Star.
London, England, 1820-10-26 00:00:00

THE QUEEN.

We have, till to-day, been prevented, by want of
room, from laying before our Readers a full copy of
the Report of the Secret Committee of the House
of Lords, on the Correspondence between Colonel
Baoww and Mr. Powann: nor can we now find room
to offer any remarks on the contradictions which this
Report establishes between the evidence of POWELL
and the real facts. Mr. Powrinn stated to the
House, that his only object in sending Rosielli to
Milan, was to pacify the families of the witnesses :

and, on another occasion, that it was to get some
papers verified, which he was to bring back with
him. But look at the Correspondence (No. IX.) and
there it will be seen, under Powtt.c's own hand-

writing, that the real object for his being sent abroad
was, that he might be of use to Colonel Bilowx, though
it has been asserted, over and over, that Rasteili was

not an agent of the Milan Commission, and that no
such agency had been or could be established. Again
it also deserves notice, that Mr. PowELL expressed

hopes that !taste& would return, though he had in
his pocket at the tithe a letter from Colonel BROWN
(No. V.) telling him that the Colonel believed Mat Rat-
telli teas Shuffling"—aye, others have
been shuffling, in this business, as well as the per-
jured wretch Rattelli.
All but the veriest, slaves of power were satisfied,
long before the closing of the QUEEN'S case, that the
prosecution had completely failed, and that a Con-
spiracy against her MAJESTY had been completely
established ; and Mr. DENMAN'S summing up must
carry conviction to every mind, not predetermined to
shut their eyes and ears to the truth.
We cannot pretend to notice particular points in
Mr. DENMAN'S address ; for it was throughout a
congeries of strong points which would be injured
by separation ; but we must call the attention of our
Readers to one circumstance which may have es.

taped the notice of many, that Barbara Kress
when speaking of the rooms, spoke impersonally,
—" It was ordered that a double bed should be put
in the room;" &c.—leaving it _to be concluded

that the Quires 'had ordered this arrangement.—
But mark the fact, as now brought to light by an
article in the Algenurine Zeitaing, German Newspaper.
Though apartments bad been taken for the QUEEN,
at the Bear, she was conducted by the postillions
(properly tutored, no doubt,) to the Post Inn, where
GRIMM and his accomplices had, we suppose, taken
care to make such arrangements, and give such
orders, as best suited their infamous purpose. But,
we shall here give a translation of the statement ;al
the Paper jusealluded to:
" Flinn ens Guam) Ducnr or Barms.—As so much is said
in the Newspapers respecting what took place during the rest
deuce of the Queen of ENCSLAIUD at Carisruhe, it may be inte-
resting to know what is said in Carisruhe itself on that subject.
Before the arrival of the Qum, apartments were taken for
her at the Bear Inn. The postillions, however, drove her,
without ceremony, to the Post. Moreover it is customary
in this, and all other respectable inns of the country, that
waiters, and not females, should attend on the guests. The
maids have merely to clean out the rooms and to attend to the
beds, and it would never ester into the head of any maid to
enter an apartment while the guests were in it. If Mrs. Kress
did this, she must have receivel particular instructions for that
purpose. Two Chamberlains were appointed to attend the
Qoaas during her stay here, and they were with her the greatest
part of the day. The boar when Kress gives out that she sur-
prised her in her room was the% of the Cirde at Court, and the
Queen was present in it. The Chamberlains in attendance on
ber must have been best able to clear up this point. There are
still Englishmen at Carlsruhe in quest of witnesses to confirm
the dexterity and sincerity of Madame Kress, and others who
are seeking for witnesses against her. Will it at list be necessary
to have witnesses again foe all these witnesses?"
The prints which daily calumniate her Maistsrr
are in a great rage with Mr, DENMAN, because he
could find no parallel to the present prosecution in
the History of any Christian country, and was
therefore obliged to go back to the times of Imperial
Rome. They would willingly forget that ere long the
events that are passing before our eyes will be matter
of history; and should a third prosecution of a similar
character ever arise, the a4vocate will not then need
to look only to the history of Nero for a parallel.
The miseries of Oct./4ra, the wife of the Roman
monster, commenced with her marriage day ; like
her MAJESTY, she was the object of two conspiracies;
and she was equally deprive 4 fif her fuller and
bTi?b!rr her natural!°t:St9Tst P!!,.

in that day of abject Courtiers, servile Senators,
and unworthy Priests, to second the inclinations
-of Nato; but the Arople of Ratite received her
on her return from banishment, with the same ge...
nerons sympathy which the People of England have
uniformly manifested for their persecuted Quash.
History has dwelt little on the instruments by which
the Tyrant was enabled to effect his abominable pnr-1
poses ; for, unfortunately, Sovereigns can always find
instruments for the blackest purposes with too muds
_facility; and the sufferings and final death of the nom
fortunate 9CTATIA are, therefore, considered the to
cessary result of the foregone conclusion of Nano.
Towards the conclusion of his address, Mr. Dra-
w! hypothetically dragged out to public obloquy
some person—a Peer—whom he described as endea-
vouring to taint the minds of his brother Judges, by
circulating among them, in the total absence of
proved or proveable offences, false and fulsome ru-
mours. If, said the eloquent speaker, such a person—
whom he also challenged to appear (" Come forth,
thou slanderer r he exclaimed)—should prove to be
one of the Royal Family, he has done more to fcr-
reit his succession to the Throne than ever has been
done by the subject of the present Bill. In justice,
to Mr. DENMAN, we must presume, that the con-
duct which called forth this dreadful castigation,
has been of the most odious description.
The following Notice has been issued from Bran-
deaburgh House, dated October 25 :
" Mr. K. CRAVEN and Sir Was. GaLL, Vice-Cham-
berlains to the Queaw, are commanded to announce,
that, in consequence of the lateness of the season, and
the probable approach of wet weather, her MAJESTY
wishes to decline receiving any future Addresses in
person after Monday next, the 30th instant. It is,
nevertheless, to be understood, that her MAJESTY by
no means intends to exclude the presentation of such

Addresses as may be at this moment in preparation,
and which, if not ready by Monday, her MAJESTY
will receive and answer without the ceremony of a
formal Deputation."

TWENTY-FIRST DAY OF THE DEFENCE.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
The House met this morning at the usual hour, and the usual
preliminaries were gone through in the ordinary form.
counsel were called in at twenty minutes past ten o'clock.
Dr. Ltearnecrou addressed their Lordships.—" My Lords,
if I had been left to my ewn discretion, and to follow the dic-
tates of my own wishes, I should not now have rben to address
your Lordships. But in the discharge of my duty to my Blue.'
trious Client, I am delegated, by my Learned Friends, who
think this, case so important, and so extensive, that, after all
their exertions, some facts yet remain to be stated. Your Lord-
ships mast feel that my task is not en easy one, and that
I coins to the performance, surrounded with difficulties be-
yond all measure. But, my Lords, I have one consolation,
a consolation that, in the judgment of all my friends, this
case stands on a foundation so firm and secure, that even
the; treatment of an unskilful Advocate cannot injure
I have also the consolation to feel that the more this ease beer*.
tinized the more will the innocence of my Royal Client appear.
I will, in the course of my address to your Lordship, avoid re-
petition, where repetition can be avoided ; but your Lordships
must feel, that, were I gifted with the most powerful elo-
quence, my observations can have no weight, except taken into
consideration with the circumstances that have already taken
place. It becomes more immediately my duty to make one or
two observations on the subject of the charge in this Bill: I
have, in the whole of my professional life, been engaged in cases
of Divorce ; but there are circiimstances in this case unprece-
dented in the records of past times, and, I thank Gon, without an
example in the present age. It is not, my Lords, that the tri-
bunal is new, or that the Government is implicated in the cause;
but there are other circumstances without a parallel in the page
of history. I will first notice the age of the party accused, and I
affirm to your Lordships, that there is not a single instance, in
modern or in former times, where a husband sought to di-
vorce his wife, by accusing her of adultery at the age of 50.
It is a circumstance well deserving the most serious considers-
tion—a wife separated from her husband, scarcely living a single
day with him after her marriage--she is sought to be divorced
at the age of 50; when there is not a single instance even where
the parties bad lived together, of a divorce being sought, where
the wife had attained the age of 45. But there was another
point. The husband of the Lady accused, has been twenty-
four years separated from his wife—separated by hid own art
and by his own choice—separated not in consequence of the mis-
conduct of that wife, or of the breath of suspicion having tainted
her character, but separated in the wayward indulgence of
his own pleasures and his own passions. Now, my Lords,
how stand I then ? Lives there a man in the world who
is so bold as to come before your Lordships, and say he has
cause of complaint—be has injuries to be redressed, under
such circunistances ! But although Kings are in many respects
above the laws of man, who dare impiously affirm that he is
above the laws of Goo? Is there one divine law for Kings,
and another for man ? Are the vows at the Altar to be binding
on the peasant, and to be violated with impunity by the Prince? Is
there one Gem for the poor individual, one divine law for him, and
another for the sceptred Monarch ! What was the object of the
sacred contract of marriage, but the happiness of the individuals?
But where, my Lords,ishall I look for the happiness of the
lestrious Accused—where shall I find we trace of comfort, dui.-
' ins the whole of her married life ! Shall 1 look to Isos ? Shall
I look to lsls' or to the time when the intercourse between
the Mother and the Child was. forbidden ? Shall I look to the
time when that Mother was exiled from her Country and
Friends, and when the spirit of persecution followed her
every step ! I know, my Lords, that the agitation of, this
subject shakes the Crown, and the dignity of the Monar-
chy ; but it is in the faithful discharge of a solemn .duty
that I have been compelled to advert to these painful circum-
stances ; and I have done it with all the delicacy I have been
able. It is hardly possible to *hew the difference between
shis case and the proceedings in the ordinary Courts. lint
nillat should we say of a husband, insensible to his own die.
Cill...lrma a husband (aeries Fifty Thousand Pounds a-year,
pet to restrain his wife from an adulterous iutereourse wide* he
helicied she was carrying on, but to permit its unrestrained
pees? What ehoold 'we say den individual earning to claim jos-
dee who had said to his wife, " 9e thy wey,.. not in the.leopeete
at the RatouW,, Vaud by say frirkt Mr. Denman, Yin*iisr*
ofd this any, end sips no essre,“—but 454—indedge Ay crimi
voi passint--rend inidt foie pleasures of edniterWil

sad yen aIeII he fkraiiked elk the mast inspb wow
I am happy, tuy Lords, to he able to say, ;bat I shall not be
under the necessity of introducing another topic. It has been
considered, by my Learned Priced', unnecessary to say one
word in recrimination. This Hew% my Lords, has the power
to pees this BM ; but, unless you are prepared to violate the
laws of Goo and man—unless that Bench, which forms a
part of the Constitudoe, is prepared- to abandon the tenets of
the Gospel—you cannot, and fou shall not, pronowee for this
Divorce! Before I enter upon the ghost examination of the evl.
deuce, which It is my !mention to parsec, permit me to sac a
few words as to the principles by which you are bound to be di.
meted in your judgment upon this ease. It is not to ask you
to acquit the defendant upon a point of law, that I address
you upon this point, but to prevent those of your Lordships
who are not conversant with that way of considering the
case, from being misled by the Learned Counsel fee 'the
Bin. The Solicitor-General, in his summing up, quoted the de.
claim of the Learned Judge of the Ccnsistory Colin, in the ease
of Loveden again, Parker. Now, though to the talent-4se
matchless talent—of my Learned Friend, no man bows with
greater deference than I, yet I am surprised that he has extracted
a principle from a particular part of that cases and applied it as
a general principre."
litre Dr. Loanunnton read the passage quoted from Sir Wu.
uses Stores decision, by the
.Soueroa.Grxeaar. It stated,
that it was not necessary to prove the direct fact of adultery—a
thing, in most cases, impossible. It Is suiScient to have inciden-
ad circuinstances, leading to a conclusion of guilt, not to a rash

conclusion.
" What !" said Dr. Lusnlxotox, " Do you think, by the situa.
don in which Sir 'Wu.wiat Scion was placed, when he delivered
this opinion. The case was under discussion and argument. He
said this : 4 Here are acts of indecent familiarity proved by wit.
nesses above all exception. Here are intercepted letters from Mrs

Loveden to Mr. Parker. of such a nature and character as many

a woman who would enter into a brothel woultL be ashamed to
mention. I should not read those letters, but they contain

the moat positive evidence that the het had taken place." Those
letters had not been given in evidence,but a verdict was given
in the King's Bench for the defendants although it was proved
that he had passed the night in Mrs. Loveden's chamber. In
another cue, that of Mortimer v. Mortimer, on the 12th of July,
1816, the Learned Judge insisted, when the Counsel were on
the point of giving up the idea of arguing, upon hearing the ar-
gument—and it fell to my lot to argue upon the ease- .although
convinced Of the guilt of tie woman, the Learned Judge or.
_ _

dared additional evidence ; for, said he, ' I may have a formal
conviction of her guilt; but, no "Ndicial proof.'—" But, (rot*.
sued Doctor Lushington) " I am not tube supposed to ask for
your verdict because there is no legal proof, but because there
is no proof which could in any case influence a person of
integrity. judgment, and diligence, to suppose that there was
the slightest foundation for those charges. The case, as I
understand it, is this :—ifere is an ample opportunity
here are circumstances coupled with the opportunity, which
lead to a demonstration of guilt. Now that the opportunity of
ossismitting adultery sholdd be consiiered as a proof of it,
dime is not one of your Lordships en ignorant as to allow. I
admit that if therewere evident familiarities of an indecent nature
oddly between the parties, and that opportunities of guilty en-
imam were sought after, it would be unnecessary to go any
further, but the circumstances must be in the same degree of cer-
tainty as the opportunities. If I were arguing this as an ordinary
ease, I'll tell you how I should treat it. I should shew you De
Mont, and Samba, and RasteUi to be perjured; and then, if yea
Would not stop me before the end at aryargsmient, I should throw
?pal brlet, What! when I had proved that the four principal vrit-
MIMI* mpilist my Client were perjured, to permit me to proceed :
Gracious Gem, where can be the security to life, and characters
ma Impiety ? If, when I skew you, that she, two, three,
fees, and live of the charges are supported by perjured witnesses,
are you to say, " Unless you prove the 6th and 7th, to be fabc
upon the same grounds, I shall deliver a verdict of Guilty?'
It Is the order of Dwma Femme= that we are enabled to
detect foul conistracia, by bringing to light circumstances.
which prove the perjury of those who support the charges ;
but that Power has limited the means of eladdathig the
truth, and has not permitted us to follow it beyond the
bounds of necessity. The plaintiff in an action board
establish his case upon the most indisputable evidence; muck
more is it Incumbent upon the man who aims as taking away the
life or character, to In the guilt by Ilimupeeteil testimony. lit
should say, " Thus far will I go, bit no farther; not that
you, the victim of 'my revenge, shall at least go with a stain
upon cots, which nothing tan effacer Dr.Lusbington eonthuted :
—4401 y Lords, let us in the firm place anoint what was the
eon/Fact of the Queen towards Bergasni? The Attorney-Goseral
told your Lordships that he would skew you that she was so
much notice the power of this domineering passim, that his will
and pleasure were her's, and that there was such a consummated
familiarity between them as could only be accounted for by
the last favours having been conferred. Now, my Lords, I
undertake to demonstrate by the evidence produced,. that no
such familiarity, no such intimacy existed; that there was no want
of proper respect in the one towards the other—no want of a re-
gard to ail the decencies of ordinary life. I am sure your Lard.
ships would feel that I did not do my duty, after making so broad
an assertion, if I did not point oat the evidence on which it it
grounded, and by which, I say‘ it is indisputably proved. First,
then, my Lords, let us look to the proof of the Queen's adver-
saries ; let us see what it h ; sod hovi k deserves to be looked
at? Foremost you have that memorable witness Majoechi,
and what does he swear? That 6 Bergami had more audio.
city than the other persons of the boasehold'—that there was
rather a familiarity between her Royal Highness and Berpmi:
Good Goa! my Lords what a phrase after such an opening of
the case there was 'rather a familiarity ' between them !
What a phrase from so chosen a witness; from one who has
limn so nurtured to the task of ruining his Royal Mistress;
from one whom I may call the elite of the prosecution!
What an answer to give, when we consider moreover
that my Learned Friend the Solicitor-General put all his
"Minns so ingeniously, that the witness could in no in-
seam, help understanding fully how much was expected from
iffm, and how far be was hired to go. After all this, what a
sees--,total of evidence ! There was rather a familiarity
between them!' We come next, my Lords, to the evidence
id Mademoiselle De Moot. She says that, on one Ma'
11111114 they was ' very familiar; and that, on another, she
• made no observations.' Althoegh your Lordships will per-
haps agree ',with me, that if ever there was a witness more
likely or more disposed to observe alything which might operate
le the prejudice of her Majesty, it was this woman. In fact, my
Lords, except in the evidence of the two masons, who were
entr king at the Villa d'Este, most 'admirable judges truly of the
teihd• act which a Queen ought ti observe towirds her Chamber-
hie, ad who swear no mom than that they walked together,
like two friends, like husband and wife, your Lordships will not
and in the whole body of the evidence, one single assertion of
this existing familiarity. But, my Lords, let as now turn to the
other aide of the evidence. I have to present to your Lord-
ships twelve witnesses, whom testimony goes not only ever the
whole 11'004 of the ingetot; dams gi criminality, but estadl

to the time of het last departure from Rome. ' I will make, my
Lords, no comparisons ; I will not so far dishonour the respect-
able names I am about to quote, as to compare their credi-
bility with that of the witnesses for the prosecution. What,
then, does the first of these witnesses, Lord Guildford,
swear? That he' saw nothing particular in the manner of the
Queen towards Bergami'—' nothing in the conduct of Bergami
towards the Queen but what was very respectfuL' Lord Glen-
bervi, in like manner, states, that he saw ' nothing like disre-
spect' in Bergami's 'behaviour to the Queen. Lady Charlotte
Lindsay, a witness whose testimony was given in the fairest and
most honourable manner, and who, I cannot help saying, was most
harshly treated by my Learned Friends on the opposite side;
she says that Bergaml -conducted himself in all things towards
the Queen, as a persoa in his situation ought naturally to do.'
Your Lordships will observe, too, that this Lady was with '
her Majesty in March and April, 1815, when the alleged adul-
terous intercourse must have been in the days of its first enjoy-
ment and extravagance. Can your Lordships believe that Lady
Charlotte Lindsay was a person so destitute of all ordinary
powers of observation, as to allow any circumstances calcu-
lated to justify the suspicion of an intercourse to pan nano-
ticed ? Can your Lordships believe so, who saw the talents
which this Lady exhibited when under examination at your bar? '
Can any one believe it who has the honour of that Lady's ac-
quaintance, and who must know, that in mental capacity she is '
an individual infinitely above the usual standard of her sex?--.
The same Lady swears farther, that the Queen behaved to-
wards Bergami as a mistress should towards her servant; that
she chewed ' the same familiarity towards Bergami as she did to
Sicard and others.' Now, my Lords, a word as to the evidence of
Lord Llandaff. His Lordship says, that he saw nothing improper
in the conduct of the Queen'—' nothing to reflect disgrace
on the character of the country.' Let me next, my Lords,
request your attention to the evidence of the Honourable
Keppel Craven, the Chamberlain of her Royal Highness.—
He says that he saw 'no improper conduct' in her Royal
degrading familiarity;' and again no sort of
impropriety of conduct' either when Bergami stood behind
the chair of her Royal Highness as a servant,. or afterwards
when he sat as a guest at the same table. Sir W. Gal, another
of her Majesty's Chamberlains, says also, that he saw ' nothing
improper in the conduct of the parties;' and that Bergami acted
as person in his situation ought to do.' fo this witness,
another question was put, such as 1 verily believe never was put
in any Court of Justice before, to ascertain the goat or inno-
cence of an accused party. Not, my Lords, that I complain of
the question, for I have felt, throughout the whole of this en-
quiry, that, only give me an honest witness, one who has a cha-
ractei to lose, one who has some pretext for standing upright in
the world, and I care not what questions you put. The
question, my Lords, was this, ' Did you eves observe any
thing in the demeanour, in the conversation, or iu the looks,
which could induce you as a man of the world to entertain ass
Rea that an adulterous intercourse subsisted between the Queen
and Bergami ?' See, my Lords, to what an unheard of test the
conduct of my Illustrious Client is subjected. If, iu the whole
course of the time that Sir William Gell had an opportunity
of witnessing the conduct of the Queen, one single act of indis-
cretion, one loose expression escaped her Majesty in the wan-
tonness of joy, or In the innocence of overflowing gaiety—if there
xv as one word, one action, one look, which could for a moment fill
the mind of this' man of the world' with only a suspicion that an
improper intercourse subsisted, it is to be brought forward as
an evidence of guilt on the part of her Majesty. Not by facts
is she sought to be convicted, but by possibilities; not by evi-
dence of what did actually pass, but by suspicions of what may
have passed—suspicions excited by such indications as may have
been gathered us all the confidence of unrestrained intimacy;
when the heart and soul had delivered themselves up to the
freest enjoyment! To have one's conduct so tried, is, indeed,
severe; but to have it by such a test acquitted, is, indeed, a
triumph, which the purest might envy! What, my Lords, is the
ar.swer of Sir W. Gel! to this searching question ? I Nzvza wia !'
What, my Lords, can my Leareed Friends say to such testi'
mony as that which I have now quoted to your Lordships?
They will say, for we have heard it said, Oh, these
were individuals of high rank and character. The Queen
was on her guard before them !' Well, my Lord; sup-
pose for a moment the fact were so, let me introduce to
your Lordships a witness of a different description; let us
see how the comparatively low are supported by the
high in rank ? My Lords, there is the evidence of Si-
card, a man who has been for upwards of twenty years in
her Majesty's service, and who was placed there by his
Majesty! He swears, that' the Queen's manner of treating her
servants was uncommonly kind, almost to a fault,' that' Ber-
garni's conduct was always most proper:' and that he was posi-
tive that in his presence ' no undue familiarity or impropriety'
took place between the Princess and Bergami. Left speaking.
(To be continued in a Second Edition.)

-.)
The following distinguished persotages were en-
tertained by the Earl and Coonteis ofbErtkv, at their
house in Grosvenor-square, on Tuesday evening :
The Earl and Countess of Sefton, the Earl and Countess of
Jersey, the Earl of Darnley, Earl of Thanet, Lord and Lady
King, Mr. Brougham; Mr. Derfinan, Mr. H. G. Bednett, M.P.
and Mr. Creevey, M.P.
Yesterday the Duke and Duchess toncAzEs arrived
ar their house in Portland-place, from their seat, at
Harrow-on-the-Hill.

DAVID SCOTT, Esq. jun. of Bengal, has remitted
fifty guineas to the Proves; of Montrose, to be dis-
tributed among the poor of tbe town and parish.
The Hunt met at Cupar on Monday the 25th ul-
timo. The Fox-hounds htnite4that day., Wednesday,
and Saturday, and had tolerable sport. The Races
throughout the week were very good, especially the
one on Thursday, between Sir DAVID MONCIUEFF'S
mare, Betsey, and Mr. Downipnilr's horse, Eglinton,
the second being a dead heat, and the others gained
by half a neck, and half a length. Although the
company was, from various causes, not so nume-
rous as on some former occasions, yet it was of the
highest respectability. The Balls displayed beauty
and fashion ; and the Ordinaries were in M•NAB's
usual style of excellence,---Among the company were,
Lady Catharine Whyte Melville; Lady Moncrieff; Lady Dur-
ham ; Mrs. Durham, of Largo; Mrs. Rigg, of Tarvit ; Mrs.
Stwart, of St. Fort; Airs. Ayton, of Inchdairnie; Mrs. Balfour,
of Balipirnie ; Mrs. Durham Calderwood, of Polton ; Mrs.
Bethune, of Blebo ; Mrs. Paterson, of Cunpoquhie ; Mrs. Don,
tr: Springfield; Mrs. Claude Russell; Miss Wemyss, of Wemyss;
Misses Metcalf; Misses Hope; Misses Graham, of Fintry ;
Plisses Dewar, of Gaston ; Miss Inglehart; Miss Bayne, of
Item; Miss Low, of Clatto ; Miss Donaldson; the Earl of
Leven; the Hon. Colonel Ramsay; the Hon. John Stuart;
the lion. John Gray; Sir David Moncrieff, Bart. Col. Oswald;
Colonel Don, of Springfield ; Major Belches, of Invermay; Mr.
Itigg, of Tani, ; Mr. Thomson, of Charleton ; Mr. Ayton, of
Irandairnie ;, Mr. Moray, of Ahercairney ; Mr. Stuart, of St.
Fort ; Mr. Leslie, of Roches ; Mr. Cheape, of WeUfield ; Mr.
Paterson, of Connoquhie ; Mr. Whyte Melville, of Mount Mel-
ville; Mr. Durham Calderwood. of Polton ; Mr. Bayne, of
kites; Mr. Dewar, of Gilaton; Captain Parsons, 10th Hus-
sars; Mr. Guthrie, younger, of Craigie ; Captain Ayton, H. A.
Captain Cheape, I. C. S. Mr. Dowbiggin ; Mr. Moncrieff
Skene ; Mr. Gardiner Marshal ; Mr. John Brougham; Mr.
Graham. jun. Ste.

•Adiimariimm