Star.
London, England, 1814-07-06 00:00:00

Noble Lord depended on the dress in which De Be-
renger had arrived at his house. and also on the way
in which the Bank-notes the Noble Lord had given
• Mr.. Buy came to De Berenger's.hands. Now the
Noble Lottl had stated, that it was only within a few
days he was able to account, by his wine-merchant,
for the notes, and indeed he had now offered evidence
which, in his npiniori, the House, in justice to its cha•
ratter, ought to examine.
Mr. BARHAM thought it no wonder, if Lord',
Cochrane should be innocent, that he should look
with jealousy to his right hand and to his left. It
must be remembered, that one in his situation could.
not well be supposed to speak in cold blood. His
(Mr. Barham's) conviction of the Noble Lord's in-
nocence had been gradually gaining strength; for he
appeared to have laboured under a great disadvan-
tage on his trial, in consequence of his conduct hav-
ing been arraigned by a previous tribunal, unknown.
to the law. Besides, he seemed to have been so full
of his innocence, as not to have taken common care
to secure himself upon the trial. In consequence
of those circumstances, and the punishment so exces-
sive which had been heaped on the Noble Lord, he
could not vote for more paul.liment.
Mr. PONSONIW said, he never witnessed so much
good nature, candour, moderation, and tenderness
as had been manifested by the House towards Lord
Cochrane ; but he could not suffer the ill-judging cool
duct of the Noble Lord to prevent him from examin,
ing with a scrupulous eye the facts which he had re-
presented, and giving them all the attention which
they merited. It was impossible for some not to feel.,
offended at the manner in which the Learned Judge,
who tried his Lordship's case, had been mentioned ;
but it was not an act of injustice to question the di-
rection of the Judge to the Jury, and it was a common
occurrence to move for a new trial on the grounds of
mis-direction from a Judge, and he never heard that
any Judge was offended with such an application.—
For his own part he did not carry his respect for le-
gal authorities so far as to suppose that a Judge was
infallible. According to the statement which Lord
Cochrane had read, it appeared that Lord Ellenbo-
rough had represented in his summing to the Jury
that such and such witnesses proved that De Beren-
ger came into Lord Cochrane's house blazoned in the
costume of hiscrime ; now this circumstance had been
repeatedly contradicted in the sepretentation made
to the House, and truly if the Judge actually made
,uch a mistake, it would contribute to mislead the
Jury. With regard to the Rule of the Court of
King's Bench, mpch as he venerated the regula-
tions of a Court of Justice, be was unable to under-
stand how in law and reason and justice this Rule
could stand. (Rear, hear.) Suppose that six per-
sons were convicted, five of whom were guilty and
me innocent, was the Litter to be refused a new trial,
in the ground th it he could not get five men, over
whom he had no controul, to join with him iu his ap-
plication. They were told Iron: the highest authority,
that it was better for ninety-nine guilty persons to es-
cape than for one innocent person to be convicted.—
No such rule as this existed in an Irish Court, and it
had only been lately ititrrdueed in the Courts of West-
minster, and he should be glid to learn on what fetal..
.cation it cond. Lord Cochrane stated another mat-
ter extremely important, and though his speech was
embarrassed and confused i.i other parts, he appeared,
sufficiently den- in that pant; namely, diet he could,
prove that the Bank-notes were paid into the hands,
of De elerenger, without his privity or concurrence,
and i! this representation wai just lie would feel much
reluctance in voting his expulsion. He knew it was a
matter of extreme delicacy to interfere with the deci-
Sion of a Court of Law; this motion was m::,;e on the
sentence itself, and how should the House proceed
If they revised the sentence, they would din
nature of a superior Court ; the House could do no
,trch (Ling, but they were called upon to superadd
more punt:A:mem, and he could not, in the present
state of the cast, vote to-night for expulsion—(/Iw,
Gear.) At liir rate, he hoped the House would at
least prise and leave leisure for reflection, 14 it the,
expulsion took placC to-night, he could, ot. sleep on his
pillow with comPlrt--(1-1ear, hear.)
Lord CASTLEREAGH thought it nicesi.ary, for
the character of Pat liament, to make up its mind as
soon as possible, on thl! principles on which it should
proceed in a case of t!:is kind. If this proceeding
ere not well weighed, Parliament would be opening
a door for others to expect the same chance of clear-
ing themselves. He had always understood, that by
expulsion no addition was made to the ignominy of
the person accused; but that the House could not en-
quire into their guilt or innocence, only that they
were no longer fit persons to hold a place in the Coun-
cil of the nation. He entreated the House no! to de-
legate to a Committee above stairs the power of in-
vestigating the characters of the Courts of Law, and
that too in a Star Chamber, sitting in secrecy. He
trusted the House would see no reason for re-trying',
a cause of this description. It would be better to en
Jute an individual so charged among them, than to'
assume a jurisdiction which it could never exert fur
the general benefit. He therefore conjured the House
no: to think they were inflicting punishment, for that
implied a right of trial.
Mr. l'oNsoliav and Lord CASTLERIAGII tactually'
explained.
Mr. S. WORTLEY would rather vote for the
amendment than for the original motion. He had al-
ways had some doubt of the guilt of the Noble Lord,
and he now had more. For it might have been a con-
trivance of others to throw the blame on him.

Mr. BANKES said, that there were only two
modes in which they could proceed ; and those were
either to reject the motion of the Hon. Gentleman
opposite, or to proceed to the expulsion. It Mem-
bers had strong doubts as to the guilt of the Noble
Lord, it became them to act according to the dictates
of their own consciences, and acquit ham ; but if they
should, they would be acting contrary to the prece-
dents of that Hone ; for there was no instance of a
criminal conviction against a Member, where the ex
pulsion did not follow as a matter of course. It was
not so much as a punishment to the individual, as lot
the sake ut the character of the House, that it was
.nflicted. He saw nothing in this case which should
wake them step out of their ordinary course in such
natters. The louse was utterly incapable, by any
of its known powers, to re-try a cause which had
:been determined by-tbe highest Coon of Jurispru-
fence in the! country ; and would it delegate to a
select Committee powers it did not possfss itself i
Whatever course Members might be pleased ulti-

proposed (stately to tab,
was surprised that the Hon.
A by
tbehAemtrellsdtemdentht.ey would abandon. that '
dents as to be bound by them t
Mr. WHITBREAD
C,enonlytlebuy:
ed with others,
wish them
cema"tooube.ndimosolisnb.
jousrtieicde.io
It
trewcaes
NthoabtiheeLocorudl,
dwhconmbeadtothantcnoncighlut serzohnibertedth jaussatid.ceretvo the
d
acnonwsioduerildnwg
erse
of all that was distinguished in his profession, and
noble in his rank.. He, however, saw great
.Ifficul y
He (Mr. Whitbread)l
eight think the N
or blaming the conduct of the
his mind was, that the'
of
prmobTediLong,rd innocent, without as%
that was the case,
from the ill-judged defence he had made, what. must
Noble. Lord was innocent ;
riß
ena gt the
-hi' ngodTeeh The verdict,
impression on
stated if they
e feelings of the
be the intrinsic value of the faancdts if
fe
had
wseeeremepdrotperlo
beywhirollitnigghttoteorralegby
ttb?e,
whole
rlthe Noble Lord
House against him.
hisdoubtsHe
should
strong—foruldvote he might
against the ex.
pnlsion
have been entrapped by others. He ( Mr.Whitbread)
alluded to the advice the person who had absconded
bad given the Noble Lord not to go down to the
House, and defend himself, on the first mention of
this conspiracy ; because if he did, it would be his
utter ruin. It was possible that this person might have
misled him in more instaoces than one. It it came to
a vote of expulsion he would say—Not Guilty.
Mr. BATHURST noticed the language held by
Lord Cochrane, on the conduct of the Noble Lord,
before whom he bad been convicted, in terms of cen-
. To appoint a Committee would be worse than
useless, and declared it was utterly and wholly im-
possible an enquiry of the nature recommended to
them cciild take place. The statement of the Noble
Lord, which had &Nil delib:.rately prepared, urged
nothing which might not be urged by any person
convicted of a serious offence. Many individual.,
whn.e guilt was proved beyond tLe shadow of
doubt, had gone out of the woad attesting their in-
nocence. The Noble Lord might have a minty:" for
asserting that which was not true. His motive for
making his statement was to hold himself up in the
eyes of his Constituents If au enquiry was made
into the case of Lord Cochrane, one must also be in-
stituted with respect to Mi. Q. Johnstone, tor they
could not take upon themselves in this mu to do
justice to one, without making the same attempt so
favour of the other. The Noble Lord had saki a sys"
tematic plan bad been for sled by his political'oepo.
vents to erect his expulsion and ruin. He might
tave learnt trots his Friend, whose advice bad been
quoted, and isito had told him what he said was
never attended to. that be was not of such impor-
tance in the House as to make any party care for
his ab,ence or his presence. If the Noble Lord had
not called forward those witnesses tiu his trial which
were necessary for his ,defence, he bad no one to
blame but himself. He had since been able to
shew no grounds on which a new trial .ought to
be granted. Toe punishment to which he was sen-
tenced was disgraceful, but not more to than was
necessary to punish the crime of which he had been
convicted. He (Mr. Bathurst) could see no reasi n
for interfering with the decision of the Court, and was
of opinion the Noble Lord ought not to continue a
Member of that House.
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT complained much of
the asperity of the last speaker, and .defended Lurd
Cochrane. If Lord Blenborough, in his charge to
the Jury, had stated that to be proved which was not
supported by evidence, the Wible Lord ( Lord Co-
chrane) had a right to complain of his conduct as he
had done. If this were proved, they had a right io
say he had beep unduly convicted. He vindicated
the conduct of Lord Cochrane in several respects,
and contended his case had been grossly and cruelly
misrepresented by the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
Bathurst). The Noble Lord's defence was not like
that of a person conscious of guilt, but the statement
of a man whose feelings were much irritated, and
who was careless of punishment. The statement, he
thetip,ht, ought to be made public ; but though the
N Lord (Castlereagh) said, our establishments
were not in such a state as that it was possible for
diem to be shaken by any thing of the kind, but in
the same breath he warned the Gentlemen who usu-
ally attended to take down their debates, that on that
subject they must not open their mouths. He (Sir
Francis Burdett) believed, on his honour and con.
science, that his Noble Friend (for so he would still
call him) was as incapable of fraud as any man Who
then heard him. He should think himself the basest
wretch in existence, if he had not made this declara-
tion feeling as he did for the situation of the Noble
Lord (Cochrane) and rememb ring likewise his for,
mer services, which ought at least to have protected
him front one part of the sentence—(Hear, hear !)
That sentence he thought cruel, disgusting, and se-
vere beyond all example. The Noble Lord himself'
was the only person he had met with who was not of-
this opinion. He (Lord Cochrane) when he (Sir F.'
Burdett) visited him in the King's Bench had said, if
guilty, lie whole of the sentence, and more than the
whole had been deserved. All sentences were to him
indifferent, as, losing his character, he had lost
most the power of bearing his existence under such a
load of shame. On this occasion they had made a
new crime. Such tricks had been common before;
but they had never been vissted as this transaction had
been. A French Paper had been published some
years ago in the Strand. The forgery was proved
beyond all doubt but no criminal prosecution was
then thought of. (Hear, hear.). Such an offence
was then only punished as a misdemeanour ; and
in such a case, six months' imprisonment would
have been considered a severe sentence. Loot Ciicli-
rane had been convicted l.n the oath of a liackuey-
coachman, and on that of a post-buy of the name of
Shilling. The latter, it could be proved, had said
"he would swear for which ever side paid him best ;"
and the former was marked as a bad character among
those who were his daily associates. He thought the
evidence of these persons who were to receive £SOQ
on tl.e conviction of the Noble Lord, (tot that wes
the fact), ought not to he credited whets opposed to
the affidavit of the Noble Lord himself. He could
not bell:twit: was possible for Lord Cochrane, who
couldnn 10
had ever
esettioon become
to rem a
a nsan of probity of honour, to change
on a e,u
seclede g objection party to a fraud. He
ng the subject to a Se,
lect ComMittee, and whatever had been done else-
wher.e% hp igified that House would net add injustice
toin justice.
Mr. W. WOINEs'
as an adjournment had taken
• ..

. .

place in .a similar ease on a former occasion, was wil-
ling in the present instance to give the Noble Lovd
an .opportunity of bringing forward any proofs whith'
had n his
He
donwhtosuwldhcieonh sheent to a
in
anyjhonewunmrnimgmheitnntwd,:nsohhtottforofaetmontr.deference
to the
opinions
of
others.
Col. VYSE considered the expulsion of the Noble
Lord to be the necessary consequence of the sentence
given against him in the Court of wing's Beath.-
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL opposed the mo
tion fur a Committee, and defended the proceedings
which bad taken place against the Noble Lova. The
Honourable Baronet had mentioned the business of
L‘Eclair," and asserted, that that of which the No-
ble Lotd bad been convicted had now for the firm
time been made a crime. What I was it now for the
first time made a crime by the law of England far
persons to conspire, to cheat, and to defraud t
denied the truth of this assertion. It bad always bees
a crime, and it was a crime which had long been pi-
nished by pillory. He could see no reason for inter-
fering with the decision t f the Court of King'sßerich,
and must vote for the expulsion of the Noble Lord.
Lord A. HAMILTON could not vote for the ex-
pulsion of the Noble Lord on the rec Ad of the Court
of Wing's Bench alone.
Mr. WILBERFORCE felt it his duty to bow to
the decision of the Judge and Jury by whom the case
had been tried. He wished it to be considered, if
they took upon themselves to interfere with the judi.
cial proceedings in the Court of King's Beath, What
a weapon this power ;night place in future times in
the hand of a corrupt Monster. (Near, haw.) This
argument, be thought, ought to have some
with the Hon. Baronet; and when lie veto=
what he had heard that Honourable Baronet lay
of the House of Commons, he was astonished *at
'he should wish that which bad been decided in a •
Court of Justice on oath, to be referred to a- Com-
mittee up stairs for revision, where in oath could
not be administered. (Hear, liar. hear.)
Mr. WROTIE.SLEY expressed Isimelt f.proura-
ble to an adjournment of the debate.'
Mr. S. WORTLEY rose to mote an adjourn-
ment ; but having spoke before it was not in his power
to do so.
Mr. WRQTTESLEY, who had been about to
move whtn the Honourable Gentleman rose, again
addressed the House, and moved the adjournment or
the debate to Tuesday next.
Lord CASTLEREAGII opposed the adjourn-
ment in a short but animated speech, and call 'upon
the Hoose at once to pronounce their judgment on
the case under consideration.
Mr. W. SMITH spoke in favour of the adjourn.
ment.
na it
dhf
doi
of; as
liweoznireferring The House divided, when the numbers were—for
o sni
donot :Ile
original
gt jhneescolt
motionmt to
vaed thert
the Adjournment, 74; against it, 14'4; Majority,6B.
m t'eheei
t questionmwhoausit rieldinte,
..
House again divided—For the Motion 140—Against
it 44—Majmity fir the Expulsion of Lord Coch-
rane 96.
THE PRINCESS OF VALES.

The SPEAKER communicated to the House the
following Letter, which he had received from the
Princess cf Wales:
The Princess of WALES desires Mr. SPEAK.=
will acquaint the House of Commons, that she has
received from Viscount Cameasion, the Copy of 4
Resolution voted yesterday in a Committee of the
whole House, enabling his Majesty to grant cut of the
Consoli,fated Fund of Great Britain the annual sum
cf Fit ty Thousand Pounds, for her maintenance : and
tl.e Princess of WALLS desires Mr. SPI4ICES will es-
pt..ss to the House of Commons her since.re thanks for
Alm eztraordinary and unsolicited mark of its munifi-
cence.
4, The Princess of WALES at the same time desires
Mr. SPEAKEE will inform the House of her deep n.
Bret, that the Burthens of the P'eciple should be at all
increased on account of the circumstances in which she
has been placed ; and that tle crown consent to any
addition to those Burthens beyond what her situation
may appear to require. That she therefore hopes the
House will reconsider its Resolution, fcr the purpose
of limiting the Income now proposed tt, be settled upon
the Princess of WALES, to the annual sum of Thirty-
five Thousand Pounds ; which will be quite sufficient,
and will be accepted with the'liveliest gratitude, as
an unequivocal proof that the Princess of Watts has
secured the good opinion and ffutscatiu of the house •
of Commons.
" Connaught House, July 4, 1114."
The letter of her Royal Highness sea, ordered to
be taken into consideration with the report t!;is day.
message /MOM Tlll iIIGE2.T.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER.
brought down Messages from the Prince Ryge..t,
recommending to the House to make good, grants
of e2OOO per annum to Lords CoMbernstre :rad
Exmouth, as rewards (or /heir public services.--
Referred to a Committee of the House this day.
The other Orders of the Day were disposed
Adjourned at half-past two o'clock this morning.
An'order has beta sent from the Secretary of State to tint She-
riffs of London, to inflict the sentence or the Pillory Lustlese
4:IIRANE, Stc. on Wednesday, the lOth of August; mid* hip
and Mrs. ei.stew, on the ran of Aogue.
Accounts, winch may be considered as demi offipliberntbst‘
received In town, fully continuing the report of the captwe
the Laws Anterican (neat&
Tibthatsoiviho DAY.—The following regulations
are'to be observed tomorrow, at St. Paul's :
ihu Minor Canons and their Friemis to enter the Cborob, it%
U,. . Leash's Gate, by Nine o'Clock is the Morning.,
114 c Aldermen and Members of tiro Caw of Common Count
at the North door, by Ten &Cluck.
tie koreign Mini.ters to enter rather Wpm Ten, Wader
that their Carriages may not break into or interfere with taw
Church uoracNis r
Procession of the Members of the Boum of Pariinsumn and sH
Royal Fandiy.
he Members of isegis Homes of Parlament to freer the
btandfortehezith:Nuk7iiyhm..,:t..,orda.Histropfelleineillitistnpelledlbilli".l

I,

CORN MARKET, MARK LANE. JULY •
We bad no fresh arrivals of any GrOss this inoraiug, end bts4
little businem doing. (4ir pcicee cootisne wise is Monday.
A„,

•• •
haft tar N LOCKS THIS DAY AT MUNE (ruiANIL..
[Woad 11-1-0•40. pi ex. div.--ler_ sett ?Off
4 per Ct. IN 'll—S per Cr. Navy 97$ es. ay.
°umlaut, pre.—.Daalt Long Aosta. 34 I Maths
India bomb, 1411. iSare..-4.lelkecitter two ca. ss.

LONDON : Printed by 4.avaL IPickett Pieces
published there, PA se* star tace•Tfigie