 |
A. Yes.
Q. Do you mean to say, that Mr. De Berenger afterwards went through the house, so as to render that necessary.
A. He went up into the attics.
Q. Did he go into your room?
A. He did not.
Q. What occasion was there for your getting up to see him measure the garden?
A. There was no occasion for that; but we were getting up, and she thought the gentleman might come into our room.
Q. Was she in the habit of calling you?
A. Sometimes she has done it.
Q. Who was with Mr. De Berenger, besides Donithorne.
A. I do not remember seeing any other.
Q. Who carried the rod with which they measured; was it Mr. De Berenger or Donithorne?
A. I cannot say, indeed.
Q. You may recollect who held the paper, and put down the measurements; which of the two carried the paper, and which carried the measuring rod?
A. I cannot tell which of the two it was, they being at the top of the garden almost.
Q. It is only a small garden, we know the situation?
A. It is a long garden.
Q. Which of them was it?
A. I cannot say, indeed, which of them it was.
Q. But one of them did?
A. Yes.
Q. Was there snow on the ground then?
A. No, it was a wet morning, I think.
Q. Are you sure it was a wet morning?
A. I think it was a wet morning, but I did not take particular notice of the day.
Lord Ellenborough. It had rained a good deal, had it?
A. Yes, it had.
Q. There was a good deal of rain last February, was there?
A. I think that was a wet morning.
Mr. Bolland. Had the effect of the rain been such, as to give them a good view of the surface of the ground, so as to measure?
A. Yes, I think it had.
Q. The snow was melted?
A. I think it was.
Q. And you saw them lay the rule regularly, that they could take the measurement properly?
A. Yes.
Lord Ellenborough. Did your husband fail, when he gave up the hatting business?
A. Why, yes.
Q. There had been no commission of bankrupt against him?
A. No.
Q. And he gave up his business in that house, and you have been since living at Mr. Donithorne's house?
A. Yes.
Q. How long has he been in the bail line?
A. In the bail line!
Q. How long has he been bail for people?
A. That is unknown to me, if he has.
Q. You have never known of people coming after him to be bail?
A. No, I have not.
Q. He has told us he has been bail for two persons; you know nothing of that?
A. No.
Q. When did he fail?
A. On the 17th of February.
Q. Has there been an execution in the house you lived in since that?
A. No.
Q. Is Mr. Donithorne a creditor of your husband's; do you owe him money?
A. No.
Q. Is he a relation?
A. Yes; he is a cousin.
Lord Ellenborough. How far is York-street, Westminster, from the Asylum?
Mr. Park. I understand it is behind the barracks in Bird-cage Walk.
Lord Ellenborough. It is about a mile I should suppose then?
Mr. Park. From a mile to a mile and a half.
Mr. Gurney. Is Mr. Donithorne here?
A. I believe he is.
Mr. Gurney. Then I suppose we shall see him.
Isaac Donithorne, sworn.
Examined by Mr. Richardson.
Q. We understand you live in York-street, Westminster?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you remember Mr. Tragear coming to your house, after he had given up his house in Queen-street?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you remember what day it was?
A. I believe it was Thursday; I am positive it was.
Q. What day of the month?
A. The 17th, I think, or the 18th of February.
Q. Are you well acquainted with the person of Mr. De Berenger?
A. Very well; I have been for some time.
Q. You are a cabinet-maker?
A. I am.
Q. Had Mr. De Berenger furnished you with designs for furniture at any time?
A. Yes, he had.
Q. Do you or not remember seeing him on the Sunday after that time when Tragear came?
A. Yes.
Q. That would be the 20th?
A. Yes.
Q. At what time in the day did you first see him?
A. Between nine and ten in the morning.
Q. For what purpose did he come?
A. To look over the grounds. I was going to make some alterations in my little garden, and also about other work that I had in hand.
Q. What other work do you mean?
A. Work I had for Miss Johnstone, No. 18, Great Cumberland-street; work I had in hand; I furnished all her house.
Lord Ellenborough. Mr. Cochrane Johnstone?
A. Yes.
Mr. Richardson. You were furnishing Mr. Johnstone's house at that time?
A. A house for Miss Johnstone.
Q. Did you see him again in the course of that same day?
A. Between eight and nine in the evening.
Q. Did he call again at your house in York-street?
A. Yes.
Q. About what time was it?
A. It was between eight and nine; I did not take particular notice of the time, not expecting there would be any question about it; we were all sitting in the parlour, and Mr. De Berenger knocked at the door, and I let him in, and he walked in, and while I was handing a chair to him to sit down, he said I will not disturb your good company, and he said he would walk into the back; and he did, and he staid about a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes.
Q. Did you walk back together?
A. Only into the parlour; in the morning, we were, I dare say, an hour together in the garden.
Q. Did you go into the garden in the evening?
A. We did not.
Q. What was the purpose of his calling in the evening?
A. Merely to answer the purpose of the morning, we meant to do something in the garden; he said he would call if he came that way in the evening, to tell me when he would draw a plan for the work I was going to do in the garden; I was going to build a room there.
Q. He was to draw a plan?
A. Yes.
Q. In the evening he called about the same business?
A. Yes.
Q. Was any further answer to be given to him?
A. This was the business; I was going to turn the front part of my house into an inn, and to make the back part of my house into pleasure grounds.
Q. And you had consulted him about the mode of doing it?
A. Yes, I had; Mr. De Berenger told me he could make out a handsome plan for me.
Lord Ellenborough. Did he tell you what you were to pay for it?
A. That house was not his, I pay L.60 a year for it.
Q. He did not tell you, that from L.200 to L.300 would not be excessive for a good plan?
A. Not for that plan.
Q. What did you expect to pay for a good plan?
A. That depended upon what sort of plan it might be, they might make a good plan worth that.
Q. You would not scruple paying that for a good plan?
A. I think I should for that for I had not the money to pay it.
Q. He put down the measurements in the morning?
A. Yes, he paced it over, but he told me he would come again and measure it quite correct.
Q. He put down the figures?
A. I do not know precisely whether he did or not.
Q. He had his pencil?
A. Yes, and a ten-foot rod that he carried.
Q. Did he bring a ten-foot rod to walk with?
A. I have a ten-foot rod myself, as a cabinet maker, and Mr. De Berenger paced it over.
Q. What sort of a morning was this?
A. A damp cold morning, a kind of misty rain; very cold.
Mr. Richardson. He said he would call at a subsequent time?
A. Yes, he did; here are all the designs.
Q. Those are the designs of furniture?
A. Those are the designs of furniture that I made for Miss Johnstone, or the honourable Cochrane Johnstone, for furniture in Great Cumberland Street; I believe I have some notes respecting them.
Cross-examined by Mr. Adolphus.
Q. Mr. De Berenger came to you, as a friend of Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, to give you plans for Mr. Cochrane Johnstone?
A. That was the case.
Q. He never gave you plans for any body else's furniture?
A. Never.
Q. You never employed a draftsman of his class to give you plans?
A. No, I made up two pieces of furniture from his plans, to go into a library; that was the first thing.
Q. He came as a friend of Mr. Cochrane Johnstone's?
A. Yes, to look to the furniture.
Q. And then, out of friendship to you, knowing you had little alteration to make, he proposed to assist you?
A. Yes; I first proposed the business, and Mr. De Berenger approved of it.
Q. He was going to make a survey of the inside of your house that morning; was he not?
A. He did of that also.
Q. Particularly your lodgers bed-room; he was very anxious to see that?
A. And all my own.
Q. He was very anxious to see your lodgers bed-room?
A. Not that particularly.
Q. You went and knocked up Mr. Tragear?
A. Yes; I went up and desired them to rise, and to clear up their room, for that he was coming there.
Q. Did you desire them to rise yourself?
A. Yes, there is not a doubt of it, for I went up stairs.
Lord Ellenborough. Will you take upon you, upon your oath, to say, that you went into that bed-room out of which they had come?
A. Yes, twice over.
Mr. Adolphus. What is your christian name?
A. Isaac Donithorne.
Q. Do you know any thing about the Stock Exchange?
A. A little; something about it.
Q. Have you ever done business there?
A. Never in my life.
Q. Have you ever employed an attorney?
A. Yes.
Q. Who is your attorney?
A. That gentleman there.
Q. What is his name?
A. Mr. Tahourdin.
Q. In what particular business is Mr. Tahourdin your attorney?
A. By the desire of the honourable Cochrane Johnstone, who thinks himself very ill used by a set of villains.——
Q. After all that preamble, as to Mr. Cochrane Johnstone's being ill used by a set of villains, will you answer my question, what Mr. Tahourdin is doing for you?
A. Issuing some writs.
Q. What have you desired him to do?
A. To issue some writs.
Q. How many?
A. A hundred and thirty-five.
Lord Ellenborough. A hundred and thirty-five writs, of what kind?
Mr. Park. Qui tam actions, and that was the reason I did not propose calling him.
Mr. Adolphus. Are you to pay Mr. Tahourdin the costs of those actions, or Mr. Cochrane Johnstone?
A. Mr. Cochrane Johnstone most undoubtedly, I should think.
Mr. Park. I really think that ought not to be asked.
Lord Ellenborough. If a man at my instance issues a hundred and thirty-five writs, to be sure I must bear him harmless; how long has your neighbour Tragear failed?
A. Why he never failed, to my knowledge; he left his shop publicly, and came to my house.
Q. He does nothing in the bail way, by way of filling up his time, does he?
A. I know nothing about his private concerns.
Lord Ellenborough. You take upon yourself to say, that you know he has not failed; is not his wife likely to know, she has told us he did when he came to your house. You may go about your business.
A Juryman. Are you a journeyman or a master?
A. I am a master in a small way, sometimes I keep three or four men.
Lord Ellenborough. Whom else do you call?
Mr. Park. No more, my Lord.
Lord Ellenborough. Do not you prove where De Berenger dined that day?
Mr. Park. No, I have no means of doing that.
Mr. Gurney. I beg to call Mr. Murray, to put one question to him, in contradiction to Smith?
Lord Ellenborough. If that question occasions a reply that will throw us into the night; if you think this case of alibi requires a serious answer, you will of course give it; but I think you would disparage the Jury by doing so.
Mr. Gurney. I will not call him, my Lord.
Lord Ellenborough. Do not let me supersede your discretion, if you think there is any use in having your witness.
Mr. Gurney. No, my Lord, I am quite content with the case as it stands.
REPLY.
Mr. GURNEY.
May it please your Lordship;
Gentlemen of the Jury,
It is now my duty to make a few observations in reply on this momentous cause; and, I assure you, that I rise to the discharge of that duty with feelings of no ordinary nature. It is a duty in which it is impossible to feel pleasure; for every gentleman must feel degraded in the degradation of a gentleman, and every Englishman must feel mortified in the disgrace of a man whose name is associated with the naval or military glories of his country. But we are here to try these defendants by their actions; and whatever their conduct may have been in other respects, by those actions must they stand or fall. By the actions of these defendants, as respecting the matters charged by this indictment, you are now called upon to pronounce upon all the evidence that you have heard, whether they are innocent or guilty.
Gentlemen, if in the outset of this case I addressed you with confidence, as to the result, I address you now with confidence, increased ten-fold, when I recollect the arguments by which these defendants have been defended; when I recollect the evidence which has been adduced in their defence, and when I recollect too the evidence which has not been adduced in their defence; the first, as it appears to me totally failing, in making out a case of innocence; and the two latter concluding to their guilt.
Gentlemen, as it is the smallest part of the case, I will take up that part upon which you were addressed last this morning, by my learned friend Mr. Serjeant Pell, which has been denominated in this transaction the underplot. My learned friend endeavoured, with great ability and ingenuity, to persuade you, that the transactions which have been brought before you, did not constitute one plot, consisting of two parts; but two separate and distinct plots, two conspiracies totally unconnected with each other. And my learned friend concluded very properly, that if he could convince you of that, he should entitle his own clients to an acquittal on this indictment.
Gentlemen, if there were two conspiracies, then miracles have not ceased; for unless you can believe, that a most extraordinary miracle has occurred, it is quite impossible to conceive that there were two plots. It is not necessary in a conspiracy, that every party should know every other party in the conspiracy; it is not requisite that he should be acquainted with all the dramatis personae, and the character assigned to each; it is enough if they engage in the general plan to forward the same general end, and each takes the part which is assigned him to the furtherance of that end. Now, gentlemen, look at the whole of the case, and see whether it is possible to believe, that these persons who came in the second post-chaise from Northfleet to London, were not cognizant of part of the plan, at least, if they were not of the whole, and that they were not aiding in the general conspiracy, to give a temporary rise to the funds on the 21st of February. That they afforded very material assistance in the completion of that purpose, is proved to demonstration. Independent of the facts, we have their own testimony against themselves, which is quite conclusive. Ask M'Rae, whether the plot was one or whether it was two? M'Rae was ready to come forward, and to impeach all the parties who were concerned in the conspiracy. Did he not, therefore, know the whole? When Mr. Cochrane Johnstone proffered him as a person who should betray the whole, and inform against all the parties conspiring. Are we to be told, that Mr. Cochrane Johnstone thought he knew a part only instead of the whole? Was Mr. Cochrane Johnstone meditating a second fraud upon the Stock Exchange? Was he endeavouring to get another L.10,000 out of them, by tendering them a witness, under pretence of his disclosing the whole, when he had it in his power to disclose no more than they already knew?
Gentlemen, M'Rae has been surrendered by my learned friend Mr. Alley, who never deserts his client if he can render him any service. No advocate is more zealous for his clients; yet my learned friend felt the proof given so irresistible, that he should be disgracing himself, if he stood up to ask you to disbelieve that proof, or even to hesitate about it, and he surrendered his client at once. Mr. M'Rae then stands here confessedly guilty of this conspiracy. Mr. M'Rae, who on the 15th of February had been proposing to Vinn the same plot, which was executed by De Berenger on the 21st. You find his companions in the post chaise were Sandom and Lyte, and their employer, by his own acknowledgment, the defendant Holloway. What can you wish more to prove that they were all engaged in this transaction? Mr. Serjeant Pell says, you must take Holloway's confession altogether; and because he declares, that he was not concerned with the Cochranes and Butt, you are to take that to be the fact.—Gentlemen, I do not assent to that doctrine, that when a defendant makes a confession, you are to take all the circumstances he alleges in his own favor, at the same time that you take those which are against him. Mr. Holloway came to propitiate the Stock Exchange committee; he came to ask them not to prosecute him. He could not have asked for that forbearance, if he had confessed a participation with De Berenger and the Cochranes. The only chance he had, therefore, was to deny his having any part in that plot, which, he knew, they were most anxious to unravel. But taking the whole of the case together, I think that it is impossible for you to entertain the smallest doubt upon this part of the subject.
I come therefore, gentlemen, to the other part of the case, upon which, after the great length of time which you have employed upon this case, and the fatigue you have undergone, I will not trespass upon you long.
Gentlemen, this part of the case branches itself into three or four heads, upon each of which I must make a few observations.
My learned friend, Mr. Serjeant Best, addressed you at considerable length upon the subject of the stock transactions of his three clients, Lord Cochrane, Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, and Mr. Butt; and he argued, that because it appeared not by any accounts which he put in, in addition to mine, but by the accounts which I gave in evidence, that these parties had been large dealers in consols and omnium, and had had large balances previous to the 21st of February; that therefore you were to believe, that they had on that day no possible interest to commit this fraud. That because they had had on a former day a larger balance, they could have no possible inducement to the commission of this crime. Gentlemen, observe the amount of the balance on that day, it was in omnium and consols very nearly a million. Reduced to consols it amounts to L.1,600,000. Then attend to the evidence of Mr. Baily, who tells you that the fluctuation of one-eighth was a gain or loss of two thousand pounds. Though they had been both buying and selling, yet their purchases had been much larger than their sales, and their attempts to purchase larger than their actual purchases. On Saturday the 19th, Mr. Butt had endeavoured to purchase one hundred and fifty thousand, and actually purchased fifty thousand. On this Monday, the 21st, all the three have this immense quantity of stock upon their hands; they have no means of getting rid of it, for Mr. Baily has told you, that but for this fraudulent transaction, it would have been impossible to have got rid of it, but at a great loss. They had been buying as a person must do, to keep up the market, to redeem himself from loss; and on this memorable day, all this stock is sold, it is sold at a profit of upwards of ten thousand pounds; and if it had been sold without a profit of one single farthing, still the getting out without a great loss, was to them very great gain.
Recollect gentlemen, that just one month afterwards came the news of the rupture of the negotiation at Chatillon, when the premium on omnium fell from 28 to 12 per cent.; if that news had come instead of this false news, on the morning of the 21st of February, the loss of these three defendants, would have been upwards of one hundred and sixty thousand pounds. These persons, therefore, were so involved, that ruin stared them in the face, and when they were in this situation, they did as I allege, and as I maintain I have proved by evidence perfectly irresistible, engage in this conspiracy, to give this fraudulent rise to the funds by this false news; and the moment the object had been attained of the rise of the funds, that moment all the stock was sold, and sold to the profit that I have proved. So much for these several stock transactions, which supply the corrupt motive by which these defendants were instigated to the commission of this crime.
Then, Gentlemen, we come to that which is a very important part, and indeed a main part of this case, the identity of Mr. De Berenger; that identity, including the question of hand-writing. Upon this subject we have had, for the last two hours, the evidence which has nauseated every man in Court; the evidence of the alibi, which no man living can believe; in which no two witnesses agree; in which we have contradiction after contradiction from every one of them. My learned friend, Mr. Park, last night told us we should have the evidence of two watermen, who had rowed Mr. De Berenger across the Thames, who knew his person perfectly well, and who recollected the occurrence particularly, because it was the first Sunday after the frost had broken, and the river became navigable. I suppose the river is frozen again this morning as they are not here. Gentlemen, the interval of the night has made the advisers or manufacturers of this part of the case reflect upon it, and they have brought, instead of the two watermen from the river, the Irish ostler from Chelsea. Gentlemen, they who projected this alibi, did not attend to one circumstance, which cannot fail to have struck you long ago, namely; that this is a case perfectly unassailable by alibi. Let it be supposed, that I had not identified Mr. De Berenger by the persons who saw him at Dover; by the persons who saw him on the road; by those who saw him get out of the chaise at the Marsh Gate, and get into a hackney coach; that I had not identified his countenance by any one of them, still his identity is established beyond all contradiction, for knowing that an alibi would be attempted, I defeated it by anticipation. I take up De Berenger at Dover as I would a bale of goods—I have delivered him from hand to hand from Dover to London—I have delivered him into the house of Lord Cochrane—and I have Lord Cochrane's receipt acknowledging the delivery. You have, at the Ship at Dover, the person pretending to be Colonel Du Bourg, the aid de camp, in a grey military great coat, in a scarlet uniform embroidered with gold lace, and he has a star and a medallion. You have him traced from stage to stage, identified by the Napoleons with which he is rewarding his postillions; the first postillion delivers him to the second, the second to the third, and so on till he is landed in the house of Lord Cochrane. Who went into the house of Lord Cochrane? Ask Lord Cochrane. It was Mr. De Berenger, and it is not pretended that any other person entered that house in that dress, or any thing resembling it; and therefore if I had not any witness to speak to the identity of the countenance of Mr. De Berenger, I have proved such a case as no alibi can shake. But add to that the evidence of identity. I have had much experience in courts of justice, and much upon the subject of identity, and I declare, I never in my life knew a case of identity, by the view of countenance, so proved. The countenance of Mr. De Berenger is not a common one, a person who has observed it cannot have forgotten it. I do not call merely such persons as have seen him at the messenger's, or in the court of King's Bench, or anywhere else. I put the case to the severest test, calling witnesses who had not seen him since his apprehension, desiring them to survey the court, Mr. De Berenger sitting, as he has done, undistinguished from other persons, in no conspicuous situation, and you saw, how one after another, when their eyes glanced upon his face, recognised him in an instant as the person who had practised this fraud. Now, gentlemen, if this were not a case of misdemeanor, but a case in which the life of the party were to answer for the crime he had committed, I ask, whether many—many—many guilty men have not forfeited their lives upon infinitely less evidence than I have given as to the person of Mr. De Berenger?
Then if Mr. De Berenger was Colonel Du Bourg, what becomes of the question of hand-writing? The hand-writing of De Berenger to Du Bourg's letter, was spoken to by Mr. Lavie, who had made particular observation on his hand-writing, having seen him write at the messenger's. My learned friend, Mr. Park, says he should not know the hand-writing from an hour's observation; perhaps not; but this was more than an hour's observation; it was observation repeated more than once, and it was observation for the very purpose. The fact confirms the judgment of Mr. Lavie. I ask, who sent the letter to Admiral Foley? The answer is, Mr. De Berenger; whose hand writing is it? can you have any doubt that it is the hand-writing of the person who sent it? On this point, witnesses are called by De Berenger (one of them a most respectable witness, undoubtedly) to prove that this does not resemble his ordinary hand-writing. No, gentlemen, certainly not; he would not write in his usual hand. Lord Yarmouth says, the character is more angular than his usual hand. That would be the case, where a man is writing a feigned hand; but still that occurs here, which almost always does occur, a person so writing is very likely to betray himself just as he gets to the end, and when he comes to sign his name, the initials shall be so striking, as at once to excite the observation of such a man as Lord Yarmouth, and his lordship says, This R in the signature of R. Du Bourg certainly does very much resemble the R in the usual signature in C. R. De Berenger; but, taking the evidence of identity and that together, it is clear, that he was the person at Dover; that he was the person, therefore, who sent the letter to Admiral Foley; and the evidence of Mr. Lavie is therefore so strongly confirmed, as far to outweigh all the evidence you have had on the other side respecting his hand-writing.
Then, gentlemen, we come a little further; my learned friends last night addressed you at great length, and with great earnestness, upon Lord Cochrane's affidavit, and they requested you would not suppose Lord Cochrane was capable of making a false affidavit. Gentlemen, that Lord Cochrane would have been incapable of deliberately engaging in any thing so wicked some time ago, I am sure I as earnestly hope as I am desirous to believe; but you must see in what circumstances men are placed, when they do these things; Lord Cochrane had first found his way to the Stock Exchange, he had dealt largely in these speculations, which my learned friends have so liberally branded with the appellation of infamous; he had involved himself so deeply, that there was no way, but by this fraud of getting out of them; he had then got out of them in this way, and then he found, as guilty people always do, that he was involved still deeper; he found the great agent of the plot traced into his house, and traced into his house in the dress in which he had perpetrated the fraud; he was called upon for an explanation upon the subject. Gentlemen, he was gone to perdition, if he did not do something to extricate himself from his difficulty; then it was that he ventured upon the rash step of making this affidavit, and swearing to the extraordinary circumstances upon which, as I commented so much at length in the morning of yesterday, I will not trespass upon your attention by making comments now.
My learned friends were properly anxious not to leave Lord Cochrane's affidavit to stand unsupported; they were desirous of giving it some confirmation, and they exhausted two or three precious hours this morning in calling witnesses to confirm it; but those witnesses were called to confirm the only part of the affidavit which wanted no confirmation; they were called to give Lord Cochrane confirmation about applications to the Admiralty, and applications to the War Office, and applications to the Colonial Office, by Sir Alexander Cochrane for De Berenger; and after they had called witness after witness to give this confirmation upon this insignificant and trifling point, they leave him without confirmation upon that important, that vital part of this case to my Lord Cochrane, videlicet: the dress which Mr. De Berenger wore at the time he came to that house, and had with him that interview. Lord Cochrane puts him on a grey military great coat, a green uniform, and a fur cap. I have proved, that the uniform he wore was red. My learned friend, Mr. Serjeant Best, felt the strength of the evidence for the prosecution upon that, and he endeavoured to answer it by a very strange observation. "Why," says he, "consider, Lord Cochrane had been accustomed to see Mr. De Berenger in green; he did not make his affidavit till nearly three weeks afterwards; and how very easily he might confound the green, in which he ordinarily saw him, with the red, in which he saw him on that day, and on that day only." Now, if I wanted to shew how it was impossible for a man to make a mistake, as to the colour of the coat in which he had seen another, I should select the instance in which he had seen that other in a peculiar dress but for once.
But, gentlemen, my learned friend had to account for more than the red coat. It is not a plain red coat, it is a scarlet military uniform, the uniform of an aid-de-camp; and on the breast, there is that star which you have seen; and suspended from his neck, there is the medallion. Lord Cochrane is a man of rank, not unacquainted with the distinction of a star. If he was not in the secret of De Berenger's dress, he must have had curiosity upon the subject; and I beg to ask, what is to be said for Lord Cochrane seeing De Berenger in that scarlet uniform, with that star on his breast, and that medallion suspended from his neck, swearing that the uniform was green, and that he lent De Berenger a black coat, because he could not wait on Lord Yarmouth in that green uniform, which you will recollect was the uniform of Lord Yarmouth's corps, in which, Lord Yarmouth has told you, it would have been more military to have waited upon him, than in any other dress.
Gentlemen, there is more than this. My friends call one of Lord Cochrane's servants, who received De Berenger when he came there, who told him in the hearing of the hackney coachman, that his master was gone to breakfast in Cumberland-street, who took the note which De Berenger wrote to Cumberland-street, who brought back the note, and upon that note Mr. De Berenger wrote two or three lines more. Then what becomes of Lord Cochrane's affidavit, who says the signature was so near the bottom of the paper, that he could not read it. The postscript is written after the signature, yet Lord Cochrane cannot read the note, because the signature is written so near the bottom; and then when my learned friends had that servant in the box, they did not venture to ask that servant what was the dress of Mr. De Berenger. After calling witnesses to confirm Lord Cochrane, as to applications to different offices by Sir Alexander Cochrane, they dare not ask Lord Cochrane's own servant as to the dress De Berenger wore, to try whether he could confirm Lord Cochrane's affidavit upon that subject. They then tell us, that another servant is gone abroad with some admiral, and I pray you, as he was here long after this business was afloat, how was it he was suffered to go, unless his absence was more wanted than his presence; but they have a maid-servant who also saw him, and she is not called; and my learned friends, though they were so anxious to confirm Lord Cochrane's affidavit, leave him without confirmation, utterly abandoned and hopeless.
Mr. Brougham. Davis had left.
Mr. Gurney. I say why was he suffered to go away. The maid-servant is still here, and she is not called. Gentlemen, I say so much for the affidavit of Lord Cochrane, which is a vital part of this subject, and upon which, I observe with great regret; but if I forbore the observations, I should desert the duty which I owe the public. Gentlemen, there is indeed but little more for me to trouble you with, I think; but there was an observation made by my learned friend, which is very important; they cross-examined Mr. Wright, whom I put up to prove the affidavit, by asking him, whether Lord Cochrane did not at the time he put that affidavit into his hands, observe, that now he had furnished the Stock Exchange Committee with the name of Mr. De Berenger, if he was the person who practised this fraud. Gentlemen, Mr. Serjeant Best laboured this point with you in the course of his address to you, and labored it with great ability; but my learned friend did not advert to one circumstance respecting that affidavit, which disposes of all his observations in an instant. When did Lord Cochrane furnish the name of De Berenger to the Committee of the Stock Exchange? On the 11th of March; Mr. De Berenger having quitted London on the 27th of February, twelve days before; and when my Lord Cochrane had no more doubt that he was out of the country, than that he was himself in existence; he was gone to the north, not gone to the south, to Portsmouth, to go on board the Tonnant; he had been gone twelve days, twice as long as was necessary to find his way to Amsterdam; it was believed he was safe there, and when it was thought he was quite safe, Lord Cochrane was extremely ready to furnish the Stock Exchange Committee with the name of the party, and so to get credit for his candour. "What can a man do more? I have given you the name of the party, only find him, and you will see whether he is Du Bourg, or not;" he did not expect that he would be found; he was, however, found, and the intentions of these parties were frustrated.
I come now, gentlemen, to another part of the case, which would have excited my astonishment, if it had not been for the management and machinery that I had seen in this case; still I could hardly have expected to have met with that which we have had to-day in evidence, I mean the mode which has been resorted to, of accounting for the bank notes which were found in the letter-case of De Berenger, and those that were paid away by him. Gentlemen, the Defendants knew this part of our case; in truth, there is no surprize upon them in any part, they knew it all. You have it in evidence, that they have inspected the notes in the letter-case; they knew the use that we were to make of them, and then we have that notable expedient, the fruit of Mr. Cochrane Johnstone's fertile brain, the mode of accounting for all these bank notes, by this extraordinary transaction of the drawings of a design for improving an acre of ground behind Mr. Cochrane Johnstone's house in Alsop's buildings.
Now, gentlemen, only have the goodness to look at it. The work was done, it is said, last September; L.50 was then paid on account, respecting which you might, from Mr. De Berenger's letter, have supposed that no voucher had been given, for it is mentioned carelessly in the postscript, "a-propos, you have paid me L.50 on account." On the contrary, you find that Mr. Cochrane Johnstone took a stamped receipt at the time; then we have the architect called, as in an action on a quantum meruit; and architects have most magnificent ideas of plans and money, and he tells you, that two or three hundred pounds would not have been too much for such a design as that. Gentlemen, I think we are all as well qualified to decide upon that, as an architect; you will, if you think proper, look at it, and form your own judgment. But how comes it that we have these strange accounts from Mr. Tahourdin, his verbal testimony contradicting his client's letter. Mr. Tahourdin says, "I did delicately, but I did by Mr. Berenger's desire, again and again hint to Mr. Cochrane Johnstone the subject of payment, to which I must do him the justice to say he was never averse. I had done this some time before February, but no money had come;" and then, as soon as these words were out of his mouth, he puts in Mr. De Berenger's letter to Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, who says, "You (Mr. Cochrane Johnstone) have been pressing me to take money, and now I will take it." Oh, gentlemen, when does this fit of money-paying and money-taking seize these two persons? On the 22d of February! The day speaks volumes. Added to all the extraordinary coincidences, which the Defendants wish you to believe were accidental, we now have the acknowledged payment of money by Mr. Cochrane Johnstone to Mr. De Berenger on the day after Mr. De Berenger had so rendered Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, Lord Cochrane, and Mr. Butt, the important service of raising the funds by the imposition that he had practised, of which they had so promptly and profitably availed themselves.
Then, gentlemen, we have the extraordinary evidence of Mr. Tahourdin, the attorney for Mr. Cochrane Johnstone and for De Berenger, from which it appears that they were all getting up the defence to the indictment by anticipation. Mr. Tahourdin is to give a contemporaneous existence to the transaction by the production of these letters and instruments, the receipt for two hundred pounds, and the promissory note for two hundred pounds more. From all this it is plain, that Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, at the very moment when he was settling with his agent his reward for the fraud he had committed, like a man of great foresight, looked forward to the possible consequence of the trial of this day, and he provided for it, as he thought, sufficiently:—"It may be thought, Mr. De Berenger, that this money which I am now giving you is for the business of yesterday, let us take care to prevent it; you write to me, I will write to Tahourdin; it is not absolutely necessary (perhaps, he added) to trust him with the secret, he will be an admirable witness hereafter; I will put into his hands the promissory note and the receipt, he will give them contemporaneous date, and then I shall be able to account for my giving you, on this 26th of February, four hundred pounds."
Persons who devise these contrivances, gentlemen, have not, as I observed to you yesterday, the skill to provide for all circumstances, and now and then the very things which they do to effect concealment, shall lead to detection.—Now mark:—Mr. Cochrane Johnstone is to pay and to lend to Mr. De Berenger four hundred pounds. As he was to give him four hundred pounds, why did he, or Mr. Butt (for they are one and the same) take so much trouble, and go through so much circuity in shifting and changing the bank notes? You observe, that the bank note for L.200 is sent to the bankers, and exchanged for two notes of L.100 each; and then the same agent is sent to the Bank of England to get two hundred notes of L.1 each; and that about the same time another agent is sent to the bank, to exchange the two other notes for L.100 each for two hundred more notes of L.1 each. Why, for the purpose of this payment and this loan, do they go through this operation of changing and changing again, to procure a vast number of notes for Mr. De Berenger, to enable him to take this long journey to the north? Why, gentlemen, it is because one pound notes are not traced so easily as notes for one hundred pounds; people take these small notes without writing upon them, but they do write upon such large notes as L.100 and L.200, and that they knew might afford means of immediate detection, but the device, when detected, makes the fact still stronger, and you have in proof, that sixty-seven of one hundred, and forty-nine of another hundred, were found at Leith in De Berenger's writing-desk. This affords a strong presumption, that he had the whole four hundred, besides which I have traced to him; a forty-pound note which he changed at Sunderland, and a fifty-pound note which he gave to his servant, Smith; and these, too, have been traced up to Mr. Butt. When all these turnings and windings are thus discovered, what measure of your understandings, gentlemen, must these Defendants have taken, to imagine that you could be imposed upon by such flimsy materials as these manufactured papers? The device is gross, palpable, and monstrous. What does all this prove?—Nothing for the defendants; but then it proves a great deal against them. Recollect too, gentlemen, that this L.400, which is shewn to come out of the hands of Mr. Cochrane Johnstone and Mr. Butt, after the 24th of February, is also shewn to have come originally out of the hands of Lord Cochrane himself on a prior day; and therefore you have the money coming out of the hands of all the three; the reward of the agent coming out of the hands of the persons who had been benefited by the fraudulent services of that agent.
Gentlemen, it is difficult to abstain from many more observations on this defence; but the case is too clear to require them, and I will no longer trespass upon your patience. It appears to me absolutely impossible to doubt respecting the guilt of the several defendants. De Berenger is Du Bourg. When De Berenger is Du Bourg, the rest all follows; he was the agent of others, unquestionably; he was not himself the principal. You have had a mass of perjury exhibited to-day to extricate him, and consequently his employers. That, like all falsehoods, when detected, only serves to make conviction more clear and more certain. With these observations I sit down, feeling most grateful for the patient attention I have received, both from his Lordship and from you, and perfectly sure that you will do justice to the Public.
SUMMING UP.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH.
Gentlemen of the Jury,
You are now come to that period of the case in which your most important duty is to be discharged, as it respects the individuals who are the object of this indictment, and the public, whose interests are to be protected by the justice you are called upon to administer.
This is an indictment for an offence of great malignity and mischief; it is for the offence of conspiracy, which is charged to have been committed by the eight persons whose names are upon this indictment; and it is for you to consider upon the statement of the evidence I shall make to you, how far that offence is brought home to all or any of these Defendants.
The offence of conspiracy, gentlemen, is an offence consisting in a wicked concert, contrivance, and combination of individuals, to effect some public or private injury or mischief; that contrivance and that combination is not to be collected, nor is it practicable, in the course of human affairs, to collect it from the mouths of the parties assembled for the purpose of communication, but from the actings and conduct of the several parties as they may appear generally, to conspire and conduce to the same wicked end and purpose; and if it appears to you, from the actings and conduct of these parties, that they entertained the same common purpose of mischief, and that they have by their several actings combined and co-operated to the effecting that same wicked purpose, that is sufficient to bring home the imputation of the crime charged against the parties; therefore the prosecutor need not shew that they have met in common council, or even that they have seen one another before, if their acting shews they were influenced by one common purpose of mischief, and aimed at the production of the same malignant end and effect. Suppose persons jointly charged in an indictment with the breaking of an house, are found on different sides of the same house, besetting and endeavouring to enter it at the same time; you need not shew that they had actually met, and previously contrived the plan of this joint robbery; the unity of their conduct proves their joint contrivance and concert to accomplish the same end; though, indeed, this is a case where personal presence at the acts done, renders all intendment of the personal concert of the actors unnecessary. The same rules which apply to the offence of conspiracy as a misdemeanor, apply equally to all crimes committed by concert up to the crime of high treason, which is often established by evidence of the distinct actings of separate parties breathing the same purpose, and immediately conducing to the same end. The question, therefore, for you to consider upon the evidence (which I am sorry it will be necessary for me to state to you at a greater length, than, with regard to your ease and convenience, I could have wished) will be, whether the case is not brought home by satisfactory evidence to a great number, if not to all the Defendants.
The crime charged upon this indictment, in eight different charges or counts, is that of conspiring to raise the price of the public funds; in some of them it is charged to be with a view to corrupt gain upon the part of these persons or some of them, or at least to the prejudice of other individuals; for that is enough to constitute the offence, even if the individuals engaged in this conspiracy had not (as it is imputed to them that they had) any corrupt motive of personal advantage to all or any of themselves to answer; if the criminal artifice operated, or was in all probability likely to operate to the prejudice of the public, and was clearly so intended, we need not go further; when we know that a great amount in the funds is at certain periods bought for the public or large classes of individuals; and you find by the testimony of Mr. Steers, that on this very day the sum of L.15,957. 10. 8. was bought for the Accountant General, which would have been bought for less; and every person for whose use the Accountant General purchased, having to acquire by means of such purchase shares in the public securities, would of course have so much the less stock for his money, on account of this fraud, and would consequently receive a great pecuniary injury thereby; and no doubt, multitudes of persons besides those immediately alluded to, and whose cases are not brought individually under your view, must have been affected by it; for the dealings in the funds are, we know, every day carried on to a vast amount, and every person dealing on that particular day, as a purchaser, was prejudiced by the practices by which a false elevation of the funds was on that day occasioned.
Of the counts, one or two, I think, are not counts on which, properly, your verdict can be founded, because they state, that every one of these Defendants knew that a gain was to be acquired by Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, Lord Cochrane, and Mr. Butt; and it does not appear, with sufficient certainty, that they knew the relation in which these three persons stood to the funds, or their interest and speculations therein; I mean, that such persons as M'Rae, Holloway, and so on, might not know the precise situation in which the three stood; but if they all co-operated to the same end, and the Northfleet imposition, as I may call it, was intended to be auxiliary to the imposition intended to be effected by the way of Dover, and the parties knew that they were acting in the same fraud, and were respectively conscious instruments in producing the same effect, they are all guilty of the same conspiracy; and it has been admitted, by a learned counsel for some of the Defendants, that his clients, Holloway, Lyte, and Sandom, have been concerned in a conspiracy; but, he says, that the conspiracy in which they were concerned, was another and a different conspiracy, from the one in which the three first-mentioned of the Defendants were engaged; and that you cannot unite the two conspiracies together, and convict them all as guilty of one entire individual conspiracy; and it will be one material point for your consideration, whether, under the circumstances which have appeared in evidence, it is made out to your satisfaction, that they were all conspiring to effectuate the same purpose, pursuing similar, and with almost a servile imitation and resemblance, the same means, at the same time, in the accomplishment of the same end.
Now how has it been done? in both instances, by the adoption of disguises. Of what nature are the disguises? in both instances, military disguises; one, indeed, has gold lace round the cape, and the other has embroidery. Sarah Alexander says, those procured by M'Rae, were officers coats, with flowers of worsted, and that the hats were embroidered, the one having a brass plate, and a gold tassel, instead of the sort of ornaments that the superior actor in this conspiracy (if such you shall be of opinion he was) had. One was decorated with a star, and that silver ornament that you have seen; the other was in rather a plainer dress; but there was in each case the assumption of the character of officers; and the communication of false intelligence respecting the good news which was to accelerate peace, was common to both parts of the scheme. You will consider, upon the whole of the evidence, whether there is not a link or connection, between the upper and under plot, through the means of M'Rae, and perhaps of Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, and, whether the two conspiracies are not united through the means of that person, M'Rae; his conduct itself is extraordinary; by a most remarkable offer, on the part of Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, it is proposed that there should be the sum of L.10,000 given to this man; a man in a low and ordinary and desperate situation; and it is stated, that Lord Cochrane, Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, and Mr. Butt, would give L.3,000 among them. Why should they give that? If, indeed, they could thereby mislead and draw away the public attention, and divert it to the pursuit and hunting down of M'Rae, as the sole artificer and perpetrator of the fraud, and could thereby turn aside observation and suspicion from themselves (supposing them to be properly charged with this offence), L.3,000 would be well paid, and cheaply employed for such a purpose. It is for you to say, whether these letters which have been read to you, do not appear pregnant of this contrivance and device on the part of the writer.
The first question, gentlemen, will be, was the Defendant, De Berenger, the man who was found at Dover, about one o'clock on the morning of Monday the 21st of February, and who proceeded through the several stages to London, and ultimately to the mansion of Lord Cochrane himself, and was there received with that dress, whatever it was, that he wore; but the dress he wore, is proved by so many witnesses, that I will not fatigue you with stating it now, because I must, by and by, state the whole of the evidence to you.
A great deal of observation has been made about the character of hand-writing, of what I call the Dover letter—the letter sent to Admiral Foley; the object of sending it to him cannot be doubtful, for it was intended that the Port Admiral should (as he would if he had believed the report) communicate that intelligence to Government, and which, if the day had been tolerably clear, might by telegraph have reached this town in much less than half an hour, I believe in a quarter of an hour; and having been sent off at this very early hour to Admiral Foley, who was called out of bed to receive it, it would have been in town early, and the stocks would have been up at the very moment, when under the peremptory order before given, L.50,000 would have been sold, as well as every other part of the stock, standing in the names of the Defendants.
Gentlemen, there has been great stress laid upon this letter, and whether it be or be not the hand-writing of De Berenger, I will not (for it is not my province) draw the conclusion which might be drawn from looking at that letter; it appears to me evidently an artificial, upright, stiff hand, as contrasted with the ordinary natural character of hand-writing of that gentleman. It is sometimes useful to look where the same words occur in different parts of the same letter; and when you come to look at the words, "I have the honour to be," in one part of the letter, and the words "have pledged my honour," &c. in the other; they present in the first instance, a more angular formation of letters than I have generally seen, and with reference to the idea thrown out of this being written in great haste, it is not impossible that this gentleman having meditated the whole contrivance before-hand, should have brought this letter down with him, ready written and directed from town, and that he had called for pen and ink merely to go through the appearance of writing a letter, and which he might fold up as if for the purpose of being sent; but that he might hand over to Wright, of Dover, the letter he had brought with him, not trusting to the hurry of the moment for the proper formation of one. I do not say that such is the fact; but it is clear that the letter produced, is the one he actually sent; for he says afterwards to the witness, Shilling, that he had sent a letter to Admiral Foley, in order to apprize him that the telegraph might work; the Dover express-boy proves that he carried the letter given to him, to Admiral Foley, and what letter can that be, if it is not this, which is proved to have been delivered to Admiral Foley? This letter was calculated to impress the Admiral with the belief, that the allies had obtained a decisive victory, that Bonaparte was killed, that the allies were in Paris, and that peace was likely to take place immediately. After the calamity of the long war we have had, ending as indeed it has ended, in the fulness of glory; we all feel that we have had an abundant measure of glory, though painfully earned; every body recollects the sort of electric effect produced upon this town the moment the news now under consideration arrived; the funds were raised preternaturally; one cannot indeed on looking back, account for it, how the omnium should have been up to twenty-eight at that time; there was a considerable elevation beyond that price during the course of that day; it rose to thirty and a fraction.
Gentlemen, the prosecutors allege that the Defendant, De Berenger, having forwarded this letter, pursued his course, coming to town in the manner stated, and that he ultimately came to Lord Cochrane's house, upon which I shall hereafter comment. You will not, I think, have any doubt that De Berenger was the man who appeared under the name of Du Bourg; but in order to obviate or remove that impression from your minds, the learned counsel for the Defendant, De Berenger, did adventure or rather was forced upon an attempt, which I own it seemed to me to require the utmost firmness to attempt to execute; for there never was evidence given since I have been present in a court of justice, which carried to my mind such entire conviction of the truth and authenticity of that part of the story; you were yourselves witnesses to the manner in which the witnesses, who spoke to the person of De Berenger, were put upon the investigation; they were told to look round the court, and they accordingly threw their eyes about the court in every direction, before they found the person whom they said they had so taken notice of; you saw them look behind them, look down, and on every side of them, and then suddenly, as if they were struck by a sort of electricity, conviction flashed upon their minds the instant their eyes glanced upon him; this occurred in every instance I think but one, where the witness not having his eyes conducted that way, did not discover him. The learned counsel having such abundance of proof on this head, did not resort to a means usually adopted on occasions of this sort, and to which it is perfectly allowable to resort, namely, that of shewing the person to the witness, and asking him whether such person was the man; when a man stands for his life at the bar of the Old Bailey, the witness is frequently bid to look at the prisoner at the bar, and to say whether he remembers him, and whether he is the person, or one of the persons (as the case may be) who robbed him; and he pronounces whether according to his recollection, he is the person or not. So multiplied a quantity of testimony, so clear, and so consistent, was, I think hardly ever presented in the course of any criminal trial; differing in no circumstance respecting his person and dress, excepting in some trifles, which amidst the general accordance of all material circumstances, rather confirmed by this minute diversity, than weakened, the general credit of the whole, and gave it the advantage which belongs to an artless and unartificial tale. Some saying his cap was a little flat, as it might be owing to its being drawn over his face; one saying that it was brown; another I think, that it was of a fawn colour; and one who spoke with the utmost certainty in other particulars, that it was nearly the colour of his pepper and salt great coat; but in all the other substantial particulars, they concur in their accounts most exactly; and these minute variances exclude the idea of any uniform contrivance and design in the variation; for where it is an artificial and prepared story, the parties agree in the minutest facts, as well as the most important; and indeed, gentlemen, so abundant, so uniform, and so powerful is the evidence as to one point, viz. the identity of Berenger, that it strikes me, that if these witnesses are not to be fully believed as to this point, then almost every man who has been convicted at the Old Bailey upon so much weaker proof of his being the person who committed the particular crime with which he is charged, (and which has been the case in almost every instance I have known), may be considered as victims unjustly sacrificed in a course of trial, to the rash credulity of their judges and juries. If the evidence produced is not sufficient to establish this point, I am at a loss to say by what description and quantity of testimony, such a point can be satisfactorily made out in a course of trial.
When the learned counsel addressed himself to prove an alibi, I could not foresee how it would be satisfactorily accomplished; I cannot say I believed he would accomplish it, but I believed it would be attempted by better evidence than that which has been adduced; you recollect the prior testimony of the Davidsons; the servants had gone out at two, instead of four; Mr. De Berenger, according to the evidence he has adduced, is found three miles and a half off; where he had dined, is not shewn, he is in a hurry to get back; according to the next set of alibi witnesses, he is found at Mr. Donithorne's between eight and nine, having been found there in the morning, to measure the garden, at not a very convenient time, with the snow upon the ground; and who are the people who speak to this? a man who has been in the habit, which some of us are, of examining the countenances and demeanor of men brought forward to speak to guilty untruths, becomes in a degree familiar with the modes of behaviour which such persons adopt. From something in the manner of one of the witnesses, which suggested to me that such a question might not be improperly addressed to him, I asked him, whether he had not been used to be bail? (thinking that he might possibly be one of those hired bail, who are the disgrace of our courts of justice). What does he answer? why, he had been bail once, and then he had been bail another time, and the amount he did not know; and I think he said he did not know whether he had not been bail oftener; a man who is in the habit of being bail, must swear to the amount, and he must swear he is an housekeeper; and this man had no house over his head of his own, but was living in the house of another; I thought, too, the man might have failed, and been obliged to quit his house on that account; and it so appears, that he was undone in his circumstances, and that he was a man occasionally presenting himself to swear to his possession of property, warranting his becoming bail for others. Then what becomes of Donithorne; he is an inferior cabinet-maker, employed by Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, and has brought a great number of penal actions for him; at every turn of the case, he doubles in upon us, and you will presently have to say, whether he and others, and which others, are not affected by this case.
Gentlemen, the evidence begins with that of John Marsh, who keeps the packet-boat public house at Dover, he says, "Upon that 21st of February, I heard a knocking at Mr. Wright's fore door of the Ship Inn, between one and a quarter after one o'clock; I went out upon hearing that, and, on going out, I found a gentleman there, who had on a grey great coat, and an uniform coat under it. I called for a person at my house to bring two lights across; when I had the two lights, the gentleman had got into the passage; he had a star on his red coat, under the great coat; it is similar to this star." Now, it is said these persons saw him in the dark, but candles were brought over, and you may see a man's countenance by the light of two candles placed near him, almost as well as you could in the day-light we have at present; it would certainly be sufficient for the purposes of observation; if it were not so, half at least of the injuries done at night would be very imperfectly proved, if proved at all. He says, "I do not recollect that he had any other ornament; he was very anxious for a post-chaise and four; the porter at the Ship came down to him; he wanted an express horse, and a man to send to the Admiral at Deal;" then it is highly probable, as he wanted an express horse, that he did send this letter by that express; the witnesses swear they saw him writing a letter. "I asked him where he came from, and he told me, he was the bearer of the most important dispatches that had been brought to this country for twenty years; I asked him where he came from? he told me, from France. I asked him, where he landed? he told me, on the beach; and he begged of me to get a post-chaise and four for him; and then I went and called Mr. Wright, of the Ship Inn; then he wanted pen, ink, and paper. I had shewn him into a room; as soon as Mr. Wright came down stairs, Mr. Wright gave me a sheet of paper, and pens and ink, which I carried into the room; I gave it to him, and he began to write upon it; he called for a bottle of Madeira, and something to eat." That circumstance of his having wine, is afterwards confirmed, for when he is going up Shooter's hill, he is giving it away to some of the postillions. "I asked him, whether I should call the collector of the port? telling him, that it was his business to see such people when they landed; he made answer to me, that his business did not lie with the collectors; then Mr. Wright came, and I had no more conversation with him; two candles were placed, one on each side of him, and I could see him; that is the gentleman; (pointing him out.) A gentleman of the name of Gourley was there, and another of the name of Edis, was also there." Then he says, "I went to get horses with all possible dispatch; he told the two postillions he would give them a Napoleon each;" and that description of coin attends him throughout, nor does it quit him to the last, for in the very desk when he is taken up in Scotland, there were found Napoleons tallying with these; therefore the proof in this particular is dovetailed and closed in, beyond any thing I almost ever saw in a court of justice. Then he says, "he had a German cap on, and gold fringe, as I thought;" and it turns out, upon an exhibit we had made to us of a similar cap, that De Berenger had such a cap; those that are shewn, were made in the resemblance of what, from the evidence, they collected the articles to be. They are not the originals; the coat, it appears, was cut to pieces, and got out of the Thames, but the actual cap is not produced; "this is all that I heard and saw."
Upon his cross examination, he says, "I am not in the least connected with the Ship Inn, but on hearing this knocking, I went across to see who the gentleman was out of mere curiosity; I did not observe whether it was moon-light, foggy, or star-light." It does not signify which it was, for he saw him by candle-light. "The boots let him in; I was with him about five minutes altogether, but I cannot speak to a minute; he was in great haste to get away; I should think he was not more than twenty minutes at Mr. Wright's altogether. I held the candle while the boots unlocked the parlour door, and I went and put them on the table; he wished me to quit the room, and I did not go in any more." Then he is asked about a large company in the inn, he says, "I do not know that there had been any; I never saw him before nor yet since, till to-day, but I can take upon me confidently to swear, that this is the man." He made a very strong observation upon him, and he pointed him out in the manner you saw. "I never was examined upon this subject before, only by Mr. Stow, the collector."
On his re-examination, he says, "he told me before I sent for the lights what his business was, and that he had landed on the beach. I was in the passage with him till the lights came; my attention was called to him as a stranger of importance. I saw the person when I was by myself in the hall, and knew him the instant I saw him; I have not the least doubt that he is the same man."
One of the other persons who saw him, of the name of Gourley, a hatter at Dover, speaks to the same thing—"I was at Mr. Marsh's, the packet-boat, on the morning of the 21st of February; Mr. Marsh went over and called for lights; I took two candles and went across with them to the Ship, where I perceived a gentleman in a pepper and salt coloured coat, similar to that which is shewn to me. Mr. Marsh asked me to go and call the ostler up, and to tell him to get a post-chaise and four immediately. I did so; and after some time, when I had got the ostler up, I returned back again and found the stranger in the parlour; there were lights in the room; there were two candles upon the table; the gentleman was walking about in a red uniform trimmed with gold lace, with a star upon his breast, and he had a cap on similar to that, with gold lace on it. I asked him, what news; having heard them say he was a messenger. He said messengers were sworn to secrecy, but that he had got glorious news; the best that ever was known for this country. He rang the bell and called for pen, ink and paper, to write a letter, to send off to the Admiral at Deal." So that he professes, as the first witness says, to write a letter; and here he speaks of sending it off to the Admiral at Deal:—"that was brought to him, and he continued writing some little time while I was there. I took leave of him before he had finished the letter; the candles were sufficiently near him to observe him; that is the gentleman, and I have not the least doubt that it is him."
On his cross examination, he says, "I came over when I was called by Mr. Marsh to bring candles; I went and called the ostler, and waited till I waked the ostler; I left the candles in the passage; I saw him write on the paper when it was brought; I was sitting with Mr. Marsh when he arrived; I had not dined at the packet-boat." I suppose the question pointed to whether this man was likely to have been sober or drunk at that time: I do not know that there is any thing extraordinary in a man's sitting up till twelve or one o'clock; but that has been the subject of the observation.
Upon his re-examination, he says, "perhaps I might be in the room, so as to have an opportunity of observing him three or four minutes; my attention was called to him particularly; he had a cap on sometimes, and sometimes not; I have no doubt that is the man."
Eliot Edis, a person who you recollect was rather deaf, says, "I am a cooper in the victualling yard at Dover, I was at the packet boat on the morning of the 21st of February, Gourley was there with me; my attention was called to a messenger who had arrived. I saw the messenger first at the Ship, he was in a room at the time, walking up and down the room. I observed his dress; he had a grey great coat and regimentals, scarlet trimmed with gold; I did not particularly notice any other ornament; he had a cap with a gold band, that was the colour of the coat, it was a slouched cap;" upon that there has been much observation; "the cap appeared to be made of a kind of rough beaver, I do not know whether it was black or brown;" by that light you would not know very distinctly whether it was black or brown; "it was rather flat all round, and had no rim like a hat. I saw him sit down and write. I did not hear him say whom he was writing to. I could hear him talk; but not to understand him, being rather deaf; his cap was on while I was there." He is desired to look round, and to point out the gentleman, and he says, "that is the gentleman," pointing to him. "I have no doubt that is he; I had never seen him before that night, nor since;" and yet as you saw him, looking round, he instantly found him out among so many as there were then round him, it is not probable that if they had not seen him before, and had not his picture engraved upon their minds, they would have known him again so well; and it would be very remarkable that they should all pitch upon the same person. "I might see him perhaps for five or six minutes; the cap was rather slouched; it had no brim to it; it was drawn over his forehead; the round part of it was drawn over his forehead. I was not in court when Marsh was examined." It was suggested that he might have picked up his story from Marsh; but a man who was deaf could not have heard him, if he had been in court.
Mr. William St. John is next called; he speaks in the same manner; it is unnecessary to go through the whole of it. He says, "he wore a scarlet coat with long skirts, buttoned across, with a red silk sash, grey pantaloons, and a grey military great coat, and I think it was a seal-skin cap;" now with that light he might very easily mistake; I believe it is very common to have seal-skin caps for travelling.
Mr. Gurney. This is seal-skin, my Lord.
Lord Ellenborough. I did not know that; "he had, I think, a seal-skin cap on his head, of a fawn colour," and it is a fawn colour, certainly; "there were some ornaments on his uniform, but I do not know what they were, something of a star on his military dress; he was talking up and down the room in a very good pace; I asked him, whether he knew anything of the coming of one Johnson," a messenger whom the witness expected; "he said he knew nothing at all about him, and begged I would leave him to himself, as he was extremely ill;" this gentleman appears too inquisitive, and he did not seem to like him. "On my leaving the room, he requested that they would send in paper, and pen and ink; I immediately retired, and met the landlord, Mr. Wright, coming into the room, I believe, with the paper, pens and ink; in a few seconds afterwards I returned into the room, and he was writing, I did not hear him say any thing about the paper he was writing. I left the room immediately. I saw him again at the door in the street. When he was stepping into the carriage, I asked him what the news was; he told me it was as good as I could possibly wish; I did not see what he did with the paper he was writing upon, nor did I hear him say what he was writing about, he went away the first of us."
Now this man has been made a good deal the subject of comment; for it appears that he had gone down to Dover, and was, in some respect, waiting for news; there was a kind of reluctance in him to acknowledge that, in respect of which there need not have been any, for there is nothing whatever objectionable in his sending up paragraphs for the Traveller newspaper. I believe the publishers of these papers mostly have some persons stationed at the out-ports, to obtain intelligence of important events, and particularly so critical and anxious a moment as that was they would naturally have such persons at the port of Dover; there was nothing he should not avow; and if it was with the view to purchase in the funds, in consequence of the intelligence he should receive; if a man purchases funds upon public intelligence fairly and honestly come by, when every body has an equal opportunity of acquiring it and the intelligence is genuine, it is like buying any other article in the market, upon fair knowledge of the circumstances connected with its value; it is as allowable to deal in that article as in any other, upon equal terms; but the objection here is to a dealing which resembles the playing with loaded dice; if one plays with secret means of advantage over another, it is not fair-playing—it is a cheat: I own I have been much shocked with this sort of fraudulent practice, called three times over, in the letter of Cochrane Johnstone, a hoax; I cannot apply a term which imports a joke to that, which if the Defendants are guilty of, is a gross fraud upon public and private property; and unless every species of depredation and robbery is to be regarded as a species of pleasantry, I think the name of hoax, which has been given to it, is very ill applied to a transaction of so dishonest and base a description.
Then Mr. St. John says, "I went to Dover, by desire of a friend of mine; his name is Farrell; he is a merchant in the city, and is a proprietor of the Traveller." Then being asked, where that gentleman lived, he says, "In Austin Friars: I was to communicate to Mr. Farrell or to Mr. Quin." Then he says, "certainly the arrival of news at such a time would have an effect upon the funds."
Then William Ions, the express-boy, being shewn to the last witness, St. John, he says, "this is the boy whom I saw sent with one of the two expresses that was sent that night; this lad went with the express to the Port-admiral at Deal, I believe; it was the express that Mr. Wright gave him from the gentleman who was there; from that gentleman."
William Ions says, "In February last I was in the service of Mr. Wright, of Dover; I was called up when the officer arrived there, and was sent with an express to Admiral Foley; I took the letter I received to Admiral Foley; Mr. Wright gave me the letter whilst I was upon my pony; he came out to the door with it; and that letter which I received, I delivered to the Admiral's servant at Deal. She took it up stairs to the Admiral, and I saw the Admiral before I left Deal, after the letter was delivered to the servant, who took it up stairs." Therefore, whatever he received at Dover he delivered to the Admiral, and what the Admiral received we have here; there is an interruption in the proof certainly, in consequence of Wright, of Dover, not being well enough to be here as a witness; and therefore it did not appear by his testimony, that that which he, Wright, had received, Wright had delivered to his express-boy, to go over to Deal with; but that is supplied by the circumstance of De Berenger, if he was the person, telling Shilling, the Dartford driver, that he had sent off such an express; therefore it must be presumed that he had sent that letter which contained an express to the Admiral; and that which the Admiral received he shews you.
To supply that defect in the evidence, Mr. Lavie was called to say, that he believed it to be De Berenger's hand-writing; and though this does not appear to be the ordinary undisguised hand of this Defendant, yet after Lord Yarmouth, who had given his evidence that he did not consider it his hand-writing, referred to the letter R, the initial letter of Random de Berenger's christian name, he considered that as resembling his hand-writing, and you would observe, whether there was not such a resemblance as Lord Yarmouth mentions, if it were at all material; but it ceases entirely to be material, when he tells Shilling, as he does, that he had actually sent such a letter to the Admiral.
Admiral Foley is next called; he says, "The letter was brought to me, that that boy brought to the house; I was a-bed; I read the letter in bed; I did not mark it; I enclosed it in a letter to Mr. Croker, the Secretary to the Admiralty; that is the letter; I sent it enclosed in this letter to Mr. Croker; I arose immediately, and sent for the boy into my dressing-room; I questioned the boy a good deal; I did not telegraph the Admiralty, because the weather was too thick; when I sent for the boy up, I had the letter in my hand; it was then three o'clock, and dark; the telegraph would not work; I had a candle, of course; I am not certain I should have telegraphed the Admiralty," and if he had seen reason to doubt, he would have acted very properly in abstaining from so doing; he could not communicate all that would excite the doubts he might himself entertain; he could only send a few words, indicating the most important particulars of the story which the letter contained, and therefore he might very properly hesitate about communicating any part, if he thought the whole contained doubtful, still more if untrue intelligence.
The evidence of Mr. Lavie is only that he believed this to be De Berenger's hand-writing; that he had seen him several times in the custody of the messenger in the month of April, and in the course of those interviews, he saw him write a considerable deal; he saw a whole letter which he handed across to him when he had written it, and it was given back and copied again, and for about an hour he was writing different things, and handing them backwards and forwards. He says, "I also saw his papers in his writing-desk, and I verily believe that to be his hand-writing, from what I saw him write." This is the evidence, and much less than this evidence, is what we receive every day in proof of bonds, notes, and bills of exchange; a person says, I have seen such an one write, and I belief that to be his hand-writing; and that is sufficient to launch it in evidence as prima facie proof, leaving it to the other side to resist such proof, if they can.
Gentlemen, now we put this person in motion from Dover. Thomas Dennis is next called, who says, "I am a driver of a post-chaise in the service of Mr. Wright, at the Ship, at Dover. Early on the morning of the 21st of February, I drove the chaise from thence to Canterbury to the Fountain Inn; I drove only one person, it was a man; it was too dark to see how he was dressed; I had the leaders; he gave me and the other lad a Napoleon a-piece." He could not see the person; and there is identity only by the sort of specie in which he deals. "I sold it for a one pound note. I know the lads at Canterbury, who took him after me, Broad, and Thomas Daly; I saw Broad and Daly set off. There is nothing extraordinary in persons travelling day or night into Canterbury. I cannot say whether it might be the 20th or 22d; persons do not often give us Napoleons for driving them, I never had one given me before." No immaterial circumstance to induce a recollection of this particular traveller, nor (connected with similar evidence from other witnesses) to establish his identity.
Edward Broad, a driver of a chaise at the Fountain at Canterbury, says, "I remember the last witness coming to our house with a fare, early in the morning in February, I do not remember the day of the month, nor the day of the week; it was one gentleman came from the Ship at Dover; I drove the leaders—I drove to the Rose at Sittingbourn; the chaise went forward with four horses—he did not get out. Michael Finnis and James Wakefield drove him from thence; I did not receive any money from him, the other boy received the money, I had a Napoleon for my share." Till the day-light breaks, we have nothing to identify him in the course of his conveyance, but the Napoleons.
Then Broad, upon his cross-examination, says, "I have long lived at the Fountain, and have known Thomas Dennis some years; I do not know that I ever drove a fare that he brought before; I might; there are a great many boys from that inn at Dover; I have driven a single gentleman before, and sometimes a chaise and four." But upon re-examination, he says, "I never before received a Napoleon for it."
Michael Finnis, the driver of a chaise at Sittingbourn, says, "I remember the last witness bringing a gentleman in a chaise and four to our house, I did not take particular account of the time, it was early in the morning, it might be between four and five o'clock; I did not take particular notice, for I had no watch with me—it was dark; I drove him to the Crown at Rochester, Mr. Wright's house; I cannot say what time it was when we got there, we were not above an hour and ten minutes in going. The Gentleman got out there, and gave me two Napoleons, one for myself, and one for my fellow-servant; I took no particular notice of him; he had a pepper and salt coat on, and a red coat under that, I perceived, and a cap." So that this man took no particular notice of his countenance, but speaks to his dress and his appearance, as the other witnesses do.
Mr. Wright, who keeps the Crown Inn at Rochester, who saw him in the house, speaks with much more particularity; he says, "I remember a chaise and four from Sittingbourn arriving at my house on the morning of the 21st of February, I remember that was the day; it was a tall person, rather thin than otherwise, who came in the chaise; he had a pepper and salt great coat, with a military scarlet coat under it; the upper coat was nearer the colour of that coat, than any thing I could state (pointing to the coat on the table); the scarlet military coat he had under that, was very much trimmed with gold lace down the front, as it appeared by candle light, and a military cap with broad gold lace round it; it appeared to me to be cloth or fur, it appeared to be nearly the colour of the great coat." The cap does not appear to have any resemblance to the great coat, but in all other respects his description seems to be right. "On the military coat, there was a star, and something suspended, either from the neck or the button, I do not know which, something which he told me was some honour of a military order of Russia;" it turned out to be a masonry order. He is shewn the star, and he says, "it had very much the appearance of that sort of thing. I suppose I was in conversation with him about ten minutes; it was about half past five when the chaise drove into the yard; during those ten minutes I was getting some chicken for him, in our bar parlour. I was called up by the post-boy of my brother at Dover, I went into the yard, and found a gentleman looking out at the front window of the chaise, and he said, he was very hungry, could he get any thing to eat? that he had ate nothing since he left Calais; I asked him, if he would have a sandwich, as I supposed he would not get out of the chaise; he said he would get out, and he did get out, and I took him into our bar parlour; when he got there I said, I am led to suppose, that you are the bearer of some very good news to this country;"—a very natural overture to conversation on the part of an innkeeper, and to extract a little intelligence from him; "he said, he was, that the business was all done—that the thing was settled; I asked him, if I might be allowed to ask him what was the nature of his dispatches? he said, he is dead; I said, who? he said, the tyrant Bonaparte, or words to that effect, I believe these were the exact words; I said, is that really true, Sir." Upon which this gentlemen seems to have been piqued at having his veracity questioned, and said, "if you doubt my word, you had better not ask me any more questions;" in answer to which, Wright, not being willing to have his curiosity unsatisfied, said, "I made an apology for doubting the veracity of his story, and asked him, what were the dispatches? he said, there had been a very general battle between the French and the whole of the allied powers, commanded by Schwartzenberg in person; that the French had been completely defeated, and Bonaparte had fled for safety; that he had been overtaken by the cossacks, at a village which I think was called Rushaw, six leagues from Paris; that the cossacks had there come up with him, and had literally torn him in pieces; that he had come from the field of battle from the emperor Alexander himself, and that he either was an aide-de-camp of the emperor, or of one of his principal generals." Now the account he gives, tallies almost in terms with the letter which had been sent off to Deal; so that there is another proof of the identity of this person, and a connexion of him with this letter sent to Admiral Foley. Then he adds, "He told me, that the allies were invited by the Parisians to Paris, and the Bourbons to the throne of France. That was pretty well all the conversation that passed; he ate very little, if he did any thing—he said he was very cold; I asked him, if he would take any brandy? he said, no, he would not, for he had some wine in the carriage;" it turned out that it was so. "He enquired what he had to pay? I told him, what he had had, had been so uncomfortable, I did not wish to take any thing for it; he did not accept of that, he threw a Napoleon on the table, and desired me to take that for what he had himself taken, and wished me to give the servants something out of it, he meant the whole of the servants, for when he got into the chaise, the ostler asked for something; and he told him, that he had left something with his master, out of which he might be paid. He went away in the same chaise that brought him, with four horses. James Overy and Thomas Todd, were the persons who drove him." Mr. Wright had proceeded thus far, and then he looked round the court, and fixing upon De Berenger, said, "I believe that is the person; I have no doubt—it is certainly the gentleman; I had never seen him before, or since." This undoubted identification of person, is almost peculiar to this case; I never saw a case in which so many persons turned into the court at large, recollected a man at once, and with so much certainty.
Upon his cross-examination, he says, "I never saw the gentlemen before nor since till to-day; he wore a large cockade, very dirty, as if it had been worn a long time;" then he produced the Napoleon; and he says, "upon looking at him, I am sure he is the same person."
James Overy, who was the postillion, says, "I took up a person at my master's house at Rochester, on a Monday; I do not remember the day of the month. I drove him to Dartford, to the Granby; he had on a grey mixture coat; a red coat like an aid-de-camp, adorned with a star, very full indeed, something about his neck hanging down, and a cap, and a bit of white ribbon about the cap, such as officers wear, with a gold lace band round it. When I came to Dartford, it was ten minutes before seven; it was day-light two miles before we came to Dartford. I am not sure I should know the person again; he gave me two Napoleons, and he paid me five L.1. notes, and a shilling for mine and the Dartford horses, and the turnpikes; he gave us a Napoleon a-piece. Thomas Shilling and Broad took him from Dartford."
On cross-examination, he says, "the cap was such a cap as officers wear in a morning, slouched down, I think the top of the cap a little turned down; I did not observe the colour."
William Tozer, the next witness, says, "I keep the Crown and Anchor at Dartford; I remember Jem Overy bringing a fare to a house in our town on a Monday about the 21st of February, and the person I took notice of was sitting in the chaise. I made my obedience to the gentleman in the chaise, hoping that he had brought us good news; he said he had, and that it was all over; that the allies had actually entered Paris; that Bonaparte was dead, destroyed by the cossacks, and literally torn to pieces." Here again is the same account in effect which is contained in the letter to Deal, given by word of mouth, "and that we might expect a speedy peace. During the conversation, I saw him give Overy two gold pieces, which afterwards proved to be French pieces; I had them in my hand. I saw enough of the person in the chaise, to be positive I should know him if I saw him again." This was the witness, who looking round, did not find the Defendant; to be sure, the Counsel might have asked him whether that was the person; but from delicacy that was not done, which was certainly an unnecessary delicacy upon such a subject.
Thomas Shilling, the chaise-driver from Dartford, says, "I remember taking up a gentleman who came in a chaise and four to Dartford, I believe it was on the 21st of February, it was on a Monday. I had the wheel-horses. On our road to London, he discoursed with me a good deal; the waiter at Dartford, at the Granby, first spoke to him, asking him whether he brought any good news; the gentleman said, yes, it was all over; Bonaparte was torn in a thousand pieces; the cossacks fought for a share of him all the same as if they had been fighting for sharing out gold; and the allies were in Paris. We were ordered to go on; we had gone to Bexley before the gentleman spoke; the gentleman then told me not to hurry my horses, for his business was not so particular now, since the telegraph could not work. I told him, I thought the telegraphs could not work, for I knew almost every telegraph between Deal and London. He then said, "postboy, do not takes any notice of the news as you go along;" I told him I would not, unless he wished me to do so; he said, I might tell any of my friends as I returned, for he durst to say they would be glad to hear it; he said he had sent a letter to the Port Admiral at Deal, for he was obliged to do so;" therefore you have him, unless this be a premeditated falsehood in the evidence of this man, Shilling, authenticating the fact of the letter from Dover; "he said that he had walked two miles when he came ashore at Dover, before he got to the Ship Inn; that the Frenchmen were afraid of coming any nigher to Dover, for fear of being stopped." Where he got into Dover, or how, we do not hear; of the points of the outward voyage we know nothing; of the homeward we have a pretty good account of all the places where he touched, &c. "then we drove on till we came to Shooters Hill; when I got there, my fellow-servant and I alighted, and the gentleman gave us part of a bottle of wine; he said we might drink, because he was afraid the bottle would break; he gave us some round cakes also. I chucked the bottle away, and handed the glass again into the chaise; he told me that I might have it; he then said, "postboy, you have had a great deal of snow;" I said, "we have;" he said, "here is a delightful morning, postboy; I have not seen old England a long while before;" then he asked me which was the nearest coach stand; I told him at the Bricklayers Arms; he told me that would not do, it was too public, he was afraid somebody would cast some reflections, and he should not like it." It was bringing him very nearly within the vicinity of the King's Bench, where it should seem his countenance was better known than he liked it to be. "I told him I did not think anybody would do that, they would be too glad to hear of the news; he asked if there was not a hackney-coach stand in Lambeth; I said "yes," he said "drive me there.""
Now it has been observed he points his direction towards Lambeth, and the other express, it seems, that went through the city, which has been called the Northfleet expedition, is ordered not to go Lambeth, but to Lambeth Marsh. The learned Counsel has remarked, that they are not ordered to the same point at first, and that it would have been a strong confirmatory point, if they had been so; but there is to a great degree an identity of direction, an identity of object, and something like an identity of disguise in military uniform; "he said, drive me there, postboy, for your chaise will go faster than a hackney-coach will. I drove him to the Three Stags in the Lambeth road; there was no hackney-coach there. I ordered my fellow-servant to stop, and looked back, and told the gentleman there was no coach there; but that there was a coach stand at the Marsh Gate." So that the Marsh Gate arose incidentally, and was not his original plan; "and if he liked to get in there, I dared say nobody would take any notice of him; I think he pulled up the side blind, that had been down before all the way; when I got there, I pulled up along side to a hackney-coach; I called the coachman, and the waterman opened the coach door, and I opened the chaise door; the gentleman stepped out of the chaise into the coach without going on the ground;" the question which produced this answer was put with a view to something adverted to, as published upon the subject, in which some evidence was supposed capable of being opposed to the story of the driver, in this particular, who, however, relates it plainly and naturally, and is confirmed by the waterman, who was there at the time; "he then gave me two Napoleons; he did not say one was for my fellow-servant, and the other for myself, but I concluded that it was so; I have got them here," and he produces them; so that it does not appear that he has distributed this gentleman's bounty, but he is still a trustee for his fellow-servant. "I did not," he says, "hear him tell the coachman where to drive to. The name of the coachman is Crane. I know the person of the waterman very well. The gentleman was dressed with a dark fur round cap, and with white lace, and some gold round it; whether it was gold or silver I cannot say; he had a red coat on underneath his outer coat; I think his outer coat was a kind of a brown coat, but I will not swear to that; I saw a red coat underneath it, down as far as the waist; I did not see the skirts of it; I think it was turned up with yellow, but I should not like to swear that; it had some sort of a star upon it. I think upon his outer coat there was a kind of white fur; but I should not like to swear to that. I should know him in a moment. I have seen him and knew him again; that is the gentleman (pointing to him); I have no doubt. I saw him once before in King-street, Westminster, in a room; I knew him then the moment I saw him; I never had the least doubt about him; the moment I saw him I knew him."
Upon his cross-examination, he says, "I was not told this morning in what part of the court he sat; I looked round the court when I came in, and saw him immediately; I never saw him before February." He is asked about a reward that was offered by the Stock Exchange, he says, "I heard of it the day it was printed, two or three days after this transaction happened. I remember a club at Dartford, called the hat club; I was there;" and then there is some foolish story about his laying a wager there; but as there is no evidence brought to impeach his testimony upon the grounds to which the cross-examination went, it is unnecessary to pursue that part of the examination further; he says "Lambeth Marsh is not far from the Asylum. I went there for the purpose of getting a coach; that he says (pointing to Bartholomew) is the waterman."
Then William Bartholomew the waterman is called; he says "I am a waterman attending the stand of coaches at the Marsh Gate; I know Shilling by seeing him come up with post chaises; he is a Dartford chaise-boy. I remember his coming with a chaise on the 21st of February; there were four horses, and there was a gentleman in it; it was between nine and half past nine in the morning; there was only one coach on the stand; one Crane drove the coach; I saw the gentleman get out of the chaise into the coach, he stepped out of the one into the other; I opened the door, and let down the step for him; he had a brown cap on, a dark drab military great coat, and a scarlet coat under it; I only took notice of the lace under it. The gentleman ordered the coach to drive up to Grosvenor-square; I do not remember that he told me the street in Grosvenor-square. I really think that is the gentleman, it is like him; dress makes such an alteration, that I cannot with certainty say."
Then Mr. Richard Barwick says, "I am a clerk to Messrs. Paxtons and Co. bankers, in Pall Mall. I remember passing by Marsh Gate on the morning of Monday the 21st of February. I observed a post-chaise with four horses, it had galloped at a great rate; the horses were exceedingly hot, and I saw a man getting into a hackney coach; I followed it, and saw it as far as the Little Theatre in the Haymarket; I wanted to know what the news was." Being a banker's clerk, it was natural he should wish to know what the public news was. "I observed the coach passed the public offices in the way." It appears, that he was a little surprized at this person not stopping to communicate his news at those offices. Whether he suspected him or not, he does not say; but observing that he stopped at none, and it being time for him to go to the banker's shop, he did not think it worth while to pursue him any further. This was about nine o'clock, as he supposes, that he left him in the Haymarket. Then he says, the gentleman had a cap on with a gold band, such as German cavalry use at evening parade; this appears to me something like it.
Then William Crane, the coachman, says, "I remember on Monday morning the 21st of February, taking up a fare at Marsh Gate from a post-chaise and four from Dartford. I was directed to drive to Grosvenor-square; I drove into Grosvenor-square; the gentleman then put down the front glass, and told me to drive to No 13, Green-street; the gentleman got out there, and asked for a colonel or a captain somebody; I did not hear the name, and they said he was gone to breakfast in Cumberland-street; the gentleman asked if he could write a note; he then went into the parlour; the gentleman gave me 4s.; I asked him for another." Hearing that Napoleons had been distributed to drivers, he thought that a hackney-coachman might ask for a little more of his bounty than he at first received. "He took a portmanteau that he had, and a sword, went in and came out again, and gave me another shilling. The portmanteau was a small black leather one; I saw that gentleman in King-street, Westminster, at the messenger's house. I think this is the gentleman here; when I saw him in King-street, as I came down stairs, he looked very hard at me; I knew him then, though he had altered himself a great deal in his dress." |
|
