HL Deb 05 July 1820 vol 2 cc212-6

"An Act to deprive her Majesty Queen Caroline Amelia Elizabeth, of the Title, Prerogatives, Rights, Privileges and Exemptions, of Queen-Consort of this Realm, and to dissolve the Marriage between his Majesty and the said Caroline Amelia Elizabeth.

"Whereas, in the year 1814, her majesty, Caroline Amelia Elizabeth, then Princess of Wales, and now Queen Consort of this realm, being at Milan, in Italy, engaged in her service, in a menial situation, one Bartolomo Pergami, otherwise Bartolomo Bergami, a foreigner of low station, who had before served in a similar capacity:

"And whereas, after the said Bartolomo Pergami, otherwise Bartolomo Bergami, had so entered the service of her Royal Highness the said Princess of Wales, a most unbecoming and disgusting intimacy commenced between her Royal Highness and the said Bartolomo Pergami, otherwise Bartolomo Bergami;

"And whereas her Royal Highness not only advanced the said Bartolomo Pergami, otherwise Bartolomo Bergami, to a high situation in her Royal Highness's household, and received him into her service, and that in high and confidential si-tuations about her Royal Highness's person, but bestowed upon him other great and extraordinary marks of favour and distinction, obtained for him Orders of Knighthood and Titles of Honour, and conferred upon him a pretended Order of Knighthood, which her Royal Highness had taken upon herself to institute without any just or lawful authority:

"And whereas her said Royal Highness, whilst the said Bartolomo Pergami, otherwise Bartolomo Bergami, was in her said service, farther unmindful of her exalted rank and station, and of her duty to your Majesty, and wholly regardless of her own honour and character, conducted herself towards the said Bartolomo Pergami, otherwise Bartolomo Bergami, and in other respects, both in public and private, in the various places and countries which her Royal Highness visited, with indecent and offensive familiarity and freedom, and carried on a licentious, disgraceful, and adulterous intercourse with the said Bartolomo Pergami, otherwise Bartolomo Bergami, which continued for a lung period of time during her Royal Highness's residence abroad, by which conduct of her said Royal Highness, great scandal and dishonour have been brought upon your Majesty's family and this kingdom.

"Therefore, to manifest our deep sense of such scandalous, disgraceful and vicious conduct on the part of her said Majesty, by which she has violated the duty she owed to your Majesty, and has rendered herself unworthy of the exalted rank and station of Queen Consort of this Realm, and to evince our just regard for the dignity of the Crown and the honour of this nation, we, your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Lords spiritual and temporal, and Commons in parliament assembled, do hereby entreat your Majesty that it may be enacted;

"And be it enacted by the King's most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords spiritual and temporal and Commons in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, that her said Majesty Caroline Amelia Elizabeth, from and after the passing of this Act, shall be and is hereby deprived of the title of Queen, and of all the prerogatives, rights, privileges, and exemptions appertaining to her as Queen Consort of this Realm; and that her said Majesty shall, from and after the passing of this Act, for ever be dis- abled and rendered incapable of using, exercising, and enjoying the same, or any of them; and moreover, that the marriage between his Majesty and the said Caroline Amelia Elizabeth be, and the same is hereby from henceforth for ever wholly dissolved, annulled, and made void to all intents, constructions, and purposes whatsoever."

After the bill had been read a first time, the Earl of Liverpool moved, that copies should be sent to her majesty, and her majesty's attorney general, and also to the king's attorney-general, which was agreed to.

Earl Grey

observed, that the more he considered the objections against the mode in which they were proceeding, the more he was confirmed in those objections. The bill, he thought, instead of stating generally the criminality imputed to her majesty, should specify the particulars of time and place, in order that she might be enabled to meet the allegations. The preamble, however, did no such thing, and therefore was wanting in that certainty of description which her defence required to be stated. He therefore wished to know, whether the noble earl intended to adopt any other mode of proceeding subsequently, with a view to supply that defect, he wished also to ask, whether any course was in contemplation for supplying her majesty with the names of the witnesses about to be produced against her?

The Earl of Liverpool

said, that the second reading of the bill would be the proper time to enter into the discussion. He had no difficulty however in stating, that the specification in the preamble was as particular as any other to which they could refer, and was in all respects sufficient to guide her majesty's defence. With regard to the names of the witnesses, it was unprecedented in the history of parliamentary proceedings to furnish them, while a bill of Pains and Penalties was depending. It was unusual in all proceedings, exept in trials for high treason; but as her majesty had claims to the utmost indulgence, sufficient lime would be allowed her to select her evidence, and this would do away the only plausible ground that existed for demanding a list of the witnesses.

Lord Dacre moved, that her majesty's counsel should now be called to the bar, in order to state points which were neces- sary to her defence. He did this upon information which he had received recently.

The Earl of Liverpool

suggested that the noble lord might obtain his object, without resorting to a course which was contrary to the whole analogy of their proceedings, and promised that if a petition was presented to-morrow, the bill being in progress he would not then object to it.

Lord Dacre

assented, and did not press the motion.

Earl Grey

thought, that whatever course was taken under the present proceeding, it must be attended with great disadvantage to her majesty. The commencement of a prosecution, grounded upon evidence which could not be met for a considerable time after the evidence had produced its impression, was unfavourable to the end of justice. It would be more conducive to that end if the whole could be postponed until there was an opportunity for proceeding with the accusation and defence together. In all Divorce bills the accused party had the advantage of the knowledge to be derived from previous proceedings. The noble earl had alluded to the management of the case at the bar; but he wished to know by what authority, or at whose direction, any person could appear at that bar to conduct the prosecution?

The Earl of Liverpool

said, that the attorney-general might be called upon by the authority of the House either to appear himself, or to provide some person to conduct it.

Earl Grey

observed, that from the noble lord's statement it would appear as if the House itself had assumed the character of a prosecutor in a case which it was about to try.

The Earl of Liverpool

stated, that the House had actually appointed counsel in other cases, and there could be no doubt that they would see justice done between the parties.

Earl Grey

said, he was aware that the House had appointed counsel in other cases, in that for instance of the Berkeley case, but here was a case of prosecution for which he had not heard any precedent. He was as far as the noble lord from suspecting the justice of the House; but, it was not only necessary that they should be just, but that they should appear above suspicion.

The Lord Chancellor

defended the pro- ceeding by a bill of Pains and Penalties originating in that House, and justified the interposition of a secret committee. The attorney-general was one of the legal assistants of that House, in which capacity he was liable to be called on to conduct the proceeding.

Lord Holland

remarked, that the attorney-general was a member of another House, and might therefore be objected to as the manager of a prosecution in the House of Lords, upon which he would have to pronounce hereafter in the House of Commons.

The Earl of Liverpool

said, that though the order was given to the attorney-general, he would not be obliged to appear personally, but might send some other person, as had occurred in many cases.