GENERAL HISTORY. 



[147 



an^ which evinced a profound 

 knowledge of the law, a minute 

 examination of the evidence which 

 had been adduced at the trial, and 

 offered certain affidavits i« support 

 of his application. Did the Court 

 then entrench itself behind its 

 technical rules, or say that it was 

 too late to grant a new trial ? 



Mr. Horner differed from the 

 Hon, and Learned Gentleman as 

 to what he had said with respect to 

 the examination of evidence in this 

 case, as if it were entering upon a 

 new trial. The House was not 

 doing any thing in the ordinary 

 course of criminal jurisprudence, 

 but exercising a species of juris- 

 diction peculiar to itself, in which 

 there was no rule to prevent them 

 from calling for evidence. He, 

 however, thought that in this case 

 it was not necessary to call for 

 more information than they had 

 before them, and he was fully sa- 

 tisfied with the verdict of the jury 

 and the judgment of the court. 



The motion was negatived. 



On July b,Mr. Broadheadmoved 

 the order of the day for taking into 

 consideration the record of the 

 conviction of Lord Cochrane and 

 Mr. Cochrane Johnstone. The 

 Speaker being informed that the 

 former was in attendance, he was 

 introduced by the Serjeant at 

 Arms, and was desired to take his 

 place. A Messenger of the House 

 then stated, that on going to serve 

 the order on Mr. Cochrane John- 

 stone, he was not to be found; and 

 two Members of the House affirm- 

 ed that they had seen him at Calais. 



Lord Cochrane being then called 

 upon to state what he had to say 

 in his defence, made a speech, 

 of which, from its length, and the 

 rariety of particulars mentioned in 



reference to the evidence on his 

 trial, we can give only a very sum- 

 mary account. His lordship com- 

 menced with most solemnly de- 

 claring, in the presence of the 

 House, and with the eyes of the 

 country fixed upon him,thathewas 

 wholly innocent of the crime laid 

 to his charge, and for which he had 

 been condemned to the most in- 

 famous of punishments. He then 

 proceeded to comment upon the 

 steps taken by the prosecutors pre- 

 vious to the indictment, the ap- 

 pointment of the jury, and all the 

 circumstances connected with the 

 trial ; in doing which he indulged 

 himself in such a severity of per- 

 sonal invective, that in the report 

 of his speech it was found necessary, 

 in order to avoid the charge of li- 

 bellous publication, to make a 

 great number of asterisms. One 

 of the most important particulars 

 adduced by his lordship relative 

 to the evidence, referred to the co- 

 lour of the coat in which De Be- 

 renger (the chief conductor of the 

 imposition) appeared at his house. 

 It had been sworn by Lord C. that 

 this was a green uniform ; but in 

 the brief given to his Counsel it 

 was described as a red coat with a 

 green collar. When this contra- 

 diction appeared. Lord Cochrane's 

 counsel, Serjeant Best, attributed 

 it to an oversight, and declined ex- 

 amining Lord Cochrane's servants, 

 then in attendance, on the point. 

 Their affidavits, however, made 

 before the Court, subsequently to 

 the trial, fully went to the fact of 

 their having seen him in a green 

 coat. A great part of his lord- 

 ship's speech consisted in remarks 

 on the conduct of the Judge (Lord 

 Ellenborough) who tried his cause, 

 and whom he accused of gross par? 

 l»2] 



