Alexandria gazette & daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1817-1822, 1820-09-02

e
upon in the charge; but here facts might
be charged to have been committed IN home
Naples, Jerusalem, or Canstantinople In
1915. I6. II 10 and l9. How was it pos
sibe for her to contradict such charges II
she had not list of witnesses, and copies
Of the dispositions against her? With all
their dignities they were but men and II
there had been persons tracing her from one
coast to the other, where she had no means
of rebutting the charges against her. what
would the people of England say. if they
did not act in conformity to the law Where
would be the glory of our law, il it was not
supported in that house? 1t was impossible
to assimiate parliament entirely to court
Of justice, but they were therefore the more
bound, by every feeling of honor and JUS
tice, to set further example of both to all
the courts below them. liza list of witness
es were furnished TO the queen, their lord
ships time would not be so much taken up
as it would if she had to search for witnesses
in various parts of the globe, end TO facts
charged to have been committed al so many
and such distant periods Of time. When
they had done so, they would have better
view OF the case, towards the turtherance OF
public justice, than they could under any
other circumstances. Let them look at the
consequence of their refusal, they must be
worse than death to the ilustrious individual
born of long line of honorable ancestry.
He therefore feltjustifed in saying, that she
was peculiarly an object of their lordships'
attention and consideration. Let them re.
member to be just that we stood above all
other countries in our character OF justice
and equity let them take care that they did
not forfeit that high opinion in the eyes Of
the world. The motion was, that copies Of
the dispositions against her majesty, and lists
of witnesses to be produced against her.
should be furnished to her majesty, and her
law advisers, in order to enable her to pre-
pare for her defence, and that copy of
these resolutions should be forthwith pre-
scented to her majesty.
The Lord Chancellor said, he was bound,
whatever might be his feelings, to discharge
his duty boldly and faithfully. He was rea-
dy to admit that they should not always be
bound to precedenls. He was. on the con.
trary, decidedly of opinion, that were pre-
cedents. initiated against public justice,
their lordships were bound to cast them on
one side But, on the other hand, they must
consider that, in the eye of justice, all were
equal, for
The poor beetle that We tread upon,
In corp'ral suf rance, feels pang as great
As when giant dies"
But no one could deny that list Of wit
nesses furnished to person before accuse.
ton, gave an unfair advantage to the person
accused, and to the person appointed to
cross examine the witnesses. He would re.
Ter the House to the opinion of as great
Lawyer, and as excellent a " hig as ever
lived Sir M. Foster, who said, that he Sta
tute of Treason worked great Injustice
When he was called upon to prosecute GER
tain men for high treason he found he could
not examine single witness that was not
in the list furni he'd to the prisoners and ii
he had put an Il for an into the name of any
Of the witnesses, ne could not have examin-
cd a ho hoI hnnt hast fpn
in the world for the prosecution. Assimj-
late this case as they would to High Treason,
they could not furnish list of witnesses
without suffering the Bill of Pains and re
naltes to pr coed, IN the mean time. and to
allow the W nesses for the prosecution TO
be examined The more the proceedings
Of that House were as>imilated to those OF
the Courts of Law, the better he should like
them, The Act which did assmilate them
to Courts of Law, did not say Que word a.
bout furnishing lists OF witnesses. tie would
ask the Noble and Learned Lord, what would
be the consequence, if in cases either OF Vi
vii or Criminal Law, lists of witnesses were
furnished before prosecution. No man
knew better what answer to give TO that
question :; he knew that the general interest
of Justice required that no such thing should
be done. 1t appeared to him, under all the
circumstances of the case, that the question
tc be put to their Lordships was. whether
they should suffer themselves to depart from
the rules which regulated the ordinary
course of justice, which would be viola