Sitting of 21 August 1820

THE QUEEN—ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
Lord Castlereaghrose to move that the House at its rising should adjourn to that day four weeks. His object in moving such an adjournment was, that the House should be enabled to provide for the proper course, in whatever state the proceedings of the Bill before the House of Lords might be at the time. So that in the event of any interruption to the proceeding, by giving time to her majesty to call evidence from abroad, an ulterior adjournment might then take place, or that time might be given for the fullest attendance by a call of the House.
Mr. Tierneysaid, if he understood the noble lord, the arrangement was, that nothing should take place at the period when the proposed adjournment should end, but to fix a convenient period for a call of the House.
Lord Francis Osbornesaid, his objections to the bill now in progress
826
through the other House were so deep-rooted and insuperable, that, if it were in his power, he should think it his duty to prevent even the threshold of the House from being polluted by it. He for one begged to give notice to the noble lord that no power on earth should ever induce him to enter into that mockery of justice. He meant not to say that he would not attend in his place to oppose the introduction of the bill; but sooner than incur the disgrace of making himself a party in a mock judicial proceeding, he would resign his seat. He protested against a proceeding that would convert that House into a judicial tribunal, for which it was wholly incompetent; and so strong was his conviction of that in competency, that he thought he was not using too strong an expression when he said that the House had damned itself as a court of justice by passing the Grenville act. He should therefore move as an amendment to the motion of the noble lord, "That an humble address be presented to his majesty, praying that his majesty will be graciously pleased forthwith to prorogue the parliament."
Mr. Hobhouserose to second the amendment. He had that day come down to the House under the full impression of moving a similar amendment to that proposed by the noble lord, if no member more competent to the task undertook that duty. He was most anxious to take the first opportunity of entering his protest against that monstrous measure of iniquity which was now in progress in another place, to the disgrace of the House of Lords, and the degradation of the monarchy. If he had no other objection to the measure, the preparations he had witnessed that day—preparations got up by the ministers for the purpose of hedging themselves in their alarming course—would alone have compelled him to call upon them to desist. Never, he believed, had this country witnessed such a sight as had been presented to him that evening on coming down to perform his duty as an English member of parliament; never since the days of Oliver Cromwell had a similar spectacle been exhibited. What was the world to think of a measure that could not even be generated without an assemblage of military guards; and that could not be carried on without filling with troops every apartment in the neighbourhood of parliament, and every avenue leading to either House? Indeed

827
he should have thought it his duty, had he not been prevented by the motion of the noble lord for the adjournment, to move that the commanding officer be called to the bar, to state by whom he had been ordered to take such a station. It was not enough to say that the House of Lords required the protection of the. military; he for one would object to moving one step in this business until the army was removed from the chambers of parliament. He did not know if it was not even the duty of a member of that House to move that the military be withdrawn from the House of Lords; for it could not be forgotten that by a military force, Cromwell dismissed an English parliament, and Buonaparte dissolved the Council of Five. Hundred at St Cloud. Without entering into any discussion of a question that had already been so ably argued both in that and in the other House of Parliament, he should content himself with expressing his gratitude to the noble lord for his amendment, which he gladly seconded.
Mr. Tierneycould not agree to the amendment recommending a prorogation of Parliament, after the proceedings that had already taken place in the Lords. It would be most unjust to her majesty, after what had passed, to stop short, and deprive her of the means of defence. When he said that, he begged it to be understood, as not lending himself in any degree in support of the form of proceeding. To that, no man could feel a stronger objection than himself. In acceding to the motion of adjournment, he felt he was giving no pledge to the course he should pursue, whether to receive the bill, or to suggest another mode, or that he was surrendering an iota of the privileges of that House.
Mr. Westernexpressed his decided aversion to the erection of that House into a court of justice. In every view of the subject, such a course was attended with difficulty and danger. He assured the House, that from one end of the country to the other, there could not be found an impartial person who did not regret the prosecution that was now going on. Not an individual could be met who did not regret, nay even condemn, the erasure of her majesty's name from the Liturgy. He never yet heard a single ground on which that fatal act could be defended. The people were loud in the expression of their abhorrence
828
at the treatment her majesty had received. Possessing the same feelings, he should give his support to the amendment of his noble friend. He did so the more willingly, because that House had, by its former resolutions, condemned the commencement of the prosecution. It at present stood clear of the contamination, and he trusted it would never find its way within its walls.
Lord A. Hamiltonobserved, that he felt as fully as any member the unfortunate predicament in which the House was placed. He felt as fully as his right hon. friend (Mr. Tierney) the conflicting difficulties and dangers that on every side surrounded the question, but he also was convinced that these difficulties and dangers were much more likely to be increased by a continuance of the present course, than by at once putting a termination to it. It was with that conviction that he should give his support to the amendment. To justify his own consistency hereafter, he took that opportunity of declaring, that whenever or in whatever shape the proceeding came before them, his vote should never be regulated by the consideration of the guilt or innocence of the accused. He felt, then, as he from the first moment declared, that his insuperable objection to the prosecution of the Queen, whose life, not for the last six, but for 26 years, has been a life of unparalleled persecution, arose from his full conviction of her being precluded from the possibility of having justice extended to her, on the consideration of her guilt or innocence. In considering the guilt or innocence of that unhappy woman, there must be taken into consideration so many shades, such a variety of discriminations, such palliations, that he ever must contend, that those who originated the prosecution, were disqualified by their very own acts towards her, from proceeding against her. When he reflected on the manner in which she was forsaken, abandoned, and insulted at home—persecuted and vilified abroad—he felt he should not be acting with justice towards her, if he did not protest against a trial, instituted under such circumstances, and conducted by such accusers. That was not the proper time to cast imputations on his majesty's ministers: but he could not help saying to them, that they could with a very ill grace, accuse others of inconsistency, who had themselves given such frequent proofs of

829
the most palpable contradiction. In what a perilous predicament, he would ask the noble lord, would the country be placed, if, after the House of Lords approved the Bill of Pains and Penalties, the House of Commons rejected it! The House would recollect, that at the same moment a Green Bag was sent to both Houses; and yet his majesty's ministers had themselves declared, that nothing could be more unadvisable than that two proceedings should be going on at the same time in both Houses. He felt, in common with every man in the country, an insuperable aversion to a legislative proceeding which constituted the offence, affixed the crime, judged the criminal, and inflicted the sentence. But above all, when he considered that this anomalous proceeding was to be carried into execution in defiance of all public opinion, denying that power of recrimination which the law of the land afforded to every other person labouring under the same accusation, he must continue to view it as a most fatal prosecution. With that body of evidence before him—with such a mass of misapplication as the whole proceeding presented, he found himself obliged to make a choice of evils, and be felt he took the least when he voted for the amendment of his noble friend.—Referring to the motion which had been made on a former occasion by the hon. member for Bramber, he observed, that the effect of that motion had been to fortify his majesty's ministers on the question. It was impossible that the hon. member's motion could have succeeded: for it was, in fact, to ask a person who had already suffered great injury, to submit to still greater. If the amendment which he (lord A. Hamilton) had moved to address the Crown to restore her majesty's name to the Liturgy, had been carried, all the evils which had ensued, and which would ensue, would have been obviated.
Lord Castlereaghwas of opinion that nothing ought to drag the House, under the present circumstances, into any thing like a discussion of the great question at issue. On a subject so extensive, so important in all its bearings, and requiring so much calmness and time, the House ought not to be forced into an immediate deliberation. He was not aware of any existing circumstance which should lead the House to depart from the course they thought best at the period of their last se-
830
paration. He was not surprised that the noble lord thought fit to object, in a constitutional point of view, to the mode of proceeding which had been adopted. He was not surprised that the noble lord differed from him on the subject. Whenever it should be the pleasure and convenience of the House, however to make the inquiry, he should be quite prepared to justify his colleagues and himself, both with respect to the merits of the measure itself, and with respect to their conduct upon it. But that was not the question on the present occasion. After the extended and elaborate debate which preceded the last adjournment of the House, it was considered expedient to separate, leaving the question as it was at that time pending before the House of Lords, and which might probably bring the bill before the House of Commons. It was then understood that it was probable no other subject would arise at their re-assembling, than what would be the ulterior adjournment which it would be expedient to adopt. To press any other subject at present would be rather a surprise on that part of the House not present, who had no idea that any important business would be transacted without notice. Unless the noble lord, therefore, could show that something had occurred since the last adjournment, that afforded a new view of the case, he did not think it would be expedient to introduce the important subject into discussion in the present attendance of members, which, although great, was not what both sides of the House must wish for on this serious and constitutional question. What circumstance had occurred since the separation of the House, to make it more consonant to wisdom and justice to interpose and quash the proceedings? When the House last separated, there was of necessity some doubt whether or not the other House would take any proceeding. But they now knew by the examination of the journals of the House of Lords that a proceeding had been adopted by that House. It was a matter, indeed of public notoriety, and he might therefore perhaps say so without being very disorderly, that all the facts of the case had been opened to the other House, and would necessarily go forth to the world. Under such circumstances, he thought that no man who had a value for justice, for the dignity of the Crown, for the morals of the country, and above all, for

831
the personal honour of her majesty, would propose that the subject should be quashed and extinguished; and thereby leave her majesty in the calamitous situation of having such a case opened against her, without giving her the opportunity of answering it. Did the noble lord who spoke last, look to the perils with which the constitution was assailed, only in the form which those perils; assumed in a bill of Pains and Penalties. The noble lord did not always contemplate penal statutes with so much horror. The bills for reforming the representation of certain boroughs in Scotland were tolerably penal. The noble lord, however, seemed to have made up his mind, more like a stoic than a friend, to leave her majesty in her painful and degraded situation, without giving her the means of justifying her character from imputation. God forbid that he should consider that any thing which had yet passed in the House of Lords had been proved, but no man who regarded the honour of the Queen, the Crown, or the country, could propose to arrest the case in its present state. To address his majesty to prorogue parliament would be to quash and extinguish the whole proceeding, without affording her majesty any mode of vindicating herself. He could not but consider the noble lord who had last spoken, a singular kind of friend to her majesty to recommend such a course. The House would feel, that the Queen would be placed in the cruellest situation that woman was ever placed in, if they were now to tender advice to his majesty—advice, which indeed, under the circumstances of the case, would be scarcely constitutional—to prevent the other House of parliament from proceeding, and thus to extinguish their deliberative faculties. What interpretation would such an act bear in the eyes of the country, contrasted as it would be with the grounds on which the House had last separated? Would it be attributed to considerations connected with the public interest or safety; or would it not be rather imputed to fear and intimidation—feelings which every effort had been made to excite since their last separation? There was nothing before the House to induce them to accede to such a proposition. It would, therefore, be ascribed to a base surrender to the endeavours so actively and perseveringly made, to create a flame in the country, to inculcate the belief that a
832
conspiracy against her majesty had been got up by government, for the purpose of inflicting an injustice upon her which every honest mind abhorred. Although in that House he felt it unnecessary to disclaim any such intention on the part of government, it would be in vain to make such a disclaimer to the persons to whom he alluded. In the name of God he adjured that House not to add their influence in disseminating this delusion. Let them do their duty fairly and steadily. They might depend upon it, that the facts would tranquillize the country one way or the other. Either the honour of the Queen would be vindicated, and the charges against her majesty would be proved to be destitute of foundation; or the accusation would be substantiated in a way that would leave it to the wisdom of parliament to deal with it. The House might rely upon it that the moment the facts were known the country would be tranquillized. If the House wished to keep the country in constant fever and agitation, open to every daring spirit, fit. for the purposes of every base conspirator and political adventurer, they could not succeed better than by addressing his majesty to prorogue parliament, as if there was no consideration of public justice or public safety which required that they should remain assembled. One hon. member seemed to regard with something like constitutional jealousy the military force then in the neighbourhood of the Houses of parliament, and appeared to consider the placing of that force in such a position as quite a novel proceeding. If the hon. member would inquire, he would find that it was not a measure of the executive government that the troops were so stationed. It had been done in consequence of an order of the other House of Parliament, which order was founded on precisely the same resolution as that agreed to at the impeachment of Mr. Hastings, when no one supposed that there was any necessity for an armed force to be in the neighbourhood for the security of parliament. It would be remembered that the peers invariably went to the hall accompanied by a body of horse-guards. He said this to repel the notion that there was any thing in the measure which had not a precedent in the best of times—at times when it could not be pretended by any one that the liberties of the subject were in any way threatened.
Lord A. Hamiltonin explanation, stated, that what he had said was, that being bound to vote on the present occasion, he, after deliberating on the difficulties which pressed on both sides of the question, would give his reluctant vote for the amendment. The noble lord had talked of him as being the friend of the Queen. He wished to be understood as the friend of the country, and in that capacity he was anxious to put a stop to the present proceedings.
Mr. Wilberforcewould not have troubled the House with any observations on the present occasion, had it not been for what had fallen from a noble lord, who had alluded to the motion which he (Mr. Wilberforce) had some time ago made on the subject of her majesty, but which had not experienced the success that he expected. But for that he should have contented himself with silently acquiescing in the motion for the adjournment, it being distinctly understood, that in doing so, no hon. member pledged himself to any opinion on the bill of pains and penalties, if it should come down to that House. The noble lord had stated in that House what would he studiously and industriously repeated elsewhere; that he (Mr. W.) had been anxious in making the motion to which he had alluded, to fortify ministers. He declared, from the bottom of his soul, that nothing could be more sincere than his desire on that occasion to put an end to the necessity of any further proceeding. He had no intention to fortify ministers.
Lord A. Hamiltonobserved, that what he had said was, that the hon. member's motion had that effect—not that the hon. member had that intention.
Mr. Wilberforcesaid, that when a proposition such as that which the noble lord had advanced, was accompanied with a guard, the proposition generally appeared elsewhere, but without the guard. That was generally dropt. It would, in all probability, be stated elsewhere, that the noble lord had said, not that such was the effect, but that such had been the object of his motion. He had frequently been subjected to the most detestable calumny so originating. He was obliged to the noble lord, however, for the explanation. As to the amendment proposed by the noble lord on that occasion, to address the King to restore her majesty's name to the Liturgy, he had not made such a proposition to the House, because he knew he
834
could never have carried it. It had been declared by his majesty's ministers, that they would lose their places rather than advise his majesty to acquiesce in any such recommendation. How, therefore, could he hope to carry his motion? He solemnly declared, that when he made the motion alluded to, he thought it would be successful. He argued thus: The assurance of so large a majority of the House of Commons, that her majesty's acquiescence in the request of the House would not be construed into a disposition to shrink from inquiry, but only as manifesting a wish to coalesce with the Wishes of parliament. He did think that the character of the House of Commons was so high, that it would be a far greater boon to her majesty as an equivalent, than that proposed in the antecedent negotiation by her majesty's law advisers. He certainly never did wish to stop any thing so much as he did to stop that proceeding. It had already produced many evils; but he did not think the House foresaw all that would ensue. Already disclosures of the most injurious moral tendency had been made; but the matter would be much worse when the evidence appeared, and was followed by the necessary discussion. With reference to the form which the proceeding had assumed, he confessed that his mind had been so completely occupied with a disposition to quash the matter altogether, that he had not paid sufficient attention to that particular. This however was not the time to discuss the question, but he reserved to himself the full right of expressing a future opinion upon it. He must say, however, that if the bill were to be brought down to that House, it appeared to him that it would become an absolutely interminable proceeding. The House of Lords was accustomed to act as a court of justice. Many members of it had filled the highest official situations, and of course were listened to by the other peers on questions of law with great deference. If necessary they had also the twelve judges to refer to. But how was the House of Commons situated in that respect? Every single question to a witness might become the subject of debate for an evening. His legal friends knew that the other hon. members of the House demurred, allowing that they had more legal knowledge. There would, therefore, be as much discussion on the points of law, as on any other part of the sub-

835
ject. He regretted exceedingly that some other mode of proceeding had riot been preferred. There had been a necessary deviation from precedents. In the establishment of a new proceeding, it ought to have had at least some analogy to other proceedings. For instance, formerly in the House of Lords, the lord high steward summoned a committee of the Lords to investigate cases of treason; at which the whole House might be called at pleasure to attend; although that was abrogated by the 7th or 8th of William 3rd. He wished that some such proceeding bad been adopted in the present instance, that, by way of guarding against the frailties of our nature, a reduced committee had been framed, such as, so much to the honour of that House, was effected under the Grenville act—that a secure firm spot of land should be rescued from the great ocean around. For the noble lord's proposition to address the King to prorogue parliament he could, however, by no means vote. It would be just neither to the Queen nor to the country to leave her majesty in her present condition. Most heartily should he rejoice if her majesty should acquit herself of the charges preferred against her; although in that event he should be far from admitting, what was so roundly asserted, that a conspiracy had been formed against her; for he was satisfied that those who had preferred these charges had done so fairly and honourably, and not with any calumniatory intention. But, without determining the question of guilt or innocence, to leave her majesty's character in its present state, would be derogatory to the dignity of the royal family and to the interest of the country, of which the dignity of the Crown must ever form an important part.
Mr. Broughamobserved, that perhaps this was a question on which he ought not to say any thing, but, with the permission of the House, he begged to offer a few words. No man who had attended to the course of the proceedings in that House would accuse him of having shown any anxiety to press this subject on, or any disinclination to allow of any interval which might afford a chance of doing justice, without any further parliamentary investigation to the high parties implicated. On the contrary, from the moment the message from the Crown was presented to the House, he had intreated parliament to pause before it was too late.
836
Parliament did listen to his advice by acquiescing in the motion which the hon. member had made at his suggestion. He had stated this much to remind the House that he had shown no disposition, to precipitate the measure, but the reverse. He had implored the House to pause before it was too late. The period for pausing had now however gone by. With great submission to the noble lord, and to those who supported the amendment, it was now too late to stop. Whose fault it was, he would not pretend to say. The proceeding had, however, commenced, and it was too late to stop short. The House were well aware of what had passed elsewhere. The case had been opened. The whole of the facts had been stated certainly with a detail and particularity which he had seldom observed in any other case. Nay more. A witness—the chief witness—one whom they had all been expecting—one who was to prove almost the whole of the case, had been examined. His examination in chief had nearly ended; but he had not yet been cross-examined. Now, at such a moment, he could not conceive any proposition so untenable as to propose to parliament to stop. He could not conceive any thing more unjust towards her majesty, than now that the accusation had been promulgated, and a witness heard in its support, to propose to pause even before that witness had undergone any cross-examination. This would indeed be a most crying act of injustice. There was another reason why it would be peculiarly so. The House of Lords, on the present occasion, had acted on a different principle from that which they had adopted on any former occasion. On a comparatively trifling case, that of lord Melville, the House of Lords thought fit, doubtless with a view to the ends of public justice, strictly to prohibit the publication of a tittle of the evidence until the whole should have been produced; in the present delicate and important question, when so much might depend on the publication, their lordships had never taken a single step to prevent the disgusting details from being served up for the public palate, and presented morning after morning to the whole country. What the grounds were for this proceeding he could not pretend to determine; but it furnished the strongest reason for not stopping the proceeding. To stop it, would, in fact, be

837
the grossest outrage to justice. He did not impute any motives to the House of Lords; they were all honour and justice; the arrangement which they had made might turn out to be a just and wise arrangement, but it would be converted into a crying injustice against her majesty, if the amendment proposed by the noble lord were acceded to. He implored the House, therefore, not to listen to the proposition. On the merits of the great question itself, he would not say a single word. It would be time enough to discuss them, if, which he could not anticipate, they should hear any more of the proceeding in that House.
Lord F. Osborne consented to withdraw his amendment, and the House adjourned to the 18th of September.

Preamble
The order of the day being read for the further consideration and second reading of the said bill, counsel were called in, and
Mr. Attorney Generalresumed his speech, as follows:—
My lords; I have now to resume the statement of the facts which are to be adduced in evidence to your lordships, and which I commenced on Saturday. The last time I had the honour of appearing at your lordships bar, I believe it will be in the recollection of your lordships, that I had in that statement brought her majesty, then princess of Wales, and her suite, to Catania in Sicily; and before I continue the narrative which it is my very painful duty to recite to your lordships, I would beg leave to supply an omission in the statement I made on Saturday with respect to her majesty's suite; for it will be in the recollection of your lordships, that amongst that suite I enumerated the name of Dr. Holland, and I believe I did not apprize your lordships of the period at which that gentleman left her majesty's service. My lords, I think it right to bring the fact before your lordships; because otherwise, upon the statement I made, your lordships might be under the impression that he had continued in her service up to the period to which I have brought the narrative; but he left her majesty at Venice upon that tour which I stated to your lordships was made by her majesty from Milan to that port, in the month of April or May 1815, and about that period her majesty took into her service two gentlemen whose names I did not state—a Mr. Hownam and a Mr. Fiynn, both of whom

775
had been I believe, in his majesty's navy.
My lords; from Catania her majesty proceeded, as I was about to state to your lordships, to Augusta in Sicily, in the month of March 1816. My lords, I have stated that during her majesty's residence in Catania she had procured for the person named Bergami the title of the knighthood of Malta; but soon after her arrival at Augusta, not satisfied with the honour she had thus procured, she then procured a title of a higher nature, namely that of baron. She procured from the Sicilian government the title of Baron della Franchina, and he from that time was always addressed by her majesty and her suite by the title of "baron." My lords, I am not aware what circumstances had occurred to have induced her majesty to procure that additional honour, other than those I have stated, namely that familiar intercourse of which I apprehend I have already satisfied your lordships; but if there was any doubt, the facts I shall have the painful duty to relate, must remove that doubt, not only that there was that licentious familiarity which the circumstances I have stated must satisfy your lordships had at that time continued between them—but an actual adulterous intercourse continually carried on between her and Bergami.
My lords; I should state to your lordships that either at Augusta or Catania, her majesty set for her picture, one or two of which she presented to Bergami. I believe in one of them she was drawn in the character of a Magdalen, with her person considerably exposed; in another she was drawn as a Turkish female, the little child Victorine introduced in a Turkish dress, and that Bergami's picture also was taken upon that occasion for her majesty in a Turkish dress; and that one if not two, of her majesty's pictures were presented by her to Bergami. As I have already stated to your lordships, it is impossible to account for these presents and these extraordinary marks of her majesty's favour towards Bergami at that time, upon any other ground than that intimacy and that intercourse which I have already had the pain to describe to your lordships.
My lords; from Augusta her majesty set sail upon a voyage to Tunis, afterwards visiting Greece and other parts in the East. For that purpose she hired a ves-
776
sel, a polacre, as it was called, for the purpose of this voyage. It will be necessary for your lordships again to advert to the arrangement made on the part of her majesty with respect to the distribution of her servants and suite on board the vessel. When first she went on board, her majesty's sleeping apartment, as well as that of the countess Oldi, her lady of honour, were assigned to her within a room which at that time was used by them as a dining-room; the communication to her majesty's bed-room being through this outer room, and there being an internal communication between her majesty's room and that appropriated to the countess Oldi into this room, which was on the outside of these two sleeping apartments: there were two doors, both of them leading from the cabins, one of them near an apartment assigned to some of her female attendants, the other on the opposite side. For a few nights Bergami's sleeping apartment was at a distance from her majesty's; but an alteration then took place: one of the doors leading into this outer room through which the communication was to her majesty's apartment was ordered to be closed up, leaving only one entrance into that room which had previously not been used as a sleeping room, but a room in which they dined, or a passage room, and a bed was brought into that room for the accommodation of Bergami. My lords, that bed was placed in such a situation, that when the door of her majesty's bed-room was open, it was visible from the bed on which her majesty slept, and therefore the person sleeping in her majesty's bed, and the person sleeping in the one assigned to Bergami could see each other in bed, and had free communication by conversation, the only access to those apartments being that single door which I have stated remained, the other being closed. It is obvious, therefore, to your lordships, that the only access to her majesty's bed-room was through the room in which Bergami himself slept; the consequence of which was, that when the access to his room was closed, there was no mode of getting to her majesty's bed-room. That arrangement took place during the voyage to Tunis, and it will appear to your lordships in evidence, that at night the door of the eating cabin, in which I have stated to your lordships Bergami slept after this alteration, was constantly, shut after they had retired to rest; and then, as I have

777
stated, the princess's cabin had no other entrance than that which led through that cabin in which Bergami slept. Here again, this is only a continuation of that uniform, I had almost said constant, continual arrangement, which took place wherever she went, whether by land or by sea, of having the bed-room of Bergami as near as possible to her own, and having her own sleeping apartment and that of Bergami so contiguous that they were shut out from all communication from the other parts of the suite; and your lordships will find, upon the present occasion, that his room not only was contiguous to that in which the princess slept, but that the beds themselves were placed in such a situation that her room could not be opened when Bergami was retired to rest, without her seeing him in bed, and he seeing her majesty in bed. Why, my lords, do these arrangements take place? It is impossible for me, or I think for 3'our lordships, to assign any other reason than that I have given for this arrangement. Why is this Bergami to be selected to sleep so near her majesty? Why is it that the arrangement is constantly made by which the female attendants who were near her were removed? Why this care taken to prevent this communication with her room at night except through Bergami's room? It would be difficult indeed, to account for it, except from the other circumstances of the case, which develope that which it would be otherwise utterly impossible to understand, and leave no doubt as to the nature of the familiarities and criminal intercourse which at that time existed between them.
My lords; her majesty sailed in this polacre; at first she went to Tunis; from Tunis she visited Utica. At Utica there were but few apartments; there were only two bed-rooms in the house in which she slept, in one of which rooms, her majesty slept with the little Victorine, and in the other the countess Oldi and the two filles-de-chambre slept, the rest of the suite sleeping at the house of the consul resident there. My lords, it will appear to your lordships, that in the morning after the night on which she slept there, Bergami came very early to her majesty's apartment, and long before her majesty had risen from her bed. Here, as at other places, Bergami's access to her majesty's room was without any restraint: he enter-
778
ed without any notice; he passed into her majesty's bed-room, she being at that time in bed, and there he remained a considerable time. My lords, it may be asked here again, for what purpose was this visit? how is it that before her majesty has risen she requires the attendances of Bergami, or for what purpose is this visit paid? I say, that, but for the intercourse that existed between them, there is no female of any rank in society, either here or abroad, who would, at that early hour in the morning, before she had risen from her bed, admit without ceremony a person who undoubtedly at that time had been raised by her to the rank of chamberlain, had been decorated with the order of the knighthood of Malta, and had had conferred upon him the title of baron: but, I say, these titles, or these dignities, or this advancement, did not furnish a reason why this person alone is to be admitted to her bed-room when there was no necessity for his attendance—but such was the case. My lords,' perhaps your lordships will think I am fatiguing your lordships when I am enumerating these facts; but when you find that this was the continued habit of intercourse between those persons, your lordships will see how material they are to lead to the conclusion, not from these facts alone, but added to the other facts in the case to which I am endeavouring to lead your lordships, that this licentious and adulterous inter cousse was at this time continued between them.
My lords; another fact occurred upon this tour: her majesty visited a place called Savona. Here again facts occurred which can leave no doubt upon your lordships mind, if proved, that an adulterous intercourse took place at Savona between her majesty and Bergami. At Savona the room assigned to Bergami for sleeping was a room immediately outside that of her majesty's, through which she must pass to arrive at her own room.—
Lord Chancellor.—What is the date of this?
Mr. Attorney-General.—The 12th of April, my lord. She was at Utica on the 8th of April, in the year 1816. Savona is in Africa, near Tunis. I may have mistaken the name: it is either pronounced Savoan or Savona. I have it Savona. She visited that place on the 12th of April, 1816. I was stating to your lord-

779
ships, that a bed-room was assigned to her majesty; immediately outside that bedroom was the room appropriated for Bergami, in that room appropriated for him there was no bed, but in the princess's room there was a large bed.—My lords, as I have stated to your lordships, the access was through that room appropriated to Bergami, in which there was no accommodation for his sleeping; and it will appear to your lordships upon the morning after they had so slept there, that her majesty's bed appeared to have been occupied by two persons. Bergami was the only person who had immediate access to that room, as I have stated to your lordships—the only communication was through that room appropriated to him—in that room there was no bed—in her majesty's room, there was a bed of a large size-that bed evidently showed upon the following morning, that her majesty had not reposed in it alone, but that two persons had slept there. In any ordinary case, I say, that fact alone would be sufficient to decide any person who had to decide upon it, that adultery had been committed that night. If you find that a man has access, and the only person who has access to the bed-room of a female; if you find that the bed of that female shows in the morning marks of two persons having slept in it, I say not only this is a presumption, an inference, but the natural conclusion that an adulterous intercourse took place between them. Such was the case at the place I have mentioned to your lordships; and when you find this communication in the manner I have stated from time to time—when you find rooms appropriated in the way I have stated, and this familiar intercourse kept up, no man can doubt, although you have not the evidence at each particular place, yet no man can doubt, that there was a continued intercourse between these persons of the description I have mentioned. My lords, from Africa her majesty sailed to Athens, stopping at Malta, I believe for a day. She arrived at Athens on the 22nd of April, 1816. My lords, after having visited some of the Grecian Islands and Athens, she proceeded to Constantinople, and afterwards visited, I believe, Troy, and from thence she went to Ephesus. I will state to your lordships a fact which occurred at Athens, to show the degree of familiarity which existed between her majesty and Bergami, and to show that which undoubtedly would be the necessary effect
780
of that intercourse between them—the little respect and attention, I mean in the way of distance, which even a chamberlain or a baron would show to a princess he was serving. I will mention a fact that will satisfy your lordships of the great familiarity which existed between her majesty and Bergami at Athens. Her majesty was visited by the captain of an English vessel which touched there, and who thought it is duty to pay to the princes3 of Wales that respect which he, as a captain in his majesty's navy, ought to pay. He landed, and called upon her. He was introduced through the garden to an alcove, in which he found her majesty, Bergami, and the countess Oldi, sitting; Bergami being dressed at that time in a sort of hussar dress, with a cap, which the officer describes as a foraging-cap upon his head, sitting with great case and familiarity near her majesty. Upon this officer being introduced, her majesty, with that politeness which distinguishes of course all persons of high rank, rose to receive him, requested him to sit down, and had some conversation with him. Bergami, without the slightest respect towards her majesty or this individual, rose—without paying the accustomed mark of respect which officers of distinction of all sorts ought to pay to those whom they are serving—without any expression to show the respect which he owed to her,—he got up as one of equal rank, and as if entitled to treat her as of equal rank with himself—he got up and retired without the slightest mark of respect from the alcove in which he was sitting. I mention this to show the degree of familiarity which existed between them—the assumption which this man naturally took in consequence of the familiarity of manners which he thought himself at liberty to assume, considering himself of equal rank with her majesty, and entitled to assume dominion over persons serving her majesty. Undoubtedly your lordships or any jury would not infer from that fact alone any thing; but, when coupled with the other facts of the case, it speaks volumes: it shows what was passing in this man's mind at the time, that he thought her majesty had reduced herself to a level with him, and that he was entitled to pay her no more respect than any other individual with whom this intercourse had taken place.
My lords; I have stated that from Athens, after visiting Constantinople, her majesty went to Ephesus, and there again

781
another circumstance took place, which affords decisive evidence of that intercourse which was carrying on between them. Her majesty when at Ephesus directed that a bed should be placed for her under a vestibule, in front of a small church, or the ruins of a church, which was surrounded with trees: her dinner had been provided for her, and was intended to be carried to the room which had been prepared on that occasion; but she having retired to that vestibule for repose, the weather being extremely hot, Bergami was seen coming from that vestibule, after her majesty had retired there, and when no other person was supposed to have been there; and the dinner prepared for her majesty and intended to be served up in another room, was ordered to be carried there for herself and Bergami alone; and it will appear, that her dinner was served up in that room, her majesty sitting upon a small travelling bed which she carried with her, and Bergami sitting near her on the ground; and in that room Bergami remained alone for a long time, no person being permitted to have access to this room. Again, I ask your lordships, why is this? why is Bergami the only person to be selected to retire with her majesty to her bed-room and there partake of her dinner, and afterwards to be left alone there during this period of time? Can you divine any reason for this, except what I have stated to your lordships? My lords, in the course of that visit to Ephesus they proceeded to another place called Aura; and, my lords, here a still more striking circumstance took place between her majesty and Bergami. They had a tent erected for her majesty's accommodation, and her majesty had a bed placed in that tent, and, my lords, at that place she is seen in her bed undressed, Bergami, as it is described by the witness, in his shirt sleeves almost undressed sitting upon her bed, and he remains in that tent in that dress for a very considerable time, and he is afterwards seen coming from that tent where her majesty was in bed, in the dishabille I have described to your lordships; and this, my lords by day. I ask your lordships again, if her majesty wanted some attendance—if some attendance was requisite upon this occasion—how is it that her lady of honour, the countess of Oldi, or some of her maids of honour, are not selected to be with her? No such thing! Bergami, and Bergami alone, is selected to be with her majesty, in a dress that was
782
unbecoming in him to be present before her in, and he is selected for that situation when she is undressed and in bed,-and he remains for a very considerable time in that situation in that dress. I shall be told, "this is strong suspicion, but your case should go further than that to prove an adulterous intercourse." I say, that in an ordinary case this alone would be sufficient to prove the fact of criminal conversation; but this is a continuation of the conduct I have been describing to your lordships: it marks the connexion between these parties, and that a guilty intercourse was continually taking place between them upon this occasion. A man who can so familiarly enter the room of a female when that female is in bed, he himself in a dishabille—I say, there is no woman who would admit a man to such a liberty who had not granted him the last liberty that can be granted by a woman,—I say, that is the inference which your lordships must draw, and which you will draw, when you consider, that one of these persons was a princess, and the other a courier advanced to the station he then enjoyed, by her.
My lords; they afterwards proceeded to Jerusalem; and there her majesty, not satisfied with the honours she had procured for her favourite—the knighthood of Malta, and the barony della Franchina—not only procures but created orders to confer upon him—she procured for him at Jerusalem the order of St. Sepulchre, a Catholic order which she obtained at that place, and she herself upon that occasion instituted an order of her own, the order of St. Caroline, and after conferring the knighthood of that order of St. Caroline upon several of her domestics, she makes Bergami the grand master of that order! [A laugh] My lords, I am very well aware this cannot but excite a smile on your lordships; but it marks most strongly, the degradation which her majesty had sustained, and that disgraceful connexion which still existed between them. Why is this man selected? I ask your lordships why it is that in a situation of this sort, her majesty selects him to be grand master of this order which she had instituted? I say it is impossible for any one to hear these facts, and not to be satisfied in his own mind, that it proceeded only from that attachment which had laid hold of her majesty, which alone had been the cause of her degrading herself in the way I have stated. You have this

783
courier from time to time made, first knight of Malta, then knight of St. Sepulchre, grand master of the order of St. Caroline, and baron della Franchina!—If, my lords, what I have already stated to your lordships cannot but have excited the most painful and distressing feelings in your lordships minds—if, my lords, any doubt at present remains, supposing the facts I have stated to exist, upon the nature of the intercourse between her majesty and Bergami, the facts I am about to state to your lordships will, I think, remove all doubt from your minds. Her majesty embarked on board the polacre, which I have told your lordships she hired for the purpose of this voyage, and which was called the Royal Charlotte, upon her hiring it—she embarked at Jaffa on her return to Italy. The weather being at that time excessively hot, she found it inconvenient, after a short period, to sleep in the cabin which she had previously occupied on board, and she directed that a tent should be raised for her upon the deck, in order that she might sleep in that tent; and the directions were obeyed. Not only was a sofa or a bed placed for her majesty, but close to that, without any partition, under the very same tent, a bed for Bergami. My lords, in that tent slept her majesty and Bergami from that time, I believe without intermission, until her arrival in Italy. The lower part of that tent by day was raised round to admit the air, but at night it was closed down: when her majesty and Bergami retired to that apartment, which they usually did at the same time, and by themselves, the tent was let down to exclude the observation of the crew, or the other persons of her Buite, and she and Bergami remained in that tent night after night, as I have stated to your lordships: the bed of her majesty and that of Bergami being placed close to each other, and without any separation. Not only did this occur at night, but frequently in the course of the day after dinner her majesty retired to this tent with Bergami, and upon those occasions the canvas was let down, in order to exclude the observation of the crew or the passengers.—My lords, this took place, as I have stated to your lordships, without intermission, during the voyage from Jaffa to Italy. Can your lordships have stronger or more decisive evidence, though I may not have conveyed my account intelligibly? Her majesty embarked at Jaffa, sailed from thence and arrived afterwards at Syra-
784
cuse, and landed at Terracina. She arrived in Italy in the month of September 1816. My lords, I say this fact alone, I apprehend, is not only presumptive, but conclusive evidence of that which your lordships are to be satisfied of, upon that part of the preamble, namely, an adulterous intercourse between Bergami and her royal highness. Was it ever heard of, that a female should, night after night, receive into her chamber a man to sleep there, the beds close to each other, and this continued for a long period of time—I ask your lordships, was it ever heard of, that such an intercourse took place, without its leading to the inevitable conclusion, in the mind of every one, that it was for the purpose of that connection, which I say this affords decisive evidence of, on the part of these persons? But if you find, accompanied with this, that during her majesty's being on board this ship, they are seen caressing each other by day—that she is seen by persons on board the ship, sitting on Bergami's knee—that they are seen embracing each other in this situation—no man can doubt what conclusion he is to draw from the circumstance of their being shut up for hours together in that bed-room, nobody else having access to it, and more particularly when female delicacy would have prompted her to exclude every person from that bedroom, except her female attendants. And yet he alone is selected to remain in this tent, to sleep there, and does actually sleep there, close to her majesty during this voyage.
My lords; not only did these circumstances take place during this voyage, but she seems to have actually thrown off all restraint and reserve, that could be observed by her. A bath, more than once, is prepared for her in this vessel, and Bergami is the person to accompany her to that bath; he is the only person that remains with her whilst she is bathing: and, after that fact, will your lordships doubt, that if a woman has so far thrown off her virtue and delicacy, as to admit a man to be present on such an occasion—when you find him sleeping in her room, however some persons may be so sceptical as to think they might sleep together without any improper intercourse taking place between them—when you find this female, acting in this way—when you find this man accompanying her at the time she is bathing—there is no man, after these facts, can doubt that during

785
that period that intercourse had taken place which would alone make a woman so far forget herself as to expose herself to these familiarities and indecencies—that this is the only circumstance which could enable a woman to endure the presence of a man upon such an occasion—that nothing but such an intercourse could have induced any woman to admit a man to approach her person in the way Bergami is permitted to do.—Upon this voyage it happened that they were on board the ship on the 24th of August, which was St. Bartholomew's day, and the name of Bergami happening to be Bartolomeo, there are great festivities on board the ship, in honour of her majesty and Bergami. The crew are regaled, and in their carousals, they drink the health of her majesty and the chevalier Bergami, whose birth-day, or rather the day of St. Bartholomew, was kept on that occasion. I ask your lordships what inference is to be drawn from this circumstance? None. But when you couple this with all the facts of the case, no man can doubt that all these honours were conferred in consequence of the disgraceful and licentious intercourse which at that time existed between these persons. Whilst I am upon this circumstance of the fete or festivity of the 24th of August, I should mention, that your lordships will find that in the preceding year (a fact I had omitted to state) the same thing had taken place at the Villa d'Este in August 1815, that there were festivities in honour of the courier Bergami.
I should apprehend that the facts I have stated to have taken place on board the polacre, would, of themselves, be decisive evidence of the whole preamble of this Bill. My lords; I do not, upon this part of the case, consume your lordships time by entering into a minute detail of the various familiarities observed on board this vessel, the degradation to which her majesty submitted, in her intercourse with this courier, her occupations and indecent exhibitions on board that ship, because I know very well, in this opening of mine, I ought rather to lead your lordships minds to the general nature of the case, and the strong facts to be proved in evidence, than to detain your lordships by a minute detail of those circumstances which your lordships will hear from the evidence, and which you had better hear from them than compel me to narrate—
786
but your lordships will find, during the whole of this voyage the intercourse was of the most licentious description, and that she demeaned herself by doing the most menial offices towards him that was possible, herself occasionally mending his clothes, and doing various other acts which I will not detail to your lordships, because when detailed in evidence they will satisfy your lordships that, although not decisive evidence of guilt, yet when connected with the other facts of the case, they all demonstrate the nature of the intercourse which was taking place between them, and the degradation to which her majesty had submitted.—My lords, upon her arrival in Italy, in September 1816, her majesty proceeded to the Villa d'Este, ahouseshe had occupied upon the Lake of Como, previous to her departure; and your lordships will find that upon her arrival at the Villa d'Este, Louis, the brother of Bergami, was advanced by her majesty to the situation of prefect of the palace. He had before, as was usual with the suite, as well as the mother of Bergami, dined at a separate table from her majesty—they had dined with. Faustina, the other sister, and her husband, who were also admitted, and a cousin of Bergami, who was admitted and made comptroller of the household; but soon after their return, the mother of Bergami, who before that time had been called "the grand-mother," not only by the suite, but by her majesty, is ordered to be called by the name of Madame Livia. She and Louis, Faustina and the husband, were now at a separate table from the rest of the servants.
My lords; during her majesty's absence from Italy, a theatre had been built at the Villa d'Este. After the facts I have related to your lordships, I will not detain, you with any long narrative of her majesty's performances in this theatre, where she performed generally with Bergami, she in some character, and Bergami in another; sometimes appearing in the most low character of a servant; at other times in other characters, Bergami usually acting in the theatre with her. Your lordships will see this circumstance is only one of many others I have stated, of the degree of familiarity with which her majesty treated her servants, a degree of levity incompatible, as it appears to me, with the dignity of a princess. But, however, at the Villa d'Este, her majesty did occasionally perform there; Bergami acting

787
the part of a lover, and her majesty the person upon whom his attentions were bestowed. During her residence after she had returned to the Villa d'Este, her majesty took a tour to Lugano and other places; and I wish to mention here a fact that occurred at the Villa d'Este, showing the intercourse kept up between her majesty and Bergami. It happened, my lords, that one day a courier was dispatched with a letter to a person at Milan, and he returned with an answer which was to be given to Bergami. The courier returned at a late hour of the night, or rather early in the morning, when most of the family, or all indeed, were retired to rest; and thinking it his duty to deliver the answer to Bergami, as soon as he had brought it back, he went to his room for that purpose: upon going to his bed-room he found that Bergami was not there, but in a short time he saw him coming in his shirt, and his robe-de-chambre, out of the princess's room. My Lords, one would ask how it was that Bergami, at this hour, when all the rest of the family were retired to rest, and when it would naturally have been expected he was in his bed—how it was, that at this hour he is seen in this undress, coming from the room, in which her majesty, the then princess, slept? My lords, he was observed, and of course spoken to by the courier who had brought back the answer: that courier had been but a short time in the service of her majesty. Bergami was therefore desirous of making some excuse for this undoubtedly apparent impropriety, and he stated that he had heard his child cry; and upon the following morning, he desired the courier to say nothing of what he had observed, as it was an accidental circumstance. But the fact struck the man as it would any person, who had seen such a circumstance—the inference was plain—here was Bergami coming out in this undress from her majesty's room at a period when the other members of the household had retired to rest—the rooms of her majesty and of Bergami, as I have stated, being separated from the rest of the suite, and of easy communication from the one to the other. I ask, how can you account for that fact, but that he had been visiting her majesty at that time, with a view to that intercourse that had taken place between them? This fact alone, in an ordinary case, would be enough to satisfy any jury, of an improper intercourse be-
788
tween the female and the man, under the circumstances. You can account for it in no other way. There is no reason for a man visiting the bed-room of a woman at that hour of the night, unless some reason could be given, which does not exist here. No other reason can be given for it, but that which I have stated, namely, that intercourse which was going on; and it is from these repeated instances, your lordships will be led to the conclusion, that there was this adulterous intercourse taking place between her majesty and Bergami.
After her majesty had been a short time at the Villa d'Este, she visited a place which had been purchased (a fact I beg your lordships attention to) for Bergami, a place called by the name of the Barona, the Villa Bergami. In addition to these honours conferred upon him, this courier, who entered her majesty's service in the lowest state of poverty—this roan, by the year 1816, is not only covered with these orders and dignities, but has purchased for him a very considerable estate in the neighbourhood of Milan, a place called the Villa Bergami, or Barona—a purchase to the amount of several thousand pounds, purchased for him for his residence near Milan between the period I have stated. How does he acquire this property? By the same means that he had obtained his titles—through the means of this most bountiful princess; who, not satisfied with conferring on him honours, added to them estates. These circumstances must be accounted for. People do not in general act without reason, and without motive. What reason was there for this conduct, but that which I have stated as the only motive and reason—this adulterous intercourse which took place between them? Had there been any thing in his conduct which called for these honours—any thing but this disgusting intercourse which could have operated upon her majesty's mind?—Your lordships will find upon her going to this place, where she remained some time, at the Barona, as it is called, and during the carnival there, the most disgraceful scenes took place in this house—scenes which I would rather leave to the witnesses to describe to your lordships, than shock your lordships by detailing them—scenes, which if fully proved before your lordships, will, I believe, satisfy you, that this house, the Barona, deserved the name of a brothel, more than a palace, or a place fit for the

789
reception of her majesty, or a person of the least virtue or delicacy. Balls were given there, not attended by the rank and nobility of the neighbourhood—not by persons who, if her majesty had kept up her dignity, would have been proud of the honour of her countenance, but by persons of the lowest description, and the greatest licentiousness prevailed in this house during the carnival—licentiousness which I would not state as an imputation upon her majesty, unless I was satisfied in my conscience, I should be able to prove it passed with her knowledge; because it would be said by those who defend her majesty, "if the fact were so, if it took place in the kitchens, or the lower apartments of the servants remote from her, they ought not to affect her majesty in any degree:" but I understand, and believe it will be proved, that they passed under her eye and her observation, and that, so far from expressing any disapprobation, she appeared pleased at what was going forward, rather than express any dissatisfaction or disgust at it.—Your lordships may say, "true, it may be that she has demeaned herself in a manner highly unbecoming a princess, but this alone is not sufficient to prove the adulterous intercourse you charge between her majesty and Bergami:" but, when we prove these facts to exist at the time these familiarities were going on between them, these facts show to your lordships, and must show, that this licentious intercourse was continuing, and had so far operated upon her majesty's mind, as to make her wholly regardless of that character, which she ought to support towards her domestics; and when you find her engaged in these scenes, you will conclude that this was the certain result of such an intercourse as existed between her and Bergami, and can only be accounted for in that way.
After her majesty had been at the Barona, she, in the month of February 1817, made a tour through the Tyrol into Germany. And, my lords, a remarkable circumstance took place almost at the commencement of that tour,—a fact again which of itself will prove to your lordships that an adulterous intercourse was taking place between them. It happened on their arrival at a place called Charnitz, that it was necessary Bergami should return to Inspruck for a passport to continue this journey, and he was absent at the time her majesty retired to rest; and as he had not returned she had to sleep in
790
her room that night with one of her fillea-de-chambre: it happened that Bergami returned with his passport in the middle of the night. What would have been the conduct of a person who had gone upon such a mission, and returned to the suite of the person he was serving on that occasion? You would suppose he would retire to his own bed to rest; but, no; he comes into her majesty's room, her female attendant being asleep—he comes into that room, and her majesty upon his coming in, orders her female attendant to get up and retire from the room, leaving Bergami with her. Upon that occasion her female attendant was ordered to get up from her bed, to take her bed out of the room, and retire to another room for the rest of the night, and Bergami is left alone with her majesty. Why is all this? what reason was there for it? I ask whether that fact would not in an ordinary case be conclusive evidence of an improper intercourse taking place between them? and if it could in an ordinary case, it is still stronger in a case like this; because, when a man is treated as this man was upon such an occasion, I say her majesty conducting herself in this way is stronger evidence of the fact taking place between them. The female attendant retires, and the man remains. This fact alone, if proved satisfactorily, must convince your lordships minds, independently of any of the other facts, that an adulterous intercourse took place between them.
But, my lords, that is not all. In the course of this journey her majesty proceeded to Munich, and afterwards to Carlsruhe in Germany, where she remained eight or nine days. At Carlsruhe similar arrangements were made with respect to the bed-rooms: there was a bedroom called No. 10, appropriated to her majesty, No. 11 was used as an eating-room or passage; and No. 12 was appropriated to Bergami; the doors opening from No. 10 and No. 12 were opposite to each other, so that by passing through the center room you pass from the room in which her majesty slept to the other in which Bergami slept, or vice versâ, by passing through that room you went from Bergami's to the room in which her majesty slept. Whilst at Carlsruhe, her majesty is found one day sitting on Bergami's bed, he being in bed, with Bergami's arm round her neck. She is surprised in this situation by one of the

791
chamber-maids at the inn, who was going to carry some water to the room; she found her sitting there, he being in bed and undressed with his arm round her majesty's neck. Would such familiarity take place between persons of this description, without that intercourse to which I am so often obliged to call your lordships attention? In that bed afterwards is found a cloak belonging to her majesty, which her majesty is afterwards seen wearing; in Bergami's bed is found that cloak which her majesty is afterwards seen wearing; and in that bed are also observed marks by the servant of the inn, which can leave no doubt upon your lordships minds—which, without attempting to explain, your lordships will be led to the inference of what I am wishing your lordships to understand. Those marks, that cloak in the bed, and her majesty being sitting there—I ask, whether your lordships can have any doubt that an adulterous intercourse took place between her majesty and Bergami? I say, my lords, again, that fact alone would be sufficient proof, in any ordinary case, of the adulterous intercourse taking place. Here if your lordships should be satisfied, you will have all the other parts of the case showing these facts and the acts committed, proving a continued intercourse between them of the nature I have been describing; and when once proved, it explains the whole of the circumstances in this case—all those circumstances which are otherwise enveloped in mystery—the honours conferred upon Bergami—the estate bought for him—and the other circumstances. This fact at Carlsruhe, the circumstances which took place on board the polacre and at Charnetz, and a number of other circumstances of the kind which I need not enumerate, if they shall be given in evidence satisfactorily before your lordships, as I believe they will be, will prove conclusively the case set out in the bill now before your lordships, not only of licentious and disgusting familiarities, but of the adulterous intercourse which actually took place. My lords, from Carlsruhe her majesty visited—
Lord Chancellor—What is the date of that?
Mr. Attorney General.—In the early part of 1817; January or February 1817.
Earl Grosvenor.—What is the date of the carnival?
Mr. Attorney General.—The latter end
792
of the year 1816, or the beginning of 1817. She set out on her tour to the Tyrol in February 1817; so that her arrival at Carlsruhe was, I believe, about the latter end of February or the beginning of March 1817. My lords, her majesty visited Vienna, where she remained a short time. She then proceeded to Trieste: a two-wheeled carriage was purchased by Bergami, in which he and the princess frequently travelled alone, she having previously travelled along with the little Victorine; the countess Oldi also travelled with her, but another carriage was now purchased by Bergami, which was sufficient to contain only two persons, and in which he and the princess usually travelled alone. At Trieste they remained a few days; and there again observations were made by persons at the inn, upon the state of her majesty's bed and bed-room. There again, as at all the other places (for I fear I tire your lordships by repeating it), an arrangement was made for Bergami's bedroom to be near to her majesty's, communicating with it. In her majesty's bedroom in this place was her small travelling bed, and a large bed capable of containing two persons. This was in the month of March 1817. I think I have stated to your lordships, that there was a small bed and a large bed, and Bergami had one room appropriated near to her majesty, and observations were made upon the state of those beds; and it will appear to your lordships, that there were frequently the appearances of two persons having slept in her majesty's room, and at the same time it appeared that Bergami or any other person had not slept in the room appropriated to him. It was observed, moreover, that there were wash-hand basons for two persons in her majesty's room, and other utensils that appeared to be used by two persons when the servants went to arrange these rooms: but the strong fact that was observed at Trieste was observed elsewhere, not only that the rooms had free communication with each other, but that there were the appearances in her majesty's room of two persons having slept together in the bed in that room, and in Bergami's room where he ought to have slept, there was the appearance of no one having slept; and he was the only person who, from the arrangement of the room, could have access to sleep there. No other person had any communication with or ventured

793
to approach her majesty's room without that notice which persons were bound to give; and under these circumstances I apprehend your lordships will feel very little doubt, that the two persons who slept there were Bergami and her majesty, not only from the state of the room, but the observations made of the state of the bed.
My lords; in the course of that journey her majesty and Bergami were observed frequently, when they had occasion to stop at an inn to change horses, to retire to rest themselves—to repose themselves together upon the same bed: they would go into the same bed-room, and throw themselves upon the same bed, and there remain during the period, either that the horses were changing or any other delay that took place. That was observed upon more than one occasion during that journey. It may be said, there is no conclusion of guilt to be drawn from the circumstance of Bergami and her majesty reposing upon the same bed. Of itself it proves nothing; but when united with the other circumstances, would not you con dude necessarily that an adulterous intercourse took place? But if you find that he is the only person admitted to these familiarities—that no other person ventures to approach her in this way—that this is done in the most familiar way on her part—it naturally leads to the conclusion, that this intercourse was taking place between them; and when you find the other circumstances and the inference to be drawn from those other circumstances, is not that the natural consequence of that familiarity daily taking place between them? The princess of Wales wishing to retire for repose in the course of a journey, would it not be natural that her lady of honour, the countess of Oldi, should attend upon her, or at least one of her female attendants? But Bergami, and Bergami alone, is the person selected. Mow can he venture to use those familiarities towards her majesty, but for this reason, that an adulterous intercourse was continuing between them! They visited Venice upon this occasion, and I believe returned for a short time to Milan to the Barona, and upon their return to the Barona upon this occasion, Bergami's mother and brother Louis, who had previously executed some of the most menial offices, were permitted to dine at her table with herself and Bergami; and from that time you
794
will find that Bergami's mother and brother were admitted to the table and eat with her and Bergami. Here again it may be said, this of itself, though it marks great condescension on the part of her majesty, surely ought not to affect a person of her high rank and dignity—they prove nothing at all, but a desire on her part to show attention to these persons, Bergami's mother and brother Louis. I say it is a little singular that it is only this family that is so signalized by her majesty with these marks of condescension—that they are the persons, daily gathering about her, until at last they compose the greater part of her suite—I say it is a little singular that this mother of Bergami, who filled an under station in this family, should be so suddenly exalted. It may be said, it was out of the great affection which her majesty conceived Bergami had for his parent: but the little Victorine, whom I have mentioned, is from time to time taken the greatest notice of; she is dignified with the title of "princess," a title which I find her majesty, although that does not mark any thing as applicable to Bergami, has also conferred upon the boy William Austin, who is called a prince throughout the whole of the journey, as well as the daughter of Bergami. After her majesty had been a short time at the Barona, she visited the Villa d'Este, and afterwards returned to Rome, and was a short time at a house which had belonged to one of the Buonapartes, a place called Ruffinelli, and she afterwards was at another house near Rome, called the Villa Brande. My lords, during her residence at Rupinelli, her majesty is seen in Bergami's bedroom; but at the Villa Brande your lordships will find a more important circumstance as affecting this inquiry. My lords, at the Villa Brande, Bergami's apartment was very near her majesty's, and there was a door of free communication between the room in which she slept through another or corridor into her majesty's, and he was there observed by one of the servants, upon more than one occasion, two or three times, at a very early hour in the morning, going from his own room undressed to the princess's room, entering that room, and there remaining with her majesty—
Mr. Brougham.—Will you favour me with the date of that?
Mr. Attorney-General.—About July 1817. Your lordships will have it proved

795
to you upon two or three occasions this was observed—that at a very early hour in the morning, when the rest of the family had retired, Bergami is seen coming from his sleeping apartment and going to her majesty's apartment, entering that room and there remaining with her majesty. Why, my lords, I ask your lordships what does this fact prove? Can your lordships doubt the motive for a man going in that way, at an early hour in the morning when her majesty was in bed to her room and there remaining? Do your lordships require any further evidence of the adulterous intercourse between these parties? Would it, I ask, in any ordinary case, my lords, be attended with the least hesitation on the mind of any persons who had to decide upon the question, where a man goes from his own room, a servant, at the dead hour of night or early in the morning, entering into the room in which his mistress is supposed to be alone, and there remaining with that person from that time, and not seen to come out of that room again—I ask whether there could be any doubt existing upon the mind of any person who had to decide upon the question, that during that period a criminal intercourse took place between these parties? I apprehend certainly not; and more particularly when you find this is not a solitary instance, but that it occurs two or three times during her residence at the Villa Brande. At this place, too, Bergami, as upon other occasions, was admitted to her majesty when she was dressing at her toilet, when she was in a state of dishabille, when she ought to have admitted no male person there: he is admitted upon all occasions, without notice and without reserve, and allowed to be present there during the time her majesty is dressing, and, in addition to this, your lordships will find the facts I have before stated to occur at this place, namely, visiting her room in the manner described, several times during her residence there, and that the arrangement was made there which had taken place at almost all the other places, affording a facility of communication between her room and that of Bergami.
I believe from the Villa Brande her majesty went, in the month of August, to Pesaro, where from that period she took up her permanent residence, or almost entirely resided at a villa near Pesaro, and upon her going there the same arrangement took place with respect to the rooms—the princess chose rooms for herself and
796
Bergami separate and apart from the rest of the suite, and having communication with each other, and the same intercourse was continued there which had taken place at almost every place she had visited. And wherever she took up her residence, so attached did she appear to the person and society of Bergami, that his absence always seemed to occasion considerable depression on the part of her majesty, and the greatest anxiety for his return; and when he occasionally visited, as he did, the house at Milan which was purchased for him, you will find, more particularly on one occasion the greatest anxiety expressed for his return, and, that upon the day he is expected she sets out in order to meet him, and being disappointed on that occasion she sets out on the following day, and the greatest joy was expressed on his return; at the meeting all that fondness and attachment appeared between them which might be expected to exist between two persons between whom such an intercourse as that I have explained took place.
Lord Chancellor.—Have the goodness to mention the date of each particular transaction. It will be a great relief to the House.
Mr. Attorney-General.—I do not know whether it is the wish of your lordships that I should specify each particular fact which I have stated as I have gone along.
Lord Chancellor.—Go on, do not go back.
Mr. Attorney-General—My lords, her arrival at D' Este was on the 11th of April 1817, at Ruffinelli about the 29th of June in that year, and at the Villa Brande within a few days of her arrival at Ruffinelli, which would be early in the year 1817. She was at the same place in April, and in May; she was at the Barona, January 1817; she quitted that residence, on the 27th of February for her tour into Germany by the Tyrol, and she returned to the same place for a short time in the following month of April, and went from there to Rome, and afterwards to Ruffi-nelli in the month of June, and continued there till the July of that year, and from thence went to Pesaro, where she arrived about the 9th of August 1817. At Pesaro, as I have stated to your lordships, her majesty resided from that period until her departure for this country, except for a short time, when she visited France, and occasionally other places.
My lords; I have abstained in the course

797
of the narrative from going more into de-tail than was absolutely necessary.
Lord Dundas.—At what period was it that her majesty went to reside at Pesaro, and when did she leave it? for it may be of considerable importance to state that.
Mr. Attorney-General.—My lords, the fact to which I called your lordships attention of her majesty going to Pesaro was in the month of August 1817. My lords, I have abstained in this case from going through a variety of particulars, many of which will be produced in evidence. You will hear detailed what was the course of her majesty's conduct at the Villa d'Este. When she resided on the banks of the Lago di Como, it will be proved she was constantly in the habit of going out alone with Bergami in a sort of carriage which was so constructed as to be only large enough for one person to sit down in, find consequently one must sit upon the lap of the other. In this carriage it will be proved that she used to go out with Bergami, sitting in his lap, he having his arms round her neck for the purpose of driving. There also she is seen with him, as it will be proved before your lordships in evidence, upon the lake in a canoe, and upon one occasion bathing with Bergami in an open situation in the river Brescia. Upon other occasions they are seen by various persons during her majesty's residence at Como in most indecent situations, kissing each other; and many other familiarities will be proved to have taken place during her residence at Como by various witnesses, which I am sure your lordships will think it better for me to abstain from detailing. I shall therefore content myself with only calling your lordships attention to the circumstances generally, as showing the familiar intercourse that subsisted between her and Bergami.—My lords, upon the return of her majesty from the East, she brought in her train a man who, from the accounts given of him by the witnesses, appears to have been of the most brutal and depraved habits—a person called by the name of Mahomet, who at the Villa d'Este, as will be proved to your lordships, exhibited the greatest indecencies at various times in the presence of her majesty and Bergami. They were present at the time those exhibitions took place—exhibitions, my lords, which are too disgusting for me to do more than allude to; and it is with the greatest pain that I am compelled at all to advert to them; but the evidence of so
798
many persons concurs in showing that those exhibitions did take place in the presence of her majesty, as will, I fear, leave no doubt upon your lordships minds of the fact—exhibitions of the most indecent attempts to imitate the sensual intercourse. These scenes were exhibited in the presence of her servants; but from the evidence with which I have been furnished it will be proved that they were exhibited more than once in the presence of her majesty and Bergami; and that she not only permitted those exhibitions to go on, but permitted this person, who deserves not the name of a man, to continue in her service. It may be said that these are circumstances highly disgusting, but which ought not to affect her majesty with that degradation which is to follow, provided the circumstances stated in the preamble of the bill be made out. But, my lords, it is not merely the diusgst which the detail of these exhibitions must excite. Do they not show a want of moral feeling on the part of those who performed them, or permitted them to be performed? Is not that woman who can demean and degrade herself by being present at such scenes, not only capable of sacrificing her virtue, but sacrificing it in the degrading manner I have stated? If the facts I have stated be proved with regard to what took place between her majesty and Bergami, they not only go to prove that part of the preamble of the bill which states the carrying on of an indecent and offensive familiarity, but afford the strongest confirmation of the other part of the case, namely, that of an adulterous intercourse having taken place between them.
Another circumstance I shall state which will not surprise your lordships; for it is the forerunner of such consequences, and clearly marks the ascendancy which this man had obtained over the mind of her majesty; I say, a circumstance occurred that your lordships will not be surprised at; for it always accompanies or follows such a vicious course. You will find, that when her majesty first went into Italy, she did that which became a protestant princess. She had divine service performed either in her own house, or attended the chapels in the place where she happened to be residing, where the worship was conducted in that mode, till Bergami entered into her service at Genoa; but from the time of his entering into her service at Genoa, I believe it not only ceased, and she had no religious ceremo-

799
nies performed in her family, but she so far demeaned herself as to accompany this Bergami to Catholic places of worship, and used there to kneel by the side of Bergami. I say the abandonment of religious feeling, and of those religious rites which ought to be observed by persons in all circumstances, and especially where you find that she demeans herself so far as to accompany this man, is an act of familiarity disgusting and degrading in itself—but I cannot help thinking that this is a strong confirmation and corroboration of the other facts] I have detailed to your lordships, and must satisfy your lordships that that disgraceful and illicit intercourse did take place between her majesty and Bergami on the various occasions I have stated.
Looking at the general nature of the case independent of the principal facts I have stated, let me ask your lordships if you can account for some of the facts that occur. They appear to me to defy all explanation: here is a man in the greatest poverty, never known by her majesty till received into her service: in a short month he is upon terms of the greatest familiarity, and not only is he upon those terms, but his family are surrounding her in every way; and when I state the family, let me call your lordships attention to the nature of her suite when she settles herself at Pesaro. Your lordships will find that there is Bergami, her grand chamberlain; there is his mother in her service filling no station in particular; his brother Louis advanced from a menial station; the sister the countess of Oldi advanced to a high station; another taken into her service, and dignified by the title of director of the palace; another relation of the name of Faustina; Martine is advanced to the office of house steward; together with the child of the name of Victorine: ten in number I think are received into her majesty's service and establishment, and are all surrounding her, and attending upon her person. I ask your lordships how you can account for this single fact, why this man should be decorated with honours and that he should have favours conferred upon him to the magnitude I have stated? I say, how can these facts be accounted for? It may be said, will your lordships from these facts draw an inference that an adulterous intercourse has been committed? No, my lords: taking the facts alone, I do not ask you to draw that inference; but when your
800
lordships find, In addition to those circumstances, that familiarities are constantly taking place between them, and when you find that at place after place arrangements of the rooms made in order to facilitate access between them—coupled with the other acts to which I have alluded, her conduct on board the polacre, and her conduct at various places to which I have pointed your lordships attention, I say those facts of themselves would have been sufficient; but the other facts, if proved, cannot leave any doubt upon your lordships minds of the disgraceful and degrading intercourse that has taken place between her majesty and Bergami.
"But how are those facts to be proved?" is asked in a triumphant tone. We have heard general slander heaped upon foreign witnesses: it will be said, how will these facts be proved? It has been asked who are the persons that will be called? What are their stations in society? My lords, look at the case. Persons of high character and station to prove the circumstances I have stated cannot be called. The case does not admit of such proof. They are acts committed by her majesty, in the retirement of her house, and surrounded by her domestics. A case like the present can only be proved by persons who filled menial and domestic offices—who attended upon her person at inns, and who had the opportunity of observing the bed-rooms and the state of the beds—it is only by witnesses of this description that facts can be proved. Generally speaking in cases of criminal conversation, it is impossible to have any other description of witnesses but such persons as are about the house, or who are upon the spot where the facts take place. But it is said, these are foreign witnesses"—look at her majesty's conduct—she dismisses all her English suite—she appears to be no longer an English princess—she surrounds herself with foreigners. Can those who advocate her cause consistently complain of us for calling foreign witnesses, Italians, when she herself has advanced an Italian to the highest situation in her service and whose family she considers as deserving of the greatest attentions? Yet her majesty is to say, do not call Italian witnesses to prove these facts. Your lordships are told that Italian witnesses are not to be believed, because they are foreigners. What does this hold out to the public—"Go abroad and carry on what kind of conduct you please—do as you like

801
—commit the most flagrant acts—acts of the most disgusting and most disgraceful nature—you can never be convicted in a court of English judicature, because I tell you beforehand, if the facts rest on their testimony, they will not be believed; they are branded with perjury and infamy. Go to Italy, and carry on what scenes you please—you may be as guilty as the meanest and vilest wretch that ever trod the earth—do what you please—you cannot be found guilty of the charges, because foreign witnesses alone can depose to them—you are quite safe, because the answer to it is, they are foreign witnesses, and therefore wholly destitute of belief." Will such an argument be received by your lordships, in such a case as this? It is, I admit, your duty to scrutinize, to weigh, and to examine with all the care you can the testimony which shall be adduced at your lordships bar; but I conjure your lordships to dismiss from your minds any prejudice which may have been endeavoured to be raised against foreign witnesses. Let us as Englishmen feel and value the honour and integrity of our countrymen above all others; but do not let us say we are so perfect that all others beside are unworthy of credit. Let it be recollected, that if it is by foreign witnesses that this case is to be proved, it is occasioned by her majesty's own conduct—it is occasioned by her making herself Italian, and taking about her person attendants of that nation. I am sure she will not willingly traduce the character of a person the most confidential in her service—her honoured and favoured Bergami—by saying, "you are of a nation that are utterly unworthy of credit, and you ought never to have been received into my suite at all." It is from her majesty's conduct that this difficulty arises: it is from her conduct that the facts which I have stated to your lordships can alone be proved by persons of that description.—But, suppose your lordships condemnation to extend to Italians, are persons of all nations to be condemned in the same way? are persons who have no interest in this inquiry not to be credited because they happen to be foreigners? I am satisfied no prejudice of that kind will weigh with your lordships, and notwithstanding the adroitness with which it has been put by my learned friend, when addressing your lordships on another subject, I am sure it will not operate on your lordships minds. It was said, with a triumphant
802
air by my learned friends, "we hope those persons whom you are going to call, are walking about in freedom; that they are under no control; that all those persons who are to give their testimony have liberty to go where they please," Would to God it could be so! but I only need call your lordships attention to some circumstances which have recently occurred, and ask, whether with safety to themselves they can have that loco-motion jestingly described by my learned friend, and which persons ought to have under those circumstances? It is not their fault that it is not so; and it is a disgrace to this country, that their situation is rendered at all hazardous. When once the manly English feelings are awakened, and the whole of the facts are before them in evidence, so as to enable them properly to judge of this case, I believe, notwithstanding the popular clamours, that all that feeling of irritation which has been excited will subside. It is upon the evidence alone that your lordships are to decide under the sacred obligations of honour; and I am satisfied that you will not be induced to prejudge the case, from any observations that may arise, from the situation in which many of the witnesses were placed, or from the services they performed whilst in her majesty's employ; still less that you will prejudge this case by coming to a conclusion that you cannot give credit to these witnesses. You must hear them—you must see how they comport themselves, and in what manner they give their evidence at your lordships bar. You will examine every circumstance accurately, that can tend to establish, or which may go to diminish, the credit of their testimony. I am satisfied, whether Catholic or Protestant, whatever departments they have filled, to whatever country they may belong—if your lordships are honestly and conscientiously satisfied that the facts I have detailed are true—I am satisfied, as every person in the country will be, that there is not one of your lordships, high in attainments, high in rank, high in honour, but will bring with him all the qualifications of a judge to this case; and according to the evidence, whether it tends to establish the innocence or to prove the guilt of the party interested—I am satisfied that your lordships will firmly, calmly, and impartially arrive at that conclusion which is consistent with the justice of the case.—My lords, I shall

803
now proceed to call the witnesses before your lordships, to establish the facts; and then that part of the duty which devolves upon me will be complete.
A considerable pause now ensued.
Lord Erskineobserved, that it might be expedient to come immediately to an understanding, with regard to the situation of the witnesses, after they should have delivered their testimony. It might be material to the ends of justice that they should be placed in a station of security, and be forthcoming, if, on a subsequent occasion, their presence should be found necessary.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that in accordance with the usual course of their proceedings, the witnesses might be questioned before their departure from the House as to where they were about to go. He agreed that they ought to be kept within call, and remain in attendance till the end of the cause; and therefore now moved, "That the witnseses do attend from day to day till further orders."
This motion was immediately carried.
Lord Kingexpressed a wish that the House should distinctly understand in what situation the witnesses would be placed, and that it should be known whether, on their coming to that bar, they would be liable upon the evidence which they gave to an indictment for perjury. Their lordships were now proceeding in a legislative capacity, but the King's attorney-general was employed to conduct the case brought under their consideration. This, it appeared, was done upon an order of the House itself. Undoubtedly their lordships might commit a witness for falsehood or prevarication, for the term of their own sitting; but as it was not improbable that they might have to revise parts of this proceeding, it was desirable to learn whether the witnesses would be in the same predicament as in a court of record.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that if the noble lord's question were put to his experience, he could make no answer; but on general principles he would state his opinion, that the witnesses might be prosecuted at law for perjury.
Lord Kingobserved, that his doubt arose from the circumstance of their now sitting, not in their judicial, but in a legislative capacity.
The Earl of Liverpoolremarked, that in his apprehension what might be done
804
in the case of an impeachment might also be done upon this occasion.
Lord Kingwas of opinion that this was a question of law, not of parliamentary privilege; but it might be doubted whether a prosecution could be commenced without the special order of the House.
Then Teodoro Majoochiwas called in.
Before he came to the bar, her majesty arrived, and was received in the usual manner, all the lords standing. The witness was now arrived. On being placed at the bar, his name was called out aloud, and the moment her majesty saw him, she exclaimed "Theodore! no! no!" rose from her seat, and hastily retired from the House, followed by lady Anne Hamilton.
Nicholas Dorier Marchese di Spineto was sworn as interpreter in support of the bill.
Mr. Broughamasked, whether he appeared by any order of the House, or at the instance of the party promoting the present bill? He wished to ascertain this point, because upon the answer which he received would depend his right to introduce an interpreter on the part of her majesty.
The Lord Chancellorthought there could be no objection to inquiring of the interpreter himself by whom he had been engaged to offer himself to the House in that capacity.
Mr. Broughamthen addressed the marchese Spineto, and asked, in whose employment he appeared there as an interpreter?—I received my instructions from Mr. Planta and Mr. Maule.
Mr. Brougham.—Do you mean Mr, Planta of the foreign office, and Mr. Maule, solicitor to the Treasury?—I do.
Mr. Brougham.—That, then, is quite. a sufficient reason for my desiring to have a second interpreter sworn. Though it may not, strictly speaking, be necessary at this moment, it may be more convenient to swear him immediately.
Binetto Cohen was accordingly sworn as interpreter, on the Old Testament, on behalf of the Queen.
Mr. Broughamthen stated, that the witness now called appearing by the name to come from Italy, and whom he therefore assumed to be a Catholic, was now about to be sworn at their lordships bar; now was therefore the time for him to urge any objection to the taking the oath. He desired, therefore, that he might be

805
asked whether he had undergone those preparations in this country, which he should prove by evidence were necessary to be undergone in his own country, before he could be sworn at all in any judicial proceedings; and without arguing the point, would leave it to their lordships decision.
The Counsel were informed, that there was no doubt, if the witness was sworn in the form that he thought necessary, to speak the truth before the House, and according to such forms as were observed in courts of justice, his evidence was receivable.
The Witness was then sworn, the oath being interpreted by the Marchese di Spineto.
Interpreter.—He swears he is here to tell the truth, and nothing else but the truth.
The witness was then examined as follows: by Mr. Solicitor General, through the interpretation of the marchese di Spineto.
Of what country are you a native? Of Pisterlango.
Is that in Italy? Yes; 12 miles distant from Lodi.
Do you know a person of the name of Per-gami? Yes.
When did you first know him? In the service of marshal Pino.
At what time did you first know him? It was in the years 1813 and 1814 when I entered into the service of general Pino. I knew him because he was in the same service, in the same suite.
Mr. Brougham.—Do you understand English? Nothing.
Do you understand it when you hear it spoken? I do not understand it.
Mr. Solicitor General.—In what situation was Pergami serving under general Pino? As valet de chambre.
In what situation were you serving at that time under general Pino? Rider, or postillion, or courier.
Do you know in what situation Pergami at that time was in point of his finances? I know him too well, because I was lodging in the house of Pergami, where I had hired a room.
The question which is asked is, what situation he was in, in point of funds or finances, at the time when he was in the service of general Pino? He was more poor than rich.
Do you know what wages he at that time received? At that time he was receiving three livres of Milan per day.
Do you know whether he possessed any property except the wages which he so received? No.
What do you mean by no; that you do not know the fact, or that he did not possess any
806
other property? I know nothing else, but that Pergami had but the three livres per day.
Did you leave the service of general Pino before Pergami-left that service? I did.
Into whose service did you enter after you left the service of general Pino? I went to Vienna, and entered into the service of his excellency the duke of Rocca Romani.
Did you afterwards enter into any service in the city of Naples? I entered into the stable service of Murat.
Was Murat at that time king of Naples? He was.
While you were so serving in Naples under Murat, did you see Bartolomo Pergami? I did see him.
When was it that you saw him there for the first time? When was it you first saw Pergami at Naples, while you were serving at Naples? At the house of a courier, who was called Bastinelli.
At what time did you see him; what Year? In 1814.
About what time in that Year? Before Christmas.
Where was it you then saw him the first time? In a room.
Where? In Naples.
In whose house? In the house of her royal highness the princess of Wales.
In what situation was Pergami at that time? Courier, and, it was said, also equerry.
Recollect, as nearly as you can, the precise time when you entered into the service? In the beginning of 1815, after Christmas holidays.
Answer, with as much accuracy as you are able, how long it was after the time you had first seen Pergami at Naples? I recollect so much, that before Christmas holidays Pergami told me that he would have made me a present.
You have told us, that at the commencement of the year you entered into the service of the princess; you have also told us you saw Pergami at Naples before that time: How long was it before you entered into the service of the princess that you first saw Pergami at Naples? A fortnight after, fifteen or twenty days after.
In what situation in the princess's service did you enter? Servant, livery servant, or lacquey.
By a Lord.—Did you wear a livery? I did.
Mr. Solicitor General.When you entered the service, did Pergami dine with the rest of the servants? There were two fables.
At which of those two tables did he dine? At the table of the upper servants, with M. Sicard, maitre d'hotel: Hieronimns; a waiting maid of the dame d'honneur, but I do not remember the name, being an English name; the valet of Dr. Holland, I remember nobody else.
Did any other person divide the duty of Pergami about the person of the princess? M. Hieronimus sometimes.

807
Did they take that duty by turns? By turns, amongst the upper servants of her royal highness.
Did any of those persons who took it by turns to attend upon her royal highness attend out of his turn? In the morning, when they carried the tray for the dejeuné, many times Hieronimus performed this service.
Can you describe the relative situations of the sleeping-room of Pergami and that of the princess? I remember them.
Describe them? From the room of the princess to that of Pergami there was a small corridor and a cabinet, and immediately on the left there was the bed-room of Bartolomo Pergami.
Then it is to be understood there was between the bed-room of the princess and the bed-room of Pergami nothing but that corridor, and that small cabinet? There was nothing else; one was obliged to pass through the corridor, from the corridor to the cabinet, and from the cabinet into the room of Pergami; there was nothing else.
On the other side-of the room of the princess, what room was there? The great saloon.
Did any person sleep in that cabinet in general? There was no person who slept in that cabinet; it was free; there was nobody sleeping in it.
Did the other people of the suite sleep in that part of the house, or at a distance? They were separated.
Do you remember Pergami meeting with an accident? I do remember it.
What was that accident, and when? A kick from a horse, when her royal highness went to the lake of Agnano, together with king Murat.
In consequence of that accident, did it become necessary to take him home? It did. Did you accompany him? I did not. Did you attend him? I did wait upon him. In consequence of this accident, was Pergami put to bed? He was obliged to be put to bed.
While you were attending him as you have described, did you see the princess? The first time that I saw her royal highness was in the presence of Dr. Holland, who was dressing his foot.
Did you give him any broth at any time? At the first I brought him vinegar.
Did you bring him any broth? Often. Do you remember at any time when you were giving broth to Pergami, any body coming into the room? I do not remember.
In consequence of this accident which Pergami met with, was any direction given to you as to where you yourself were to sleep? I do remember an order.
Where were you directed to sleep? On the sofa in the cabinet near the fire-place.
Is that the cabinet of which you have been speaking? It is.
How many nights did you sleep there? Five or six nights.
808
Did you, during the night-time, see any person pass through your room? I do remember seeing somebody passing.
Did you say there was a fire in the room? Always a fire.
Who was the person that passed through your room? Her royal highness.
Did she pass through from the corridor to Pergami's room in that direction? She did.
How many times did this happen during the five or six nights which you state yourself to have slept in this cabinet? Twice.
As nearly as you can recollect, at what time of the night on the first occasion? About half an hour past midnight, between twelve and half past twelve.
How long did she remain there as nearly as you can recollect? Ten or fifteen minutes. Describe the manner in which she passed through the cabinet, in what way she walked? Very softly; and when near to my bed stooped to see, and then passed on.
After the princess had entered the bedroom of Pergami, did you hear any conversation, or any thing else, pass between them? Only some whispers.
You have told us how long the princess remained the first night, can you state how long she remained the second time,? Between 15 and 18 minutes, some minutes more or less. Do you recollect having heard or observed any thing when the princess was in Pergami's room the second time? Whispering conversation.
Was there any garden attached to the house? There was a small garden attached to the cabinet where I was sleeping.
Was that garden open, or was it generally kept locked? For the most part locked.
What do you mean by "for the most part locked?" It was more often closed than open. Where was the key kept? By Pergami. Did the princess ever walk in that garden? I have never seen her.
About how long did the princess remain at Naples after you went into the service? About a month, or forty or forty-five days.
Did you go with the princess when she left Naples? I did accompany her royal highness.
Before the princess left Naples, and after you had entered into the service of the princess, did any of her English attendants quit her? There were some English of her suite that left her.
Who were they? I will state them. Tell us the gentlemen first, and then the ladies? M. Sicard.
What was he? Maitre d'hotel. Captain Hesse.
What was he? It was said that he was equerry.
Who else? The chaplain. What was his name? I do not remember the name.
Who else? A chamberlain; a tall man; but I do not remember how he was called.

809
Do you know whether his name was Gell? Yes, he was called Gell, with two small mustachios.
Was there any body else that you remember; do you remember Mr. Keppel Craven? I do not remember; it was an English name. Were there any other gentlemen that you remember to have left the suite of the princess at Naples? I do not remember, whatever I remember I will mention their names. Did any ladies quit the suite at Naples? A small lady, rather a thin, but I do not remember what was her name; lady, lady something, she was thin.
Do you remember lady Elizabeth Forbes? I do not remember.
After you quitted Naples, you say you went to Rome, to what place did you go from Rome? To Civita Vecchia.
At Civita Vecchia did you embark on board any vessel along with the princess? On board the Clorinde, a frigate.
To what place did you go from Civita Vecchia? We passed by Leghorn.
Did you stop at Leghorn? A little time we stopped at Leghorn.
Do you happen to recollect whether any of the attendants left at Leghorn? I do not re-member.
Where did you go to from Leghorn? To Genoa.
Did any person join the princess at Genoa? Captain Hownam.
Any body else? Lady Charlotte Campbell; a lady tall, rather fat, and two daughters; a handsome lady.
How long did the princess remain at Genoa? Forty or fifty days.
Where did she reside at Genoa? In a palace out of Genoa, towards the road that leads to Milan.
Do you remember whether the bed-room of the princess was near the bed-room of Pergami at Genoa? Between the room of Pergami and that of her royal highness there was a room in which they kept trunks, luggage, & c.
Did any person sleep in that room? There was nobody slept in that room.
In what way could you pass from the room of the princess to the room of Pergami? In coming out from the room of her royal highness, and passing through the room where the luggage was, there was an entrance to the room of Pergami?
Are you rightly understood, that you might pass from the room of the princess to the room of Pergami, directly through the cabinet where the luggage was deposited"? Yes I mean so.
Did you observe where Pergami breakfasted while you were at Genoa? I made observations.
Where did he breakfast? In a small room at the top of the grand saloon.
Did he breakfast alone, or did any person breakfast with him? He and the princess;
810
one morning I saw him and the princess take breakfast together in the small room.
Were you hired to wait upon Pergami or to wait upon the princess? To be at the service of her royal highness.
Did you in fact wait upon her royal highness, or did you wait upon Pergami? I waited both upon her royal highness and Pergami.
When you describe the princess to have breakfasted in this cabinet with Pergami, did any other person breakfast there? I saw nobody else.
Do you remember one night a courier of the name of Vinescati coming with a letter from Milan? I do not remember.
Do you remember at any time in the night knocking at the door of Pergami's bed-room, and endeavouring to wake him? I do remember.
Upon what occasion was that, for what purpose? It was in the night when Vinescati came, and I went to knock.
You say you knocked at night at the bed-room of Pergami, for what purpose was that? To call him up to tell him that there were people in the room.
What time in the night was this, to the best of your recollection? About one, or half past one.
Did Pergami make any answer? Pergami made me no answer.
Did you knock so loud that if Pergami had been there he must, in your judgment have heard you? He ought to have heard me; he must nave heard me.
Did the princess ride out in any way? She did ride sometimes.
Did she ever ride upon an ass? She sometimes rode upon a donkey.
Did you, upon those occasions, make any observations as to any thing that passed between the princess and Pergami? Yes.
State what passed at the time she was riding on an ass? He took her round her waist to put her upon the ass.
What else? He held her hand lest her R. H. should fall.
Did you make any other observation? I have made no other observation; they spoke; they discoursed.
Was Pergami like the other servants in the house, or did he appear to possess more authority than the rest? He had the more authority; higher authority.
Was there an apparent distance kept up between the princess and Pergami, or was there an apparant intimacy and friendship between them? Rather a familiarity.
Did Pergami continue to sleep in that room you have described during the whole time of the residence at Genoa? I do not remember.
To what place did you proceed when you left Genoa? To Milan.
Where did you reside at first at Milan? In the house of Carcuna, near the New-gate.
How long did you remain there? About' five or six days.

811
To what place did you go from that house? To the house of Boromeo, where there had been a tribunal of police.
Was it a house belonging to the family of Boromeo? It belonged to the family of Boromeo.
Do you remember, before you quitted Genoa, whether any of the relations of Pergami entered into the service of the princess? I remember.
Who were they? The sister of Bartolomo Pergami, who was called Faustina.
Was Faustina a married woman or single? She came without her husband; I do not know whether she was a spinster or married woman.
Whom else of the family did you observe? Lewis Pergami.
Any body else? The mother. Any body else? A child.
How was that child called? It was a strange name.
Was her name Victorina? It was.
How old was that child at that time? Between two and three years old.
Did the mother of that child come? No.
Are the persons whom you have now enumerated all of the family of Pergami, who went into the service at Genoa? I remember no others but these.
What situation did Lewis Pergami hold in the family? Courier.
Did the mother fill any office; had she any duly? She had none.
What was Faustina? At that time nothing.
You have told us that after the princess left the house at Milan near the New Gate, she went to the house called the Boromean; how were the sleeping apartments of Pergami and the Queen situate in that house? I remember them.
Were they near to each other or at a distance? They were separated only by a wall.
How were the doors of the two rooms? At first people entered into an anti-room. On the right slept Mr. William, and going straight forward one might enter the room of Pergami; the room of Pergami finished the house on this side.
You have told us that the apartment of the princess was separated from the apartment of Pergami only by a wall? Yes.
Was there a staircase or a landing-place near to these two rooms? There was.
Was there any door that went out of Per-gami's apartment on to that landing-place or staircase? There was a door that led on to this landing-place.
Was there also a door that went out of the princess's apartment to this same staircase? There was.
How far were these doors from each other? About seven or eight feet.
Mr. Broughamhere observed, that he trusted the solicitor-general would take care that no other witnesses remained
812
present while a witness was under examination. This was the practice in all other courts, and he had no doubt, from its propriety, would be adopted by their lordships.
The Solicitor Generalcould have no possible objection to the removal and separation of witnesses. He was not aware that any witness for the bill was present, except the one under examination.
The Lord Chancellorsaid the rule of course embraced all the witnesses, both for and against, always of course excepting those whose duty it was to remain present.
The Solicitor Generalsaid, that his only wish was, to have the practice respecting witnesses observed here as in other courts. He wished it to be strictly general. He put it, therefore, not alone in point of strict practice, but in candour to his learned friend (Mr. Brougham), to take care that his witnesses should be excluded.
Mr. Broughamreplied, most undoubtedly; he had no other wish than that the exclusion should be strictly general. All whom he knew he intended to call, he wished should be out of the House; of course he could not mean that the prohibition should extend to any of those whose duty it was to remain. There might be one or two whose duty it was to remain, that he might have hereafter to call.
The Solicitor Generalcommented on the expression used by his learned friend, "all whom he knew he intended to call," He submitted to his candour whether all should not remain out that there appeared the smallest probability of his calling.
Mr. Broughamssured his learned friend that he did not mean to speak equivocally; he meant to deal fairly and candidly, and his learned friend might safely leave the matter to his candour, as he had appealed to it. Of course it was quite impossible for him to know, at this moment, what witnesses it might be necessary for him to call. He could not tell, until his learned friend's case was closed, whether he should call any witnesses or not. If he only heard such witnesses as the present called, he certainly should not call any. [A laugh.] He again assured his learned friend that he meant to exclude his witnesses until the time arrived for their examination.
Mr. Solicitor-General.—You described, that the two apartments were separated from each other by a wall, and that there was a

813
door in each apartment opening on the same landing-place, these doors being distant about two yards from each other; was that a private staircase, or did the bed-rooms of other persons open upon that same landing-place? This was a secret staircase, which led also into a small apartment, but it was pot frequented; people did not frequent it.
Did any one sleep in that small apartment? The brother of Pergami.
Which brother? Louis Pergami.
Did the princess breakfast alone, or whom did she breakfast with during the time they were staying at this Boromean house? Sometimes she breakfasted with Pergami.
Did any other person breakfast with them? I have never seen any.
Did you wait upon them at breakfast? Sometimes I did; sometimes I did not.
When you did not, who did wait? Either Louis Pergami or a man of the name of Camera.
Who was Camera? The courier.
How long did the princess remain at Milan in the whole at that time? Between forty-five and fifty days.
During the time that she remained at Milan, did she take a tour to Venice? She did.
Before she went to Venice, had lady Charlotte Campbell joined her from Genoa? She had not.
Did lady Charlotte Campbell go from Genoa to Milan with her daughters? She did.
Did lady Charlotte Campbell go from Genoa to Milan with the princess? Yes.
In the same carriage at the same time, or did she follow her immediately afterwards? I do not remember.
How long did lady Charlotte Campbell remain at Milan? Four, five, or six days before her R. H. set out for Venice.
Did lady Charlotte go away accompanied by her two daughters? She took her two daughters with her, because her daughters were no more seen.
Had the princess then any English lady of honour left in her suite? I had not seen any.
Did any other person come; do you know a person of the name of the countess of Oldi?
Yes, I do know her.
How soon did she enter into the service of the princess after lady Charlotte Campbell went away? Two or three days after.
Was the countess Oldi any relation to Pergami? It was reported, it was said, that she was his sister.
Was that known in the house at first, or was it kept secret? It was secret, it was not known.
Did you know that the countess Oldi was sister to Pergami? I knew it.
Was it generally known at first in the house? After they saw her in the house, they began to say that she was the sister of Pergami.
How soon was that after she came? When they saw her at table, and when the whole of the family began to see her.
Where did you go to at Venice? The Gran Brettagna.
How long did you continue at that inn? Three or four days.
What other house did you go to from that? A house next by, belonging to a private individual.
Can you tell us the relative situation of the bed-rooms of the. princess and Pergami at that private house? I remember it.
Were they near to each other? One was here, and the other was here, next one another; there was only a great saloon between them; they were divided by the great salood.
Did the doors of both bed-rooms open into that saloon? They opened into the same saloon.
Did you see the princess either at Milan or at Venice walk out with Pergami? Both at Milan, and also at Venice.
In what manner did she walk with him, side by side, or did she lean upon his arm? Walking arm in arm.
Was this both at Milan and at Venice? Yes, it was at Milan and at Venice I saw that.
Was it in the day-time or in the evening? By night.
At what hour? Half past nine or ten, between nine and ten.
You have already stated that Pergami dined at the table you have described; did he at any time dine with the princess at her table? I have seen him.
When did you first observe that he dined with her royal highness? At Genoa.
Did he continue to dine with her after the first time he had dined with her at Genoa regularly? Always, as far as I recollect.
Where did she usually sit at the table when he dined with her royal highness? Her royal highness sat at the top of the table, he was sometimes on her right, and sometimes on her left, and sometimes opposite.
You have said that the first time he dined, with the princess was at Genoa; was the princess at Genoa more than once? I do not remember that.
You have told us that you went from Genoa, to Milan; did you go to Genoa at any subsequent time for the purpose of embarking on board a vessel?
Mr. Broughamobjected to this question. He could not think their lordships would permit his learned friend to make his own witness contradict himself. If the answer were given in one way, it. might contradict the preceding answer given by the witness. He must object to this way of pursuing an examination. If was, in fact, to put leading questions.
The Solicitor Generaldisclaimed any intention of putting what could with propriety be called a leading question.
The Lord Chancellor.What is the question you mean to put?
The Solicitor General.I shall put it in this way, my lord—whether the witness after he left Genoa ever returned there to embark for Venice?
Lord Erskinesaid, that though he thought a counsel might put one question to a witness which would have the effect of contradicting a preceding answer given by that witness, yet that such a question ought not, nor need not, be put in a leading shape.
Yes, I returned to Genoa to embark.
When you say that Pergami dined for the first time with the princess at Genoa, do you mean when the princess was at Genoa the first time, or when she returned to Genoa for the purpose of embarking in the manner you have described? The first time.
Where did you go from the Boromean house at Milan? The lake of Como, the Villa Villani.
How long did you remain there? About a month and a half.
You have described the room of the princess as being near that of Pergami, were the other rooms occupied by the persons of the household at a distance? They were.
How many rooms were there between the bed-room occupied by the princess and that occupied by Pergami? On one side there were two rooms, and on the other side there was nothing but a small passage.
By that do you mean to say, there were modes of passing from Pergami's bed-room to the princess's? There were.
One of which was through two rooms, and the other through a passage, is that so? Just so.
Did any persons sleep in the rooms you have described? There was nobody slept in those two rooms.
Did the other people of the court sleep in that part of the house, or in a different part of the house? They were separated from that part of the house?
Did you make the bed of Pergami at that time, or assist in making it? Yes, I did.
Did you observe whether that bed was slept in every night, or not? No.
Could you tell from your observation upon the bed, whether or not Pergami had always slept in it, or whether he had slept elsewhere? The bed had the appearance that he had net slept in it.
Did that happen at Villa Villani? It happened also somewhere else.
Did it happen often at Villa Villani? Yes.
Do you remember the princess at the Villa Villani wearing a blue silk bed gown, lined with red? I remember it.
Do you remember the princess giving that blue silk gown to Pergami? Yes.
After you had seen the princess wear that blue silk gown, did you see Pergami wear it? Yes, I remember it.
816
Often? He had always this dress upon him.
In the presence of the princess? Yes.
When you make use of the word always, do you mean always in the morning, or through the whole of the day? Every morning when he made his toilette.
At what time did the princess usually rise in the morning? Half-past ten, eleven, alfpast eleven.
When she rose, did she usually ring for her servant or call for her? Sometimes she called; sometimes she did not ring the bell; but for the most part she called.
Did Pergami rise at the same time, or before, or alter the princess? Sometimes he got up at the same time that her royal highness did; sometimes he got up a quarter of an hour later than her royal highness.
Where did the princess go to from the Villa Villani? The Villa d'Este.
How long had she staid at the Villa Villani before she went to the Villa d'Este? Forty-five or fifty days.
Do you happen to recollect the relative situations of the bed-rooms of the princess and of Pergami at the Villa d'Este? I do not remember, because it has been changed all anew.
When did that change take place? When the voyage to Egypt was undertaken.
How long did you remain at the Villa d'Este before you went upon this voyage? About two months.
On board what vessel did you embark upon this voyage at Genoa? A man of war.
The Leviathan? The Leviathan.
To what place did you go in the Leviathan? We went to Porto Ferrajo.
From Porto Ferrajo where did you go to next? To Palermo.
Did the princess go to court at Palermo? She did so.
By whom was she accompanied? I do not remember.
How long did she stay at Palermo? Twenty or twenty-five days; no more: I do not remember properly.
To what place did you go from Palermo? To the princess Bodari.
After you left Palermo, which place did you go to? Messina.
Did the princess take a house in Messina, or near Messina? Near Messina; in the neighbourhood.
Do you know the relative situations of the bedrooms of the princess and Pergami at Messina? I remember.
Were they near each other? Between the room of the princess and that of Pergami there was a room in which the dame d'honneur slept.
Who was that dame d'honneur? A sister of Pergami.
Did the other persons of the suite sleep in that part of the house or in another part? In another part of the house.

817
You hare told us, that the only room between the princess's room and Pergami's, was the room of the countess of Oldi; was there a communication through that room from the princess's room to Pergami's? No, it was necessary to pass through the room of the dame d'honneur.
Is it to be understood that there was an interior communication from the princess's room to Pergami's, through the room occupied by the dame d'honneur? By passing through the room where the dame d'honneur slept, one might pass from the room of Pergami to that of her royal highness.
Do you recollect Pergami breakfasting or eating with her in the morning at Messina? I do.
In what room was that? Beyond the room where her royal highness slept there was a cabinet which led into a garden, and in that-cabinet they took their breakfast.
Did they breakfast alone, or was there any other person with them in general? Alone.
Do you remember Pergami at Messina asking leave of the princess to go and make some purchases? I do.
Did the princess give him leave? She gave him leave.
Describe what took place when they parted from each other for that purpose? I saw Pergami, when the princess was going to take her breakfast come in and say, "Will your royal highness permit me to go to Messina to make some purchases;" and having had this leave, he took her hand and kissed her lips.
About how long did the princess remain at Messina? Twenty-five or twenty days, that is about the time; I cannot take upon myself to say precisely.
To what place did the princess proceed from Messina? To Syracuse.
Did she proceed by sea or by land? By sea.
Did she lodge at Syracuse, in the town of Syracuse, or in the neighbourhood? In the neighbourhood, out of the town.
Did the princess continue to live in the same house that she originally took at Syracuse? In the same country house.
Was it near the pier? About a gun-shot.
Describe the relative situations of the bedrooms of the princess and Pergami at that house you have now mentioned? Her royal highness slept in a room under, and he slept in a room above.
Mention whether there was a private staircase communicating from the one room to the other? There was a private staircase.
Did that staircase lead immediately from one room to the other? It did immediately.
Was there another entrance into the bedroom of the princess for the ordinary purpose of persons who waited upon her? The chamber occupied by her royal highness had another entrance, that led into the saloon where they dined.
Do you remember seeing Pergami, at any time before going to Syracuse, go into the
818
room of the princess, without being entirely dressed? I remember it.
The question was repeated at the request of her majesty's attorney general. Yes.
Mr. Solicitor General.—Where was this? If I do not mistake, I believe it to have been at the Caza Villani.
What part of his dress had he on? He had that morning gown on which her royal highness had given to him, with his stockings and his under small clothes or drawers.
Where did the princess go to from Syracuse? To Catania.
Can you describe the relative situation of the rooms of the princess and of Pergami at Catania? I can.
Were they near to each other, or distant? In a kind of court or yard a little smaller than this room, this house.
Was there any thing else except that court interposed between the bed-room of the princess and the bed-room of Pergami? There was nothing else but this court or yard.
Could any other person, after they were in bed, get into that court?. No, because there was a door which was locked.
Do you remember whether Pergami was taken ill at all at Genoa? I remember it.
State whether it was necessary that his bed should be warmed? It was.
Did you warm the bed yourself? I did.
Did you see the princess upon that occasion? I did.
Was the princess in the room before you went in, or did she come in afterwards? I was already in the room when her royal highness came.
How was Pergami sitting? Upon a bench or stool while I was making the bed.
Was any direction given to you as to the mode of warming of the bed? I received an order.
From whom? Her royal highness.
What did she tell you? To warm the bed; to make it neat, clean, and nice, or comfortable.
Did Pergami take any medicine upon that occasion? He did.
Who mixed the medicine for him? I do not remember.
How long did the princess remain in the room? During the time that the bed was warmed.
Was Pergami, at the time when he was silting on the side of the bed, entirely dressed, or partly undressed? He was not dressed; he was dressed in part.
Can you state to what extent he was dressed; what part of his dress he had on and what part of his dress he had off? He had this morning gown on, but I do not remember what other things he had on.
How long did the princess live at Catania? About a month and a half, I cannot remember the lime precisely.
To what place did she next go? To Augusta.
Did she go by land or by sea? By land.
Do you remember the situations of the bedrooms of the princess and Pergami at Augusta? I remember.
Can you describe them? There was a small yard or court into which led both the rooms of her royal highness and Pergami; from the room of one you would pass into the yard, and also the other.
After they were in bed, could any person get into that court? No, until they got up in the morning.
At Augusta did you embark on board any Vessel? We embarked on board a polacre.
Was that an Italian vessel? It was said that it was a Neapolitan polacre.
Where did you go in this vessel from Augusta? To Tunis in Barbary.
At Catania or Augusta, one of the two, did Pergami receive any title? It was at Catania
Was he ever called excellency? I remember his being called so.
Was that at Catania? At Catania he was called his excellency.
Did he wear any decoration? An order of the knighthood of Malta.
Do you know whether while he was in Sicily he received any other title? This I do not remember.
Do you know whether at any time he was ever called baron? I remember he was called a baron of the Franchina.
Did he receive that title first in Sicily? Yes he did.
Do you recollect where Pergami slept on board the vessel, the polacre? He slept in the cabin where they dined.
Was the princess's cabin adjoining to that cabin where they dined? It was near.
Did any other person sleep in that room where they dined? I do not recollect.
When the princess arrived at Tunis, where did she reside? At the English consul's.
Did she reside there during the whole time she was at Tunis, or did she change her abode? She changed her lodgings.
Where did she go to afterwards? The palace of the bey.
Do you remember the relative situation of the bed-rooms of the princess, and of Pergami, in the palace of the bey? I remember it.
Were the rooms near each other? They were a little distance.
What separated them? There was after the room of Pergami a little room, a small passage or corridor, then a large passage, in which there was nobody, and that large room led into the bed-room of the princess.
Did any body sleep in the small intermediate bed-room? No, because the small room was neither a bed-room, nor any other room, but a mere room of passage.
Did the rest of the suite sleep in that part of the building, or a different part of it? All in another part.
Did the princess go afterwards in that
820
vessel to Constantinople, and after some intermediate places to Scala Nuova? Yes.
Where did the princess's suite lodge at Scala Nuova, in what kind of building? They did not stop at Scala Nuova, but went to see the grotto of the Seven Sleeping Men.
How far is that from Scala Nuova? Half a day's journey.
Do you remember a place where there was a barrack? Yes, a cafle turque.
Where was that? A little before going to the grotto of the Seven Sleeping Men.
Did the suite of the princess take up their residence in that caffe or barrack during the night? Yes, they did.
Do you remember a vestibule and a small church surrounded by a wall near that spot? I remember it very well, or too well.
Where did the princess sleep the first night upon her arriving at that place? Under the caffé, or within the caffé, under things all made of boughs of trees
Do you remember while they were at that place, being sent for by Pergami, or the princess, to that vestibule inclosed in the wall which as been mentioned? I do.
Was the princess there at that time? She was.
Was Pergami also there? He also was present.
Was there any other person present? No one else.
Was it surrounded by a wall? It was surrounded by a wall.
Was the princess's travelling bed taken there? I carried it myself.
By whose direction? Both Pergami and her royal highness.
Did Pergami and her royal highness remain there together? Yes.
Had you prepared the dinner in any other place? I had carried it into the coffee house, and her royal highness and Pergami ordered me to carry the dinner within this place, surrounded by a wall.
Did they dine there by themselves? They were alone.
Where was the princess sitting? Sitting on the bed.
Where was Pergami sitting? On the ground, at the feet of her royal highness.
Did you wait upon them? I did.
After dinner was over, did they remain there? Yes.
Was any other person with them? There was no other person present.
Did the bed remain there? It did.
How long did they remain together in that place? An hour, or an hour and an half.
Where did they go to from Ephesus? To Scala Nuova.
Did they embark again on board the polacre? They did.
Where did they land? At St. Jean d'Acre.
Do you remember going from St. Jean d'Acre to a place called Aum? Yes, under the tent.
At AUM did all the servants of the princess's suite remain in the day-time under tents? They were under the tents.
Were they in the habit of travelling by day or by night? In the time of night.
And they went to sleep in the day-time? Yes, they slept during the day.
Under tents, in the manner you have described? Yes.
Do you remember the tent under which the princess slept? I do.
Was that among the other tents, or at a distance from them? It was at the distance of six or seven paces from the rest of the tents; there were three or four paces distance between them.
What, to the best of your recollection, was the distance between the tents occupied by the rest of the suite and that tent set a part for the princess? Five or six paces.
Under the princess's tent was there a bed? There was.
Was that the ordinary travelling bed of the princess? There was a little small travelling bed that her royal highness had ordered to be placed there, and there was a Turkish sofa.
Did this tent consist of one circle or of two? There were two tents one into another, a double circle.
You have told us there were a bed and a sofa in the inner tent, did you see the princess there and any person with her? There was Pergami.
In the inner tent where the bed and the sofa were? Yes, and sometimes the little child.
Were the bed and the sofa placed within the inner tent? They were within the interior lent.
Was that inner tent of a circular form? Both were in a circular form.
What distance was there between the inner circle and the outer one, as nearly as you can recollect? The length of my two arms.
Were Pergami and the princess there during the time that was allotted for sleep? During the time of rest.
Were the inner lent and the outer tent both closed? The inner tent was shut up by them, and the outer tent he might either close or leave it open as he chose.
When you say that the inner tent was shut up by them, by whom do you mean? Bartolomeo Pergami, because the tent was closed from the inside.
Did they remain there during the whole time that was allotted for sleep? Yes, they did.
Do you remember going from Aum to Ragusa? No.
Do you remember going from Aum to Jerusalem? Yes.
Did you slop between Aum and Jerusalem? Yes.
Did they encamp again in the same manner? They raised the same tents in the same way.
Did the princess and Pergami again sleep under the same tent? Under the same tent.
How many days were spent on this journey in which they were travelling with tents? About two days, or two days and a half.
After the return from Jerusalem, where did the princess again embark? At Jaffa.
On board the same vessel? Yes, the same vessel.
On the voyage to St. Jean d'Acre, had the princess slept below in the cabin? Yes.
Do you remember on her embarking at Jaffa, on her voyage home, any tent being raised on the deck? I do.
What beds were placed under that tent? A sofa.
Was there a bed besides a sofa? A travelling bed.
Of the princess's? A travelling bed of the princess's.
Did the princess sleep under that tent generally on the voyage from Jaffa home? She slept always under that tent during the whole voyage from Jaffa till the time she landed.
Did any body sleep under the same tent? Barlolomco Pergami. That was on the deck? Yes, on the deck. Did this take place every night? Every night.
Were they shut in; were the sides of the tent drawn in, so as to shut them entirely in? When they went to sleep the whole was enclosed, shut up.
Did they use a lanthorn or a lamp for the purpose of going to bed? They had a light. You have said there was a light used, what was usually done with that light? Sometimes, after I had made the beds, Bartolomso Pergami told me to take away the light, and I took it away; sometimes Pergami himself gave me the light out of the tent, by thrusting his hand between the lower extremity and the deck.
Where those beds regularly prepared every night? Every night.
Do you remember whether the princess bathed on board this vessel? I remember it. Where was the bath prepared? In the cabin of her royal highness.
Who assisted her at the bath? The first time I carried the water into the bath, and then Pergami came down and put his hand into the bath to see the temperature of the water; then he went up stairs and handed her royal highness down, after which the door was shut, and Pergami and her royal highness remained alone in the cabin.
Do you remember whether this bathing took place more than once? I remember that it has been move than once.
Do you remember, at any time, when the princess and Pergami were below in the room for the purpose of taking a bath, being called to supply any additional water? I do remember, two pails, one of hot and the other of cold water.
Do you remember who took that water in?

823
I went with the water as far as the door of the cabin, and then Pergami came half out of the door and took the water, and took it in.
Do you know whether, at the time when you took the water in this way, the princess was actually in the bath or not? I cannot know.
Where was the cabin that you slept in situated, with reference to the tent you have described on the deck; was it under it, or how? I slept in the dining-room, on a sofa.
Was that, or not, under the tent? It was immediately under the tent, below deck.
Did you ever, on any occasion at night, while the princess and Pergami were in the tent, hear any motion over you? I have heard a noise.
What did that noise resemble; what did it appear to you to be? The creaking of a bench.
Where did the princess land? At Capo d'Anza, in the pope's dominions.
Where did she go to from Capo d'Anza? I do not know, because I did not follow her.
Who went ashore at Capo d'Anza? The princess, the sister of Pergami, countess Oldi, Hownam, the Turk, the Moor, a man called Camera.
Who was the Turk; how was he called? One was called Salem, and another Soliman; but I think the turk was Soliman, and the other Salem.
Do you know a person of the name of Mahomet? Mahomet.
Where did he embark on board the vessel? At Jaffa.
Did Pergami go on shore at Terracina? He did.
Was that before the princess landed? Before.
For what purpose did he go? For the purpose of getting leave to land without performing quarantine.
Do you remember the princess and Pergami taking leave of each other at the time he landed at Terracina? I remember it too well.
What passed between them? I saw him, al the time of taking leave, kiss her royal highness.
Where were Pergami and the princess at that time? They were in the cabin where they dined.
Where did you again join the Princess? At the Villa d'Este.
How long did the princess and Pergami remain at the Villa d'Este before they again left it? About a month, I think.
How long did the princess and Pergami remain at the Villa d'Este before they again left it? I performed the Quarantine at Genoa forty days, and I arrived thirty-seven days after her royal highness had arrived, and I remained there one month.
What time was it that you got to the Villa d'Este? I do not remember.
Did the princess and Pergami, after you arrived at the Villa d'Este, go to a place called the Barona? They did.
How soon did they undertake that journey after your arrival at the Ville d'Este? A month.
Whose house was the Barona? I do not remember.
Do you know a place called the Villa Pergami? This I remember.
To whom docs that house belong? To Pergami now; he has bought it now.
Are the Villa Pergami and the Barona the same place? It is the same place. Before it was called Barona, and now they have changed the name, and it is called the Villa Pergami;
Do you know when Pergami became first possessed of that place? I remember that it was about the lime that they were in the house Villani; bull think that it was while they were in the Villa Villani that he bought this house.
Was this Villa Pergami, not the house but the estate about it, of considerable extent? There is land about it, and a species of rough house where they make cheese for the farmers; a farm-house.
How long did the Princess and Pergami remain in the Villa Pergami on that visit? About the lime of six weeks, a month and a half; afterwards they took the road to Bavaria.
Was that during the carnival? It was during the carnival.
Do you recollect the relative situations of the bed-rooms of the princess and Pergami at the Villa Pergami? I do remember.
Were they near to each other? They opened both on the same landing-place.
By crossing that landing-place was there a free communication between the one and the other? Yes, the landing-place was about a yard in length.
Was that separated from the other bedrooms of the house? From all the rest of the house.
Do you remember while the princess was at the Villa Pergami, any dances or balls being given there? I do remember.
Did that occur frequently? I remember twice.
How far was this from Milan? Two miles? What description of persons attended at those balls? Country people, peasants.
Did any of the nobility of Milan visit her during the time that the princess was living there? I do not remember it. Yes, at one time Bellcgardc went to pay his respects to her royal highness; then after that Saurau, his successor.
Was Saurau his successor? Yes, after Bellcgardc went away, Saurau came.
Did you accompany the princess on her journey into Bavaria, and into Germany? I did.
Do you remember how the apartments of the princess and Pergami were arranged in that journey, at the different inns through which they passed? I remember in Bavaria. At what place? At an inn, the Golden Stag at Munich.
How were they arranged at that place? The dining room separated the bed-room of her royal highness from that of Pergami.
Do you remember in the course of that journey, or any other journeys, the rooms being arranged by the master of the house before the princess arrived, and being afterwards changed? I remember it.
Do you remember, upon any occasion, in those journeys, the rooms being arranged for the respective parties before the arrival of the princess? I do remember.
Do you remember after such arrangements had been made upon the arrival of the princess and of Pergami any change in the arrangement being made? I do remember.
Can you slate whether that happened more than once, and at what places? I remember it to have happened in Bavaria.
At what place in Bavaria? At the Golden Stag at Munich.
By whose order was the change made? Her royal highness and Pergami.
How were the apartments originally arranged; were those of the princess and Pergami near or distant from each other? Distant.
Was the change afterwards made to the relative situation yon have before described? They were changed, and then Pergami said, this is the room where her royal highness is to sleep, and this is the room where I shall sleep.
You have stated the conversation which took place about the rooms in which Pergami was the speaker; was her royal highness present at the time? She was present.
Adjourned till to-morrow.