"That her royal highness had cretated and constituted a new order to recompense the faithful knights who had the honor of accompanying her royal highness on her pilgrimage to the holy land "1st. This order shall be given and awarded to those only who have accompanied her royal highness to Jerusalem, with the exception of the professor Mochetti, who could not, being prevented by accident, accompany her royal highness. 2. That Colonel Bartolomo Bergami, baron of Franchino, knight of Malta, and also of the holy sepulchre of Jerusalem, and equerry of her royal highness, the grand master of this order, and his children, male and female, may succeed him, and shali have the honor to wear this order from generation to generation and end to end. 3. The same advantage of wearing this Order is granted to the Knight of the Holy Sepulchre, Mr. William Austin, and to his legitimate children, who shall for ever enjoy the same. "4. To Mr. Joseph Hownam, Captain in the Royal English Navy, and Knight of the Holy Sepulchre, and in the suite of her Royal Highness, it is also granted to him to enjoy the same Order, as a personal favor to him." Here the interpreter said he believed that he had not expressed the literal meaning of the instrument, for it was thus: "This honor shall be personal for you, Mr. Joseph Hownam, Captain in the British Navy, and Knight in the suite of her Royal Highness, to wear this honor during your life; the Cross and Patent to be returned at your death to the Grand Master." "5. The Grand Master to wear the Cross of the Order round his neck, suspended from a gold chain; but the other Knights to suspend the insignia from the button-hole of the coat." "6. The abovementioned Order to consist of a red Cross, with the motto, 'Honi soit qui mal y pense,' to be worn with a riband of lilac and silver, and to be called by the name of the Order of St. Caroline of Jerusalem." (Signed) "CAROLINE, P.W. (Undersigned) "Col. B. BERGAMI, &c, &c. &c." Directed to Joseph Howoam, Knight, in the suite of her Royal Highness the Princess of Wales, No. 15. The interpreter having finished the reading of the document. The Duke of SOMERSET expressed a wish that lieutenant Hownam should be called back, for the purpose of being examined again with respect to the tent scene on board the polacca. Earl GREY suggested that the best time for him would be after the defence had closed. Lord HOLLAND wished to know whether the expenses of this proceeding were to be all placed under the head of secret service, and to be defrayed out of that fund. The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, that as long as the investigation continued strictly a secret one, the expenses were to be defrayed from the secret service. When it took a public character, the expenses were to be provided from some other fund. Ear! DARNLEY wished to know whether all the expenses hitherto incurred, both by the Milan commission, and the witnesses for the prosecution, were included in the paper laid upon the table. The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, all the expenses, except that of messengers, were included under the two heads of the Milan commission, and witnesses. The expense incurred by messengers belonged to the crown office. Here there was a pause of some mo ments. Mr. DENMAN said, their only object in calling back the witness De Mont, was to examine her as to certain declarations, which, if she admitted, they were to have the benefit of them. If she denied any such declarations, they were prepared to prove that she had uttered them. The LORD CHANCELLOR thought this mode of proceeding was within the scope of the rule before laid down by their lordships. The rule was thisthat after the examination in chief, the cross-examination, and the re-examination, if counsel wished to put any further questions to a witness, it must be done by suggesting the question to the house. Their lordships might however, allow the question to be answered immediately after they were suggested by counsel, to be catered however on the minutes as the examination of their lordships. Mademoiselle De Mont now appeared at the bar. Examined by Mr. WILLIAMS.→↓ I am acquainted with a person named Franchese Martini (short), not Martini (long). [The nicety of this distinction made by the witness excited a laugh.] of it. I never could have said to Madame Martini that the princess was surrounded by spies since she left England, for I never saw any spy. I will net swear that I did not say so; but I do not recollect it. Though I said that I never could have mentioned this, as I knew no spy, I will not swear that did not say so; but I recollect no such conversation. I have no idea of it. I do believe I never said so to Madame Martini. I will not swear it; but I do not think I said so. I do not recollect having said to Madame Martini that the princess was very unfortunate; I do not recollect this conver sation at all; I do not recollect having said to this woman that the most simple actions of the princess's life were always misinterpreted. I do not recollect the conversation at all. I will not swear that this conversation, or no part of it passed in the year 1818, but I do not recollect it. I remember being on a I I know a place called Mauge, in Switzerland. I have seen Madame Martini several times, but I do not recollect having seen her in April, 1818,I or any part of that year. I cannot rei collect having sent for her to alter a bonnet at Mauge, for I do not reside at Mauge. I may have seen her on the subject of a bonnet in that year, but I do not recollect it. I know Madame Martini, but I do not recollect having seen her in that year, or having had any conversation with her about the Princess of Wales. I saw her after I left the service of the Princess of Wales, but I do not recollect any Conversation about her royal highness. It may be, but I do not recollect it. I do not recollect that Madame Martiui spoke to me on the subject of my jour-visit at Madame Jecroix's, at Mauge. ney. I may have had such conversa- I was on a visit there several times. tion, but I do not recollect it. I do was there in the year 1818; I was there not recollect Madame Martini having seveal times after quitting the service spoken to me on the subject of the of the princess. I might have had Princess of Wales's conduct. I do not a bounet altered by Madame Martini recollect having spoken to her about while I was on this visit in 1818; but the princess, or the persons who surI do not reccollect it. I had several rounded the princess. I do not recol- bonnets altered by her, but I do not lect having had any conversation with recollect one being altered in 1818. I her about the character of the Princess do not remember having told Madame of Wales; 1 remember her having Martini that I was always near the mended a bonnet for me several times person of the princess, I do not recolat Mauge; I do not remember Madame lect Madame Martini having said to Martini putting the question-whether me that as I was always about the the Princess of Wales was not a woman person of the princess I must have of intrigue. I do not at all remember. observed all her actions. I will not any conversation with her on the sub- swear that she did not say so, but I do ject. I do not mean to swear that she not recollect this conversation. It may did not put the question, but I do not be, but I have not the least idea of it. at all recollect it. I will not say she did not put the question. I do not recollect that she put it. I I have not the least idea of it. I do not recollect having been angry with Madame Martin on the subject of the princess. I do not recollect this conversation. I have not the least idea of it. I do not recollect having told her that all that was said of the princess was calumny, and that her enemies circulated these reports against her. I recollect nothing like it. I will not swear I did not say so: it may be; I have not the least idea of it. Before I was put upon my oath, I said nothing about what passed in the house of her royal highness. will not swear that I did not use this language, but I have not the least idea In consequence of an observation from Lord Lauderdale, the Lord Chacellor directed the interpreter always to put the question in the exact words in which it was proposed. I do not recollect that Madame Martini enquired particularly of me whether there was auy thing unchaste in the conduct of the princess. I do not at all recollect having had this conversation. I will not swear it did not take place, but I do not recollect it. I do not recollect having said to Madame Martini that it was impossible any person could be more pure than the princess. I cannot swear that II had not this conversation; but I do not recollect it. I do not recollect, in answer to my question put by Madame Martini, having used these precise expressious, or any thing to that effect. I do not remember such a question; and if the question was asked, I do not think I made such an answer. The LORD-CHANCELLOR desired that the questious, in future, should be put to this witness through the house. If the examination was to be inserted in the minutes as the examination of their lordships, it was fit that the questions should be put in a proper mauner. The questions were then put through the Lord Chancellor. I have not the least idea of having said that the old king was the only friend her royal highness had. I will not swear I did not say so; but I do not believe I did say so. I was several times at Mauge. I might have been there in the monthfof Nov. 1818. I may have been there in that mouth; I do not exactly recollect. I was there in the end of November, or the beginning of December. I have not the least idea of Madame Martini having asked me if her royal highness was much afflicted at the death of her daughter the Princess Charlotte. I will not swear that Madame Martini did not put that question. I cannot swear it, but I have not the least idea of it. I have not the least idea of having said it was no wonder her royal highness should be much afflicted, as she lost all she had by the death of the Princess Charlotte. I do not believe any such couversation took place. I have not the least idea of having said to Madame Martini that it was possible the Princess of Wales would make some diminution in the expenses of her household after the death of the Princess Charlotte. I assure you I do not recollect any such conversation at all. I will not positively swear it did not take place, but I have not the least idea of it. When was it you first made any deposition in this cause? The LORD-CHANCELLOR.-Has the witness said any thing about a deposition in the course of this day's examination. Mr. WILLIAMS; Yes, my Lord. Mr. BROUGHAM submitted that the question might be put, even though the wituess had not said any thing as to a deposition since she was last brought to the bar. After a few observations from the LORD-CHANCELLOR the question was withdrawu. The former questions and answers were then read over to her, and she in answer said, she adhered to them. Re-examined hy the SOLICITORGENERAL. Before I was examined here I was examined at Milan, and had said nothing about her royal highness. I meant by saying I never spoke of her till I was sworn, that I said nothing previously of the conduct of the prin cess and baron Bergami. The SOLICI1OR-GENERAL. May Lask this witness, my lord, about the journey with Bergami. The LORD-CHANCELLOR said, that it could not be made to arise out of this last examination. By the Earl of LAUDERDALE.When the occurences of which you speak took place at Pesaro, was the account of the Princess Charlotte's death known? The witness replied in the negative. Madame De Mout was here ordered to withdraw. Mr. BROUGHAM then said, that he was desirous that De Mont should be recalled, and kept at the bar during the examination of the witness whom he was about to call, and with whom he wished to confront her. The LORD-CHANCELLOR said, the regular course would be to examine the new witness, and first lay a ground of contradiction, before the witnesses were confronted. TWENTY-EIGHTH WITNESS. FRANCHETTI MARTINI was then caled in, and examined by Mr. Williams. I am the wife of Henry Martini, of Mauge, where I keep a milliner's shop. I know Louisa De Mout these many years, ever since she was quite young, about 16 years, and learning to work; and a good while before she entered the service of the princess. I remember seeing her in the year 1818, in the month of April, when she was in the country house of Madame Jecroix, where I was called to do some work. Before that time I had read the journat of De Mout, and had conversed with her about the Princess; and in answer to some questions of mine respecting the conduct of her R. H. she told me she knew nothing against the princess. Here au argument took place between counsel respecting what Madame De Mont had said and the SolicitorGeneral stated that she had merely said she never spoke of the princess's Conduct with Bergami until she was examined at Milan. After a conversation among the peers, it was decided that the examination of the witness should be continued. Her examination was accordingly resumed by Mr. Williams, aud she said, "I then observed to Madame De Mout that the princess was spoken of a libertine, as a gallante; and I said so, it being frankly my opinion, from what was said, Madame De Mont's answer to me was--"it is nothing but calusoy all calumny, invented by her enemies in order to ruin her," and she said every thing that was good of the princess. She also told me, that ever since the princess had left England she was surrounded by spies, that her best acitons were misinterpreted, but that she did nothing that all the world might not see and know. She said, she had never observed any thing wrong about the princess, than whom it was impossible, to her (De Mont's) knowledge, for any body to be more virtuous. She also said, that the old king was the only prop or support of the princess. Witness, in conclusion, said that she had known Madame De Mont for several years. years ago. It was when I made that. Cross-examined by the SOLICITOR- it. Cross-examined by the SOLICITOR GENERAL.-I rememberthis conversation occuring in1818; because by referenceto my books, I found that iwas in April of that year, Madamt De Mout had had her hat or bonnet done at my place, and that was about the time we had the conversation. deny that my husband was embarrassed in that year; neither he nor I were ever bankrupts. Columbia, where De Mout lives, is but a short league from Mauge, where I have seen her several times, but only to converse with her on this affair once, and that wasthe time I have already stated. I don't recollect having seen Madame De Mont in 1817. I did not see her immediately before April, 1817: she was then in the neighbourhood. After quitting the service of the princess, I saw her in April, 1817, when I did that work for her. De Mont came several times to my warehouse at Mauge. Au acquaintance originated in that, I do not re-ing at home which may be decided collect the time De Mont came to Mauge first, but she was learning to do needle work at the house of the Demoiselles Regard; she might be then about 15 or 16 years of age, but I cannot tell if it be five or six or teu This £100. is not to be paid to me; it was only placed in the bank as a security for their promise; they did not promise me £100., but only what is just and fair. This is only a guaran. tee, as they said they did not wish to buy up witnesses. I will swear nobody made me any promise of moneynever. I swear the exact truth. I received £70. on account, for which I gave a receipt, as I have a suit depend against me if I am not returned on the 24th of next month; and not knowing how long I should have to remain here, I would not leave my affairs without something to depend on. The gentle men paid my expenses. I travelled post, because it is only this day week left Geneva at four in the afternoon. I do not expect any fixed sum besides the £70.; my dependence is on what the government will do. We have left our affairs in the hands of strangers, and to the government of this country m the case, he wished to recall Mr. Leman, in order to explain some discrepancies that appeared between the statement and Mr. Leman's testimony. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL ob was always in court. we have a person we placed there injected to this, on the ground that he my room; and there are three young women in my shop to do for. I have had no fixed promise; these gentlemen said nothing to me about it. To a question where do you live now, she answered, " My God! we arrived here last midnight. Last night I was placed somewhere, and here I am to day" (laughter). Re-examined by Mr. WILLIAMS. I often saw De Mont before she went into the service of her royal highness, and after at the house of Jecroix, where this conversation took place about eight days before I seat her the work I had to do for her. The witness was asked if she had any conversation with the Demoiselles Jecroix on the subject of what De Mont said, which was objected to, and not persevered in by Mr. Brougham. A chair was here offered to the witness, who observed, on seating herself, "Ah, mou Dien, que je suis bien fatigue." By Lord DARLINGTON : De Mont is not at all acquainted with my husband. By Lord HARROWBY.- asked De Mont how the princess was afflicted on hearing the news of the death of the Princess Charlotte. De Mont told me the princess was extremely af flicted; that she had then lost all she had rost dear to her. A peer asked her, if, from her knowledge of De Mont, she would believe her, which was objected to by the Solicitor-General. By Lord LAUDERDALE.—I do not know if De Mout said, she was with the princess when the news arrived of the death of the Princess Charlotte, but I asked her if she would return to the service of the princess, to which she said-Yes. She told me she was then on leave of absence, because the suite of the princess was in mourning. She did not say if she was present when the news of the death of the Princess Charlotte arrived. Mr. BROUGHAM said, in reference to a statement which yesterday appeared from the Baron d'Ende, and without meaning to impute any fault Mr. BROUGHAM said, he was one of those persous expressly alluded to in the house as clerk of the agent. Mr. LEMAN, cerk to Mr. Vizard, was then called to the bar, and examined by Mr. TYNDALL. -I arrived at Carlsrbue on the 13th or 14th of September; I was told the baron d'Ende was theu there. He was not; but I was told he would return on Sunday, the 17th. Ou this I set out for Baden, and on my way I met a gentleman's carriage: thinking he might be returning, I stopped, and asked if the carriage belonged to the baron d'Ende, and found it was. Ia consequence of this, I handed him the letter of her majesty, addressed to the baron d'Eude, as chamberlain of the grand duke of Badeu. I spoke to him, and asked him if I had the honor of addressing the baron d'Ende, to which he answered yes. He opened the letter, read it, and took me into his carriage, and we went back to Carlsrhue to his house. I have not the slightest doubt I was with the baron. The baron said he had business which would then detain him till Tuesday, that his minutes were at Baden, and that he could not answer the question I proposed to him without first consulting those minutes. I next went to Darmstadt, and saw the baron for the first time at Baden, when he consulted his diary, and I took down his deposition in writing. He showed me several letters he had received from her majesty. Before I left the baron d'Ende, he said, as the information he was to give was of an official character, his friends thought he could not give it without the consent of the grand duke. The grand duke was not then at Baden. I was told he would not return till about the 20th. Mr. TYNDALL wished to ask the witness what Baron d'Ende said about the grand duke's return, which was objected to by the Solicitor-General. Lord LIVERPOOL thought the question might be asked, considering the papers which were then laid on their lordship's table. The question |