HL Deb 06 October 1820 vol 3 cc318-63

The order of the day being read for the further consideration and second reading of the Bill, intituled "An Act to de-"prive Her Majesty, &c," and for hearing Counsel for and against the same; the Counsel were accordingly called in.

Then the right hon. Lady Charlotte Lindsay was again called in; and further cross-examined as follows by Mr. Solicitor General.

Is there a garden in the neighbourhood of Naples called La Favorita? Yes, there is.

Did your ladyship ever walk in that garden with her royal highness? Yes, I did one day.

Was Pergami also present at that time? He was.

Did your ladyship in going from Naples to Rome, travel in the same carriage wth her royal highness? I did.

Did Pergami ride as courier during that journey? He did.

Did your ladyship also go in the same carriage in the journey from Rome, after your ladyship left Rome? From Rome to Civita Vecchia. Yes, I did.

Did Pergami also ride as courier during that part of the journey? I believe he did, but I have not so accurate a recollection of it as of the former part.

Does your ladyship recollect, upon the former part of the journey, Pergami coming up to the window of the carriage, and addressing her royal highness, saying "à boire madame?" I perfectly recollect his coming up to the carriage, but it was after he was called; we had provisions in the carriage, and her royal highness gave him some of the provisions out of the carriage, and something to drink.

Has your ladyship a distinct recollection that it was after he was called? I think it certainly was after he was called.

Is there any circumstance that enables your ladyship to pronounce with certainty as to that? No, but merely because it was more natural, that he should not come till he was called to have some provisions given to him.

Then your ladyship has no recollection either the one way or the other, as to that circumstance, but it is a mere inference from reasoning in your own mind? It is; there was nothing struck me as particular in the circumstance.

Was there any bottle in the carriage, which her royal highness handed to him? There was a bottle of wine.

Did he drink from that bottle? I think he did.

From the bottle itself without any glass? Yes, I think so.

Did he afterwards return that bottle to her royal highness? I cannot be quite positive, but I fancy he returned the bottle, but I cannot be by any means positive as to that; her royal highness and I had taken our refreshment before he was helped, and whether he returned the bottle to the carriage or not, or whether he threw the bottle away, I cannot be certain.

Although your ladyship is not certain, to the best of your recollection which way was it, did he return the bottle or throw it away? I rather think that he retuned the bottle to the carriage.

After your ladyship had made up your mind to quit the service of her royal highness, did you not state that it was a vast relief to your mind having come to the resolution of quitting her royal highness? I have no distinct recollection of having stated that.

When your ladyship says you have no distinct recollection of having stated that, do you remember having stated any thing to that purpose or effect? No, I might have said that it was, but I do not know that I ever did.

Did not your ladyship, after you had come to the determination of quitting her royal highness's service, say that it was a vast relief to your mind, having come to the resolution of quitting the service of her royal highness, and that you then considered that no woman with any regard to her character could remain in the service of her royal highness? I certainly do not recollect ever having stated any such thing in such words.

Does your ladyship recollect having stated any thing to that effect? No.

Will your ladyship undertake to say, that you did not state the very words now made use of? I have no recollection of having stated any such words.

Your ladyship will not undertake to say you did not make use of those very words? I can say that I did not make use of those very words; I have no recollection of having made use of any such words.

Your ladyship had before said you had no recollection of having made use of such words, and the question then proposed was, whether you would undertake to say that you had not made use of such words? I can only say I think it extremely improbable that I should have made use of such words; and I do not recollect that I did.

Your ladyship is to be understood to say you will not undertake to say that you did not make use of those words? I can only say that I have no recollection of that; I think it very improbable.

Will your ladyship undertake to say that you did not make use of words to that effect more than once? I have no recollection of having made use of words to that effect.

But your ladyship will not undertake to say that you did not make use of those expressions more than once? I can only answer as I did before, that I have no recollection and I do not think it probable.

Did not your ladyship say, upon quitting the service of her royal highness, that if it had not been for an anxious desire to assist a particular individual out of the savings in that service, you would have quitted the service long before? I think it is very possible I might have made use of those words; I do not distinctly recollect that I did, but I think it is possible.

Having recalled this little circumstance to the recollection of your ladyship, did not the former conversation, to which allusion has been made, pass at the same time? I have no distinct recollection at what time I might have said I was induced to remain, from the wish of assisting that individual from my salary; I have no distinct recollection when I said that, and I certainly do not think it was coupled with any words expressive of an ill opinion of the princess.

Is your ladyship to be understood that it was not so, or that you merely think it was not so, coupled with such terms? As far as I can recollect, it was not so.

But your ladyship will not be positive? I can only say that I have no kind of recollection of it, and that I do think it not at all probable.

Still your ladyship is understood that you will not say positively that it was not so? I have no kind of recollection of ever having stated that my resignation was on account of what you mention, that no woman of character could remain.

Your ladyship will perceive that is not an answer to the question put, whether your ladyship will say positively that it was not so? I can only say I have not the least recollection that I said so to any body.

Your ladyship, in answer to a question put on the examination in chief, stated, that some communication had been made by lord Guilford; was the conversation to which your ladyship has spoken, and which your ladyship recollects, after that communication, from lord Guilford? I have not the least recollection whether it was before or after.

Does your ladyship recollect, whether or not it was about the same time? No, I do not recollect any thing about the period at which the conversation you allude to might have taken place.

Was it after your ladyship had actually resigned? I do not know.

Are there no circumstances to bring that fact to your recollection? Yes, I think that what I said about having continued in the service, in order that my salary might help a certain individual, must have taken place after the communication made me by my brother.

Re-examined by Dr. Lushington.

You have been asked as to communications which took place verbally, upon the subject of your ladyship's resignation; to whom was that communication made? To my husband.

To any one else? To no one else.

Is Mr. Lindsay a person in distressed circumstances? He is.

Has he been so for a considerable period of time? For some years.

Had your ladyship ever any difficulty, whilst in the princesses service with respect to the payment of your salary?

The Solicitor-general objected to the question, as not arising out of the cross-examination.

The Witness was directed to withdraw.

Dr. Lushington

said he had, in the first instance, asked why the witness had quitted the service of her royal highness. In the cross-examination the solicitor-general had endeavoured to show that she had quitted her situation for reasons that had not been stated in her examination in chief—reasons which might materially affect her majesty. He now wished to examine the witness on these to set the matter right.

The Solicitor General

said, he wished to enter into no argument on the subject. Rather than do this, he would suffer the question to be answered.

The Witness was again called in and the question was put.

Yes, at one lime there was a good deal of arrear due.

Did any other circumstances occur in the year 1817 to render your ladyship's continuing in that situation disagreeable to you? Yes, it would have been particularly disagreeable if my attendance had been required at that time, because I was under considerable depression of spirits.

Had your ladyship at that time lost a near relation? I had lost two.

Was it not the late lord Guilford, and the late lady Glenbervie? Yes it was.

Did you yourself observe any thing in the conduct of her royal highness, any impropriety, to induce you to quit her service? I myself never observed any improprieties in the conduct of her royal highness to induce me to quit her service.

Examined by the Lords.

Earl of Donoughmore

.—You have mentioned that you joined the princess of Wales ten or twelve days previous to her leaving Naples? I did say so.

Your ladyship also said you were one night on your journey to Rome?—Yes, that is quite correct.

That you remained at Rome two days? Two nights and one whole day.

At Civita Vecchia six days? To the best of my recollection six days.

And on board the Clorinde three? I think three nights.

Making altogether twenty-four days? Yes.

After your ladyship had quitted the frigate, you went one way, and the princess went another? Yes, I went with my brother.

Therefore, the experience your ladyship has had of the conduct and deportment of the Queen as princess of Wales extended over a period of twenty-four days only; that being the number of days mentioned in those enumerated by your ladyship? Certainly, at that period.

Therefore the testimony of your ladyship, the opinion your ladyship is enabled to give of the conduct of her majesty as princess of Wales, extends over a period of twenty-four days only? In Italy.

That is the part of the conduct of the princess of Wales which you are here to speak upon: it extends over a period of twenty-four days only; during that time you have said that you observed no impropriety on the part of her royal highness in her intercourse with Pergami? During that time I observed no impropriety on the part of the princess of Wales in her intercourse with Pergami.

What part of the English suite of the princess of Wales was in her royal highness's service at the time of your ladyship joining her at Naples; was sir William Gell? Yes, sir William Gell.

Did sir William Gell remain in her royal highness's service when she quitted Naples, or had he left it? Sir William Gell resigned before we left Naples, on account of his health not permitting him to travel to the North.

Was the hon. Keppel Craven in her royal highness's service at the time of your joining her at Naples?

Yes, he was.

Did he remain in her service when she sailed from Naples?

No, he also resigned.

Was captain Hesse in her royal highness's service at the time of your ladyship's joining her royal highness? Captain Hesse was at Naples with her royal highness, but I am not certain whether he was in her service or not.

Did captain Hesse embark with your ladyship and her royal highness on board the Clorinde?

No, he did not.

Then he had quitted the service, if he was in the service, as well as the other persons who have been mentioned? Yes, he certainly did not accompany us when we left Naples.

At the time that all those persons had quitted the service of her royal highness, were you aware of any other persons having joined that service; was Pergami himself in the service? I found him in her royal highness's service.

Did a sister of his, of the name of Faustina, join the service of her royal highness at that time at Naples? Not that I am aware of.

Did you know that such a person was ever in the service? I never heard till lately, of such a person.

Louis Pergami, his brother, did your ladyship know any thing of his having joined her royal highness at Naples? I am not quite certain, but I think I recollect a person of the name of Louis Pergami at Naples.

You do not know of his having been taken into her royal highness's service at Naples? No, I cannot speak with certainty to it.

Did you know any thing of the mother of Pergami having entered into her royal highness's service at Naples? No, I never heard of her till lately.

Did you know any thing of a child, of the name of Victorine, having been admitted under her royal highness's protection at Naples? No, there certainly was no such child at the house at Naples when I was there.

In answer to a question just now asked, as to the reason you had for quitting her royal highness's, service, you have said, that you had seen nothing improper in her conduct? No, I had seen nothing improper in her royal highness's conduct.

Therefore there was nothing your ladyship had seen improper in her royal highness's service which was the cause of your quilting that service? I had not seen any thing improper that was the cause of my quitting her service.

Had your ladyship any other reason for quitting her royal highness's service, of any sort or kind, which operated upon your ladyship's mind, excepting those which your ladyship has already mentioned? I certainly had not seen any thing improper in her royal highness's conduct while I was in her service; but the reports were of so unpleasant and degrading a nature, that they did operate upon my mind in making me not wish to continue in her service.

Lord Calthorpe

.—During your acquaintance with her royal highness, had your ladyship observed in her a degree of familiarity towards her menial servants, both male and female, that is unusual in persons of such high distinction? I certainly think that her royal highness was peculiarly affable and familiar in her manner to all her servants.

Does your ladyship think that that condescension greatly exceeded that which is usually shown among the higher classes in this country towards their inferiors? I think the higher classes in this country are much more apt to be exceedingly kind and condescending to their servants than those perhaps of a rank beneath them, and I think that her royal highness's manners were very peculiarly so.

Docs your ladyship, think that those manners were peculiar even in a foreigner? I am perhaps no very good judge in that case, but foreigners are I think more apt to converse with their servants than English people, they have less reserve; and I think that her royal highness had certainly that sort of familiarity that I have observed in foreigners, in conversing with their servants.

Does your ladyship think that that familiarity greatly exceeded what you have generally seen shown by foreigners, from the opportunities that you have had of seeing foreign society? No, not greatly.

When your ladyship said that you had not observed any impropriety in the conduct of her royal highness towards Pergami, or any impropriety in his conduct towards her; had you reference to that peculiarity of her behaviour to which you have adverted? I had.

Is your ladyship then to be understood to say, that from the habit you were in of seeing this unusual degree of familiarity and freedom in her royal highness's manners, circumstances might have passed unnoticed by you, which in a person of more habitual reserve than her royal highness, would have appeared to you extraordinary, and perhaps unbecoming? I do not know that they would have appeared to me extraordinary and unbecoming, her royal highness appeared to me to talk to Pergami, as she used to do to Sicard; and various other persons in her family.

Earl of Lauderdale

.—Your ladyship has said that you quitted her royal highness's service, in consequence of a request from the earl of Guilford your brother; was that request communicated in writing? It was.

Has your ladyship the letter in your possession communicating that request? No, I have not.

Can your ladyship say whether the difficulty of receiving your salary, was the ground upon which that request was made? No, I do not think that that was the ground on which the request was made.

Do you know whether that letter is now in existence? I believe not, I did not keep it.

Have you made any search for it? No, I have not.

It being suggested that her ladyship might he requested to search for the letter, and to produce it if still in existence, the attorney-general of the Queen objected to the production of the letter if in existence.

The Counsel were informed, that a question having been put yesterday, what led this lady to resign, and she having said the request of her brother; the counsel on one side having established that fact on their part, the counsel on the other side had a right to say either that that should not stand part of the minutes, or they had a right to know what was the request contained in the letter; but that unless the letter was proved to have been lost, questions upon the contents of it could not be asked.

Her ladyship was directed to make a search for the letter, and to produce it if in existence.

Earl of Lauderdale

.—Your ladyship has said, that when at Naples you have been in her royal highness's bed-chamber; did you go into her royal highness's bed-chamber when you were not sent for, or without knocking at the door? I do not suppose that I went without being sent for; but I am certain I did not knock at the door when I went.

Do you ever recollect having gone there without being sent for? I do not recollect at Naples whether I did or not; I should not have gone unless I had had something particular to communicate, of course, to the princess without being sent for, and I do not recollect that that occurred whilst I was there.

Your ladyship has said, that before you went to Naples there was an arrangement about your quitting the service of her royal highness at a particular time; was that an arrangement of your proposal, or proposed to you by the princess of Wales? It was my proposal when I was at Nice. Her royal highness wrote to me, saying, that as I was still upon the continent she wished I would come and join her at Naples; in answer to that I said, I would obey her royal highness's commands, but I hoped she would not object to my availing myself of the request of my brother to return to England, as I wished to be in England by the beginning of the summer, and could not very well travel by myself.

The following question was put at the request of the Solicitor General:—

At what month in the year 1817 was it you resigned your situation under her royal highness? Upon my word I cannot be entirely accurate as to that, but I should think it was either the month of June or July; about that time of the year.

The Witness was directed to withdraw.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Llandaff was sworn by the Lord Chancellor, at the table, and examined by Mr. Brougham as follows:

Was your lordship in Italy in the year 1815? I was.

Was your lordship accompanied by the countess? I was.

Were you together at Naples during that year? We were.

How long a period of the year were you at Naples together? I went there the latter end of 1814, and I remained there till April 1815.

Did you go there in November 1814? In November or December, I do not exactly recollect which.

But before the end of 1814? Yes.

During that time did your lordship frequent the society of the princess of Wales? I did.

Did your lordship frequently visit at her royal highness's house? Very frequently.

Was your lordship at her royal highness's frequently in the course of a week? Yes, I was certainly.

About how often in a week? Once or twice a week.

Did your lordship dine there? I did, frequently.

Did your lordship frequent evening parties there also, at times when you had not dined there? I did.

Did the countess of Llandaff accompany your lordship to her royal highness's house upon those occasions? Most generally.

What society visited her royal highness in Naples at the same period with your lordship and the countess? I think the generality of the English, all the Neapolitan noblesse of course.

During the time that you had that intercourse with her royal highness did your lordship ever observe any impropriety in her conduct? No.

Did your lordship observe any thing in the demeanor or habits of her royal highness which made it at all unpleasant for you to permit the countess to associate with her? Not the least.

Was Pergami at that time in her royal highness's service? He was.

Did your lordship see him so? I saw him constantly.

Did your lordship see any thing in the manner of her royal highness towards him, or in his manner towards her royal highness, that was at all improper? Never.

Did your lordship ever afterwards, after leaving Naples, again meet her royal highness in society in Italy? I met her royal highness after that at Venice.

About what time of the year was that? I think it was about June or July 1315.

Where did your lordship lodge at Venice? I lodged at the hotel Gran Brettagna.

Was the countess with your lordship there also? She was.

Where did her royal highness then live? Her royal highness was then in the same hotel; she had one side of the hotel, I had the other.

Did your lordship renew your intercourse in society at that hotel with her royal highness? I did.

Did the countess also? She did.

Did your lordship observe any thing there of an improper description in her conductor demeanor? Not the least.

Did your lordship ever happen to go into her royal highness's chamber while living in the same hotel? I have occasionally gone in there in the morning, her sitting-room being immediately opposite my sitting-room.

Did your lordship on those occasions knock at the door before going into the room? I cannot take upon myself to say whether I did or did not.

Does your lordship recollect ever having gone in without that ceremony? I cannot Jake upon me to say; I rather think I have, for this reason, I had a child that her royal highness took a fancy to, and I used to walk in with the child into her royal highness's room.

Did your lordship say you ever recollect having knocked before you went in? No, I do not.

Your lordship docs not recollect having knocked any more than not having knocked? No.

Has your lordship lived for any considerable time in Italy, besides those different months you have mentioned? Yes, I have.

A good deal? Two years.

Does your lordship know whether it is the practice in Italy for men as well as women to be in ladies bed-chambers in the course of the morning? I think it is a very common practice in Italy for men to attend ladies rooms as much as women.

Is it an ordinary practice in Italy for men to see ladies in their bed in the morning when they call?

The Attorney-general objected to the Question.

The Counsel were informed, that the witness must state whether it was from his own knowledge he spoke.

Mr. Brougham

.—Your lordship is requested to speak from your own knowledge, and your own practice and experience? I have seen many ladies in bed in a morning.

Was that in the ordinary intercourse of society? It was.

Were those ladies of unimpeachable conduct and character? They were, as far as I know.

Did your lordship at the same time sec other gentlemen enjoy their society in the same manner? I have.

And at the same time with your lordship? At the same time my brother and I were together; and we have frequently gone together into rooms where ladies were in bed.

To make a morning visit? To make a morning visit.

Cross-examined by Mr. Attorney General.

When was it that your lordship was at Venice when her royal highness was there? It was either June or July in the year 1815.

Was Pergami with her royal highness at Venice? He was.

In what situation was he then, does your lordship know? As courier.

Did your lordship dine with her royal highness at Venice? Not at Venice.

At any other place than at Naples did your lordship dine with her royal highness? I did not; I never met her at any other place than Naples and Venice.

How long was your lordship at Venice whilst her royal highness was there? I remained at Venice, I think, about two months.

How long was her royal highness there at that time? I do not recollect; she left the hotel, and I cannot state how long she remained there.

You have been asked whether you were in the habit of visiting her royal highness, and going into her chamber without notice; did your lordship mean her bed-chamber? No, certainly not; her sitting-room.

Examined by the Lords.

Earl of Lauderdale

.—Does your lordship recollect the names of the other attendants at Naples when you dined with her majesty? The servants; no, I do not.

Can your lordship state any circumstance which has impressed the name of Pergami upon your mind, without your knowing the name of any other attendant at table? Pergami was a very singular figure, and I knew him by that; I recollect him by his figure; he was a strong looking man.

Is your lordship to be understood that you became acquainted with his name by remarking his figure, and from that circumstance asking what his name was? I never asked what his name was; but he being pointed out to me as Pergami, and from his figure I did not forget him; I recollected him afterwards from that circumstance.

Does your lordship recollect who pointed him out as Pergami? I do not.

Lord Grantley

.—Whilst your lordship was abroad, did you observe any thing in the conduct of her royal highness calculated or likely to reflect disgrace upon our own country? I did not.

Lord Ellenborough

.—Does your lordship recollect a ball given by her royal highness to king Murat at Naples? I do.

Was your lordship present at that ball? I was.

Does your lordship recollect the dress of her royal highness upon that occasion? I do not.

His lordship withdrew.

Then the Honourable Keppel Craven was called in; and having been sworn, was examined by Mr. Denman, as follows:

In the year 1814 you were in the service of her royal highness the princess of Wales, as one of her chamberlains? I was.

Did you leave this country with her, and go to the continent in that character, in the course of that year? I did not leave this country with her; I joined her royal highness at Brunswick.

Did you accompany her royal highness from Brunswick to Milan, and from thence to Naples? I did.

When you joined her royal highness at Brunswick, was it settled between her royal highness and you, how long you should remain in attendance upon her? Not exactly the lime, but as much space of time as my affairs would allow me to give up to her royal highness.

How long, in point of fact, did you remain in attendance upon her royal highness's person? I remained rather more than six months.

Where did you leave her? At Naples.

And why did you leave her? It was always understood, when I entered her royal highness's service, that I could not stay with her more than two or three months; when I arrived at Naples, I found that I could remain with her as late as the month of March, and I therefore informed her royal highness of this, and she was pleased to continue my services with her.

Did you in fact stay three months longer than you originally intended to stay? I staid about four months longer than I had intended to do; for when I first set out, I did not expect to stay above two months with her.

Do you remember, when you were at Milan with her royal highness, that any courier was discharged for misconduct or any other cause? There was no courier discharged at Milan, but he was to be discharged afterwards, and another was to be found at Milan to supply his place.

In consequence of that, did you apply to the grand chamberlain of the emperor of Austria, to find a person of that description? I applied to the marquis Ghisiliari, who had been appointed by general Bellegarde to attend upon her royal highness whilst she was at Milan, in capacity of chamberlain.

Did he mention any person to you, to supply the place of that discharged courier? Yes, he did.

Who was that? A person whom I found afterwards to be called Pergami.

Will you be so good as to state, whether he recommended Pergami as a person fit to be received and trusted in the service of her royal highness?

Mr. Solicitor General objected to the question. What the marquis had said in recommendation of Pergami could not be received as evidence.

The Counsel were informed, that it appeared to be part of the transaction.

The question was then put, and the witness said,

He did, he recommended him very strongly.

Did he state whether he had any knowledge of the family of Pergami? He said he had known his family a great while, and that he was interested about them.

The Counsel were informed, that in the opinion of the House, it was doubtful whether that question could be put.

The Witness was directed to withdraw.

Mr. Denman

maintained, that all that had yet occurred was material evidence. The question was, whether the two last questions and answers were to stand upon the Minutes, and whether he was to be allowed to continue his examination as to the family of Pergami. Now, he did not wish that either those questions should stand upon the Minutes, or that his examination into the family of Pergami should be allowed to continue, unless they were necessary to show that the family of Pergami was respectable, the allegation of the bill being, that he was a foreigner in a low situation—a menial servant, promoted highly beyond his merits. Now, if he proved that Pergami had been recommended to her majesty, by the highest authority, as a person whose family was respectable, though in reduced circumstances, and whose conduct was such as entitled him to consideration, and rendered him a fit object for promotion, he apprehended that he had shown sufficient cause why her majesty had given to Pergami that promotion which it was now imputed to her as a crime that she had given; and it was therefore impossible to prevent him from showing that her majesty's motives were pure, unless they wished to preclude him from entering into her defence altogether.

The Counsel were informed, that if what was stated to the witness was afterwards represented to her majesty, that representation of it formed a ground on which the evidence might be admitted, for that the representation to her majesty, and its influence on her future conduct towards that individual, might be material; that it must not be taken as proof of the fact represented, but that there was a representation true or false made to her majesty, on which she might be supposed to have acted.

The Witness was again called in and asked,

Did you know any thing of Peraami before the marquis Ghisiliari recommended him to you? Not at all.

Were you desired by the princess of Wales to make inquiry for such a person? I was.

Did you communicate to her royal highness the result of the inquiry you had made of the marquis? I did so.

Have the goodness to describe what it was that you communicated from the marquis as to the character of the individual engaged? I told her royal highness that the marquis Ghisiliari had a person that he wished to recommend to the situation of courier, and that he could recommend this person very strongly, having known his family some time, and wishing to obtain a good situation for him; that was as far as I recollect what I said to her royal highness upon the subject.

Did you state any thing to her as to the situation in which he was hired, in which he was engaged?—I think marquis Ghisiliari told me, that he hoped the man might remain in the situation.

Did you communicate, to the best of your recollection, what you are now stating, to her royal highness? Yes, I communicated all that the marquis said to me to her royal highness.

Have the goodness to state what the marquis said as to the probability of promotion? He said, that he hoped if he behaved well he would be continued in the family.

Was any thing said about advancement or promotion? Yes; marquis Ghisiliari said, that he hoped he might remain as a servant out of livery in the house when her royal highness stopped any where.

Did he state any thing as to what he knew of his family, any thing more particular than what you have mentioned? I do not recollect that he said any thing particular, except that he had known him a great while, and that he wished to be of use to all of them.

Did it ever happen to you to see the marquis and Pergami together? Yes, at Milan and at Piacenza.

Did you observe the manner in which the marquis treated Pergamion those occasions?

Mr. Solicitor General objected to the question.

Among the recommendations you carried to her royal highness of the persons recommended to her service, did you mention the manner in which he was received and saluted by the Marquis Ghisiliari?

Mr. Solicitor General objected to the question.

What recommendations did you mention as reasons for her royal highness receiving this person into her service? Marquis Ghisiliari told me he had known him and his family a long while, that he wished to be of use to them, and that he was particularly interested about him also, as he had served some friends of his, as I understood.

You went to Naples with her royal highness? I did.

On your approach to Naples, were you met by any persons at some distance from that city? We were met by the then king of Naples, but first of all by some of his officers.

Do you recollect whether you took refreshment any where on the way? We slept three nights on the road.

At what time, in point of fact, did you enter into Naples? Naples itself we entered on the eighth of November, about half an hour before dark.

What time by the clock would that be? Half past sis, I should think.

Did you go that night to any house that had been taken for her royal highness? Immediately on our entering Naples, we drove to the house that had been taken for her.

Did her royal highness then take possession of it? She did take possession of it.

Do you recollect whether there was any thing particular about the arrangement of that house, in respect of its convenience for the party that first night? It was very inconvenient, for sir William Gell and myself had two very bad rooms.

Was there any thing generally observed about the want of accommodation for the suite? There was not room enough for the whole suite by any means.

Were you and sir William Gell able to continue in the same house, or did you take lodgings elsewhere the following day? It was agreed we should take lodgings as soon as ever we could find them, and we looked for them the next morning, in the course of the next day.

Do you recollect any particular persons calling on her royal highness on the following day? The king and queen of Naples called upon her.

Do you know where she dined on the first day after her arrival? She dined at court.

Was there any entertainment given at court after dinner? There was a concert.

Do you know how late her royal highness remained at that concert? About haf p as eleven I should think.

Did you leave the concert with her royal highness? Yes, for I was in waiting.

On the evening next following that; that was the second entire day of her royal high ness being at Naples, do you remember where she passed her evening? She went to the Opera.

Did you go with her royal highness to the Opera? All her suite went with her.

Did any other persons go with her to the Opera? She went from her own house to the palace, and from the palace, with all the court and their retinue, to the Opera.

Do you remember the box which was provided for her at the Opera? She sat in the state-box with the king and queen.

Was there any illumination in the house that night? The theatre was entirely illuminated.

Did you return particularly early from the Opera that night, or how? The Opera at Naples always ends very late, and we staid till the end of it.

Can you slate whether it ended earlier or later than usual on that evening? I should think it ended rather later, for it began later.

What is the usual hour at which the Opera may be said to end at Naples? It varies because it begins later in the Summer than in the Winter.

In November? It depends upon the length of the dance also.

Have you any recollection of the length of the dance on that evening? Yes, it was very long and very tiresome.

Did her royal highness and her suite remain till the whole was entirely concluded? Till the curtain dropped.

Do you remember a masked ball that was given by her royal highness, as a compliment to the reigniug king of Naples? I do.

Do you remember any dress that her royal highness wore upon that evening? I remember she had three dresses; two of them I recollect perfectly well; the other I do not remember so well, because I only saw her for an instant.

Will you mention the two that you remember? One was a Turkish dress I think, and the other was that of a Neapolitan peasant; the third was the Genius of History, as I was told.

Did you see that dress which you were told was the Genius of History? I saw it for a short time.

Upon her royal highness? Upon her royal highness.

That night? That night.

Be so good as to state to their lordships whether that dress was in the smallest degree indecent or improper? I do not recollect that it was at all indecent.

Do you recollect particularly as to the breast?" I think it was a dress of white dra- pery, that came up very high, as far as I remember.

Do you remember what dress it was that her majesty wore before she put on that? I do not exactly recollect, but I think it was the Turkish dress; it must have been the Turkish dress, because the last she wore was the Neapolitan peasant.

As far as you recollect at this distance of time, would it or would it not have been possible to have put on the dress of the historic muse over that she wore as a Turkish peasant? I really do not know, because I took no notice of the Turkish dress much; it might have been put over some part of it certainly.

Then, according to your recollection, would it have been necessary that the dress should have been entirely changed when her royal highness shifted from that of a Turkish peasant to that of the historic muse? Not necessary entirely.

Pergami was engaged, you say, at Milan? Yes.

Did he attend her royal highness from Milan to Naples, and continue in her service during her residence there? Yes.

Did you observe any impropriety of conduct, or any degrading familiarity between her royal highness the princess and Pergami during the time between the engagement at Milan, and the departure of her royal highness from Naples? Never.

Have you dined subsequently at table with her royal highness and Pergami? I have.

Has that happened frequently? Three times:

Upon any one of those occasions, did you observe any sort of impropriety of conduct between those two individuals? Never.

Do you know the countess of Oldi? I have seen her once.

Is she a person of vulgar manners? No.

Do you remember having any conversation with her royal highness before she arrived at Naples, upon the subject of William Austin? Yes.

Have the goodness to state what it was? I think that I told her royal highness, before we came to Italy, that it would be as well that William Austin should no longer sleep in her royal highness's room.

Did you state any reason for giving that advice? I said that the people in Italy might make some observations upon it.

Was anything said about his age? Yes; I said he was of an age that might give rise to those observations.

Of what age was he then? I do not exactly know what age he was.

Was he six or seven? No.

How old do you think he was? Thirteen or fourteen, according to my idea; I do not exactly know what age he was, I only went by his looks.

Did you dine with her royal highness at Naples generally? Whenever she had company.

Amongst that company did you ever see the baron Ompteda? Yes, very often.

On those frequent occasions when you have seen him at her royal highness's table, do you recollect whether a person of the name of Theodore Majoochi had any opportunity of seeing him? Yes, he must have had an opportunity of seeing him, for he waited at table.

Did he wait habitually at table? Every day when there was company.

On the death of his late majesty did you attend the Queen at Rome? I came to Rome very soon after that event, and I waited upon her majesty the day after my arrival.

How long after that did her majesty leave Rome? I think she left Rome the day after I was with her.

Was the baron Reden, the Hanoverian minister, at Rome at that time? He was.

Is the marquis Ghisiliari now alive? No, he is dead.

Cross-examined by Mr. Solicitor-General.

Do you recollect where that conversation took place about William Austin? I cannot recollect the place, but it must have been soon after we left Brunswick.

Were you rightly understood that that was the recommendation you gave to her royal highness with reference to Italy? It was.

Then that was a recommendation that was prospective on your part? It was so.

You have mentioned that you saw the countess Oldi once; will you have the goodness to mention where that was? It was at Pesaro.

Did you dine at Pesaro upon that occasion? I did so.

And you saw her at dinner? I saw her at dinner.

You have mentioned that you dined at the same table with Pergami three times; have the goodness to mention when that was, and where the first? The first time was at Pesaro; that was supper, not dinner.

Were the other occasions also at Pesaro? One was at Pesaro, and the last was at Rome.

Was that at Rome upon her majesty's way to this country? It was the day before she left Rome for this country.

Did you accompany her majesty? No.

You parted with her at Rome? I did.

You are understood to say, that at the masked ball at Naples you took no particular notice of the third dress, the dress of the Genius of History? That was the second dress; I saw it for so short a time I had not time to take notice of it.

Did you see Pergami at that ball? I do I not recollect that I did, but all the servants were there.

Did you go up into her royal highness's room? No.

No part of the evening? No part of the evening.

You have been asked whether, in your judgment, it was necessary to take off the whole of the first dress for the purpose of putting on the second; whether it was or was not taken off, can you say or not? I cannot say whether it was taken off, or whether it was not.

Did you and sir William Gell live out of the house during the whole of the time you were at Naples, except the first day? We were in the house for, I think, two nights; we slept there.

The rest of the time you lived out of the house? Entirely; we dined in the house.

Did you not usually come to the house merely for the purpose of dining? We took our waitings by turn, and the person who was in waiting was in the house all day long.

Where was the room in which you waited, in reference to her royal highness's apartment? It was in the end room of the front suite of rooms, and there were two rooms between that and her royal highness's bedchamber.

You have said something as to the disposition of the rooms on the first night of your arrival at Naples; do you yourself personally know what that disposition was? I only know with regard to my own rooms, and those of her lady in waiting.

Was there no circumstance that led you to know in what room Pergami slept the first night? No.

Or what room was appropriated for him the first night of your arrival at Naples? No, I heard nothing mentioned about it.

Did you ever, either to lady Charlotte Lind-say, or to any other person, state that you had made a representation to her royal highnesss as to what had been observed with respect to her royal highness and Pergami on the terrace of the garden attached to the house at Naples; I did so; I did not mention it to lady Charlotte Lindsay, but I mentioned it to a person at Naples? I mentioned that I had spoken to her royal highness about it; it was with regard to what I had observed.

What you had seen? Yes.

Have the goodness then to state what it was that you saw, and what you represented? I saw her royal highness walking in the garden, and Pergami was near, he was walking also in the garden; I knew there was a spy at that time at Naples; I had had information of it from England; that being the case, I thought it necessary to caution her royal highness with regard to any outward appearances that might be misconstrued.

When you say you had information from England, was that by letter? It was by letter.

Was any other person in the garden except her royal highness and Pergami at the time to which you allude? She said there was.

Did you see any other person? No, because she walked on a sort of terrace, which was much higher than the rest of the garden; there might have been other persons whom I did not see.

Do you know whether that terrace was near to the small cabinet that was contiguous to the room of Pergami? I cannot tell, for I never was in the garden, or in any part of the house.

Where was the spot from whence you saw her royal highness? From the terrace on the opposite side of the house, near the lady-in-wailing's apartment.

What apartment was that, was it the apartment of lady Elizabeth Forbes? It was so.

Was that terrace on the same elevation as the terrace on which her royal highness was walking? No, it was higher.

When you say it was higher, do you mean that the terrace near the apartment of lady Elizabeth Forbes was higher than the other? I think so.

Where was Pergami, on the terrace? He was on the same level with her royal highness.

How far was her royal highness from the corner of the building which terminates that terrace? She was walking along the place.

How long did you see her there? Only from one end of the terrace to the other, as she walked up.

During that time you saw no otber person but Pergami? I could see no other person but Pergami during that time.

Was that the only time that you ever, saw her royal highness and Pergami in the garden together? The only time.

How long was that after your first arrival at Naples, as nearly as you can recollect? Not very long, for they were doing some alterations in the garden.

State, as nearly as you can tell, whether it was a week or a fortnight, or a month? I really cannot say exactly how soon it was.

Was it a fortnight or three weeks? I should say more than a fortnight.

And less than a month? It might be a month.

Did her royal highness tell you who that other person was that was in the garden? She said there were workmen in the garden.

Her royal highness did not tell you there was any other person in her company in the garden? No, she said she had taken Pergami in there to speak to the workmen.

When you saw her royal highness, there, however, she was walking on the terrace? She was.

And Pergami was also on the terrace? He was walking also.

In the same direction as her royal highness? Yes.

What was the business about which the workmen were employed? I never was in the garden, but I understood—

Do you know of your own knowledge? Transplanting trees.

Do you know whether there were, in point of fact, any workmen? Yes, I know there have been workmen employed in the garden.

At the time when you saw her royal highness and Pergami walking, did you see any workmen in the garden?. No, I did not.

From that terrace which is contiguous to the apartment occupied by lady Elizabeth Forbes, had you not an extensive view of the garden? No.

Do you not see from that terrace to the extremity of the building? The house.

And the garden in front of you? The garden is not in the front of the house, the garden is only at one end of the house.

The garden is in front of the house in which you were standing? The garden was in front, but there was a terrace that was higher than the rest of the garden, and that was the terrace on which her royal highness was walking.

Then, if there were any workmen, they were down below? Yes.

But you, in point of fact saw none? I saw none.

Were you ever in the garden yourself? Never.

Do you know, of your own knowledge, whether any workmen were employed there? I heard so.

You do not know it of your own know ledge? I never saw any.

How long before her royal highness quitted Naples did yon leave her service? I did not leave, it till she quitted Naples.

Do you remember a short time before that, Pergami coming, into the room where you and sir William Gell were? He came in very often when we were in waiting.

Do you remember his coming in, not in his dress of courier, but in a black dress? He never wore his dress of courier after coming to Naples.

Do you remember his coming at any time into the room in which you and sir William Gell were, and taking a chair? Never.

No such thing ever happened in your presence? Not in my presence.

Of course you have never stated such a thing? Certainly not.

Were you ever at the theatre San Carlos? Very often.

With her royal highness? Whenever I was in waiting and she went to the Opera, I at tended her, and sometimes when I was not in waiting.

Were you ever at the theatre San Carlos when her royal highness was there, and you were not of her party? Yes.

Were you there ever at a masquerade when she was there masked, when you were not of her party? I never was there when she was at a masquerade; I never was at a masquerade but once while she was at Naples; I understood the first question to refer to San Carlos with regard to the opera.

During the whole of the time you were at Naples, Pergami acted in the capacity merely of courier? No.

And waited at table? He waited at table every day.

How many other couriers were there at that time? There were no others.

What was Hieronimus? He was courier while we were travelling, but he was considered as page I believe when we were not travelling.

Examined by the Lords.

Lord Erskine

.—At the masked ball where you were present, you have said that you did not particularly notice one of the dresses of her royal highness, so as to be able to describe it; if that dress, or any dress that you saw her royal highness in, had been grossly immodest or indecent, must you have observed it? I must have observed it.

Did you observe any dress of her royal highness upon that occasion immodest or indecent? No, not one.

Lord Rosebery

.—Was the advice with respect to the withdrawing of William Austin from her royal highness's chamber followed or not? I understood it to be followed; I never was in her royal highness's room to see whether the beds were there.

You do not know of your own knowledge, whether it was followed or not? I know at one place on the road it was.

Where was that? That was in Germany before we reached Italy.

Earl Grosvenor

.—Did you consider the manners of Pergami as superior to those of an ordinary courier? Yes.

Earl of Darnley

.—Have you any knowledge with regard to the passport granted to her majesty at Rome; did you ever see the passport? I saw the passport, but I did not read it.

A Peer.—In reference to the opinion you gave her royal highness with respect to William Austin, did it proceed from yourself, or was it in consequence of your opinion and advice being asked by her royal highness? It was from myself.

You stated that you saw her royal highness on, the terrace, walking near Pergami; did you observe, they being near each other, whether they touched each other?—I did not observe that they touched each other.

Lord Ellenborough

.—Did it occur to you, that there was any impropriety in the manner in which the princess was walking with Pergami in the garden at Naples? Not the least.

Were his manners apparently those of a gentleman? They were above the situation of a courier; they were not so servile and fawning as those of the Italian servants in general.

Were the manners of Pergami those of a gentleman? Since I have seen him in that capacity they were; before that I had very little opportunity of knowing.

Earl of Liverpool

—Independently of the letter you received from England respecting her royal highness's motions being watched, what other reason had you for giving her a hint respecting walking with Pergami in the garden? I had no other reason.

Would you have given her the same hint with respect to any other servant, she had been walking with? Exactly the same.

A Peer.—Could you discover from Pergami's manners and appearance that he had been raised from a lower to a higher situation? No.

Earl of Donoughmore

.—You have mentioned just now, in answer to a question put as to the manners of Pergami, that you did not make any observation upon those manners till he became a gentleman, but that from his becoming a gentleman, you did not see any thing inconsistent in those manners; what was the period at which he ceased to be a servant, and began to be a gentleman? I do not know what the period was, for I was not with her royal highness.

To what period then was it you directed your answer when you said you did not make any observations upon his manners till a particular period, which was when he began to be a gentleman; what was that period to which you referred? It was the first time I saw him when he was raised to the situation of chamberlain.

When was that? It was a year ago, rather more.

He had not begun to be a gentleman when he was walking on the terrace? No.

You did not consider him then to have began to be a gentleman whilst you continued with her royal highness? No; for he set off as courier from Naples when she went.

All you speak to, with respect to Pergami, is, when he was in his first capacity, namely, that of a courier, or servant, and not his second capacity, that of a gentleman? I have spoken to both times.

The question refers to your continuance with the queen? While I was with the queen at Naples, he was considered as a servant, and waited at table.

When was the change in his circumstances and situation, the commencement of his being a gentleman? I do not know the precise time; I did not see her royal highness afterwards for four years.

Earl Bathurst

—You have stated that you supped with the countess of Oldi at Pesaro, with her royal highness; were there any I other ladies at supper at that time? Countess Oldi I dined with at Pesaro; there was another lady, an Italian lady, whose name I do not know.

What company was there at the supper? At the supper countess Oldi was not.

What company was there at the supper at Pesaro? Merely her royal highness's attendants.

Were there any ladies? There was that same lady I saw afterwards, whose name I did not know.

Was she an attendant upon her royal highness? I did not ask; she appeared to he staying in the house.

Were there any other ladies? I did not see any other ladies.

Lord Erskine

.—You are understood to have said, that while Pergami was in the situation of a courier, you did not particularly attend to his manners; but that when you afterwards saw him, when he was promoted, you saw nothing in his appearance or manners inconsistent with those of a gentleman? Nothing at all.

Lord Gosford

.—In the journey in which you accompanied the princess of Wales to Naples, in the ordinary arrangement of the rooms, were the ladies or the gentlemen placed nearest her royal highness? The gentlemen were not placed near her royal highness, but there were always some men near her apartment to guard her.

Do you know who those men were that generally guarded her? It was some of the servants, Hieronimus sometimes.

Can you name any others? It was the upper servants, Mr. Sicard might sometimes, for aught I know, but I did not pay particular attention to it.

Earl of Lauderdale

—Do you recollect the date at which you went to Pesaro? Within a few days.

What was the year and the month? It was the last year.

In what month? I went to Pesaro in my way to England, and in my way back from England; it was on my road.

When you first saw Pergami on that occasion, were you introduced to Pergami? No; Pergami came to me with a message from her royal highness at the inn where I was.

Did any body come along with Pergami? William Austin came.

On that occasion, did Pergami in the room take any notice of your servant? I do not know whether my servant was in the room or not when he came in.

Were you dressed when Pergami came into the room? Yes; for it was alter dinner.

And you did not on that occasion see Pergami speaking to your servant? I cannot recollect whether he did or not; I do not recollect whether my servant was in the room or not.

Was it that night you supped with her royal highness? It was the same.

What was the company at supper? I do not know their names; I think colonel Vassali was there; they were all unknown to me except William Austin.

Were you with her royal highness for a considerable time before supper that night? Two or three hours.

Did her royal highness say any thing to you about the company that was to be at supper that night? Not a word.

Do you remember any singing at supper that night? That lady I mentioned sung, but it was not at supper.

When did that lady sing? She sat down at the piano forte and sung a song, by desire of her royal highness.

Did you ask her royal highness who that lady was? No, f did not; I do not know her name to this day.

Do you know whether she was of any profession? I do not know; I do not know who she was.

Before you first got the recommendation from the chamberlain of Pergami, did you see him in attendance about the inn at Milan? No.

Did you make any inquiry whom he had served antecedently? Mr. Sicard was desired to make all the inquiries respecting his character, after the first recommendation by the chamberlain.

Do you know, of your own knowledge, whether inquiry was made of the person whom he had previously served, relative to his character? I do not know any thing on the subject.

You have said, that on your arrival at Naples, the first night it was agreed you should go into lodgings the next day, with whom was it agreed? With her royal highness; we came and told her our rooms were so bad, we must either have other rooms or find lodgings out of the house: there was an upper floor in the house; I understood the gentleman who lived in it was asked to give H up; he could not give it up, and therefore we went into lodgings. We did not go into lodgings the next day, we could not find them for a day or two.

Earl of Darlington

.—Were you the person who went to ask for the passports for her majesty at Rome? No, I was not; the passports were asked for before I came to Rome.

Do you know who was the person who was sent for the passports? I do not know; I think it was Mr. Dodwell.

Earl of Belmore

.—You had known Pergami in the situation of courier to her majesty? Yes.

Afterwards he was promoted to the situation of chamberlain? So I heard; it was not while I was in waiting on the Queen.

Do you know whether any further rewards have been conferred upon Pergami by her majesty the Queen? I know nothing but what I have heard from general report.

Lord Combermere

.—Was Pergami walking behind her royal highness on the terrace, or how? He was walking a little way behind her.

As servants usually do behind their mistresses? Yes.

What impropriety did you conceive there could be in that? I did not conceive there was any impropriety.

Why then did you give that advice to her royal highness, if you conceived, as you have now stated, there was no impropriety in Per- gami walking behind her royal highness? Because I understood there was a person sent as a spy upon the princess, and he might put that down as an impropriety, though I did not think so myself.

Can you state who was the person so pointed out to you as a spy? The letter did not contain the person's name, but I was told afterwards who it was by' a gentleman at Naples.

The witness was directed to withdraw.

Then Sir William Gell was called in, and having been sworn, was examined by Mr. Williams, as follows:

You are chamberlain of her majesty the Queen? I am.

How long have you been in the service of her majesty? From about a month before her majesty went abroad.

Did you accompany her abroad? I did.

To Brunswick? Yes.

And thence into Italy? I did.

Do you remember a courier being discharged when you arrived in Italy? I do.

Where was that? I believe he was discharged at Florence; but it was agreed he should be discharged when we were at Milan.

Did you make any application to any person for another to succeed him? I forget whether I made an application, or whether the marquis Ghisiliari came and offered a person to us.

Had you a communication with the marquis Ghisiliari upon the subject? I had.

Did you communicate to her royal high ness what was communicated by the marquis upon the subject of the person he re commended? I believe I did, most likely I did.

Who was in fact recommended? A person of the name of Pergami.

What recommendation did the marquis give of Pergami? He said he had known his family.

Did you communicate this to her royal highness? I believe so.

By a Lord.—Are you certain of it? I am not quite certain.

Mr. Williams

.—Were you employed by her royal highness at the time, to make inquiries of the marquis on the subject? Oh certainly?

Upon recollection, did you or did you not re port to the Queen, the princess then, the account you had received from the marquis of this person? As far as to say that be was a proper person.

Are you to be understood that you mentioned to her royal highness the recommendation given by the marquis? Mentioning, I cannot say but in conversation, what had passed in conversation, but not as a decided embassy to her royal highness upon the subject.

In conversation in any manner did you mention to her royal highness what had been reported respecting Pergami by the marquis? The conversation passed when her royal high- ness was in the room, and she must have heard it.

The marquis, the princess of Wales, and you were in the room together? The marquis mentioned it very often.

Did the marquis ever mention the subject of Pergami, and the recommendation of him, in the hearing of the princess? Certainly.

Upon those occasions, or any of them, when her royal highness was present, what recommendation of Pergami did the marquis give? He said he had known his family, that it had fallen into distress from the circumstances which attended the French revolution; that as to the man himself, he could answer for him being perfectly honourable, honest, and trust-worthy, on every occasion on which he might be employed.

Can you recollect whether he stated any thing more in the recommendation of Pergami, in the presence of her royal highness? He stated that, he was above the of lice into which he was about to enter, and that he hoped, if he behaved well in the family, as he had no doubt he would, he would be gradually advanced.

Did you ever see the marquis Ghisiliari and Pergami together, either in the same room or meeting by accident in the street? I remember when we quitted the marquis Ghisiliari at the Piacenza, being myself already in the carriage, that I saw the marquis Ghisiliari lake leave of Pergami.

Mr. Parke objected to the admission of any evidence as to what passed between Pergami and a third person.

The Witness was directed to withdraw.

Mr. Denman

maintained, that such an objection was quite untenable and inapplicable in this case, as the estimation in which Bergami was held by persons of rank and respectability in his own country was relevant and necessary evidence, in order to repel the libellous matter contained in the bill before the House, from which it would appear, that he was quite a despicable person. For this purpose, he proposed to examine the witness as to the manner in which Bergami was regarded and treated by the representative of the Austrian government in Italy. He hoped, then, that their lordships would not allow any technical exceptions to interfere with the important object on this occasion of ascertaining the truth and administering justice.

Mr. Williams

argued, that no such exception as was urged by his learned friend on the other side, could be sustained upon any technical principles, independently of the broad ground adverted to by his learned friend, who had last addressed their lordships; for it was not sought to obtain from the witness any words uttered, or any conversation which might have passed between Bergami and the Austrian chamberlain, but merely how the latter treated the former upon their separation at a particular time. Suppose that he (Mr. W.) should have had the honour of sitting at table with any of their lordships, if it were only as a mute or an umbra, and that he should happen to be charged in Italy, or any other country, with being a contemptible fellow, would it not be allowed to him, by any fair tribunal, to adduce the fact of such an association, in order to repel the charge? So, by analog, he contended, that the evidence which had been just tendered was quite admissible, even upon technical or tradesman-like principles.

Mr. Parke

rested his objection upon technical principles. The treatment which the chamberlain alluded to might have given to Bergami, must amount merely to an expression of opinion, and as that expression could not be received in evidence if tendered by word of mouth, he could not subscribe to its admissibility, when presented in the shape in which the counsel on the other side sought to introduce it.

The Earl of Liverpool

thought, that as the chamberlain alluded to was dead, the House had no other way of coming at the fact, hut by admitting the evidence now offered.

The Counsel were informed, that the manner in which this person was received in society was evidence, but not conversations between other persons on that subject, unless it was shown that those conversations were communicated to her majesty.

The Witness was again called in, and asked,

Be pleased to state to their lordships in what manner the marquis Ghisiliari conducted himself towards Pergami when he took leave of him? Pergami was, I believe, about to mount his horse; the marquis Ghisiliari being in his uniform as chamberlain of the emperor of Austria, and with his key as chamberlain, denoting what was his employment at the moment, took Pergami round the neck in the street, and kissed him twice before all the people; which we observed, as it was a singular thing when people were just come out of England, though a common custom in that country.

When you say the common custom in that country, is it the common custom between equals and gentlemen? Between equals, and perhaps not otherwise.

Among the higher ranks is it not the custom? It is the common custom among gentlemen.

Do you remember the princess of Wales and her suite arriving nearly at Naples, approaching Naples? Certainly;

Was she met by the then king Joachim? At Aversa.

That is a small distance from Naples? About six miles.

Do you remember whether the house to which her royal highness went at Naples was sufficient for her and her suite? It was not sufficient for the suite, though it was a very good house.

Was there room enough for them there? There was not.

Do you remember whether her royal highness was called upon by the queen of Naples the following morning? I believe she was.

Do you remember how her royal highness disposed of that evening after the call from the queen of Naples? I remember very well, because I attended her myself; her royal highness was invited by the queen of Naples to a concert in the palace.

Do you remember how late her royal highness remained at the concert? I should think between half past eleven and twelve was the time when she quitted it.

Do you remember any thing with respect to the state of the Queen at that time, at the concert? No, nothing particular.

As to her being tired? Tired, exceedingly tired and annoyed with the length of the concert; it was a very long concert, and very tedious.

On the following evening do you know where the Queen went? I do, because I was in waiting.

Where to? To the theatre of San Carlos in stale.

What company was there in particular? I remember every body that was there; it was in the state box of the theatre, which was splendidly illuminated for the princess of Wales; the company was the king and queen of Naples and the princess of Wales.

What was the entertainment? It was the Opera of Medea, and the ballet I remember also.

How long did her royal highness remain? I remember very well, because I was very lame, and had to stand behind her royal highness the whole night, and it must have been at least twelve, if not half past twelve.

Do you remember the manner in which her royal highness went back from the Opera? In the usual manner, in her own carriage in state, attended by myself and those of her household usually employed on those occasions.

Was there not a garden nearly attached to the house in which her royal highness resided at Naples? Yes, there was.

Do you know whether there was any alteration in that garden, either in transplanting trees or improvements? The garden had been cleaned up, and the trees nailed against the wall; they were in a confused state, lying over the paths, which is customary in that country.

For what purpose had there been workmen in that garden? I saw workmen hailing up trees that had fallen, from the walls over the paths.

You saw that yourself? Yes, I did.

How soon was that after the arrival of the princess at Naples that you collect the workmen being in the garden? That really cannot tell.

Do you remember an entertainment being given by her royal highness to Joachim the king? Exceedingly well.

Were you present? I was in waiting again myself.

Do you remember at any particular part of that entertainment, there being the ceremony of crowning the bust of the king, or any thing of that sort? I remember it perfectly well.

Just state what it was? The company hart expected that something was to be seen at the opening of a certain door; after a longtime the door did open, and there appeared two Neapolitan ladies, the duchess of Civitela and the countess of Derri; I think, the duke of Casarano, with a trumpet; the princess of Wales came down with a wreath of olive or of ivy, of olive I think, and placed it upon the head of a bust; the door opened, as it might be so; the scene was shown, and the door closed in as much time as I do it, and no longer.

Do you remember the particular dress of the princess of Wales upon that occasion.? I remember it perfectly well; it was a dress which I should say is best exemplified by the figure of the Townley Curiatius in the British Museum, or Mr. Hope's Minerva; it was meant to imitate one of those statues.

Was there any thing indecent or indecorous in the style or nature of that dress? The whole world is capable of judging; those statues are very much draped, completely covered.

In point of fact upon that occasion was the dress of the princess of that description? As nearly imitated as dress of that kind can be imitated, as it appeared to me.

Were the duchess and countess you have mentioned to their lordships in an appropriate dress also? Something in the same sort of dress; but the door was open so short a time, that it was almost impossible to discover any thing with accuracy; it was almost like a flash of lightning; it was meant to represent that.

Did you attend the princess further than Naples or not? I remained at Naples.

What was the cause of that? Because I was tired of travelling with the princess, particularly in the winter; and I really was not able to attend her in the way in which she travelled.

Why not? Because I had the gout very frequently, and had it very often while I was travelling with the princess.

Did you see her royal highness again after that time? Several times.

Where first after her royal highness quitted Naples? On her return from her tour in Palestine, I met her on the road, and accompanied her to Rome, and then went into waiting.

Did she apply to you to come into waiting? It became a matter of course; I do not remember the words of any application.

How long did you remain in waiting at that time upon her royal highness? As long as her royal highness remained at Rome.

Do you remember whether upon that occasion any persons of distinction waited upon her royal highness? I remember very well, as I presented several myself.

Mention any that occur to you now? The count de Blacas the French ambassador; I remember it from a remarkable circumstance, that he introduced himself with the ministers of the house of Bourbon. I remember observing, that the ministers of the house of Braganza, and others, came rather in a manner extraordinary, because they were called the ministers of the house of Bourbon, they announced themselves as that on the staircase; the Portuguese minister.

In what year was this? It was on her royal highness's return from Turkey.

Had she been some time returned from the long voyage then, do you know? No, because I met her on the road.

In the year following, were you again in attendance upon her royal highness? I was in attendance upon the princess when she was at the Villa Ruffinelli, at Frascati, and at the Villa Brandi the same year.

How long did you remain in attendance upon that occasion? About three months, rather more than less.

At that time do you remember whether any persons of distinction visited her royal highness? A great many.

What was the reason why you did not continue longer in attendance upon her royal highness than the three months you have described? Because her royal highness was going to the North to settle some of her affairs, and she gave me leave to go to Naples.

Where was her royal highness going to? She had an idea of going to Como; a large party was invited to go with her royal highness to Como, the prince of Saxe Gotha, and several other persons; but she found it convenient to sell the Villa at Como, and that put off the whole party; the princess Dietrichstein was also to be of the party.

Have you been in attendance upon the Queen after that time, till lately? I have been in attendance only for a few days, while the princess as Queen passed through Rome the last time.

Upon that occasion were you employed to apply for a passport for the Queen? No, I was not; that had been done before by Air. Dodwell.

Did you yourself see the passport? I saw the order for the post-horses, which I considered as a passport, signed by the secretary of state.

Do you mean that you saw the secretary of state himself sign it? I saw the order for the post horses, with the secretary of slate's name, Gonsalvi, written under it; and several other gentlemen were called to witness the same fact, whom I can name if it should be necessary.

That passport is left at the first stage you come to? I believe it is given to the postmaster.

You did not get it along with you further than the first stage, at all events? I believe it is given to the post-master, which was the reason why four gentlemen were called to witness the manner in which it was made out.

How was it made out?

The Attorney General

submitted, that his learned friend was now entering on a course of examination that was objectionable on two different grounds. In the first place, the contents of a written instrument were not, by a fundamental principle of law, admissible in the shape of parole evidence. At the same time he thought it manifest that the circumstances to which this part of the examination was directed were not material to the question which their lordships had to try.

Mr. Daman

said, that in answer to these objections, he had to remark, that the rule of law, as observed in practice, was, to receive evidence regarding the contents of a written instrument, if that evidence was shown to be material to the general issue. It had already appeared that, conformably to usage, the passport in question was left with a post-master in Italy.

The Earl of Liverpool

begged to remind the learned counsel, that it was not a regular passport, but an order for post-horses.

Mr. Denman

—It operated as a passport: according to the strictest rule ob served in the strictest court, he was en titled, after previously indicating the materiality of the question, to render evidence as to the contents of any document. If his learned friend, Mr. Williams, were allowed to pursue his examination, he would assure their lordships that very important facts would be discovered. He would undertake to say, that the questions put by his learned friend, upon this subject, were most material, as affecting the interests of his royal client. It would be proved, if their lordships received the in formation, that in this passport, or post horse order, or document of some kind, her majesty was treated by the secretary of his holiness in a very extraordinary manner. They would find, that his excellency thought proper to describe her in that document as the "Princess Caroline of Brunswick," after being fully apprized that she had become Queen consort of England. The pope's secretary of state waited not for any judgment of the British legislature,—he asked not for any act of parliament to dethrone and degrade a queen, in order to justify his conduct. He would undertake to say, that, if not restrained, a great deal more of important matter would be adduced. It might possibly appear, that the secretary of his holiness had acted in this way at the instigation of the Hanoverian minister at the papal court. It might be shown, that all the means which were of usual force to corrupt and influence the human mind had been employed with an activity truly remarkable. The point, however, on which he now rested, was, the strict, fair, and legal admissibility of such evidence, in this stage of the proceeding. Even if a doubt existed on the technical propriety of the question, yet its importance to the elucidation of truth, its importance to the honour of a Queen charged with the crime of adultery, and its importance to the honour and happiness of the whole British nation, were considerations that would necessarily impress themselves on their lordships' minds, and exercise a salutary influence on their judgment.

Mr. Williams

, on the same side, argued, that supposing the preliminary objection to be of that kind that must prevail in the courts below, or in the trial of an ordinary case, it was not a complete or valid objection in the present instance. But in every court of justice the materiality of evidence was a consideration to be entertained. No rule of admissibility was so strict as to exclude evidence that might affect the real merits of a case. It was always open, after the reception of such evidence, to determine whether it should be allowed to operate on the judgment which was to be ultimately pronounced. The present question came distinctly within the latitude sanctioned in courts of subordinate jurisdiction; and where, if a written instrument were shown to be lost, parole evidence of its contents was regularly admitted. No doubt could be entertained that a document had in this case been left abroad—left in a part of Europe where their lordships could exercise no control, and from which there were no positive means of recovering it. It was like a document shown to be lost, or to be no longer in existence. These were the considerations which seemed to him applicable to the first and only question which it was now necessary to discuss—the question of admissibility: whether the evidence was material or not was a subject for subsequent consideration.

The Attorney General

, in support of his objections, thought it extremely unfortunate that, whenever, in the discharge of a duty which he could not abandon, he did object, on principles of law, to the course which was pursued on behalf of the defence, his learned friends should break out into invective, and, instead of a distinct answer, should appeal to the passions or fancy of their audience. It was said that his objections were technical; but was a man in his situation to be so told whenever he found it necessary to interpose? Advantage had been already taken of his not interposing at previous stages of this proceeding; the argumenlum ad hominem had been more than once addressed to him, and his silence interpreted into concession. Why was he to be required by his learned friends to deviate from the usual course, or to discard rules of evidence wisely framed for the discovery of truth? One of those fundamental rules was, that no verbal testimony, DO parole evidence as to the contents of a written instrument, should ever be received, till it was shown that the instrument was lost or destroyed. It was doubtful, he conceived, whether, under any circumstances, evidence with regard to the document now in question could be admitted; but it never was yet heard of, in a court of justice, that, upon a mere suggestion that a post-office order was left abroad, it was right to hear a witness go into a narrative of its contents. In a case of no unfrequent occurrence, that of the loss of a bank-book, an examined copy was always required. The other side was bound to-show that due pains and diligence had been used for the purpose of recovering possession of the document. If their lordships would refer to the question of materiality, they would find it difficult to discover of what importance it was to this case, to show how a particular passport, or order for post-horses, had been drawn up by the pope's secretary of state. It was his duty to watch the course pursued by his learned friends on the other side: their lordships could not judge at once whether evidence thus tendered might not be material; and the only security was in adhering to the known and established rules of evidence. Whatever might be the remarks or animadversions, to which he-subjected himself, he was resolved to pursue a straight-forward course; and he trusted their lordships would excuse him if he did occasionally interpose, and re- mark the deviations that were attempted from those rules of evidence to which he had alluded. The evidence which his learned friends now tendered could not be received if those rules were adhered to. The evidence, against the Queen had been limited in respect of time, and all the circumstances referred to in that evidence had occurred long before the period when the document in question first came into existence.

The Counsel were directed to withdrawn

The Lord Chancellor

observed, that the question just argued between the counsel at the bar was one of very great importance in itself, and also as it respected the merits of the present case. It was impossible, with justice to the case, to apply a rule to one part of the evidence, and not to enforce the application of it to every other part. If it was thought right to depart generally from the practice of the courts below, the departure ought to be complete. The first question' was that of admissibility; and, according to every legal principle of evidence, the proof of the loss or destruction of a document was to be made out before any parole testimony relative to it could be admitted. There were innumerable cases in which documents had been lost, the contents of which were most material to a clear understanding of the whole merits; but every court proceeding upon the known rules of evidence required it to be shown that application had been made, and all diligence used, for their production, and in vain. He should, therefore, propose that a question be referred to the Judges upon this subject; and that it should be framed in something like the following mode:—"Whether parole evidence, as to the contents of a passport stated to have been left abroad, could be admitted without some previous general testimony that application had been made; or, if not, that it could not have been made with any prospect of success?" If the learned Judges should decide in the negative, the second question of relevancy or non-relevancy would be disposed of. He would only now add, that it was impossible, in this stage of the proceeding, to conduct it so as to attain the ends of justice, unless they protected the witnesses up to its conclusion. He was sure no noble lord would have applied the epithets of corrupt or perjured to any witnesses in the midst of a pending process."

The Earl of Lauderdale said, it seemed to him to be assumed, that an order for post-horses was a passport, or else that it could be evidence, in the absence of a passport; both of which propositions he was disposed to deny. A passport was given in the first instance, and, from it, an order for post-horses was made out; but if their lordships wished to know what was the tenor of the passport, he did not believe that object could be attained by a mere reference to the post-horse order. With respect to the possibility of the passport having been destro3red, that was a preliminary point, which their lordships ought to decide. If it was in existence, it would be the proper evidence as to the designation that had been given to her majesty.

The Lord Chancellor

observed, that in the question which he had recited, he had mentioned the post-horse order, with reference to its being the next best evidence, in case the passport could not be produced. The whole matter would be for the consideration of the learned judges.

The Marquis of Lansdown

said, it appeared to him, that it would be more difficult to get any information as to the post-horse order, than it would be to procure information relative to the passport; and for this reason; because the passport remained in the hands of the person who got it, and that person might be asked, whether he had the document in his possession, or whether lie had destroyed it? But it was not so with the order; for post-horses, which was left with the post-master, as his justification for granting those horses. The individual who presented the order had afterwards nothing to do with it. He begged leave to state, contrary to the opinion of the counsel at the bar, that a post-house was not like a court of record, where every paper was preserved. No reason existed for preserving papers there, as they were preserved in other offices. The post-master's only motive, in preserving the order for a short time, was, lest, in the course of twenty-four or forty-eight hours, he might be called on by his government to show why he had afforded facilities to any particular parties who might have passed through the country. If, as had been stated, all those orders were preserved, the whole library of the Vatican would not contain them in a very short time, so great a number of foreigners were continually passing through Italy. The case, therefore, resolved itself into this:—whether it was absolutely necessary, that the evidence should be given in the shape of a document? If it existed, it could not be suspected that such a document would not be readily produced; if it did not exist, he could see no reason for refusing parole evidence of its contents.

The Earl of Lauderdale

said, the practice throughout Europe was, to send the passport to the post-house, for the purpose of having the order made out from it. He must contend, that, before it was established that such a document was tantamount to a passport, evidence that no passport had existed should be given; for this, he believed, was the only case where an order for post-horses was granted without a passport being previously exhibited. The thing, he thought, was impossible; and he conceived they ought to have a preliminary examination, in order to ascertain that fact.

The Marquis of Lansdown

observed, that the view in which he understood the learned counsel to ask their lordships for liberty to give evidence of the passport, was in order to show the style and character in which the party travelled—a fact set forth in that document, which had been signed by the cardinal secretary of state. As to the question, whether all persons, wanting post-horses, must exhibit a passport, the noble earl would find, that the practice varied in different states, and even in the same state, at different times.

Lord Ellenborough

was of opinion, either that the original document should be produced, or that evidence should be given, in the first instance, of its destruction.

Lord Erskine

said, as he understood the subject, it appeared that the evidence which was sought to be given, went to this point—namely, whether cardinal Gonsalvi, in a certain paper signed by him, treated the Queen of England with due respect? Whether he did or did not deny to her that honour which she had a right to claim? Now, it appeared to him quite impossible that this could be shown by the production of an order for post-horses. Where was it to be had? In the courts here, an original copy, an office copy, or an examined copy of a document, might, according to the case, be procured. But what would one think if a postmaster were asked for an office copy or an examined copy of this order? The ques- tion was, whether this was not a point that might be filled up by some examination? If, by any diligence of that kind, the difficulty could be removed, he conceived their lordships ought to allow it.

The Lord Chancellor

conceived, that the suggestion of his learned friend, if agreed to, might create considerable inconvenience.

The Earl of Liverpool

wished to say one word, without any desire to provoke discussion. He alluded to the second part of the objection, which was connected with the relevancy of the matter meant to be proved in evidence to the case now before them. He would ask, how that matter could, in any point of view, bear on the present case, unless they could connect the circumstance referred to with the government of this country. How the conduct of the pope or cardinal of the court of Rome, as to the treatment they had given her majesty, if that treatment were not connected with this government, could be considered as affecting this question, he could not perceive. He really thought the conduct of those individuals had nothing to do with the subject under consideration. He stated this, not as an objection on his part—for he was anxious to raise" as few of those objections as possible—but he merely threw it out as a suggestion for the consideration of others.

The Marquis of Lansdown

differed in opinion from the noble earl. He thought it would be most material to the Queen's case that the point in question should be proved. The noble earl stated, that it could be of no consequence if the conspiracy, of which it was said to form one indication, was not brought home to this country. But this was not a correct view of the circumstance. There might be a conspiracy formed in another country against her majesty the Queen, and its result might be the preferring of these very charges; although, at the same time, this government might not be at all privy to the existence of such conspiracy. He maintained, that it would be material for her majesty to prove a circumstance of this nature. Would their lordships refuse to hear evidence of such a conspiracy, because counsel at the bar stated that he could not bring it home to this government? Would they reject evidence, when counsel stated that he had the means of proving a conspiracy against the Queen in another country, which at a subsequent period was adopted by this government, because he could not bring its origin and growth home to them? What he understood the counsel at the bar to say was, that he could connect this conduct of cardinal Gonsalvi towards the Queen with an application made to him by the Hanoverian minister, and that he believed this application formed part of a conspiracy, or something like a conspiracy, to degrade her majesty's character. It was right, therefore, he thought, to go into proof of the fact.

The Lord Chancellor

said, he would not press their lordships to refer the question to the learned judges. He remained of the same opinion that he had originally advanced; and as he was extremely desirous to stand right with their lordships, he would re-state what that opinion was. His idea was, that, if an order for post-horses be written, its contents could not be proved by parole evidence unless testimony was given that it had been destroyed, or that it had been refused, after proper application was made for its production.

The Counsel were again called in; and were informed, that in the opinion of the House, the order for post-horses could not be given in evidence by parole, unless it was proved not to be in existence, or that an application had been made for the production of it, which had been unsuccessful.

The Examination was then resumed.

When you saw the Queen at Rome, upon the late occasion to which the question has alluded, did you see Pergami? Several times.

Did you see Pergami as well in the presence of the Queen as when she was not there? Yes, several times.

In the demeanour of the Queen towards Pergami, or of Pergami towards the Queen, did you see any thing in any degree indecorous or improper? Not in the least.

In what manner did Pergami conduct himself towards the Queen upon the occasions when you saw them together? With the most marked attention, and, generally speaking, as one should expect, what he ought; he did every thing which he ought to do, as it appeared to me, nothing singular or particular.

Was the countess Oldi in attendance upon the Queen at Rome at this time? The last time, certainly not.

Had you seen her previously? Twice; whilst I was in waiting at Rome the countess Oldi was lady-in-waiting to the princess.

During what length of time was the countess of Oldi in attendance upon the princess when you were? At the Villa Brandi alone, three months.

Had you an opportunity of judging of the conduct and demeanor and manners of the countess Oldi? Yes, I had a very good opportunity, for I generally sat next her every day at dinner.

Is the countess Oldi a person of low and vulgar manners? Certainly not.

What is the appearance and demeanor of the countess? A very decent, rather good-looking, respectable modest lady.

Upon any occasion when Pergami has come to see you, or you have seen him, when the Queen has not been present, what has his conduct and demeanour been towards you as to manner? I should say, on all occasions rather more respectful than was necessary; he generally required to be pressed to sit down; that sort of behaviour.

You have been for some time, in Italy? I have been, at different times, almost ever since the Queen first went abroad.

According to the habits of that country, is it an unusual circumstance for men-servants to go into a bed-room while the ladies are still in bed? I believe not at all uncommon; I believe it is very usual.

Do you know the baron Ompteda? Yes, I do.

Have you known yourself, of your own knowledge, of his dining with the Queen, when princess of Wales, at Naples? Certainly; I have met him at the princess's table at dinner.

Once, or more than once? I cannot remember more than once at this moment, I mean at her table; I have met him at other tables.

You have been in the East, have you not? I have.

Have you been in the habit of seeing a moorish dance in the eastern countries? Not only in the East, but in Spain and Portugal.

Describe this dance generally, if you can?

[A laugh.]

Lord Chancellor

.—You should recollect, Mr. Williams, that sir William Gell has got the gout. [A laugh.]

Can you give any description, verbally, of the manner in which it is usually performed? I believe every body in London has seen the Spanish bolero dance on the theatre; it is something like that; in one part of the exhibition the two performers run up together, sometimes in an attitude of defiance, and sometimes in an amorous attitude; the same dance prevails overall the south of Europe, and every body sees it without making any remarks upon it, ladies and gentlemen, from Madrid to, I believe, China; and people may see it both in Rome and Naples.

During the time that you were at Naples in attendance upon the princess, were there many families in the habit of visiting her?

A great many; every body that was there, I believe.

The Neapolitan nobility? All the Neapolitan nobility, and all the English nobility that were there.

Can you tell whether the English nobility, of which you have been speaking, were presented, or attended at the court of the then king of Naples, Joachim? I believe every one, without exception.

Name any of those who were in the habit of attending either the court or the balls of Murat, or hunting parties, or any of his entertainments? The marquis of Sligo, the marquis of Conyngham, the marchioness Conyngham, lord and lady Oxford, lord and lady Holland, and many others; lord and lady Llandaff, lady Elizabeth Forbes.

And many others that you do not remember? Yes; lean remember them in a little time: but every body that was there.

Was it there or at Genoa that lord Exmouth dined with the princess? I do not know anything of lord Exmouth.

When you were at Rome, upon the last occasion do you know whether Pergami was received in the families of the Roman nobility? That I do not know at all, I do not believe that he ever went out.

Cross-examined by Mr. Parke.

How long were you at Rome the last time you were there? A few days only.

How long were you in attendance on her royal highness at Rome, after her return from the long voyage? The whole time she was there; I do not recollect how long.

How many weeks was it or how many days? I should think a very few days.

You are understood to say, that after the expiration of those few days you quitted and went to Naples? Yes, I asked leave of the princess, and went to Naples.

You are understood to say you accompanied her royal highness when she first went to Naples, and formed part of her suite? I did. Were you with her when she arrived at Naples? I was.

What time of the day was it? It was in the evening.

Was it late in the evening? No, not late in the evening, it was day-light; about sun set I should say.

You say there was a garden behind the house where some work-men were employed? There was.

Did you yourself ever see the princess walking in that garden? Yes.

Did you ever see Pergami walking in that garden? Yes, I did one morning.

Was the princess there at the time? She was.

Were they walking on the terrace? They were.

How near was Pergami to the princess? About as near as I may be to you [about five feet.]

Was he walking at the same time with her? Yes.

How long did you see them walking together on the terrace? Scarcely half a minute.

Where were you at the time you saw them? I was in another wing of the house.

Did you see any body else in the garden at the time? Nobody but a man who was nailing up certain trees that had fallen across the path.

You were at a masquerade with the princess at a house of the king? I was at a masquerade, and was in waiting.

Were you there the whole time? I was there the whole time, and very much fatigued with it.

Did you see Pergami there? I believe I saw him there with the rest of the servants.

Where were the servants; what were they doing when you saw them? They were generally waiting upon the company; handing ices, sweetmeals, and other things.

You did not see him there at any other time than with the rest of the servants? No, I do not recollect that I did.

Did you see her royal highness when she was in a Turkish dress? I believe I did, but I have not a very distinct remembrance of it.

When you saw her in a Turkish dress, did you see any other persons dressed as Turks? I believe there were a great many people dressed as Turks in the masquerade.

Was she by herself at that lime, or forming a part of a group when you saw her? That it is really impossible to say at a masquerade, it appears to me.

You cannot recollect whether you saw her alone, or with a group of Turks? No, I really cannot.

Did you attend her royal highness up-stairs when she changed her dresses? I was once with her up-stairs in the course of the evening.

Did you accompany her down afterwards? I should hardly think I did; I might come down the stairs with her, but not handing her.

Do you recollect in what character she was at that time? No, that I really do not.

Examined by the Lords.

Lord Erskine

.—You have said, that notwithstanding the opportunities you have described of observation, you never saw any impropriety whatsoever in the conduct of her royal highness, or of Pergami and her royal highness towards each other? No, never on any occasion.

Supposing it had been true that there was a criminal intercourse between her royal highness and Pergami, and that Pergami had acquired a complete dominion over the mind and body of this illustrious princess, do you think it probable you should have oberved nothing that gave you an indication of that kind?

Mr. Solicitor General

submitted to their lordships whether the question could be put.

The question was waved.

Lord Ellenborongh

.—Did you ever observe any thing in the conduct of the princess of Wales towards Pergami, in her conduct, manners, conversation, or looks, to induce you to entertain an idea that there was an adulterous intercourse between them? Upon my honour I never saw the princess speak to Pergami hut on matters of business, though I was in the house for three months at once with them.

Can you give a more distinct answer to that question?—I never did.

Was there any thing in the manners of Pergami which made it disagreeable to you, as a gentleman, to share with him the duties of chamberlain? Quite on the contrary; he was remarkably attentive to me, and would have handed me down stairs with candles if I would have let him; I was obliged to explain to him, that it hurried me, being lame, and to request he would let it alone.

Do you consider, that that conduct, on the part of Pergami, was the conduct of a gentleman? Perfectly so to me.

Did Pergami, while you were in the service of her royal highness, take more than a fair share of the duties of chamberlain? Certainly not.

Did you observe any thing in the conduct of Pergami towards the princess, which would have been different from the conduct of any English chamberlain? Nothing, but that he was more attentive.

Earl of Darnley

.—Can you state to the House whether, in point of fact, orders for post-horses are preserved or not? I really do not know whether they are preserved; they are given before you set out from the city; as for instance, from Rome an order for post-horses is, I believe, equivalent to a passport, as in the case of the Queen; that order is delivered to the post-master, who without it would give you no horses at all; consequently the passport is of no use till you have obtained that order.

Have you not every reason to believe, that the order for post-horses, which has been referred to, would not be in any case forthcoming? From what I know of the Roman government, I am perfectly convinced it would not be forthcoming, but that is merely from private information, knowing how that order for post-horses was got up.

Earl of Liverpool

.—Are you aware, or do you now know the fact of Pergami being or not being a married man? I believe he is a married man, I do not know it.

Do you mean to say that is your present belief, or that was your belief when Pergami was originally placed in the service of her majesty? I believe somebody told me so at the time, I am not sure whether it is correct or not.

Have you not seen a child that has been with the Queen of the name of Victorine? I have.

Do you not know that she was the daughter of Pergami? She was called the daughter of Pergami, but whether she was the daughter of Pergami, or not, I do not know.

Lord Chancellor

.—On the return of the princess from the Opera at Naples to herown house on the second night she was at Naples, do you know whether she retired to her chamber immediately, or where she went? Her royal highness retired to her own chamber: I was in waiting, shut the door, having made my bow, and went out; I believe her royal highness went to bed immediately.

Earl Bathurst

.—You have said you saw the princess and Pergami walking on the terrace, and that there were also workmen there; was that soon after your arrival at Naples? I have said before I am not quite clear as to the time, but I should think not the earlier part.

Lord Enniskillen

.—What was the hour of the night that the Queen returned from the Opera, and that you left her at her chamber-door? It must have been towards one o'clock at the time she got to her own door; very late indeed.

You described that the Queen was dressed in a robe resembling a Grecian female, could that robe be put over any other dress she had that night, without undressing? Not only it must have been so, but I have a clear recollection of the dress her majesty had on under it: a dress perfectly plain, that came up to the neck, was very short, and had no train.

Earl of Lauderdale

.—Did you attend the princess of Wales to the Villa Brandi and Ruffinelli? I was with the princess of Wales perhaps three days at Ruffinelli; I then came back to Rome, and attended her to the Villa Brandi, where I staid with her all the time she was there, being about three months.

Do you remember the date of the princess of Wales being at Ruffinelli and the Villa Brandi? It was at the time she was at Rome, about the year 1817.

Can you state about what months of that year? I think I can, about the months June, July and August.

Do you remember whether Louis Pergami was there? He certainly was, some part of the time.

Do you remember whether any other persons of Pergami's family were at Ruffinelli or Brandi? There was the countess Oldi, who I understood was his sister.

Do you remember any other? I really do not at this moment.

Was there another sister, named Faustina? Not that I ever heard of.

You never saw her? I never saw her, knowing her to be either Faustina or his sister, certainly.

Did Louis Pergami dine at table at the Villa Brandi? Sometimes he did.

At the table with the princess? At the same table.

Did you ever see Pergami's mother? Never, to my knowledge.

Yon do not remember having seen in the princess's service any other members of that fatuity but Louis and the countess Oldi? I do not remember any others.

Earl, of Rosebery

,—Did you yourself observe whether the short dress her royal highness wore when she had that of a Grecian female was on her royal highness in the first character she assumed? It was impossible; it was only by being in the passage close to the door, when the door was opened, I saw the princess in that short dress upon which she fixed, as I imagined, and indeed as I am certain, all her other dresses.

You are certain that the first dress her royal highness wore was over that short dress? It could be no otherwise.

The question refers to that under-dress you speak of, coming up high, but as without a train, which you mentioned as being under the dress her royal highness wore when she assumed the character of a Grecian female; did you yourself know, that her royal highness wore that short dress during the first character she assumed? It must have been so, for it was a dress made on purpose for that; I saw her immediately before she went down as a Grecian female; it was impossible that she could have had time to take it off, before she appeared as a Grecian female.

A Peer.—Where did Pergami sit at table, when you were at table with him? I think generally somewhere on the left hand of her royal highness.

Did he sit next to her royal highness, or at a distance from her royal highness? Sometimes next to her, and sometimes at a distance.

When you were at the same table? When I was at the same table.

Did you sit on the opposite side of her royal highness, or where? I generally sat, if there was no company, on the right-hand side of her royal highness.

And Pergami on the left? Pergami sometimes the next to her on the left hand, and sometimes round the corner of the table; it was a square table.

When other company were present, did Pegami continue to occupy that place? That was just as it happened; sometimes, yes, and sometimes no, according to the rank of the people.

Lord Falmouth.

—You have stated that Louis Pergami has dined at table when you were present, how often may that circumstance have occurred? It has occurred several times, but sometimes he was on business of her royal highness, and then he was absent from home; when he was at home, I believe he generally dined there.

What situation did Louis Pergami hold in the establishment of her royal highness at that time? I believe he was her royal high ness's equerry at that moment.

Where might Louis Pergami usually sit upon the occasion, when he has so formed part of the company? I think generally at the other end of the table.

The following question was put at the request of Mr. Solicitor General.

When her royal highness appeared in a Turkish dress, did she or did she not wear trowsers? I happen to know what those trowsers were; she did wear trowsers, made in the form of Turkish trowsers; I beg to explain what they are, the trowsers that her royal highness wore, are very much like a common petticoat sewed slightly together between the legs at the bottom, such as are commonly worn in the Levant.

The following question was put at the request of Mr. Williams.

Could the terrace of which you have made mention, on which the Queen and Pergami were once seen walking, be seen from surrounding houses, as well as a great part of the house itself? From every house in the neighbourhood.

Lord Brownlow

.—On those occasions, when the princess at the masquerade at Naples went upstairs to change her dress, do you know whether any attendant was there to assist in changing her dress, and if so, who was that attendant? To say the truth, I believe she had a very great number of attendants; the door was opened and shut perpetually, and every body was in and out of her room.

Do you believe that Louisa Demont was one of those attendants? I do not remember her, I dare say she was.

Do you know whether Pergami was in attendance? I do not.

Earl of Lauderdale

.—When you were at Ruffinelli, do you recollect Pergami being ill at any time? No, I do not.

You were not at Ruffinelli all the time that the princess staid there, were you? No, I was not.

The Witness was directed to withdraw, and the House adjourned.