The Sun.
London, England, 1820-10-16 00:00:00

difeCi

ig •
e
ould•
itnes7
[ivhou

Ise oh°
Ltia that
that I.le

vthi
syou't
derati°:

°lle

• that he
clulitte4

, o
i at D°.
Itre3te

rnose
r
sholl
mingtehsc
se 05,
Pere
he
ine
to
5 na'ti
ale Vril
po~ee
been 0)
ipplYr
ble and

asou f°,`
,at
is 0006 c
court pc
cuwa
;ase l'aho
ds, s°`;‘,
.ding
Ellis
Cou3"

opitii°P
liouies7
ch t"
• q"lies:
Wl''
E,LIILi"
Ler./
hod
• wv
i,grk A '
le 11.3.4;
if 1

inter'

shell°
ee I to'
,II:d

astle'

to 9°U
rot f°rt
;aid -
oad 31
steP-
Abe
rea:g ; ,
asteilt
,14Qta

Castlereag, •
,the, subject ; but Of my own
act. h upon
granted the passport, without the immediate
01):;:lacetricoef
to I,odo o
rd
so.
It is the constant
v*El I have not, received instruc-
• s from- Lord Castlereagh, ce.. any other per-•
`Qtl, respecting the granting of passpoits to per-
st?4s who had attended as witnesses. At the
~nlle the- passport was granted I knew from the
t`iewsPa p ers, awl from my gerieral.knowledge of
~:- events of the day, that Rastelli .had been
f,';',,ainbletl, as a witness ; hut I' knew it from no
...ler source• It was granted, .I believe, on the
1 I.Lh of Sept; Mher.
N,•,-u+,° 3'oo. know whether Rastelli was charged
ti 1:,,,", dispatches from the Foreign Office ?—Cer-
T:Y, not from the Foreign Office.
tn 'a You know of any passport being granted to
4t c,°orier for the purpose of. bringing back Ras-
to •,---I know' that passports have been granted
owetuer .couriers, but 1 do not know, from my
n ii•
.
I, non ledge, for what object.
.13,,v°r,d LAN.snowN.—ln what capacity aid Mr.
port ..eit aPply at the Foreign Office for the pass-
of Rastelli ?---As an agent on the part of the
Frosticution„certainly.
~P04,,°r,1 DArtiaNG•rox.—Do you know if Mr.
.1•0`1!-"•i. made arty application at the same time
ttliPsPorts for anv one else to go with Ras-
-1.,•1 think certainly not.
von °rd 11AltICLi..y.—Has.Mr. Powell applied to
4 ii,at any other time for passports for any other
-',.e witnesses to go away ?—Cer%.:ainly not. llo,qere You acquainted with the Orders of this
ovetrespectina the witnesses at the. time you
- tue efr Passport • ) I was aware of the circurri-
•44
rt 0niew..7.11
its. notoriety but I. knew nothing of
r, Th 1Y-
voi e'., -4°ao. CHANGiLLOR asked whether the
A•sei at thellar desired to suggest any question.
the '..l3'tOuGii t.‘i begged their Lordships to put
„collo. it, " ,
4.-t ' *, "..g questions : . .
thiihr. ''sb td know whether Mr. Powell said any
N. 4. he'se to the witness respecting Rastelli's
that-eck ?----A.. As far as I recollect, he said
Curti lock
was 'the most proper person to re-
and,
4161,,,.._,5ati5fy the families of the remaining
bo .‘,44.'
telt b"." recollect any thing else "saidabont R;as-
Irretie,re, grog back other witnesses with him ._
• bo:,'",er nothing else.
4), olitio-'tne witness recollect Mr; Powell's,havini
4'do -tied Rastelli's examination to the witness :
IV 'wt.
Ulf
le.( there any persons present besides your-
frett}illell Mr. Powell • came into your Office to
l'ere -I,l)asspurt for, Rastelli ?—lt is likely there
tilis,,,uut 1 am not able to - state positively if
~,- o re, or who they were, if any.
kli admitted.
" 4 "4". that other couriers have
lata Sent r•
4. -0 Italy by the agents for this Bill,•
.tc=l-I.4‘t‘‘ias the earliZst. passport granted after
flow, of of September :—.L cannot tell.
the
Iht, * soon. Will you undertake to say after
toi- t}°:f September ?—I really do riot know ;
11)ati.s a,t. I do not keep the books; I have no
or L
I ~ i'. Nliowing but from memory., •
able 2tis'l to know how it happens that you are
port -°f• irecollect to the very day when the pass-
ttilit' oc't;ktastelli was granted, and yet have no re-
bitlat -.," as to the others is--In consequence of
I .
l''43ed had: observed .in the newspapers had
all, la this II ' I caused the person offici-
,,, J 4ct- (Rise,
'ldcbit'g to look out the dates in the bOokS last
Tr ay ; I knew nothing about it.
t'ki°4l,l tlttounnm reqUested their Lordships
ii'!...stins°soltr Mr. Planta to ascertain the dates of
1` k ' -'s granted at the Foreign Office. to
,ttlit..e,.
t, ; couriers sent over.
e,.,01•!(jirk";°,111) CIIA'NcELLOR directed Mr. Planta
;4 .wgi'Y to ascertain the dates.
'tlitri. `.mess then withdrew.—Counsel having
1.01.-Voyn,
tr43tioo i.'4lol.A.avON rose and said he had now a
el,„ ..0 ,
.
t;' VQSj t' 'll°llllt, to which he did not expect any
'44„,,,,1". would be made. The object of his mo-
IPectin-s- t° call.upOn•Counsel for\an opinion re-
t:e'taloi= their own case ; an opinion which he
;11 E4ki 3t thenght their Lordships were justified
ii,,.
fue2lionia' and the Counsel were entitled to give.
`J •"t•tl trove that Counsel be called in and in..
"ti •
r, %1)01 lat it appeared from the testimony of
4•4111ivell. that Rastelli had been sent abroad on
4thlClltlaSt('r4V,iee: and could not attend that House ;
:;:sehte-I,eY should be asked, whether, in the
wit! of
that witness, they were prepared to go
f The ItanY other part of their case."
-or" 4.40, r,
and said, that be-
lt tit Pt .-• kAIA.NCELLOR rose _
ih°4 i the motion of the Noble .Lord to the
-.0, ,e, -Le f .
'Crlar,,e. felt himself called upon, in the faithful
t11Fag5,,,,•40- °`,.‘l,lis duty, to put their Lordships in
de- .1 oi,ine, °,.lis sentiments on the question which
tip't'oe. ~,,,-I.ord had presented for their consi-
to his Ile rrat, however, before he entered
v't'lle -11°"1- sentiments, express his surprise
t1,,,111e rn 49. beard no reason alleged in support
Wthoos.„°t:°ll of the Noble Lord. Although
10 'in C-;n:144 a perfect right to call her Ma-
4,,t4etz, 'lse' to the Bar, and put this question
Q,) 41:et-after they had asked, as they had
ite'lvtilined!satelli should be called to the Bar and
cr. as d .nd that Rastelli was not forthcoming,
'lf • (!cid
to il triot. etilY of opinion, that the further part
ti;ilqi. LlO. ought not tnbe put. He would state
ti. ("et 6iPs the- aroands of his opinion. If
,'"lt p tr'el at- -lie Bar, • , informed
'-(.1.t -'-astQlis ' B,ar, after being.
11 oral . ' was o,it of the country, thought pro-
of er.....:•
' to,' •e. sent to their LOrdships, that they could
J:It: .Q 1,,,,
thi, itio 1 tntlY with the safety of their client,
I, l) ler defence
l'th °I-Itide , it would be their Lord-
tilt,. 444,, n doty. to call upoittlie Counsel -on
to, 'l‘itqt
4' ° State their reasons, the, one for
it :14:..ctuch a-course necessary, and the other
,t,4411.41 o'g0'g t" it• And having heard both sides,
Ire si leo he their .1 dI • - 'bu-iness. to pro-
'l,,, ~ .. lei,. • • . 4or s lips s
,liiicitts'lotlid b°l'vn opinion whether the. Proce.ed-
st,,t},a4 this ' suspended, or should go op. In
t 4.'_l3liiii;-:,c°__Ptt: stheir Lordships would be
,•,t,,,:i7re ~,ta‘,l_ rri. ost dangerous precedent; for. if
I,c)n
;(2otins lubsfied that any Court could call
ty't)? *Oulu t:° give an answer to such a• ques-
-11
r 4 itsi.• 'lllPose upon that Court the neces-
tltttthi azisi::g the Counsel what were his reasons
1ei,,,t,41 put !Is.he might think fit to make to the
'Qiiitn
varl ")
et hi.rn ; and it was impossible, from
..
Y oi human Mnts, that there

barona.

master.

should not be some future parts of a Counsel's
case' which it might be his most sacred duty to
withhold. If they thought proper to interpose,
' and ask the Counsel's reasons, they must give him
full credit for having looked to all parts.of his
case, and most faithfully consulted the interests
Of his client. 'lt was impossible for their. Lord-
ships to act on the opinion of Counsel. His opi-
.nion was that it would'be .a most dangerous .pre-,
cedent ; and he apprehended it was hiS duty to
govern his own conduct by his conscientious
judgment. He should take the liberty of moving,
under this • explanation, as an amendment to the
Noble Lord's motion, that the words " be asked
if there was any other part of their case they
could proceed with," be. left out, and that they
be informed " that it remained With them .to
make any application' they thought fit to the
Court."
The Earl of Ltvcaroot suggested -the omis,
"lion of the words " upon public service."
Lord HOLLAND applauded the course prOposed
to be adopted, which 'he said was extremely li-
beral, but it struck hirn, at the same, time,
,as an
extremely unnecessary • one, ; inasmuch as the
Counsel had already ascertained the fact which
the House was so-anxious to inform them of.
The Earl of LtvEneoOL .suggested theintro-
duction.of words-expressing that Rastelli, was:
detained abroad by illness, and that measures
had been taken to bring about his return to .this
confitry.
• The Marquess‘of LANsbOwN said, that fact had
merely. appeared upon the evidence of Mr. Powell,
and he thought it was too Mud): to call'upon the
House to recognise it as a fact -upon such slight
grOunds.
. . .

The motion, with the *LORD CHANCELLOR'S
amendment, being agreed to; and Counsel called
to the bar,
The LORD CHANCELLOR obServed,
.that he
might dispense with the 'necessity of telling the
COnnSel the decision of the'House ; for although
nominally absent, it must be obvious to all, their
Lord Ships that.they were in a situation' to.know
all that was going on as well as.their:Lordships.
Mr. BROUGHAM tliOi addressed the House,
and said, that the application lie had to.make to
their- Lordships'whs, that th 4 would be.pleased
to adjourn for a short apace of time (five mi-
nutes,) whilst he took the opportunity-of consult-
ing with his Learned Brethren on this 'most
portant juncture of their IllustriousClienf's case.
The Loll)) CHANCELLOR said, the House would
grant any time that might be thought.necessary.
• The House was accordingly adjourned for a
quarter of an hour till two o'clo"ck.

- At two o'clock the HoUse resumed, and Coun-
sel re-appeared at the Bar.
Mr. BROUGIIAM.—" My Lords, the eitraor-
dinary circumstances under which -we are placed,
and the insuperable difficultie4 by which we are
surrounded, render it impossible for us to announce
that we have formed any determination as to the
future course we may follow, more than to E ay,
that we shall to-day pursue a little further the
line of examination in which we haVe lately been
engaged."
FtrArpo POME called in and sworn.

Examined by Dr.L6titNoToN.-,--Q. In what
part of Italy do you usually reside ?—A.. At the

How long have. you resided. there is my
own parish, 35 Yars.• In the place,. where I work
by day 14 years.
Is the Barona the name of a parish is.

Have you resided in the house at the Barona
where the Princess of Wales resided ?—lt is 14
years since I have dwelt in that house.
Do you remember her Royal Highness residing
in that house ?—Yes I do, by day and by night.
What are you by trade or profession ?—A car-
penter.

Do you know Giuseppe Rastelli ?—I do.
Was Giuseppe Rastelli in the Queen's ser•
vice ?—Yes ; he was a courier.
Do vou know Louisa Dumont, who was chain•
bermaid in the Princess's service ?—I do.

Do you remember in the course of last year
Rastelli coming to the house at the Barona
do remember.

By whom was Rastelli accompanied ?—Ras-
elli came together with the son of the head

Was Dumont with Rastelli at that time?—
Dumont came half an hour after in a carriage, with
another person.

Wereßastelli and Dumont, at that time in the
house together i—They were. .

What did you see Rastelli do on that, occasion ?
—I saw them make a little drawing up stairs.
Did Rastelli, upon leaving the house, offer or
give you any money ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL submitted that that
was a leading question. • .
Mr. DENMAN said it ought to be a leading
question, because it was asked for the purpose of
contradicting the statement made on, oath by
Rastelli.

The Vestion repeited.-4le asked me whe-
ther I had received presents from those persons
who had come ; I said no. lie afterwards made
me a present. •
To what amount made me a present of
40 francs, or two Napoleons.
Did Rastelli say any thing to you respecting
Dumont when he gave you the money ?

Tile .AVTORNEY-GENERAL again objected.
The Loan CirANctr.r.oit said, that Dr. Lush-
ington would find in the evidence that Kastelli
had not teen asked whether lie had given any
one money, but whetherlie had given money to
-anyone to give evidence against the Princess—.
The question must be put accordingly..
Dr. LtiSHlNGTON—Ceitaitily, ray.. Lord. My
question will lead to that'effect. •
Did Rastelli offer you any money, to come,here
as a Witness ?—Re did offer me.another day. But
on that day he offered me not. It .N Vas not on*
that day, but he told.me if I.had any thing to..
'say against her Royal Highness I should receive
a great present. . •
When was it that he. I old- you j.cp.Ll:
ceive this greirt present, if you had any thing to
say against her Royal Highness ?--No; I have

said. I had .nothing to depose against her Royal
Highness. - I had nothing bzwidy!butlik-elfof her.
State, as nearly as you can, the exact: words
of-:Rastellir when be 'told N ..that-ybulshould
liaye.this great present. if ;you had any..thing to
depoie-:against the Princess ?;—He told",4nse—
Poine, if you like you may make yourself a man.
I asked .him, In,what manner? Ile saic4 :you who
have always.lived in this house ;by day and night,
may have something to depose against the"Priu-
cess. I said, I have nothing to depose' against
that-Lady, who has always done a great deal of
good.

:Was-Pumont present, on that occasion ?—She
was not.
Did Rastelli, , at thetime. he made that offer,
mention her. name to you?—
The ATTPRNEY-G ENERAL . objected to this
question.
Lord- ERSIcIN'E understood that it liasthe in-
tention of the Learned Counsel to prove. that
Rastelli was.not.only au .-agent, but a most pro-
fligate and corrupt agent, and it was now neces-
sary, in order to discover to what extent that
corruption had
_operated, that whatever he said
should be given in evidence. ' •
The LORD CIIANCELLOR. stated, that this evi-
dence could only. be properly received, in ,conse-
quence of Rastelli not being present. That. being
the case, he-could not consent. to r.-fuse evidence
which might :have . been obtained- if Rastelli had
been at hand. to be called: to the Bar. •
. The. question was then repeated..
Did Rastelli, at the time :he made you that
offer, mention Dumont's name to you ?—No ; be-
cause, it was a few days after that he had with me:
this .con versa tion . •

Dr. LusnisoToN.—lt is plain that the-witness
has not understood the question. ,
The SoLiciTon-GENERAL.protested against al-
lowing such questions to be put, which, he con-
tended, could not be permitted if Rastelli was
personally at•the Bar. It had been said that in
consequence oflii3 absence, the House would allow
his.Learned.Friends to go into a line of examina-
tion which could .n:ot take place if •he had been
present:
.•lie submitted that it was competent for
the House or his Learned Friends to postpone the
proceedings until•his return.• But it appeared to
him.da.ngerous to allow the witness at the 'Bar to
be examined, when he knew that Rastelli was not
in this country to contradict his evidence. •
The LORD CHANCELLOR.—How-doesheknow it?

The SOLICITOR-6 ENERAL , did not positively
assert that the witness at the bar knew of Ras=
telli's- absence, but if he had been, in a-situation
of knowing it, it might have ,a great effect oon the
evidence he mighrgive. As to saying that Ras-
telli was convicted of having' suborned witnesses,
there were as yet no proofs that he stood in that
situation. He had denied it on crath,.. and others
had equally sworn to his doing it; but he sub,
mitted whether it was proper for any person to
ssy,. before the whole evidence had been' heard
on both sides, that Rastelli was a ccirrupt and
profligate• witness. He thought the lTestcourse
would be for his Learned • Friends to apply to
the House to postpone the present proceedings
until after Rastelli's return.

Mr. DENMAN apprehended that under the cir-
cUrns-tances of the case, as :the absence*of Ras-
tern was occasioned by no fault of their's, he and
his Learned Colleagues were not bound to make
any application to their Lordships to postpone
the proceedings, but were free to pursue the
.course which they originally intended.' He heg-'
ged leave. to assure their 'Lordships that that
course had been adopted in the full confidence
that Rastelli was in this country, and might be
called to the bar,.-when wanted,-as --Majocci and
Carrington had been. So firmly convinced were
they of his being it hand to appear, that theyhad
actually. called the present.witness to the bar be-.
fore they had ascertained that Rastelli had been
sent away. The course which they were now put:
suing was, he contended, consistent with the strict
rules of law. Rastelli having sworn that he had been
no agent to the. Milan Commission othewise than as
a courier,. and that he had never offered money to
any individual to become a witness, they under-
took- to prOve that -he- had done so ; and the an-.
saver .to the question 'now. put to the witness at
the bar would show, by reference to the name of
Dumont,. that he had made such applications and
'offers. .

Mr. DENMAN • defended the relevancy of the
question:; the answer to whicir.would shew that
Rastelli- made an.ofrer of money to the witnesses.

It was competent for them to call. the attention
of the witness •to what passed between Itastelli
and 'Dumont,- because it was' matter -to 'bring
home conviction •, to Itastelli. They 'stood on
their right to shew the. statements'of Itastelli
were. false; -he was the agent of the pr9secutors,
and the ' Queen's -Counsel ought in justice' to be
allowed to provethe extent' of that agency.
The Lonn CHANCELLOR ordered the question
and answer to -be read. They were accordingly
repeated by Mr. Gurney:
The A.TTORNEY..GEXERAL,III`repIy, contended
that the 'question :Could not be - put, fOr'the rea—
son stated by the Solicitor-General. His Learn-
ed Friend, Mr. Denman, had said this man, RaS-
te'lli, stood in the 'situation of an agent for 'the
'prosecutors, and , that 'his evidence was to be
taken to be false. lie denied'that Rastelli waS-
a general , agt,nt ; his ag,eneY• went no further
than procuring witnesses- to. -attend before "the
Milan Committee. • There- -Was' no -4.97idenee.
•to prove he brought witnesses to. this .Conn-
try. ' It. had been asked- who wag' the proge-
' cutor ? In 'every criminal case. the public -Were.
prosecutors. But how stood the . 'case here ?—.
Rastelli had been examined at their •Lorclitlips,
,Bar, and' he had, diiio'sed 'that -he 'Nva,.,sr!
qnZlCZenf as a courier to get witnesses before the m
rnittee: He vas-asked :if- he-ever offered rtiOn'ek:
to any witness to 'coine'•to their-Liirdships' 13 ai., .:
And h,e . said 4C. 'NO I have- not.'''' ' Was' that
proved to be a false assertion ?' It "wni knot..
With respect to his 'conversation with-othet Ijf.. ,
sous, and his declarations,' to others;:Ahey could.
not.be.heard, :He conjured their Lottls,bip§ not
to allow a course of proceeding to be followed

which was at variance with all the rules of law,

When they proposed •to 'call Jiack Rastelli., yes-
terday, no specific 'question was to be put to him.
He •:was to be examined as Other witnesses are,
under 'similar .CirChinsta'n ces ; and if 'they had tied
•.him as their witnesi they could' not Lve a4ed
llim a single toestion respecting conversations with
Dumont., If such 'queStions...had beep put,. _his
Learned Friends would' frave "gone beyond all the
rifles and botindatieS of 'e-Vidence.. 'lf they pad
called Rastelli to the Bair, they could net,iha.ve
asked- hiin ..one 'question fia.ving the'. same ten-
dency as' that .propohnded. Ile was ready "to O-
mit' tiri the -full eXtent the impropriety ?f, 14.5-telli
telli being EtbSBIII, limit that accident could _not
wal4ant their LordShipS in. a deParture frnal 411
the rules of tali. ' The Counsel. for .I.ior Majesty
might have asked-for delay i , and, if t, was not
asked Ttir,theY. certainly ought not to be Placed
in 'a 'better 'situation than they would have sto9d
in, had. Rastelli been here. lie entreated-, their
Lordships not to come to a' concluSion upon'the
conduct of • Ristelli before they heard the evi-
dence on, the one side and the other. Whatever
might have been. the conduct of Rastelli-,-7-wha.t-
evertruth or falsehood there might be in the pre-
amble of the Bill,—their Lordships would come
to no'conclusion before the case for the,Defend-
ant was closed. ' He concluded ;by .inbrnitting
that the question could:not be put.'
The 'Earl of LIVERPOOL said; he certainly did
think that Rastelli being absent, the,other party
ought not 'to be deprived of 'the advantage to ;be
derived from any question which might have
'been put, in case Restelli had been present.
The Loan CII,4NCLOR intimated that this
was one of those allowances to' which her Majes-
ty's Counsel; were entitled, from that act of the
.Agent for' the Bill, by which they were deprived,
of the benefit of _examining Rastelli, at the.mo,.
ment they thought best for the object they
had in view:. It did seem to hiM that the Coun-
sel for the defence bad. called Rastelli as an evi-
dence in.chief; btit allowing that'they had, he
would not say that they might not have had the
option of changing their call, • and, examining him
in the *ay of cross-examination.,'
The objection was overruled, when the witness
was recalled, and the examination resumed by Dr.
LuSHINPTON.

Where did this second} conversation take place ?
It took place on a morning that he called on me,
and we
,went to the inn together.
Did:he then make any offer, or promise of money

to you, to become a witness against the Queen,
and in what words, as nearly as you can recollect'
He told me, if you have any thing to depose
against her Rpyal Highness, now is the time. You
will become a great man, and receive A great pre-
sent. We" went to the inn together, talking, and
dined there.

Dia he, when he spoke of. your getting a great
present, mention the name: of Dumont ? Yes.
Did'he mention the name- of Dumont with re-
ference to any offer ofponey made to her ?
Mr% littuNGßAiw here.questioued.the Interpre-
ter respecting the words used. by. the :witness,
there being some difference in the !translation of .
the words. by Mr. Cohen.
The Lonn CnANCELLOji suggested that the In-
terpreter, to- prevent interruption, should make
the witness understand that holding Uplis.hand ,
was a signal for him to stop speaking.
The suggestion was followed, and the witness
received a communication 7 which made him un-
derstand the arngeinent.
The witness then gaVe the ameNled answer in .
these terms :—He told me Dumontlwas..still in
her Royal 'Highness's 'service, and I- aftervv.ards -
formd• she was tot there. He told me if I de- •
posed,something I should have a great pre-
sent.: I said I have been ten days in. the
house, and I aver saw any Thing to enable:me .to
speak any ill of -that'Lady, meaning her Royal
Highness. He then said you know.nothing._ I

tell you that house was avery disorAerly house.
Bad women were in it, and so forth. I answered
this was a falsehood ; for I had been in the home
day and night after night, and I had seen nothing

of it. AVe then separated.
Did Rastelli on that occasion say any thing
further rewecting Dumont?-No.
The Earl of lavutPoot. here desired Mr.
Planta to she called to the Bar. , He accordingly
appeared, attd the Noble Earl put the follQH ing,
'question : •

_
IV hat-is the first date of the first passport after
'the I.Bth of September, granted,to any courier,
going to the North .of Italy ?-7.1t appears to •ine
to be the 28th of September. •
Mr. Plana withdrew, and the former witness.
was recalled. -
Was it on this occasion► the eNprer.sion was used.
about' Duinont's snaking a'goocl day's work
Yes ; it was on :that occasion that Rastelli was

goingabent making recruits.• ••?
'State all that liastelli—said about, making,•a:
.
good day's Work can't, express it . ',must
• only. say; :that he told me, that, when she came,-
to make a drawing she made a good day's work. .
Do you knowa person
.of the name
.of Rk- • •
gaud ; he was a companion of Rastellin • ,
'Of what business w.vs he sells salt, t 0...
bacco, brandy, and °fluor, liquors, lie dwelt tw-u•
gun-shotsOutof Milan.• •
Did Raganti you
.to
.come And depose-
a'-rainst her RoYal-Hig'huess •
• The'KV-44Gyi bdraccrott7Gv4EßAL objected,to ••
• this questioriH,The person whose conduct is af-
fected tiaa riot been examined. as •'•a witness,. nor
• had he been 'preyed to .be at, all conneoted.with,
the proceeding. -1 •
Dr 451.1114G,T01.F .:Afwirld be. ,abie.
to: convince Ahe'Lord-s. of the propriety of .thee
Otetiou':l .R4telli.W.9s_asked,,in 'the course. of • ,
ht eiarnina' an,' If Itt:0-7.:.i'94casip.nally-tvoot to the
Milan Committee,!.tlrswe'red requested
o adeniVtlial..Corn!=nittee a man of-the name
'OP nagailtf. Abu eviAence ie (Dr...Lushieg-,
649- Was entitled to kiye diro proof of.the.aets .
dove-by :The eottweLtfos-„tive.,Qen
'Wad, difficulties to encounter in the .prosecution,...
Which had' not taken ;.any, flisOnct,.shape•or.forrn...
If' would Aeie-fore be • hard -to take from

hem the power of thewing, by agency,subornaJ

tioia of perjury. It was obvious frow Rastelli's