The Sun.
London, England, 1820-10-14 00:00:00

sence of pny Peer.

The' Earl of CITINARvoN said, that, before the
:House- r;oceeded to call. in the. .Co.onsel,
he
wished t;) ‘vithdraw the notion he had submitted
'Vesterda!:; for the purpose of substituting a dif-
Ti'erent mode of proceeding, to:which he believed
there 'wouid be-ttoobje;ctiOn: He, however, first
..wishcd4or some le.planatiOn 'front a N'obte
oppoSite.. . ,
Ear' of Li vtr: .37 ol could, assure their La rd-
S.!lips-tliat he had..given no particular instructions
au cite Sn4jsreet '..113W' al,ludecd to by the Noble
but Noble Friend,. the.. Secretary fOr
;the- ifoine Department, would doubtless do his
utmost to, prevetrt the.withdrawin, of witnesses
in future.. NYith respect.,to the ,k oreig. n Office,
he had not; the:least. ditlicuity in explaining that
Fail& A' 'passport had ben applied for h a
Gentlutrran. on behalf of aastelli, ,and as it was
`sui;poieed that, the application was in, accordanc!e
the. 14,4,pfficertiof,the the VIISSpOyt
th-e metal way.
.Counsel weft, now called 16, when Mr. rowT.LL
wps ititrolocelt6 the ba;. I n alnt to the first
'qUeL;C:,on put to him, relative' to Rastelli's setting
c,u fer Milan, we understood the witness to say,
that,he bitnwlf left town on. the:Wth, 'and that
R.1.te11.1 left early in the Morningof ti.!e. 15th of
Sfq,Aphilier, but was eXpCted to return in pro-

per :time.:
QuedlioPzeil.bst the Earl of CARNARVON.—DO
yon knoW whether 'tastelli was directed-to take
dlspi,ttches,to Charles Stuart, our Ambassador
a* Faris do not.
Hastelli was sent abroad. 4 at ivh.t time
did you calculate on his arrival at Milan'—in
about seven Or eight days.
What period of time was it understood that
Rastelli was to remain at Milan ?—I sent over
sonic papers _by Rastelli, which required to be
further I,?gali'zed, which were to be made use of
at the opening of this business again, and conse-
quently he was to haVe returned before the 3d of
. .
October.
Was Rastelli to go any where else except to'
Maar. ?—He was to go directly there.
Does Mr. Powell. know Whether there was any
other person sent back to Milan about the same
time know of one person who was sent back
previous-to I,hat period ; but it was not any one
who had.been examined'here.
Was that. person the only one sent back
can recollect only one. • • -
Was that person one'of those who landed at
-Dover-as Witnesses for the. Will eras not.
Glow soon after that period was any one' sent
back, or allowed to 'goback, to Italy am
not a..vw-e that any one was sent.sback alTer
Previously to ItaStefiVOßin;;;; sent abroad, you
stated that one person was sent to Milan ; was
any other person allowed toga back to,Milan ?-1
am not aware of it. .
Am i to understand that, previously to Ras-
teln going back to Italy, no person who had
given.evMenee was sent back, except the one per-
Ign you mentioned to us ?--Yes, to the 1.344 of
my knowledge and belief.
-r-Earl
l'lut of LA.III/EfiDALE took an objection
to this line of examiliatiOn. The witness ought
to be protected from disclosing those circum-
stancc3 in his conduct which affected the interes
of his 'principal. Their Lordships could not con
cider the agent as one of the parties in any case
The Earl of LtvEaeoot. felt no difficulty

saying, that any witness or witnesses who had
ire summoned there, but had nut been examin-
ed at the Bar, might with propriety be sent back.
There were, indeed, some reasons that made it
desirable for them to be seat back ; and he, for
one, wished them to be so sent. Had he been asked,
to the best of his belief, if any such witnesses had
been sent off, he should have supposed that many
of them had, though it turned out that only one
of them had been sent back; but this was merely
a matter of opittion with him, us die measure, of
ceettse, rested in the discretion of tk Law Offi-
cers-of the Crown...
Earl Gave observed, that it had been proved
to their Lordships that one of the agents in this
affair' had sent ofr, most improperly he
thought, a material witness. When an explana-
tion "of the transaction was called for, they were
-informed tliat it *was be muse the families of that
arid- the other witnesses had been alarmed for
their safety here, and that it was necessary to
quiet' their fears ; and therefore it remained
for their Lordships to consider rif the excuse
was a valid one. Hence his Noble Friend had
framed a question in order to know whether some
percon or 'persons had not been sent back besides,
--who coUld have answered the purpose of are.
Teasing- the families of the witnesses in this case,
evitheut Rastetli's going. with them. lie must,
therefore, still couteud that it Ins a proper ques-
tion to be put..
The Earl of. LAUDEI.IDALE., in reply, said, the
question ought, to be put thus—Was there any,
one of the wituesses who had been present at
Dover, that might have been sent back instead of
Rastelli, but who had not -been? If was one of
the most sacred rides of law never to compel an
teeent to go beyond that extent in his communca.
Coes which was consistent with the interest of
those who confided in him.
The Loan CHANCELLOR was decidedly of opi.
nlort. that their Lordships could not be too cat.tiJ:ts in .
putting questions -of this kind ;. for if
they were permitted to be jut upon one side,
-they must clearly be put upon the other side ; it
was impossible to contemplate the consequenees
"of suoh.a practice to either side; and he begged
to add; that there was no principle more sacred
than that 'the agent in all caws should nut dis-
c:lo4e the secrets of his client.
Thearl of ItoasLYN said, that it appeared that