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

PARLIA.AIENT,

- OUSE OF LORDS-SATURDAY.

THE QUEEN'S DEFENCE.

• [Continuation. of Saturcirw'i Proteedings.]
Lord AUCKLANFII said the question now before
.here was simply ths, whether or not, when an at-
torney in a- ctrusehas cOinniittol an act in violation
or d--lav of public justice, fhe Court can exa-
',line him as to matters vy hiA. he Aleetares he can-
.
not! disclose Without a 4,2iOtation, of private' conti-
•
. t.ence.

CHAN:2I:I.ot; fepit4 in a very low
tone, in'antlible belo,:v the bar. • . •
;, • Earl GI r'Ltlieti wished Mr. PO ELL to be
That.. Gentleman being re-
Cact•ci at the bar, Eacl.Greyresumed his exa-
,.l4itutt,icin. e•
naderstanft r00,..,t0.,,?:ta,te that you have in
ybnc•.possession a copy, of the letter which you
"roseCdtotrel,BroWn, $41:011g au account of
It ~~telli's object, Crcu
.yourlfir'O'dnce that copy ?
-;-1•Oe--thJ: whole' .of the letter, btit that part ?---
A., I coceivoll.•qorrlninnications made by me to
•Caonel BroWu confidential communications
usade.-,by iniN.; as an'agent for this Bill; and, con-
the agent; or .one of the agents for
I.ebitsct to :the predlction of all my
-cCorreYpoEderue relating to that subject..
Or-to any ['art of it ?—,lf d.pbject to the pro-
.
• unction of• the whole, I oiPrpict, of con' rse, 'ter
~...pro!loct4?n of •a
-'You have also received a letter from Colonel
Brown, do you objet t to the production of tha t ?
I object,',in 'the character ill which I stand, to
-the pros uctiyn..of any letters to ór.frbm Colonel
• :Brown. • .

• I understand' you to say, that. Ton gave Ras-
.
.telli a positive injunction to return before the re,
.sumptiou of these -proceedings ? If he could, I,
s:iated to Ra-stelli, that he. was to be, back on or
before tlze 3d of October, .or as soon as he pos-
..;il.ilV could. •
Did you State to him your reason for wishing
..A`ot his speedy return ?-4 don't recollect stating
.air particular reason.
understood you to say yeSterday, that you
did not -expect ltastetti svrould be 7,vanted before
this bUsiness would be proceeded upon in the
iiouse of Corm-nous ?—Of course.
On what account then did you give him such
a poitive injunction'?—:-Because I expected kim
to return with the papers whiph I sent, and
which I considered I: might want to use on the
recoth.meddernentof4he -proceedings on the 3d of

.octaber. -
•
hell it was only in tirdt view, and ,not with‘the
-expectation of his being wanted as a witness; that
.Toi2 desired b•i's return?-4 did n6t conceive his
'return essential in any Other tight, as the Coun-,
.sel.'for the prosecution had stated that the had
had
:no further questions to .put to the witnesses. •
Tet.you are aware that the House had express,'
its opinion, and 47,ivfn 'instructions, that the
Wilnesses should he forthcoming ?-1 do not re
....oliectt that.
*ere Earl Gnu' repeated
.the question.—.l
certainly understood that, during the progress of
-:tbe.,prasecntion upon the Bill, the witnesses were,
it.L”be dcept in attendance. . •
°gut you' have heard• it, o.,ediared,in the House
,thatAhe'witnesses should be taken care of? Yes.
L-L.nd- did you not know, therefore, when you
:sentltastelli away that you were. violating the
in.-itnictions of the House ?—The Circumstance
certainly did not strike me at the time I seat
lims,tefli away.
If- die.witatesses who returned home again had
.been desired to give information to the families-of
the witnesses here, could they not haVe done so as
nuell as Rastelli ? —As R.aste:fli had been with the
party at Dover',
_'acid was well .acquainted•• with '
the finiiiies Of the witnesses who had been mal-
treated, I lhOught him the Most proper person to
• •
"Wu' **ere 'then desirous that Rastelli should
,have-dpersonal communication with Cie families
'of the Witneses wh'z.,.are here?---As far as was
his'Obwer..
Yeti cens'ide'red him then'as the ,best .agent
whotn- pill could employ to have persenaL.com-,
munication with those families -thought: him,.
the best'person to have communication. with the
Jfamities. Of those persons for that purpose.
• ria.son yoir sending Rastelli back then
;was, Ahat he should have. such . cornmunication
With thri4e-faniilies ?—,l wished him to see them,
';and deliver letteis fromthe witnesses here.
Can frt state of yoUr'own }:nowledge, szagent
in thiinus,e, whether any' of the witnesses who .
,have been examined in this cause, have' their fa-
residing at Milan panse.ensued, ahcl
the .qnisti.3ri was. then read over, to- -Mr. Powell
'by this.' short-hand writer.[=-N,ever having; seen
aup 'of•thcAr families, of 'had' any communication
with erem,l do not know where they may reside.'.
Ha:it:they. not'all been 'examined here, and in-
bifirninalion'stated. the..reSidences ,of their
cannot , recollect where they stated
Allen] to reside. " •
Did-Yon not know that ail the witnesses, *with
the .ex.tOfioti of *•Majocci, stated the residence of
-theirliantilies• to be in 'other places than Milan
do net recollect where theystated .them to
.reside::;':.

. Then you meant him to have.personal comma-
.- • nikation ivitli their- fainilieS,?—,Yes.
You have state that a 'courier to Milan might
makfr.. the joutney in ex or seven days ?—ln six
.days and•nights.
Is that'the most 'expeditious-rate of performing
.the jouKfey ?—lt is riGt an extritOrolinary rate of
,goin.;;ti fOra•courter.
Do yoit.think a emirier could go to Milan aid
return. in fourteen days ?L--I think he might.
Did you expect, geste..li would return,Ki that
time ?--'I 'say what E expected •I have
known Courier.; perforth the journey to :Milan in
six or seven days. '
is that the leafit: time required for going and
i..•00::5.!-E—l•4o not sty-the least time,. .