The Sun.
London, England, 1820-10-06 00:00:00

PROCEEDINGS OF TIIIS DAY.

Prayers were read this morning at ten o'clock
by the Bishop of Buisror... There was a consi-
derable crowd below the Bar. Excuses were
made for the absence of his Royal highness the
Duke of York, owing to indisposition, and also
for the Marquis of Northampton and the Earl of
Bridgewater. At about 20 minutes past 40
o'clock, M. Marietti, the younger, was called to
the Bar, when he delivered in the additional
letter, which he yesterday had promised to bring
with him.

WITNESSES FOR HER MAJESTY.
The Counsel were then called in, and Lady
CHARLOTTE LINDSAY was introduced to the Bar.
Cross-examined ky the SoLicrrou-GENERAL.
Q. Did her Ladyship know whether there was a garden in
the neighbourhood of Naples in which she had walked with
her Royal Highness.—A. She did.
Was Bergami also present at the tittle?—He was.
Did her Ladyship, in going to Naples frost Rome, travel in
the same carriage with her Royal Highness?—She did.
Did Bergami at that iteriod tide as *cootie' I—He
Did her Ladyship go in the same carriage on the iournay to
Civiti Vecchia?--She did.
At that time also did Bergami ride as courier I—She be-
tieved he did, but could not recollect it so well.
On that occasion did Bergauti come up to the carriage and
address the Queen ?—She recollected his cowing up to the
carriage when he-spoke to her Royal Highness, who gave him
_provisions and something to drink.
Could her Ladyship recollect if there was any bottle in the
carriage her /loyal Highness travelled in?—'there was.
llid Dergatni think from that buttlel-7She thought he did.

Did 13erganii tirink from the mouth of the bottle or out of a
glass ?—Front the bottle.
Did he afterwards return the bottle to her Royal High-
ness ?--She could not decide that ; though she was not co.-
tAin, to the hest oilier recollection he returned it.
Does not her recollect now whether he returned

$e bottle or threw it away . —She thought he returt.ed it.
When at length her Ladyship quitted the service of her
Royal Highness, did she not state to somebody, that it was a
vast relief to her mind in quitting the service of her Royal
Highness ?—She bad no distinct recollection of having said so.
Does she not remember stating any thing to that purpose
or effect-?—She did not recollect it.
Did not her Ladyship say, that it was a vast relief to her
mind in quitting her Royal Highness's service, and that no
woman who had any regard fur her character could rt121:1111
iu the service of her Royal Highness?—She did trot recollect
her stating any thing to that effect.
Would her Ladyship then undertake to say that she really
did net make use of these words ?--She had no recollection of
making use of them, or any such 'words.
Would her Ladyship then persist in saying that she never
had mode use of these words ?—She could only say that she
thought it extremely improbable she shoull, and that she bad
nu recollection of them.
Would her Ladyship now undertake to say that she had not
made use of words to that effect more than once ?—She had
no recollection of having used such words, and did not think
it probable.
Did she net say, after quitting the service of her Royal
Highness, that," were it not in order to serve a particular in-
dividual out of her "savitigs, she would have quitted her ser-
vice long ago?"—She thought it possible Site might, but she
did not recollect.
Hiving now called these cirkionstances to her Ladyship's
recollection, could she remember if the former words were not
used at Sgme.time or other ?—She had no distinct recollection
When she had said she was induced to skier Royal
Highness's sees-ice in order to serve an individual, but it was
nut coupled .with such words as those.
Could her Ladyship be positive of this ?--;--She could only
say that she bad no kind of recollection of it, and that she
thought it not at all probable.
Was it to be understood, then, that it was -not positively
so ?—Sire had no recollection that she ever said that no wo-
man of character would remain its her Royal Highness's ser-

vice.
[Here the Solicitor-General -reminded her Ladyship tha
this was not an answer to the question he had put ; but she
still declared that the bad iso recollection of the words im-
puted to her.]
Her Ladyship had stated that she received a communicetion
from the Earl of Gisildfosal; Was the conversation before or
after that communication I—She could not recollect if it was
before or after.
Could her Ladyship reoolleet if it was about the sar4tr tsrwe ?
—She did not reeollect.
Was it after she hail resigned bee situation with the Prin-
cess of Wales I—Site did not know.
Were there no circumstances to being it to her Ladyship's
recoßectiun I—There were some; and she thought the men-
tom of her remaining in service was after thecommunicatinn.
Mr. DENMAN here asked the witness if the commonsica-
tion bad heen made known to any one; to -which -she replied
that she had communicated it to her husband, and tootle else.
In answer to another question, it appeared that Mr. Lindsay
had beets in distressed circumstances for some years.
Mr. BROUGHAM here interposed, and shewed the object
of the last question, which was to chew that Lady Charlotte
Lindsay had quitted her situation from embarrassutenta,-aud
not owing to her dislike to the Princess.
Witness now withdrew from the House being much affect-
ed, lint soon returned.
Q. Had her Ladyship any communication -while in bee
Royal Highness's service -on the subject of a salary ?—.l. She
had ; for -at one time arrears were due to her.
Had any other circumstances in 1817, reasle the service of
her Royal Highttese empleatant do bee?—lt was particularly
disagreeable toher,-becanse she was under -considerable de-
pression -of spirits at that time.
Had her Ladyship 'lost any body at that time ?—She had
lost two relations, Lord Guildford and Lad} Gleniservie.
(Here her Ladyship wept, and could scarcely speak.)
Had she ever observed any impropriety in the conduct of
the Queen, to induce her to quit her service ?—She -never had
observed any such impropriety As Intkuceal her to quit the
Princess's service.
Ay a PEER.
Q. From the effect that her Ladyship's evidence was
likely to base on the present cause, it was -wished to as.
-certain how long she had •1n,e41 about the Catieeu.
witness had said that she bad been at Rome, Civita "%rec.
chia, and on board the Clori-nde, in all 24 days-; therefore
tier experience e-f the conduct of the 'Qtseen extended only to
the space-of -24 days?—A. In Italy.
Her Ladyship had said that during that time slue had ob-
served no impropriety in her Royal Highness's conduct to
Bergami, or Bergami's to her I—Duriog that time she had
observed no impropriety on the part of her Majesty -in her in-
tercourse With Bergalei.
Could her Ladyship say whether Sit W. Gell joined her
Majesty's service at Naples I—He had.
Had Sir Was. Gell remained at Naples or left it?—Sir Wm.
Grit bad resigned before they left Naples on account of ill
health.
Did her Ladyship know whether the Hotiont able Keppel
Craven had joined her Majesty at Naples?—lie had.
Did he remain there?—'He had not remained, hut resigned-.
Had Captain Hesse joined them?—He had.
Did he also quit at Naples ?—He
At the time they quitted the service of the Queen, was her
Ladyship aware that any one else joined her I—There had.
-Did her Ladyship -recollect a young woman named Faus-
tina?—ihe could set recollect.
Did her Ladyship 'know a person of the name of Louis Ber-
ganti, and whether lie joined the Queen I—She was nut quite
certain, thought she recollected him, but -could not speak with
certainty.
Did she know any thing about the mother of Bergarui, as
to entering the Queen's service?—tike did not.; she had -ne-
ver known any thing about her till lately.
Did she know any thing of a child named Victorine, athe-
ing in the Queen's House I—She knew of no child being in
the house.
Her Ladyship had said, that she saw nothing improper
in the Queen's conduct while in her service ?—She never
bad seen any -thing improper in the thlet during th it time.
Had her Ladyship heard any report respecting the Queen ?
[Here there was some murmuring in the House, and the
question was not persisted in.]
The LORD CHANCELLOR—Your Lordships .can admit
no reports of any kind.
Examination reeume
Q. Can her Ladyship now recollect if there were any-other
circumstances which operated on her mind in quitting the ser-
vice of the Queen ?—Slue certainly had not seen any impro-
priety while in the service of the Queen; butt there were re-
ports of so unpleasant and degrading a maitre, as partly to
operate on tier mind its q-aittkig the -service of the Queen.
Had leer Ladyship observed if her Majesty showed a degree
of familiarity to her servants, male and female, not becom-
ing her dignified rank?—She remarked that her Majesty was
affable and familiar-to RH her Servants.
Did the Queen's condescension to her servants exceed that
of people of rank in this countryto their domestics ?—She had
observed that persons of-rank in country were more con-
descending to their servants than
,persons of a lower class:
and there was sotilethieg peculiar ha the lecher-lone of the
Queen.
Had that familiarity senile part of the Queens greatly ex-
ceeded that generally sheen by foreigners? —No, not gt catty.
Whets her Ladyship said that she saw no impropeieta; in the
conduct -if Bergatni lei the Queen, or the Q*Cels towards hint,
(lid she speak with reference to what she had described as pe-
culiar in the behaviour of the Queen I—She bad.
Could her Ladyship say whether there kni4lit not appear
an extraordinary and unbecoming mode of conduct, if in at
person of more reserved habits than the Queen?—Her Royal
Highness talked to Bergami as site -did to Sicard and aid the
other persons its her family.
Had -her Ladyship's brother at anytime communicated any
reports to her respecting the Queen, and advised her to quit
her Royal Highness's service?—(Thin question was objected
to, and the Noble Peer withdrew it.)
flit Earl LAUDERDALE—Did bee Ladyship -quit the
set vice of the Queen in consequence of the letter she received
front the late Lord Guiletfoedl—(Here the eortfusioet its the
House prevented us 'from catching the answer.)
Could her Ladyship say that she quitted in consequence of
the request so made, or on account of the difficulty of obtain-
ing her salary I—Answer wits tonsudible.
[Here much discussion took place respecting the necessity
of not putting more questions on this head, till it was ascer-
tained if the lettere-mild he produced to the House.]
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that it was necessary to
invite whether the letter iii question was in existence at all,
anti if so, whether her Ladyship had made any search foi it.
Mr. 13110V(41,131 here objected to the production of the let-
ter, or to direct her Ladyship to search after it, seeing it was
written by a pt.! son who was not a party to the case, but by a
relative to the witness, who himself was a stranger to the
matter.
The LORD CHANCELLOR ,aid, her Ladyship had beets
asked why she quitted the service of the Queen, when slit re-

plied that it wfis In tsar severiee of the request of Lon'
ford. Non., having 'staled that, either the evidence 56 ,:;41
corded ought nut to, remain, or the letter should be seacl"
foi, t the option of Noble Lords.
Loard Eau(' NE thought that the Lady at the Bar had OIL'
her evidence with great fairnesi. She had stated she $0";
thing in the Queen's conduct and Bergami's to induce be
quit the service; and hero the matter, in his opinion, 51°12

end. tbt
The Earl of LIVERPOOL woad give no opinion On
yt
subject ; but if any of their Lordships were of opinion t"tre,
the letter ought to be produced, her Ladyship should be
rected to search for it at once, withdraw fur the presents g
save trouble both to herself and the House.
Earl GREY 1. -we understood, the prodoctioei

opintara, as

the letter. -
In answer to some further questions by the Earl off tik,l
DERBALE, her Ladyship stated, that when she was at arq
she seldom went into the hed-chamber of the Queen with();
being sent h always without nocking at the ilee
She added, (
that the proposal for uittink g the Queen nrigilat:
ed with herself, in coos( (Netter of an invitation from her WI:.
thee to return to England, as she wished to reach this cola
try in the beginning of summer, she therefore left tbeQu
iu flay or June, 184 5.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE now moved that her Lail
should be directed to search for the letter ; which the 1,4 f
Chancellor then directed her to do agreeable to the order
their Lordships, wad she withdrew from the