The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-10 00:00:00

THE DIINDONALD PEERAGE.

The further hearing of this case was resumed
yesterday before the Committee of Privileges of the
House of Lords, The facts are these : The present
Earl of Dundonald presented a petition a short time
ago to their lordships' house, praying it might be
declared that he was entitled to vote for represen-
tative peers in Scotland. His lordship's brother,
Capt. Cochrane, R.N., her Majesty's ship Warrior,
presented a petition, claiming that he was the eldest
lawful son of his father, the late earl, and that in
consequence he was entitled to the peerage. Capt.
Cochrane has since withdrawn this petition, and
their lordships appointed yesterday morning for the
further hearing of the evidence in support of the
present earl's claim.
The Lord Chancellor, in answer to Lord Redes-
dale, said that Capt. Cochrane's claim had been re-
ferred to the Committee of Privileges. That com-
mittee had all the elements of a judicial court, and
he could not consent to the investigation being
abandoned. _

Lord Brougham said that it was very well for
Capt. Cochrane to withdraw from these proceedings
after he had damaged his mother's reputation. Lady
Dundonald's character had been attacked by her
own son, and therefore, in his opinion, the case
should proceed.
Lord Kingsdown did not consider that the case was
at all altered because one of the claimants had with-
drawn. .

. _
The Lord Chancellor suggested that the petition
should be served on the third son.
Lord Chelmsford said that Capt. Cochrane bad
produced a witness, Jackson, who had been exa-
mined at considerable length, and whose evidence
was of a very extraordinary description. He there-
fore considered that after that evidence the com-
mittee ought to proceed in investigating the case.
After some further discussion,
Their lordships agreed to proceed with the case.
The aged Countess of Dundonald was then called
in. Her ladyship was accompanied by Lady Napier,
and proceeded, at the request of their lordships, into
the body of the house, and took her seat on the
woolsack.
Sir Fitzroy Kelly, who appeared with several
other counsel on behalf of the present earl, asked
her ladyship if she was acquainted with a person of
the name of William Jackson, who was uow residing
at Long Clawson, near Melton Mowbray— She said
that she bad known him formerly, but was never on
intimate terms with the man. She had never stated
to that man that she was not married to Lord Dun-
donald, and she denied that she had ever told him
that, when living with Lord Dundonald as his wife,
she had offered to become the mistress of Mr. Basil
Cochrane. She had never ueen Mr. Basil Cochrane
at that time. She had read the evidence of Mr.
Jackson regarding her marriage; there was not a
word of truth in Jackson's statements. I never
stated to him that I was not married before the year
1818. I never said so to Jackson, or to anyone else.
It is an infamous falsehood.
In answer to Lord Brougham-4 never com-
plained or threatened to leave him because he had
not married me ; how could Ido so when I was
married? I never denied the marriage of 1812
to this man Jackson, or anyone else.
By Sir Fitzroy Kelly—She had never stated that
she had a good mind to leave Lord Dundonald be-
cause be had not married her, and she had never
said that she would go and live with his uncle, Mr.
Basil Cochrane, as a mistress ; nor had Jackson said
that it would be wrong to leave Lord Cochrane and
go and live with an old man like Mr. Basil Coch.
rune ; nor did she say that at all events he was a
"clean man." She did not know what was meant
by that statement. She had always despised this
man Jackson. He was the greatest enemy her hus-
band ever had. He had been formerly his secretary,
and God alone knew the trouble he had caused her
husband. She begged to state to their lordships that
she was in no way related or connected with this

infamous man.
Sir Fitzroy Kelly then refet red her ladyship to
page 23 of the printed evidence of Jackson, and
asked her if it was true that she had proposed to
this man Jackson to go and live with him and leave
Lord Dundonald.
Her ladyship said she knew that he was a mar-
ried man with a wife and child; she was happy
with Lord Dundonald, and his lawful wife. How
could she do so? It was most false; it was all false.
In answer to Lord Redesdale, her ladyship said
that she had an elder sister, 14 years older than her-
self. She did not know at what place this sister was
educated. The reason she was re-married in Edin-
burgh was because Lord Cocbrane's relatives
wished it.
By the Attorney-General—She could not state at
what place or when she had last seen Jane Moxon,
one of the witnesses to the marriage at Annan in
1812. She was now dead. She said—l cannot re-
collect all these things; it is upwards of 50 years
ago. Three counsel are questioning me, and all these
noble lords. I have been questioned, I think, enough.
In answer to Lord Redesdale, the Attorney-
General said he had no evidence to bring before
their lordships on behalf of the Crown.
Lord Cranworth said it was for Sir Fitzroy Kelly
to say what further evidence he intended to offer.
Lord Chelmsford said that it would be desirable to
have some explanation with regard to the reasons
for the second marriage, and his lordship considered
that it was the duty of the Attorney-General to see
to that part of the evidence.
The Lord Chancellor said that the arguments of
SirFitzroyKelly might be so satisfactory that their
lordships would not ask for additional evidence.
Sir Fitzroy Kelly then proceeded to address their
lordships on behalf of the Earl of Dundonald, and
contended that no length of tirre could make his
case better. The great opponent was no longer pre-
sent, and the evidence in favour of Lord Dundonald
was conclusive. He could account for these extra-
ordinary marriages. Their lordships all knew that
this great man, through his long and eventful lisft,
never did anything like other men•
lie wi!
careless of public opinion, and therefon his
men had had
through sufferings that few wo
men. Lady
nLotadybe
Djuanddgoendaidlikehatdhosegonoef
aocthileorns
h r oc. uagpht a
na
Cochrane had made statements, through his coun-
tioong i encounter,
iiewithoutanadshhaaddow
sel, to this House against his own mother, which
noaecht.
euhncalde.croTwhneea
wouldlordships' House—statements that his mother had
aolsforegpor
lived unlawfully with his father, and that his own
be perpetuated among the records. of their
memory
11
alln making
ihisngmother had proposed to carry on incestuous inter-
course Kelly) contended that not only was
itlhlue ac-
cusingss
et illustrious etwau
himste hnif father
statements,
forgery
srfr:gh
at
eahnrdeydrn'
ahso
nt
d deterred
fra u d. himßut
ftri
Dundonald not guilty of these crimes, but teha(tSLiraFay.
the late Lord