Star.
London, England, 1820-11-04 00:00:00

•
c
•I't rr. •
• F.. 14 4
op.!,
Lire.

. .

. .
_
In a few days will be published, " Who bad been the advocate for it there? Air. Hownam.—
taken, and the statements
AUGU
In One Volume, Svcs. by BAI:DWIW, Cc.aDocK, and Joy. Pater- The kW' of so reluctant a witness as Mr. iiownam, who ad-
elevation of Bergami w. mstance not free from Ws-
, I
nostbr-row, ' . mined, at the outset,. that he had been* under the greatest obli- . picion; it was a deviation from that high rank and dignity
TUS ; OT, THE AMBITIOUS STUDENT.- ! cations to het' Majeety, was one of the most powerful ar_ which a Princess, or a Queen tat England ought to maintain
Being a brief Attempt to illustrate some of the Various this suspicion was not to he construed into guilt, much
Effects of Literaturcupon the Mind when deeply studied. .
guments in favour of the supposition, that the adulterous inter- but •
1 *course had been -carried. on with -"cry little interruption.— 1 less into such guilt as could justify the pa.ssipg of this Bill.
ille conceived these Was ddtabt that the ad! had been IHe agreed too that the promotion of a -of 13...) --;'s de

THOhISPN'SCHEMISTRIL—NEW EDITION.
. in a few days Will be published., in Four Vol;%. tivo.
ASYSTEM of CHEMISTRY.—By THOMAS
THOMSON, M.D. F.R.S. L. and E. Regius Prtitessor'
of Chemistry in the University of *Glasgow, &c. Sixth Edition.
London : Printed for Baldwin, Cradock, and Joy ; and for.
William Blackwood, Edinburgh.

no _ the adultery
proved ; be declareds from his heart, his belief that not only the
adultery was proved, but also a long course of adulterous inter-
courae. He did not know how any one, looking at the -evidence,
could think otherwise. Three of the most prominent witnesses
were aewell omitted to credit as 'any that ever appeared in a i
Court of nustice. liergami laying on the bed in the day-time j
with the tent closede was a strong proof of guilt indeed; for 1
what other purpose but that of an improper inteecourse could it
heso closed? After paying-the utmost attention to this dial
duringehe-whole time,' he could not but feel satisfied as to the
guilt of.the Queen. He wished he could have come to a con-
'teary decision e btit, in his conscience, he could not.' He wished
. thete had beealmore evidence, or less then had been produced.
He wished that a selection had been made. ale was a member
of the Secret Committee : lie then felt there was ground for
this •proeecutiott ; and, now that forty or .fifty days had been
spent in the enquiry, his opinion remained. still unchanged.
Matfy things had been brought forward quite irrelevant ; instead
of trying the accused 'person, four or filfetays had been occu-
• ed in trying the Milan Commission ; and yet nothing against
the character and conduct of that Commission had been proved.
Hewished that some of the witnesses had mot been brought for-
It had been laid that the Public had decided this ques-
tion ; but he certainly did not attach much importance to that ,
opinion, as it had been declared before the Queen's Trial briar.
Front the moment her Majesty landedin this country, Addresses
bad followed each other declaring her to he perfectly innocent.
Their. Lordships had been told, that if they gave a verdict
agairet the Queen, it would be without effect; but, if they were
to be intimidated by such a threat, they would be unworthy
the seats they held as Peers of the realm. The Noble Lord then
noticed the allusions that had been been made by Counsel as to a
parallel ''caseto the present, and entered into a long eulogium in
praise of his present Majesty; who had immortalised his name,
and the age in which he lived, by the success which Lad at •
tended the period in which he had swayed the British sceptre.
Berl GREY.—" My 'Lords, it is with some degree of reluc-
tance tlfat I rise at the present moment, as I was anxious to
hear the arguments of the Noble Lords opposite in favour of this
Bill of 'Pains and Penalt.es. But, my Lords the attention I
'have raid to this subject has so far exhau,red me, that Were
I ichiger ro delay addressing yntir Lordships, I fear I could
not dolt with hey degree of jostiee to the cause, or satisfaction
to myeelf. I will therefore now state the reasons why I
shall vote against the, second reading of the Bill. Some
complaint has been made as to the observations of the Counsel;
but, if anything has fallen froth the Learned Counsel improper
fon them to utter or your Lordships to hear; if they have used
inflammatory Language; or-exceeded that duty which loyalty to
llitir Sovereign demanded, your Lordships ought not to have sat
Yere anti allowed theni to proceed in that line of conduct.—
Ir is not my duty to defend the Counsel, and, therefore, I will
nol folloW the conduct of the Noble Lord (Redesdale), who has
represented the conduct of the Counsel in a way I am sorry to
bear, and which I should be still more so to hear repeated. The
same Noble Lord had complained, that the Learned Lord on
the Woolsack had not made that luminous and judicial speech
which he expected, and which no man was more able to make.
I should have wished, for my own information, that the Noble
Lord had taken that comprehensive view of the subject,. but I
must state that no such duty was imposed opon him. He is—
otot as the Noble Lnrd seemed to think he is—the presiding
lodge to instinct the Jury, but he is a Peer—a Juror on this
trial, and has a right to give his opinion ; but not like the Judges
in the Courts below, to sum up for the instruction of the Jury.
This explanation le due to the Noble Lord on the Woolsack, who
itated.that he gm* his opinion as a legislator, not as a judge. I
will now, my Lords, proceed to consider this great question with
all the calmness, judgment, and impartiality I possess. At the
commencement of these proceedius, I stated my objections to the
principles and policy of Bills of Pains and Penalties. I will not go
so far as some Noble Lords have done, in saying nothing can ever
justify their adoption ; but they are so ohjiktionable in their
nature, and so unconstitutional in their practice, tbat nothing
but the most urgent State necessity, could justify resorting
to them; and no such State necessity has been proved in the
present instance. I will not now re-state my arguments
against the Bill; I have entered them in a protest; but it was
with great surprise that I heard a Noble Lord (Reciesdale)'
who was on the trial of Warren Hastings for seven years, say,
that an impeachment -would not lie in the present case, because
an indictment would not lie. I heard this with surprise, for
impeachments were adopted to meet tests not proVided for in
the ordinary rules of law. The Noble Earl then proceeded, in
an eloquent strain, to combat the arguments of the Lord
Chancellor, that x Bill of Pains and Penalties afforded more
advantage tb the accused than a trial by impeachment.—
It might be moresfavourable to guilt, as affording an additional
chance to escape; but to innocence it afforded no such protec-
tion. It was one of the anomalies of thirproceeding. that if the
•Bill passed, it would then have to go to another Court, where the
whole process would be to go over again—where new evidence
'might be produced—but where witnesses could not be examined
on oatli; and where they could not, like their Lordships, have the
aid of the Learned Judges. This was a most frightful anomaly in
these proceedings. 'Having declared his objection as to the mode
of proceeding at the commencement, he then determined to at-
tend to the case as it would be made out by evidence. He felt
that if such a case was made out as would justify the degradation
of the Queen, he must then consider himself bound either to vote
for the Bill, or to see her Majesty sit on the throne tainted
and disgraced.. But the case to be made out was, that her Ma-
jesty's conduct had been so licentious and disgraceful, as to bring
dishonour on the Sovereign,sand to he a publia scandal to the
Country.—Vhe Noble Earl then read the preamble of the Bill,
which, he said, had been so ably alluded to by his Noble and
Learned Friend (Erskine) yesterday, just before he was taken
and when he was advocating those principles with 'which his
glorious life was identified ! The case to be made out for the
Bill was not one of simple adultery, but of gross and licentious
estbduct, which equally disgraced the Sovereign and the Country.
Nothing short of such a case could justify the Bill. " And how
paid the Noble Lord) was it to be poived ? by witnesses beyond
aft suspicion? hear).-111 proportion as the rank of the
Individual was high and illustrious—in proportion as the penal-
ties were' seVere--and in proportion as the proceeding was
•ovel, and contrary to law and justice—in such proportion ought
the case to be made out by evidence. above all taint—above all
suspicion!' Even the positive testimony of a witness of Sut
peened charecter ought not to. have • been admitted. NOw,
my Lords; I will ask if the case has been so made out? I
will now, my -Lords, proceed to 'the ceie as made nut by the
most active partizans of the Measure ; hut I cannot but feel stir-
I prised that a Bill of Pains ind Penalties should he persisted in,
founded on a case which has felled so completely. If. at the
1 conclusion c.f the Attorney General's speech, we could have
foreseen that the charges at Naples, which were the foundation of
all the charges, would have been abandoned—if we had foreseen
that Charges were to net on the evidence of Mejocchi and De
Bloat —if we had foreseen that the charges at Trieste, Carlsrube,
and at Genoa, would have -been relinquished, 'could we for a
moment have believed that we should ever have been called to a
second reading of this 'Bill? On all these charges; the advo-
cates for the Bill no longer relied ; the whole of the charges
had dwindled down into the conduct of her Royal Highness
dui leg her voyage on hoard the polacca—Pfeer, heir!)—
Wmtiki any man lay his hand on his heart and say, that it lie
; had foreseen this was the whole thit would be proved, that he
Would to: a moment
.have entertained the proceedine ? A fier
! forty-five days of enquiry, now, when we are iu the twelfth
hotir of the proceeding, we are called upon to pass this odious
Bill of Pains and Penaltics oti the single charge of the po'acca."
• The Noble Lord then complimented his Friend (Lord Lauder-
• dal:) for his integrity, and said, as his speech had been most ,
powerful, he would mm re immediately reply to it. Ile diCertd
with hid Noble Friend materially, not only as jto the fCeelt and
toucluilun to which he had come, but also in the views he had .

This day was published, in ,Ostasso, price
A New Edition of
THE CHEMICAL CATECHISM: with NOtes,
Illustrations, and Experiments.
By SAMUEL PARKES, F.LS. M.G.S. &c.
The Ninth Edition; containing an Account of the latest Dis-
coveries, and illustrated by an additional Copper.plateEograving
of Chemical Apparatus.

• Also, by the same Author,
The RCDIMEXTS of CHEMISTRY, with in Appendix of net.;
Facts, to the present Time, and Eipt Copperylates, price ss.
half-bound.

•
Cirtmicar. ESSAYS,. with Twenty-three Engravings, in Five
Volumes, price Two Guineas.

A LiTTZIR to FAIMIRS on the Use of SALT in AGWICULTWIIt,
with a very large Appendix of Proofs and Illustrations. The
Fourth Edition, price Two Shillings.
Published by Baldwin, Craduck, and Joy, London.

• The " Essay on the Uses of Salt," by Mr. Cuthbert W.
Johnson, baying been acknowledged by him to be a direct piracy
from Mr. l'arkes's printed works, he, to avoid a legal prosecution,
has consented to withdraw the said book from circulation. "

TRIAL OF THE QUEEN.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
continuationfruns thefirst yesterday's STAR.)
Lord HAREWOOD, in continuation:—" I wish," said
the Noble Lord, 's that I could be as clear in my sowu
mind of the innocence of her Majesty. as, indeed, I am to
the impolicy of passing this Bill. When I see a Bill. with
two parts, one of Degradation, and the other of Divorce ;
and when I see the second reading of it pressed to a vote,
with an understanding thee the Divorce clause shall aftenvarde
be dropped—l can consider it now as nothing else but a Bill of
Degradation. But, as a Legislator, I must consider what is to be
the operation of this Bill, and of this 1 am firmly persuaded—
regretting always the extraordinary cause of this measure—re.
gretting deeply that it was 'ever brought here at all—(Hear,
hc --or)I feel convinced, after what has passed—even if nothing
had passed, I am perfectly convinced of this—that whatever
the feelings of the people of the country on the subject may be,
their good sense will very shortly -appreeiate.every public cha-
racter in the way deserved. Only give the people an oppor-
tunity of judging fairly, and I will take on myself, in behalf of
the people of England, to say that their judgment will, in the
run, be a correct one. I have known them long, and never
saw it otherwise !" The Nobk Lord, after some further obser-
vations, concluded by repeating that he felt himself bound to
vote against the Bill! .•
Lord DONOUGHMORE now rose. After a few obser-
vations in answer to Lord Ilarewoori, he proceeded to com-
ment on the speech of Fail Grosvenor. As for that Noble Lord,
it would indeed be a difficult matter to follow him through the
labyrinth of his imagination, for he bad visited the upper regions;
he had visited the eclipse; and it would be a serious matter
to pursue him in his lofty speculations—(Much laughter).—
Now, he should proceed as calmly as possible to deliver
his, views of this grist question, and to state the grounds
upon which he should give his vote. Ile should, in consider-
ing the question, shut out from his view the testimony of
Majsechi, and of that woman, De Mont. lie should con-
sider the evidence of Sacchi as if no such thing had ever been
given ; and Cuchi and Barbara Kress should be also ex-
cluded from his notice, determined, as he was, to calculate
upon evidence that was liable to -no objection whatever. This
he had resolved to do, although the Counsel on one side
declaxed that those witnesses were the very best possible
witnesses; an assertion which met with the 'professional
contradiction that. might have been expected front the Coun-
sel upon the opposite side. The Noble Lord (Donoughmore)
here expressed his admiration of his Noble Friend's (Lord Lau-
derdale) able and lucid speech upon this question, and said, that
in most of the positions laid down in that speech he fully agreed.
The favourite of the Illustrious Accused had been, indeed, highly
honoured. Titles bad been procured for him, apd be was in the
enjoyment of an estate. There were some little intermediate
things which were deserving of notice—some little familiaities,
which would be, indeed, undeserving of notice, if not coupled with
some facts of irresistible force. The taking of the chain from the
Queen's neck, and placing it on Bergami's ; the gift of the portrait ;
those were things which, though far from being conclusive in
themselves, greatly added to the sopicion of guilt when placed
in juxtaposition to the more formidable proofs of guilt. Now, if
two persons, a male and femake of whom no suspicion had been
previously entertained, had happened to sleep under the same
tent, owing to circumstances of an extraordinary kind, be
should, indeed, be extremely sorry to say that he entertained
a worse opinion of the character of the female than he had'
before entertained ; but, when he considered that all the for-
mer evidences of a criminal intercourse were to be put in ad-
dition to the fact which had been proved beyond all doubt—that
Bergami and her Royal Highness had, for live weeks, slept un-
der the same awning, day and night, it was impossible to draw
any infereece but that of guilt. He could not see how it was
possible to pronounce any other verdict, after proof of constant
cohabieetiou for foe weeks under the awning—( Hear, hear).—
The Noble Lord here proceeded to read the minutes of evi-
dence of the Captain and Mate of the polacca as to the station
of her Royal Highness and Bergami on the gun, on the bed une
der the awning, and the disgusting familiarities that took place
between them. This was, his Lordship said, a complete an-
swer to the question which had been asked on the other side,
whether it was possible that adultery could have been com-
mitted on board the polacca ?—Why, the polacca was a place
of security far transactions of this kind. her Royal Highness
had hired the yee.el, and all on board were her servants; and
she had travelled from place to place, not so much from the de-
sire
to behold other countries, and to contemplate the revolu-
tions which had taken place in the nations of antiquity, as to de-
rive gratification from another source—(d laugh).—Therti was
something more in her imagination than curiosity of this sort
was calculated to inspire. Why had the Captain removed his
young relation, the .late, upon the exhibition of the passion? be-
. cause he was determined to let her have her pleasure—(.4 laugh).
He knew that her Royal Highness had paid for her amusement,
and she ehnald not therefore 'he prevented from gratifying her-
self. Now, in common cases of adultery, one single fact supplied
ground for damages ar.d separation ; but in this case there were
six months of indecent familiarities observed. He tc-ald not
charge all that time as an adultery—(4l nigh).—but there were
five weeks of it which had been passed by her Royal Highness
and Bergenii under the same tent day and night, and no doubt
existed as to the presumption that the voyage bad been under-.
taken, not as a voyage of discovery, but of gratification. The
Noble Lord here teal part of the evidence of Garguilo, which'
stated, that S:hiavini had been present when the tent was
closed, by oreer of her Royal Highness, upon her and Ikr-
gami. Adultery was, he said, often proved by a single
witness. Now, if the charge was not true, why had not
Schiavini been produced ? The evidence of what had occurred
i during the Live weeks to which he alluded, remained, in truth,
wholly uucontroveatd. Now this was what had bezn stated
favour of the Dia, by the evidence brought forward iti support
it. What bad Veen roved in lav,:nr tit the Bill hy ilieclefi:nce?

. • - person _•argami's de-
scription from caprice and favour, was a very different thing
from that advancement which it was the pride and hoes( of a
free country to see persons originally of low renk, obtaining
through a long gradation of meritorious services. But was
the (bleep therefore to be condemned because Bergatni may
Possibly have burn unworthily advanced? • Was not all history
pregnant with examples of persons raised from the lowest
situations to the highest from no better motives than mere
caprice and favour? What was the Sovereign of that Court
( Murat) where the Queen resided at the time of this advance-
ment of Bergami ? And were we not now in amity• and
alliance with one Sovereign (Bernadotte) whose extraction was
ant higher than that of the hero of the present story—Wear,
erase.— Ile again ...drained that' his elevation was a circurne
stance of some suspicion, hut give it what weight they.reight, it
was still only a suspicion—(Hors/oar;—By certainty and truth
alone, could such a Bill as this be decided. How then stood
the real facts of the case? Some there were deposed to, .which
if eetahliahed satisfactorily—if the witnesses on whom they
,rested were worthy of credit—could leave no doubt in the case.
It their Lerdsaips could believe Majocehi ; if they could believe
Dv Mont; if they, could believe Sacchi, there would be an end to
the case; the fact of adultery must be held to be clearly and
decisively proved. But their Lordships. had heard it aeknow-
ledged,liythe authors and supporters of the lAll,that imtwith sten...
ing all the facts to which these witnesses had sworn, and front
which alone guilt could be inferred, yet, if they were unsup-
ported by other circumstances, and by one another, they could
not justify the I louse in passing this Bill of Pains and Penalties.
Ilia Noble Friend on the cross-bench (the Earl of Lauder-
dale) bad said, that though there were many contradictions in
Mejocetti's evidence, still he was not prepared to say he might
not have spoken a great deal of truth—that, in short, the evi-
dence of Majocchi was not materially damaged; that De Mont,
too, though not entirely to be depended on, was in the main a
good witness; and that Sacchi was not, perhaps, so good as either
of the other two; but that, taking all their testimonies in the ag-
gregate, though he did not implicitly rely on any one of them, and
coupling them with the other circumstances of the elevation of
Berganai, and so forth, they did convince his mind of the truth of
the grand charge which these witnesses had been all working to
establish. Was this right doctrine ? Was it to be endured that
proofs, which were bad singly, should be held to become giapd
in the aggregate? Was such a consolidation of damaged truths
and damaged evidence ever heard of? The Noble Lord here
quoted the opinion of Sir W. Scott its the case of Evans v. Evans
(given in the Star of Thursday), as establishing clearly that such;
!tickle of building up a case, was a misapplication of the doctrine
of presumption. The next point to which he begged their Lord-
ships' attention was, that want of certain evidence on the part
of her Majesty which she might have produced, but did not
produce, and of which so much had been 'said by some of
their Lordships. lie thought that her Majesty's Counsel had
exercised a sound discretion in this respect. In support of this
opinion, his Lordship entered into an examination of the situa-
tion in which her Majesty stood with respect to those persona
who had not been called as witnesses; and as to the situation
in which these persons would basic stood with respect to the
House, when exposed to the excursive and harassing sort of
examination in which their Lordships had shewn themselves
disposed to indulge. aleriette Brun, and the Countess of
Oidi, whose absence was chiefly complained of, when produced
merely. to contradict certain statements in the evidence for the
prosecution,'might have been examined as to every circumstance
of their knowledge of her Majesty, during the many years this),
were in her service, and if caught triepine ever so slightly, the
Lynx-eye of his Noble Friend (Lord Lauderdale) would nct
have failed to detect the error, and to point it out to observation.
as a thing throwing utter discredit on their whole testimony.—
It was in evidence too that Marietta Brun had been tampered
with, and was her Majesty, after what she had experienced of
the treachery of servants,. to expose herself unnecessarily to the
repetition of such a risk ? And after all, it was surely a great
deal too much, that an • inference of'guilt should, be raised
from the absence of witnesses, when all that had been made
out by the witnesses adduced, was totally undeserving.of etc-
dit—(hear, hear).—lf he was sitting as a juryman, he could
never on such a ground venture on a verdict of guilty. lie would
not go into a detail of all the contradictions- in the evidence for
the prosecutim ; .but he would requeit the attention of their
Lordships to some of the more remarkable. Here his Lordship
proceeded to comment at some length on'those parts of the ev
dunce of 31ajocche Sacchi, and Be Mont, in which they had
either flatly contradicted themeelves, or were met by the
flattest contradictions, from other persons of unimpeachable
credit. It was impossible, be concluded, for any man •who
wished to do justice to place any reliance on their testimony:
Plaisterers, boatmen, carpenters, bricklayers' labourers—every
body, in short, but an Englishman, and a credible witness—a
(Hear, hear)—the meanest labourers, the refuse of Italian rabble
constitute the mass of the witnesses who have been brought to
your Lordships' Bar. It appeared from the evidence of most of
these people, that they never mentioned a syllable of what they
had seen, at the time the circumstance took place! So prudent,
so modest, so reserved were these witnesses, that they never
mentioned a single word of what they had seen to any human
being, until they were called on to give their depositions before
the Milan Commission! This circumstance 'hewed at least that •
they did not disclose anything until the traffic iii evidence be-.
came profitable, and then they came forward, like disinterested
persons, to tell all they knew !—(Hear, hear, hear).—Was not
this, said the Noble Earl, enough to induce reasoning men to
discard all this purchased testimony, as totally unworthy of cre-
dit?—(Hear, hear).—lt was not a little remarkable (continued
his Lordship), that the principal witnesses in support of the
prosecution, Majocchi, De Mont, Sacchi, and, he might add,
itastele, were all discarded servants of per Majesty; that
three of them were dismissed in November, 1817, and Majocchi
two months before that period ; as.l that all die prof' in the case
was confined to the time these individuals were in the service of
her Mejeety—(Hear, hear).—Front the time they left the Queen
not an atom of proof, nor the slightest imputation of IMproper
conduct had been tendered against her Majesty—(Repealed cheers
from all tarns I.f the Muse). Not only were all of them discarded
servants, but two of thsiin were, in possession (if the chaiges
against the Queen were true) of secrets which would have made it
the height eat iaadness in her Majesty to discharge them—(Hear),
=De Moot admitted that she was diacheiged for saying that
which was false; she admitted it in her evidence, and in her
letters; she also admitted the justice of-her discharge; she ad-
mitted her conduct with'Sacchi had been criminal; for, in the
letter she apologized, sad attributed her conduct to that fatal
passion which had misled her. Could any than believe this
woman% evidence? She swore that her Majesty's dress at the
ball was indecent, and Sir Win. Cell swore it was not, and so
did others, whose evidence could not be exceptede• She also
said that Bergami was three quarters of an hour in the Prin-
cess's mem at Naples, whets she was &engin* her dress._ If
ibis had not been disproved completely by Sir Vollleern Cull,
he could not have believett the statement; for, If the, parties
were sleeping together nightly, it was not likely that they
should take that opportunity to be together for such a purpose,
especially that her Majesty should place De Mont at the door
to witness her guilt. The stateinent was evidently the inven-
tion of. the Ji!le de chambre. But Sir Wm. Cell,' whose love of
antiquity is well known, had-given a description of. the dress,
which proved it to have been directly the reverse of indecent.
As to the alleged exposure of certain parts of her Majesty's
person, if it were even true, he was afraid he might readily find
instances, according to the modern meaner' of elevated society,
to justify that departure front good taste and delicacy ; and, he
behaved that many, even of tharlArdshiits, might have cause n
lament that exhibitions of this nature should be looked upon as -
fillerrlicui W the existence of guilt—(Hear,
aftleed, did he ivirb tot. a refermaiion in this /esprit; &leiter
this proceeding were attended
.with no tither good effeefil* •
tres.ed that, at least, it would operate as an instructive ,kalue
, to the fumelea of ea bleed, to eurrese the excesses of tiris elate_

M.: 'I •••.' *Add" •Ik !N.• - - ' ... •• • .
. -. ~• i -olt\_.,ii,:„..
0 . .
4
iftrat 4, 182()..
.. . - . _
. ,