HL Deb 05 October 1820 vol 3 cc260-4
The Marquis of Lansdown

said, that having been the person who had first called the attention of their lordships to a letter of M. Marrietti, which seemed to indicate an attempt on the part of colonel Browne to interfere with the witnesses in the cause of the Queen, on the subject of which, papers had been laid before the House [See p. 109], he should have been sincerely happy to express his satisfaction at the explanation which had been given in the letters which the noble earl (Liverpool) had produced. Unfortunately, that was not in his power, as a letter had come into his possession at the same time that the noble earl had produced his explanation, which letter tended to throw a light on the proceedings very different from that which the noble earl's explanation had cast on them. That letter had been sent to him by a person with whom he had had no previous intimacy, and who bad given him no special authority to make public use of it, and he, in the exercise of his discretion, had thought fit not to do so. But since that time, not only the letter to which he had alluded, but other letters, throwing a still stronger light upon the case, had made their appearance in the public papers; and, great as his satisfaction would be in declaring his conviction that there had been no interference, he could not now have that satisfaction. Any of their lordships who had read the papers in which those letters were contained, would see that the case could not rest there. Far would it be from him, even on the assertion of Mr. Marrietti, though he believed him to be as respectable as any man, to condemn an individual without a hearing. But if their lordships would read those letters, they could not help feeling a doubt that Mr. Marrietti was induced to make the communication to his son, not by a direct intimation from colonel Browne (for that was negatived), but by one conveyed through the confidential clerk. The first letter of the elder Marrietti, which bore date the 16th September, contained the following passage:—"It is true that Browne has expressly and repeatedly insisted, with Mr. Albertonio, that he should make known to you the dissatisfaction in that quarter towards you, and the danger of the Alien bill which you were going to encounter." That letter had been written after a knowledge of what had taken place in England. There was a subsequent letter from the same gentleman, dated Milan, Sept. 20, in which it is said, "He (col. Browne) seeing himself much disquieted on this account, made such an application to Signor D. Ciceri, and to Signor Albertonio, that the former begged me to convey to the said colonel Browne a letter of mine, which, in a certain way (in certo qual modo,) might justify him with his government from the too rigorous interpretation given to my former letter. And after having written and re-written, through the medium of the said Signor Ciceri, draughts of such a letter to be shown, the copy which I in close to your address was fixed upon. You will likewise find the copy of a letter which the said colonel Browne desired from the said Signor Albertonio, who gave me the account contained in the letters formerly addressed to you. To the honour of truth, I have regarded what colonel Browne said, through the medium of Signor Albertonio, as an act of friend- ship, to prevent him from being brought into any danger. Nor could I ever have imagined that such a thing could have been of as much importance as it has proved. However that be, to facilitate the allaying of such a controversy, and to preserve amity with all, I have thought proper to second it, as you will perceive by the copy. They wished me to declare that my first letter was the result of my own simple suspicion, and had no ground to rest upon; but this I will not allow, because the having named colonel Browne in the way I did, would have been charged on me as a calumnious imputation; and, therefore, you will see in my letter sent yesterday to him (colonel Browne) that I mention my not having direct conversation with him, and derive my information from what he caused to be said to me by Signor Albertonio. Regulate yourself, therefore, in every thing, with the greatest prudence, in order not to incur other annoyances and other dissatisfactions, which can only produce evil to you." The expression of the Italian, as to the purpose of the representation he had made, was stronger—it was lasciar anello, to leave a loop-hole, "to leave a ring" on which to hang, as it were, an exculpation. Now, as to the considering all this interference of colonel Browne a mere act of friendship—this intimation to a person of whom he had no knowledge, and made, too, through a confidential clerk—considered, too, as emanating from a person who was the agent for the opposing party in the Queen's cause, and representing, as the noble earl said, though in a qualified degree, the government of England—how could it be regarded by an individual like M. Marrietti, who was living under a government, of which it was no satire to say, that it was absolute and despotic, for such it professed itself to be—under the Austrian government of Milan—but as a wish to influence his conduct? He did not wish to prejudge, even now, the conduct of colonel Browne, but he felt it impossible, that the explanation which had been given should now be considered as satisfactory. Further explanation must be had, and the making the letters evidence, would be the mode, perhaps, of bringing the whole case under the view of the House. M. Marrietti could be called to state whether the letters were authentic.

The Earl of Liverpool

said, he perfectly agreed, that after the publication of the letters alluded to, or even if they had not I been published—if any such letters had been in existence, it was impossible that the thing could rest where it was. He; only desired that their lordships would not form any opinion to the prejudice of colonel Browne, till further explanation had been asked or given. It would be observed that colonel Browne had never had any communication with M. Marrietti; that every communication that had taken place, must have passed through a third person, M. Albertonio. It would be observed, too, that he had never mentioned the Alien act, at least, so he asserted, and M. Albertonio did not deny it. He (the earl of Liverpool) was willing that the documents should in some way be made official, [that the fullest inquiry might take place. They might be addressed to some official person, or M Marrietti might be called to the bar to authenticate them. Some subsequent proceeding might then be had.

The Marquis of Lansdown

said, there was contained in the letters no distinct denial that the Alien act had been referred to. M. Albertonio only said, he was ignorant of its provisions, and that the personal security of M. Marrietti had not been threatened. Colonel Browne did not say whether or no the Alien act had been alluded to; he denied that any threat had been used.

The Earl of Liverpool

wished all the letters to be put in; the first letter of M. Marrietti, in which the discussion originated, as well as the others.

Joseph Marrietti was now conducted to the bar, and having been sworn, he underwent the following examination:—

The Clerk

of the House.—You are desired to look at those letters (handing to the witness the letters produced by the marquis of Lansdown). The witness took the letters into his hand.

The Marquis of Lansdown

.—Having looked at those letters, Mr. Marrietti, inform the House whether they are the original letters you have received from your father?—A. The first is an original letter written by my father to me, and is dated the 21st of August; I received it by post. The second is the 16th September; my father wrote it, and it was inclosed to me.

The Lord Chancellor

.—By post?—A. By post; but it was inclosed in another letter. The third is a copy of a letter written by my father to colonel Browne. The fourth I received in a fifth letter It is a copy of a letter from colonel Fletcher to colonel Browne, and dated the 20th of September. I received it by post, inclosed in an envelope.

The Earl of Lauderdale

.—Are these in the hand-writing of your father?—A. They are.

The Marquis of Lansdown

.—Has Mr. Marrietti received any other letters on this subject from his father?—A. No.

or from Mr. Albertonio?—A. None from Mr. Albertonio. He wrote to me some time ago, telling me that it was stated by some person, the name of which person I forget, that I had been seen in the house of Demont. I answered, it was not true, because I had not seen Demont.

Who is the Signor D. Ciceri, mentioned in one of those letters?—A. M. D. Ciceri was a friend of ours, who came to our house; and I know he was also a very great friend of colonel Browne's, because when I came here he begged of me to bring some dispatches for colonel Browne.

Have you in your possession that letter: which you say you received from M. J Albertonio?—A. I believe I have.

The Lord Chancellor

.—Then be so good as to inform the House to-morrow whether you have or not.

Mr. Marrietti then withdrew.