Star.
London, England, 1820-09-09 00:00:00

FROM THE MORNING CHRONICLE.

" The decision to which the House of Lords came yesterday, I
with respect to the manner in which the Counsel for the QCZIDI
shall conduct her defence, is perfectly in unison with their refusal I
to communicate to her a specification of charges, or a list of
witre•ses. The jealousy which the house displayed in the case
of Lord MELvn..t.E, lest a prejudice should be excited against
that individual in the public mind, by the publication of the pro-
ceedings from day to day, was, to the great surprise of many,
relaxed in this case—a case in which, of all others, as the honour
ar.d revutation of a Lady were at stake (laying aaide the morals
of the country), the utmost vigilance and circumspection might
have been.expected ; and thus for weeks and months the Pub.
1 c have been served with regular dosts of all manner of gross
cliares against her DIAJLSTY, in the shape of Green Bag 11e-
ports, liills, Statements of Counsel,-and Evidence of Witnesses.
But the the whole store of matter treasured up against
her Maw iv comes to be vsbausted, that moment the jealousy
of their Lord-hip. would seem to begin to display itself.
" Surely, after the possession which the prosecutors have so
long had without interruption of the Public, it was not demand-
ing too much, to ask that the Ihrise should at least hear what
the Qrs can urge in her defence. But when Mr. NOCCUA3I
tells their Lordships that it is his intention to proceed forthwith,
the Loin CIIANCELLOIL stops him short, with the information,
that onlesa Counsel pledged themselves, before opening their
case, they would go on without delay to the end, they cannot be
all 'wed to proceed. Well might the :Marquis of LANSDOWN ob-
serve, that a treaty of this kind with a Counsel is one of the
most extraordinary proceedings ever adopted its any Court of
Justice. What ! shall an accused party be prevented frogs enter-
ing on his or her detenee? Shall a Court of Justice interrupt its
own proceedings, unless that party engage to follow in every sub-
sequent stage the course which *most agrecab* to the Court?

If her 11Attires Cowles! do not choose te go on.withouttiekt
to the end qt the evidence, the- Howie can then do without
hearing all the .o:knee, what It is not improbable it will now!
be allowed to do, without heating either statement or e/idence,
that is, come to a decision on the ease. Not so, however,
thought their Lordships; and, con.e dividai, it was decided. in
favour of this treaty, by A majority-of 165 to 60. A-subse-
quent proposition of Mr. BILOUGHAS, to be allowed to comment,
this day, on the summing up of the Sor.aotvoli-Gootast., was
rejected by a majority of 170 to 49. Mr. BROUGHAM undertook
to give a final answer to the proposition of their Lordships, at
eleven o'clock this day. ,

“ Why should their Lordships be so anxious to regulate the
mode in which her Musser's Counsel shall conduct her de-
fence, and to insist that without undertaking to call evidence
forthwith, they shall not be allowed to commence? Perhaps
Counsel, as Earl Gm observed, may. after addressing their
Lordships, and .witnessing the effect of that address, deem it
unnecessary to call any witnesses at all. Their Lordships surely
would not allow themselves to be influenced• by statements of
Counsel which are not borne out by proof ; and if there is a
disadvantage in having the speech of Counsel before the Public,
unsupported by evidence, how long have the charges of the pro-
secution been before the Public, without being supported by
proof ? Surely when all the power of the State has been arrayed,
and half of the Poteninios of Europe have been called into the
field against one helpless woman, it is rather too much that every
advantage in the manner of conducting the proceedings should
also be given to the party possessed of such fearful odds.”