The Sun.
London, England, 1820-10-25 00:00:00

been ronsidered by the supporters of the Bill'
proof of a criminal intercourse. He might
eppeal 'to common sense and ask if her Ma-
jesty had been• guilty of an adulterous inter- '
co-arse with this man, would he have gone upon
deck ? Would so trilling an inconvenience have
been regarded ? Would she have transferred
herself to the deck ? No : she would have re-
anained below in the dark, where the situation
was favourable to a concenjeod illicit. connection.
Her Majesty slept upon deck, not under a tent,
as it had been .so often and improperly termed.
It Was the awning of the ship, covering the
deck and extending to pillars which supported
it. Under the awning there stood a bed, and
it sofa next the hatches, which were always
-open. The real character of the tent or awn-
ing was never -stated in the examination in
thief. The fact was -suppressed for the pur-
pose .of making an impression not warranted.
They were told the awning during the day was
'up, and let down at night. That might be so,
:and yet two persons sleep innocently under it. •
Duriag the whole of the voyage her Majesty was
extremely fatigued. It was necessary she should
tie attended by some person on the deck of a
'S p, and what person could be so proper as the
person she had appointed her chamberlain ? Her
clothes were worn during the whole of the voyage,
end there was only one instance which furnished
llre slightest pretence for supposing Ber,arni
slept under the.tent at all. NO per.ion.deposedt'that
-they Vi ere seen at any time of night sleeping un-
der the tent. It was only inferred from the evi-
.d.ence of Lieut. 11 ownatn. Some circumstances
went to negative that inference. 'There was uo
proof of adultery, neither was there any mystery.
Her Royal Highness, an unprotected female, but
the boldest of her partyewished to pass the night
on deck, and it was necessary some man should
be on the watch., while she took repose. There
were twenty-two seamen onboard. The steers-
men relieved each other, and could their Lord-
ships fairly say the situation warranted a belief
that the criminal act was committed ? There was
an absence of direct evidence on the subject;
Captain llownam admitted that bp believed her
Royal Highness slept in one bed and Bergamiln
another ; were their LordshipsOn that statement
to decide that the parties slept on the-deck and
committed adultery.? In a case of this impor-
tance, were they to have it made out by 'dis-
carded- servants? How could they make out
the case upon the mere belief of a witness ?
-tioswer might have been objected to.
The belief of Mr. Hownam 'seas no evidence at
40 1, yet his Learned Friends had drawn an infe-
rence from it, said to 'be fatal to the Queen.
Captain Hownam, however, went on to say,
there was no impropriety in the act of sleeping un-
der the tent. The Queen did not, in his opi-
won, incur any degradation. During the three
years that officer remained with the Queene he
seas not able, to state one single circumstance
by which they could infer the crime of adul-
tery was committed. Lieutenant Flynn was
not regularly called by the Counsel for the
()lase e n .—Residing in Sicily, he saw in the
public papers an account of the process against
her Majesty. Without asking for 600 dollars a
-trronthi as the captain of the Sicilian bark did,
he came away -like a brave and honourable -man,
to give his- evidence in support of the Queen.
It was clear he bad never been in a Court. of
Jastice before. Be was alarmed at the tribunal
before which he stood, and gave his answers at
random ; a more alarmed witness he had never
seen, yet more correct evidence in regard to be-
lief was never given by any witness. Mr. Den-
man described himself to be an admirer of that
legal talent, which by cross-examination drew
out truth from the lurking place ; but he could
never apprOve of cross-examination for the pur-
pose of betraying an honourable but nervous man
to commit hiMself. It was perfectly immaterial
to the case, whether the paper Lieut. Flynn pro-
duced was produced or
.not. Lieut.'Flynn, think-
-ie e he was to give evidence, copied dates from the
log. When he came to England, he found the
copies were so ill spelled and so badly made by
the pet-=on who was employed for the purpose, that
they could not be produced in a Court of Justice,
therefore he got Count Schiavini to copy it.
Every body knew how often a braYe man was
nervous, placed in situations he had never known
before., There was no case in which the Barris-
ter had so much advantage and superiority, •as
when he was conducting the cross-examination
of such a person. He should never feel disposed
to exult, or betray, an honourable and brave man,
placed in the situation he had described. No.
man, however, could believe, after the evidence
of Flynn and Hownam, there were nnyindecen
ties exhibited on hoard the polacca. • His Learn-
ed Friend, the Attorney-Generale had said,
13ergami used to make an indecent exhibi-
tion of his person to -divert her Royal High-
ness. What said Hownam and Flynn in-support
of that statement ? Why,, that there were some
light exhibitions at Tunis, and, that Bergami on
(etre occasiou put on a dress resembling one worn
by a man who exhibited those light performances.
That was the %%'hole act of indecency and fanilia-
rity to which the Captain of the polacre had de-
posed. The tent en the deck of the polacre
was the last wreck of the case, and it was not pos-
sible for any man of hAellect to suppose the deck
was a place which the parties would select for
the - pug-pose of adultery. I f the other ante-
rior deal es were disposed Of, the deek was un-
worthy the.as:tentien of their Lordships. They
were trying the highest person in.. England, and
there could be no 'middle course of proceeding.
She was innocent or guilty. He did not deal in
exaggerated statements, but he would say, rather
than his Royal Mistress should stand at the bar
to receive from the House a comprothise injurious
to.her honour and degrading, he would himself
hand her to the block to lay down her illustrious
'Lead. He could never wish to see his Queen carry
. away the implication of guilt ; the object of pity
and scorn:;—the unfortunate tiving instance of
rank and character degraded. They were to try
her Majesty as they would try a Queen for High.
'Treason, and then lie might ask- what Judge

- • •
could say be had received evidence to convict her. ,
If any Judge could be found to declare the
Queen guilty upon the deck evidence, the an-
terior charges being negatived, he ought to be'
impeached. Adverting to the story reipecting
the Bath, it was preposterous to suppose Berga-
mi - did more than try the temperature of the
water. If their Lordships meant to try this case
by probability, they would negative the charge.
There never was such a witness in the world to
convict the Queen, if she had been gushy; as
Captain flownam. lie was with her Majes-
ty three years, and during that time, all the
criminality With which she was charged took
place. lie entreated the Lords to consider
that the polluted evidence against the Queen was
the evidence of discarded servants. Ile then
went to the kissing stated to have taken place
between the decks of the vessel. Majocci deposed
that Bergami was permitted to kiss the Princess.
The other witnesses proved that assertion to be a glaring false-
hood. They all said Brig:mil kissed her hand, which they
were in the habit of doing. The kissing on leave-taring
stated to have lahrn iniacs at 'Messina, was 110 IluOrt., accord.
1114 to the evidence of Dumont, than hissing bet Nlajesty's
hand. Dutnont's back was turned. She beard a hiss, and it
fine.,ltt. have Inert) a hiss of the baud. The scenes- at the Villa
d'Est e were proved by that gentlemanly servant anti of-
ficer in the service of Napoleon, Sacchi, and other dis-
carded set rants. The facts stated were pollution to the
tips of any decent individual—No husband could receive
benefit front details so nauseous. The more profligacy a
husband throws upon his wife, the more he degrades
him•elf and tarnishes his honour. He funnel no exam-
ple in history, of any Christian King claiming the right to di-
voice his wife under similar circumstances. Ile found some-
thing like it in the history of Imperial Rome. Octavia had
scarcely become the wife of Nero, vre she was the object of iris
disgust ; she was repudiated, and is mistreswraken in her place.
conspiracy was formed against her, and she MIS accused of
criminal intimacy with a slave. Her servants were not bribed,.
bat tot lured to depose against her. Their evidence was trot
tredi'ed. The public believed her innocent ; she was, how-
ever, condemned, and in unshed from Rome. On her return
front exile, the people received her with feelings of regard;
bin a seeend conspiracy was raised, and the unhappy Empress
was again banished to an island in the Mediterranean], where
she was put to death, having no choice but poison or the
(lag./ et. Her veins were opened by order of the inhuman Nero,
and she expired. (Ho e Denman quoted the words of
Cit us Its embellish his description.) Her 'Majesty left this
con otry, and soon after her &pa:tore reports and rumours
were raised, w hick her Counsel had then to grapple with.—
Deprived of her only daughter, she was plunged all the ago-
ny of a fond parent, and made the object of conspiracy. In
the fatal month of November, 817, Every one of the material
witnesses in support of the Bill were dismissed from lier ser-
vice. it was then all her secrets were impired into. At
that time Sacchi, Majocci, Dumont, and others, turned spies,
formtrs, and, like serpents, turned upon their Royal and
gracious Mistress. When the four persons of the Princess's
suite left her. then the conspiracy against the Princess was
formed in their hearts, and was sure to he carried into execu-
tion. There was, however, it) the worst' of natures, some
moments of eolOpooetion, and fortunately Dumont lead de-
stroyed herself as a witness against her Royal Highness, by
one of the most cordial, sincere, anti energetic panegyrics
that could be pronounced on her Royal Mistress. While that
document remained, it was impossible to believe one particle
of the testimony which she had given at their Lordships: Bar.
It ass a happy circumstance for her Majesty that Dumont
had been called against her, suttee in her letter written to her
sister, she had given a testimony which invalidated every part
of her evidence. The letter written by Dumont was an acquit-
tal of her Majesty. He th•ctined Marietti, the sister of
Dumont, and oilier witnesses, because her Majesty's Counsel
did not wish ire expose those persons to a cross-examination
like that whicb_Lieutenant Fiynn underwent ; in consequence
of a deviation from correctness with respect. to a paper of no
consequence, that officer had been etansigned to infamy.
With the expel knee of Lieutenant Flynn's cross-examination
before their c• es, they were justified if) not exposing the par-
Ullllll.l iled disgrace.
The Earl of LivEltpoor. here stated that it was four
o'clock, and the House adjonrovd,