Chapter XVIII: Part 18

Isherwood, a clerk to Prescott & Co. says, "I paid that check, I think on the date of it, the 26th of February 1814," just before the time when De Berenger went off, "in a £.50 bank note, No. 13,396, and a £.40 note, No. 6,268." A £.40 note and a £.50 are shewn to him, to each of them he says, "that is the note."

John Seeks is shewn a cancelled bank note of £.50; he says, "I gave change for it, I cannot exactly recollect the day; here are some letters on the back that I know it by; I gave change for it to Mr. De Berenger's servant, Smith."

Now there we stopped last night, upon that note, because it could not be proved that Smith, De Berenger's servant, paid it for his master; this morning it is proved by Smith, that he did pay that £.50 bank note to Seeks, by desire of Mr. De Berenger, therefore that £.50 is fixed upon him as drawn from the same source, namely, the bank note which had come from Mr. Butt.

A memorandum in Mr. De Berenger's book, written in pencil, was referred to by the counsel, "W.S. £.50." Mr. Lavie says, "I never saw any writing in pencil of Mr. De Berenger's, but I believe this to be his writing, it is exactly the same sort of character as the other."

Benjamin Bray is called, he says, "I live at Sunderland;" he is shewn a £.40 note, he says, "I received it from the waiter of the Bridge Inn, at Sunderland; I had seen Mr. De Berenger at Sunderland, previous to that; I gave the waiter six £.5 notes, and ten £.1 notes for it, of the Durham Bank. Mr. De Berenger came shortly after to my house, to take his leave of me: I am a druggist, and agent to the Durham Bank. From the 17th to the 21st of March, I had known of his being at Sunderland; the waiter had come requesting bank paper. I made an apology to Mr. De Berenger for not sending him more bank paper in change, and he acknowledged having received the whole of the notes I had sent from the waiter; he went by the name of Major Burne."

Then, on cross-examination, he says, "I know that £.40. note, by the copy I made of it in my waste-book"--he had not the waste-book here, but he says, "I know it also _from my initials on the back_ of the note, made a day or two afterwards, when it was fresh in my recollection. I did not keep it distinct from my other notes, but I marked it between the 31st of March and the 4th of April; but" (what is more material) "I generally do not put my initials on bank notes, but I did on this; I had no other £.40. note at the time, and have had no other since;" so that that £.40. bank note is proved likewise.

Mr. Pattesall says, "I am a partner in the house of Bond & Co. I did not pay that check of Mr. Fearn's, it was paid by Mr. Evans, a clerk of ours." That person of the name of Evans never came, and was called on his subpoena.

They then produced two Napoleons, found in the pocket-book of De Berenger, and with that they closed the evidence on the part of the prosecution.

On the part of the defendant, they first read the letters of Le Marchant, which, as I have before observed, certainly reflect very much upon himself.

They then call Lord Melville, who says, "I am acquainted with Sir Alexander Cochrane; I recollect Sir Alexander more than once applying to me, that Mr. De Berenger might be allowed to accompany him, and to remain with him on the North American station, to which Sir Alexander Cochrane was appointed; it was shortly before Sir Alexander sailed upon the command; I think it was five or six months ago. Sir Alexander was desirous that he should accompany him, for the purpose of instructing either a corps to be raised in that part of the world, or the Royal Marines, in the rifle exercise; and afterwards, when Sir Alexander wished that an officer of engineers should accompany him, and when I suggested that it would be difficult to give him that assistance, from the small number of engineer officers that could be procured, Sir Alexander mentioned, that as an engineer officer, he would be quite satisfied with Mr. De Berenger. I think there was some rank necessary to accompany such an appointment. I said I could not agree to the appointment, as far as the naval service was concerned, but I advised him to apply to the Secretary of State, or to the Commander in Chief; stating, that if they agreed to it, I should have no objection to let him accompany Sir Alexander. Lord Cochrane was appointed to the Tonnant, about the time Sir Alexander Cochrane sailed. I have no personal knowledge of Mr. De Berenger."

Colonel Torrens, who is secretary to the Commander in Chief, says, "I remember an application being made on behalf of Captain De Berenger in the latter end of December, or the beginning of January, by Sir Alexander Cochrane, to urge the appointment of De Berenger to go to America, for the purpose of applying his talents in the light infantry drill, that is, the rifle service; he says, there were great difficulties started to this application; and in consequence of those difficulties the appointment did not take place. It was under consideration, however, at the Commander in Chief's office. I do not know personally the character of Mr. De Berenger."

Then Mr. Goulburn, Under Secretary of State for the Colonial Department, says, "there was an application made by Sir Alexander Cochrane, on behalf of De Berenger;" but he gives no further account.

William Robert Wale King says, "I am a tinplate worker. I was employed by Lord Cochrane, in making signal lanthorns and lamps. I made him a new sort of lamp, for which he had a patent. He came frequently, nearly every day, to my manufactory; he was there the 21st of February. He came between ten and eleven in the morning, that was about the time he usually came. I perfectly recollect the circumstance of a note being brought to him by his servant. I was present when the note was delivered. He immediately opened it, and retired into the passage; and he came into the workshop again, and shortly after went away. His Lordship had been about a quarter of an hour there, that is a mile and a half from Grosvenor Square; his Lordship only said 'very well, Thomas,' not making any observation expressive of anxiety as to his brother."

Mr. Bowering says, "I am clerk in the Adjutant General's Office. Major Cochrane, the brother of Lord Cochrane, was returned as with the army in the South of France, "sick," on the 25th of January. The returns ran from the 24th of December to the 24th of January."

Then Thomas Dewman says, "I am a servant to Lord Cochrane, and have been seventeen years in the family. I carried a note to Lord Cochrane at Mr. King's manufactory; I remember the gentleman coming to Lord Cochrane's in a hackney coach; I do not know that I have seen him before or since. He first asked, where Lord Cochrane was gone to? and I told him he was gone to Cumberland-street to breakfast, because his Lordship told me he was going there to his uncle's; I went there after him, and not finding him, I returned to the gentleman; his Lordship had told me to follow him with some globe glass to Mr. King's. I had been there on Saturday; I supposed he might be there; I told the gentleman that I most likely should find him there; I should however have gone, if the gentleman had not sent me; he took the note from me, and said, I will add two or three more lines. I took the note to his Lordship at Mr. King's; his Lordship read the note in my presence; I left him at Mr. King's; his Lordship had no man in Green-street but me; the other servant was in the country; he had been there two or three months before that; his Lordship had given Davis warning on his appointment to the Tonnant. Davis was not in his Lordship's service at that time, but he happened to be in the kitchen when the gentleman came; Davis is gone." This, it should seem, is only to account for not calling Davis. "Davis is gone with Admiral Fleming to the West Indies. It was a little past ten when the gentleman arrived. I was engaged to Lord Cochrane since Christmas; I had been in the family of Lord Dundonald; I do not know Holloway or Lyte. When I gave the note to Lord Cochrane, he said, 'Well, Thomas, I will return.' I waited on Major Cochrane when he first went into the army; I saw Lord Cochrane leave the place, that is Mr. King's."

Then it is admitted, that Lord Cochrane has a patent for the invention of a lamp, dated the 28th of February last.

Mr. Gabriel Tahourdin says, "I have known Mr. De Berenger five or six years; I introduced him to Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, in May 1813. Mr. Cochrane Johnstone was in possession of a place at Paddington, named Vittoria, which he was desirous of improving. I introduced De Berenger to Cochrane Johnstone by mere chance; De Berenger afterwards employed himself in preparing a plan, and had nearly completed it. Shortly before Mr. Cochrane Johnstone went to Scotland, in September, he made him one payment on account of it. Besides the plan, De Berenger prepared a prospectus; Mr. Johnstone had got a number of that prospectus printed, early in October, to take to Scotland with him. I conveyed a letter from De Berenger, and I spoke several times to Mr. Johnstone, upon the subject of paying for those plans, but no price was fixed upon till February last; I made repeated applications to Mr. Johnstone, in a delicate way, to pay him, and on the 22d of February." That is a very remarkable time, immediately after the transaction on the 21st; if the gentleman knew any thing of De Berenger's conduct, on the previous day, it may deserve consideration, whether that was the most likely time, in point of delicacy, to have made the application. "Mr. Johnstone sent me a letter on the 22d of February 1814, enclosing a letter from Mr. De Berenger to Mr. Cochrane Johnstone." Now these letters, if you wish them to be read, I will read.

_Foreman of the Jury._ We think there is no necessity, my Lord.

_Lord Ellenborough._ They relate to other work he was doing for him; there was that plan, I should have thought from two to three hundred pounds very excessive compensation for it; but still there was some claim affording a ground for money transactions to pass between them. As to the dates, there is one circumstance of Mr. Tahourdin dating the letter of De Berenger to Cochrane Johnstone, enclosed in the letter of Cochrane Johnstone to himself, which appears not very usual in the course of business; the letters shew other transactions between them. Whether they were pretended or not, or if existing, then artificially brought forward or not, may be a question; but the letters certainly are dated at a most critical time, namely, on the 22d of February. Then he says, "There is a reference in the letter, to an assignment of some property, which De Berenger had, which assignment was prepared at my office: I do not know whether Mr. Cochrane Johnstone answered De Berenger's letters." He is shewn a letter, and he says, "That is my answer to the letter of Mr. Cochrane Johnstone; I wrote it on the 23d of February."

There was a business to settle with Lady Mary Crawford Lindsay. There is a great deal of business certainly introduced into these letters, so much almost as to induce one to think there is an artificial introduction of business, to give the appearance of reality to the letters; however, Mr. Tahourdin certainly swears that there were such transactions at that period. But one cannot help recollecting that Mr. Tahourdin, towards the close of the case, appears to have been in communication with the two last witnesses, Donithorne and Tragear, on whose evidence I shall have to observe. He says, "I saw a very few days after their date, a receipt for £.50. dated 20th September 1813, received of C. Johnstone by hands of G. Tahourdin, on account of large plans;" there is a receipt for £.200. dated the 26th of February: "Received £.200. on account of plans and prospectus delivered, C. R. De Berenger;" and a note of hand for £.200. more, De Berenger to C. Johnstone, dated the 26th of February; I saw it two or three days afterwards. So that, just after the extraordinary transaction which had such an effect upon the funds, a communication that had taken place between them, and these letters are produced, and which are conceived to be material, with reference to the question now before you. He says, "there were subordinate plans for the details of that same place." Then he says, "I had become security for the Rules for De Berenger, some months before I knew Mr. Cochrane Johnstone." Then he is shewn the letter, which has been described as the Dover letter; he says, "this certainly is not the hand-writing of De Berenger; I have received a thousand letters from him, and this is not his hand-writing; I do not believe it is a disguised hand of Mr. De Berenger; I have always considered De Berenger as a man of strict honour and integrity; I have trusted him to the extent of about £.4,000. in money, besides my professional claims on him." Some writing in a road-book found in De Berenger's desk, is then shewn to him; and how any person should have writing by him like that, purporting to be his own, and it should still not be his own hand-writing, one cannot conceive. But he says, "some of it is more like his hand-writing than others, but I do not believe," he says, "that all the writing is his; some of the letters" he says, (on being shewn the pencil-writing in the book found in De Berenger's desk) "look like his writing; the smaller parts look like his hand-writing." He is asked, "whether he does not believe the whole of it to be his hand-writing?" and he says, "I do not know what to say, this pencil is not like what he writes in general; it being in pencil puzzles me more than any thing else."

Then General Campbell is called, who says, "I know Mr. Cochrane Johnstone; I met him the second week in October last, I think at the Perth meeting; he shewed me a prospectus of a new public building to be erected in the Regent's Park, or in the neighbourhood of it, I think he called it Vittoria." He is shewn the prospectus, and he says, "I believe this is a copy of the same that he communicated to me in his or my own apartment."

Then on the part of Mr. De Berenger, Lord Yarmouth is called; he says, "I am lieutenant colonel commandant of the regiment of Sharp-shooters. Captain De Berenger was acting adjutant, a non-commissioned officer. I have known him since 1811; very early in that year. I cannot recollect the day. I have received letters from him, and have seen him occasionally write, and have seen him frequently on the subject of the contents of those letters, and am acquainted with his character of hand-writing." Then that letter sent to Admiral Foley is shewn to him; he says, "If I had heard none of the circumstances, I should not have believed it was his hand-writing. He solicited to go out in the month of January last. Some time back he told me, that he had very nearly arranged to go out to drill the men on board the Tonnant."

Upon his cross-examination, he says, "the hand-writing of this is much larger than Mr. De Berenger's; he generally writes a round and neater hand." He is shewn another letter; and he says, "I received that letter on the day it bears date, or the day immediately after." He is then shewn the writing in the road book; and he says, "It is larger than De Berenger's usual writing; some part of it is not larger, it is less round; it is more angular. I am not sufficient conversant with hand-writing, to swear either way to this." Then he looks again at the letter sent from Dover to Admiral Foley; he says, "the letter R looks very much like his hand-writing in the R of Random, before De Berenger, Random being his second name." Then being asked, what he should think of this gentleman coming to him in his bottle-green coat of uniform; he says, "It would have been more military that he should come so, though I never exacted it of him. I should not have been angry at it, but should have thought it the regular dress for him to appear in. If he had appeared before me in an aid-de-camp's scarlet uniform, and with a star, I should have been indeed surprised to see him present himself before me in that dress."

Sir John Beresford is then called; he says, "I have seen Captain De Berenger twice before yesterday. I never saw him write; I know of his application to go to America, as a sharp-shooter. In the beginning of February I paid my ship off, and met Mr. Cochrane Johnstone in town, who told me, Sir Alexander Cochrane was very anxious he should go out in the Tonnant, to teach the marines the rifle exercise. I went to the Horse Guards, to ask whether any thing could be done; I was told it would be useless to apply to the Duke of York, and told Mr. Cochrane Johnstone of it; this was before Sir Alexander Cochrane sailed in January or December. I met him at dinner at Mr. Cochrane Johnstone's. I was there to meet Sir Alexander Cochrane, but he did not come."

Mr. James Stokes says, "I am a clerk of Mr. Tahourdin; I have been so between three and four years, and during that time have frequently seen the hand-writing of De Berenger; he has been a client of my master's, and has been assisted very much by him. I have seen a great deal of his writing; this is certainly not his writing, not a word of it; and the letter 'R.' (which Lord Yarmouth had spoken to) is not at all like it."

Then they call witnesses, who at last come to swear, that captain De Berenger slept in his own apartments on the Sunday night, the 20th of February; of course, if he did so, he could not have been on the 21st at Dover, at the time sworn to by the witnesses.

William Smith is called; he says, "I was servant to Mr. De Berenger, I was so about three years and a half; I have seen him write frequently." Then he is shewn the Dover letter, and he says "I do not believe that is his hand-writing; the signature there, Du Bourg, I really believe is not his hand-writing, no part of the letter; I am positively sure it is not. He has lately lodged with a person of the name of Davidson, in Asylum Buildings. I was with him on Sunday the 27th of February, when he went away; I perfectly remember he was at home on Sunday the 20th; he slept at home on the Saturday night the 19th, and went out about nine o'clock on Sunday morning; he came in afterwards at nearly eleven o'clock, and went out again immediately afterwards; he stayed out only about twenty minutes, and returned again when people were gone to Church, and stayed at home till about four o'clock, he then went out again. I was not at home then, I was over the way with my master's dog, leaning with my back against the rail, when he came down on the opposite side of the road facing the door. I went out with my wife soon after, and returned in the evening about eleven or a few minutes afterwards; he was not at home then, he came home afterwards, in five minutes after I got home, that was a few minutes after eleven; he slept at home that night. I and my wife were down in the kitchen taking our suppers, and my master was in the drawing room; before we got to bed, I heard him pass my room door to go to his bed-room, that might be about half-past eleven. He did not breakfast at home the next morning; I did not see him the next morning; I saw him about three o'clock in the afternoon of Monday; my wife made his bed."

Then he says, on cross-examination, "I let him in at a little after eleven at night. He rapped at the door in his usual way; his usual rap was not over loud, between loud and gentle; he went to his bed-room that night; I did not see him in bed the next morning, I heard him go into the bed-room." Then he is shewn a letter, which he says, "I wrote to Lord Yarmouth," (but that is not given in evidence) "I have my master's military grey great coat here at Guildhall; I never acknowledged that my master slept from home that night, to Mr. Murray; I never told either Mr. or Mrs. Davidson, that coming home and not finding my master at home, I had left the key for him at the usual place in the area, that he might let himself in; I never told them so, either on Monday the 21st or any other day, to the best of my knowledge. He has no attendance in the morning, he does every thing for himself, he does not usually ring his bell of a morning before he comes down to breakfast; he is a very quiet man, I never knew him otherwise, he never makes a disturbance, he walks about very much. My master finally left his lodgings on Sunday the 27th; I remember changing a £.50 note with Seeks," (that is the £.50. I have mentioned to you) "received it from Mr. De Berenger, I received it on the 27th, the day he went away; I took his things to the Angel Inn behind Saint Clement's; a day or two before he left to go into the country he gave me £.20. I never saw him give Sophia £.13. if I was in the room, I did not notice it. I do not remember, after my master finally went away, Mr. Cochrane Johnstone's calling with a letter; I never told Mrs. Davidson, that a gentleman who called there was Mr. Cochrane Johnstone. I was not at home; she told me a gentleman had called there, and described him; I said, most likely it was Mr. Cochrane Johnstone." Upon his examination I thought he had said, that he had seen him only once, but then he said, at last, that it was only once at his house. "I did not tell her on the Sunday, that if my master had been at home on the Saturday, when Mr. Cochrane Johnstone brought that letter, he would have gone off on the Saturday night; I did not tell her so either on the Saturday or the Sunday. My master was at home every day from the 20th to the 27th, going out as usual. On the 21st, he went out to dine; he did not tell me where he was going to, or when he came back where he had been to, that I recollect; he did not tell me he had been to Mr. Cochrane Johnstone's, when he came home, nor before he went out, that he was going there. When I came home on the Monday, I saw a strange black coat; I cannot tell whether the coat fitted my master; I never saw it on; I brushed it; I am used to brushing coats; I did not know whose coat it was; I cannot tell whether it was the coat of a man six feet high. I swore an affidavit; I drew that affidavit myself; I told Mr. Tahourdin of his absence on the 7th or 8th of March; I drew out the affidavit before that time, and did it without any sort of concert with any body whatever, merely for the vindication of my master's character. I sent the affidavit to be published; I found my master a very injured gentleman; I took it to Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, and he published it." And then he says, "I let him in," that is, De Berenger his master, "on Sunday the 20th."

Ann Smith, the wife of William Smith, says, "I was a servant with my husband to Mr. De Berenger, in February last, and had been so two years and a half. I saw my master at home on the 20th of February; he went out about nine o'clock in the morning, and came in again between ten and eleven; he did not stay at home long then, before he went out again. My husband and I went out between four and five, after my master was gone out; he went out about four o'clock. My husband and I returned home about eleven, a few minutes before my master; my husband got in a little before me. My master came in that evening; he was let in by my husband, and I heard him above stairs; he had a bit of bread and a glass of ale that night for supper. I did not see him that night; it was my business to make his bed. I got up on the Monday morning about seven, that was the Sunday and Monday before he finally went off, I am sure; I usually get up about seven. My master went out that morning before breakfast; my husband went out about eight, and my master went out a little before him; I did not see him go out nor hear him; I did not know he was out till I let him in; I made his bed on the Sunday morning; I was up stairs making his bed, and he went out, I looked out of the window and saw him go; I made his bed on Monday, but that was not till after he came home, which was about twelve o'clock; when I found he had been out, I went up stairs immediately to make his bed." You will consider whether there is any room for believing she might be correct, and that he might have lain down upon his bed before she made it. "The bed appeared as usual, as if it had been slept in on Sunday night; I and my husband slept in our bed, and I made his bed on Monday as well as on Sunday. I remember how my master was dressed on the Monday when he came home; he had a black coat on; he had a bundle in his hand; I saw a part of a coat where the bundle was open, a grey coat just where the knot was tied; my master continued to sleep regularly at home til he finally went away."

Upon her cross-examination she says, "my master had no other man servant but my husband; he used to wait upon him, and do any thing he was requested to do. I used to carry up breakfast when he rang, if my husband was out; he did not ring for my husband to attend him in the morning to dress. I supposed my master had breakfasted out when he came in; I was rather surprised that he had not rung. On the Sunday, when he went out, he had on his black coat and waistcoat, and grey overalls; I did not remark that the coat was too long for him; I do not know how he was dressed when he went out on the Monday; he came home in a black coat; I cannot tell whether it was the black coat in which he went out on Sunday. I never saw Lord Cochrane. I never observed the black coat at all in the bundle; I saw part of a grey coat, and the green uniform coat was in the bundle. There was nothing extraordinary in my master's going out in green, it was his drill dress; he was in the habit of going out in it, and returning in it; I never knew of his going out in a green drill dress, and returning with a black coat before. I made an affidavit; I saw nobody on the subject of that affidavit; I saw Mr. Tahourdin a few days after making the affidavit. Mr. De Berenger wore whiskers sometimes; I do not know whether he wore whiskers then or not, I did not see much of him. I had not seen the bed on Monday morning till after his return."

Then the ostler at Chelsea, and his wife, are called to prove, that he was at a late hour in town. John M'Guire says, "I am the ostler at Smith's livery-stables, at the Cross-keys yard, Chelsea. I am acquainted with the person of Mr. De Berenger; I remember seeing him on the 20th of February; it was on a Sunday. I remember it perfectly well, because I knew he was within the Rules of the King's Bench; and I determined to ask his servant, how he was out of the Rules. He had lived at Chelsea before. It was a quarter past six in the evening that I saw him at Smith's stable-yard gate; he asked me if the coach to London was gone; I told him the six o'clock coach was gone, but the seven would be ready in three quarters of an hour; he said, it would not do to wait for the seven o'clock coach, and he turned round and took his way to London. When I went home that night, I mentioned to my wife, that I had seen Mr. De Berenger at a quarter past six. I was induced to mention it, from knowing he was in the Rules of the Bench, and not having seen him that way for some time before; he went from the lodgings he had at Chelsea, to the King's Bench."

Upon cross-examination, he says, "I have known him three years and a half, I knew him to be an officer in a corps of Riflemen; that day fortnight I saw his servant, on the 6th of March, and he said, he was not clear of the Bench then. Last Monday week I was examined by the attorney. He had on, when I saw him, a black coat, a black waistcoat, and grey overalls or pantaloons. I have seen William Smith this morning. De Berenger wore whiskers when I knew him before, but when I saw him on this Sunday he was close shaved, he had none then; it was three miles and a half from the Asylum." Now it appears, that De Berenger was three miles and a half from the Asylum at a quarter past six, where he had dined; if he had dined any where, we have not heard. He says, "he thought it was wrong to be out of the Rules, and he was shocked at it."

Then Mr. Hopper says, "I am an architect. I saw Mr. Cochrane Johnstone's premises at Alsop's Buildings two nights ago." He is shewn the plan and prospectus, and he says, "From the trouble that must attend it, a compensation of from, £.200 to £.300. might not be excessive." I have mis-stated it, therefore before; he does not say, it would not be excessive, but it _might_ not be so.

Then Mrs. M'Guire says, "I am the wife of M'Guire, the ostler. I did not know Mr. De Berenger, when he lived at Chelsea, I knew Smith his servant. My husband mentioned to me on the 20th of February, his having seen Mr. De Berenger, Smith's master; he mentioned it to me at ten at night; it was the Sunday before Shrove Tuesday, it was my child's birth-day, and therefore I remember it. My husband told me, he had seen him at about a quarter past six; he said, he wondered whether he had got his liberty yet or not; I cannot particularly say whether he said it was shocking or not; he said, he wondered whether he had got his liberty."

How this should have excited the curiosity of this man, one cannot well conceive; but one cannot comment upon that which one cannot read and believe.

Then Henry Doyle Tragear is called; he says, "I was at Mr. Donithorne's house in York-street, Westminster, in the month of February last. I was staying there; I went there upon the occasion of my leaving my house, No. 39, Little Queen-street, Holborn, where I had carried on the hatting business. I left my house finally on the 17th, and went to Donithorne's; I remain at his house still. I had seen Mr. De Berenger frequently previous to that, at Mr. Donithorne's house. I particularly remember having seen him there on Sunday the 20th of February; I saw him twice that day; I saw him between nine and ten in the morning, and again between eight and nine in the evening; I saw him at Donithorne's house both these times; he might stop about half an hour, more or less. I have seen him frequently talking with Mr. Donithorne about some drawings, designs for pieces of furniture, and things of that sort. Donithorne is a cabinet maker. Donithorne has shewn me these things before. I am a hat manufacturer; I am not entirely out of business but I have not a house at the present moment; I went there to reside till I could get a house to suit myself, to start in business again." According to the wife, it did not appear as if he was likely to go into business again. "My wife, Mrs. Donithorne and Mr. Donithorne were there in the evening. When he came, Mr. Donithorne went into the garden with him; he said he would not come into the parlour to disturb the company; I had seen him repeatedly before."

Then upon cross examination, he says, "I was not struck with any alteration in his appearance that night; he had no whiskers on that night; I do not know whether he had ever worn whiskers before; he had a black coat on that day; he had his hat on. It was between eight and nine when they took a walk in the garden. I cannot say whether his hair was powdered; they went out to take a survey of the premises in the morning. I have seen Mr. Donithorne and Mr. Tahourdin together one day last week. I will swear, that I did not know they were acquainted together before that time; I never was sent for to become a witness upon this occasion; I went myself; Tahourdin did not send for me; I went to Tahourdin I think one day last week. I did not know that I was to be a witness till last week, or that it was material I should recollect the 20th of February. I let my house on the 17th of February to Samuel Nicholson; and on the Sunday morning following Mr. Donithorne came to my room, and told me a gentleman was come to look over the house, and if I would get up he should be obliged to me. I have seen Smith, the servant." He then says, "I have been bail twice, once for fifteen pounds, that I believe is settled; I have been bail again, but I do not quite know whether that has been settled, nor the amount. I don't recollect if I have been bail oftener."

Then Mrs. Tragear, the wife of the last witness, is called; she says, "I know the defendant De Berenger; I have seen him often. I and my husband went to stay at Donithorne's when we gave up our house; the day we gave up our house was the 17th of February. Mr. De Berenger called at Donithorne's on Sunday the 20th, between nine and ten in the morning; we were not up then. Mr. Donithorne was in the cabinet business. He came up and said, he was anxious we should get up, as a gentleman was come to look over the house. When I got up, I threw down the sash, and saw Mr. De Berenger; he was measuring the ground in the garden. I am sure it was he; I saw him again in the evening between eight and nine; we were in the parlour along with Mr. and Mrs. Donithorne; asked him to come in; and he said he would not disturb the company; he wanted to speak with Mr. Donithorne; they walked backwards into the garden, and I saw him no more."

Then, on cross-examination, she says, "my husband is deaf at times; Mrs. Donithorne came to call us; Mr. De Berenger went into the attics; he did not go into our room." It is afterwards said by Donithorne, that he went two or three times into it. "I do not remember seeing any one in the garden with De Berenger and Donithorne; one of them held the measuring rod and the other, took the figures down. There was no snow; I think it was a wet morning, and the rain had cleared the snow away. My husband failed on the 17th of February; he then came to Mr. Donithorne's, who is a cousin."

Then Donithorne is called; he says, "I live in York-street, Westminster. Mr. and Mrs. Tragear came to live at my house, on Thursday the 17th of February. I had known De Berenger a long while; I am very well acquainted with his person; I am a cabinet-maker; De Berenger had furnished me with designs for furniture. I remember seeing him on the Sunday morning, after Tragear came to my house, which would be the 20th of February, between nine and ten in the morning; he came to look over my ground, as I was going to make some alterations in my little garden, and also some designs for cabinet work. I furnished Mr. Cochrane Johnstone's house in Cumberland-street, for Miss Johnstone. I saw him again between eight and nine in the evening; I let him in, and asked him to walk into the parlour where we were sitting; he said he would walk into the back-parlour; he stayed about a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes; he did not go into the garden. In the morning, we were I dare say, an hour together in the garden; he called in the evening, to give me an answer when he was to draw a plan for me." (This does not appear to be business of sufficient consequence to have led this man twice there in the course of that day.) "I was going to convert the front part of my house into an inn, and the back part into pleasure-ground; it was a misty rainy morning, and very cold."

On his cross-examination, he says, "he came as the friend of Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, to give me plans for furniture; I proposed to him surveying my house, with a view to the improvements I intended to make. I went and called Mr. and Mrs. Tragear, and desired them to get up; I have no doubt of it, I went twice." He is then asked as to some writs against persons in the Stock Exchange; he says, "I employed the attorney, Mr. Tahourdin, by desire of Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, to issue 135 writs; Mr. Cochrane Johnstone is to pay for them;" it appears that these writs are against persons for stock-jobbing transactions. "Tragear never failed, to my knowledge."

Gentlemen--This is the whole of the evidence on each side. I have made my observations upon it, as it has proceeded. You have heard from me already, that this is a case in which both the individuals and the public are deeply concerned. It is important that public justice should be vindicated by the conviction of the defendants, if they are guilty; and that justice should likewise be done to the defendants, by exempting them from punishment, if they have committed no crime. You will consider upon the whole of the evidence, whether these several parties were connected in one common plan, and were using their several endeavours and means to raise the Funds for corrupt advantage, by false contrivances, and the circulation of false intelligence--if you believe that all of them were concerned in it, you will find them all guilty--if you believe that any of them are exempt from a share in this Conspiracy, you will acquit them.--You will now consider of your Verdict.

_Mr. Richardson._ Your Lordship stated, that there were some Counts upon which they ought not to be found guilty.

_Lord Ellenborough._ Yes; Gentlemen, you will find the defendants not guilty upon the first and second Counts of the Indictment, as those allege facts and motives, in which they cannot all be supposed to be joined.

_A Juryman._ They are guilty or not guilty of a Conspiracy.

_Lord Ellenborough._ Yes; a Conspiracy, which is a crime that cannot be committed by one; it must be committed by more than one.

_The Jury retired at ten minutes after six o'clock, and returned at twenty minutes before nine with their Verdict, finding all the Defendants--GUILTY._

Court of King's Bench.

_Tuesday, 14 June 1814._

LORD COCHRANE.

My Lords, scarcely recovered as I am from the shock, which I experienced on hearing of the verdict pronounced against me at the late trial, I must crave your utmost indulgence, not only on that account, but also because I am unacquainted with the proceedings and forms in Courts of Law. I feel it essentially necessary, and I trust I shall make it evident to the minds of your Lordships, that it is essentially necessary to the cause of justice, that there should be a revision of the proceedings that have been lately had, and that a new trial should take place, at least as far as I am concerned and implicated in that transaction.

It has been my misfortune to suffer from an intimacy, or rather an acquaintance, with men, over whose conduct I could have no control whatever. I have been informed, that it is not competent for my counsel to rise up on the present occasion to ask your Lordships to grant me a new trial, and therefore it is necessary I should address you myself.

_Lord Ellenborough._ Your Lordship must have been misinformed on the subject; any application you wish to address to the Court may be addressed to them by counsel, and perhaps with more convenience to yourself.

_Lord Cochrane._ I understood there was the case of a conspiracy, in which it had been held that a revision of the case, and a new trial could not be moved for, unless all the defendants appeared in Court.

_Lord Ellenborough._ That would be the same, whether the application was made by counsel or by yourself.

_Lord Cochrane._ It is only for the purpose of preventing my counsel from trespassing on the rules of the Court, that I have adopted this mode of proceeding, and I trust--

_Lord Ellenborough._ I am afraid, my Lord, we cannot hear you, unless all the parties are present in Court. That is the rule of the Court, and we have acted on it so lately as this very morning.

_Lord Cochrane._ I have to complain, that evidence was not brought forward on the late trial, which was extremely material to shew my innocence. If your Lordships will permit me to read the evidence to which I allude--

_Lord Ellenborough._ It will answer no beneficial purpose, because we cannot advert to what you are now stating, unless the other parties convicted are now in Court.

_Lord Cochrane._ If your Lordships will grant me permission to read the statement, you will be better able to judge of the propriety or impropriety of granting my application.

_Mr. Justice Dampier._ By the rules of the Court it cannot be; your Lordship has been informed of the practice of the Court, and from that practice, the Court has no power to depart.

_Lord Ellenborough._ The practice of the Court is exceedingly beneficial, and must be adhered to by us.

_Lord Cochrane._ My Lords, I have now in my hands several affidavits that will prove my innocence, if the Court will hear them. They are very short.

_Lord Ellenborough._ We have announced to your Lordship the rule of practice, and we are extremely unwilling to give you any pain, but we cannot forego the regular practice of the Court. We could not do it on the application of Counsel, and no more can we do it upon your application.

_Lord Cochrane._ I shall be exceedingly brief. The facts, which I shall prove by these affidavits, will sufficiently justify me; and it will redound to the honour of the judges of this land, to suffer me in this instance, though contrary to the practice of the Court, to shew my innocence; when those who are guilty of this transaction, and over whose conduct I have no control, dare not appear in the place where I now stand.

_Lord Ellenborough._ We must abide by the rules of the Court. If we give way to the importunity of one, we must give way to the importunity of all; we must administer the same justice to all, without distinction of persons.

_Lord Cochrane._ I beg only to state----

_Lord Ellenborough._ It would be idle to announce to your Lordship, that there is such a rule of practice as that which I have mentioned, unless we meant to abide by it; the rule is, that no application can be made for a new trial, unless all the persons convicted are here: we have acted on that rule this day; and if we were now to adopt a different rule, it might very properly be said, there was one rule for the poor and another for the rich.

_Lord Cochrane._ My Lords, I have briefly to state these facts, that before the late trial, so conscious was I of my innocence, that I did not think it necessary to instruct counsel, as several gentlemen in court know. I never read over the brief on the subject, till after the trial, when I found a very gross error had crept into it, with regard to the dress of the stranger who called at my house; and my servant is in consequence represented as having admitted that he was dressed in a red coat. The fact was, that being questioned as to the colour of the coat, he stated that he appeared to be an army officer, to which he very naturally attached the idea of a red coat, for the servants did not see it.

Court of King's Bench.

Monday, _20 June 1814_.

_Mr. Gurney._ I move your Lordships for the Judgment of the Court in the case of the King _v._ De Berenger, and others.

[_The Officer called the Defendants, who appeared, excepting
the Honourable Andrew Cochrane Johnstone, and Alexander
M'Rae._]

_Mr. Serjeant Best._ Upon this occasion I appear only as Counsel for Mr. Butt; and before I make the motion which I feel myself called upon, under the circumstances of this case to make, I take the liberty to suggest to your Lordships, that if I should not succeed in my motion in arrest of judgment, there is a fact which was not proved at the trial, but which it was necessary to prove for the purpose of convicting these defendants upon any count of the indictment, in which it forms a material averment, namely, that there was war between England, and the Allies of England, and France.

_Lord Ellenborough._ I am afraid there are too many statutes which speak of war with France, for the Judges to allow themselves not to have cognizance of that objection.

_Mr. Serjeant Best._ But there is none, my Lord, which refers to any war between England, and the Allies of England, and France. Unfortunately it has been only of late that we have had Allies. I make this application on the part of Mr. Butt only, and I submit to your Lordships upon the counts on which this defendant has been convicted----

_Lord Ellenborough._ You appear now only for Mr. Butt?

_Mr. Serjeant Best._ I do, my Lord.

_Lord Ellenborough._ I have made a minute, that on the trial you told me you were Counsel for the second, third, and fourth, defendants, Lord Cochrane, Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, and Mr. Butt.

_Mr. Serjeant Best._ I am not now Counsel for Lord Cochrane, I am moving merely for Mr. Butt.

_Lord Ellenborough._ That is a new proceeding, that Counsel shall renounce some clients, in order to serve others.

_Mr. Serjeant Best._ My Lord, Lord Cochrane has desired me not to move on his behalf; and I may state so much for him, that he has no intention to move in arrest of judgment. My other client, Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, is not here.

_Lord Ellenborough._ If you move in arrest of judgment for one, all have the benefit of it.

_Mr. Serjeant Best._ My objections are three; first, taking the third count as it stands, (and the objections apply to every successive count in the indictment) that there is no body of crime alleged, no offence known to the law, the raising the price of the public funds not being necessarily a crime; In the second place, that if there be any crime, which is alleged, the persons who are to be affected by that crime are not particularized; My third objection is, that it is stated, that the object of the conspiracy was, to raise the price of the public funds of _this kingdom_: this kingdom being now the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, I conceive there is no kingdom of England, but that the kingdom of England is merged in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and I humbly conceive, nothing that is here charged has reference to any funds and government-securities, except the funds and government-securities of that part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, called England.

My Lords, I am aware of the extent to which the decisions pronounced on this subject have carried the doctrine, with respect to conspiracy; but I conceive it will not be found there is any adjudged case which goes so far as to reach this transaction, taking it as an abstract proposition, that the conspiracy was, to raise the price of the government funds of this country. Unless your Lordships can pronounce that the raising the price of the government funds of this country is a crime of itself, a conspiracy to raise the price of those funds cannot be a crime by itself; but in order to make it a crime, it is necessary to state some particular circumstance which gives it a criminal character.--I conceive nobody will be found to argue, that the raising the price of the public funds, without some side object, must be mischievous to the country, and therefore a crime; so far from that being the case, I conceive the higher the prices at which the government funds can be kept, except in particular cases, the better for the country, because it is upholding the credit of the country.

_Mr. Justice Le Blanc._ It is stated, that they were to be raised on a particular day.

_Lord Ellenborough._ By false reports and rumours.

_Mr. Serjeant Best._ An intention of doing that on a particular day, may be either a meritorious or a criminal action; but what I submit to your Lordships, is, that of itself, it is neither the one nor the other; it is therefore necessary to put on the record something which shall bring the fact within the purview of the law. It is not stated upon this record, that the defendants were possessed of any funds, that they were desirous of selling those funds, and that therefore they meditated a fraud on the particular persons to whom they should sell their funds, by raising the price;--it is merely stated, that the object was to raise the price of the funds, which I submit to your Lordships may be commendable or criminal.