ページの画像
PDF
ePub

COBBETT'S WEEKLY POLITICAL REGISTER.

VOL. XXIII. No. 14.] LONDON, SATURDAY, APRIL 3, 1813.

481]

TO JAMES PAUL,

OF BURSLEDON, IN LOWER DUBLIN TOWN-
SHIP, IN PHILADELPHIA COUNTY, IN THE
STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA; ON MATTERS
RELATING TO HER ROYAL HIGHNESS THE
PRINCESS OF WALES.

My dear Friend,

Letter VI.

[Price 1s.

[482

bility; and, as the Princess's defence does, in my opinion, demolish the testimony of the other three, Mrs. Lisle alone remains as a witness whose testimony has some weight. It was, therefore, in the opinion of Mr. Whitbread, of great consequence to explain every circumstance relating to the mode which the Four Lords pursued in getting at and in recording this testimony. I will not, for fear of mistakes, attempt to make This Letter will conclude the remarks any abstract, or abridgment, of his speech which I mean to address to you, relative to upon this occasion; but, will insert it just the interesting affair of the Princess of as I find it reported in the Times newsWales. I have, indeed, already gone into paper of the 18th of March, that being the the whole of the subject as far as it is ne- fullest report that I have been able to find cessary for me to go into it, seeing that the of Mr. Whitbread's speech, which, as far Defence of the Princess leaves so very little as related to the subject before us, was as to be said by any one. But, there have follows: "He must," he said, "trouble arisen certain matters, forming the sequel" the House for a few minutes with some of the disclosure, which are well worthy" passages in Mrs. Lisle's evidence, relaof your attention; and, of these, the most tive to the Princess and Captain Manby. important are, the debates, or, rather, the" Mrs. L. could not say there was any atremarks and counter-remarks, which have" tachment; and she never saw any kissing been made in the two Houses of Parlia- "hands, &c. He wished to confine himment, relative to the deposition of Mrs." self to material points. After the eviLisle, which deposition you will find in"dence was given, the depositions were the Register, at page 393.

[ocr errors]

"taken; and he was not surprised, under MR. WHITBREAD, in the House of Com- "all the circumstances, at Mrs. Lisle's mons, on the 17th of March, last past, re- "signature to the deposition; but he was, ferred to this affidavit, or deposition, and he must confess, surprised to find leading he animadverted upon the conduct of the questions put to her by his Learned Four Lords, who took it down. The Four Friend, the Lord Chancellor Erskine; Lords, in their place, in the House of" questions on which that Noble and LearnLords, a few days afterwards, entered into "ed Lord, when an advocate, would have an explanation, vindicated their own con- "expired, sooner than have permitted to duct, and spoke in very severe terms of the" be answered by any witness of his, on a attack which had been made upon them. "trial in a Court of Law. One would be Before I enter further into this matter, I" tempted by the deposition to think, that beg you to observe, that it is of very great "Mrs. L. said all in one breath as it' were. importance; because, as you will have" The question in the examination was put perceived, of the whole of that crowd of" to Mrs. L. "Did Captain Manby sit witnesses, who were examined upon this" next to the Princess at dinner?". Yet, in occasion, Mrs. Lisle is the only one, to whose testimony the Princess appears to attach any importance; and, indeed, she is the only witness whose testimony seems to merit any serious refutation. She is, as was observed in my last Letter, one of the various other questions put to Mrs. L., four persons, upon whose testimony the" and expressed his astonishment that so charge of impropriety of conduct did, in" many leading questions should have been the eyes of the Four Lords, rest for credi- " put to her. "What! did the Princess

"the deposition, it seemed as if she stated "it voluntarily. Then Lord Erskine asks

Mrs. L."whether they all sat just as "the four Noble Lords sat round their "table with her ?" Mr. W. remarked on

66

66

66

66

66

"putation upon her!

❝ters.

66

66

66

[ocr errors]

66

66

66

[ocr errors]

Let Gentlemen

6

a pretty This was and yet too

session for him, because he was hand

"and Captain Manby sit apart? What, if "sitting together, do you suppose they bring to their consideration the situation "talked about?" Lords Erskine and El- "of their own wives, sisters, and daugh"lenborough put these questions; and then When they left home to attend "the deposition is to go out to the world" to their public or private business, would "to impress the sense of guilt on the part "they not treat with contempt and scorn, of the Princess. The answer of Mrs. L. "evidence such as this, if it was attempted "regarding the conversation was, that she" to charge criminality upon it? (Hear, 4 did not listen to it. Then Lord Erskine hear.) They might be disposed to pro"desires her to answer him, as a woman. "secute the calumniator: but Her Royal of reason, character, and of knowledge" Highness did not stand in the situation "of the world, whether the Princess's "of a person for whom such steps could "conduct was proper for a married woman "be taken. He was ashamed of some "-he puts it to her honour as a mother?" parts of the examination. It was asked, Really, there never was a question put to "whether she went out with Mr. Hood in * a female witness which could make the a whiskey? Whether he drove it? This "chords of sensibility vibrate more strong- was something like the mode of crossly in her heart. The answer was col- "examination... Who was there besides "lected, dignified, affectionate, and mo"Mr. Hood's servant?' Was he a man "therly, for the question referred to her or a boy? A laugh.) How often own family: my daughter," she says, "did she go out so?' Was it fair-play ""lived well with her husband." To the "to the Princess to extract answers in that "question again, whether the Princess "manner? Then they came to Mr. Ches"lived as a married woman ought? Mrs. ter, who was stated to be "L.'s answer was, not like the statement in young man.' (A laugh.) the deposition. Lord Ellenborough, in- too ludicrous to be serious, deed, said to the Chancellor," I suppose "serious to be ludicrous. The inference "you'd put it as any married woman." "seemed to be, that there was a prepos "What did you ever think of the "Princess's talking with Captain Manby?" "was another question: but these were "never answered, though we had some"thing about them in the deposition. He "was sorry to be obliged to animadvert ་་ upon the conduct of the four Noble "Lords Commissioners; but he should be "doing injustice to the cause of justice, if he did not say, that, if the accused had "been provided with an advocate, witnesses would have been protected, or "prevented from answering many inter-"to shake, because Mrs. Lisle had derogatories that were put to them. The "posed so and so. That was not a fair "Princess, says Mrs. L., 'is free and "construction of Mrs. L.'s evidence, if "condescending.' 'That,' says the Chan"the examinations were read. I heard "cellor, is not my question.' I thought,'" Her Royal Highness say,' says the witsays Mrs. L., that the Princess liked" ness, that she had been ill, and that "to talk with Captain Manby, rather than "her candle was gone out.' Was not the "with the Ladies.' Let the House recol- "Princess to be in a situation common to "lect, that there were, and are attached every subject of the realm? The public "to the Princess, persons of high consi- "mind must form her shield, and her "deration; yet could any body doubt that" protection. Read the evidence, and say "when new society, which afforded new "whether she has not a right to be treated topics of conversation, broke in upon the as innocent, till she be proved guilty. sameness-the fatigue of retired and "Mrs. L.'s testimony gives an easy, namock royalty,-debarred from many tural, and probable solution, of this 66 sources of amusement,-yet uncompen- "mysterious transaction. (Hear.) Mr. "sated by even the trappings of her state, "Chester, it seems, walked out twice "could any body doubt, or be surprised," with the Princess; and he was left at that the Princess should find something" Lord Sheffield's. Then for Captain "in it agreeable? Yet that was an im- "Moore. He dined there, and where, it

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

66

some. It was asked,' Is he not hand"some? The answer was, ' pretty!' "All that was nauseous had been read; "but he should notice one point: the witness was asked, 'Do you recollect the "Princess getting up and going ont of her room into another at night, for a light?' "Answer, I do.' 6 Why,' say two lawyers, did she get up in the night? (laugh.) Yet this was in the deposi"tion; and the shakers of heads continued

[blocks in formation]

66

was asked, did he afterwards? Why, go 66 seem to involve a dereliction of his duty; "down stairs: she sent him for a book." but he trusted nothing should so far "How long was he in gelling it?" make him forget that duty, as to touch "Twenty minutes. Then it was asked, " upon matters by whose disclosure it "how long he staid the second time. This" might be impaired. But the character part of the examination was as much like" of his Noble Colleagues must not be left "an imputation on Mrs. Lisle, as upon to suffer through his silence. They "the Princess. Well then: the Princess" were all placed in the strange and hard "actually made Captain Moore a present "situation where they must be condemned "of a silver inkstand! Mrs. L. saw him" unheard, or look for an imperfect vindiafterwards on the Princess Charlotte's" cation by the scantiness of their right to "birth day, when he went away before explain. But nothing should prevent "the rest of the company. He (Mr. W.)" him giving the fullest denial to the ca"might now go to Mr. Lawrence, and solummy in question,—that foulest, basest, on to the end of the chapter in the same " and most malignant calumny that could "manner. He had, he conceived, done" have been thrown out against men in "enough in referring to this book; and the situation which he and his Noble "he clearly saw that the notes of the ex- "Colleagues had held. It would be "amination took the sling entirely out of "remembered that some years since His "the depositions."

66

66

66

[ocr errors]

This was the speech of Mr. WHITBREAD, as reported in the news-papers. He had, by some means, obtained a written copy of the questions put to the witnesses. This" paper, it seems, he read to the house, making his remarks on it as he proceeded. No notice, in public, was taken of this, by the Four Lords, till the 22d of March, when they all four spoke of it in the House of Lords. Lord Ellenborough, the Lord Chief Justice, led the way; and, as the other three gave their full assent to the correctness of his statement, I will not insert any of their speeches except his, which I take from the Report, published in the Times news-paper of the 23d of March, and which report gave it in the following words.

66

66

66

Majesty had been advised to issue a Commission for an inquiry into matters "which involved some eminent persons in this country. In that Commission his (Lord Ellenborough's) name was inserted, without his knowing any thing of "the matter. Once engaged by His Ma"jesty's command, he did his duty to the "best of his power. But it was in the "performance of that duty that some person, with the most abandoned and de"lestable slander, had dared to charge him with a gross act of dishonesty; him, on whose character for integrity, diligence, and care, depended more of the property and interests of the people than on those of any other man in the country; yet of him, it was foully and slander"ously alleged, that he had falsified the "Lord Eilenborough commenced by "evidence given before the Commission, saying, that he had to trouble their "giving in as a document, evidence that "Lordships on an occasion, in which many was not received, and suppressing that "motives concurred to make him come "which was actually given. This was all "forward reluctantly. The House would" a lie-a vile slander,—all Jatse as Hell. "understand, that the circumstance to "He would not violate the propriety of "which he alluded, was connected with" "the mention of individuals whom his re

66

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

66

"

"

66

66

66

66

that House; he knew the respect and

decency which it required; but he must spect would not allow him lightly to give the lie to falsehood. He should now name. He was aware, that in coming "trouble the House with a short statement "forth to clear himself, there might be of facts. In the course of the inquiry an imputation of weakness and irritation" his Noble Colleagues thought it proper "under the charge which forced him for- to have some person to take down and "ward; but then it was necessary that arrange the evidence. His Majesty's truth should be told: there were cases, "Solicitor General at that time, (Sir " in which all of respect that we could feel" Samuel Romilly,) was the person fixed "for general opinion,-all of credit that" on. One evening the Commission havwe could claim with the world,-all ho- ing met, and the witnesses being in at"nour and propriety urged us on exculpa- tendance, it was thought better not to "tion. Auother reason still might retard "defer the examination, and lose the even'him, he was a Privy Councillor: go- "ing, though from some circumstance or ing into a question of this nature might" other Sir Samuel Romilly was not in

66

66

(6

"attendance. The messenger sent for "Now what was the case in which leading "him could not find him, and the exami-" questions could be put? It was, where "nation proceeded. The Commissioners" there were contending parties; and lead"requested that he (Lord Ellenborough)," ing questions were only improper when “ as he had been in the habit of taking "the counsel might be suspected of in"down evidence, and probably took down "structing his own witness. But the Judge "in the year twice as much as any man in "had a right to put any question which "the kingdom, should take down the evi-" appeared to him likely to elucidate the "dence of the witnesses in attendance. "truth. There was another case, when "He declared upon the most sacred asse- "the witness was adverse; but here the "veration that could be made,-the most "rule had its exceptions, and nothing to "solemn sanction of an oath,—that every "be derived from it could impeach the "word of that deposition came from the "putting of any questions by Commissioners "lips of the witness in question,-that" who could have had no object but the truth. "every word of it was read over to her,- "It remained for this stupid and cursed "if not paragraph by paragraph, as it was impudence, for impudence was a curse, "taken down, certainly all after it was "to add another query, and gravely de"taken, and every sheet signed with "mand why the examination had not been "her name. If it would not be going "written in question and answer. But "into the particular disclosure, which was there a man grey-headed in the law. 66 nothing could induce him to allow or "who had ever heard of such a thing? "advise, the bare inspection of the paper" If the whole of the facts could be de"would be enough to shew that fabrica-tailed, no prejudice on the subject could "tion was impossible. It was full of in- lie on the minds of the public for an "terlineations; the mind of the party was "instant. But as a Privy Councillor he "expressed in its language, any man" could not address the Prince Regent "might have seen, în its changes and cor- "for that purpose--( Hear)-One of the rections, that the deposition went to "most alarming symptoms of the age was, "ascertain the full meaning of the witness," that brutal and savage indifference with "and could not have been the work of" which men threw about slander at the "him or the other Commissioners. He "highest characters: this was tossing "might, at least, from his station, take "firebrands,' and then saying, am I not "the credit of laborious accuracy; and he "in sport?' But in the whole transaction, "would venture to say, that not one word "he and the Noble Commissioners, he "was in that written deposition which had "must be allowed to say, felt, not perfect "not been spoken by the witness. But" indifference, (for who could feel indif"how absurd was the charge! Would "ference?) but a single desire to do their "his Noble Colleagues have suffered him" duty-(Hear!). He was sorry to have "to vitiate the evidence! Would they 66 so far troubled the House. His purpose "have allowed him to set down a word on "was not vindictive, but exculpatory. "the paper which was not deposed by the "For whatever punishment the offence "witness? He had every reason, from "might call, he would call for none;—he "the most perfect recollection, to say, was only desirous to stand unimpeached "that the paper in question contained the" in the opinion of the country, and honest "whole evidence--and nothing but the" in the eyes of his fellow-men." "evidence of the witness. Their Lord- My Lord, the Chief Judge, appears to "ships would forgive him for those repe"titions; but when they shewed so just a "jealousy of the reputation of their body, "when it was so important that his (Lord Ellenborough's) integrity should stand "without suspicion, from the multitude of "interests connected with it,their Lord"ships could not blame him for standing "forth to repel in the strongest manner so base and impudent, and miscreant an imputation. (Hear.) Nay, the thing was "foolish as well as wicked. It was despi"cable from its very stupidity. It charged "him with putting leading questions.

ἐσ

[ocr errors]

have been very much enraged upon this occasion. He appears to have been greatly moved. He appears to have been in a passion, as people call it. But, before I inake any remark on the merits of this dispute between the Four Lords and Mr. Whitbread, it will be necessary to pursue the matter as it proceeded in parliament, where, on the 23d of March, Mr. Whitbread, having, in the meanwhile, applied to Mrs. Lisle, produced a letter, signed by that lady, stating, that the paper, which he had sent to her (the same which he had read in the House) was a correst

copy of the questions put to her and of her | Lisle, who had read and signed her deanswers, as she had written the whole position, seems to have thought it necessary down, immediately after the examination to guard against this; for, upon her going took place. He also entered into an ex- home, she wrote down the answers as conplanation as to the nature of the animad-tained in her deposition, and she put to versions which he had made upon the con- them the questions, by which those anduct of the Four Lords; and said, that he swers were drawn forth. This she rehad not accused them of putting a false garded as an act of justice due to Her deposition upon paper; that he had not Royal Mistress, and, as appears from her accused them of any fabrication; that he Letter to Mr. Whitbread, she immediately had not said, that they had been guilty of gave Her Royal Highness a copy of the any falsification of testimony; but, that he whole of the examination, in question and had said, that leading questions were put, answer; and, as you will perceive, Her and that, if the evidence had been inserted Royal Highness says, in one part of her by question and answer, instead of putting defence, that, in such a case, the quesdown the answers only, Mrs. Lisle's tes- tions as well as the answers ought to have timony would have appeared in a very dif- been subjoined to the Report. ferent light from what it did; and this appears to have been the impression on the mind of Mrs. Lisle herself; for, otherwise, why did she write down the questions and answers upon going home from the Commissioners ?

The main points to be considered here are, first, whether leading questions ought to have been put by the Four Lords upon such an occasion; secondly, whether they ought to have reported the evidence in question and answer, or only in the an

swers.

Mr. Whitbread has, by the writers in some of the news-papers, as well as by the Four Lords, been charged with ignorance, because he complained of the putting of leading questions. It is very well known, that, what is called a leading question is sometimes intended or has an obvious tendency to draw from a witness that which is not true; or, at least, to point out to him what to say; and, such questions are not allowed to be put by the advocate on whose side the witness is brought; but that any question may be put by the adverse advocate, or by the Judge, because they cannot be suspected of any desire to tutor the witness. Therefore, as applicable to the present case, Lord Ellenborough is reported to have said, that "nothing could im"peach the putting of leading questions by "the Commissioners, who could have no "object but the truth." No: certainly. God forbid that I should say, that they had any object but the truth; but, still, when a deposition, consisting, in part, of answers to leading questions, came to be published to the world, such deposition might be understood in a sense different from that in which a simple declaration, or narration, of the witness would be understood; and, indeed, in this case, Mrs.

Upon this second point, the Lord Chief Justice defied any man to cite an instance, in which the minutes of a Judge had been taken down in any other way than that in which Mrs. Lisle's deposition had been taken down; and, in the House of Commons, Mr. Whitbread was told, that he ought to have known, from his attendance at the Quarter Sessions, that such was the universal practice; and that, therefore, he ought to have considered it as proper in this case.

Now, observe, it must here be supposed, that the reprovers of Mr. Whitbread spoke either of depositions or examinations previous to trial; or, of examinations before a court and jury; and, I am of opinion, that neither of these furnishes a case in point. As to the first, the examinations thus taken do not serve as the ground of any final decision; the party accused may be held to bail or committed upon them; but, he is afterwards to be tried; the whole is to be heard over again before other magistrates and before jurors, who are to decide upon the case; but, who are not to decide, till they themselves have heard the witnesses speak; till they themselves have heard the questions as well as the answers. In the case of Mrs. Lisle's deposition, there was no after examination to take place. The King, to whom the deposition was sent along with the Report upon it, was to form his judgment upon the answers only. The difference here is so manifest and so important that it needs nothing further to make you fully sensible of it.

As to examinations before a court and jury, it is very true, that the Judge makes a minute of the answers only. When he sums up the evidence, he seldom says a word about the questions, and merely tells

« 前へ次へ »