commun. were
compelled to proceed ex parte. One vote might deride the
(petition, and that vote might be given in error. Realties,
a Bill moat follow an impeachment. Did they not run the
risk of involviog the House of Commons in contradiction,
by forcing them (either on a Bill arising from onpeachnient,
ur on a Bill urigtuating with that Howse, a motion for im-
peachment having failed in the Lower House) to examine
evidence 011 both sides, they (the Hinge of Commons)
having come to a decision by hearing the evidence of only one
side ? There had been other conspiaints made, such us the
want of a specification of charges and of a list of wilucests.
He mentioned these only to 'hew that where the accuseel had
suffered inconvenience ur disadvantage by the course of pre.
ogling, they ought to hare the advantage of that con-
'Wendt tttt is the judgmeat. But their Lordships were sot
to raise up visionary thearlyaotages when smug had existed.
Its what waif could the amassed obtain so oomplete a kisow-
ledge of the specific charge., and of the peasants sad
mom er, the sistgoacs. as by bombes then mood et the
• as* JAM a, 141113. 6•11 18:1Sosha
VS

Er 4' "parti
•