Page images
PDF
EPUB

CHAPTER VII.

TRIAL OF THE QUEEN.

Remonstrances against the Mode of Proceeding.-Report of the Lords Committee. -Bill of Penalties.-Discussions respecting it.-Preliminary Questions.Opening of the Trial.-Evidence against the Queen.-Pleadings.-Evidence in Defence of the Queen.-Pleadings.-Debates in the House of Lords.-The Bill carried.-Withdrawn.

EVERY effort to adjust amicably the differences in the Royal House, and to avert a full inquiry into this painful subject, having thus proved abortive, nothing remained but to proceed in the course which had been already marked out. Before, however, the secret committee began its operation, the Queen interposed a remonstrance against the mode of investigation employed. She drew up a petition in the following terms:

To the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in Parliament Assembled.

"CAROLINE R.

"The Queen, having been informed that proceedings are about to be instituted against her in the House of Lords, feels it necessary to approach your Lordships as a petitioner and a fellow-subject. She is advised that, according to the forms of your Lordships' House, no other mode of communication is permitted.

"Now, as at all times, she declares her perfect readiness to meet every charge affecting her honour; and she

challenges the most complete investigation of her conduct; but she protests, in the first place, against any secret inquiry and if the House of Lords should, notwithstanding, persist in a proceeding so contrary to every principle of justice and of law, she must in the next place declare, that, even from such an unconstitutional course, she can have nothing to apprehend, unless it be instituted before the arrival of those witnesses whom she will summon immediately to expose the whole of the machinations against her. She is anxious that there should now be no delay whatever in finishing the inquiry; and none shall be occasioned by her Majesty. But the Queen cannot suppose that the House of Lords will commit so crying an injustice as to authorize a secret examination of her conduct, in the absence of herself and her coun sel, while her defence must obviously rest upon evidence, which for some weeks cannot reach this country. The instant that it arrives, she will entreat the House of Lords to proceed in any way they may think consistent with

the ends of justice; but in the mean time, and before the first step is taken, her Majesty desires to be heard by her counsel at your Lordships' bar, this day, upon the subject matter of this petition."

This petition was first tendered to the Chancellor, who was requested to present it to the House of Peers. The application to a channel so hostile, seems not much to be approved, since it would scarcely have any other object than the awkward situation in which it placed that great functionary. Perhaps, however, the Chancellor rather committed himself when he declined to do what is usually considered as a duty incumbent on any member of the House. The petition was, therefore, on the 26th June, presented by Lord Dacre, who, animadverting on the Chancellor's refusal, stated, that he himself never had the slightest communication with the Queen, but was merely performing what he conceived a duty to a person under accusation. The Chancellor observed, that having only three minutes to consider of the application, it had occurred to him, that he was the last person in the House by whom this petition ought to be presented; and he had found no precedent in the Journals for such a proceeding. At the same time, he declared to their lordships, and was ready to declare in the face of the whole world, that he would rather suffer death than admit any abatement of the principle, that a person accused is not therefore to be considered guilty.

Lords Grey, Holland, and Lansdowne insisted, that there was nothing in the situation of the noble and learned Lord which made any distinction between him and other members of the House, or exempted him from any of the duties incumbent upon them.

Lord Liverpool urged, that any in

dividual peer might have particular and personal motives for declining to present a petition. This was admitted, provided the motive were not taken from consideration of the place

where he sat. The Chancellor declared, that he would never hesitate to present a petition from the highest or the lowest in the land, provided he thought it consistent with his duty to the House.

After these prolegomena, the petition was read, and it was agreed, that Mr Brougham should be heard in support of it.

Mr Brougham stated, that nothing could be farther from the intention of her Majesty, than to ask for delay, in the accustomed and vulgar sense of that word. She asked for no delay of the prosecution; she asked for no delay of judgment, because she was conscious that she was innocent, and because she knew that their Lordships were just; but she asked for delay, because she knew that all the forms of law and justice would be set at defiance if they refused to listen to her petition, and proceeded to try her on the ex parte statements of her enemies. What the charges themselves were— by what testimony they were supported-who the base tools were who lent themselves to procure, collect, and arrange them-how they were scraped together-by whose influence they were conjured up, he could not tell; but it was enough for him to know this, that be it creditable to the collector, or be it odious and disgraceful to the collector and the witnesses, it went to affect the character, and to impeach the conduct of her Majesty, for something that was alleged to have been done abroad. Now, it was known to their Lordships, that her Majesty had resided for the last five years at a great distance from this country; that she had lived beyond the Alps and the Appenines, and that it was physically

impossible for her to procure the production of a single document, the presence of a single witness, or even the answer to a single letter, that might be necessary for the vindication of her character, in less than five or six weeks. Unless, therefore, the necessary time were allowed, her Majesty could have no means of defence, and might as well be condemned without the formalities of trial. When an English woman was accused, no foreigner must be admitted as an evidence against her-none whose principles hung on them by a loose tenurenone who denied the obligation of an oath; she had an opportunity of knowing the witnesses against her, and she could compel the attendance of those who could give testimony in her favour. Her Majesty possessed none of those advantages; she was discountenanced by all the authorities, both at home and abroad; she had to meet all that bribery, all that force, all that malignity could collect and array against her. He would ask their Lordships if they could doubt that her Majesty was conscious of her innocence, and fearless of the result, when, under such circumstances as these, she called on her law officers to go on, and demanded no delay of the proceedings. It was his duty, however, to guard her against the dangers into which she might be led by this intrepid consciousness of innocence. It was impossible that the advocate could do his duty without full communication with his own witnesses, and without an opportunity of knowing the witnesses on the opposite side. He assumed, with great humility, that their Lordships would at least allow her Majesty a few months to bring forward her witnesses. He supposed that there was not an English tribunal not even a Milan tribunal that would deny an accused party some opportunity of de

fence. How unfair, that before this time, the invisible tribunal-he begged pardon, the secret committee, should have pronounced sentence, her name have been blackened all over Europe, and an unfavourable impression produced for a great length of time. These reasons, he urged, were conclusive against any secret investigation, and for delaying the commencement of the trial in any shape, for the space of two months.

Mr Denman followed on the same side, and strongly urged similar arguments. In what situation would her Majesty be placed, after the report of the secret committee? A committee of fifteen of the most distinguished peers of that House, whose minds had been impressed by the contents of this bill, were to pause for a time on these impressions, and then to sit in judgment on her Majesty's character, her honour, and perhaps her life. How was it possible for the most honourable mind to divest itself of prejudices so impressed? In such circumstances, how great was the likelihood of worthless characters furnishing such evidence as they might deem to be acceptable? It was enough to rouse suspicion, that the desire to receive such testimony was known to exist. There was a peculiar call in such circumstances, to allow every means of guarding against the dangers of subornation.

Mr Williams began on the same side, but was stopped by the Chancellor, who observed, that it was not customary for more than two counsel to be heard in support of a petition.

This proceeding was followed next day by Earl Grey, with a motion for doing away with the Secret Committee, and for proceeding by open investigation. It did not appear to him that there were any precedents exactly applicable to the present case; and, if they were, they might have taken

place in times, when considerations of equity had little influence. The proposition made to them was, that they should now proceed to examine in formation of a nature totally ex parte, case directly affecting the character and honour of the Queen. This examination was to take place without affording her any means of explanation on the charges made against her -any opportunity of examining witnesses, or of saying any thing in her own defence. Upon such a partial examination their Lordships were to make a report with a view to some proceeding in that House. Be that proceeding what it may, her Majesty would inevitably be placed in a disadvantageous situation with respect to it, from the weight of their Lordships' report, in the first place, against her. Notwithstanding all his respect for the noble and learned Lord, he could not be satisfied as to those subtile distinctions, by which he endeavoured to prove that the Queen could not be arraigned as guilty of high treason. At all events, the House of Commons might impeach her as having acted in a manner unworthy of her high station. That illustrious person came before them in a character in which he believed no Queen of England had ever before appeared. She is a petition er; she prays for a prompt inquiry, desirous that no delay may take place, but begs that she might not, by a previous proceeding, have the accusations against her sent forth into the world, not as the charges of her accusers, but as those of that House. He was far from wishing their Lordships to yield to any factious clamours; yet surely they ought to pay some regard to the character which their proceedings would have in the eye of the public. Their Lordships occupied a high station in the country, distinguished by a long line of ancestors, possessing wealth, rank, and everything that could

entitle them to respect, and secure their perfect independence. Possessing these high advantages, they were bound to take the greater care how they brought the character of their proceedings into question. Secret committees had of late been too common in this House, and their very name stamped a suspicion on any proceeding connected with them. Were he a member, he would not hear the paper of accusation read, he would insist upon seeing and hearing the witness himself. The committee was entirely composed of ministers of the crown, and of persons devoted to them; and the report would be entirely their report. Was there any secret charm in the committee-room of that House, which was to inspire them with that energy, wisdom, and justice, which they could not find in their cabinet ? The only mode of extricating them from the straits in which they had involved themselves, was by a fair, open, and impartial inquiry. This might be done either by judicial proceeding, by bill, or by a mixture of both modes. The conduct of ministers during the whole of these proceedings, had been most extraordinary, weak, and unjustifiable; and by their imbecility and vacillation, they had brought the question to an issue, which they could not pursue without danger, or retract without disgrace. It was now twelve months since they had the report of their commission in their hands, upon which they ought either to have acquitted the Queen, or commenced proceedings, which might by this time have been terminated. They entered into negociations, in which they coupled the menace of proving criminal charges, with the offer of an arrangement wholly inconsistent with them. They now sought to divest themselves of their official accountability, and to throw upon committees of Parliament their duties and responsibili

At a season of great public distress and danger, at a moment of great peril to the peace and tranquillity of the country, they had shown themselves unfit for the emergency, and called upon their Lordships for direction. When the tempest arose→→→ when the winds raged when the waves beat high, the vessel of the state was left by them, without compass or rudder, to the mercy of the storm. The concessions which they had made to her Majesty, and the panegyrics which some of them passed upon her, were totally inconsistent with the charges which they advanced. Her Majesty was accusedthe charges were in the bag-a committee had been proposed-and yet they paused, and agreed not to open the bag, but to address her Majesty, with all respect and submission, to surrender some of her rights, that inquiry might be prevented. Lord Gray concluded with moving to discharge the order for the meeting of the secret committee. He knew nothing of the accusation against her Majesty-nothing of the witnesses by which it was supported-nothing of the evidence by which it could be repelled. But on this principle he stood, that there should be no secret investigationthat there should be no inquiry that was acknowledged to be derogatory from the dignity of the Crown, and injurious to the best interests of the empire.

The Earl of Liverpool had been much surprised to hear the Noble Earl, after disclaiming any intention to make this a party question, conclude with one of the most inflammatory party attacks that had ever been made within the walls of Parliament. He was prepared to appeal from the judgment of the noble Lord to the country, to Parliament, and to posterity, and to be tried by them for the conduct pursued by himself and his

colleagues for the last eight years. He was willing that their counsels and acts should be compared to the counsels and acts of the administra tion with which the noble Earl had been connected. The wish of ministers to avoid proceedings against the Queen, and to prevent her coming to this country, was approved of, he was sure, by nine-tenths of the nation. Was there any alternative, then, when she arrived, between allowing her all the honours and privileges of her rank, or placing her in a state of accusation? He was conscious of none of that vacillation, of which the noble Earl had accused ministers. They had laid the papers on the table, and moved the appointment of a committee. A strong sense had been expressed in the other House, that an attempt at negociation should be made; and with this ministers had gladly complied; but they did not know of the motion to this effect an hour before it was made.-Lord Liverpool insisted that the Chancellor was perfectly correct in his opinion, that the Queen could not be chargeable with high treason. She could be brought in only as an accessary; and where, as in the case of a foreigner, there was no principal, there could be no accessary. A legislative proceeding was the only course that could be adopted; and the House of Lords, from being accustomed to examine witnesses upon oath, as well as from other considerations, seemed the quarter from which it should originate. The next question was, whether there should be any preliminary inquiry, He could find no precedent of a Bill of Pains and Penalties, without some such inquiry; and, if there was one, it was surely prejudicing the cause less that it should be secret, than that it should be public. This was an ac cusation against the first subject in the realm, and the case could not be

« PreviousContinue »