Sitting of 23 August 1820

Preamble
Immediately after prayers,
The Earl of Darlingtonrose, to call their lordships attention to a subject connected with the important business before them. In order to assist them in accomplishing the object they all had in view, which was the doing of ample justice, it was necessary they should have the means of forming a correct judgment on the evidence. It was therefore desirable that their lordships should have before them printed copies of the evidence taken from day to day. However difficult it might be to obtain this evidence, he thought it indispensable; for it might be necessary for their lordships to ask questions on many points, and he believed few possessed memories capable of retaining the great mass of evidence detailed before them for a length of time. For his part, he felt himself totally unable to keep the evidence in his mind, so as to avail himself, after a period, of it by recollection. The evidence given by the witness in support of the bill, on the first day, had made, he confessed, a very strong impression on his mind; but the cross-examina-
870
tion which took place yesterday [a cry of Order, order!] had tended very much to diminish that impression. He made this observation by way of illustration, to show the necessity of their having the evidence printed from day to day. After the counsel on each side had examined a witness, certain noble lords might wish to complete that examination by questions of their own. This could not well be done, unless they had before them, every morning, the evidence of the preceding day. It would probably be stated, that it would be difficult to get the evidence printed in this way: but this objection, he thought, could scarcely be made, when their lordships saw what was done by the newspapers. Very much to his astonishment, he had seen both yesterday and today, the whole of the evidence of the preceding day published at length. He could not be certain that the evidence was always thus given without the alteration of a single word; and it might be said that their lordships ought to have a vouched copy; but as so much was done in the newspapers, he thought there could be no difficulty in getting it detailed in the same manner for the use of the House. He would therefore move, that minutes of the evidence be printed for their lordships from day to day.
The Earl of Lauderdalesuggested the propriety of their lordships having before them plans of the places alluded to in the evidence. It would facilitate the investigation very much if the different parties would agree on a plan; or, if that could not be done, each might give in a plan.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that, however desirable it would be for their lordships to have on the table, every morning, printed copies of the proceedings of the preceding day, it would be necessary, before their lordships came to any resolution on the subject, to consider what steps mast be taken for accomplishing such a purpose. Unless they departed from their rule, that whatever was printed for the use of the House must be held to be correct on the responsibility of the clerk, he did not see how the printing could take place. With respect to the publications to which the noble lord had referred, it was easy to understand how persons who might obtain admission there, could, by retiring every half-hour in succession, be enabled to give an account of the proceedings. After all the experience lie had had in matters

871
of this kind, he doubted whether any utility which might be obtained from having the minutes printed from day to day would be a compensation for the departure from their lordships' rule.
The Earl of Darlington,in consequence of the objections to his motion, withdrew it. And the House being called over, the counsel were called in.
Then Teodoro Majoochi was again called in, and further cross-examined as follows by Mr. Brougham, through the interpretation of the Marchese di Spineto.
Do you recollect a German baron visiting the princess of Wales at Naples? I do not recollect.
Do you recollect a German baron visiting the princess of Wales at Genoa afterwards, on her way from Naples to Milan? I do not recollect.
Did any German baron visit the princess of Wales at the Villa Villani, during her residence there? There was a baron whom I think to be Russian, who twice paid his visits, but I do not know what name he had, and this is the same which was mentioned to me also yesterday.
Was the name of that person Ompteda or Omteda, or any name sounding like that? Precisely I cannot recollect the name by which he was called, for it was an extraordinary name, or unusual name.
Are you sure it was not baron Pampdor? I do not recollect.
Do you recollect that baron, whatever his name was, at the Villa Villani more than once? Once I remember; more I do not remember.
Had he not a servant with him, who used to live with the other servants of the house? I remember he had a servant, but whether he lived with the servants of her royal highness, I do not recollect.
Was there not a room in the house of her royal highness at the Villa Villani, which was called the baron's room, giving it the extravagant name whatever he had? I do not remember this.
Do you recollect a thunder storm upon the lake, in which her royal highness's party of pleasure was exceedingly wet? I do not remember this.
You have said that in the house at Naples, the rest of the suite of her royal highness except Pergami slept in another part of the house from her royal highness? I do not remember whether the other family slept separate or distant.
Do you now mean to say that the rest of the family of the suite, excepting Pergami, did not sleep at a distant and separate part of the house? I remember the position of the bedrooms of her royal highness and Pergami, but those of the family I do not recollect.
Then you do not recollect now, and you
872
will not swear now, that the rest of the suite of her royal highness did sleep apart, at a separate part of the house? I remember well where her royal highness and Pergami slept, but as to the rest of the family, I do not recollect where they slept.
Was not this question put to you the day before yesterday, "Did the other people of the suite sleep in that part of the house, or at a distance?" I remember the position where her royal highness slept.
Answer the question put to you, was not the following question put to you the day before yesterday, "Did the other people of the suite sleep in that part of the house, or at a distance?" Yes, it is true.
Did you not give to that question the following answer: "They were separated?" I said they were separated, but I meant that they were so situated that they could not communicate together; I meant to say, that they could not communicate together.
Did you mean by that, that there was no passage, no way by which a person could go from the room of her royal highness to the rooms of those others of the suite.
The Solicitor Generalon reference to the Minutes stated, that the former answer of the witness was, that they were separated.
Mr. Broughamstated, that the Italian word used by the witness was "lontano," which meant "far off."
The Solicitor Generalobjected to any interposition to alter the Minutes after they had been taken down by the short-hand-writer, and acquiesced as a correct translation.
The Interpreter was directed to be as precise as possible in his translation.
Do you mean to represent, that there was no way of going from the princess's room to the rooms of the rest of the suite, except by Pergami's? What I remember that I have seen no passage.
Do you mean to represent, that there was no way of getting from her royal highness's room to the rooms of the rest of the suite? I have seen no other, I have seen no passage.
No other passage than what passage? I have not seen any passage that led from the room of her royal highness to that of the family, I have seen no door except that which led into that of Pergami.
Do you know where the rest of the family in point of fact had their rooms? I do not remember that.
Will you swear that the rooms of Hieronimus and Dr. Holland and William Austin were not close by the room of her royal highness? This I do not recollect.
When you went from Vienna to Milan with your father, where did you lodge? At my house at home.
How did you support yourself? With my money.
How long did your own money last? I do not remember how long it lasted me.

873
Did any body give you any money there? I do not remember; when I left Vienna I received money, but after I had left Vienna nobody gave me money, for I must speak clearly or openly.
Did any body give you money at Milan, after you had got there? I remember that they did not.
How long did you remain at Milan at that time? Precisely I do not recollect, but I think I remained between the space of eighteen and twenty days.
When you had returned with your father to Vienna, did you not yourself pay for the vetturina who carried you back? Yes, I did pay the vetturina back.
Who gave you the money at Vienna before you set out from Milan? Colonel Brown.
At Vienna? Colonel Brown gave me the money to go to Vienna.
Who gave you the money at Vienna to go to Milan? My father paid for my journey; this I do not remember; but I know well that my father paid for my journey.
Who gave you money at Vienna before you set out?
The Solicitor Generalobjected to the question, as assuming that some person gave him money at Vienna.
The preceding questions and answers were read, and Mr. Brougham was directed to proceed.
Mr. Brougham.—Who gave you money at Vienna before you left it? My father paid the journey; nobody gave me money: my father paid me my journey, and I remember that nobody gave me money.
How soon after you got to Milan did any body give you money? Nobody gave me money when I arrived at Milan: when I arrived at Milan nobody gave me money.
While you remained at Milan did any body give you money? I remember not: I remember that nobody did: I do not know.
What is the answer you mean to give? I remember to have received no money when I arrived at Milan; I remember I did not:"non so;" I do not know: "piu no;" more no than yes:"non mi ricordo;" I do not remember.
Mr. Cohenbeing directed by their lordships to state whether he agreed in the interpretation given by the marchese di Spineto, stated that he did.
The Earl of Roseberysaid, that it was most essential that the House should understand what the meaning of non mi ricordo was; whether it was that the witness did not remember a certain event, or that he remembered that no such thing occurred.
Lord Longfordbegged that the last answer given by the witness should be repeated to him by the interpreter, from the short-hand writer's notes.
The Marquis of Lansdownthought the better course would be for their lordships to leave the questions as they stood upon the cross-examination; and afterwards, when the regular time came for their scrutiny, to put such questions as they pleased.
The Lord Chancellorstated, that the usual practice was, for the counsel to proceed in their examination, cross-examination, and re-examination, before their lordships interposed.
The Lord Chancellor.—Mr. Brougham, proceed with your cross-examination.
Mr. Brougham.—My lords, I have done with the witness. I have no farther questions to ask of him. In a common case I should certainly be satisfied with this examination. In this case I have certainly no reason to desire to ask him a single question further.
Re-examined by Mr. Solicitor General.
Did your father conduct you from Germany to Milan, for the purpose of your being examined as a witness with respect to the con-duct of the princess of Wales?
Mr. Broughamobjected to the question as leading.
Mr. Solicitor General.—Upon your arrival at Milan, to which place you say you were conducted by your father, were you examined as to your knowledge of the conduct of the princess of Wales during the time that you were in her royal highness's service? I was.
Had you any other business in Milan? No.
Where, after that examination was done, did you go to? To Vienna.
When you were at Milan, before you were about setting off on your journey to return to Vienna, do you recollect having received any money or not? Before my setting out from Milan, yes; before my departure.
For what purpose did you receive that money? To make my journey.
Did you receive any money before you received that money for the purpose of enabling you to make your journey? I do not remember.
What do you mean by "Non mi ricordo?" When I say "Non mi ricordo," I mean that I have not in my head to have received the money, for if I had received the money I would say yes; but I do not remember it now, but I do not recollect the contrary.
The Interpreter sworn on behalf of her majesty was informed by their lordships, that the House expected him to interpose whenever he apprehended, that the interpretation given by the other interpreter was not correct.
Mr. Solicitor General.—You have stated that after this examination you returned to

875
Vienna; who sent you to this country now? Colonel Brown; he sent me from Milan to Vienna.
Who sent you from Vienna to London at this time? This I cannot say, for a person came to fetch me and tell me to come from Vienna to London.
Did that person come with you? This person has conducted me to London.
After you had arrived in London, did you go over to Holland? Yes, I set out for Holland.
Did you remain in Holland with the other witnesses?
Mr. Broughamsubmitted, that if the rules of courts of justice were to be adhered to, as he understood they were to be in this case, the reexamination could only apply to points which arose out of the cross-examination, and his learned friend was proceeding into new matter. He made this observation merely for sake of regularity.
The Solicitor Generalsaid, that he was as anxious to preserve regularity as his learned friend, and maintained that he was quite regular, as he was proceeding to interrogate the witness with respect to his movements since his arrival in this country, the cross-examination having applied to the witness's journey, as well as to what happened to him in London.
Mr. Broughamdenied that he had put a single question with regard to the witness's journey to Holland, however he might have interrogated him as to his motions while resident in this country.
The Solicitor Generalargued, that his learned friend had put several questions to the witness with respect to what happened to him upon his journey, how he went from Vienna to Milan, how he went back, what became of him upon his arrival in London, palpably with a view to cast a doubt upon the character of his testimony, and to induce an inference, that he was delivering his evidence from some overruling, improper motive. He apprehended, therefore, that, to repel such an inference, he was entitled to examine the witness with regard to all his motions, from the time he left Milan up to the hour of his appearance at the bar. If it were otherwise, especially where the character of the witness was questioned, it would be in the power of a counsel to take up the evidence by piecemeal, to present garbled statements, and to give a false colouring to all the motives, circumstances and conduct of the witness. But the course for which he contended, was not only accord-
876
ing to the rules of law but of common sense, and was evidently necessary in order to elicit the truth.
Mr. Broughamhere offered himself to the attention of the House, and meeting some interruption from a cry of "Order,"
The Lord Chancellorsaid, "Mr. Brougham, you have the right of reply."
Mr. Broughamexpressed a hope that he would be allowed to exercise that right in the usual way of courts of justice, where an advocate was not interrupted by any cries of approbation or disapprobation from the judges. He repeated that he made his objection to the course of examination which his learned friend was pursuing, merely with a view to preserve regularity. It was his original-intention to have gone into every particular connected with the journey and movements of the witness, but from what had transpired this morning and yesterday, he felt such a proceeding unnecessary. If he had put any question to the witness which could warrant the course of re-examination proposed by his learned friend, it would be easy to point it out; and unless that could be done, he maintained that the question to which he had just objected was inadmissible. But if he did not forget himself as much as other persons appeared to have done in the course of this examination, he had never put any such question. He had not indeed said one word as to the witness's journey unless as to that from Vienna to Milan and back again. He had put no question as to the witness's journey from Vienna to London, or even as to his trip into Holland. Under these circumstances, he thought his learned friend could not consistently prosecute his proposed inquiry. Indeed, if his learned friend were allowed to do so, he saw nothing to prevent him from going back before the witness's journey from Vienna to Milan, as well as to other points which had not been touched in the cross-examination; nay, into the birth, parentage, and education of the witness. His motive for pressing this objection was, to guard against any irregularity in those proceedings.
The Lord Chancellorstated, that whatever difference there might be with respect to the rules of evidence in parliamentary proceedings, and the rules of evidence acted upon in courts below, he was influenced by a conviction that the nearer and closer their lordships kept to

877
the rules of law in the courts below, the better they would discharge the duty which they owed to all parties. That he was himself of opinion, in which the learned judges concurred, that this inquiry ought to go on.
The question was proposed to the witness? Yes.
Mr. Solicitor General.—To the best of your recollection, how long did you remain there? Twenty or twenty-five days; I do not precisely recollect.
Did you afterwards come over to this country with the same persons? No.
Did you come to this country with those persons with whom you were living in Holland? No.
Did you come over to this country with those persons with whom you were living in Holland? No, others had remained in Holland; I am not come with all.
If you did not come with all of them, did you come with some of them? With some of them.
Did you come in a vessel up to London? Yes.
Did you land with the same persons in the neighbourhood of this place? Yes, the same persons with whom I came from Holland have landed at the same dwelling where I am.
Is that near this court? Yes, it is.
Have you all remained there from that time to the present? Yes.
Have yon come from that place for the purpose of giving evidence here? Yes.
Have you all dined at the same table? Yes.
On board the Polacre, at the time when this tent was raised, were mademoiselle Demont and mademoiselle Brunette on board? I do not remember that.
Do you know mademoiselle Demont? I know her.
Was she on that voyage? Yes.
Did you see her from time to time? I saw her.
After the vessel left Jaffa, on the voyage back to Sicily? She followed the journey; the voyage.
And the countess Oldi also? Until her royal highness landed, the countess Oldi followed also.
Was the sleeping place of these women below deck?
Mr. Broughamobjected to the question.
Mr. Solicitor General.—Do you remember where the sleeping-place was; whether above or below the deck?
The counsel were informed, that it was the wish of the house that the counsel, on original and re-examination, would put their questions generally so as to avoid objection.
Mr. Solicitor General.—Was mademoiselle Brunette on board during the voyage? Yes.
With respect to the Villa d' Este, you have
878
told us there was a passage contiguous to the apartment of the princess; was. there any door at the extremity of this corridor? At the end of this corridor there was a wall on the left; there was a cabinet of her royal highness.
Do you remember whether, in going into that corridor, there was a door to close the corridor if necessary? Yes, there was a door which shut up the corridor; and when that door was shut there was no way of going into the room of her royal highness.
When that door was shut, so as to prevent persons from going into the room of her royal highness, did it prevent any person in the bed-room of Pergami from passing into the bed-room of her royal highness? When this door was shut, as far as I recollect, there was a passage by which people might pass from the room of Pergami to that of her royal highness.
You have stated, that besides the approach to the bed-room of Pergami at Naples, through the small cabinet in which you slept, there was a small door in that bed room of Pergami? In the cabinet there was a door which led into the room of Pergami.
Was there in the room of Pergami another door? Another door by which Pergami came himself.
Where did that door open to? I will go into the room of Pergami; I mount the stairs and turn to the left, I cross the room where her royal highness dined, and there was a small corridor, and on the left there was the-door of the room of Pergami.
Was that door near the dining-room in-which the princess and her suite dined? In the middle there was this small corridor.
Between the two, do you mean? Yes, between the two rooms; at one end of the dining-room there was this small corridor, and on the left there was the room of Pergami.
Was that the room where the princess and her suite dined, and where the servants attended? It was.
How long did you remain in the service of her royal highness? Three years.
Were you dismissed from the service of her royal highness, or did you go away of your own accord? I asked once for my dismission at Rome, and twice at Pesaro, and the second time Pergami granted it to me.
At the time when you left the service of her royal highness, did you receive from her royal highness any certificate of your good conduct? Yes; I had it not in the hand-writing of her royal highness, but there is her seal; Schia-vini wrote the paper.
Have you got that certificate about you?— The witness produced it.
The Marquis of Buckinghamsaid, it would be quite impossible for their lordships to understand the nature of the evidence given, with accuracy, unless they

879
were furnished by the counsel on both sides with some plan or plans of the apartments to which the evidence referred.
The Lord Chancellor.—The better way would be, for the counsel on each side to agree upon one plan for the information of your lordships. And if they do concur in delivering in such a plan, let it have no denomination of rooms; but let the apartments be marked 1, 2, 3, or 4. The plan should be produced to-morrow morning.
The Solicitor Generalstated, that the counsel in support of the bill were in possession of some plans, but that they were subject to the objection referred to by their lordships; but that copies should be prepared according to the intimation now made by their lordships.
Mr. Broughamsaid, that he felt great difficulty indeed in acceding to the production of a plan in this stage of the proceeding. When their lordships recollected that these plans must necessarily embrace descriptions of ships, palaces, houses, inns, and other places, in so many countries of Europe, they must at once be struck with the difficulty of compliance. The plans, even with the numerical arrangement, might lead to serious injustice. He must, indeed, be an uncommon framer of a plan, who could so arrange it as that it would not at once furnish the witnesses with the relative position of all the rooms they had to describe, and at once enable them to reconcile their evidence to the actual description. He begged to apprize their lordships that he meant to regulate his evidence principally, or at least a great deal upon the description of the houses given by the witnesses on the other side. Now, how could he do this with effect, if he were obliged, at the outset, to produce a full plan? The publication of the evidence, morning after morning, was not calculated to promote the justice of the case; but from the circumstance of so many of the witnesses being foreigners, the language of that publication was not understood by them, and consequently full information of what was passing was not received in such a quarter. But any man, whether he understood English or not, if he had eyes, must understand a plan. While the publication went on, and the language was not understood, the witnesses were nothing the wiser, but a plan at once put them in possession of all. There was an end at once, then to"non mi ricordo;" that vanished at once, and the tutelary saint of the plan settled
880
every thing. If the plan were indeed ordered to be drawn up from the description of the evidence as already given before their lordships, then he could have no objection to such an arrangement; but he could never consent to the circulation of such a plan as that called for, in the present stage of their proceedings.
The counsel were informed no plan could be delivered until it was sworn to be an accurate plan; that, supposing the plan to be accurate, the witnesses would have a right to look at it; but that it might be left to the counsel on one side to produce a plan, and prove it to be correct, and the counsel on the other side to object to it, if they were informed it was incorrect.
The Marchese di Spineto was directed to translate the paper delivered in by the witness.
Mr. Broughamstated, that he had not cross-examined as to the conduct of the witness while in the service of her royal highness, but that he was ready to admit he was considered as a good servant, particularly a good travelling servant, during the whole time he was in her royal highness's service, and therefore submitted that the reading of this paper was inapplicable and incorrect.
The Solicitor Generalsubmitted, that the course of the cross-examination had been to impute misconduct to the witness; that certain questions had intimated that he was to he considered as a member of a gang which attacked the house of her royal highness; that he afterwards applied to her royal highness to be taken into her service again, but that his services were refused.
Mr. Broughamwas heard in reply, and further stated, that it was not brought home to the knowledge of her royal highness, being written by Schiavini, who was not proved to be connected with her royal highness.
The Lord Chancellorstated, that there were two questions:—First, whether this was authenticated to be the act of the illustrious personage implicated in the inquiry:—Secondly, whether, if so authenticated, it could be received in evidence; that upon the latter question he did not understand there was any doubt in the minds of the learned judges, and there was none in his own; but that he did entertain a doubt whether it must not be proved that the person who put that seal had some authority to do so, before it could be read,
Mr. Solicitor General.—Do you remember Schiavini? I do.
What situation did he hold in the household of the princess when you left? Equerry maresciallo.
What do you mean by maresciallo? The person who commands.
Had he the general management of the house? To command; I do not remember.
Where was the princess at the time when Schiavini gave you this character?
Mr. Broughamobjected to the translation, as implying that it was a certificate of good character, whereas the contents were not at present before their lordships.
The Lord Chancellorstated, that if it was written by any person shown to have been authorised by her royal highness then it would be permitted to be read.
Mr. Solicitor General.—Can you say whether Schiavini had the general management and superintendance of the servants of the household? I do not know who commanded, for Pergami commanded, Schiavini commanded, both commanded; it was impossible for me to know which of the two commanded, who was the superior commander; Pergami came and commanded, Schiavini came and commanded; all commanded.
One of their lordships intimated, that the word servants had been translated 'Le Corte,' and the interpreter was asked whether that would include the personal attendants on her royal highness.
Marchese di Spineto.—It would include the whole of the establishment of a person of the rank of her royal highness.—This was acquiesced in by Mr. Cohen.
Mr. Solicitor General.—Who, at the time when you left the service, had the immediate superinlendance of the servants? This I do not remember.
Did you apply to Schiavini to give you this paper?
Mr. Broughamobjected to this question as irrelevant; for the proof of the application to Schiavini, or even of this paper having been written by that person as major domo to the princess, could answer no purpose whatever in this case, unless it appeared to have been authenticated by the princess.
The Lord Chancellorintimated, that applications to Schiavini, unless the evidence should be carried farther, would be useless; that the counsel who offered it must at all events prove that Schiavini was in the habit of giving similar testimonials to other servants.
The Solicitor General withdrew the question, stating that be was not able at present to carry it further.
Examined by the Lords.
Lord Auckland.—You state, that in the voyage from the East to Terracina, there were tents put on the deck of the vessel: what sort of weather had you? I do not remember.
Lord Ellenborough.—How was her royal highness dressed when she passed through the cabinet to Pergami's room at Naples? I do not remember.
Earl Grey.—Did you see her royal highness distinctly on that occasion? Yes.
But you do not know how she was dressed? I do not remember what dress she had.
Were you yourself in bed? Yes.
You were understood to say that her royal highness went and looked at you? Yes.
Did you pretend to be asleep at that time? As I am now asleep.
Interpreter.—He means that he was awake.
Earl Grey.—Did you pretend to be asleep? Yes, I feigned to be asleep.
Did you shut your eyes? Yes, a half: by shutting the eyes no one can see a person.
You shut them just enough to make her royal highness think you were asleep, but not enough to prevent you seeing her? Yes.
You stated that you left general Pino's service at the blockade of Mantua? From the blockade of Mantua; that is, before shutting the gates of Mantua.
Did you leave general Pino's service voluntarily, or were you dismissed? I remember to have asked my dismission from the adjutant Lunard, and he told me he could not grant me my discharge until general Pino returned from Milan.
What did you do in consequence of that order? I continued to remain in his service.
Did you remain till the return of general Pino? I did.
On his return, did general Pino give you your dismission? The adjutant came and told me I was now at liberty.
Did you get a certificate of service from general Pino? No; because I did not even ask for it.
Where did you go immediately from the service of general. Pino? To Milan, to my family.
How long did you remain at Milan? I do not remember the time.
Did you remain out of service while you were at Milan? Out of service.
How did you maintain yourself during that time? In getting some money by buying and selling horses; in making horses to be bought and horses to be sold.
When did you leave Milan? I do not remember when I left Milan.
Where did you go when you left Milan? To Vienna, during the time of the congress.
How did you go to Vienna? I had a horse of my own, and with two of my companions, we put some money together, and bought a small species of small cart, and we travelled together.
What was your object in going to Vienna? To see whether I could find some place to get a mouthful of bread: to get my bread.
Lord Darnley.—You state that Pergami was in the habit of dining with her royal highness, having commenced at Genoa, and con-

883
tinued always afterwards; you have also stated, that lady Charlotte Campbell joined her royal highness at Milan: Did lady Charlotte Campbell ever dine with her royal highness at the same table with Pergami? This I do not recollect.
Marquis of Buckingham.—You have stated, that when on board the polacre you saw Pergami hand down the princess to the place prepared for the bath? I did.
Did you see Pergami and the princess enter the cabinet in which the bath was prepared? I did.
You have stated that you handed down two buckets of water to Pergami for the bath, and that Pergami received them? I carried two pails of water to the door of the bath, and Pergami came out and took one of the pails; I do not know whether it was hot or cold.
Did you see the princess when Pergami took the pails from you? No; because she was within, and I did not see her.
You say there was another cabinet within the dining-room besides that provided for the bath? I do not remember whether there was another cabinet.
Then the following Questions put to the Witness, and his Answers to the same, were read from the Minutes of yesterday:
"Was not the bath taken always, when taken, in the dining-room itself? Not in the dining room, but in the room next to it.
"What do you mean by the room next to it? A small room.
"What do you mean by the other small room, where was that placed? Another small room that was on one side.
"Do you mean, that after you entered from the fore part of the vessel, where every body slept, into the dining-room, that within the dining-room there was another small room entering into it? As soon as you enter the dining-room there was a small room where the princess took the bath."
Was there another small room within the dining-room besides that used for the bath? I do not remember.
When the princess and Pergami descended to go into the place destined for the bath, did you see the countess Oldi? I did not see her.
Did you see any of the female attendants of the princess? I did not see any.
Did you see any of the female attendants of the princess on that occasion on the deck of the vessel above, when they descended below? I did not see any myself.
Earl of Carnarvon.—You have mentioned a tent having been erected upon the deck of the polacre; was that a double tent? I do not remember whether there was one or two, but I know well there was this tent where her royal highness was.
Did that tent cover the whole deck, or was there room to pass by the side of it? There was room for people to pass.
Do you know whether any person slept in
884
that space left? I do not remember I had seen any person.
Marquis of Buckingham.—At what time of the day was this bath taken on board the polacre, morning or evening? About noon; somewhat before dinner.
Was Pergami dressed or undressed when he received the buckets of water from you? He was dressed.
Lord Falmouth.—You have stated, that at the Villa Villani you remember the princess to have given a blue silk gown to Pergami? Yes, a blue silk gown.
How do you know that the princess gave Pergami that blue silk gown? Because I saw it afterwards upon the back of Pergami.
The former question was, "Do you remember the princess giving that blue silk gown to Pergami?" and the answer was, "Yes." How do you know the fact that it was given to him by her royal highness herself? Because he told me that her royal highness had given him this dress; he, he himself told me so.
Earl of Oxford.—You have said, that you saw the princess and Pergami in the cabinet on board the polacre, but that you did not see the princess when you brought in the water; when was it you saw the princess in the cabinet? When the bath was ready he went up stairs, took her royal highness, brought her down into the room, and shut the door.
Lord Duncan.—To a question put, "Do you know whether, at the time you took the water, the princess was actually in the bath, or not?" you have stated, "That you cannot know." To another question, "Whether the female attendants were upon the deck?" you have answered, "That you did not see them." Can you swear that none of her female attendants were at that moment in the bath-room with the princess? Yes, I can swear to having seen nobody go into the bath-room of her royal highness.
Were you actually in the room, or merely at the outside of the door of the cabinet, or the door of the inner room? I was at the door when Pergami went up stairs to tell her royal highness that the bath was ready; when they came down, Pergami told me, "Be at the door, for if there be any need of water you shall give it to me."
At which door was it, at the outer door or the inner door, that the two pails of water were given? At the door of the bath-room itself.
Earl Grey.—Could you, in the position in which you stood at the door of the bath-room, see every body that was in that room? When it was open I could, but when it was shut I could not.
Will you swear there was nobody in that bath-room except the princess and Pergami? I can swear, and I do swear, that there was no other when Pergami and her royal highness came into the room, because I put myself at the door.
Do you mean positively to swear, that you

885
saw nobody else go into that room, or that nobody else could be in that room without your knowledge? I have seen no other but her royal highness and Pergami.
Was it possible for any other person to be in that room without your seeing them? No, that cannot be, for if there had been another person, I should have seen her, and I swear it.
Lord Auckland.—Did you remain in the outer room during the whole time that the princess and Pergami were in the inner room? At the door with the two pails of water.
Lord Chancellor.—You have stated (vide p. 26 of the printed Minutes), being asked where the bath was prepared, that it was prepared in the cabinet of her royal highness; you were asked who assisted at the bath, and you said, "the first time I carried the water into the bath, and then Bartolomeo 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 Bartolomeo Pergami and her royal highness remained alone in the cabin," was there any person in the room in which the bath was when Pergami went up stairs to bring the princess down? There was nobody, I saw nobody.
Was there any person in that room when he brought the princess down? No.
Or when the door was shut? No.
Earl Grosvenor.—Was there any other door by which persons could go into the room where the bath was placed? I had not seen any other door.
Was there or was there not? I had not seen, if there was any other.
Will you swear there was no other? I have not seen, and I swear that, because I have not seen any door but that.
Lord Chancellor.—If there was any other door into the room where the bath was prepared, must you have seen it? If there had been another door I must have seen it; but I have seen no other door.
Lord Auckland.—Did you see the princess and Pergami quit the bath-room? No, but I have seen Pergami come out of the room to go on deck; to call the maid to come down and dress her royal highness, and I have heard, with my own ears, when he said, "mademoiselle Demont, come down to dress her royal highness."
Leaving her royal highness by herself in the bath-room? Alone in the bath-room.
What was your position when Pergami left the bath-room? I was still there with the hot water, because I thought that they still might need the hot water.
Could you at that time see into the bathroom? When Pergami went out, he went out sideways, and immediately shut to the door.
How long had Pergami and the princess been in the room before Pergami went to call the maid? About half-an-hour.
Marquis of Huntly.—Was Pergami, on retiring from the bath-room, dressed in the same
886
way as when he handed the princess in? He was.
Earl Grey.—Did you remain with the warm water at the door of the bath-room, when Pergami went to call the maid to dress the princess? I remained there till he told me to go away.
When did he tell you to go away? When he went up to call mademoiselle Demont, he told me, now no more water is wanted.
Did you go away immediately, or did you wait till mademoiselle Demont came down stairs? Pergami remained up, mademoiselle Demont came immediately down, and I took my pails and went away; and I saw mademoiselle Demont alone enter the bath-room.
Do you know how long the princess remained in the bath-room, after mademoiselle Demont went to her? I cannot know it because I went away about my business.
When mademoiselle Demont came down, Pergami did not come with her? No; I saw only mademoiselle Demont.
Lord Anson.—In page 26 of the printed evidence, there is this question' "Do you re-member 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," to which you answer, "I do remember, two pails, one of hot and the other of cold water;" upon receiving those orders, did you go any where to gel that water, in order to have it ready at the time that Pergami might call for it? No, I went no where, because there was a sailor who gave me the water at the door of the dining-room.
Then you received the water at the door of the dining-room, not the door of the bathroom? '1 he sailor came as far as the door of the dining-room, and brought the two pails, and I took these two pails and carried them to the door of the room where the bath was.
Did you receive the pails in the dining-room, or did you go to the outside of the dining-room door, to take those two pails? At the door of the dining-room; I did not go out of the room.
How did the sailor know that this water was likely to be wanted, on Pergami desiring you to have it ready? Because the sailor had got ready the bath in the room, and it was said her royal highness was going to take the bath.
Lord Darnley.—You stated, that a tent was placed on the deck of the polacre; what was the nature of that tent; was it that commonly called tent, or merely an awning? It was a tent which was spread on the deck by the means of a rope, and then in the evening it was closed as a pavilion, as a closed tent, it was closed all round; in the evening this tent was let down and was closed all round; and they said, "Stop it well, stop it all round, see that there be no hole, no opening."
Was it single canvas? Sometimes it was a single tent, sometimes other pieces of canvas were put round to stop the openings.
Earl Grosvenor.—By whom were yon recommended to the service of her royal highness? By Bartolomeo Pergami; that I remember.
Earl Grey.—Do you know that the princess was in the bath before Pergami left the bathroom to call mademoiselle Demont? This I cannot know, whether she was in the bath, because I did not see into the bath-room.
Marquis of Lansdown.—You have stated, that when you were at Home you asked for your discharge, but did not obtain it; and that afterwards at Pesaro you asked for your discharge, and did obtain it. What was your motive for wishing to be discharged from her royal highness's service? Because her royal highness was surrounded by bad people.
Earl of Carnarvon.—How was her royal highness dressed when she went into the bath-room with Pergami? As far as this goes I do not remember.
Was it an ordinary dress, or a bathing dress? This I do not remember precisely either, what dress she had.
What was thesize of the bath-room? Perhaps from here to the first bench (from 6 to 7 feet); a small room.
What furniture was there in that room? I remember that there was a sofa bed, or sofa,? where in the morning we placed the cushions when we opened the tent.
Marquis of Lansdown.—You have stated, in answer to a question put to you just now, that you asked to quit, and actually did quit her royal highness's service at Pesaro, because you conceived a bad opinion of the persons about her royal highness; if that was your motive, what was your motive for making the application afterwards, which you have stated you did make, to be restored to her royal highness's service. Had you then altered your opinion of the persons by whom her royal highness was surrounded? I applied to Schiavini, in a kind of conversation, whether it might be possible to enter again into the service of her royal highness thus, in a playful way.
Did you then mean nothing that was serious by making the application to be received again into the service of her royal highness? No, as people do in common conversation; would it not be again possible to enter into the service of the princess; and I was in service at that time.
Lord Falmouth.—You have stated, in page 26, in answer to this question, "Do you know, whether, at the time you took the water in this way the princess was actually in the bath or not?" "I cannot know." You have just now said, that when you took in the two pails of water that Pergami received into the bathroom, if there had been anybody there besides Pergami you must have seen them; how is it that you reconcile this apparent inconsistency, that, when you could not see whether the princess was in the bath or not, you could sec whether there was any other person in the room besides Fergami?
Some discussion arising whether there was a contradiction in the evidence, the question was withdrawn.
Lord De Dunstanville.—You have said that in the journey from St. Jean d'Acre to Jerusalem you and Carlo or Carlino sometimes slept between the outer and the inner tent. Can you recollect how often you so slept? I remember twice.
Do you remember at either of those times to have heard any conversation, or anything that induced you to believe that there were two persons in the inner tent? Yes.
Could you distinguish whose the voices were? I could not distinguish the voice; but I heard whispers.
Could you understand of what persons the voices were, whether male or female? I heard two voices speak by whispering, but I could not make out whether they were women's voices or men's voices.
Mr. Brougham requested permission to suggest a question, to be put by their lordships to the witness.
The counsel were informed that they might propose any questions to their lordships.
Mr. Brougham proposed the following questions, which were put by their lordships.
You have stated, that you were in place at the time the conversation passed between you and Schiavini about being taken back, what were your wages at that time? I was in the service of the marchese Erba Odescalchi.
Did you or did you not make repeated applications to Hieronimus also to be taken back into her royal highness's service? This I do not remember.
Did you or not also make application five or six times to Camera to be taken back into her royal highness's service? Softly on this point. The first or second time that Camera arrived at Milan, Camera sent his son for me, and Camera told me, and I remember it as well as if it was now,—Teodore Majoochi, do not enter into any service, because her royal highness wishes to take you back, and I shall pay you. This conversation must be put down, such as it is, and I beg to be allowed to speak. Camera told me—Teodore, give me back the certificate of your good service, give me back such paper, and I will tell to her royal highness that you have not taken a further engagement —' that you have not been in any further service, and she will pay you for the whole time you have been out of service—all the time you have been out of service, and all the damages or losses you have suffered; and I told Camera —Camera, give me back my paper; because I had already given him my paper, because rather than go to serve her royal highness on account of the persons that are about her, I will go and eat grass.
Was this conversation with young Camera or with old Camera? With Camera the father.

889
Did you or did you not, ever make application at any other time to Camera, to be taken back into her royal highness's service? No.
Do you know whether Camera was examined at Milan? Of this I know nothing.
Earl of Lauderdale.—Was this conversation you had with Camera at Milan, before you went to Vienna, or subsequent to your return? Before I went to Vienna.
The witness was directed to withdraw.
Gaelano Palurzo was called in, and the following questions proposed through the interpretation of the marchese di Spineto:
Mr. Denman.—What religion are you of? A Roman Catholic.
When did you last take the sacrament of the Lord's Supper?
The counsel were informed that the question was not usual.
Mr. Denman stated, that he should be able to show that, in the opinion of Catholics, an oath was not binding, unless taken soon after confession, and the Lord's Supper being taken.
The counsel were informed, that in the opinion of the House the oath would be binding; and their lordships directed that it should be administered.
The witness was sworn.
Examined by Mr. Attorney General, through the interpretation of the marchese di Spineto.
What countryman are you? A native of Naples.
What is your occupation? Captain of a merchant vessel.
Are you part owner of the vessel which you command? I am.
What share? One fourth.
In the month of April 1810, were you mate of a ship then commanded by a person of the name of Gargiulo? I was.
What was the size of that vessel? Above three hundred tons.
Do you remember the princess of Wales coming on board that ship at Augusta in Sicily? I do.
To what place did the vessel sail from Augusta with the princess on board? Directly to Girgenti: at Girgenti we had not sufficient water for the ship, and we sailed to Tunis.
Do you remember the names of the persons who accompanied her royal highness on that occasion? Almost all.
Mention the names of those whom you recollect? A certain Bartolomeo Pergami, a count Schiavini, a certain William Austin, a certain Camera, Teodoro, Carlino, a cook named Francis.
Any females? Yes.
Who? The countess Oldi, I believe, but I do not remember quite well; the dame d'honneur, two chambermaids, one of whom was called Dumont, the other was called Brunette, and a little child, called Victorine.
When you first sailed from Augusta to Tunis, do you know the situation of the cabins appropriated for the princess's and the countess Old's sleeping rooms? The real cabin of the ship was divided into two; on the right hand there was the bed of her royal highness on the left, that of the countess.
Outside those cabins, was there the dining cabin? There was.
Do you know where, at that time, Pergami's cabin was? I do.
Where was it? In the first cabin, on the right hand, immediately after the dining-room.
Interpreter. —I cannot make out whether it was immediately after, on a straight line, or on one of the sides.
The question was proposed to the witness.
The whole size of the ship almost was divided into three parts, not quite equal; the two lateral parts were divided into small cabins; one of those small cabins, that properly which was most near to the poop, and was near to the dining-room, was that appropriated to Pergami.
Did the dining-room extend the whole breadth of the ship?
Mr. Denman objected to the question as leading, and submitted that the witness should be directed to describe the situations of the rooms.
The Attorney General was heard in support of the question.
The Attorney General was informed by their lordships that he might put the question, did the dining-room, or did it not, extend the whole breadth of the ship? or that it might be preferable to ask. How much of the breadth of the ship did the dining-room occupy?
The question as thus modelled was proposed.
The whole breadth.
After you left Tunis, did Pergami continue to sleep in the cabin in which he had slept upon his voyage to that place, or did he sleep in any other part of the vessel?
Mr. Denman objected to this question, as assuming that they did leave Tunis.
Mr. Attorney General.—After you had been at Tunis did you sail from thence to any other place? We sailed for Malta.
After you left Tunis, did Pergami continue to sleep in the cabin he had first occupied, or did he sleep in any other part of the vessel? His bed was removed into the dining-room, and most specially, or properly, or particularly, on the right hand of the dining-room.
Interpreter.—I have translated that word in several ways; I cannot give the proper meaning of the word in one word; I should translate it, "more particularly on the right hand," or "to speak more correctly, on the right hand."
Mr. Attorney General.—Was the right hand side of the dining cabin nearer or farther from the princess's room than the left hand

891
side of that cabin? As the chamber of the princess was on the right hand side, it was more near, because they were both on the same side.
Where about was the door leading into the princess's bed-room? The room of the princess had a door which led into the dining-room, and then it had another door of communication with the chamber of the dame d'honneur.
Was that communication with the chamber of the dame d'honneur from within the princess's room? Yes; the cabin was divided into two chambers, as we have said, one for the princess and the other for the dame d'honneur, by a painted canvas; before reaching the end of this canvas, at the boards or partition which divided the ship, there was a door of communication.
When Pergami's bed was removed into the dining-room, how far was it from the door of the princess's bedroom? The room of the princess had a wooden partition which divided it from the rest of the ship; on the opposite side was the poop of the ship; near to the canvas on the left hand was the bed of the princess; nearly in the middle of this partition there was a door which led from the room of the princess into the dining-room; on the right hand in this dining-room, at a proper distance, was situated the bed of Pergami.
If the door you have mentioned was open, could a person in the princess's bed see Pergami's bed? Why not, according to the division which was made; in whatever situation a person was in this bed of Pergami's, he could not help seeing the bed of the princess when the door was open, the situation of the bed was such that they could not help seeing both together, but a person might stand up in the bed in such a position that he might not see the bed of the princess; if he stood upright he might put himself into a situation not to see the bed of the princess, but a person in the bed of Pergami might see the bed of the princess because they were in the same line.
You have stated, that the body of the ship was divided into three divisions; on each side were cabins, a passage in the middle terminating in the dining-room; in going from that passage into the dining-room, how many doors were there leading into that dining-room? There were two doors.
After the ship sailed from Tunis, was one of those doors closed? Yes, one was closed; it was nailed up.
After that, was there one entrance or two from the dining-room into that passage? One outer door.
Where did you go from Tunis? To Malta.
From Malta where? To the Archipelago, and the island of Milo.
Did you afterwards go to St. Jean d'Acre? After much voyage, we went to St. Jean d'Acre,
Where did the princess go from St. Jean d'Acre? To Jerusalem, to visit the holy places.
892
Did you accompany the princess on that visit to Jerusalem? I went in her company.
During that journey, did you travel by night or by day? We travelled the whole of the night and part of the day; but during the other part of the day, when it was very hot, we rested.
When you rested by day, were any tents erected? Not always, for at Nazareth we lodged at a private house; but when we left Nazareth, until another convent at a little distance from Jerusalem, we rested in tents.
In what tent did Pergami rest? Where the tents were raised, we dined also; and in one of those tents was the princess; and in this tent was immediately placed an iron travelling bed; and upon a piece of matting, like that in this House, was put another bed; then they there dined, with the countess Oldi, and Austin, and Pergami; and then I saw nothing else, because I went to dine myself.
Do you know who slept in that tent? For the princess I know, because it was the tent of the princess; but as far as the others are Concerned I do not know, for I went to rest myself.
Do you know where Pergami slept?
Mr. Denman objected to this question, the witness having stated, that he was in a situation in which he was disqualified from knowing where Pergami slept.
The Attorney-General was heard in support of the question.
The counsel were informed, that in the opinion of their lordships that question might be asked.
Mr. Attorney General.—Do you know where Pergami reposed during the time these tents were erected? I positively cannot know where they slept, because I left them and went to dinner.
Mr. Denman interposed, and desired that no more might be interpreted; stating, that in the further part of the answer the witness stated his imagination.
The Attorney-General objected to the interpreter being interrupted while giving the answer of the witness.
The counsel were informed, that it was the desire of their lordships that the interpreter might not be interrupted in giving the answer of the witness, that the House might judge of its application to the question.
Mr. Brougham submitted, that their lordships might ask the interpreter, whether it was or not, an answer.
The counsel were informed, that the interpreter being sworn to give the answer, their lordships must hear it as he translated it, and must judge of its application, the counsel resting perfectly satisfied that if it should not be evidence, it would have no weight in their lordships minds.
The interpreter was directed to proceed with the answer.
Interpreter.—The words are, "but I imagine."
Mr. Dentnanagain interposed. Their lordships, he said, knew that, in a court of justice, if, instead of taking the statement from an interpreter, they examined the witness himself, and he answered that he did not know some particular point, but that he guessed or imagined some circumstance relative to which a question might be asked, the counsel appearing in such a case would not do his duty to his client if he did not instantaneously interpose, and prevent the witness from proceeding. In any court whatever, he conceived the same course should be followed, and that the counsel, when a circumstance of that nature occurred, was bound to bid the witness shut his mouth. Here, when a word was interpreted "I imagine" it was absolutely necessary for him to interpose to prevent the whole of the answer being received.
The Lord Chancellorstated, the interpreter could not be stopped in giving his answer, until it appeared from so much of his interpretation as he had made, that he was then about to state imagination, and that it now appearing what the witness was about to state, was the witness's imagination and not his knowledge, that he could not give that in evidence.
The Interpreter was directed to inform the witness, that he was to state to their lordships only the facts within his knowledge.
Mr. Attorney General.—Did you ever see Pergami reposing under any other tent? No.
When you were at Jerusalem, were you present at the church there at any ceremony? I was.
Was the princess there? She was. What was the ceremony? Pergami, Austin, and the count Schiavini were made knights of St. Sepulchre.
Do you know whether that is a Catholic order? It is, because they wished first to know something about the holy Sacraments from us Catholics.
Whilst you were at Jerusalem, was any other order conferred upon Pergami? Whilst we were at Jerusalem I know nothing of it.
Did you remain at Jerusalem with the princess, or return before her to Jaffa? I went to Jaffa before her royal highness.
Did the princess and her attendants embark at Jaffa on board the same ship? They did.
After they left Jaffa, was any tent made upon the deck of the vessel? There was.
Was that tent closed at night? It was.
Was any sofa or bed placed under that tent? There was a sofa and a small bed, the same which her royal highness had on the journey.
894
How were that sofa and bed placed under the tent? They made an angle, with a little distance to make a passage.
Have you yourself ever assisted in closing that tent at night? Outside I did.
Who was in the tent at. the time you have assisted in closing it? The princess, Pergami, and some person belonging to her service—some of her suite.
Do you know who remained in that tent during the night? Those who remained under the tent I do not know; but the servants who were in the tent, came out of it, for I saw them on the deck, and spoke to them.
A doubt was suggested whether the witness had not said they came in and out of the tent, and the question was proposed to the witness.
Under the tent I do not know who remained; for this tent had a communication which communicated also below; and whether the princess went out also from it, I do not know.
Have you ever seen the tent raised in the morning? Yes.
Whom have you seen under that tent, or have you seen any persons under that tent when it has been raised in the morning? For the most, the princess either sitting or lying on the sofa, and Pergami on the bed, and some person in the service; sometimes I did, and sometimes not.
When you have seenPergami so on the bed, how was he dressed? With his usual lower dress; and above he had a species of Grecian cloak or toga—a species of morning gown with large sleeves.
Have you ever known that tent closed during the day? I have.
For how long at a time? A little time, half an hour or an hour.
Who were under the tent when it was closed in the day? It appeared the same as it appeared in the evening when the tent was closed.
Who were under the tent at the time it was closed in the day? The princess, Pergami, and some person belonging to her service that assisted in closing the tent.
Did that person who assisted in closing the tent come out from it, or remain under it? Many times I have seen this person on service come out, but at other times I was employed about the business of the ship, I do not know whether this person came out of remained.
Interpreter!—I used the word person, as he does not say whether it was male or female.
Mr. Attorney General.—Do you know by whose directions the tent has been closed on those occasions? Sometimes the count Schiavini, or Camera, but always one of the suite of her royal highness.
Have you ever seen the princess and Pergami walking together upon the deck? I have.

895
In what manner? Arm in arm.
Have you ever seen them upon the deck when they have not been walking? I have.
In what situation have you seen them then? In different situations.
Describe some of them? Sometimes sitting on a gun, with the arm of one behind the back of the other, because the gun was small, supporting each other with the arm; sometimes Pergami lying on his back upon his small bed, and the princess standing near to the bed of Pergami leaning forward; but whenever this happened, the captain, now with one excuse, now with another, sent me away, because we are distant relations.
You say you have seen the princess and Pergami sitting on a gun with their arms round each other, have you ever seen the princess and Pergami silting in any other situation? I have.
In what situation have you seen them? Sometimes I have seen Pergami sitting on the bench near to the main-mast, and the princess sitting on his lap or thigh, with an arm round his neck over his shoulder.
Have you observed how Pergami's arm was upon that occasion? Pergami's arm was behind the back of the princess, and the arm of the princess was round the neck of Pergami.
You have stated that there were a sofa and a bed placed under this tent, do you know where that bed was taken from when it was placed under the tent?' This small iron bed came on board when the princess came, with all of her furniture or luggage.
Do you know, before the tent was erected, where that bed was placed? First of all we must observe the nature of the bed, which had the legs of iron, and a piece of canvas without boards at the top; when we began to stretch the tent upon deck to shelter from the sun, then the princess ordered this sofa to rest herself during the day, and then also from out of her luggage was brought forward this small bed.
Do you remember in the course of your voyage St. Bartholomew's day, the 24th of August? I do.
Did any thing particular take place on board the ship on that day? During that day there was general mirth through the whole of the equipage, or the whole of the crew, which could hardly be kept in (luring the evening; afterwards dishes were set with lights to make an illumination all over the ship, and to all the sailors was given to drink; by the order of Pergami, they had a dollar each; and all the crew danced, and they cried, "long live St. Bartolomeo! long live the princess! Long live the chevalier!"
When Pergami came on board at Jaffa, did he wear any other orders than the order of St. Sepulchre? At parting from Jaffa it was seen several of her majesty's court appeared with orders, with a yellow or straw-coloured ribbon.
896
What was that order called? St. Caroline.
Cross-examined by Mr. Denman, on behalf of the Queen.
Who of the household had those orders you have last named? Pergami, Austin, the count Schiavini, the doctor, Camera, and the two English officers who were in the service of her royal highness.
Had not every one who had been at Jerusalem with her royal highness those orders? Not all; hut only those seven persons whom I have mentioned.
You say you are a Neapolitan by birth, where do you live now when you are at home? I am fixed at Messina, because I live with my father, who is established at Messina.
Interpreter.—He means that he is still with his father; that he is not emancipated.
What is your father? Gian Battista Paturzo.
What business or trade? First pilot in the royal navy of Naples, with the rank of an officer.
You are not married yourself, arc you? I am not.
Have you always borne the same name? Yes, certainly; I never changed my name.
Was your name well known on board the ship you have been speaking of? Yes, certainly; by all the crew who knew me to be the pilot.
Of how many did the crew consist? The crew consisted of two-and-twenty in the whole.
They were all constantly employed in managing the ship? The crew was employed both in the service of the ship and the service of the princess, as I was employed myself.
Have you seen any of them lately; within this week? I have seen the captain.
What is his name? Vincenzo Gargiulo.
Have you seen no other of the crew during-this week? I have not.
Have you seen any of them within this half year? About two months ago; but during the last six months, as Messina is a thoroughfare, I have seen some of the sailors on board other vessels.
Who was the man whom you have seen within the last two months? Francesco da Campora.
Where did you see him? At Messina.
Was the little gun you spoke of upon the deck? On the deck, we could not carry it in our pocket.
The bench near the mainmast was on the-deck also? The bench was upon deck, because it forms the trap-door.
The crew had access to all parts of the deck at all times?? As soon as the tent was closed, nobody could pass through the place occupied by the tent, but in all the other parts of the ship they might go on deck I mean.
Were you ever at Milan? Now in my way here.
You came from Messina to England by Milan? I came from Messina by sea to Naples, from Naples by land to Milan, Paris, Dieppe, from Dieppe I crossed the sea to Brighton; and from Brighton by land to London.
Was that the first time you were at Milan? Yes.
Who first applied to you to come here? For this business, the English vice consul at Messina.
When was it? Towards the 23rd and 24th, or 25th of the last month, July.
Was that the first time you were desired to give evidence upon this subject? Yes.
Did you go to the consul, or did the consul come to 3'ou? The consul sent for me; because he had been charged by the minister at Naples.
What are you to have for coming here? For what I have lost, it will be very little indeed.
How much is it you are to have? For coming here, I must receive, as a compensation for the ship and the trade I have been obliged to give up to come here, eight hundred dollars a month.
Interpreter.—The dollar is about 4s. 3d. to 4s. 4d., but I remember once to have changed it as high as 4s.5d.
Mr. Denman.—Did you pay your own travelling expenses? I have paid nothing, because I came accompanied by a courier. I have been obliged to come, because the minister applied to the consul, and the consul told me, that if I would not go, I should be made to go, by means of the government; and as the business was to say the truth, I was not willing to come to such extremities.
Who was that courier? From Naples to Milan, Nicola Janneo; from Milan here a Mr. Krouse, or something like it.
How did you travel from Naples to Milan? In a carriage; I could not go on foot.
Do you mean a stage coach, or a diligence? A hired carriage, which the courier hired.
Then it was hired for you two; not a carriage which any person might take his seat in for paying? Those questions it is useless to put to me, because I know nothing at all about it. I saw the horses changed, the only thing I know is, that the minister gave me to the courier, and the courier brought me here.
The minister gave you to one courier, and that courier gave you to the other, Mr. Krouse? This courier brought me to Milan; at Milan colonel Brown gave me into the charge of the other courier, when the courier brought me to Milan; at Milan we delivered a letter to colonel Brown, which letter the minister had given me; and colonel Brown gave me to the charge of Mr. Krouse, who conducted me here. How long were you at Milan? I have not my memorandum book in my pocket book, perhaps two or three days.
Where did you live during those two or three days? At an inn.
898
How often did you see colonel Brown there? When I took the letter to him, and when I went to take my leave to set out with the second courier.
Did you see a man of the name of Vimercarti? The name of Vimercarti I do not know at all; this is the first time it reaches my ear.
Did you see any person there who examined you, and took down what you had to say? Yes.
What was that person called? There was present colonel Brown, two persons, the person who wrote, who made four, and I made five.
Did colonel Brown put questions to you? Just like this gentleman, to tell the truth and what I had seen.
Were you sworn upon the cross of Christ? I did not take any oath on the cross, because I was not asked; but it was the same, because if I did not take it then I can take it now, and a thousand times before I die, because it is the truth.
Were you sworn at all at Milan? Not at all.
Had you been examined at Naples before you set out? No.
How did you travel with Mr. Krouse from Milan to Paris? Also in a carriage.
Were you and Mr. Krouse alone in it, or were there any other persons? I and Mr. Krouse and the post boys that were changed.
Was it a cabriolet? What we call a calashe, with four wheels, with two seats to sit upon. When did you arrive in London? Yesterday.
How long did you remain at Paris? We arrived in the morning, and set out in the night.
In the course of that day did you see any person at Paris who talked to you on this subject? No, in regard to my deposition, no.
Did they ask you any questions upon this subject? I want to have a better explanation, because I do not understand.
Did any body talk to you at Paris as to what you were to say against her royal highness? No; because otherwise it would have been the same that we have just been saying now of the deposition.
It is not asked whether any body told you what to say, but whether any person had any conversation with you on the subject? Did anybody talk to you at all at Paris on the subject of the princess? No, for in Paris I was so little a time that it was hardly sufficient for me to rest, for I was travelling by post.
Were you never examined before upon this subject before you set out from Messina for Milan? No.
What day was it you were at Paris? What is to-day; for I do not know.
This is Wednesday; how many days ago is it? Those are such minutiae that I do not remember.

899
Do you mean to say that you cannot tell whether you were at Paris during the last week or not? Saturday, the last week, I was at Paris.
Have you been examined since you came to England? Yes.
Before you came into this house I mean? Yes.
Have you been brought into this place before you came in just now as a witness? No. When were you examined here in London? Yesterday.
Do you know the name of the gentleman who examined you? No.
You were not sworn, I suppose, yesterday? No.
Where have you been since your arrival in London? There; where all the rest were, where there is communication with this room, down below.
All the rest of whom? Others; persons who are there.
How many? I never had the curiosity to reckon them.
Can you tell whether there were twenty or one hundred? I have not reckoned them; I think of my own business.
Do you mean to say that you do not know whether there are ten persons only or ten times ten? Ten and ten times ten make a hundred, if I do know arithmetic that will do. In the place from which you come here, were there as many as six persons? Whether there arc six or whether there arc more, I do not know; I do not know more than three, which is the captain, Theodore, and the cook.
Do you mean Theodore Majoochi who has been here examined? Yes.
Where did you sup last night? At a table.
Did those persons sup with you, the captain, Theodore, and the cook? First of all last night I took tea; secondly, there are persons the servants in the employ of the place, then in the room where I took tea we were five, the captain, this Theodore, and the other; I do not know who were taking tea, there were two, three, or four; I paid no attention to the number.
Did you sup together afterwards? I took no supper last night; I took tea.
What day was it you came from Dieppe to Brighton? Yesterday I arrived here, which was Tuesday; Monday we set out from Dieppe, and on Monday evening we reached Brighton.
Mr. Broughamstated, that not being aware of the attendance of this witness, he trusted their lordships would not feel him precluded from putting further questions to him as well as to the former witness at a future time, in case of receiving information which might render it material to do so.
The counsel were informed, that the House would judge of the application when it was made, with the circumstances occasioning it.
Re-examined by Mr. Attorney-General.
Have you left your ship at Messina? Yes, certainly.
What is the size of your ship? Two hundred and sixty-nine tons.
Is 800 dollars per month more than an adequate compensation for your coming here, in consequence of your ship and yourself being unemployed during the time? I want to know whether it is meant to apply to a compensation for myself, or for the ship.
Is that more than an adequate compensation for the ship being unemployed during the time you are here? This 800 dollars per month is not so much for the mere hiring of the ship, for I and the other men of the same kind do not reckon so much upon the hiring of the ship merely as a carrier of goods, but from what we can derive from our own trading, because we load the ship, together with some other merchants, at our own account, and we may lose a great deal, but we may gain a great deal.
Taking those circumstances into consideration, is the sum you have stipulated for, more than an adequate compensation in your judgment? I cannot tell, if my speculation would succeed, I could gain a great deal more; but if my speculation should fail, I could lose more.
Examined by the Lords.
Earl Grey.—Where is your ship now? I have left her at Messina.
Was it about to sail on any other voyage, when you left it? No.
Must that vessel remain unemployed while you are absent? I do not know.
Is it possible, that it may be sent by the other proprietors in the course of its usual trade? Why not, because then they put on her another captain, and that hurts my business.
Then it is a compensation for your absence, and not for the ship not being employed? For the gain which I lose by leaving the ship, and leaving my trade unattended to.
Have you a share as the proprietor of a fourth part of that ship in any profits made by that ship during your absence? The fourth part of the ship is mine; is given to me after the deduction of the expenses merely for the freight, but not for what I might derive upon the gain of the trade.
You gain the proportion of that paid for the profit of the freight, but not the profit of the adventure? None in the merchandize, because as I am not present I do not employ my money, and cannot have any share in it.
In the voyage from Jaffa, how many sailors were usually employed on the deck at night? Of the whole crew, one-half was employed for four hours, and the other half was not employed, consequently the other half was at rest.

901
Then the House is to understand, there were always ten or eleven men upon the deck during the night? And when it was bad weather all the hands were on deck.
There were never less than ten? Never, except of those who during the night went to assist to dress the horses.
Those men were in the habit of walking up and down deck while they were on duty? The person at the helm was at the helm, I was near to the person at the helm, and the others were walking at the bowsprit at the fore-castle.
Was there a passage by which they could walk past the tent? The tent occupied a little more than one-half of the breadth of the ship.
Was there a passage by the sides of the tent from one end of the ship to the other? On the side where the tent was there was no passage, because the tent reached to the side of the ship; on the other side there was a passage.
Were the men in the habit of passing the tent during the night? Whenever there was any occasion to perform some service at the poop, they passed; when not, as is the custom of all sailors, they remained in the forecastle.
Marquis of Lansdown.—At the time at which you state that you were desired by the captain to go away on some pretence or another, where were you sent away, to another part of the deck, or below? According to what he commanded me to do.
State, to the best of your recollection, what he ordered you to do, whether to go below, or to another part of the deck? Sometimes he told me to go into the cabin to settle his accounts, for they were open accounts; sometimes he told me to go to the forepart, and take care of the sailors, that they should not make a noise, or something like that.
When the captain so told you to remove, were there any other persons that remained near that part of the deck where her royal highness and Pergami, and the captain, were? A shipis not a town; though I went away from them, I was not divided from them except by the great boat or the long boat, which was in the middle.
Did any other persons remain in that situation from whence you were desired to withdraw? Where the princess was, was the princess alone; but as I have stated, the gun, as well as this seat or bench, was in the very middle of the ship, wherever they put themselves, they are in a species of situation wherever they place themselves.
At the time that you were, under some pretence or other, directed by the captain to remove from that part of the deck where her royal highness, and the captain, and Pergami were, were there other persons remaining near to the captain, and to her royal highness and Pergami, in that part of the vessel? As soon as I went away, I could not know what was passing there.
902
Were there any other persons, at the time you were so sent away, who were suffered to remain in that part of the deck from whence you were sent? Must I know it before I went away, or after I have gone away.
At the time you went way? At the moment that I was going away something was ordered to me, and I could not pay attention to what was done, or who remained.
At the time you have stated that her royal highness and Pergami were reclining in the way you have stated upon the gun, can you recollect whether the state of the weather was calm, stormy, or otherwise? If there had been a storm they could not have been on deck; it was summer-time, and it was fine weather. Once we had a storm, and they were not then on deck.
Earl of Rosebery.—Had your ship much motion at that time? During summer there is only light air, and then it is followed by calms; and there is hardly any tide to make any motion; and when they were sitting there, it was calm; the ship did not move.
In the voyage from Jaffa, you state, there was a communication to the cabin below from the tent; did that communication lead to any other part of the ship, or was it only a communication to a particular place from which there was no exit, except to the tent again? I will describe the plan immediately, and thus I spare trouble; if you will favour me with a sheet of paper I will do it immediately. Do your lordships wish to have the plan of the corridor where the cabins were, or of the part of the vessel, or the whole deck.
Did that communication which you state went from the middle of the tent to below, go to any other part of the ship; and if so to what part?
[The witness drew a plan of the ship.]
Interpreter.—He has given me the description of the tent; the whole of this is the whole tent when it was closed, this is the sofa, and this is the bed; here are the steps that go down below, and the tent would take in the steps inside.
[The plan was handed in to their lordships.]
(See next page.)
Witness.—Those steps lead into the dining-room.
Then when the tent was so placed, was there any possibility of getting into the dining-room except through the tent? There was another place which I have marked a little higher up under the archway, because that led into the middle of the cabins.
In the position you have described her royal highness and Pergami upon the bench under which was the pump, were there any other persons capable of seeing their position? Yes, why not; because it was a time that other people were taking the fresh air in the cool of the evening, other people might see if they chose to look.
Lord Auckland.—Can you recollect in what part of the ship during this voyage, Teodore Majoochi slept? Yes.
State it? He had as a place assigned to him a hammock in the hold, but wherever he felt more easy he stretched himself.
Could he from that sleeping place possibly hear what passed in the night in the tent? When he slept in the hold I believe not, because the noise must have passed through two decks.
Lord Ellenborough.—DidTheodoreMajoochi sleep habitually in the hold, or between decks? To assert that would be telling an untruth, which I will not tell.
Did he ever sleep in the dining-room? I know not.
Where did Pergami sleep during the voyage from Jaffa? There were two beds as we have said under the tent, and when the tent was opened, it was seen that upon that small bed was Pergami, and on the sofa was the princess; when the tent was closed I had no communication with the part of the ship belonging to the princess, therefore I do not know.
On the voyage from Jaffa, had Pergami any other place to sleep in but the bed within the tent? Where the princess and Pergami slept under the tent I have not seen them; but what I know morally is, that the princess and Pergami slept under the tent, because there were horses on board, which made a great deal of noise, and they said that they could not bear to sleep below.
904
Where were the beds placed during the voyage from Jaffa, which the princess and Pergami used as described by you in the voyage from Tunis? On the sofa there was nothing else but the single mattrass of the princess, which was doubled, and the other mattrasses of the princess were placed on the bed, where they had been placed at the beginning, below.
You stated, that the further part of the cabin was divided into two; in one of the rooms so formed slept the princess, and in the other countess Oldi; and the bed of Pergami was placed in the dining-room; where were those two beds placed during the voyage from Jaffa? The bed of the princess remained there where it was; as to the bed of Pergami, when he got up, it was rolled up; for they had other things—their luggage; for the bed of Pergami had not a bedstead, but was put down on the planks of the corridor, and it was rolled up in the morning; but I never have paid attention to see whether the bed was there or was not there.
Was the distribution made of the apartments different on the voyage from Jaffa from what it was on the voyage from Tunis: can you draw a plan of the distribution of the apartments before and after the alteration?
[The witness drew a plan of the original situation of the apartments in the ship, which was handed to their lordships.]
Besides this, which I have now given to their lordships, the only alteration made was,

905
that the bed of Pergami from his room was put into the dining-room near to the door.
Was Pergami's bed taken out every night on the voyage from Jaffa? As to this I cannot tell what happened below in the apartment of the princess, because there I had nothing to do, and I do not know what happened in that place, except that when we put into a harbour, where the princess landed, either with the whole or a part of her suite, during the day I, with the crew, went to clean the apartments, and thus I was enabled to see that the bed of the princess was there, because I went to have the room cleaned.
Did other persons sleep where Majoochi usually slept? Yes, that is where Majoochi had his bed.
Did Camera sleep in the same place? No, Camera slept in the cabin.
How many tents were there in the journey to Jerusalem? I do not know; many, several; as many as were sufficient for so many as we were.
Lord Chancellor.—Do you know where the female attendants slept in the voyage from Jaffa? The women had the small cabin which I have marked down, the other was assigned to the countess Oldi, but I never went below, and saw whether they actually slept there.
Lord Belhaven.—Did you ever see the lantern, or light, put out from under the tent, after the princess had retired from the tent, to any person to take it away? The light, yes; sometimes this light was given from under the tent, and sometimes it was carried down below, by the communication below.
Do you know who received it under the tent? This light was not put from under the tent; it was put out of the tent, sometimes the captain, sometimes Theodore, sometimes Carlino, sometimes the sailors; even the captain himself took it away, whoever was near.
Do you know who gave it out? No, for this light remained in the tent for sometime after the tent was properly arranged; I did not remain near to the tent beyond the time in which the tent was arranged, then I went away; I mean when I was there.
Do you know whether any person slept in the dining-room during the voyage from Jaffa? Do your lordships speak of what I have seen with my own eyes.
No; do you know it positively?
Mr. Denmanexpressed his unwillingness to interpose by way of objection to a question from their lordships, but submitted, that the question was not in the form in which questions were usually put by counsel.
The counsel were informed, that where questions were put by the House, their lordships had always permitted counsel to submit to the House, whether these questions were correct, that the counsel had most properly called the attention of the House to the question put by the noble lord; that he had therefore to request that the noble lord would state
906
the question he wished to propose; that in the Berkeley peerage it had been laid down, that after the counsel has closed their examinations, their lordships were at liberty to put questions not put by the counsel, being bound to do justice between the parties. The question was proposed as follows:
Do you know whether any person slept in the dining-room during the voyage from Jaffa? This I do not know; I do not remember any particularity with regard to this.
Earl of Darnley.—Do you know whether during the same voyage, the princess took her clothes off during the night, or whether she did not? We must distinguish betwixt knowing and seeing; what I know and what I have seen; I have seen sometimes in the morning the princess open a little of the tent, and I saw her having a while gown on, a dressing gown, or some gown or other, and she opened the tent just to take a morsel of air in the morning before the sun rose. Mr. Cohen was asked whether that was the whole of the answer, and he stated that it was.
Lord Ellenborough.—Have you ever seen Pergami look out of the tent about the same time? No; because towards the sea where the princess opened, the princess opened just as little as to put out her upper parts, her neck or shoulders.
Was there any communication between the chamber in which the princess slept down below, and that of the countess Oldi, when they both slept down below? Yes, there was a communication to pass from the room of the countess Oldi to that of the princess.
Without going through the dining-room? Yes.
Mr. Denman requested their lordships to put a question to the witness, which, under the leave of the House, was proposed as follows:
What is the name of your ship at Messina?
Il Vero Fedele:
Does it belong to the port of Messina? She does.
What are the names of your partners? Only Jagonio Milanase.
Earl of Lauderdale.—From your knowledge of the situation of the dining-room relative to the tent, could a person in that dining-room hear what passed in the tent when the tent was shut up? Yes, a person might hear well, provided they were words pronounced with their natural force.
[The witness, and also the counsel were directed to withdraw.]
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that before the House separated, he wished to state, that he had not failed to apply to the highest sources of information, on the point, how far prosecutions might be supported against witnesses examined in the course of this proceeding. He under stood, most unquestionably, that such

907
prosecutions could be maintained; but he had not put to the same sources any question as to the effect of the exercise of the privileges of the House, should it interpose to prevent the production of the necessary evidence. It was material that the public mind should be satisfied upon this matter: and another point of importance was, that in endeavouring to accomplish this purpose, the House should not lose sight of its privileges. A third consideration was, that, by coming to any resolution on this subject, it should not be implied that there would be any occasion to prosecute any of the witnesses. He purposed to-morrow to move the House to resolve, in effect, that if there shall be occasion for such prosecutions, the House will suspend its privileges, and not interpose to prevent them; meaning, at the same time, to frame that resolution in such terms as to answer all the objects in view.
Ordered, That the further consideration and second reading of the said bill be deferred till to-morrow.