tage of an opportunity to state his case, and to explain his conduct. But to this assertion he, (Mr. P.) could not subscribe, and he hoped that he should not be charged with any disrespect to the Court, in de

House, in considering the real facts of the question, would dismiss such conduct from its recollection. Indeed, he had no doubt that such would be the case-for he never witnessed so much candour, moderation, and tenderness, as the House had through-claring that he was quite unable to comout manifested towards the Noble Lord. prehend the rule which had been pressed That House would, therefore, he was against Lord Cochrane's motion for a new satisfied, be ready to separate the conduct trial. Indeed, he could not conceive such to which he had alluded, from the facts of a rule to have any foundation in law, justhe case. Some one had appeared to hold tice, or reason. He did not presume to that to impeach the charge was tantamount say that this rule was unjust, but that he to an impeachment of the rectitude of the did not comprehend the grounds upon Judge by whom that charge was made, which it could be justified. For instance, and that, therefore, such impeachment was it meant by this rule, that if a verdict should be decidedly discountenanced; but of guilty should be pronounced against six he was persuaded that no one could suppose persons, five of whom were really guilty, him inclined to cast an imputation upon while one was really innocent, the innocent any Judge, and sure he was that to ques- should be refused a new trial, although tion the rectitude of a Judge's charge, im- perfectly able to establish bis innocence, plied no imputation whatever. Indeed, because the others over whom the innocent no such conception prevailed, for nothing might have no controul or influence should was more common than an application for decline to join in the motion? If so, how a new trial upon the special ground of a could such a refusal be sustained upon any Judge's misdirection to the Jury, either as principle of equity, or law, or reason? to case or fact. Yet it was never under- What, was an innocent person to suffer stood that any Judge felt himself offended through any mistake or deficiency of eviby such a motion, or that it implied any dence, because the guilty, with whom he imputation upon his general rectitude or might be connected by a prosecution, should character. For himself he could say, that not think proper, or could not be conno one was more likely to feel a higher trouled, to join in an application for a new respect for the judicial, but yet he could trial? He declared that to his mind such never feel that respect so far as to believe a rule was totally incomprehensible, and if in the infallibility of a Judge, and there- it were to be maintained, what was to fore he could not subscribe to any such become of the highest authority, by whom doctrine as that upon which he had ani- it was said, that it was better 99 unjust madverted. The law itself, indeed, sup- persons should escape, than that one person posed the infallibility of a Judge by pro- should suffer? The Right Hon. Gentleman viding the remedy which he had stated.- here took notice of Lord Cochrane's exThe Noble Lord (Cochrane) had stated planation respecting the bank-notes found one fact, which, if true, certainly illus- in the possession of De Berenger, and trated that infallibility. For the Noble traced into his hands, observing, that this Lord had stated, that the Judge before explanation was calculated to make a whom he was tried had, in his charge to material impression in the Noble Lord's the Jury, said, that De Berenger had pre-favour, as it served to shew that these scated himself to the Noble Lord," blazoned in the costume of his crime," although not a tittle of evidence was adduced to sustain such an allegation. This he could not help thinking a very extraordinary allegation, if the statement of the Noble Lord was true-and that the Judge did mis-state a very material point to the Jury, which was particularly calculated to mislead their judgment. It was said by a Learned Gentleman, whom he did not then see in his place (the Attorney-General), that although a new trial was refused to the Noble Lord, he had still the advan

notes might have found their way into the possession of De Berenger, without the Noble Lord's privity. This explanation, indeed, appeared to make a great difference in the merits of the Noble Lord's case, and therefore must, with other circumstances, indispose the House to agree to a motion of expulsion, at least without some further enquiry. From such an enquiry, he could not conceive that any danger could arise of an improper interference with the due administration of justice.For it was not proposed to interfere with the sentence of the Court-but that House

being called upon to superadd to that sen-1 tence the expulsion of the Noble Lord, it became its duty, for the sake of justice and its own character, fully and candidly to consider the grounds of such an extraordinary proceeding. He protested, therefore, against the idea that such consideration would involve any interference with the Jurisdiction of the Court of King's Bench, and with a view to that consideration, he should recommend the appointment of a select, and perhaps a secret Committee, to investigate the allegations of the Noble Lord, and to report the evidence to the House. That such a Committee was likely to involve in its proceedings any reproach upon an interference with the due administration of justice he did not at all apprehend, and such an apprehension could not therefore influence his judgment. As to the declaration of the Attorney-General, that the Noble Lord was afforded all the advantage of a new trial, although his motion was refused, he could not admit the fact for the Noble Lord was notoriously without the assistance of Counsel; and unless it was maintained that a man un--It had been said, that the expulsion learned in the law was likely to make as much impression as a Learned Counsel, the position of the Learned Gentleman was not tenable. On all these grounds the Right Honourable Gentleman thought the House should agree to the appointment of a Committee of Inquiry, or at least adjourn the discussion with a view more volly to consider the merits of the case before it came to any decision. At all events, he declared that, as the case at present appeared, he could not sleep upon his pillow, if he voted for the expulsion of Lord Cochrane.-(Hear, hear!)

Mr. WHITBREAD expressed himself much satisfied with that part of the Hon. Gentleman's speech which preceded the conclusion of it, and with no other. However much that Hon. Member might be accustomed to consult the Journals of the House, yet he thought he could never be so entirely blinded by precedents, or buried under the records of Parliament, as because in former instances members had been expelled the House who were placed in the situation of the Noble Lord, that therefore Parliament were to lay aside their own discretion, and not to judge of every case which should be brought before them as a foundation for a parliamentary proceeding on its individual merits. Because a person was convicted of a criminal charge, were they, the members of that House, to affect so much purity, so much delicacy of character, as immediately to proceed to the expulsion of that person from the House, not stopping to enquire into the justice of the sentence, and even refusing to hear any proofs which might be brought for ward afterwards to establish its injustice.

which was to follow the record of the conviction, was no additional punishment: but he would put it to the House, whether the bitterest of all the bitter moments which a person in the situation of the Noble Lord must endure, would not probably be that in which he learned the sentence of expulsion from his seat in that House. It was a question involving great difficulty. He thought, that, in a question of privilege, a Committee of the whole House would be the most eligible mode. He had always entertained doubts as to the guilt of the Noble Lord, there were Mr. BANKES observed, that there was certainly circumstances attending the transno instance whatever to be found in the action, for which he could by no means Journals of the House, or the practice of satisfactorily account. The speech of the Parliament, in which expulsion had not Noble Lord had strengthened those doubts. followed the producing the record of con as to his guilt. If such had been the effect viction, as a matter of course. This con- of that speech on his mind, and on the sequence followed not only in criminal minds of many other gentlemen, what must cases, but in all cases Parliament reserved be the innate value of the facts contained to itself a discretionary power of expulsion. in it, when it was evident that in the He did not mean, however, to say, that course of his speech the Noble Lord had a case could not be made out, in which it gone out of his way to excite the feelings would be improper to expel a Member on of the House against him, and to prejudge account of the verdict of a Jury. And if instead of advocating his own cause?there was any one who, in the present in- Such was the force of those facts, that stance, thought there was a rational doubt even an Honourable Member who had of the Noble Lord's guilt, he ought un- risen to call the Noble Lord to order, in doubtedly to suppose him innocent, and one part of his defence, had candidly de must necessarily vote against his expulsion.clared, that after hearing the whole state

Honourable Gentleman. Not only, indeed, had that Right Honourable Gentle man been deficient in candour, but he had grossly mis-stated the facts of the Noble Lord's defence. The Noble Lord had said that the Judge, in his charge to the Jury, stated circumstances which had not been

ment, he could not conscientiously vote for bis expulsion. It appeared that there were several parts of the charge by the Judge which were incorrect in point of fact.Lord Cochrane had also given an explanation, which he professed himself ready to confirm by evidence, of some of the most mysterious circumstances in the transac-given in evidence. Now there were mattion, and which he (Mr. Whitbread), had often declared in conversation, he thought most required explanation, such as the particular dress of De Berenger, and the bank notes found in his possession. After the statement made by the Noble Lord, he did not firmly believe the possibility of his innocence, and if the question were pressed to a division, he should vote against the original motion. If the House were not to exercise their discretion in a case of this kind, but merely to look at the record of the conviction, it would be better to pronounce the sentence of expulsion at once, without the mockery of a defence. He thought it possible that the Noble Lord might have been entrapped into an apparent participation in a crime of which he was innocent, and circumstances which the Noble Lord bad, in an agony of feeling which overpowered him, mentioned with respect to the conduct of a near relation of his who had absconded (Mr. C. Johnstone), seemed to warrant such a supposition. Mr. Whitbread here alluded to Mr. Cochrane Johnstone's advice to Lord Cochrane not to come down to the House with any statement on the subject previous to the trial. Mr. BRAGGE BATHURST contended, that if the House went into the enquiry at at all, they must go into the whole evidence on the trial. He commented severely on the allusions made by the Noble Lord to the conduct and motives of the Learned Judge. Mr. C. Johnstone bad made the same protestations of his innocence as Lord Cochrane had done to night, nor did he see any difference in the two cases. The Noble Lord had not, he conceived, brought forward any evidence to night which it was not in his power, and which he was not bound to have brought forward on his trial. On these grounds he was for the original motion.

Sir F. BURDETT condemned the tone of asperity with which the Right Honourable Gentleman had expressed himself, and the absence of all that generous feeling in commenting upon the defence of the Noble Lord, which had been observed during the discussion, till the speech of the Right

ters which seemed to prove that the case was so. Lord Ellenborough had supplied evidence to the Jury, and had he (Sir F. Burdett) been upon that Jury, and heard from the Judge presiding that Berenger had gone to Lord Cochrane's with the medallion, stars, &c. he must confess, notwithstanding what might have been his high opinion of that Noble Lord, he should have concluded that he could not have been off his guard, could not have been without suspicion, and that such in fact was conclusive against him: at all events, it was a fact which he thought well worth ascertaming by that House, whether Lord Ellenborough had so charged the Jury, because upon that charge he believed the conviction of Lord Cochrane had mainly depended; and if what the Noble Lord had stated respecting it was true, then he had been unjustly convicted. Another gross mis-statement of the Right Hon. Gentleman was with regard to the Rule in Court. It had been asked by the Right Hon. Gentleman why Lord Cochrane had abandoned his legal advisers? He did not abandon them, he consulted with them; but they were of opinion they could not interfere with so good a grace as the Noble Lord, who was not bound by the same technicalities. Another part of the Right Honourable Gentleman's speech related to the conduct of Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, who, he said, had also protested his innocence in that House, and was therefore entitled to claim the same re-hearing as the Noble Lord, as he stood on the same footing. But here again the fact was otherwise. Mr. C. Johnstone had not appeared in that House since his conviction; while, on the other hand, Lord Cochrane had not fled from the penalties of the law, which indeed he laughed at, anxious only to redeem his character. This conduct on the part of the Noble Lord had made a powerful impression upon his mind, which it would require a strong concatenation of evidence, and a very different Jury, to remove. He did not mean to impute any blame to the Jury, because, under all the circumstances, and with that charge

which was delivered to them, they acted | No one would say that in reference to the au honourable, impartial, and just part.-individual who had petitioned the House He should be surprised, however, if that on that day (M'Rae), and whose petition Jury, now that new things had transpired, seemed to contain matter important to the and new lights were thrown upon the ques-present question, and Lord Cochrane, that tion, did not feel anxious to amend their the punishment of the pillory would be own verdiet and re-consider the case. The equal upon both of them. The pillory was only difficulty he felt in considering the never intended in this country as a punishpresent question was, because Lord Coch-ment for persons in Lord Cochrane's starane appeared to be so slightly connected tion. Yet, in addition to all this, the with the transaction. It was not as if Noble Lord opposite (Lord Castlereagh) Lord Cochrane had been found in the com- had told them, that to expel Lord Cochrane pany of notorious sharpers and swindlers. from that House was to be considered as If, indeed, he was at all involved in it, no punishment. It was merely a proceed he had been so through a near relation, ing of course, following upon the record of upon whose guilt or innocence he did not conviction, no matter what circumstances mean to pronounce, but from whose in- might attach to that conviction. There fluence it certainly appeared Lord Coch- might be corruption in a Judge-there rane had acted. In expressing his re-might be perjury in a Juryman-but still, probation of the conduct of the Judge, he according to the doctrine held that evening, might, perhaps, incur the same censure as they were to allow an innocent man to his Noble Friend (for so in his conscience perish, provided he had once been conhe held him to be), but he should be the victed, under whatever circumstances. It basest, the meanest, the vilest of beings, if was thus an Honourable Member on the he remained silent upon a sentence, from floor (Mr. Bankes) had argued; but then which the gallant and eminent services of he soon forgot himself, and admitted that it that Noble Lord ought to have protected might be proper to go into inquiry, when a him, even if he had been guilty. (Hear, proper case could be made out. Now, if hear, hear!) And the House would de-ever there was a case which called upon ceive themselves, if they thought that no feeling of disgust was excited in the public miud by that sentence. There was not a single person with whom he had conversed (except the Noble Lord himself) who did not consider it as cruel and unjust, beyond all former precedent. Lord Cochrane was the only one indifferent to it as a punish-together. He had been present at what ment. In a conversation which he had was called the striking of a Special Jury, held with him in the King's Bench, he when I happened, said the Hon. Baronet, (Lord C.) said he did not complain of the to be engaged in a great law question with sentence; if he were guilty, he deserved it you, Sir. (A Largh.) The Hon. Baronet all and more; but what he most felt was then went into an examination of some the stain upon his character, and he had parts of the evidence, and contended, that almost lost his power of existing under such it was preposterous to oppose to the dea dreadful load. Such were the feelings of claration of Lord Cochrane the evidence the Noble Lord upon the occasion. It of such men as Crane, the hackney coachwas the first time, indeed, that the offence man, and the postillion, with regard to the had been considered as a crime. In the colour of the coat worn by De Berenger, eye of the law it was considered as a mis-and concluded by observing upon the prodemeanor only; and in former and better | bability of a man like Lord Cochrane, times six months' imprisonment were con- whose whole life had been devoted to the sidered as a very heavy punishment for a pursuit of glory, and whose conduct had misdemeanor. But here we had a large been hitherto free from reproach or stain, fine, a long imprisonment, and a punish-becoming all at once a swindler and a ment which, he contended, was unfit to be cheat. He therefore hoped the House applied to a Naval Officer of eminent ser- would at least consent to pause before it vices, holding that high rank in the country decided, though for his part he saw no which Lord Cochrane did. There was no reason for refusing to appoint a Select equality of punishment in such a sentence. Committee.

the feelings, the character, and the justice. of that House, the present surely was one of them. A great deal had been very cloquently said by Mr. A'torney General, in behalf of Special Juries. He (Sir F. Burdett) happened to know something of the mode in which those Juries were got

Printed and Published by J. MORTON, No. 94, Strand.

VOL. XXVI. No. 4.] LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 23, 1814. [Price 1s.

91]

SUMMARY OF POLITICS.

[98

complish this, it was not possible for any man to contend successfully.-But what has been the result of Napoleon's overthrow? for if there has been no change in our situation for the better; if the people, who were the most active in hostility against him, have gained nothing by his fall, and all the advantages that followed it are enjoyed by France alone, it was surely worse than madness in us to make so many sacrifices to bring about an event, which, in

THE EMPEROR NAPOLEON. Although the course of events has, for some time, belied the assertions made respecting Napoleon by his enemies, at and previous to his abdication, these vile calumniators have not been induced, by his overthrow, to relax in their vindictiveness. Formerly they told us that he was the cause, the sole cause, of all the misfortunes which afflicted Europe; but more particu-so far as regards ourselves, has been atlarly, that to him, and to him only, was to tended with no beneficial results. Now, be attributed the existence, and the con- without going at all into the question about stant accumulation, of those enormous the continuance of our war taxes, of our taxes and that immense load of debt with war, naval and military, establishments, and which the supporters of corruption have of the loan system; without adverting to loaded the country. To Napoleon, it was the obstacles which exist, and, I am afraid, said, we owed the stagnation of commerce, will always exist, to a restoration of our the ruin of our manufactories, the high commerce, to the encouragement which our price of provisions, the interruption of our manufactures were in use to receive, and national improvements, and the consequent to the revival of national improvements; and rapid increase of pauperism, which, each of which afford a melancholy and like mighty torrent, threatens to over-striking proof, that the fall of Napoleon. whelm the land. All this, and much more, has not brought with it any of those blesswe were seriously and unceasingly told, ings which the nation were promised, originated in the inordinate ambition, and Without, I say, referring at present to any unrestrained power, of this "sanguinary of these topics, it appears very clear to me oppressor;" and as long as he was per- from the manner in which the supporters mitted to wield the sceptre of France, so of corruption still speak of Napoleon, long, we were confidently assured, would that even they themselves are convinced he continue to torment and afflict suffering they were formerly deceiving the public: humanity. It was by such representations that they were using the name of Bonaparte as these; it was by a constant recurrence as a stalking-horse, to support the corrupt to them; it was by the sacrifice of truth, system by which they profit; and that they and the universal prostitution of the news-well knew, whoever governed France, that paper press, that nearly a general abhor- that nation would be great and powerful rence was created of the character of Na-and able to maintain a preponderance on the poleon. Even a great proportion of his ad- Continent, which would always serve as a rers, deceived by these imposing means, check to any meditated designs of aggranwere gradually entangled in the vortex, and dizement there, on the part of this country. joined in the cry against him with as much They also knew, that France, by herexclu good will as his most inveterate foes. Thus sion from the rest of Europe for twenty it was that corruption was able to strengthen years, must have rendered herself indepenitself, and that the means were obtained dent, by her internal means, of those which effected the destruction of this sup- articles which formerly constituted the posed enemy to the human race.-It was sources of our commercial wealth, and natural for those who viewed Napoleon in national greatness. Whether, therefore, that light, to contribute to his downfall, it was a Bonaparte or a Bourbon who and against so formidable an accumulation reigned in France, those men, who com of instruments as those employed to ac-stantly and audaciously decried the forD