Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1820-12-21

dc>c' irtion have occurred. But, MY Lords.
IN a i"riner discussion rpon the subject OF
Bills OF paiuS ana Pen3ltiPs ii was vriy pro-
pe,iy areues.-wLsm the nature ct tiiS piu-
ceedlng WAS under ConSidc alton, ~Eether il
Was MOI "a proceeding mere favorable .thaa ANY
o'her which could have been adopted. Il am
not entering into the question whether i, rs |
more or less conStiutional-but whether II is
more favorable 10 the party accused than "A |
proceeding by Impeachment. My Lords, l |
say that II property Proceeded in-bN which |
mean, " Tue inquiry should be carried on |
by Tue applications of the ordinary rules OF |
e'iifnce,H II shall be conducted by the osdi- |
nary rules aud principles OF Jaw il il by far |
Tue more Inobjcc,io"able, as well as the more
favorable cou, So To pursue. Ny Lords, Vt I'M |
parchment were the mode adopted by pro-
ceedius III tue House OF Commons. one vote of
that mouse would decide whether it was 70 be |
Impeachment or not, and that vote would also
decide tie question. Now, my Lords IN a |
| 3hi oi Pans and Penalties, in the ist place,
Tue chafses con'a'nrd IN the hill would be
examined by both honscs, and both houses
wonid nave an Opportunity OF hearins hOth
slides @nd both parties. Opportunities would
also be afforded 10 scrutInize evidence, aud TO
Judge how tai II was consistent with truth
but, my Lnrds, II Has been stated with very
considerable WEIGHT, that we are submitting
| the judi smeut of this House 10 the Judgment
ct the Commons. My Lords, will ask whe-
the, me Saa'r observations may rot be made
with regard Ia Divorce Bills do not state
| nav wheth tins will be Divorce Bill or
! not-ihat must be subject for after conside-
| rdton-b stIl ask whether. precisely the
| Ndmc Objection may not he taken To Divorce
! Biil>, aud other Bills which 20 dOvsn from this
mouse 10 tbs house Oi commons. and whether
we may not I've involved in the Saise SOFT Of
CONTRADICTION "ith tbs house ct commons,
when they come 10 examine the questions
WIN reieie"ce TO tue points upon which those
Bills may be fonndedi My Lords, passing on
| however, dn-ther complaint hds been made.
that Ia the progress of this proceeding the
defendant has not heIa furnished with see
oihcatOn Ut the charges anu " til tho list of
| he witnesses ny WHICH lhoSe CHI. rseS were 10
| be RuppOfttd....t mention this baranse il has
been urged that, III cInssqnesce o this omiS-
sion, the party or Persoa accCsed has been
placed an d 'i'uslon OF @iiiiculIy
Nav, my Lords Say, when ii shall appear
that any Such 'iItRrnlIy shall have existed i,
IL Your DUTY to give TO HE party accused the
Oeht NJ "i that TACT, and prupOrlrndbiy TO in-
ciIne In her iavJr, Hear, hear, hsar) Bu; al
TIE same TIME we ought not 10 raise d diff
chitN where none really exists. MS Lords I
ask. IN what way possible could these charges
nave been so n,stu'iy communicated "a in the
course OI the enquiry. Orin what way couid the
lstot the witnesses have been communicate
so tifcciuaiIy - by prOdusia; those wituesses
at your Lordships Bar and then po,tponing
me ieiencp, which The party accused was
called upeu to make, tn that period u which
that pai ~ might ClIoOSe TO postpone il?
am prepared 10 admit that the immediate
cross examination OF Il witness NAV br
desiTdbe-and with regard To Rastcili [
have already expressed my opinion But
then say, that tile lass OF immediate cross
examinations Is greatly compensated by The
Advantage OF the defendant hearing the whole
| OF TIC charges against her, and then cIitIsiug
the period when she shall be disposed In an-
swtr IL. My Lords in this case il seem, TO
me That yOu are bound TO attend 10 the great
ptihcip!eSot Britlsh Jn'tice-principes which
are InsepaTably connected with every part OF
our constitution. You are ia thiS DIS ia evetv
other case TO consider the accused as innocent,
uh'il proved TO be guilty. II il your Lord
ships DonuIen duty also TO pronounce the
parry innocent, unless YOU are perfectly satiss
! ned that she hat b7sn proved guilty. Aly
LoidS, Nou are likewise, in looking 10 The ua-
ture OF lhe evidence 10 consider The diHicuI-
lies winch belong 10 this case. My LGrd,
you will recoiect, that il has been uIs ed that
| theie has been. or May have been, aud taken
tor granted that there mas, much more facility
with respect to fhDse who produced the wit
heS"tS IN support OF this Bill than there has
beer GA tu part OF those whose duty II was to
pToduct The witnesses in answer 10 the Bill.
u, my Lords, You think that this CT cum>tauCe
has existed iU that case the accused ought 10
have the benefit of il (Hedr hear. NV
Lords, You have likewise again 10 .ook 40 the
Charges which have been Brought agd,ast tue
witness RaStelli. These charges may have
| been founded IN mistake, o ne may have used
his influence TO induce particular persons to
give testimony al your LordsbIps' Bar. 1t
your Lordships think the charges well fouRd.
Ell, that Is a cIrcumstance also Ut which Tie
accused rs entitled 10 the benefit aud 50 with
every otter circUmslarce which shall sxcile
reasonable aud just suspicion III NOnT Lord
ships minds, as TO The evidence which has
been brought forward IN support of lhls biil.
Hear, henr. Bot, inv Lords, the rule ny
Which have formed my cpiEion is this {: lay
M aside all the testimony IN tbs which
can he suspected, | have addressed 10 myself
this question" Does the unsupported avi-
dence produced ON the part of those who have
supported this bill, and the testimony which
has been given in answer to tins bill and
laying aside all doubtful evidence which has
been submitted on both sides entirely oHt of
nay consideration, ask my self does the eyi-
denre which stands unsupported ia support of
Tue pill, aud uncnDtIddcted by that called In
the defence, taken altogether, sustain the al
legation OF an adulieTOus intercourse, or does
Itnttf IL Is uPou tue view of the case, which
have taken ia this way, that | shalt deliver
the opinion which alter the most paiutul at
ienton' have been induced to form Hear,
hem( lappreErnd, my Lords, at least so il
seems 10 me, that if you look to one or two Of
tilr case1 or circumstances which have been
proved it you look 10 the circumstances
winch have been proved by the witnesses be-
You'd Suspicion and to whom suspicion has
| not attached dnriug the whole of this case, l
| say. my Lords, If you look at the point OF
! view that IL does appear 10 me, aud / am
soiiN 10 say 1t, That you cannot draw from this
evidence any other conclusion than that there
! has been an adnilerOus intercourse. Withres-
] pect To contradictions aud the contradictions |
which IL may be said llsve been given To- The e.
| whence II has been Hiyduty very frequently 10 |
| consider the effect which contradictions NAV |
| have IL sum ming up the judgment, if l may |
| use the sNpressOD, IN cases which have come |
! under my observation Ii may osten happen |
/ 10 the coarse of trial that circumstances
| are proved which may have no effect upon the I
real question at issue and il may also nap
! pen that facts are alleged whirh Il is impOssis
! bic for any party to contradict. But in cases
! where persons are called who speak to par
| iicuiar fact, other persobs beiEg present, and
| 40 contradiction is given with respect TO that
| fact CHOSE persons being within the reach OF
| the party whose interest IL is to dispTove the
TACT thcU. u ~ pears IN Tle, that Tie ciTcun.-
of fhpgp uprgous m bainv led |