Star.
London, England, 1820-09-08 00:00:00

FROM THE MORNLNO CHRONICLE.

" Our readers will not fail to remark the important observe.
tions on the subject of the Divorce part of the Bill, to wbird, A
question of the Earl of Lonsnatn gave rise. The Earl of Ir-
ViIIPOOL stated, if there was a strong feeling in that House, or or
the country, from religious or other considerations, against the
Divorce, he had no objection to abandon that part of the mea-
sure; and he assured the House, that personal relief did not en-
ter into the wishes of his Mammy. We observed, some days
ago, that a majority of the thshops had determined against the
Divorce, and that Ministers were satisfied they could not carry
it; and the result has proved that our information was coma.
This abandonment, be it remarked, is at the closing of their
own case, and before a word of the Queen's has gone forth
to the world ; and we leave our readers to draw their oa, a
conclusions from this circumstance. The Divorce is a =tar
of per feet indifference to Ministers ; they now treat it with tte
utmost nenchafanee. But was it always thus? Does this indif-
ference proceed from a conviction that they have Failed in 'anklet
out their case? or have they outraged the religious and mord
feelings of the country, by demanding that for their Monarch
which no private individual similarly circumstanced could have
demanded, and which demand was, more than any other part of
the proceedings, calculated to deprive that Monarch of the regard
of his subjects, while all the time both themselves and their Royal
Master set no value whatever on the Divorce?"

HOUSE OF LORDS.
TWENTIETH DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.
The House met, pursuant to adjournment, at half
past eleven o'clock ; after. Prayers were read, the roll
was called over, and some Peers excused attendance.
The Earl of DERBY presented a Petition from the Inhabi-
tants of Liverpool, complaining of the oppressive nature of the
Poore Rates, and praying tbartheir Lordships would take the
subject iqto their Co isidemtlon.—.Ordered to lie on the table.
About three minutes Issfore twelve o'clock, Counsel were
called in.

The LORD CRANCELLOR.—Mr. Brougham, you are
desired by the House to state whether yea are ready to com-
mence the defence now, and follow it by evidences, or only opcn
it now and then ask a delay before you examine any witnesses.
Mr. Buouonax rem, and ins very low tone of voice, which
was scarcely audible, addressed their Lordships. We under-
stood him to say that he was prepared to commence the defence
of her Majesty now, and should be feel it necessary to call evi-
dence, that he might be allowed to do so, or possess the option
of calling witnesses u a future period.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE moved that Counsel do with-
draw. This being done, the Noble Lord said he was sure that
their Lordships would grant the Learned Counsel for the Queen
every indulgence necessary for the ends of justice, at consistent
with the dignity of the House; and, that if they required time
for defence, it would readily be granted.
Lord ERSKINE did not wish the Counsel for her Majesty
to be fettered in the defences but that they should be allowed to
commence now, without being called on to say whether tlu y
intended to call witnesses and continue it to its conclusion or
not. The Learned Counsel might make such an impression on
the House, as to render it unnecessary to call any witnesses. In
the ordinary Courts of Law—and the nearer the proceedings of
their Lordships were assimilated to the Courts-of Law the bet-
ter—when a prosecution was commenced, the Counsel could
either begin the cause, or, if be wished to delay it, he could dv
so, by withdrawing the record, or specially moving the Court
for that purpose; but when a cause was ogee begun, he must
go through with it ; and the Counsel for the defence must also go
oa with it, because be is supposed ro have barn fully prepared.
Should, however, any circumstances afterwards transpire
which are important and of which he could not have the Le-
nefit at the time, he has still a remedy in a new trill, which..
on a statement of the circumstances, is not refused. IC4
such remedy, however, was left to a defendant bettor.
their Lordships, who could not graht any new triaL Tbe
preamble of the Bill he considered like an indictment in
common law; and if their Lordships bad given the same
advantages as are given in cases of indictment, a list of
the. witnesses, and the times and places where the crime
was alleged to have been committed, they would not have
ed themselves in the predicament In which they now stood.
o individual ever came to a Bar situated as her Majesty; she
Ignorant of the charges against her; and could not even pre-
pare fur her defence until the case for the prosecution was
closed. Her Counsel could not cross-examine the witnesses,
because they had never known even their names until placed
at the Bar of their Lordships. What were now the conse-
quences ; the evidence that had been adduced was not "ll'

filed to their Lordships; it had gone forth to the Public, and
VV33 now partly known throughout the whole of Europe.
The Noble Earl opposite (Liverpool) did himself honour when
he said; GOD forbid any impression should be made on any per- .
sun by the evidence that had. been brought forward : he would
say, Goa forbid also; but it was not in human nature, not to be '
affected in some degree by es-pane statements. If the House
should adjourn now, a very unfavourable impression would rest ;
against her Majesty. His Majesty's Solicitor-General, is sum- I,
niug up, bad said the evidence was incontrovertible. Were
their Lordships then to adjourn for two or more months, and I
suffer evidence to go forth, uncontradicted, which the Solicitor-
General had said could not be answered? If it was wrong in

Courts of Law to bear the Counsel fur the prosecution sum up,

Without hearing the Counsel for the defence, bow much more sto
in the present case? He contended that they ought to hear the
Counsel for her Majesty, without requiring from him any promise
as to whether he would call witnesses now, or then ask for delay.
But what was the cause of all this inconvenience? The division
of the cause into two parts. And why was it so divided? Not
certainly to favour the accused. The Learned Counsel upon
one side had stated, that the evidence already produced was
such as could not be answered. Should not the Counsel on the
other side have an opportunity of stating whether he could an-
swer it or not ? Let that be done; let the bane and the antidote
go out together. There could be no injustice in such a course.
Iler Majesty's Counsel had a right, before the adjournment
took place, to call upon their Lordships to pause on the evi-
deuce. He had no feeling in the case, nor should he permit the
intrusion of any but what might belong to it in the end, and yet
he was afraid to spend two or three months with the evidence
in his mind, assisted and enforced as it was by the summing up
of Counsel. All that her Majesty's Counsel asked was, that they
should permit him to make his statement, leaving it to their
Lordships to determine afterwards as to the course to be pur-
sued with respect to the evidence. If, after making his state-
ment, he should proceed to call in witnesses, then would be the
time for them who disapproved to state their objections.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE said, that the question on
hich they were now to decide was this, whether they would
adjourn after the persons who appeared for the Bill had closed
their case, or whether they would permit the Counsel for her
Majesty to open their case before the adjournment. He would
contend, upon every principle of justice, that if they were
.to adjourn at all, they should do so at the present period.—
The House had proceeded all along with a view to afford the
utmost indulgence to her Majesty. It was true, as his Noble
. Friend had stated, that the influence of such a body of evidence
remaining in the mind for two or three months was an evil,
but the evil had been mitigated by the permission to cross-
examine, and the foundation laid by that means for more
extensive examination in future. Though the observation
made by a Noble Friend of his yesterday was perfectly just,
it appeared to him at the same time to be quite unneces-
sary, for there was no man in that House who did not feel
tle importance of suspending any opinion, till the whole of the
case was before them. Ile had already stated the extent of the
evil as the proceeding w•as going on? but what would be the effect
of agreeing to the proposition now before them. Let them
look to the prejudice which must operate on the public ntind,
in that event, and consider how much stronger the objections
were to such a mode of proceeding. They would then send
the Public to ruminate on the statement of her Majesty's
Counsel for two or three mouths. They would not only give that
advantage to the Counsel, but the additional one of being the
single witness in support, of his own case. Their Lordships could
not know whether the evidence would come up to the case or
nat. The Counsel might, in fact, state what he pleased
without any consideration as to the possibility of substantiating

•it in evidence. The Counsel had alluded to an intention of bring-
ing forward a part of his evidence now, and the rest afterwards,
but sec what the consequence of that would be: The Counsel
%Could open his case and bring his evidence in part ; be might
.:ate what he pleased to expect from the evidence that was to
follow, and that expected evidence would derive colour and cre-
dit from the impression made by preceding witnesses, though
nican facts entirely different. Her Majesty's Counsel were ho-
nmrable men, for whose principles and talents no one could
have a greater respect than be had ; but their Lordships would
eh wrong to trust them with the opening of the case, except
pon condition that they should proceed with the evidence kg.
mediately. Let the evidence be brought, that they might see

whether it came up to the cause. His Noble Friend had talked
of the Courts below. The Courts below could furnish no ana-
logy, for such an adjournment had never been proposed there.
He remembered having been present upon an occasion where the
Counsel for the defendant applied to the Judge to adjourn the
cause until the next day. This was in the case of Lord Auck-
lard ; and Lord Elleaborough, who was the Judge presiding,
refused the application. He wanted to know how her Majesty's
Counsel could have mistaken the principle upon which the delay
was to be granted. It was to be granted to afford time for the
collection of evidence. If the Counsel for her Majesty knew
mMw to open their case, they must either have got the evidence
e.,Lich is to support it, or they must intend to give full scope ,
t their imagination in making up a case, in the mere hope
they may afterwards be enabled to find evidence to prove
1.. more distorted way of presenting the case to the public
t mode more calculated to excite an unfair prejudice, it
impossible to conceive.
The LORD CI lANCELLOR said, that if to feel pain In
executing a duty could be an excuse for not fulfilling it, never
:can had a stronger excuse than he had in the present instance.
lie bad, in all his life, never felt so strongly that an important
acd painful duty had been imposed on him as in the present in-
stance. But a duty there was imposed on him, and that duty
lit was determined Pe would fulfil to the best of his judgment.
it was undoubtedly true—it was, strictly speaking, true, that
every one of their Lordships would be guilty of a violation of
their duty, if they were to draw any inference of guilt from the
e. dence which had been laid before them. Every syllable of
that evidence was capable of being disproved; and they ought
to act on the supposition that it might and would be disproved.
On the other hand, it was certain that this was a sort of
principle which could not be acted upon by all of their
Lordships, to the degree and extent which judicial minds
were capable of; and it would be false, nay wicked, to
sppost: that tither their Lordships or the public could remain
witbout same impression to the prejudice of her Majesty, from
the evidence which had been heard in support of the Bill.
—lt was only fair and just to presume that that, to a cer-
tain degree, must be the case. But admitting so to the fullest
extent, the House were still only in a situation where they
must make a choice of evils. What would be the consequence if
in criminal cases, after the defence of the accused were made, the '
riidence neceAary to support it, were to be postponed? He
could not imagine any course of proceeding fraught With more
injurious consequences to the administration of justice.—
It wauld be setting at nought all those forms, which bad from
time immemorial been thought most essential to the detection of
guilt, as well as to the protection of innocence. He entertained
the utmost respect for the judgment and experience of his Noble
and Learned Friend who bad made the proposition before the
house, but to that proposition he could not possibly give his

assent. He agreed with the Hoak Ind Learned Lord Ake
, no Court had a right to call on a Counsel to pledge hitelf
beforehand whether he would call evidence or tot; but he
. would ask the Noble and Learned Lord whether, ,sehen
a Counsel does begin his statement, there is not an implied
pledge to the Court, that he has his witnesies ready to prove it,
and that he will complete his case by going on in continuation
with the evidence, after he has closed his statement? His Lord-
ship hid largely and liberally allowed for the prejudice which
may be created in the public mind by the evidence for the pro-
secution ; but how much greater would that prejudice have been.
could we suppose the case of the prosecution to have been opened,
and the production of the evidence deferred to a futuse period'
Yet was It net nearly the same thing which was now asked on
the part of the defence? He would admit that there was some
difference in the cases ; but there was no denying that it was as
possible for prejudices to exist on the one side as on the other.
He agreed with the Noble Lord on the cress-bench, that the
House ought to repose largely on the honour of the Counsel at
the Bar; but the principles of the law did not give Counsel
credit for such infallibility as was implied in the suppositicu
that they could state a case so free from

as not to excite some degree of unfair prejudice. It was not
on the responsibility of particular Individuals, but on gene-
ral principles that the House could safely act. Nor could
the House, in this case, be guided by any analogies furnished by
the practice of the Courts below. There such a thing as an ad-
journment for two months, or for any period whatever, was
wholly unknown. Out of the very nature of the present case,
there arose a necessity for submitting to one evil or other ; and
upon his honour as a Peer, and his sense of duty as a man, he
could not consent to the proposition before the House. He
could not agree to the defence being opened, unless the Counsel
for her Majesty stated pointedly whether they meant to pros
in continuation with the evidence after opening their case.
Earl GREY said, that in a case of this important nature---
important as it concerned the present and the future—he shad,'
act in a manner unworthy of:the rank he held In that House, as
an honest and independent Peer, if he did not, even in opposi-
tion to the opinion of the Noble and Learned Lord on the
Woolsack, offer his sentiments to the House. He (Lord Grey)
gave his complete assent to the assertion of the Noble and
Learned Lord, that this was a case of great difficulty. He had
always entertained that opinion. He had hesitated—he had
doubted in his choice of evils, and he preferred that which in
Ms censcience he believed to be the least. 'lt had been said,
that the difficulty which now presented itself had no reference
to any former proceeding of the House in this case.—
From this proposition he entirely dissented. It was to
be traced to the decision of that House, where first those
proceedings were adopted--to the refusal by. that House
to give what had been granted to all others against whom heavy
accusations had been laid—to the denial of those advantages which
would enable her Majesty's Coursed to look with confidence to
a certainty as to the charge, and as to the production of witnesses.
The Noble and Learned Lord had said that the present diffi-
culty had not arisen from this; and that if the list of wit-
nesses, and the specification of time, and place, and charges,
had been allowed, it must inevitably have occurred. It was
not so. If the charges had been specified, if the list of
witnesses had not been refused, so occasion could have oc-
curred, to give a right to her Majesty's Counsel to expect •
suspension of the ordinary proceedings of the House. But those
advantages being opposed by the order of their Lordship, it
became necessary that am equivalent should be granted to
the accused who was placed in so extraordinary a situation,
who had travelled in the three quarters of the world, and
Who of necessity could not be aware of the persons to
be brought forward to establish against her charges, with
the particular nature and :bearings of which the was wholly
unacquainted. The equivalent then was promised, and how was
it granted ? The Noble Lord on the Woolsack had, he believed,
mistaken the statement of the Queen's Attorney-General, and
supposed that it was his wish to address their Lordships upon
the defence, and, after having proceeded to a certain extent with
witnesses, to propose a suspension of the proceedings. This was,
he thought, a misapprehension of the meaning of the Learned
Counsel, who, if he (Lord Grey) was right, wished to address
their Lordships, and to be influenced by the effect of that ad-
dress, as to whether he should call witnesses at all or not. The
question then was, whether Counsel were to open the defence,
with the power to call witnesses, and to suspend the proceed-
ings on the Bill till those witnesses were produced? This
is a choice of difficulties. Disadvantages might arise from,
'hiving die speech of Counsel before the Public, unsupported by
evidence, and, perhaps, incapable of being supported by evi-
dence. As an argument against the probable occurrence of such
a disadvantage. it was said, that the conduct of Counsel might
be relied upon, and that, at the Bar of that House, there could
be no abuse of the privileges granted to professional men. Goa
forbid that Counsel would ever appear at that Bar who
were disposed to abuse their privilege. From his own know-
ledge of the professional Gentlemen engaged in this cause,he was
justified in assuring the House, that they would not state what
they did not suppose to be material to their case. But without re-
ference to their general character, although the House might
trust to the Counsel for discreet conduct in their proceedings,
It was to be considered that Counsel must depend upon the in-
structions which they received, and that they might be led io
make statements which were not founded in truth. These
were, be admitted, great difficulties, but if the evils upon the
other side were looked at they would be found to be com-
paratively of enormous magnitude. The cross-examination of
witnesses must necessarily be suspeuded.Her Majesty's Counsel
did not at the commencement of this case know the character

or the abode of the witnesses who were to be brought against
her Majesty. They had merely a sort of general knowledge
of them, and an intelligent witness, who was possessed of the
advantage of being unknown, and of being able to consider, be-
fore an answer was thought necessary to be given, in conse-
quence of a difference of language, could more readily bailie a
Counsel than if there were evidence to contradict and rebut. What
would be the effect if a case of conspiracy, or of perjured witnesses
(he di.l not speak this in allusion to the present case) ?
[ Left speaking].

The Duke of GRAFTON gave a sumptuous enter-
tainment on Wednesday, at his house in Clarges-
street, Piccadilly, to a large party of distinguished
personages, among whom were, the Duke of ittlT•
LAND, the Duke of PORTLAND, the Marquis of LANS•
DOWN, the Marquis CAMDEN, the Marquis of Exa-
TER, the Earl of DARNLEY, the Earl of Esse.; Earl
BRADFORD, Lord DACRE, &C.

Groupes of persons were to be seen, yesterday, in
every street and open space of the Metropolis,viewing
the solar eclipse through pieces of glass, smoked
over candles ; in consequence of which black eyes
were the order of the day, and many a pocket hand-
kerchief was carried off by the light fingered tribe,
whilst the owners were absorbed in Sue and Moon
gazing !