The Sun.
London, England, 1820-10-19 00:00:00

PARLIAMENT,

MOUSE .OF LORDS-YESTERDAY.

TH QUEtisPS DEFENCE.

-~.~-

'[Continuittion of resterdag's Proceedings.]
The, Loan- CHIEF. JUSTICE of the Court of
King's., Bench concluded as follows :--c' Suppos-
ing that, according to the, rule of Jaw, evidence
of a conspiracy., _by suborned witnesses, to sup-
port any'proseCution,'on,ght not to be admitted,
except such as applies to the prosecutor or the
age;,..s einPloy ed by hinr—whether general-evi-
dence of such Conspiracy will hot, neverthekss,
in the first instance, be received,as a preliminary
step to-connect the" prosecutor hirnSelf,Jor ally
. agent 'employ.ed, by hip), With 'the' Conspiracy
and whether, by the same-yule,- evidence should
not received from the defendant, he seeking
to e•stablish in. proof- the, existence of a couipi-
racy to suborn eci;lenc azainst The.
Judges understOod this to relate, in the •first'part,
to the, admissibility otr„geueral eV,idetice, impli-
cating a prosecutor or his_-agent in a charge of
,entered into a conspiracy to suborn evi-
dette.; and, in'the whether it was open
to a detendant to offt3r evidence for a sithilar pur-
pose. .-Vhderstantling. the 'question as• thuS 'di-
vithd, and conceiving it to allude, in the first
instance, to. the subjeCt of guilty participation,
he and_ his Learned Brothers agreed that it was
often necessay t rb-adinit such general evidence.
But at the same time it was important to observe,
that. the general iatnre of the case was, in 'ordi-
nary practice, opened to the Court, and the con-
nection and rs-latiOris of itsdifferent parts in some
degree explained. It might :-..ecothe the duty of
a Judge to stop such general- evidence, if he
thought it unimpoytant or takina 'an -irregular
tendency. IVith regard to the 2dr branch of the
3d titiestion, they were of opinion that, evidence
as to .sthornation was admissible, whenever it
affected any person so as to lay him open'-td pro-
secution."
The-ATTORNEY-GENERAL, from a wish 'to al-
low all
.possible latitude to the A.ccused, gave
the'point in dispnte, on an'understanding thathe
shoOld at liberty to bring new -witnesses 'to
rebut any eVidenCe which might now be, produc-
ed.=--'ll4 Efarl'of LIVERPOOL also expressed him-
self'desirous that the fulle'st inquiry should take
plane into the acts Vimicarti and itigirnti , and
the:Honse--having admitted their agency-as esta-
blished, ordered the examination of Pomarti to,"
proceed:

• -
. ,
BONFIGLI 0 POMARTI examined by Mr. WILDE.
All the previous questions and answers of the
wittieSS"Were repeated until the short-hand wri-
ter 'came to they question to -which objection had
been taken.. 7
Mr. WILDE then put the folloWing'questions'i-L-
Q. You have stated -that TrmiCarti had told
you to bring her' Royal Highness papers ;. did
he offer you- any inducement to -bring those pa-
pers ?—A.?. He told me that he-would- have' given,
me 'an-employment, and that he would-have given
me•more erpoltnnent than my employment.
Did he state the nature of the employment thk
he Would give you,?—ln the Police of Milan.
Did. you :afterwards posSess-yoUrself of anyof
her nighness's paPers3. and fake them to.-
Tinkat-6
•
The tiOLICUOtt-GENERAL objected to'
mode of putting the .question: - • • -
- 'l'he`Lojn Cit.iNCi:m.oa.—A4khim what he did.
Mr.
.WILDE.----Did you do any thing in conse--
quenee.of What. Vimicarti' said the- follow-
ing -day I•hrottglit him some.
Did Vimiearti 'say any
.thina as -.to the time
you should go to his otlice ?7,--.HI told rne,tolci in -
the evening.. ,
Did he mention any time ?--After sunset..
Did: you, upon any other occasion, take any
other-papers, of her -RoYal Highness's to Vinti-7
carti,?—f- did.

For how bong a period were you in the habit
of 'taking the, papeis of
.Cadazzi,
,her R0..1
Highness's Solicitor, to Vimicarti ?
The SoLiciToa-0 ENER L submitted that this
was a leading question.
On how many occasions did you take papers
from Cadaze; and carry them to Vimicarti----1
don't know--z—many times:
jou do so frequently ?--No.
About how many times ?---Seven or eight, 'times
at the utmost.

Did'Vinlicarti.know when you took' those pa-
pers that you' were a clerk in the offic4 of Cadaz.-
•
zi knew certainly. •,
. .
.133,- whose de:,ire or request -did you take
then] ?---I don't knoW the-wan.

Bad you .any consersation ;tli Virnicarti
aboul your taking diem toltl me' to bring
to Mai those. papers I could get.
Did yoU rect,:a., any thing from Vimicarti for
tabirtg those' papers ?—;Money.
How- often'did you receive mane y, from Via&
carti for taking her Royal 7lighne.s7.s papers
Six time.%'

Were yonsatisfied.with the tporte:y that ,you got
from Viinicarti-?-4. was not.—(La)ughter)
Did you eqi.make any complaios to atiy one
that you did not:get,money enough
The ,Sor.icyron-C-4:baniAL- again: 'interposed,
and objected to this manner of shaping the ciues;.
lion. •-' • •
Ask 101 if .he did not•rnake:complaints to 'Co-
lonel'Brown that • Vlinicarti had not given
money emintgli 'for taking her-, Royal Ifighne's
papers, to hire complained once.
What 'did Colonel' Brown „„say, to you upon-
making, these_ ?—R.e told me that he.
_ _

was a friend of the ...kdlocate Vimicartig and that
1 ought not to.doubt that Virnicarti would pay
me what he had, promised.
1)41 'gou, iti 'consequence of. this 'communica-
tion. with Col-Niel Brown, make any application
to Vinticartijor money;—Coyne!. Brown told

me to call agsin;tliq'following day on the Advo-•
cafe Vitnicartb wb,c, .would give me something.
Did you call
Did you receive any more money ?—.l!did.