Star.
London, England, 1820-09-07 00:00:00

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, IS2O.

positions they have made." Then I answered,that though I knew
something, I would never tell it, far it would commit me; that
I knew only one of the witnesses; that I did not know the de-
positions of any of the other Witnesses ; and that I could
give him no other account. Mr. Marietti then added, that
it was wished to know so much, because the Queen might
prepare her own defence. Afterwards he asked me, whether I
might know something concerning the depositions, repeating his
assurances that he did not wish me to commit myself, or any of
the parties.

those quarrels ?—Hcr Royal Highness always she xed satisfaction
at my conduct.

Did she promise you any certificate of your good conduct ?
We did not talk about a certificate.
The Arroatow-CENsant. then shewcd a paper to the witness,
and asked him whether he knew it WC be the hand-writing of
Schiavini?.—Witness-As far as I know, it is the hand-writing
of Schiavini.

Have you seen him write?—l have also received a letter
from Mr. Scbiavini.

Did M. Marietti, at any time, give the witness any advice as
to the evidence he was to give in this cause ?—Never.
Did Marietti oiler you any money ?—Never:
The Marquis of BUCKING HA M here asked her Majesty's
Attorney-General, if there was any other question which he
wished to put as to this interview, and he would willingly put it?
Mr. linounnast said there was not. Ile bad no reason to be
diasatisfied with the answers already obtained, though others
might be.
Lord GREY—Did you ever go by the name of Milani befort!
you came to England ?—I took it at Paris.
In what year?—Four or five weeks before I set out for
England.
When was tbat?—ln July last year.
What was your motive for changing your name at that time?
I—l was known in London under my own name ; and in conse-
quence of the tumult which had happened, and of the darter I
should have run of coming in my own name, I changed it.
What rumour induced you to do so was warned that the
witnesses against the Queen might run some risk if they were
known.
liad you been informed that they actually had run any risk ?
—They had not run any risk. '
Having stated, in a•former answer, that you changed your
name on account of a tumult that had happened, I wish to
know what you mean by that tumult? While I was at !
al Gentleman came, accompanied by the courier, Crouse,
and this Gentleman told me that it would be necessary to
change my name, because ft would be dangerous to come to
England under my own name (having told him that I was known
in London by my own name), and that already something had
happened on their account, not.on my account, but on account
of other persons.

Have you seen him write ?—Several times.
Do you believe that to he his hand-writing d o.
The LORD CHA NCELLOR stated, that application had
been made to him, staing, that one of the witnesses for the
Queen (Lord Frederick Montague) was abroad, and in such a
state of health as not to be able to come over to this country.
It was requested that the House would decide whether or not
that person could not 'be examined abroad by some authority
in the shape of a Commission. Now in Ireland there had been
lastanceseg such things, and if the parties upon both sides would
agree upon the subject, their Lordships would probably have no
objection—(Hear, hear).—He should not now expect an answer
from the King's Attorney General, but to-morrow morniu,g he
should communicate the application to him, and the House
would expect that he would be prepared with an answer.

Roster Haaz, examined by 1k: ArTOINry-G£%art AI.
lie said, he was cashicr in the haniting-house of Messrs.
Cootts and Co. thirt,..n years. filer Royal Highness kept cash
in the house of Contra and Co. previously toter going abroad.
lk had paid her drafts, as cashivr.
Here .a paper was produced, and the Arronstcr-GiNsitas
asked witikesa whether it was the hand-writing of the Quee■?—
I think it is the writing of the Princess of Wales before she
was Queen. _

Cross-ermined by Mr. 13ftorcttAtt.
has seen the hand-writing of the King, and believes he shou:d
know it.
The Socterroz-Gxxxaat—Have you ever seen the King
write?—Never. •
Hour do you know his hand.w•riting?---I only saw it in the
Commission.
llave you any other knowledge, except from papers shewn to

Did hi tell you of a tumult that had taken place?—He told
me of some disorder.
On what occasion did he say that disorder had taken place?
—He told me no more.
What do you mean by something happening on account of
" other persons ?"—The Gentleman mentioned to me that som e
disorders had happened in regard to other persons, coming to a
similar cause.
What do you mean by a similar cause?—l have repeated
what the Gentleman told me.
Did you understand it was with respect to persons who had
come to give evidence in the cause of the Queen ?—I believe it
was on this account.
Did you know at that time that any witnesses had come over
to give evidence in the cause of the Queen?-1 did not know
with certainty.
Where did you lodge when you first came to England
Sabioniere's Hotel, in Leicester-square.
Etrl of DARLINGTON.—What was the cause of your
being discharged ?—A quarrel with the confectioner.
In what capacity did you live in England with Mr. Godfrey?
—1 was in London and sought a place, and it was proposed to
me to go to Mr. Godfrey.
Witness spoke of a ball at the Barons, was it previous to the
Princess going to Turin ?—lt was some time before.

you
Mr. Bitouratisst—t.Did the King, when Prince of Wi!les, keep
cash at your house ?—Yes; but he was not accustomed to draw
himself.
The ATTORNEY-GrNIRAL then handed the paper to the Inter-
preter. It was dazed Pesaro, .Ith Nov. 1817, and was a Certi-•
fice.te of the good conduct of Sacchi, and was signed by the
Princass of Wales.
The ArTmuszt-Grriert.tr: then said, he had to propose to put
in the certificate of Majocchi, which is signed Schiavini, as
Marshal to the Palace. Ile thought no objection could he taken,
as Schiavini was an authorised person, and had been in the habit
of granting certificates.
Mr. BROUGHAM contended that no proof had been given thpt
SchiaviniQrsti been authorised to give such certificate, and of
course. the document could not be received in evi,tence.
The LORI) CHANCELLOR was of opinion, that there
were not sufficient grounds to thew that Count Schiavini had a
general authority to give certificates of character.
The House assenting to his opinion,
The LORD CHANCELLOR pronounced it to he the opi-
nion of the /louse, that the certificate could not be prod aced.
After a considerable pause, the AITORSEY•6IINERAL rose,
and said that he had' an important application to make to their
Lordships. There were certain parties, who were to have

Marquis of HUN fLEY.—When the Count Schiavini gave
you your discharge, did you not receive a certificate from the
Princess ?
Baourmest objected to the question, as there was no
proof of its having been signed by the Princess.
The Earl of LIVER POOL was of opinion, that their Lord-
ships, as Judges, could put any question that might be put by
Counsel, either in examination, cross-examination, or re-eau-
minat ion.
The LORD CHANCELLOR thought that the question
could not be put until proof of the certificate being the writing
of the Princess had been adduced.
Were you a private in the army, and were you promoted on
account of your merit was.
Lord F.'tLMOUTH.—How long did the Princess amain at
the balls at the Ilarona generally ?—Her Royal highness bad
her own apartment contiguous to the ball-room, into which she
came fox two or three minutes, and then went hack.
You have stated that the women were taken out of the bill-
room at the pleasure of the men. Do you know whether they
were so *len out with the knowledge of the Princess ?—I
never mole the observation.
Did you consider yoarself entitled to mix in these balls ?—I did.
Did the witness, or other servants, invite their friends to these
balls?—As far as I am concerned, no. As to others, I believe not.
I suppose the Princess, or some one for her, invited the cons-
pany?—Certainly.
When yon left the service of the Princess, had you had a ret.
cent quarrel with Bergarni?—/Viut ricork !
The Earl of LAUDERDALE—Do you speak or understand
French ?—I do.
Was the speech made by the Princess, at the Ilarona, in
French or Italian 7--Her Royal Highness spoke to me always
in French.
In what terms did she address you in French?
I fere the witness gave the Princess's answer, in had French,
which was taken down, and produced some discussion among
their Lordships to its correctness.

been produced as witnesses in support of the Bill, who resided
at Lugano and its neighbourhood. Three of them had set out
for this country, while others were on the point of setting out.
These three persons hating advanced as far as Beauvais, two
stages on this side of Paris, a rumour reached them that several
persons who had preceded them, to be witness, s against the
Queen, bad been extremely ill-treated at Dover. The conse-
quence was, that they went before the Magistrates at Beauvais,
and made depositions. that, being apprehensive of their personal
safety, they thought it not prudent. to come to Ene,land. These
depositions were forwarded to this country, and the parties
themselves actually returned to Lugano. As soon as infor-
mation was received here of the circumstance, persons were
sent in all haste after the witnesses, in the hoke of overtaking
them, and prevailing with thew to come over. The effort
was however unavailing ; the persons had reached Lugano be-
fore the messenger came up with them. On Monday last, how-
ever, letters had been received from Lausanne, which is in the
neighbourhood of Lugano;. from which there was reason to en-
tertain a confident expectation that the witnesses had changed
their determination, and that they would in fact set out for Eng-
land the day after the 29th of August. Since Monday, no farther
tidings had been received of them ; but there was every reason
to believe that the persons alluded to were now actually on their
journey hither to give evidence at their Lordships bar, and
every probability that in a few days from this tine they would
actually arrive. Under these circumstances, the Learned Coun-
sel thought he was not asking too much of their Lordships, in
applying for such a delay as, in their Lordships' judgmeut,
would afford these witnesses an opportunity of appearing before
their Lordships' bar.
Mr. Bitovsnaa: protested strongly against any delay. Tne
application was whofiy unjustified by any analogy to the prac-
tice of the Courts below. A party might there apply to have a
ttial put off on account of the unarddable absence of material
witnesses, but it was a thing never heard of, that after a trial
had once begun, any delay should be interjected in completing
the case for the prosecution. When an application too was made
.

yuu sec these virgins at the balls after the Princess had
said this to you, and was she present?--I do not know of what
virgin you speak, or in a general way.
In a general way ?—Yes.
And the ban. were attended by the same persons?—Nearly.
What sort of a carriage was it in which the Princess and Her-
-72111i were when you saw them asleep? Was it a carriage iu
which one could or lie down?—The Princess had always
three or four carriages; did not know.
Do you know what sort of a carriage the Princess was- In
when you opened the curtains?—Nun mi ricordo !
Had the Princess more carriage. that one with curtains?—l
I believe she had two.

to put off a triaf, it was upon afficlavit;.b.bth as to the mate-
riality of the witnesses and as to their utter inability to attend ;
but here all that their Lordships had was the bare statement
of his Majesty's Attorney-General that so and so was the caq:.
The application was the more objectionable that the prosecutors
in this case had had their own choice as to the time of pro-
ceeding with their case; they had been months and years pm,
paring it; and even after othe Queen had, by Message to the
House, demanded to proceed instantly, they had taken three
weeks more to complete their preparations before they would
proceed. The delay of these three weeks had, moreover. been
accorded, on the most distinct understanding that, crape 17th
August, the prosecutors wonl.l be completely ready to jo on.—
_ _. •

PRI( ESEA.:

T . ' E.

lowed to us to state that any of our witnesses h ,v, :•. n pre-
vented from-coming, by rumours of d threatened application of
: the Alien Bill to them, by rumours of the interfeienze of fo-
reign Governments to prevent their coming, or by the exertions
made by Ambassadors at foreign Courts ? My Lords, such an
application, pending a trial, is altogether without precedent, and
the agreeing to it would establish a precedent the most perni-
cious that can be imagined to the administration of justice.
The ArroaxEr-Gootaat—My Lords, I have to complain, in
this r

tl ,s case, of a misrepresentation on the part of my friends on
the other side, of the objects of my application to your Lor-
dships. I did not make that application with any view, as my
friends st:.te, of patching up the case. The witnesses whom I
stated that I expect, form a part of the original case as handed to
me. I trust, therefore, that your Lordships will not refuse this
application, if being of great importance to the ends of. justice
that the short delay which I have asked for Arnold be granted.
I have already stated, that these vsitresses may be expected in
the course of two or three days.
The LORD (*EI ANCELLOR thought it a question of great
importance; and that if such au application was agreed to with-
out sufficiently special grounds, it inUit be of dangerous conse-
imence. Ile therefore thought it most material that the proof
of the grounds upon which this apphe.tion was made should be
made kncwn, before he gave an opinion as to whether it ought
or nut to be acceded to.
The Earl of LI VER POOL observed, that the witnesses who
were expected, it appeared, formed part of the original case; as
he distinctly understood from the Attorney-General that what
they were to prove formed part of his opening. It shiiuld there-
fore he rte,;:leeted, that the case for the Bill was not, in f.:ct,
closed, as under the permission of the House, the Counsel for
the Queen had the liberty of postponing the cross-examination
of the witnesses for the Bill; and until that cross-examination
was Stiiihed, the case for the Bill was not closed, nor could the
summing up take place.
Lord ERSKINE felt it impossible, under any circumstances,
to consent to this application, which was monstrously repugnant
to every principle of justice—(Hear.) He did not at all agree
with What had fallen from the NoI,L Earl; end it was not be-
cause the Queen's Counsel might not yet have determined who.
ther they would or would not further crirss-examine, that the
Attorney-General was to be allowed to make nut

. out a new case.
What was now propos, d was nothing like an allowable attempt
to support :he testimony of witnesses who might have Woken
down in cross-examination: and who, from the beginning of
English justice, had ever heard of an instance, after' a crimirial
case had tr,zon, and, ab.:re all, a criminal case of this descrip-
tion, where the party, on acroont of any accident, how-
ever unforeseen end uncontroulable. had been permitted to add
to his proofs by delay ?—(Hear.) lie could not }emit himself
for a moment to deliberate on the question. In the case of
the murderer of• Mr. Terceira', an application h•.l been made,
before trial, for time to bring witnesses horn Liverpool to esta-
blish the insinity of the assassin ; but the Chief Justice of the
Common Ple.is had wisely refused it; and what sufficient rea-
son had here been offered for st,ipping in the very midst of the
proceedi•:g ? In a case of treason, what would a Judge say to
.t deminid that the Jury should be allowed to separate, or be
confined while the prosecutor was adding to the strength of his
case by searching for new testimony? Ile hoped their Lord-
ships would not deviate here from the rules that prevailed in
cases where the lives and liberties of their fellow-subjects were at
stake—Wear.) If they did conseiit to this delay, all be could
do was to enter his most solemn protest against a step most fa.
tal to British justice !—(Chrers.)
The LORD CIIANCELLOR thaught it would be better
(it being five o'clock) to postpone the further et usideration of

the subject till to-morrow.
The Earl of CA RN.IIiVON suggcsted that some ground
ought first. to be Lid for the purpose of forming the subject of
diuussion to-morrow ; at present there was nothing but the ap-
plication, without-their knowing what proof was to be offered
in support of it.
The LORI) CHANCELLOR said, it would be impossiLla
for human strength to get through this investigation, if suffichnt
intervals were not given between the days' proceedings, parti-
cularly with regard to himself, who had so many other matters
to attend to.
Earl U REY expressed his perfect willingness that the Noble
and Learned Lord should have thus'_ intervals of relaxation to
which he was so well entitled, but it was most essential in this
case, that before the House separated there should be some un-
derstanding as to what the nature of the proof was uponwohic%
this application was to be supported; an application which he
considered to be contrary to all the principles of justice, and
which he trusted would not be agreed to by their Lordships.—
As, however, this application was to he the subject of discussion
to-morrow, it was of importance that the Attorney-General
should be ealcd upon to state what proofs he had to bring ter-
ward in support of his application. With r.:gard to the' cre:s-
-examination by the Queen's Counsel (respecting which ha hit-ti
the same understanding as his Noble and Learned Frieial), it
would be satisfactory to the House if the Learned Attorney-
General for the Queen could state whether he should now Imish
his cross-examination, or whether he intended to postpone it till
after the adjournment, wliichlt was understood was to take place,
to enable her Majesty's Counsel to enter upon her defence. •
The ATroacar-Gxestuit., being called upon By the Lord
Chancellor, stated that he had a copy of the ',rotes verbal drawn
up at Baauvais, in which the apprehensions of the parties were
stated as tha reason for their not then proceeding to this coun-
try; and also the letter staling that these witnesses were to set
out from Lugano on the 29th of August.
The Sometroa-GCNERAL added, that they had all the materials
upon which, in the Courts below, Affidavits might be, founded,

upon which such Courts were in the habit of postponing 'trials
according to circumstances. It not being the practice to make
Affidavits in that Iloesc, persons were ready to swear in the
usual form of these Affidavits, die they believed those witnesses
to be material, and that they believed the facts already. stated
to be true.
Mr. Bacemmtm, being called upon by the Lord- Chance Heir,
observed, that their Lordships would be aware he could only,
under present circumstances, state hypothetically what w0...1.1
be bis course as to the cross-examination. Assuming, lisrwever,
that the case for the Bill was row closed, he should merely; ealt
back one of the witnesses, and having put to him three or f
questions, his cross-examination would be at an eel.- ' 431.

In either carriage, was it possible for i person to lie down?— I Was it, after all this, to be tolerated, that When the At- - Tht. ii
torney-Ue•neral had Ong through all the evidonce, he had torro.w (this) morning at Ten o'Clock
ouse then Adjourned, at nearly helfspeptoliivesenikeppe
I believe that one might.
Do you recollect whether the Princess and Bergami were sit. at hand, and found, doubtless, that it had failed to establish n •
titre or laying at the time?—They appeared to me to be sitting the case, he set out with the promise of proving, he should nowt I/
Was anybody else in the carriage but liergami and the Prin. ask their Lordships to stop till he could patch up his case with Before the re-admission of strangers, the: the division 181160
cess?—l have said that Ido not know. It is not at present in these Luganians, said to be, and only believed to he on their road Lords yesterday, 14 on Lord Retivors's motion,
my mind. hither? Was there any thing like teleplay in this? Any thing I•lerl DARNLEY cbserved, that as an account of the Pecti-
Was the Countess of Oldi there?—l do not recollect.
like equal treatment to the accuser and the accused? Any thing niary advances to the Queen, with a view to enable her Majesty
Were the Princess and nergami sitting next to each other?— like precedent or analogy to other cases of trial? If her Ma.. to prepare for her defence against the eitraordinary charges of
I saw them ooe by the other. - . jesty's Counsel had been the cause of any impediments thrown
which she was the subject, was now to be laid before the House:.
Earl of BALCARRAS.—When you had withdrawn the cur.: in the way.of these witnesses coming hire, that might have al-
he thought it also desirable, for the satisfaction of their Lord.
t., was the Priam* sitting on the right or left of Beigarril? •tered the case; !nit no such thing was pretended, or dared to ships and of the country, that the !louse should be informed of
Her Royal Hiehaess wait on the tight. be pretended. He (Mr. IL) would not say ti.at the Leatned i all the expenses which had been incurred from the outset of the
Was the aperture in the curtain on the right or left of Bcr- i Counsel fur the Bill would abuse any delay that might be ' unfortunate business whi.li at present so much agitated the
gami?-0n the right. . given; his objection was to the principle of granting such delay mind of the Pobiie, and wh ch nittet so seriously aggrieve the
Earl of ROSSLYN.—When you opened the curtaits_did in any case. The House must proceed, with a view to prece- feelings of every Noble Lord whom he had the honour to ad-
you ask fur orders?—No, because they were asleep. , dents and consequences. and they must be cautious least, in , dress. Therefore he liAt it his duty to move that an humble Ad-
DM you awake :hem?—No, I did not. I granting the delay solielted in the present case, ii might not ; dress, S'c. " That there be laid before this House an account of
Lord CA LTHORPE.--Did youash to see the Princess after i be made a Fee:dere for future appeations, made with no ' all Sums of 1%""-/' uspcntied in the Inquiry relative to her Me-
Schiavini gave you your discharge ?—I asked to see her Royal other view than for the purpose of abusing it, and defeating I testy the Qieen, since the time of her leaving England, in 1814."
Highness atter I had received the certificate, not before. the ends of justice. - I Lord ESSEX observed, that he should certainly vote fur the
Did you see the Princess after you received it ?-IVien 711 i : Mr. DENMAN, before proceeding to support his Learned motion, at the same time observing, that if the Noble Earl (Li-
skied., ! Friend, begged to ask the Attorney-General at what tutee the verpool) would give that pledge to the House, that at a future
Old you see her Royal Highness after you understood th o • witnesses wok their flight from Beauvais? period lie would lay before the House the whole of the expenses
you were to quit her s.rvice?—l did. • The ATIORNIM-GENEJLAL.—On the 27th of July. Income' in this bust Ise '
1 . , e oncluding that of the allilart Commission
What passed an that occasion?—tier Royal Highness told Mn. Dasinsiee-My Lords, I may be permitted to add, that to from its first estabitslimeot, he (Lord Essex) would advise his
me she gave me my discharge as a warning to servants, that grant the applies:ion now made by my Learned Friend (the t Noble Friend, Lord Darniey to withdraw his motion. Upon
there should be no quarrels in the house. Attorney-tietienti) would be the highest degree of injustice. i that assurance being given,
Did her Royal Highness state whet was the cause of the ' The prosecutor had ample time and unlimited means to prepare I Lind LIVERPOOL, in the fullest and most explicit mannet*
,quarrels?—Yes; my quarrel with the confectioner. his case, amid it cannos now be enduredthat he should come for- said lie would do so when the business was cencludesi, adding,
Did she state any other caaae of dissatisfaction with you? ward with a statement such as' that brooole forward by my , that it would be inexpedient to make such a communication at
---No. . Learned intend (the s'etortiey-Gentrai), in order to procure de- present. • •
Did you make any reply to her Royal Mimes.; on that occa- ' lay to examine more witnesses to patch 1:p his case. Such a I Upon this assurance, and in tSe hope of an ample and satisfac-
%ion ?—I milled to her itsyal Highness that I did rot believe proceeding 11*ln:rather unprecedented hi Courtsof Justice; hut ; tory explanat;.on upon this subj. : c at a future per. t ocl, -sort. it o i
my fault to be sufficiently great to be-discharged fe-4 it. tf delay is to ire allowed, on the ground of witnesses being , DAIMLEY said, that he should cenosit to withdraw his motion,
Did site iiiake any allialdn'to your fernier conduct prevletis to frightened away by reenacts Pl.isimoou2l danger, will i: lee al- i which motion vs.. withdrawn aecordingly.
. .