Star.
London, England, 1820-10-07 00:00:00

Did ofil travel in the nits of the Queen in bar journey to
Naples ?—lres, I did.
Do you remember William Aosta-N.-Yes, I do.
Can you tell where Austin usually slept before you went to
Noples?—Yes, he usually slept in a separate room when there
was one; when there was not, he slept in the room of the

Princess.
Do you know a person of the name of Majoce do.
Did you see Majocchi at Ruccanelli i—l did.
Did you ever hear him mention S. person of the aerie of
Ompteda ?—I have.
What did he say about this Ompteda?
The frras:sassys-Gesza4 objected to the question; as ro
conversation that passed betipeen the witness and Majocchi re-
specting Ompted.', could be evidence. lie conceived it 'cou!d
not be put in order to contradict the testimony of Majocchi,
for it was a point no which Majocchi had never been examined.
The Sotterroa-Gasecat supported the objection. If ,he
object of putting this question was to contradict the evidence
of Majocchi, the Learned Counsel on the opposite side should
state what part of it they intended to impeach ; but in the ex-
amination of Majocchi there did not appear any questions on
this point.' The), could not examine a witness as to a collateral
enquiry to impeach another witness, when that witness could
not afterwards appear.
Dr. Lusunurrou contended warml y for the question. He
denied that because lajoccbi had not been examined as to
what he had said respecting Outptedat• that another witness
might not be examined torn it. He was sure that their Lord-
ships would agree with him, when be said that no question was
irrelevant or unimportant, which tended to skew that Onrpteda
acted as a spy—suborned witnesses—picked locks, and broke
the most sacred ties of society, to impeich and ruin the cha-
racter of the Queen--of the wife of the Sovereign whom he
then served. The conduct of the Queen was at issue, and it
was not only dueto her Majesty but the duty of her Counsel to
show the means that had been resorted to to injure her elptracter
and to bolster up charges against her.
Lord RED ESDALII objected to the course of argument pur-
sued by the Learned Gentleman, and moved that Counsel should

be ordered to witbdraw.--Cotutsel withdraw►.

Earl GREY thought that the Learned Omuta was not ex-
ceeding the bounds of his duty to his client.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that it was the pest
time in his life that be had ever heard it proposed to prove the
acts of a third person by a conversation between two other per-
sons. I Majoechi had been asked whether be had had any
conversation with the witness Carrington respecting arson
Ompteda, it would certainly have been relevant to examine
Oarrington as to his recollection of what pissed between them ;
but no such question had been put to blajocchL
Lord LAUDERDALE begged to refer their Lordships to
pages 63 and 75 of the evidence. •
Lord ERSKINE rose to speak to order, and was proceed-
ing, when
Lord LAUDERDALE said, that kis -Noble and Learned
Friend would not, perhaps, think him oat of order when Is
thew on what. Account he referred to the evidence. He
was of opitna that the question could be put-r-(4
Re wished to save her Majesty's Coursed the trouble of doing
that by argument, which was already doss by evidence. In the
pages of the evidence to which his Lordship hadrefiumed, it
would be seen that Majocciti was examined as to tit burned
intrigues of Baron Ompteda, and asked particuhrly whether
there was any talk among the household of the Princess respect..
log the Baron. , .
Dr. LUSlfssirrox Seintmed.---When stopped by that Lord._ •
ships in the course of MitAnent he was pursuing, it was. not bit
intention to offer, nor bad be any conception that he could, by
possibility, make the declaration of Majoecid evidence of the
acts of Baron Ornpteda. He must Contend, however, that the con-
duct of Ompteda was of importance to the elucidation of the truth
of the case; that it was not a collateral issue, but an essential
point, deserving of the most serious investigation. If in a sub-,
sequent part of the evidence, her Majesty's Counsel should
be able to demonstrate that plots against her Majesty had
' been concerted, had been carried into execution, and bad
been detected, the evidence would afford a complete ern
planation of the conduct of her Royal. Highness, and free
if from all those injurious, imputations a. which it had been
malignantly subjected. It would skew, for instance, why
her Majesty bad, in react times, been under_ the necessity of
having always a person to sleep near her, on whose fidelity she
could fully depend. It was to elicit this fact that Majocchi
had been asked what he knew of Baron Ompteda, and of the
plot in which• he had been engaged. biajocchi had been
pleased to deny the least knowledge of the existence of any
such plot, and certainly it was open to her Majesty's Coonse I to
show, by counter-testimony, that Majocchi did know of it, and
was in the constant habit of speaking about it. To every ques-
tion on the subject of the Baron Ompteda, Majors:hi had an-
swered •by a " son en ricordo;" he did not even remember
the name of the Baron, it was. so extraordinary or unusual—,
Was it not then competent to her Majesty's Counsel to spew
that all this was false testimony ? Were they not entitled to
remove any impression to disbelief as to the plot which the dui
nigh of Majnodd might by possibility base created in &tie
Lordships' Minds? And bow could this be better done than by
'hewing out of the month of the witness at the bar, that Ma-
jocebi was in the consume. habit of speaking of Baron dmpteda ;
. that his name mad bk-intrigues were equally turdliar to hfm ;
that be used to boast of his own courage and salary, mons,
that if.he dorStidie could " kill him like a dog." Were these
things of no importessoi to 'be prokedr Were her Majesty's -
Counsel not sodded to .do away the effect of this man's per-
jury-to prove that he was perjured? The only objection which
he conceived might reasonably be made to their proving so was,
that it was a work of espererogadon to attempt to detract from
credit which no longer existed.
Mr. lisononan followed on the same side, and pointed out
to their Lordships attention some parts of Majocchrs evidence
not referred to by Dr. Lushington, 'hewing more clearly the
relevancy of thabsquiry in which his Learned Friend had been
interrupted. He thought it strange, that whenever any question
was put shoot this Baron Ompteda, his Majesty's Counsel should
invariably oppose it with all their might, per fas mat arias.
The Assoastav-Griot. replied. He animadverted in warm
terms on the style of argument invariably pursued by the
Learned Gentlemen on the opposite side. They had no right
to say that she credit of biajocchi was completely destroyed;
that still remained to be 'hewn by the course of the case,
In the Courts below such a course of examination could never
be permitted, for it was a well-kiovrn established principle that
a "motion must be previously put to the witness whom evidence
en
matins wee mad, to destroy, before another witness 'mild
be examined as to any conversatiou, and for the best of reasons,
that anopportunity might be afforded if explaining all the cis-
minuteness of that conversation. Ali he could say was, that no
evidence at all had been given relative to Baron Ompteda in the
case for the 8111, and *ordure the Learned Counsel had no right
to examine °What subject. Sanders and calumnies innumcrabh
eertaistly had boas heaped upon'the menuray of the Bum, by
Dir. Dreegheae.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that it was not sew