Brownlow.

You are what is commonly called an Orangeman?-I am.

Are you a purple-man?-I am.

You have taken the Orange oath? I have. And the purple oath ?-Yes.

Were you intimate with Mr. Ormsby?-I was not; I had seen bim about a year back; but I never spoke to him in my life, till the time the traversers were in confinement.

At that time Mr. Ormsby was very ill?-He was, but was able to be out.

Then when he talked about the Mr. Jones, in the way you have described, he had not the prospect of death? I did not mention Mr. Jones.

Davy Jones?-Yes; that was in the month of March; I am speaking of the last week in December.

When had you that conversation with him? -The time he made use of that expression to me, was the first week in March.

Was he very ill then? - Very ill indeed; he was sitting up to have his bed made, he never left his room after that.

Was he in that state of mind, that a person usually is in the prospect of dissolution, when he use 1 the expressions which you have just stated? I consider him to be perfectly in that state of mind, so much so, that a clergyman had been with him, I believe, an hour before.

What made you so anxious that the prisoners should be honourably acquitted? - Being a particular acquaintance, I felt sorry that an imputation of the kind should be made against them.

You felt no peculiar interest in consequence of their belonging to the same system as yourself?-Certainly; I considered that the same odium would be brought against the system, and that, together with my individual feeling for them, roused me to exertion in their favour.

Robert Gilbert called in; and examined

By Colonel Parry. - What is your situation in life? I am the under gaoler of Newgate in Dublin.

Do you recollect any person coming to the gaol of Newgate, for the purpose of seeing the prisoners who were confined for being concerned in the riot at the theatre on the 14th of December?-I do.

Do you recollect any person pointing out one of them, as the man that threw the rattle?

-I do.

Who was that person? -I have heard since that it is a Mr. Lewis.

Whom did he identify as the person who threw the rattle? - A man of the name of Ormsby; a man in the last stage, as I thought at the time, of a consumption.

Major Tandy was present at this?-He was. When did this take place?-I think the day or the day but one after the prisoners were fully committed.

threw the rattle?-He did; there were about ten prisoners in the yard where the man was; I was asked to show the prisoner Graham which I declined doing: I said it was not my practice to show any man singly, but I would show the yard where he was; I brought them up to an eminence and said, "Gentlemen, the prisoner is in that yard." Ormsby was talking to Matthew Handwich, and he pointed over his finger and said, "That is the man." I was greatly astonished, and after some little delay, said, " Sir, I think you are mistaken, for that man is not one of the prisoners." He then seemed to be more positive as to his dress than to his features.

You are sure that major Tandy was in a situation to hear all that passed? - Certainly, he was not further than this gentleman from me.

Did not you point out Graham to Lewis?--Not till after he had asked me if I would show him, and I said I would then.

You are positive he pointed out Ormsby in the first instance?-Certainly.

What passed when Lewis pointed out Graham?-There was some conversation between him and major Tandy, which I did not mind; Mr. Tandy being a magistrate I did not interfere between him and Mr. Lewis.

Did not Mr. Lewis say something to you upon the subject?-No, I think not.

Did any other persons apply to you to point out Graham to them?-No, not Graham.

Or Forbes? The prisoners in general, I was asked to show them all; I recollect on new year's night there came the crown solicitor to the gaol, with a gentleman whose face was covered so that I could not see, and he asked me to bring the prisoners, and to place them in a situation with other persons, that they should be inspected. I brought them all down into one of my own apartments, and placed them in a room, and the gentlemen walked up into the room, and the gentleman man who came to identify them, I recollect, identified a man of the name of Davern, who was in custody for forgery for a length of time before; I then told the gentleman he must have been mistaken, for that person was in custody for a long time before the riots in the theatre; he then requested I might bring down Forbes and show him; I told him I did not think that would be right, that he was in a most conspicuous place in the room, and I did not think it would be treating him well to show him singly.

Did you afterwards learn who that gentleman who was muffled up was?-A Mr. Vignoles, one of the lord-lieutenant's aide-de-camps.

Did not you consider it a circumstance of some considerable importance, when Lewis pointed out Ormsby as the person who had thrown the rattle?-I did.

Was the circumstance of its being in major Tandy's hearing, a circumstance that made you think it was unnecessary to make it known to persons in authority? Yes.

Major Tandy is a police magistrate ? Yes. On what day did this take place?-I think a day or two after the prisoners were fully

committed.

By Lord Milton. - Do you know who Lewis is?-Sub-sheriff of the county of Kildare.

When Lewis stated, that Ormsby was the person who had thrown the rattle, did he state it upon his own knowledge or common report? -On his own knowledge.

Did he state, that he had seen it?-He did; that he was in some situation in the boxes, that he could see him and had a clear view of him.

He was quite certain Ormsby was the person who threw the rattle?-Yes, he seemed to be quite certain at first; but when I told him, he was not one of the prisoners, he seemed not. to be so certain as to his features, but more certain to his dress.

When you told him, that Ormsby was not one of the prisoners, some doubt was thrown upon his mind whether he was the person?Certainly: and I thought him quite mistaken myself at the time.

Did not Mr. Lewis ask you whether Graham had not changed his dress?-He did.

Did you ever mention to the Handwiches, or any of the prisoners, the fact that Mr. Lewis had pointed out Ormsby? I went down immediately, and said, "What is your name?" He said, "My name is Ormsby." I said, "There was a gentleman after pointing you out as the person who threw the rattle; were you at the theatre that evening?" He said, "I was at the theatre." I observed while I was talking to him he seemed a good deal agitated. I said, "When you were at the theatre, had you this coat on?" He said, "No, I had not this coat upon me." I asked him this, in consequence of the gentleman seeming to speak more to his dress than to his person.

Did you ever mention to the prisoners that Ormsby had been pointed out as the man?-I

did.

Did sheriff Thorpe ever visit the prisoners in gaol, the traversers?-He did.

By Mr. Ellice. Can you account for the reason of your not having been called on the trial, after having acquainted the Handwiches and other prisoners of this error in Mr. Lewis in pointing out any improper person; were you summoned on the trial? No, I was not, but I attended the trial almost every day.

You were not called? -No; they told me, if that gentleman was produced, it would be then necessary to call on me.

They did not think it necessary to show that Ormsby had been pointed out as the person who threw the rattle?-I suppose they did not, or they would have produced me.

Do you mean to say, you communicated to them before the trial, that a gentleman brought there by major Tandy, had identified another person as the person who threw the rattle, but that they did not produce you? - Yes.

Were the prisoners visited by their counsel or agents between the day of which you are

speaking, and the trial? They were; and their agent was in possession of that fact; I told it to the agent.

Who were they?-Mr. Fearn was one; and Mr. Chambers was the other.

You were in court when the case was before the petit jury, in February? Yes; I am obliged to attend all the trials.

Was any thing said about this on that trial? -No, not a word.

By Mr. Denman. - Were Graham and Ormsby like in person?-They were alike in height, but Ormsby had a stoop; the other was a strait stout little fellow.

Who told you that the person who pointed out Ormsby was Mr. Lewis?-It was Mr. Stodart, a police magistrate.

Henry Cooper, esq. called in; and further
examined

By Sir J. Mackintosh. At the time Mr. Poole came to you, to ask to be put on the grand jury, did you tell him to go to Mr. Sheriff Thorpe?-I referred him to Mr. Sheriff Thorpe.

Did you and Mr. Sheriff Thorpe settle the panel immediately after the receipt of Mr. Kemmis's letter?-I attended the Sheriff's office, and retired into a room from the public office, and there we examined the panel which he produced.

Was that immediately after receiving the letter of Mr. Kemmis?-I think it was the day after I received it; but I cannot be particular as to dates.

Have you reason to believe, that you lost no time in settling the panel after receiving that letter? - The regulation of the panel was for the purpose of giving it to the sub-sheriff for his record panel; I think there was no alteration from that, whatever.

Was not that panel settled before Mr. Poole came to you, and had that conversation with you?-I am almost certain it was not.

The House resumed. The Chairman reported progress and obtained leave to sit again.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, May 12.

NEGOTIATIONS RELATIVE TO FRANCE AND SPAIN-FOREIGN POLICY OF THIS COUNTRY.] Earl Grey rose and said, that when he recollected the importance of the war now carrying on by France against Spain-when he adverted to the consequences likely to result from it, and the manner in which it would affect this country, as well as the dangers which threatened the peace of Europe, he was assured their lordships would feel with him the necessity of having before them every paper on a subject of such paramount importance. He should not, therefore, trouble the House with any further apology for the motions which he intended to make, with a view of throwing a light on the subject. The first point on which he wished to obtain some information was one which had created some sensation; and he should be glad if any thing satisfactory could be added to what had been said in explanation of the transaction in another place. He alluded to the capture of a Spanish ship by a French man of war, which must have sailed from France before the advance of the French army, and must, therefore, have had her orders whilst the French government were making those pacific assurances on which his majesty's ministers had relied for the preservation of peace, and on the faith of which they had induced this and the other House of Parliament to abstain from all inquiries with a view to the accomplishment of their hopes. It was with a view of enabling his majesty's ministers to contradict, on the part of the French government, what at present appeared an act of the greatest perfidy, that he now mentioned the matter. If this country could stand by, and see the greater infamy of the invasion of Spain by France, because the former had made alterations in her constitution which concerned herself alone-if we could see this odious and indefensible aggression, and think the interests of this country required us to maintain a strict neutrality, he did not think we had any right to interfere in that lesser act of robbery and plunder-the seizure of the Spanish ship before the French army had marched, and whilst negotiations were still pending. It was with the view, therefore, of relieving the French government from this act of perfidy and villainy that he thought himself now called upon to ask for some explanation, and with a view also to relieve his majesty's ministers from the odium of having been so grossly deluded. He had before alluded to what had passed in another place, when a secretary of state was stated to have said, "that a representation was immediately made to the French government, the answer to which was, to a certain extent, satisfactory:" but as all the facts must have been long since ascertained, he thought there was no reasonable ground for refusing the papers which he now wished for, in order to a full understanding of the transaction.

This

The next point to which he wished to call the attention of the House related to an act of the provisional government established in Spain, he believed, by the duke d'Angoulême, but certainly under the protection of the French government and army. He had read in the public papers a proclamation by that provisional government, in which they declared, that all acts done by the present government of Spain, since 1820, should be null and void. The consequence of this would be, that not only all acts of an internal nature, but all engagements with foreign powers, including the engagements made with this country, to render satisfaction for injuries done to our trade in the West Indies would be null and void. proclamation was made by the provisional government, and must be supposed to have the sanction of the duke d'Angoulême. He should be glad if it were not so; but he thought his majesty's ministers were bound to show that they had made representations to the French government on a subject so deeply affecting our interests, and to show also what satisfaction they had obtained. This was a point on which he thought representations ought to have been made, and respecting which, he should wish the House to be in possession of the answers given; of course limiting his motion to copies or extracts, which would enable his majesty's ministers to withhold any thing of a secret nature which it might be improper to make public.

The third point was one which he considered of very great importance. It related to the state in which France stood with respect to the sovereigns assembled at Verona, and went to show whether France was acting with the assurance of their assistance and support, or whether France was engaged in a strictly national war, to which those great powers were no parties. This appeared to him a point of very great importance, and one in which the interests of this country and of the world were essentially concerned. The consideration of this point necessarily led him to what had passed in the course of the late negotiations; and, after every attention which he had paid to the subject before the discussion, and since, he was confirmed in the opinion which he had already stated, that on no occasion in the history of this country, had its interests been so betrayed, its honour so tarnished, and its power and prosperity

application of the means; and, lastly, that there are grounds of probability to induce a hope of success. It is only by an attention to such preliminary considerations as I have stated, that the affairs of nations can be prosperously or even safely conducted.'

This had been relied upon, in another place, as exhibiting a contrast to the opinions which he held at the present mo⚫ment; with what view he could not imagine, except to induce a belief that he had then recommended something like a shrinking from the cause of Spain which he at present advocated; but on this subject he could confidently appeal to those with whom he had private communications at the time, that when that most unprincipled, that unparalleled (he had almost said) attack on Spain took place (but now no longer unequalled), he had from the first moment of resistance, wished success to the Spaniards. There was no assistance likely to contribute to that end, and within the means of the country to afford, that he was not desirous of giving them. And in that opinion he differed from a friend of his, with whom he was connected by the ties of relationship and mutual regard, and with whom he had often fought, under Mr. Fox, the battles of the constitution. The noble earl here read the following extract from the address to his majesty, with which he had concluded his speech on the occasion referred to :-" To state to his majesty that we cannot doubt his majesty's readiness to embrace the first opportunity of concluding a peace on just and reasonable terms; but that looking to the nature of the contest in which we are engaged, to the power of France, now unhappily established over the greater part of Europe, and to the spirit and character of the government of that country, we are convinced that this event, so anxiously desired by his majesty's loyal people, will be best promoted by proving to the world, that while his majesty is actuated by the most just and moderate views, we possess the means of permanently supporting the honour and independence of our country against every species of attack by which the enemy may hope to assail them." He could confidently appeal to that very speech to show that his feeling, as to the attack on Spain, was the same then as it was now. Whatever of difference there was, arose only from dif

solely to the most advantageous mode of carrying on the war in which we were engaged, and which we were bound to support. He thought he had sufficiently proved the uniformity of his opinions as to the case of Spain, and that the only difference could be as to the mode in which it was to be supported. Looking to the situation of Spain and Europe in the years 1809 and 1810, it did not appear to him that the employment of all the disposable military force on which we had to depend for our own preservation against the most alarming power that ever threatened the peace of the world, was the best mode of maintaining the cause of Spain; and, taking the same data, he should still entertain the same opinion. What, in the year 1810, was the situation of Europe? Holland was at the disposal of France; from Italy she drew some of her finest soldiers; Sweden had declared war against us; and Denmark, by an unjustifiable aggression which he should never cease to reprobate, indulged the bitterest enmity against us. Austria, after the defeat of Wagram, had concluded a peace with France, and the emperor Francis, as a confirmation of it, had married his daughter, Maria Louisa, to Napoleon. Russia also followed in the train of vassal states, having submitted to Buonaparte, who was at the head of armies that had conquered the world. He possessed not merely the forces of France, but of the whole peninsula of Italy, as the instruments of his ambition, and passively subservient to his purposes: he threatened the extinction of the last remains of independence in Spain. What, too, was the situation of Spain? The passes of the Sierra Morena had been forced, and so completely had the French troops overrun that noble kingdom, that they were quartered in Seville. True it was, that they had at last been driven from the Peninsula, and it was at the present moment highly encouraging to reflect, that notwithstanding all the disasters they had at that time suffered, they had been still able to afford an apparently desperate but an effectual resistance. The expectations of the French in 1810 might be gathered from a dispatch of marshal Soult, dated on the 27th of January in that year, which was couched in such terms as almost led to the supposition that the duke d'Angoulême was at this moment provided with the identical se