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

to 'whom we are opposed, that we may make that
evidence which we otherwise could not do; for,.
if we knew the power by which the machinery
has been put in motion, we can identify them
with their agents, by- the acts and declarations of
the party. When we are acquainted with the
unknown, the interesting .unknown, we may trace
its actittps and its conduct,Nd bring Sibmits ikwn.
mouth, If it has arpoutfr,.who- What he is. -I
know nothing of this shapeless being, if shape it
can be called. I know nothing of it, ,whether it
basa head or a body, or is a mere shadow—an
airy
,bein, without a local habitation or a
name.' Now I want to know from this witness,
who is an avowed agent of this ideal personage,
who and what this airy being is ?"
The Loan C,UANCELLOR interrupted the,Learn-
ed Counsel and said, that questions of the nature

alluded to could not be put to the witness, un-
less•he appeared as a witness in this Bill.
Mr: BROUGHAM wished to ask another ques-
tion of the witness, which was, how many wit-
neAsses against the Queen had arrived previous to
the I.7th of August ?
The Lona) CHANCELLOR objected to the
question.
Mr. Powell was recalled.

Mr. BROUGSIAM. - How many witnesses,
brought over for the Bill, had left the country
before the 14th of September ?
The Earl of LAUDERDALE objected to the
question.
The Earl of CARNARYON spoke in favour of it.
Mr. BROUGHAM.--Previous. to Rastelli going
to Italy, how many witnesses had returnvi'to the
North of Italy ?—I do not know of any. To
the best of my knowledge 1 believe there were

Will you swear, to the best of your belief, that
when Rastelli was sent back, you did not knou;
and believe that any other person had returned
to the North of Italy ?—To the best of my know-
ledge there was none. I have no recollection of
any—no belief of any being so sent back. If I
fiave a list of witnesses, I may speak more posi-
tively. There -were so many persons that A can-
not speak positively. I cannot recollect. Some
of the witnesses I have not seen.

, Will you then swear, that when Rastelli was
sent back, no person employed as an agent or
courier to the Milan Commission, had been sent
over to Italy sufosequent to theDovef rioe—Some
couriers have been sent over, but not wider the
Milan Commission, which I consider to have
ceased.. Mr. CoOke and I. left Milan in May,
Igl9, but the functions of the. CommissiOn had
ceased in March ; I do. not consider myself as
now acting under the Milan Commission,
The question relates to any person who had
teen employed as a courier in this Bill ?7—Cer.
tainly, couriers have been so employed,.
Will you give us their names—l mean down to
the departure of Rastelli know as a courier,
Crouse. •

Mad Crouse brought over some witnesses in
this cause ?--Nes.

Has any other person brought witnesses ?—Yes
Who are they do not know their names.

Did you know the other persons who had gone
out ,as couriers ?—I did.

Did you send any other persons to comfOrt the
families of the witnesses ?—Letters' were written
by all the persoirs here to their friends, and sent
to Colonel Brown.

Were any of these couriers, , besides Rastelli,
tai go round to the families of these persons ?
When Crouse was sent, I considered that Col.
Brown would make use of Crouse to give the fa-
milies information.

Did you give Crouse any instructions to that
effect ?—Not to my recollection.
Did you give the other couriers any instruc-
tions of that nature ?—The persons sent letters by
them. But I received information from Milan
that the families were not satisfied ; and that ac,
counts were circulated that the letters which had
been sent, had been forced from the witnesses,
and they had been obliged to write statements of
their safety.
Who gave you that information ?—Colonel
Brown.
Can 'you name any family who heard such
reports ?—ColOnel Brown's inforthation was ge-
neral; but I can name.one individual who had been
told that her hUsband had received great perso-
nal injury; it is the wife of Langarti.
Have you or the agents of this Bill not read or
heard the evidence of Rastelli ?—I have.

And did you not hear Rastelli swear that 11
of the witnesses that came over he never saw or
knew any thing of ?—I did.
And did you not swear that the reason for
charging Rastelli was, that he was. acquainted
With the families of those persons ?
The Lotto CHANCELLOR thought that that part
of Rastelli's evidence which referred to this pojut
should be read.

Mr. BROUGHAM then read that part of the evi-
dence, where he said he knew some of the wit-
nesses, some he did not.—A. I was not present
when the whole of Rastelli's examination was going
forward. But I wish to state that sending Ras-
telli had not merely a reference to those families
who had come over.

Then does witness mean to swear that Rastelli
had to go to round to all the families of those who
had come, and those who might come ?—He was
to go the families of those who came under the
directions of Col. Brown. - He had no instructions
as to those who might come.
Will the witness tell as nearly As possible how
many witnesses have come over in support of this
cannot tell exactly: •
Will you swear there were not 40?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL olljected to this
question.
I wish to ask whether Rastelli remained here
the whole time between the riot at Dover and the
time of his examination cannot say.
Will you swear that he did nut return to Milan.
after the riot at Dover ?-4 have not seen *.him
since.

Will Mr. Powell state precisely the language
and terms be used to Rastelli in sending him out