The Statesman.
London, England, 1820-07-25 00:00:00

" The Cause for which HAMPDEA' fell in the Field, end SYDNEY died on the Seafold!"

LIIPERIAL PARLIA.VENT.

to listen to the Petitions presented to you, and the
anomaly maid have been ended. Had the Queen
been gusated the list of the witnesses formerly asked,
and the places of supposed guilt, as now requested, the
ease might have proceeded like any other trial, but by
refusing both, your proceeding is like none that ever
existed upon earth. My Lords, I bare no leaning or
bias in the raso before us, except that which has been
the uniform bias of a long life spent in the admini- I
stratio■ cif justice, and which will never cease, I hope,'
till death. I cannot be mistaken i■ the principles of
law, an their-analogies are too manifest to be mis-
taken ; l therefore move that the Petition be re•
ceived.

—.oft- • •
HOUSE OF LORDS, MossaT, JbLy 44.

The House proceeded in Appeals.
The Oaths were administered to Lord Manners and
Lord Combermere.

The Royal Assent was notified by Commission to
the Royal Family Bill, the Appropriation Bill, the
Alien Bill, the late King's Servants' Bill, the Bank
Notes Bill, Tonskins' Lottery Bill, Pellew's Divorce
Bill, and a uumher of others, in all 51. •

The Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, the
Duke of Montrose, and the Itial of Shaftesbury.
,The Insolvent Debtors' Bill and the Court of Chan-
cery (Ireland) Bill were read a third time and passed,
with anaemic/ pm.
Stmngera were excludia for sometime, we believe,
whilst the Committee respecting the attendance and
accommodation of Peers, &r. on the 17th August, were
examining the Douse, attended by Mr. Soane, the ar-
chitect, for the purpose of ascertaining what altera-
tion. it would be necessary to make. After an inter-
val strangers were again admitted.

The Loan CHANCELLOR said, there could be no
questiotk4of course, as Os esseniglig w: but
he had Spardewith considinolliO asrprine Mlle part
of what lied been urged by ilia SAN sad Learned
Friend. Would his Noble and Lusened Friend, af-
ter his Tong, and he (Lord Eldon) must add, his
Il-
lustrious professional life, point oat any instance in
which what was now sought by this Petition had
been granted, namely, a spacifieation of the differ-
ent places at which the offences charged were alleged
to be slowwitted ? So far from any specification of
places or times being given, the fact was, that in in-
dictments for high treason a plate was merely named
as a venue to give the Court jurisdiction; and then,
on the part pf the prosecution, proof was allowed as
to acts aE this accused in any place, not only in the
same county, but in any other county. In eases of
adultery also, no specileation of times or plates was
ever given, but proof was allowed of any act of adul-
tery wherever committed. Equally naiweeessfal mast
his Noble and Lana *lend he in drawing any
analogy from the proceedings in Parliament, for in
no case was there to be (mind any precedent of a si-
milar application having been complied with. With-
out any authority, therefore, derived from the ana
logics ot law, or any sanction from the usages of
Parliament, which, in fact, formed the law of Parli-
a he could discover so ground upon which this
a3llretiots ought to be granted. lie wished it to be
distihetly understood, that, with regard to this case,
he was only anxious to do his duty in the situation in
which he was placed, and a material part of that duty
was to point oat to their Lordships in what respect
any motion to which their attention was called was
cuatrary to the usage and practice of Parliament.
Lord HOLLAND.—Witbout, my Lords, going into
the question of the analogies of law, upon which sub-
ject the Noble and Learned Lord is andoubtelly much
bitter informed than myself, I may be allotted to call

THE QUEEN.
Lord FAIIIIIIINE,-31y Lords, 1 have just re-
ceived from Dr. Lushington, who has leave from
else House of Commons to appear at the bar of this
House as one of the counwl for the Queen, a Petition
from her Majesty, which I have been requested to pre-
sent, and which I do most willingly, because it con-
tains a most just and reasonable request. I will read
it to your Lordships myself before 1 ask you to accept
it, "The Queen laments, my Loris, that this House
has deemed it proper to refuse her application for a
list of witnesses to be examined in support of the 11111
of devadation and dissolution of marriage, thus lea,-
isig her Majesty and her legal advisers in total igno-
ranee of the times and places to which the charges may
relate, or the persons by whose testimony the allega-
tions on the Bill are intended to he reported." This
is only preface, she does not call upon your Lordships
to reconsider this decision, but contents herself with
lamenting it, and comes with a new request. This is
just my own situation—l exercised my privilege as a
Peer, and did, as I thought and still think, a duty to
my country by asking your Lordships a few days ago
to give the list of witnesses as requested, but your
Lordships having refused it, I most not now put my
individual opinion against the judgment of the House,
but I bare a right to express that I deeply lament it.
Iler Majesty then goes on to ask a specification of the
places in which the criminal acts are charged to hare
been committed, be forthwith &livered ; for if this be
dialed, it will be bopootible to be proporog to moot
the aecosation.

`prat loads' atteetioa IA the immediate in poor
Parliamentary practice, in all of which, Ante the Re►
volution, I believe it will be found that a more en-
larged specification of charges was given in the pre-
amble than in the Bill now before the House. This
will be found o be the case in the Bills of Pains and
Penalties against Bishops Atterbury, Plunket, and
Kelly, in all of which the specification is more dis-
tinct and more at length them ht the present Bill. I
take it fur granted that the Noble and Learned Lord
meant to confine his precedents to Bills of Attainder
and Bills of Pains and Penalties. otherwise with re-
gard/ft proceedings by impeachment, there can be
no doubt that a mach more enlarged specification of
charges has been given in them than there is in the
present Bill, and 1 have no hesitation in giving it as
my opinion, that an impeachment confined to the mere
limit of charge contained in the present Bill, would
not be considered in this Bosse as sufficient to call
upon the defendant to answer. But without going
ant• further into analogies, I contend, that upon every,
principle of impartial justice, the request contain-
ed in this Petition ought to be complied with. It
is true that some difficulty may arise with regard to'
it, the Secret Committee to whom the sealed bag of
papers were .efo.red being now/eaters officio, and
no loafer iu existence. And spots this point it be-
comes a curious question in what way, or trim what
quarter, the Attorney Lieseral. or his Representatives
arc to he instructed with regard to the case for the
prosecution. or how they are to become acquainted
with the contents of the Green Bag. As. however, a
list of the witnesses had been refused to the Queen,
your Lordships sorely cannot refuse to grant. her the
smaller facility of a specification of the places where
the acts of criminality are alleged to have beets com-
mitted ; it seems to.me that such a proceeding is rail-
ed for by impartial justice, the only principle to
which we ought to look I. this anomalous case.
The Earl of &emirs/tn.—l am unable, my Lords,
to discover any mascot or analogy applicable to this
proceeding, which can authorise the complying with
the application contained in the Petition. I perfectly
agree with t►e Noble Lord that wrought ouly to look
to impartial justice; but let us consider bow the case
stands. The Secret Committee having made their
Report, I, as Member of the Executive Government,
brought in the Bill which 'is now before the House.
Your Lordships must recollect that no simmer had the
Bill been brought ia, than her Majesty petitioned that
we should proceed to hear the ease forthwith ; there
was no application fur any list of witnesses, or speciti-
esti°a of places. but we were called upon to hear the
case forthwith. It is in compliance with this request
on-the part of her Majesty that your Lordships have
appointed the earliest day for that hearing that is con-
' sisteat with the ends of justice, for if it is not oboe-
' solately amonaary, it is at least highly proper that the
I Judge% or some of thaw ghoul attend during the
henna, oldie we. It is, therefiree obvious. that her
Majesty, by calling for as immediate hearing, did not
consider either a list of witaseres or a specification of
places at at all essential to her detract. With regard
to the objection of the preamble of the 818, that it
dues not cassaba specific charges as to time and phew,
It should be reeolleciesi, that it is not coalksed to any
specific act of adultery. but that it charges an 'Wa-
itrons intercourse coatinsally kept up far a consider-
able period, and which therefore easiest, from its

" CAROLINR R.
"To TEE Loo kIPIIIITUAZ .LIM TEMPORAL IN PARLlA-

SIENT ASSEMBLED.

" The Queen lanionisthattheilbese of Lords have deemed
it proper to refuse her application for a list of the witnesses
to be examined in support of the Rill of Degradation sod
Dissolution of Marriage, thus leaving her Nlajesty and her
legal advisers in total ignorance as to the time or place to
which the charges may relate, or the persons by whose tes-
timony the allegations in the Bill are intended to be sup-
ported. Her Majesty now submits to the House of Lords
that a specification of the place or places to which the
crimiul acts are charged to have been committed should
forthwith be furnished to her Majesty's Attorney General,
fur if this be denied, it will be impossible to be prepared to
to meet the acensation, or to take preliminary seamen for
providing defensive evidence against the charges witibeat
bringing from every place her Majesty has sisitiefierlng
the last six years every witness who had an) means of ob-
serving her Majesty's conduct. Her Nlajesti *either de-
Ares to be heard by her Counsel and Agent at your Lord-
ships' Bar, is support of this her request."
This last part of the Petition I hope you will only
not grant, by yielding to the request of your men free
grace. My Lords if von refuse it, believe me, the
House will suffer indelibly in its character and ho-
nour, which has stood so high for ages, and enabled it
to support In public opinion all the other tribunals of
justice. As her Majesty asks only a specification of
the places to which the evidence is to apply against
her, we have no concern now with the indulgences of
the Statute of Treason, nothing more being asked than
the universal analogies of law. No crime whatsoever
can be charged without specifying the place where
committed, and the arts charged are almost univer-
sally facts of so limited and so notorious a character,
that the accused has an immediate and satisfactory
acquaintance with the evidence that is to be pea
danced ; but the allegations of the Bill before us are
spread over the space of six years, in places remotely
distant from each other, so that without the specifi-
cation of the places, it is utterly impossible that any
kind of defence can be made. The only answer that
has been given to this objection is, that when the ac-
cusing testimony has been heard, the House would
consent to a long adjournment, till the witnesses for
her Majesty should be collected ; but I reminded
your Lordships, when I mored for the list of the wit-
nesses, that this would be only an insulting mockery
of justice. What, toy Lords, do you mean by arous-
ing evidence, when no clue is furnished fur their ex-
aminations by the accused ? !row can she impeach
their testimony, when she is an ptter stranger to their
very existence, till she sees and hears them in the
House, and thus naintpeaelted testimony, however ut-
terly unfounded, goes forth from one end of the island
to the other,affects the minds of the people, and comes
back again upon your Lordships yourselves to affect
your own judgments before you enter upon the de-
fence. What right, My Lords, have you to eessider
yourselves as superior to the infirmities of human na-
ture, which are tkelimintlation of all the wise end
humane provisions other law ? Are you hamster se
better thee juries, who are not suffered to communi-
cate even with their ow. families until their verdict
is delivered ? Are you aims, In be trusted, and to go
forth into the very Coast of the King. who is the la-
pilli and properly licensing party in the nest ? Ido
int seek to tecereile differences between the Horse of
.Lords and tbe other *Maas's, where the anomaly of
your jorisdietima can te averted ; but you bad only