Star.
London, England, 1820-08-28 00:00:00

FRENCH

, Fretich Papers of Thursday arrived yesterday.
They contain very little additional information re-
specting the recent plot in Paris, or those that were
engaged in it.
M. Grandet, the Jugs d'lnstruttion, continues with
rapidity the proceedings against the individuals ar-
rested on the 19th inst. and on the following days.
One of the persons, who was employed in the Public
Treasury, is kept in solitary confinement in the prison
of the Concieigerie.
The following article respectinj some of the wit-
nesses against the QUEEN of ENGLAND, appears in the
Journal des Debats of Thursday. It is dated Augs:
burg, the 17th instant, and is stated to be extracted
from the Universal Gazette of that City :
" The Vienna Court Gazette and the Austrian Ob-
server have inserted a contradiction of the English
Ambassador of an article in the Universal Gazette of
this city, relative to some witnesses against the Queen
of England. The following are certain facts :
Theodore Majocco, formerly groom, Luigi Majocco,
formerly domestic, and their father, Battista Ma-
jocco, formerly courier or postillion in the service of
the Princess of Wales during her residence at Como
and Milan, arrived at Vienna in 1819. They alighted
in the suburb of Wieden, at the inn, the sign of the
Three Crowns; they then took a private lodging in
the suburb of Leopoldstadt, where they resided till
their departure for London, in the house of the Sieur
Radel, the master of a fishing-boat, No. 6, near the
baths of Diana, in the first floor. According to their
own statements they had received, on the part of the
English Ministry, appointments or indemnities ; they
had also been promised pensions for life, for them-
selves and for their families, who remained at Ccmc.
The facts which Battista Majocco declared could be
proved against the Queen of England are very
serious, and would cover her with shame. What
we have learnt with respect to Battista Majocco is,
that he Went to London last spring, as a courier.—
Theodore Majocco has declared, that the pensions of
their wives are paid at Milan, every month, by the
Advocate, M. Vilmarcati, the English agent, residing
at the Contrado Crucifisso, in the Casa nizonica.—
We derive these facts from the declarations of the
family of Majocci.'

THE EVENING STAR.

LONDON.

THIRTY CAPITALS—TWO OF X2c,oco, &c.—ALL IN
MONEY—ONLY 5,600 TICKETS—EACH TO BE
DRAWN SINGLY—ALL ON WEDNESDAY NEXT.

MONDAY, AUGUST 28, 1820.
PRICE Of STOCKS Tills DAY AT win o9cLoCk
Bank Stock 220 i 2CI-3 per Cent. Reduced 88/
3 per Cent. Cone. 68 671-4 per Cent. 861 87
5 per Cent. Navy 103111—Long ALns. 18 1-16
Exch.itter Bills 3s. 3s. pre.-omr.Lm 1 dis.
Consols for Account 671

THE QUEEN'.

It will be seen, by an article copied from the Uni-
versal Gazette of Augsburg, and given above,.
among other extracts from the French Papers, ,
that the examination of Majocci before the -House
of Lords has not yet brought out all the truth respect-1
ing the money paid, or to be paid, to him and his re-
latives, to obtain his or their evidence against the
QUEEN. At whose expense are these emoluments
and pensions to be paid ?
The remuneration paid to the witnesses has cer-
tainly been calculated by some scale with which
common people are not acquainted. The sum of
750 dollars a month was all that Captain P_ Arta.za
received from the QUEEN for the fi eight of his vessel,
to pay himself, his crew, and the tear and wear of
his vessel ; bttt, by his new speculation, he gets
a thousand dollarS a mouth ! net ! clear of ex-
penses, without any deduction for wages of his
crew, without any tear and wear of his polacre.—
In one word, he is enriched for life ! The highest
rate at which the services of this Captain, his
Mate, his crew (including their provisions and the
use of the vessel), can be valued, is, as established
by evidence, 750 dollars a month ; but his new em-
ployers pay him and his Mate alone 1,800 dollars a
month, leaving him also all the profits he can make
by the use of his vessel elsew here, during the time be
is engaged in his English expedition. Are we sure
that we are yet made acquainted with all the gains
which this business secures for the Captain and his
Mate ?

As to Barbara Kress, the chambermaid, her re-
gular wages were twelve floiius a year. She acknow-
ledges to have had given to her, at one time, thirty-
one ducats—that is more than five years wages—in
addition to all her expenses borne, with that of her
brother.

The evidence of such witnesses should, and no
doubt will, be properly sifted by the Lords, before
the conclusion of the trial ; and this is the more ne-
cessary, as it seems not at all probable that, in the
common Courts of law, witnesses, who were so
highly paid for giving evidence, would even be suf-
fered to be examined, were the fact known.

HOUSE OF LORDS-TENTH DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.
At ten minutes before ten the Lotto CUANCELLOR
took his scat on the 'Woolsack.

Prayers having been read by the Bishop of WiNT
CII ESTER, and the roll called over,
The Earl of LAUDERDALE rose andddressed
their. Lordships with great force on the improiscieti
of allowing Counsel to be heard on the point of prac-
tice, left over for discussion on Saturday. Ilis
Lord-
ship thought that, on reflection, one and all of their
Lordships must be convinced, that had they adopted
that line of conduct which they were abput to adopt
on Saturday, they would have done a thing not only
gnpresedeuted in the usages of the Pothe, but ut-

early derogatory to its dignity. It was certainly most
prudent that the House should come-to some lied
—intim as to the course to be followed in the eta-
minatioe of witnesses; but to leave it to Counsel to
argue upon and suggest to the House what that ,
come should be, was a thing without example in
the House of Peers. To put it to five Members of
the House of Commons (for such the Counsel at the
Bar were), to suggest to the House of Peers what
mode they should pursue in a judicial inquiry; was
contrary to all constitutional usage, and insulting
to the dignity of their Lordships. Looking back
at the proceedings which had taken place, his Lord-
ship thought that the whole. difficulty in which
they were now supposed to be placed, arose, not
from the want of a fixed and perfectly correct rule
on the subject, but from a misunderstanding of
what that rule actually was. The general practice in
Courts of Law, he believed, was, that after a witness
had been examined in chief he should be immediately
cross-examined, and if at a future period either of the
parties could make out a case, to the satisfaction of
the Judge, for calling up a witness a second time,
the Courts were in the use of allowing it, subject to
this condition, that the questions on the second exa-
mination should be suggested to and put by the Cour:
if approved. And was not this the very practice
which the House had, up till Saturday last, followed
in the important case pending before them ? After
Majocchi, the first witness, had been examined in
chief, he had been cross-examined by the Counsel
for her Majesty at great length, until, indeed, they
said they had no further questions to ask him.—
Yet afterwards an application was made by her
Majesty's Counsel, to the House, to have this witness
called up a second time, and having shewn sufficient
cause for the demand, the House had been pleased
to grant it. Was it not perfectly evident from this,
that the C,.,unsel on both sides were quite aware that
the House were following in this case the very course
of proceeding which would.have been followed in a
Court of Law ? Where then was the difficulty in
which the House were supposed to be placed ? Ilis
Lordship, for himself, could see none but what had
arisen from a misunderstanding cf the existing rule,
and an indiscreet attempt to depart from it. The
credibility of witnesses might be affected in two ways,
ether by circumstanees arising out of theirexamination
in chief, or by witnesses to be afterwards produced.
This was a clear line of distinction, which there could
be no difficulty whatever in observing. The Coun-
sel for her Majesty should proceed instantly phis all
that arose out of the examination in chief—(Hear,
hear)—and the House had said, that after the charge
bad been closed, they would give her Majesty full
time and opportunity to procure witnevos in farther
impeachment of the credibility of the evidence ad-
duced against her. The House, his Lordship must
again repeat, were in r.o difficulty but what arose
from a misunderstanding of their own rule—(Hear,
hear).—Let them adhere strictly to that rule, and
there would be no occasion for calling in Counsel—
for proceeding in a way that could not but seriously
compromise the dignity of the House—( Hear ).

Lord
L MANNERS said, the difficulties which were
said to exist would disappear upon the assurance, that
if Counsel omitted to put questions in the course of
the cross-examination, a suggestion to the Lord
Chancellor would be strictly attended to ; and con-
sequently all the purposes of a second cross-exami-
nation would be answered. The plan upon which
the Judges in Westminster-Hall acted was precisely
this—all knew, that if a Counsel omitted to ask a
question, the Judge immediately called the witness
back, and put the question upon his suggestion
Their Lordships were disposed to give her Majesty
every opportunity of benefiting herself; but the,
House could not adopt a course directly a: va-
riance with the practice of the Courts by which they
had pledged themselves to be influenced. The re-
fusal to grant a list of witnesses had been con-
demned, though, in hii opinion, their Lordships had
acted with the greatest propriety in proceeding as
they had done. It had been said that the peculiar
circumstances of the case demanded a peculiar in-
dulgence; but, foe his part; he could not see that any
argument could be advanced in proof of the authority
of such an emergency. His Noble Friend (Erskine)
had acted inconsistently, when he said their Lordships
ought to be bound by the practice of Westminster-Hall,
and by itnmeoliately advising a violation of that prac-
tice. The Noble Lord repeated, that the interposition of
the Lord Chancellor, in cases where Counsel omitted
to ask caestions of a witness, would, in his opinion,
fully answer the ends of justice, and moved,

a That the Noble Lord on the Woolsack be directed to In-
form-the Queen's Counsel, that they would be entitled to call
back the witnesses, after the case had been dosed upon the part
of the Attorney General, to be examined as to any new facts,
such facts being proved to exist to the satisfactionof the House."

Lord ERSKINE. said, he had anticipated the diffi-
culties which had been already provsed to have arisen
from the reftwil of his motion. Since man was born
of a woman, never had the time their Lordships had
taken to consider a difficulty been more completely
thrown away. It had been said by a Noble Lord
that no difficulty existed. If that was the case, surely
it would have been his duty_ to oppose the adjourn-
ment on Saturday—(Kear, hear). He (Lord Erskine)
should pow state to the House the only course they
could, in his opinion, follow, after having refused the
list of witnesses. It w'as distinctly understood by the
House, that after the Counsel for the Bill should be

heard, and the witnesses exam hied and cross-examined,
as far as they could, under existing circumstances, be
cross-examined, a reasonable time should be given to
the Queen' to prepare for her defence—(Hear, heart
This was the ordinary plan upon which Courts of
Justice proceeded.. How could Their Lordships agree
to let the examination of witnesses go out to the
world in an Unquestioned state for two months, or
Whatever time might* be required by the Queen fin.
the preparation of her 'defence ? Constructed as thc
human mind was, 'such a course must have the effect
of prejudicing her Majesty's cause. It should be per-
mitted to her Majesty's Counsel to ask whatever
questions the nature of the case demanded at the pre-
sent moment, as far as an opportunity occurred,
and when the case should be advanced, to resume
the cross-examination. The interruption given by
the Attorney-General to the question put by Mr.
Brougham, was an interruption to a question which
most naturally arose out of the course of the exami-
nation. Cross-examination should, in fact, be with-
out limits. The Counsel for the Queen were in a
very difficult situation, and should be assisted, in-
stead of having impediments thrown in their way,--
He thought the only manner in which the House
could now proceed, with the view of doing impartial
justice, was to allow the Queen's Counsel to pursue
what line they pleased, and go on as far as they pleased
with the question as it at present stood. The question
then would be, what was to be done when the ad-
journmeLt concluded? Sufficient to the day was the eei!
timed: Whets the House met again, let the Queen s
Counsel cross-examine again in an unlimited manne:-,
and if any thing in the regulations should occur, which
could not be said to assimilate to the practice of tbs.
Courts below, let the House be governed by feeling.;
of humanity—Wear, hear, hear).—With respect to
the interruption given by the Attorney-General, t.
was his opii.loa that the examination should be re-
sumed at that point, and that the question ihould b,!
put to the witness by the Noble Lord on the Woe'
sack. The House would, he trusted, agree in hi.
views :to proceed to the cross-examination where the
Counsel had left off, and that the question which hal
been so iinproperly interrupted by his Majesty's
Attorney-General, should be immediately proposed.
There would, in his opinion, be an end of the inten.
tion of all Courts of Justice, if the public opinion did
not, in some degree, preside in them. The Noble
Lord concluded by staring, that the House wiA
bound to pursue none but that course which wod;tl
lead to a just conclusion; and assuring their Lord-
ships that he thanked GOD he had acted as he hiki
done as the investigation proceeded.
• Lord LIVERPOOL argued, that it was contrary
to the universal practice of the Courts below, by
which. the House had pledged itself to be directe
to adopt the course suggested by Lord Erskine.
—Whatever disadvantages there m'zht be attending
the course that had been adopted, they were com.
pensated by greater advantages. The delay granted
for the Queen's defence would enable her to dome to

it with a full knowledge of all the facts and circum-
stances charged against her, and afford her the beet
means to rebut them. The Noble and Learned Lord
seemed to labour under a mistake, when he thought

that it was left to the option of the Counsel for the
Queen when the cross-examination should take
place, since, so far as he could recollect, no such
intimation was ever given—( Hear, bear, hear),
He would allow a greater latitude in this case than is
the Courts below ; and if, in the course of these pro.
ccedings, fairground should be shewn by the Coun-
sel for her Majesty for calling a witness for re-exa-
mination, he did not doubt but their Lordships would
readily permit it. Up to Saturday last, the Rowe
had been under no difficulties—everything had gale
on quite regular. The witnesses were examined.
cross-examined, re-examined, and then examined by
their Lordships; but on Saturday the Attorney-Ge-
neral for the Queen wished to put off the cross-exa-
mination, except so far as to ascertain the name and
residence of the witness. Now, if the cross-eaasnina-

tion was to be deferred, it ought not, that, to have
proceeded so far. Its object was evidently to im,
peach the credit of the witness, by questioning her
as to what sums of money she bad received,
when and where she had been examined, &c.—
If their Lordships had committed any error there
could be no difficulty in retracing their steps, were

it essential to the obtaining of substantial justice. The
question is, whether the cross-examination shall be
put off altogether until the defence ? If so, their

Lordships could not examine a single witness, and in
the course of these proceedings the most important
inforination had been elicited by the questions
asked by the Peers, who had viewed both sides
of the case, without the party-colouring of Counsel.
This was not the only inconvenience: their LordAlips
could never call on the Attorney-General to say 1..;
case was closed, when other witnesses might bete-
cessary after the cross-examination. His Lordship
thought it a strong reason why a list of witnesses
should not be given, because, in the course of the pro
ceedings it might become necessary to call other wit-
nesscs than those originally intended to be examined.
Under all these circumstances, his Lordship thoughts
with reference to this case, for the convenience d
their Lordships, and for the ends of justice, it wai
highly necessary fait their lf.lordships should proceed
as in ordinary cases, viz. by examination, cross-exa-
mination, re-examination, and examination by t! r

I

L3rdships. If afterwards the Counsel for the clefeh.
state sufficient grounds Irby a witness should
be called azaiti, then it ought to be granted by the
House. Only let a case be stated, and do not give
to the Connsel the. right to waive a cross-exaininao
tin for the purpose of collecting evidence to
peach the credit of the witnesses.
Lord ERSKINE had always understood that it'
'vas left to the Counsel for her Majesty to choose the
pzriod of cross-examin !eon.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN thought it would
be much to the satisfaction of the House to hear the
case argued by Counsel, that Noble Lords, unlearned
in the law like himself, should know the reasons on
which a deviation from the ordinary practice was
Founded. If their Lordships adopted a rule. with-
out hearing the parties against it, they could not
afterwards adhere to that rule, when sufficient reason
was given for altering it. He should always, in the
course of these proceedings, oppose every deviation
from the rules in ordinary cases, unless Counsel was
heard upon the subject. When the Noble Earl oppo-
s:te states that he will grant a re-examination on the
application of Counsel, he is entitled to the credit
cf wishing to afford her Majesty some equivalent
for refusing a list of witnesses; but it was not in the
power of the House to give anything equivalent to
the advantages of cross-examination immediately
after an examination in chief, if the list of witnesses
had been furnished. This would prevent the exami-
nation in chief (torn making an impression on that
Publ.c which feels as deep an interest in these pro-
ceedings as their Lordships—(Hear, hear, hear).—
A cross-ex imination should always follow an exami-
nation in chief ; but ih the present case, the Counsel
for the Queen had deprived of its advantages.
Their Lordships might alter the names of things, but
the a I o.lrued cross-examination would not be a new
ezaminAtion, but a continuation of the cross-exami-
nation. The circumstance of a list of witnesses hav-
ing been refused, and of the Counsel for her Majesty
being ignorant of the name and residence of the wit-
ness, pre-ented all chance of ascertaining at the
time how far such witness was entitled to credit.
Their Lordships ought not to consider themselves ,
bound by na.row rules of law; because, if they were
so bound they could not go on with these proceed-
ings. The list of witnesses ought to have been fur-
nishe.: in the first instance ; the inconvenience occa-
sioned in the examination of Barbara Kress would
have been avoided, and two days would not have
been lost. His Lordship concluded an able speech,
by declaring it essential to the ends of justice that
Counsel should be heard on this subject.
Th-e-Earl of LAUDERDALE explained.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH was happy that an ad-
journment had taken place, since it would enable
their Lordships to abandon that course, which, if
adopted, would have led to great inconvenience. In',
the case of Barbara Kress, the Counsel for the Queen
had deviated frem the ordinary course of cross-exa-
mination. His Lordship objected to an adjourned
cross-examination, on the ground of the Counsel not
being acquainted with the character of the witness ;
and he thought that, as in ordinary cases, the
Counsel should be called to enter on the defence,
as soon as the case for the prosecution was closed.
If their Lordships granted for the defence an interval
of eight or ten weeks, to enable Counsel to get wit-
nesses to impeach the testimony of those examined
for the prosecution, on what ground could their Lord-
ships ref& to the Counsel for the prosecution a simi-
lar period for procuring witnesses to rebut those for
the defence?

The LORD CHANCELLOR congratulated the
House that they had not come to a final determine- 1
lion on Saturday, according to what then appeased 1
to be the general sense of their Lordships, for it was
his decided opinion that a more mischievous prece-
dent could not have been formed than that which
they were then about to establish. His Lordship con-
icssed that, with the majority of their Lordships,
he did think, at the time, that the course they
sere pursuing was the right one, but subsequent
re9ection had convinced him that they ought
to retrace their steps. Up till Saturday the
House had gone on exactly as any of the Courts
tel..w would have done. On many occasions the
iluusc of Parliament was not governed by the rules
of the Courts below, but his Lordship was convinced
0-,at the less they departed from these rules the more
IfLly they would proceed--(Heur, hear).—His Lord-
ship then proceeded to take a review, step by step,
ot all the proceedings in the present case, and
liewetl that throughout, the House, as well as the
C•iuncel at the bar, had acted on the principle that
the Counsel for her Majesty were bound to proceed
with their cross-examination of the witnesses imme-
diately after the examination in chief, reserving
always what it would be most unjust to refuse—
liberty to the defendant to apply, and shew cause
to the House for permission, to examine any of
the witnesses a second time—(Hear, hear, hear).—
its Lordship adverted particularly to what had fallen

from Mr. Brougham in the examination of the second
witness. P.itulzo. Mr. Brougham stated, that as h e
had not been aware this witness would be produced,
he hoped their Lordships would afterwards allow
him to be called up a second time, should there ap-
pear to him occasion to do so ; and to this request
Lord.hip had replied, that when the applica•
vies made, the house would judge of it.—
Herc a as a complete recognition of the rule of ptac-

' ties for which his Lordship now Contended. Oohing
to the proceedings of Saturday, his Lordship felt
hirnitlf bound to confest that, sitting as a Judge, be
ought to have interrupted the cross-examination of
the witness long before that step was taken by the
Noble Lord before him (Lord Lauderdale). He was
now convinced that the cross-examination had not
kept within the limits prescribed by the House.
He could make every allowance for Counsel with re,
spect to the multiplication of questions ; the answer
ttrooe question was often such, that it would be most
unjust if it was not followed up by some other
question; but making every proper allowance on
that account, he thought that the cross-examina-
tion on Saturday had been carried much too far.
Adverting now to the quest on before the House, his
Lordship thought that their Lordships ought to ad-
here to the general rule, a rule established on the
wisest principles, a mode of proceeding which was
most consonant to justice, and proved to be so by
the universal practice for ages, and which had never,
to his knowledge, been in any single instance departed
from. His Lord hip then entered into a minute exposi-
tion of the anomalies which would arise by deviating, in
the way which they were about to do on Saturday,
from the established practice. Were the cross-exa-
mination of witnesses to be deferred at the pleasure
of the Counsel for the defendant, it would be allow-
ing witnesses to retire for days and weeks, to think
and meditate over what they should say when again
brought up. Was ever such a thing heard of? It
would be farther unjust to a witness himself, when
an examination in chief left any doubt as to his credi-
bility on the minds of the Court, not to allow him an
immediate opportunity of setting himself right with
them by answering such questions as might be
put in cross-examination. Were the cross-exami-
nation deferred, it would moreover be impossible
for Counsel to go on with any case for a prosecution
at all. The cross-examination of the first witness
in a case might be of such a nature as to make
it necessary to call, as a second witness, a person
whom it was never meant to call. The number of
witnesses called for a prosecution must always
depend on what arises out of the cross-examina-
tion, and it would be impossible for Counsel to
say whether he had closed his case or not until
the cross. examination was gone through with.—
lhe option contended for would, in short, be destruc-
tive of every rule of evidence known to the laws of
the country. Some difficulties, his Lordship confessed,
might attend an adherence to the established rulr;
it was impossible that the present case could be with-
out great difficulty, whatever might be the course pur-
sued—but because a difficulty existed, that was no
reason why their Lordships should not grapple with
it, because their Lordships could not look comfort-
ably at the difficulty : they were not, therefore, to
establish a precedent which would be one of the most
mischievous ever known to the history of the laws
of this country—(Hear).—His Lordship could not
consent to any other than that mode of practice which
was according to the ancient and established usage.
That mode was, that the cross-examination should
be proceeded "with immediately after the examination
in chief, and that, on cause shewn, permission might
afterwards be given to call up a witness a second time,
This rule was founded on the practice of the com-
mon law of England, and he believed their Lord-
ships would find that that law was founded on the
purest principles. His Lordship conjured their Lord-
ships that from respect to their ancestors and from a
regard to every principle of justice, they would go
on according to the ancient and established forms of
proceeding. It was better far that they should acquit
ten thousand persons, than that they should break
through a single established rule of law.
Left the House debating.

We have received Charleston Papers this morning,
to the 25th July. They do not contain any news:

EXTILACT 07 • LZTT2I 71011 cAanuassA, OUZO JULY
_l.

" Our situation is daily becoming more unPlessant. Admiral
Brion has arrived at Savanilla, a small settlement at the mouth
of the river Magdalen, about 70 miles to windward, with
twenty vessels of different sizes; his land forces are not known.
Martial law has been proclaimed here to-day : we are so taken
up with the occurrences, that we cannot attend to any business."

Yesterday Divine Service was performed in the
King's Palace, Pall-Mall, by the Rev. Dr. CLARKE.
Yesterday the Duchess of CLARENCE attended Di-
vine Service at the German Chapel, in the King's
Palace, St. James's.
Cutting off the hair was one of the usual punish-
ments for offences at Colombo (East Indies). This
was, it appears, attended with this inconvenience—
that crops, who were such from fashion or caprice,
were exposed to betaken for punished criminals. An
Order of Council was therefore published atColonobo,
on the 6th of March last, prohibiting this punishment
throughout the Kandyan Provinces.
A private letter from Naples of the 7th inst. says,
that the KING bad completely recovered from his in-
disposition. On the 4th, he made an excursion to
Capo di Monte, and returned in the evening. He
was accompanied by his two sons, the Duke of CA-
LABRIA and the Prince Of PALERMO. In all parts of
the city which be passed through, he was received
with acclamations and marks of the most sincere re-
spect. The Neapolitan Journals contained no intel-
ligence, as to the affairs of Sicily, of a later date than
the 22d ult. Nothing had publicly transpired as to
the object of the Deputation from Palermo. An ex-
tensive promotion is ordered in the army, in recom-
pence for its exertions in establishing the constitu-
tional system. There are to be created on the same
occasion, 5 Commanders and 39 Knights of the Or-
der of St. Ferdit}aad, and 51 Knights of the Order of
St. George. There are to be distributed among the
army 1.53 medals of geld and 250 of silver, and 7000
silver medals among the Provincial Militia. '