The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1820-08-28 00:00:00

Mt le odd 6 say
issperichseeil, r
ekher pea
My Lords,

set men
ti.. tor

gissestiets, .
he was at last thew. that it was not teas perfeelly maws
tit' the vifilite usiti,;ol Parlisiigent, either IN Bills of Pala
and Pantiles, or is Impeachment, bat that it amid mot be
as dine consistently with sabstaintial jristice, because yua
ormshl net make the banishing of that list of witnesses •asst.
The great eliminators between the proceedings in this Home,
sod before any other Coat, arises from the mature of the
Court, sad Irons the powers that the Court is Considered to
awe by the law within itself being so grouch assure An any
EAU& Cued whatever. In any other Courts of Law the se.
remiler appears as owe party, sod the accused appears es
soother party. The &some of proceeding is all different.
The instances in which the Court can interfere or cannot in-
terfere are perfectly welt known. The proceeding in this
Bursae Is this—that after Colonel fur the acensation hes
made out their case, sad after the Cowrie! for the defence
have made out their ease, and after the examination of every
witness, and the croamexarniaation by the accused, the ex-
amination of year Lordships is unlimited; you not only can
cremmexamine, but yen may examine in chief, and you may
lskewi►e imamate as Counsel, on the other side cruse-exansine,
and also re examine; in short, you have within yourselves,
nod trove always Is.eis in the habit of exercising 11, the
powers of examining according to all the different princ:plei
• of examination that may hr defined either in examina-
tion im chief. o► cruss.examinialius ur raexammation.
But, my Lords, this is not all, because it is perfectly well
kisurrn to your Lordships, that in any judicial proceeding in
this llonse„it is compare. fur any Member in this House to
call hack any witness, at any time, to examine the wituess
afresh, as to any fact which might induce him in wish to
have him hack. And this is out all, either ; but you like-
wise have further paler, if any new inform itiun bearing
on the case which Counsel on either side had nut prudneed,
it is within the jurisdiction and discretion of the [louse to
call witnesses themselves toil:wally, and Iti examine them
as to the facts of the case. Ido out tiarefore see, my Lords,
with this view of the subject, hew it is possible to assimilate
time proceeding of tbi House to she isruceedings carried on
in the Courts below. My Lords, the diffeulty under which

we Are placed, I do not conceive to grow nut of any decision
your Lordships have already come 10, but to grow out of the
nature of the ease itself. If this crime 1.11/1 been committed,
assuming it was high treason if committed in Eai taud, the
gre.tcr part of that difficulty would vanish. The delay
would only be a very few days, the party accused would re.
quire Intl • shunt time to get ready with his case, but the
difficulty in this case arises (rum the crime bring alleged to
be committed abroad at a tlastauee, therefore delay must
arise out of the nature of the cane, and the p..rticular

Clllllfitallete of the crime. If I were to put this cal*, if the
alleged crime had been e milled in England, and it was
to be proceeded on as high Wilson when you came to the
question of delay, and supporiiug that after the Counsel in
support of the accusation had been heard, the Defendant
should ask fur a short time, I am perfectly satisfied, that
either in impeachment, or in Bills of Pains and Petialties,or
of Attainder, dial your Lordships never would have objected
to such delay provided it was reasonable. What length of
time could it have been? Why it could nut have been
above a few days or a week at moat, to eatable them to pre.
pan' their defence. lu this case undoubtedly there must be
the disadvantages and iticonvenience of a mach longer delay.
'wrestle' all &risme from the special circumstances of the case.
Now, my Lords, I do nut see iu any view of this question,
mid I do not know how, if the list of witnesses had been
emoted, the difficnlty would have been removed. The
Noble Lord may say, that it might be lessened, bat I do not
see how it could be removed. I du not *cc how it was pus-
sib;e under the circumstances of a ease like this, to prevent
soy everting delay, and that brings us to the qiirstion
which was immediately before •us in for to the
cross-exeminatius. My Lords, it gives satisfaction that this
is the Best instatace iu which the difficulty has occurred.
In every former ease, Colons,' have felt themselves coin.
petrol to cross-examine, and a full re...ltemisation has
taken place, end an examination bas taken place by
your Lordships House. Ido • not mean to say that
they are so filially examined that they cannot be brought
back again, but what I wish. to suggest to your Lord.
ships is, that this is a situation in which we are una-
voidably placed iu this case. Hifi, my lords, the question
we have now to come to, and which has arisen for she fieq
lime, is this, whether their shall be a power vested in the
Counsel to make his option whether he will cross.examine
immediately to the fullest extent to which be is able, or
whethe► lie shall have the power of delaying that eruas•ex-
ainiuetion tun future time. It is fur your lordships to consider
whether you will adhere to that rule, if not I should still
conceive after what has pease', that it is indisputably necessary
that it should be understood in this case that Were oust
be a strict rule whether the witnesses, so cress-examined.
refight he again brought Ito, and I do nut know whether that
would not answer every purpose that the Counsel fur the
illustrious person would have. Then the question is, whir.
tber your Liirdsliipe would ur not adhere to the rule of al-
lowing the croes.exemitiatiou of a particular witness on par-
ticular grounds to be pot off; and it is nut whether the
whole of the exsminatiou should be put off, es your Lord-
ships observe, that except in this particular ease that ap.
Plication has not bern made. Ido say, that if the cross.
exeniiunt ion of any *luminrr of witnesses should be put off,
on the application of Counsel for the detract, in that re-
spect, when the evideuce on the part of the accusation is
ester, you cannot call on the Counsel for the accusation to
suin tip 'mid the cruse-examination bas taken place. This
I take to be a clear principle. I have thought it my duty
to throw this unt, and I will now more that the cuusidera-
tion of this 'case be deferred umtil Monday morning next,
then to receive your Lordship" decision."
Lord Grenville—" I eutircly agree with the Noble Eatl
that the difficulty here arises from the peculiar stature of the
case itself, but the reason why I venture to call tun your
Lordships' attention is, that 1 feel the necessity for your
Lordship.' to it sume permanent rule, from which yun shail
not hereafter hr called on to depart. I Houk, therefore,
that what is 'mitt desirable at the present ~,,,, is, that
we should turn our moots ter consider the subject maturely,
and not express any opinion, until we have find called iu
the Connect to state what 'lepers ore Ili. y wish to be adopted
in this case, irom the course of examiusii 111 l usual in other
Courts of Justice, to bear their *reams...tit on twill sides,
and then in come to a fixed and defiiiiie rule, not to Ire do.
parted from afterwards. Nu rule should beadopted
wluch
could exclude the great principle of justice itself. If a Va-
riation should ■fterwards be required, it 'must be on a sire.
ciai ease. Your Lordships had better adopt as near 21110..-
8011 e, the course of proceedings adopted in our Courts of
law. I filial, vote fur adjouruing the House till Monday, in
order that Noble Lords might consider the subject well.'
The Marquis of I.ansdown was of opinion the proper
rousse to be takes was fur Counsel to 'recalled in, sail fur
them to mike some proposition, which would enable their
Lordships to stake ■n order that would meet the justice of
the ease before their Lordships ertjourised. He would
therefore move Hutt the question for calling Counsel in,
should be put *fore that of adjournment.
lo►d Grenville said, the regular course was, that Counsel
should he called in, and he requested to state what depar-
*me they wished from the general usage of examitiatiun,
and that tiny might be nt liberty in the course of their ar-
gument, io support of their proposition, to suggest what
they might think would tend to the justice of the case.
Lord Elleriborough sald a few words, which we were
titiable'io bear.
The Earl of Liverpool agreed with the Noble Lords, that
the proper coarse would be fur Counsel to be called in, and
for them to he heard, if they were ready. When lie said
this, he was aware it was always the ditty of Counsel to he
ready.
The Lord Chancellor then put the question, " That Ike
Counsel be called in, and that the Counsel armlet the Bill
be requested to state what departure horn the usual course
of eXAlllitlatitlll they considered necessary to meet the jus-
tice of the else; that her ffii.jesle's Comma' be beard upon
tie propriety of such derriere trout that course, sad the
Counsel in flavour of the Bill be heard against the arguments
ir the opposite Coma& i" which was agreLd to.

iesdolo soy tithstster, wiatibei
institutes!, of Bab fkaima sad PrillltteS, or soy
is dot sup be (peeled M Wert shy Illwooe.
or the Noble Lord opposite (11,hdefts Ids 1
eso now to disclose that' goisliins) that be swede it dm- I
or fornishiog the wane, of the wltoesiri. Now, wiy
, I ooly feel it oriessarl to say shoo ouch Go that
no, dint when the Noble Lamed had made that notion
• • • •