Star.
London, England, 1820-08-30 00:00:00

FOR THE GROWTH OF IIIE HAIR.
Recommended by the late Dr. Hunter, and other eminent
Physicians.
HUDSON AND COMPANY respectfully inform
the Public, that having had continual objections to the fo-
reign name of " HUME DIVINE," they have, at the sugges-
tion of numerous Friends, adepted that of •' BOTANIC OIL,"
as more approyriate, it being made from a manuscript recipe of
Culpeper, the cAebrated English Botanist.
Where the Hair has fallen oft' from illness, penpira,ion,
change of climate, &c. the Botanic Oil will infallibly restore it.
In ordinary casts, a 7a. ed. Battle will prove its eui;:ttcy ; but
where there Itas be en get at neglect, or whet e the patty is advanced
in life, u certain perseverance is necessary. See testimonials of its
efficacy in a Disserte ion on toe I lair, enclosed round each Bottle.
It is also much esteemed by Ladies for dressing the I lair it males
it, if ever so bush, beautifully soft and glossy, kccrs tt in cue, and
iwparts a et:viol:4 grateful pertuniv. Price ;is. lid. 73. Oci. and
one guinea. _

iiuld by the Proprietor's WholLsale Agent, Mr. Atkinson,
Perfumer, No. 44, 6,:rrard-scree:, S.,ho-31uare ; • AlL•isrs. (..attit
and t'eirce, 57, New bock!-strctt ; Blew,
Cockspur-street ; Mr. Mae, 65, Cheapside ; and by most P.:r-
fustier. and Medtue Venders in the Kingdom.
Also, II l71)!ION's• t3eSI'ANIC I'ORWER, for
b;mutifyirg preserving the Teeth, fastenihg thont thAt ;,re
remuvinz the tame, and curing the scurer sr, the gums and
infallibly preventing the heath-Egli; prier O. W. iL bus.

• • -
ELEVENTH DA CONTTNUATION:
HOUSE OF LORDS, AUGUST 29.
Ifatattruso—ln the early part of our impression yesterday, by
a typoOsphical mistake, the speech of the Earl of Ilaatiowav
was added as part of that of the LORD CHANCILLOI4 The third
line on the second column of the third page, should have been
" The Earl of Haasnway rose and said, that" etc.
• • •
The Marquis LANSDOW NE-strenuously supported the
course advised liy.the Noble Lord (Erskine.)
The Islarlof LA UDRRDAI.E wished to ascertain the present
state of the proceedings, as he had air important motion to make.
" The LORD CHANCELLOR stated the motion of yester-
day and the Amendnsent of the President of the Council. His
',Lordship then stated that a second Amendment had taken place,
which was, in fact, an addition to the first.
A conversation then toik place upon the exact state of the
question, twtween Lords GROVILLR; Ranasom.a,ELLENannevitu,
Glum, and Lau DrIIInALZ.; after which it was determined that the
41kbate should proceed upon the second Amendment, which con-
imbed the substance of the first, and explained it.
. Lord LA UDERDA LE then said that he had a proposition to
submit, to which he was convinced their Lord.hips could,hivE
~ao possible objection. Ile thought that their Lordships would
loot do their duty to the public unless they consulted the
Julys as to what effect such a rule as they were now called
rosi. pp adopt, would have on the Courts of Law—(Hear, hear),
He said he would readily yield to reason, but would not be
beat down by clamour. lie did not ask their Lordships what
effect their Resolution would have on their proceedings here,
but he wished to kuow what effect it would have on inferior
Courts?—r(Hear. hear, Ix ar)—The Noble Lord then concluded
by moving, " That it be put to the Judges to say, if, in the
Courts of Caw a rule were established that the Counsel for the
defence shouhl cross-examine after the examination in chief, an :1
should be at liberty to call the witnesses again for a further cross-
examination, what effect such a rule would have on the admi-
nistration of justice?'
The Earl of LIVERPOOL did not think the motion of the
Noble Lord at all analogous to the question, and the Judges
would really feel some difficulty in answering the question. The
proceedings of that House could not, in any case, forma prece-
dent for the 'Conks of Law, since they were to be guided by
distinct precedents of their own, which were by no means ana-
logous. Independent of this consideration, the motion was so
made as to prevent the resolution front forming a precedent,
and, therefore, their Lordships need not be under any alarm in
that respect. He concluded by observing, that although he
was far from undervaluing the objections of the Noble Earl and
of the Noble MarqUis opposite, yet he could not but express his
opinion, that the modes of proceeding they had recommended
would be attendee% with great inconvenience.
Lord REDESDALE opposed the motion. He contended
that the general rule already established was sufficient for all the
purposes of justice: since, after the cross-examination, If the
Counsel for the defence wished a witness to be called a second
time, that liberty would readily be conceded by their Lordships.
But the privilege now proposed tz be granted of a Counsel cross-
examining altogether or in'parts, would be attended with great
disadvantages. The effect of it would be, that their Lordships
would never be able to connect the different parts of his evidence.
This was a mode of proceeding to which he could never consent,
and if adopted, it would form a dangerous precedent. lie thought
it quite sufficient that the Counsel for the Queen should posbes.s
the same advantages as they would have in a court of law.
The Earl of H A RROWIIY said, he Was content to with-
draw his Amendment, if it appeared to be the wish of the
House—(Cries of Quegiau, question).
The LORD CHANCELLOR then put Lord Harrowby's
Amendment; a division took place, when the numbers were—
Contents - - - 1 t-'1
Non-C.oatents - - - - 106

Te amended motion of Lord Harrowby was therefore car-
ried by a majority of 15.
Lord ERSKINE now rose and said, that the decision which
their Lordships had just come to, convinced him more and
more of the necessity of still doing what the I louse ought, in
his opinion, to have dime at first—allow her Majesty a' list of
witnesses, and a specification of the times when, and the places
where, the alleged acts of criminality were conimitted—(Hear).
He would now move, that the Counsel for the Bill be instructed
to deliver to the Counsel for the Queen a list of the remaining
witnesses to be examined, with a cpceilication of the times and
places to which the remaining testimony was meant to apply.
Should the House agree to this motion, his Loruship would af-
terwards move that the House should :aljourn for such a period
as might be sufficient to enable her 3laiesty to procure all neces-
sary information previous to proceeding further with the inquiry.
Lord L AL'DE RD A LE wished to ask the '.!.:ohle and Learned
Lord whether he proposed his motion as a revival of his for-
mer Motion to the same effect, which had been negatived by the
House, or as a different motion ? Did he mean, that on a hst of
witnesses being furnished, as he proposed, that the Counsel for
the Bill should be precluded from calling any new witnesses not
included in that list ?

Lord ERSKINE answered, that he did not mean that . the
Counsel for the Dill should be precluded from producing any
additional witnesses, which du:y could produce according to
the ordinary practice of the administration of justice.
Lord LAUDERDALE requested that the Resolution of the
House on Lord Erskine 's former motion for giving a list of wit-
nesses should be read.

The Resolution was read by the Clerk.
Lord LA IiDERDALE then proceeded to address the
House against the Motion of the Noble and Learned Lord.
He thought it not only of a very different character from the
former motion, but a great deal more ectravagaiit. When
his Lordship formerly asked that a list of witnesses should be
given, it was with the qualification, that such list should not
preclude the Counsel for the Bill from bringing forward any
new witnesses; but here there was no such qualification. This
was not the only piece of inconsistency in the Noble and Learned
Lord which he had to admire. He (Lord Erskine) had been
in the Majority in the division which had just taken place, and
yet he now came forward and stated, that, by the resolution
which the House had adopted, and to which he was himself one
of those that assented, the case was put into such a state of diffi-
culty, that he could not do less than make a motion to put it off
altogether for the present—(./ laugh). The terms of the present
motion were still more disgusting than those of the Noble and
Learned Lord's former motion to the same elect, and in his
(Lord Lauderdale's) opinion, quite as dest knit: of any reasonable'
foundation.

Lord ERSKINR explained.—By the qualification appended
to his former motion, he had meant nothing more than that such
additional witnesses should be admitt-d a, could be admitted
according to the ordinary course of law. Ile thought it of the
utmost importance that their lirel,hips should assimilate their
proceedings as much as possible to the ordinary forms in Courts
of law; and more latitude he had not intended should he given, as
to the introduction of new witnesses, than what thZse forms would
sanction. As to the charge of inconsistency brought against him
by ;be Noble Lord on the cross-bedeh, he could not sec any
pretence whatever for it. lie (Lord Erskiae) h.ttl voted for the
Resolution which the !louse had jiist adopted, because he thought
it was gaining something for the administration of justice;
but surely, because one good thing had been gained, that could
be no reason for saying it was inconsistent to ask for another
thing which was still better? lie thought it a great benefit
gained, that her Majesty's COIIII4CI should be alloAfed the
freest use of their own discretion id the cross-examination of
wimenes. 1k (Lord Erskine) thought it would be a still
greater and more essential benefit, to let them have a list of the
temainirr, witnesses, and a sprcifidition of the ditto) and places
of the alleged acts of crintioality • and therefore it was that lie
row made the minion which the 'Noble Lot-eh:id been pleased
so groundlessly to stigrnatize'as inconsistent.
ilarl 11%TH URST rose to oppo .• the motion. The Noble
and Learned Loud had stated nothing in support of this mot:ou
which had not been urged on his former tnotian to the. same effect.
The' same objections which existed to it formerly still exi.iird ;
and there were many inure which arose front the ad./hilted VIM

in which the proceeding now was. The House were called
upon, in the midst of a prosecution, to adjourn for two or
three months, without calling in the Counsel for the prosecution
to know whether such delay might not be seriously prejudlciaL
It might be supposed that all the witnesses were now here
aid ander protection, but where s. as the proof of that
His Lordship, for one, doubted that they were, and he thought
their Lordships should have the fact distinctly ascertained bas.
• fore they acted en the belief of it. '.'ere it even true that they
were all here, and under protection, hr would object to giving a
list on another ground. If the names of the remaining witnesses
were published, their characters would be written down in all the
libellens papers ; day after day they would be subject to calumny.
The analogy between this and a ease of High Treason had been
much talked of; but fur one, as far as his knowledge or expe-
rience went, the consequences of allowing a list of witnesses in
Met of High Treason, were not of a character to make It de-
sirable to extted the practice. When the law was passed, the
framers of it were so distrustful of its operation, that they put
off the time af its operation to the generation to come after them.
The first time, in tact, that the law Allow* i list of witnesses
was acted upon, was in the case of Lord George Gordan; and
what was the consequence? Lord George Gordon escaped—
hear).—The next remarkable cite in which it had been
acted upon, was one in which the Noble and Learned Lord on
the Woolsack was Counsel for the prosecution (the ease of
Hardy and others, we understood), and he might appeal to his
Lordship whether, in that case, a priacipal witness for the pro-
secution did not, after the delivery of the list of witnesses, bud-
denly disappear.. and was never ag..:in beardof--(Hear, hear).
According to -the best information Government could procure,
there *as every reason to believe that the witness was assess&
nated—( Ilear, hear).—ln a more recent cue (we understood
the Noble Lord to allude to the first case of Thistlewood and
others), two days' after the list of witnesses had been given in,
a-witness was found out who would infallibly have brought home
the treason to all the parties, who, in the absence of that wit-
ness, were acquitted.
Lord HOLLAND rose, and with great warmth said, he
could not avoid expressing his astonishment that a Peer of the
Realm, and ene of his Majesty's Ministers, should stand. tip in
that ouse to contend against one of the most important and
most-valuable laws of the land ; a law which had been in force
upwards of forty years, and of the benefits and advantages
which, there were most abtindant proofs—(lrear, hear).—
It was natural that those who wished to fritter away that law
should attack his Noble and Learned Friend, to whose exer-
tions, coupled with that law, their Lordships were indebted fur
that liberty and that security of property they now enjoyed.
What! would the Noble Earl contend, that because a man was
acquitted of High Treason, that the law syas insufficient? (Hear.)
Ile could not but enter his protest against an assertion so mon-
strous as that of the Noble Earl. that every acquittal of High
Treason, during the last 40 years, proved the insufficiency of
the law. He gave the First Lord of the Treasury much credit
for the ingenuous and candid manner iii which he had come
forward to grant that privilege to the Counsel for the Queen,
which he had at one tiroe wished to withholdlleer, Mar).—
There was nothing inconsistent in this, as had.bees contended
by some of the Noble Lords. It had been said, that their Lord-
ships should act on the principles of justice, and he agreed that
the principles of justice should always guide their proceedings
But the House was not now judicially formed---it was acting
legislatively, and they had an undoubted right to exercise their
judgment on the policy and expediency as wellies the justice of
their proceedings. The Noble Lord said, in conclusion, that he .
could not sit down without expressing the gratification which he
felt at seeing his Noble and Learned Friend near him (Lord
Erskine), notwithstanding his age, standing forward wit% the
same zeal and energy, defending those great principles which,
in early life, he had advocated with a genius and talents that
never were equalled, and in doing which, he had raised for him-
self a glorious immortality !—(Hoer, /war).
The Earl of LIMERICK thought, that the Counsel for the
Queen shook! be restricted to the time of their second cross.
xamitiation.

Lord CA LTIIORPE said, the House must now either adopt
the motion of the Noble and Learned Lord, or plunge into a
mode of proceeding that would be interminable. He did not
thibk, that the resolution passed that day by their Lordships
could be adhered to. He would, therefore, vote for the motion.
The LORD CHANCELLOR wished that their Lordships
might not experience the inconvenience which he foresaw. One
serious evil attending the mode of proceeding resolved upon
was, the interminable length to which it would be extended..—.
He thought that the Counsel for the Queen should not require,
and the House not grant, a longer delay than would be ne..
emery to make the inquiry as to the character of the witnesses.
One thing he must observe, that her Majesty's rouustl would
possess such advantages for the defence, as were quite nn mown
in the annals of jurisprudence.
Lard ERSKINE shortly replied, and the House divided on
his motion, when there were—Contents, 61—Non-contents, i tit
Cromeamnication e Barbara Sera.
After some observations from Earl DIANLET and Lord Hot.
LAND, of a general nature, the Counsel were stalled in, and the
resolution of the House read to them by the Loao Cnanclu.a.on.
Barbara Kress, the witness whose examination was suspended
on Saturday, was placed at the bar, and cross-examined by
Mr. lloomaßAM.

Witness, where do you live now?—ln a private haaae.
Where do not know.
How far is it from here?—i do not know ; I came in *mach.
What way did you come ?-over a bridge.
Who lives there beside yourself?-on4 the family of the house.
Where does your brother live?—in the same house.
Did he ever give you any money P--No, never.
Did he never promise your any P--No, he never promised; be
cannot promise me anything.—Why, bow could he promise me
anything?
Do you mean that he has no money of his own ?-01317 what
be brought from home with him.

Whaibusineu is your brother ?—A maker of pots.
Is be a master?—Yes, a master of pots.
What is your father ?—ifte is dead ; he was a serjeant in the
army. I have a father-in-law.
What is he?—A wheelwright.
What money have you received?-Only the ducats at Carlsruhe.
has nobody promised you money after your return from Eng-
land to Carlsruhe ?—Nohody has promised me.
Will you swear that you do not expect some advantage in
coming here ?—I was to have defitnamagensent (recompense).
How much were you to have ?—1 cannot say.
Who told you that you should have compensation?—Our
Muer. I told him that I should lose my place, and mu►t be re-
compensed for that.

Of what Minister do you speak?-111. Von Barstadt, who
told me that !should he compelled to go.
Is he not the Minieter of the Grand Duke of Baden do
not know. I only know 116 name. I have nut had any bus'.
sineis with that Gentleman except just this.
Did Jl. Von Grimm ever come to the nn at Carhnthe
Yea.

What rooms did Von Grimm occupy in the inn?—Nos. 12
and 1::.

Did he not give up No. 12 for the occupation of the Prin-
cesi ?—Tci.

Did he not go into No. 12, niter the Princess had left the inn,
to look at what WAS there?—Tes, he looked about there.
Was anybody with him when he went to make this inspec.
tlon ?—Yea, two others.

What is Von Caton) 7—As far as I have heard he is Ambas-
sador to Wurteniberg.
'low often had you seen the Princess before the day on which
you writ into the room and saw his with Bergami7--Very
little ; 1 lrtti too much business to do to take much notice.

DA you never sett them at breakfast in the morning ?—asce,
wion I came to clean up some slops fu theroom.
Was it after you bad wiped up the stops you were -called in to
remove that you saw her?—Yes.
Where did the Princess dine on the day of the timing you
saw her in the, room with Berionti?—l dotes know. ,
Did she dine a: the inn 7---No I have not seen It.
Did they ever dine at the Ins during the whole of the time