The Sun.
London, England, 1820-10-24 00:00:00

--Yc*

erlingd
1;11"

rrb°l6;

ft 6e.

er0,71,°06t
!XPeCg
latid"

I base

vit'r;
I Mc-

je 11'1
her
if
stnh
!rat'
f

Jac•

01, 1
co"'"

fOl

convvrsation having taken place;' be did not ask what that
conversation was.
b The LORD CHANCELLOR said, the question could not
t Put.
Put Mr. WILLIAMS.—Then we have no further questions to

At the suggestion of one of the Peers the witness was now
tcoiuniodated with a seat. ,
The Earl of DARLINGTON.—Q. Ask if Mademoiselle Du-
"tit is acquainted with her husband ?—A. No, not at all.
L,The Earl of HARROWBY.—Iii her conversation with
' L-.ademoiselle Dumont, did the witness ask any question re-
P':Cting the manner in which t he Princess received the tidings
-• the death of her daughter, the Princess Charlotte I—Yes.
- What answer did ftladetuoiselle Dumont make I—She told
that her Royal Highness was extremely affected, and said
e had lost all that was
most dear to her.
thllle Earl of LIMERICK.—From the acquaintance which
iwitness has had with Mademoiselle Dumont, does she
nk her word is to be trusted ?
was the suggestion, of the SOLICITOR-GENERAL this question
^AS withdrawn.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE.—Did you discover, in your
-°,lversation with Dumont, that she was with her Royal High-
41t ep when the
h Princess
itCharlotte died 1-1 believe tharett, but
-1 not ask er, about . I asked her if she would urn,
eatillte laid yes. She said she was on leave of absence, be-
a'lol suite of her Royal Highness were in mutuning.
ile slit say she'was present whet. the Princess received the
;fiW6 Gi her daughter's death I—No, she did not say that.
le witne-s here withdrew.
therelr, BROUGHAM addressed their Lordships, remindinig
of a statement lie had made on Saturday last, previous y
sr,'"eir Lordships adjourning, of the obstacles thrown in the
• cif her Majesty's defence. He carefully abstained then,
Agu...lid at present, from imputing blame to the Government
t,me
wn 12s country. He allowed that every thing had beeni
11,4tueir Part, and his illustrious clitrlit had only to lament
it, unfortunate part of her case. In order to have the mr-
llZVlances relating to the difficulty thrown in the way of the
elii WEnde coining over to this country, on their Lord-
-1,,,Pt Minutes as evidence, he should beg to call back James
Dnns clerk to Mr. Vizard.
rs,'AXIEs LEMANN was then put to the Bar.
SOLICITOR-GENERAL observed, that he
h h- o
ad
seen this individual in Court during the whole
t
pf„ e re-examination of the witness ; and he ap-
nLhrided, that in compliance with the rules
U their Lordships had laid down, this wit-
hes.o
• could not be examined.
13RouonAm admitted that the witness had been in the
is erthroughout the whole proceeding ; but contended that
l'4laelar:;it° Mr. Vizard, lie came within the exception to the
their -cirord,ovn 'by their Lordships, of Counsel, Atturnies, and
The .
lilt ,s'fitness was allowed to proceed.
ttteei;
.tike
did you arrive at Carlsrhue B
W,.'"te 13th and 14th of September.
4,ax 1;:ne Baron d'Ende then at Carlsrhue ?—I was informed
• ~It'as at Baden, and would return on t
'are set out for Badeu in the hopes offinding hi▪ mbe
-
$s ; cattle back ?—I did, on Sunday.
'•••14,." wure on the road to Baden, did you meet
the Baron
ki.Enii.` 4 carriage which I thought might be that of
. Barod
that ;ter and after it had passed me, I asked, and was informed
wh Was him.
14u.'•.4 did You do then I—l overtook him, and gave him the
letter.
!,"u speak to him ?—Yes.
"▪
eitl4-, did you say I—l said, I believe I have the honour of
tkee lui!g in the Baron d'Ende, and he replied, yes; I then
bid ZII the letter.
bid ;i'e open the letter ?—Yes
tat o He read it ?—Yes ; and he. then invited me into his car.
To. and drove the back to Carlsrhue.
lluti "at house did he drive at Carlsrhue?—To his own
po
Pr,; 'ad some conversation with him on the road I—Yes.
hti 74' the conversation you had have you any doubt that
ktile,jl speaking with the Barou d'Ende ?—Not the slightest.
• C"011g did bhe remain at Carlsrulie?—iie infortn!!d
~'e gle's would detain him till fuesday—that his minutes
, '.Utk„-• Baden, arid that, without consulting them, he could
bidgtvrer
any questions accutately.
hto remain at Carlsruhe I—l went to d'Armstadt, and
on Tuesday.
'oak I," did you next see the Baron I—On Wednesday; he
trerli-rie in his carriage to Baden, where we arrived in tho
tuat,„4 You arrived at Baden, what dill you do there ?--He
liint 144'1,14s journal or diary, and 1 took down Isis deposi-
Yeskwilling
'it sliew.you any letters he received from her Majesty ?
duo 4.4everal that he had received from her Majesty direct-
irt 4th Baron d'Ende.
did you remain at Baden that time ?—I left it at
12v14,,.;°eK on 'Thursday evening.
01.410 is left, had the Baron
.said any thing about com-
ii. ttu England I—Yes ;he said, that
. as
. the information
'eari,i,,° give was in his official capacity, his friends thought
1)• idi,". not o ,*tl ut the consent of the Grand Dke.
Rite! viril t the Grand Duke for the purpose of
wlykii-tigiinfortii7a4tio( as too his coming to England ?—Yes; and
'NI 'le had bad news,'for that he was nut permitted to go,
ltdl he h
ti c -ad asked permission, to do.
u_iera eon afterwards go to his house ?—Yes ; and he said
.
collie my heart beats, from my agitation at not being
~,id..e g 0.,,
to (,9n make any other application afterwardsl?.---es;l
4„.,_tatalittn. a letter, of which I have a copy here;
t intended
out
0%41'4 hitti, and went to his house tor Oa purp ,• b
1,,4„1 he might possibly he from home, I bad s letter
hwa 'le". He was out, and I left the letter.
Liu td letter addressed to the Baron ?—Yes.
bl',Utto% receive an answer ?—Yes; a verbal answer by a
Allts Who was then in the Life Guards of the Grand
tkr,‘Vlll:tti remember his name ?—Yes ; Lieut. Schweitzer.
tt,/ dep It?Ls that answer ?—That the Baron could not make
ttilt lit :titian without the consent of the Grand Duke, and
_ttr. de liked sending a written answer to her Majesty's
landlai),it'a to vERPOOL.-.-After you had prevailed upon the
et,,Z. did ttlit con Grand Duke for permission to come to ng-
ti:e ,),:uu sider it vs ry important that the Baron should
;:ihe (11;1'6 country ?
I Thi lop was objected to by several Noble Peers, and
llititt'l3l,"„looL coniented to withdraw it.
!‘s th.,:uGHAM-,-In the Courts below; it would be re-
'V° tilt"' an affidavit of the principal should he produced
ts 4; Vit4Materiality of a witness, and I am ready to produce:
in„,,d imself, who will swear that the Baron d k.nde
k, iniportalit witness.
Otfeet'HIANCELLOR.—Did Baron d'Ende aear to on
d Atealth ?—Yes. pp y
to lqr. ,111. pose Isis age is ?—About forty.
the r,4°UGIUM-" I attribute not any blame
4, NA-
ilre °vernment for the difficulties with which
%di,s surrounded ; it is the nature of the pro-
°lstrigs against my Illustrious Client which
e anti • •
k, r,ls
(1 impossible to proceed one step fur-
c4,,,rou equal. justice to both parties. The
'ue, if not. kept away,• is at least not
ed
trial to come, and his testimony is most
may t° my cause. He is, indeed, told that.
I"•ask this is doubtful
1.5 r4se for his cone; but,
41‘ it dreadful indeed to the ears of a courtier;
tso °4ld not only mean leave to go, but would
tUn, PIY that he had permission never to re-
th the Baron Berghstedt to Ba-
g d'Eride c
(I I-
Wo you wish to go you may go ;' but
°Ub CO
t • "ge, this word of foul omen was no
ow, still operating upon the mind of d'Ende.
to
Lords,
h 5 the 1 yield the most implicit cre-
ow 44 assertion of Baron d'Ende, that he
hi trot,"l. I have no doubt that, to use his
tttNtiv,4 t's, his heart did really palpitate, at the
4hehtiotit°,l the dismal term conge,w hid' had been
Irt4stti, fru, and which probably produced a
to 'ed. it'tn which he may not yet have reco-
the:4 thalt.,was owing
to the Hanoverian Govern
trew, "le Von Grimms, and all the rest of
•111 t
the Procured the attendance of Kresse,
444 4 I), Procured
d'Ende was not brought forward.
kirti°Ple were labouring in their vocation,
tor°ll yoursti.ers were labouring in theirs. I call
liaNdep tktiordships seriously and solemnly to
tZt or tueSe circumstances, which are of no
Yet tourialling nature. Witnesses r you pe
4 be compelled to attend on the part

of the prosecution, but not in behalf of my Il-
lustrious Client. I attach no blame, as I before
said, to any particular person or persons; but
does it not now appear that this case cannot con-
tinue with justice to the Queen; and if the King
be the other party in this cause, I am sure that
that august Monarch would be the last man in
the world who would wish it to continue with-
out the fair and full administration of justice to
his Consort."
Lord HOLLAND requested that the minutes
of Barbara Kresse's evidence might be referred
to at pages 192 and 202 ; some part of her evi-
dence was accordingly read to the House, respect-
ing what had been stated by Kresse, concerning
the compensation she was to receive.
Lord LIVERPOOL now moved, that the corre-
spondence between Baron Bergstedt and Baron
d'Ende should be read.
In consequence of this motion a letter was read
to the House, but in so low a tone of voice, that
we cannot attempt to give any thing approaching
to a verbatim report of it. The substance of it,
however, was, that although private individuals
might have been prevailed upon by the British
Government to come to this country, for the
purpose of giving their evidence in this cause, that
no individual having any connection whatever
with the Government there, would have been
permitted to come to England for such a purpose.
Mr. BROUGHAM felt it absolutely impossible,
under such overwhelming and still accumulating
difficulties, to proceed further in the examination
of witnesses.
The LORD CHANCELLOR.—The Counsel for
the Queen cannot be called upon to sum up the
evidence they have adduced, until the Counsel
for the prosecution have brought forward their
witnesses to answer*that evidence.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated that it was
his intention to produce evidence in answer to
the depositions which had been made on the other
side, endeavouring to establish the Milan con-
spiracy. Mr. Brougham had said that he did
not mean to assert there was such a conspiracy,
but their Lordships would recollect that at a
most critical period of her Majesty's defence,
witnesses had been called upon to prove the
existence of that conspiracy. " I immediately
(continued the Attorney-General) felt Um), duty
to apprize Colonel Brown, and to require his at-
tendance ; the distance, however, has rendered it
impossible to produce him at your Lordships'
Bar. Your Lordships, I am confident, would
not have forgiven me, if, before the production
of this very material witness, I had called other
witnesses of less importance. As Col. Brown's
name has been mentioned, as inquiry relating to
his conduct has been permitted, it would ob-
viously be the greatest injustice not to allow us
to answer those statements respecting the trans-
actions in which Colonel Brown's name has been
implicated. As, however, Colonel Brown is hot
here, I humbly entreat your Lordships to allow
me some time to repel the insinuations against,
and to explain the conduct of Colonel Brown
and the Milan Commission. A short time being
granted for this purpose, which I feel it my duty
to request from the justice of your Lordships,
we should be enabled to close the case."

Mr. BROUGIIAM (with much vehemence)—
" And now, my Lords, I ask your Lordships
whether this is not a Court of Justice ?"—(Cries
of " Order, order!" from the Peers.)
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, before Mr.
Brougham replies to the observations 'of my
Learned Friend the Attorney-General, I must
state that we feel it necessary to call Colonel
Brown to repel the charges which have been
made against him. If Mr. Brougham had stated
specifically in his address to your Lordships the
facts which he afterwards attempted to prove in
evidence, we should have been prepared ; we
should have had Colonel Brown here to answer

that evidence ; as it is, we are taken by surprise,
and we claim, not from your Lordships' indul-
gencO, but from your Lordships' justice, a suffi-
cient time to enable us to procure the attendance
of Colonel Brown.

Mr. BROUGnAm.—Nothing, my Lords, has
fallen from my Learned Friends on the other
side which alters my opinion. I again ask, is
not this House now to be considered a Court of
Justice ? Whenever it suits the purpose of the
Counsel for the prosecution—when they gain any
advantage by binding me round with the nine-
fold technicalities of the Courts below—when
by any possibility the interests of my client
can suffer by such restriaions, then I am told that
we must be guided by the form of judicial proceed-
ings. But when my Learned Friends think that by
flying in the face of all the principles which guide
the Courts below their case can be benefited,
then, and then only, we hear that your Lord-
ships, as a House of Parliament, have more ex-
tensive power, and that you are not to be guided
by the rules of inferior Courts. I ask your
Lordships whether this is not an unheard-of, a
monstrous proposition ? The Queen is on her
defence; and for the purpose of clearing the cha-
racter of Colonel Brown, who forms no principal
party in this case, a delay is asked. The Queen
is to be forgotten—no, not forgotten—she is to
be positively injured to save this Lieutenant-
Colonel Brown of I know not what hazards.
For what purpose, my Lords—why is this mon-
strous application made to your Lordships ; be-
cause, forsooth, the character of one of the fa-
vourite agents of the prosecution has come into
jeopardy. Let us, my Lords, first do justice to
the Queen ; the case of Colonel Brown may, with
much propriety, wait to be disposed of at a sub-
sequent period. The Counsel for the prosecu-
tion assert that they have been taken by surprise ;
if this really were the case, they have no right
to delay, in order that they may have an oppor-
tunity of mending their case. If, however, I am
called upon to argue this part of their statement,
I distinctly answer, that it is not true they have
been taken by surprise. If, in my address to
your Lordships, I made no specific charge of
conspiracy against any particular individual,
still by the remarks I offered upost the manner
in which a conspiracy had been carried on, I
gave a general notice of that which I after-

wards proved. But can any man believe,
who heard the defence for the Queen, that the
Counsel for the prosecution imagined that
they could steer through the whole of this
case, without any investigation being entered
into respecting the conduct of Colonel Brown ?
My Lords, the Counsel for the Prosecution have
not been taken by surprise, even as to the indi-
vidual witness they mention. The very moment
that the name of one of the witnesses, Ormati,
was mentioned, they took from their ample re-
positories a brief, by which they were enabled
to cross-examine this witness. And to rebut his
evidence they sent to Milan. They had the
boldness to say Colonel Brown had not due no-
tice of the charges against him, and that he was
not furnished with the means of defence. He
called upon the House not to grant the applica-
tion. Would they protract the proceeding
longer while her Majesty's mind was in a state
of anxiety and irritation which he never before
saw in human form—irritation, to be considered
most natural, when their Lordships called to re-
collection the unparalleled sacrifices of its Illus-
trious Victim ? Would the Lords continue the
state of torment In which her Majesty was
placed ? If they did, they would depart from
all the rules of the Courts below—rules they
themselves had laid down. When they refused
the applications made by her Majesty's Counsel,
their Lordships adhered to the rules of the
Courts below, but were they to grant the delay
then required, their Lordships would plunge
into a depth out of all regularity. They would
sanction a proceeding unknown to the laws of
the country. Would they do all this after hav-
ing kept the Illustrious Person under such tor-
ture and irritation, that they might enable the
other side to obtain evidence to amend a cause
already rotten ? Their Lordships might reject
the application, and terminate the whole scene
of oppressien,—the anomaly composed of guilty
details, destructive to morals and public justice.
Mr. DENMtN said, he should desert his duty
if be did not strongly oppose this proceeding,
unexampled he might say, and not only fatal to
the cause of his Illustrious Client, but unknown
to the Courts of Justice. The application was
made on the ground that Colonel Brown was not
in England, but Milan ; that was the cause of
complaint made by the Queen's Counsel. Why
was Colonel Brown absent ? He ought to have
been in England. The Milan Commission had
been the means of bringing witnesses to the Bar
of that House, and why were the Commissioners
not present to explain their conduct ? The House
and the country were in ignorance of the process
by which her Majesty had been brought to trial,
unless it was founded on the evidence procured
by. the Milan Commission and the agency of the
Hanoverian Government. It was no longer
doubtful that the evidence had been obtained
from those sources ; and was it not monstrous
that Counsel for the Queen should have been so
long in the dark contending against the acts of
those Powers ? The Commissioners were not
present to explain the means by which the evi-
dence had been collected. Their attendance had
been considered unnecessary; and when charges
of improper conduct were made, the whole pro.
ceed.ing was to be delayed, merely to enable
the supporters of the Bill to get up a new case.
They ought to blush when the name of justice
was mentioned. A person brought to trial in the
Courts of Justice well knew that the depositions
were taken by a responsible Magistrate, and
that the same were fairly submitted to a Grand
Jury. On that evidence the accused was tried ;
but who ever heard of a criminal proceeding
being delayed after the defence had been made,
to enable the prosecutor to bring up fresh wit-
nesses ? So far from Colonel Brown being ab-
sent, he ought to have been in the list of wit-
nesses in support of the Bill. It seemed that
Colonel Brown was to he brought forward in
vindication of his character. The characters of
all persons supporting the Bill were treated with
tenderness, but the feelings of the Queen of
England were totally disregarded. He had,
however, said nothing about Colonel Brown's
character, though it might be necessary in the
defence to charge the Commissioners one after
the other with gross misconduct. Before he
could make those charges, he had to encounter
numberless panegyrics on all the Commissioners.
The delay was asked for with no more regard to
the feelings of her Majesty, than if she was the
inanimate object of some rash experiment. It
was but just that Colonel Brown should be
heard, but why was he not ready to be heard ?
He did not condemn him unheard, but surely
the House of Lords would not deprive the
Queen of the fair opportunity 'of bringing her
defence to a close, merely because the cha
racter of an individual was to be vindicated

If the proceeding was to be delayed to an
indefinite period, which it would be if de-
layed at all, the louse would inflict the se-
verest punishment on her Majesty. What pre-
tence was there for delay? The Bill was a Divorce
Bill, and as the Divorce part of it had been given
up, perhaps the Lords, in their utmost severity,
would be satisfied with giving an opinion on this
Illustrious Lady's conduct. Yet whatever might
be the result, their Lordships would not travel
out of the preamble of the Bill, but come to a
conclusion upon the evidence before them. If
delay was granted, it must be reciprocal, and
this momentous process, too much tot any pro-
fessional man to grapple with, would never be
brought to an end. The Queen's defence had
arrived, and her Counsel thought it their duty to
bring it to a close. Were they not to be per-
mitted to do so ? Why was not the Attorney-
General prepared with Colonel Brown as a wit-
ness? The Milan Commission had been esta-
blished three years, and it was easonable to
suppose, from the complaints against their acts
made in examination of almost every witness,
that those Commissioners would have been ready
to defend themselves. If they were not ready,
was the Queen to suffer all the anguish of de-
lay ? He might repeat the question of his
Learned Friend, Mr. Brougham, and ask whe-
ther that tribunal was a Court of Justice or not ? If ,

it was, would any man say, it could make the,
character of an individual the ground for delay-
ing the defence of the accused ? In calling upon
the Lords not to grant the application, the
Queen's Counsel did not ask indulgence, but
right. The Learned Counsel then contended,
that her Majesty had been taken by surprise, and
that their Lordships were requested to grant de-
lay on the alleged necessity of producing wit-
nesses, which Mr. Denman named fictitious wit-
nesses. Having got over the prejudice occasion-
ed by the delay which occurred when the At-
torney-General closed his case, they were to be
again baffled, for the vindication of the character
of a person who ought to have been present
among the witnesses. Upon every principle of
justice the application could not be granted.
The ATTORNEY-GENEnar, addressed their Lord-
ships in reply with great animation. It was, he
believed, the twentieth time he was told by her
Majesty's Counsel that the Queen had met with
no indulgence from the House. The fact was, and
the House knew it, that she had met with more
indulgence than had ever been granted to any
other individual whatever. She had received no
list of witnesses, but her Majesty's Counsel had.
been allowed to hear all the witnesses examined.
at the bar, and then they had the option to post-
pone her defence. No other accused person
had ever had the same advantage. His Learned
Friends had not been ingenuous to •him. They
never expressed, in the early stage of the de-
fence, their intention to proceed upon the points
of subornation of witnesses, and conspiracy. It
was not until they had called those important
witnesses, Lieutenant Flinn and Lieutenant
Hownam, that they took another course, and.
went into a collateral charge of a conspiracy,
which only existed in the minds of his Learned
Friends. On a former occasion he objected to the
mode of examination pursued by the Queen's
Counsel, and it would have been candid in his
Learned Friends to have said—We have a right
to follow the course which leads to a charge of
conspiracy, and we mean to pursue that charge.
They did not do that. They did not tell him to
prepare for that line of defence, and was it then
too much to say the Counsel for the Bill should-
have an opportunity of bringing witnesses to the
Bar to defend the character of Colonel Brown ?
His Learned Friend (Mr. Denman) had said, he
would prove, one by one, that the Milan Com-
mission had been guilty of gross misconduct.
Mr. DENMAN.—I said no such thing. I said I was
at libertyto do so, if my case rendered it necessary.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then asked if he was
to understand his Learned Friend reserved the
right of entering into a new arse? No-man hav-
ing heard the evidence up to Pomarti, would.
doubt it was the intention of his Learned Friends
to impeach the character of Colonel Brown.
He was only asking for time to call Colonel
Brown, and then his very Learned Friend.
said he had been instructed to make the ap-
plication. "I do say here, said the Attorney-
General, I make it on my own view of the neces-
sity of such an application. I do it after con.
sultation with those who are able to give ad..
vice." His Learned Friend appeared to doubt
his word when he was charged with making an
application on the ground of bringing fictitious
witnesses from Lugano. Those 'witnesses had
been seen at Lugano by Colonel Julie. He could
not suffer such an attack without repelling it ; no
man could expect to be received in society who
could endeavour to impose on their Lordships by
bringing forward a statement of fictitious names.
In justice to the case, he had a right to call Co-
lonel Brown to the bar to contradict the testi-
mony of Pomarti and Majoni. Ile had no other
motive than a desire to do justice to the task im-
posed upon him by their Lordships, and nothing
should deter him from doing his duty.
The LORD'CHANCELLOR.---They were come
now to the most important part of the case,
and if no regular application had been made
for delay, the Counsel for the prosecution had
a right to call witnesses to disprove the parti-
cular facts whieh had been deposed against them.
The Learned Counsel had done their duty in
asking for the delay, and their Lordships would
remernbQr that they had allowed the Counsel for
the Queen to enter into the collateral evidence
of a conspiracy upon the express understanding
that Colonel Brown might be called afterwards.
The Counsel for the Queen had also done their
duty in opposing the application for delay, and
it would be for their Lordships to decide upon
this application. There were two grounds for it,
the character of Colonel Brown, and the weight
which his evidence might have in bearing updn
this case.
.In the ordinary Courts of Justice the
proceedings must be carried on from day to day ;
but that rule had been departed from, and
it was customary for Parliament to adjourn
from time to time. For own his part, he was
anxious to have a short delay himself, in order to
go home and look through the whole of the evi-
dence this evening, that he might form an opi-
nion as to whether the delay required by the
Counsel ought to be granted. It wanted only
forty minutes to four o'clock, and, therefore
the delay was not important. Any person who
suffered reason to prevail in his head and heart
would say, unless there is a necessity for this delay
it should not be permitted. lie should take on
himself the task of looking closely to the evi-
dence, with a view to form his opinion whether
it was consistent with justice that their Lord-
ships should grant this delay. The Noble and
Learned LoM concluded by proposing that the
consideration and determination of the question
be deferred till to-morrow morning, to afford him
an opportunity of delivering his opinion.

Earl GREY concurred with the Lord Chancel-
lor, and said it was highly important, when they
took this case into consideration, to say whether
the delay, if granted to Counsel, should be
granted now, or after the Attorney-General had.
called his other witnesses ; fcoarnrreiiefwd
witnesses,2lo eneil
uai
lowed the delay now, he might not only call
d
at
Colonel Brown, but have time to reconsider the
case,Th,
Adjournment
upn:eint
ti,traus up by
moved, callinga n
after three.—Adjourned tilt to-morrow at ten o'clock.

71.‘ ...... _
__
~,