Rastelli's disappearance. He professed to have sent him home to Milan in order to quiet the minds of the relatives of witnesses who were still in England as to their safety, an excuse which was received with general incredulity. Brougham dexterously availed himself of the opportunity to put to Powell the question, 'Who is your employer or client in this case?' which was received with loud shouts of 'No! No!' from the Peers. Brougham insisted that the question was every way just and proper. 'I have never been able,' he said, 'to trace the local habitation or the name of the unknown being who is the plaintiff in this proceeding. I know not but it may vanish into thin air. I know not under what shape it exists;' and then, in order to indicate who was the true author of the proceedings, he quoted Milton's magnificent description of Death in 'Paradise Lost '

charged from her service. Her examination- | were at the head of the Milan Commission, in-chief occupied two whole days; and in was called by the Peers to account for her case, as in that of Majocchi, her testimony did not fully support the statements made by the Attorney-General in his opening speech. But her evidence was most thoroughly demolished by Mr. Williams in his most able and effective cross-examination. Letters were produced which she had written to her half-sister, who was still in the queen's service, in which she expressed the greatest admiration for her Royal Highness, and her 'infinite respect and unlimited attachment for her august person,' and gave a minute statement about a proposal made to her to go to London, under the pretext of being a governess, with the most liberal promises of money, which she admitted to be utterly untrue. After her dismissal from the princess' service, she wrote supplicating forgiveness in the most humble terms, and entreating her Royal Highness to continue her protection to her sister. Another witness, named Rastelli, who had acted as superintendent of the princess' stables, after he left her service had been employed as a courier by the Milan Commission, and had gone about collecting witnesses to testify against Her Majesty. His evidence was disgusting and utterly incredible; and besides, he was proved to have bribed another of the witnesses to give evidence against the queen. After concluding his testimony, he was immediately sent out of the country. This was a grievous mistake on the part of the prosecution. It was discovered by the queen's counsel, who indignantly remonstrated against this violation of the promise which Lord Liverpool had given, that the witnesses should be kept in the country until the termination of the trial; and demanded that Rastelli should be brought back for cross-examination. Brougham admits that the sending away this witness gave the queen's counsel a great advantage, and there can be no doubt that it was of immense benefit to her cause. Mr. Powell, one of the two lawyers who

'If shape it might be called that shape had none
Distinguishable in member, joint, or limb;
Or substance might be called that shadow seemed,
For each seem'd either.

What seem'd his head,
The likeness of a_kingly crown had on.'
This felicitous quotation was suggested to
Brougham by Spencer Perceval, the eldest
son of Perceval, the Prime Minister. George
IV. felt the allusion most keenly. He said
Brougham might at least have spared him
the attack upon his shape. He was more
vain of his person and of his slim figure
than of almost anything else, and he said
to Lord Donoughmore that he thought
everybody allowed, whatever faults he might
have, that his legs were not as Brougham
had described. It was in vain that Donough-
more tried to convince him that the quota-
tion only referred to the crown. He said
he was certain Brougham had heard of his
piquing himself on his shape, and thought
it would plague him to have it held up to
ridicule.

The result of the examination of the witnesses adduced in support of the bill fully

bore out the description which Brougham | cence, pretended to have seen in such direcsubsequently gave in the Edinburgh Review tions as would have required the rays

of light to move, not straightforward, but round about barriers that pried into carriages where the travellers were asleep at grey daylight, or saw in the dusk of dewy eve what their own fancy pictured—sailors, who believed that all persons could gratify their animal appetites on the public deck, where they themselves had so often played the beast's part-lying waiting-women, capable of repaying the kindness and charity that had laid the foundation of their fortune, with the treachery that could rear it to the height of their sordid desires-chamber-maids the refuse of the streets and the common food of wayfaring licentiousness

lechers of either sex, who would fain have gloated over the realities of what their liquorish imagination alone bodied forth— pimps of hideous aspect, whose prurient glance could penetrate through the keyhole of rooms where the rat shared with the bug the silence of the deserted place-these were the performers whose exploits the Commissioners chronicled, whose narratives they collected, and whose exhibition upon the great stage of the first tribunal of all the earth they sedulously and zealously prepared for frequent rehearsal. Yet, with all these helps to success-with the unlimited supply of fancy and of falsehood which the character of the people furnished

of the Milan Commission and its labours. 'It is the first impression,' he said, 'always arising in Italy from any work undertaken by English hands, and paid for by English money, that an inexhaustible fund is employed, and with boundless profusion; and a thirst of gold is straightway excited which no extravagance of liberality can slake. The knowledge that a board was sitting to collect evidence against the queen immediately gave such testimony a high value in the market of Italian perjury; and happy was the individual who had ever been in her house or admitted to her presence; his fortune was counted to be made. Nor were they who had viewed her mansion, or had only known the arrangements of her villa, without hopes of sharing in the golden prize. To have seen her pass, and noted who attended her person, was a piece of good luck. In short, nothing, however remotely connected with herself or her family, or her residence or her habits, was without its value among a poor, a sanguine, and an imaginative people. As the treachery of servants was the portion of this testimony which bore the highest value, that of course was not difficult to procure, and the accusers soon possessed what in such a case is most wished for by the accuser, not indeed the confession of the guilty persons, but the man-servant of the one and the maid-ser--with the very body servants of the parvant of the other supposed paramour. Recourse was had to spies, who watched all the parties did, and when they could not find a circumstance, made one-men who chronicled the dinners and the suppers that were eaten, the walks and the sails that were enjoyed, the arrangements of rooms and the position of bowers, and who, never doubting that these were the occasions and the scenes of endearment and of enjoyment, pretended to have witnessed the one, in order that the other might be supposed, but with that inattention to particulars which Providence has appointed as the snare for the false witness and the safeguard of inno

ties hired by their wages, if not bought with a price-such an array could only be produced as the whole world at once pronounced insufficient to prove any case, and as even the most prejudiced of assemblies in the accuser's favour turned from with disgust.'

The examination of the witnesses in support of the Bill of Pains and Penalties terminated on the 7th of September. The evidence was summed up by the SolicitorGeneral, Copley, who exerted himself to the utmost to rehabilitate the witnesses whose veracity had been so seriously impaired by the cross-examination to which they had

of the nation. In reply to a political friend who had written to him expressing his suffering on account of the dangerous and deplorable situation in which the country and the king's government had been placed,' the Home Secretary, assuming a high moral tone, said, 'In venting your feelings, you have precisely expressed mine. All that just and honest pride which once gave comfort and dignity to a state of existence in this country, is nearly cancelled and obliterated. I am, however, much more under the influence of indignation than of any feeling which approaches despondency.' Posterity, however, has approved the verdict of the public at that time respecting the conduct of the king and the Government and has pronounced a severe and wellmerited sentence of condemnation both on the immoral and unprincipled sovereign, and on the ministers who, in direct opposition to their own convictions, stooped to become the instruments of his selfishness and malignity.

been subjected. The case for the bill then | feeling was merely a proof of the degeneracy closed, and the House adjourned for three weeks to give the queen's counsel time to prepare their reply, Although only hostile evidence had been led, and the witnesses in the queen's defence had not been heard, Į public opinion and sympathy continued to run strongly in Her Majesty's favour. Addresses of congratulation and sympathy continued to pour in upon her, signed by many thousands of both sexes and of all classes. Her counsel and the peers who supported her were everywhere greeted with the most enthusiastic applause. The members of the Government and their friends were mobbed and hooted whenever in town or country they dared to show face. The lord chancellor, once the friend, now the bitter foe of the queen, and who, as Lord Dudley remarked, 'having kept her conscience then, keeps her offended husband's now, and all for the public good,' was greeted, even at his own country seat, with cries of Queen for ever!' When Castlereagh and Sidmouth,' says Mr. Keppel, walked arm-inarm to Westminster, amidst the execrations of the mob, the former exclaimed, "Here go two of the most popular men in England." To these two unpopularity was familiar, and they submitted to it with more or less philosophy. Not so Lord Liverpool, who had hitherto been treated with singular forbearance; but he, too, at last was doomed to take his share of the popular odium. The effect it had upon him was visible to every beholder. When he rose to address the House, it was with all the timidity of a nervous young peer making his maiden speech. Nor could he have given utterance to his words at all without the aid of large doses of ether, the odour of which reached the nostrils of those who were standing on the steps of the throne.'

Lord Sidmouth tried to console himself under the general condemnation of his conduct, and that of his colleagues, by assuming that he and they were suffering opprobrium solely on account of their discharge of their duty, and that the popular

The House of Lords met again on the 3rd of October, and Brougham opened the case in defence of the queen. His speech excited universal admiration. One of his hearers pronounced it very fine;' another said it was 'one of the most powerful orations that ever proceeded from human lips;' and a supporter of the bill was constrained to admit that it was 'of the most powerful and impressive character.' His analysis of the evidence given by the witnesses for the prosecution was of the most masterly character, and he commented with great effect on their mutual contradictions, and their failure to support the statements which had been made by the attorney-general in his opening speechno doubt in reliance on the evidence they had given before the Milan Commission, but which they had either forgotten or could not venture to repeat before the peers. He animadverted, too, on the character of the witnesses, on the drilling they had received from the Milan Com

You

mission, on the glaring improbability of
many of their assertions, and on the enor-
mous sums which they were to receive for
their attendance. The peroration, which he
is said to have re-written no less than seven
times, was magnificent, and produced a most
powerful impression upon the House. 'Such,
my lords,' he said, 'is the case now before
you! Such is the evidence in support of
this measure-evidence inadequate to prove
a debt-impotent to deprive of a civil right
-ridiculous to convict of the lowest offence
-scandalous, if brought forward to support
a charge of the highest nature which the
law knows monstrous to ruin the honour,
to blast the name of an English queen.
My lords, I pray you to pause. I do
earnestly beseech you to take heed!
are standing upon the brink of a precipice;
then beware! It will go forth your
judgment if sentence shall go against the
queen; but it will be the only judgment
you ever pronounced which, instead of
reaching its object, will turn and rebound
back upon those who give it. Save the
country, my lords, from the horrors of this
catastrophe-save yourselves from this peril
-rescue that country of which you are the
ornaments, but in which you can flourish
no longer, when severed from the people,
than the blossom when cut off from the
roots and the stem of the tree. Save that
country, that you may continue to adorn it
-save the Crown, which is in jeopardy-
the aristocracy, which is shaken-save the
altar, which must stagger with the blow
that rends its kindred throne! You have
said, my lords--you have willed-the church
and the king have willed-that the queen
should be deprived of its solemn service.
She has, instead of that solemnity, the
heartfelt prayers of the people. She wants
no prayers of mine. But I do here pour
forth my humble supplications at the Throne
of Mercy, that that mercy may be poured
down upon the people in a larger measure
than the merits of its rulers may deserve,
and that your hearts may be turned to justice.'
Denman, describing the effect of this splendid

burst of eloquence on the part of his colleague, says, 'His arguments, his observations, his tones, his attitude, his eye, left an impression on my mind which is scarcely ever renewed without exciting the strongest emotion. Erskine rushed out of the House in tears.'

The examination of the queen's witnesses commenced on the 5th of October, and continued until the 24th. They were of a far superior character, and occupied a much higher social position, than the persons brought to give evidence in support of the bill. Sir William Gell, Mr. St. Leger, and the Hon. Keppel Craven, who had been the queen's chamberlains; Lady Charlotte Lindsay, her lady of the bedchamber; Dr. Holland, her physician; Lord Guildford, Lord Glenbervie, and Lord Llandaff, who had been much in her society while she lived in Italy; Lieutenant Flynn, who commanded the polacca in which her Royal Highness visited the East; and Lieutenant Hownam, who was three years in her service, presented a very striking contrast to the discarded servants, chambermaids, valets, and grooms whom the Milan Commissioners had collected to bear testimony against their mistress. The evidence of these witnesses flatly contradicted the most important assertions of the queen's Italian servants, and explained other statements which bore an unfavourable aspect.

The evidence on behalf of the queen was summed up by Denman in a speech which was delivered on two days, and lasted ten hours. Brougham termed it 'a magnificent effort of genius;' and it was certainly as distinguished for its independence as for its ability and eloquence. He gave the deepest offence to the king by comparing the queen to Octavia, the wife of Nero, who was tortured and put to death by her husband. He dwelt at some length on the appropriateness of the parallel, which it appears had been suggested to him by Dr. Parrthe capricious offence taken in the very moment of their union; the adoption of a mistress in her place; the desertion; the

investigation; the exile; the triumphant the respectability of an Italian witness, return amidst the acclamations of the come forth and depose in open court. As people; the renewed inquiry; the false thou art, thou art worse than an Italian evidence screwed out of her domestics, not assassin, because, while I am boldly and indeed by bribes, but by torture. He wound manfully meeting my accusers, thou art up the parallel by quoting the retort which planting a dagger unseen in my bosom, and one of Octavia's maids returned to Tigel- converting thy poisoned stiletto into the linus, who was presiding at her examination semblance of the sword of justice."' The and torture, hurling the boldest defiance noble-minded and eloquent advocate, while and invective at the man who had grossly uttering these burning words, looked stedaspersed the purity of his imperial mistress. fastly at the place where the Duke of The king never forgave this attack, which Clarence was seated, and raised his voice fixed upon him the name of Nero, and he 'till the old roof rang again, and a thrill of doggedly refused to permit his successive irrepressible emotion pervaded every heart chancellors, Eldon and Lyndhurst, to con- in the densely crowded assembly.' fer upon Denman the rank of king's counsel, until the Duke of Wellington at last constrained him to yield.

George IV. was not the only member of the royal family who suffered from Denman's indignant censure on this occasion. The Duke of Clarence had taken a deep interest in the trial, and, having given ready credence to some of the worst stories against the queen, he had busied himself in circulating them among the Peers. Denman's indignation was roused at this unworthy and most improper conduct, and he poured out a torrent of vehement invective against the slanderer. 'I know,' he said, 'that rumours are abroad of the most vague but, at the same time, most injurious character. We have heard, and hear daily with alarm, that there are persons, and those not of the lowest condition, not even excluded from this august assembly, who are industriously circulating the most odious calumnies against Her Majesty. Can this thing be? We know that if a juryman on such an occasion should affect to possess any knowledge on the subject of inquiry, we should have a right to call him to the bar as a witness. "Come forward," we might say, "and let us confront you with our evidence." But to any man who could even be suspected of so base a practice as whispering calumnies to judges, the queen might well exclaim, "Come forth, thou slanderer, and let me see thy face. If thou wouldst equal

It is much to the credit of the Duke of Clarence that, though he must have felt keenly the reproof justly administered to him by Denman, unlike his elder brother, he never resented it. He had 'the sense and candour,' says Brougham, 'to perceive that the sufferer from the performance of the duty of an advocate has no just right to complain. He received Mr. Denman with marked civility at his first levee, after his accession to the throne; acquiesced without hesitation in his appointment as attorney-general, on the change of Government in November, 1830; two years afterwards consigned to him, as Chief-Justice, "the balance and the sword;" and expressed the utmost pleasure in acceding to Lord Grey's application to raise him to the peerage.'

Denman was followed by Dr. Lushington, an able and accomplished lawyer, who was, however, overshadowed by his leaders. The case was closed with the replies of the attorney - general, Gifford, and of the solicitor - general, Copley, who Copley, who exerted themselves to the utmost to retrieve their failing cause. After a keen debate, which lasted four days, the second reading of the bill was carried by a majority of only 28 in a House of 218. It was now evident that the prosecution would fail; but the Ministry, in obedience to the orders of their relentless taskmaster, still pressed the measure. Their conduct was the more