GENERAL HISTORY. 



[149 



tne noble lord, together with the 

 afficfavits accompanying that state- 

 ment, be referred to a select coai- 

 initte, with power to examine 

 witnesses, and send for papers, and 

 that they do make a report there- 

 upon to the House." 



The Attorney General said that 

 this motion rested on the supposi- 

 tion that the learned lord at the 

 head of the Court had exceeded the 

 forms of justice by referring to a 

 rule which rendered a new trial in 

 this case irregular. But in fact, 

 whatever the noble lord had 

 thought necessary to state to the 

 Court had been heard to the fullest 

 extent, and it was the unanimous 

 opinions of the Judges that there 

 was no occasion for farther pro- 

 ceedings. He entered into a detail 

 of the manner in which special 

 juries (so much decried by the 

 Noble Lord) were selected, and 

 contended that there could be no- 

 thing like packing them for a poli- 

 tical purpose. In the present case, 

 Mr. Cochrane Johnstone himself 

 had struck off 24 names from the 48, 

 and those who bad tried the de- 

 fendants were nearly all new men, 

 whose dispositions it was impossi- 

 ble that the Judge should know. 



Mr. Brand said he had always 

 entertained doubts of the privity of 

 Lord Cochrane to the conspiracy 

 of which he was convicted, and he 

 trusted the House would not think 

 it adviseable to come to a hasty de- 

 cision at a time when an offer was 

 made by him to explain all that 

 was mysterious in the affair. 



Mji. Barham spoke in favour of 

 a further investigation. 



Mr. Ponsonby began by observ- 

 ing, that if the bitterest enemy of 

 the Noble Lord had been employ- 

 ed tv injure his cause he could not 



have done it more effectually than 

 the Noble Lord had endeavoured to 

 do it that night; but he trusted the 

 House, in considering the real 

 merits of the case, would dismiss 

 such conduct from its recollection. 

 Some had appeared to hold that to 

 impeach a Judge's charge was to 

 call in question his integrity; but 

 nothing was more common than 

 application for a new trial on ac- 

 count of a judge's misdirection to 

 a jury, either as to case or fact; 

 which was only supposing him not 

 infallible. As an instance of 

 fallibility Mr. P. alluded to what 

 the noble lord had asserted in 

 his speech, that the judge in his 

 charge had said that De Berenger 

 had presented himself to him 

 " blazoned in the costume of his 

 crime," though there was not a 

 tittle of evidence adduced to sup- 

 port such an allegation. The hon. 

 member then made various remarks 

 on the rule of court which had been 

 opposed to Lord C.'s motion for a 

 new trial, and contended that it 

 was a novelty without any princi- 

 ple of equity to support it. On 

 these and other grounds he thought 

 the House should agree to a com- 

 mittee of inquiry ; and said, as the 

 case at present appeared, he could 

 not sleep on his pillow if he were 

 to vote for the expulsion. 



Lord Castlereagh was anxious to 

 enter his protest against any depar- 

 ture from the fundamental principle 

 of parliamentary practice b^' any as- 

 sumption of, or interference with 

 the judicial functions. The motion 

 before the House, he said, did not 

 involve the expulsion of the noble 

 lord, but the main question for 

 consideration was, whether the 

 verdict of a jury should be deemed 

 a sufficient ground on which to 



