Star.
London, England, 1805-06-07 00:00:00

Jury Were prefent at the time. It was at the houfe
of Mr. Reid, an innkeeper. They met in a parlour of
the inn. He did not know who drew up the petition.
Mt. ROMILLY fubmitted that the Connie) for the
Learned Judge had no right to prefs this courfe of
enquiry.
Mr. ADAM contended, that as the Jury, by pre•
ferring a joint complaint again(' the learned Judge,
were united as plaintiffs in the fame cattle, whatever
any of them had done or laid, was capable of being
proved, and was equally applicable to all.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH laid, there could be
no quedion with regard to the competency of the
evidence. In all profecutions carried un in criminal
courts, it was the ordinary and costa:int courfe to et-
amine into the motives by wl.ich the profecotots
were a6tuated. If it appeared that they held plicate
affemblies, and confulted fecretly together, it was a
molt pregnant and important fad in the c"nliderot ion
of the charge : it indicated the motives the profecn•
tors had in view.; it (hewed that the profecution, in-
ftead of being founded in a funk. of private injury
and a regard to public krilice, proceded from ma-
lice, ill will, or time other impure motive. Not
only the affert.bly or tuee•Lig of the profecutors was
an aft material to proved, but the declarations of
any of them accompanytrg fuch at were important.
The objedion to the evidence, thetefore, would not
bear an argument. The v:itnefs proceeded to date,
that he did not know who drew up the petition, or
who gave inftruZlions for it. They employed an at-
torney, who fumetimes lived in Dublin, and tome-
times in Fermanagh. This attorney was the father
of one of the Jurors. The witnefs was afked whether
he had given the fame kind of evidence before the
Committee of the Houfe of Lords ?

Lord HAWKESMURY thought it irregular to
refer to the evidence given beforc the Committee.
The Duke of CLA:%.ENCE intimated, that as the
quellion had been objeliekt to by a Noble Lord, it
would be proper for the Learned Counfel to with-
draw it.

Mr. ADAM contended, th tt he had a right to afk
the queftion, in order to compare the evidence given
by the witnefs now, with that which had been given
before. It was a courfe of examination which went
to the credit of the witnefs's teftimony. He there•
fore thought, with fubmillion, that their Lorcithips
would allow him to. proceed.
Mr. Not-AN fupported his arguments.
Mr. Rom ILL? was heard on the other fide.
The LORD CHANCELLOR laid, their Lord.
(hips were called upon by the Counfel for the Learn-
ed Judge to direa that to be done, which they had
laid (Mould not be done. Their Lordlhips had re-
filled to communicate the evidence taken before the
Committee, and yet they were defired to Puffer the
Counfel to afk quellions which would oblige the wit-
nefs to repeat his evidence over a„oain,
Lord MINTO oblerved, that he was not aware
their LordOrips had ever come to any loch decition
He did not know they had ever palled any vote upon
the fubjea. He certainly recolleaed a hoble Lord's
moving a queftion of the kind, but their Lordfhips
adjourned without agreeing to it. It was brought on
again, but no refolution was adopted. He was of
opinion that it was a queftion which required further
deliberation—it was important to fubitantial
that it fhould be reconfidered—not to do fo
he conceived, be a fact ifice of jullice to forms. The
only ground of argument dated for refuting to publith
the evidence before the Committee was, that it was
a Secret Committee. Why was it called a Secret
Committee ? Sure he was, it did not bear that clia-
raaer—nor was there; in its proceedings, any cit-
cumftance from which ; could, with propriety, have
been fo denominated. It was fo far fecret, that out
of regard to the learned Judge, it was deemed pro.
per not to publith the evidence before their Lordibips
had determined upon the enquiry at their bar—but
the motive for fecrecy ceafed, the moment their Lord-
lhips were of opinion there ought to be a public in•
veltigation. As it was a proceeding conneaed with
the adminiftration of public jullice, the charaaer of
publicity naturally attached to it. He hoped, there.
fore, that Houfe would deliberate on the propriety
cf publithing the proceedings of the Committee. It
was obvious that if it was not publifbed, the Learned
Judge would have to defend himfelf at a very great
difadvantage ; while, on the other hand, every ad-
vantage would be afforded to the Petitioners—while
the evidence was kept fccret, it was difficult even to
know who the Petitioners were, or whether it was
the caufe of the Petitioners theinfelves or of other
parties. He alluded particularly to a Noble Marquis
who was an accufer upon this r ccation. Their Lord-
lhips could not but be fentible that the accufers and
the accufed did not nand on equal grounds, bccaufe
the former Were acquainted wilh the whole of the evi-
dence given before the Committee, while the latter
was entirely ignorant of it. Their Lerdlhips too
were placed in an embarrafling and delicate filtration,
from which nothiiig but the publication of the evi-
dence could relieve them ; they had the evidence, but
it &mild be recolleaed that it was given ex pane;
it was the evidence of the accufers, who confequent-
ly had never been crols-exathined. Their Lordthips
came to the inveftigation with that impreftion which
three weeks evidence, not crofs-examined, was calcu-
lated to produce. The ohjeaion in this cafe was not
of the fame force as in ordinary cafes, for though
the evidence given before a Gland Jury was ex parie,
they did not communicate it to the Petit Jury who
tried: their Lordthips, as Grand Jury, firlt heard
the ex parte evidence, and then, with that previous '
impreffion, proededed to try the accufed. This, he
conceived wrong, and therefore he hoped their Lord-
(hips would take the inkjet into their ferious. con-
fideration.

Lord SIDMOUTH Paid, the Houfe was at liberty
to deliberate again on the fubjea of the Noble Lord's
fpeech, as no formal decifion had taken place. He
had underflood that a general admiffion had been
made, as to the difficulty of publithing the evidence,
not arifing merely on the point of form, but other
°Mules which Hood in the way. He was however
of opinion, that an adherence to formi would ulti-
mately be attended with the mail fubl}antial jullice.
The evidence before the Committee had been taken,
in order to enable their Lordihips to judge of the
propriety of purfuing the enquiry. It was now pro.
poled to ufe that evidence for a different purpore.
As to the ciretunfiance.of the Learned Judge being
ignorant•of falls known to the Petiticiners, it was an
inconvenience to which every perfon ;,,:culed was
cubjeft- 'He was of opinion that there Ira* no: fuifi

cient pc:m:3 tc, indace :lei: JiLips to puWilL the
evidence.

Lord CAR LISLE are Eyee, that the evidence on
the enquiry btforc the Committee ought to be as
public as the Sua at noon day. Why were Ilion-
hand writers employed to take down the evidence, if
it was af.erwards to be kept a profound fecret. He
sea, of Apiniuri that their Lordfhips, ih, juftice to the
Learned and refpedabie Magiflrate at the bar, ought
to allow him the benefit of his Counfel having the
whole of the evidence before them.
The Earl of BUCKING fIA NI.S II I RE confidered
the publication of evidence, fo entirely rxpaia as that
taken before the Committee, to be extremely im-
proper
Earl SPENCER urged the meafure of furnifhing
the Learned Judge at the Bar with a Copy of the
Eridence taken before the former Committee. He
aliO thought, that the prefent evidence fhuuld be
printed for the ufe of the Houle.
Lord HAWKESBURY had no objection to the
evidence now going on being made public. It was
not like that before the former Committee, merely
an examination in chief. The witneffes at the Bar
were fubjea to a crufv-examination, and therefore
their evidence wnuld go to the world with all the co-
louring the parties on either tide could give to it.
The LORD CHANCELLOR (fated that it was
abfolutely necefrary their Lordfhips thould come to
fome decifion on the fubje& under confederations but
it was his opinion, that in the mean time the queßion'
propofed by the Conniel lbould not be put. If the
Learned Counfel were permitted to put fuch queßions
it was evident that, with his saftive mind, he would
eafily draw from the witnefles every thing they had
Rated in the former Committee. In order to ena.
ble their Lordfhips to come to a decifion on the main
queßion, it was neceffary that fome Noble Lord should
make a motion on the fubjeet, and he felt it very dif-
ficult to form an opinion as to what the purport of
that motion fhould be. It had been propofed on a
former occalion to revive the Committee, and whe-
ther that was the mode which ought now to be taken,
he did not pretend to decide. He reminded their
Lordfhips, however, that in coming to a decifion on
this cafe, they wr.uld eftabliflt a precedent which
would apply to all cafes generally. Every word of
t!:e evidence taken before the Committee might have
redounded to titc honour and credit of Mr. Plaice
Fix ; b :t in making this fuppofition, their Lordfhips
wrt e aware that the rule of furnifhing evidence might
be applied to cafes of a very different nature.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH agreed with the No-
ble and Leal ned Lord, that the queßion thould not
now be put ; hut he was of opinion, that, unlefs the
terms of the Houle precluded fuch quellions the ge-
neral law of evidence arithorifed the Counfel to put
them. He thought that the Committee had already
come to a decifion on the queftion of furnifhing a
copy of the evidence ; bur, as that was nee the cafe,
he hoped they v?c,uld determine it without further
dtlay.

Lord MINTO obferved, that the propriety of fur-
nilhing a copy of the evidence before the former Com-
mittee, and the right of the Conrail to put fuch quef-
lions as that now under confidetation, formed, in his
opinion, two leparate points of dirculEon.
The Duke of CLARENCE moved, that the
Chairman do leave the Chair ; this, after foine fur-
ther converfation between Tome of the above men-
tioned Peers, was ordered; and, after the Houle was
refunied, the converfation oq ;.he fame fubjea, but
rather in an irregular way, was continued, and prin-
cipally turned upon the form in which the intended
motion ihnitld be couched.

The effett of the motion, as originally propofe4
on a former evening, was, that the out-doors Com-
mitt.-e be tevived, for the purpofe of reporting to'
the Houle the evidence which had been given before
the laid Committee, in order that the fame may be,
communicated to Mr. Janice Fox, &c.
Load A UCKLAND. and other Peers, fuggefled
the propjet), of dividing this Motion; fo as that,
when the proceedings required should be laid upon
the table, the quettion of the communication would
remain to he conlidered by the Houfe ; this, they
conceived, would obviate the difficulty in point of
fot m.

The LORD CHANCELLOR feemed Rill to re-
tain hi, objeflions on the fcore of form, principally
with relped to the mode of communication ; he alto
had his doubts as to the joltice of the proceedings.
L,rd HAWKESBURY, in the courfe of his ob-
it' vations on the fubjeet, deprecated every thing that
tended to delay : the two queßions tbould therefore
be decided, the one thortly after the other, though un-
avnicl..ble difficulties mull arife in the cafe, as the
knowledge ofiss hat might be the intention of theHoufe
as to the fecond quellion, that of communicating the
evidence, would certainly influence his determination
as to the fit

The Marquis of A BERCORN approved of part
of what fell from his Noble Friend, the Secretary of
State ; though he declined giving a pofitive opi-
nicn upon the fubjed, farther than that if the pro-1
ceiciii,i),s were" laid ou the table, they ought to be
printed.
Lord EI.LENBOROUGH was of opinion, that'
by the adoption of a middle courfe, the differences
which teemed to prevail among their Lorclihips may
be reconciled. Suppofe a copy of the proceedings
were laid upon the table' flaring it to be for the ufe
of the Houle, and which might be referred to as oc-
cation may require.
The Duke of CLARENCE expreffed his approba-
tion of the idea of the Noble and Learned Lord.
After fome farther difctiffion as to the mode of
proceeding,
Lord MINTO renewed his notice of his intention
zo bring the fubjed regularly before the Houfe to-
morrow, and moved, that the Lords be fummoned
on the occafion.—Ordered.
Lord WALSINGHAN moved, that the Commit-
tee on the cafe of Mr. Juflice Fos do fit again to-
morrow, which being oritertd accordingly, the Houfe
at hall pall eight o'clock adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Sir L. Pi ito:vs tot& the oaths tqa hie feat as Repreelltatille of
the Kirnet County in Ireland.
Sir J. ANDEItsON prefented a Petition from the Directors of
the V&A Iri.r.a Docks, w Mai was alfo ordercd to be ISid on the
tatle.

The Poor Lid was recomnsitted, sod ordered to be reported to-
nsa7rutv.
_ _

The Repert of the Expiring haws Committee was brought up.
The Refonetons were agreed to,,aut Bills ataiefeti eXtuformaLlY
to toe fpirit a the