Highness was going by sea on her voyage [at another time] from Sicily to Tunis, where did she sleep?" Majocchi: "This I cannot remember."

Mr. Brougham: "When she was afterwards going from Tunis to Constantinople on board the ship, where did her Royal Highness sleep?" Majocchi: "This I do not remember."

Mr. Brougham: "When she was going from Constantinople to the Holy Land on board the ship, where did she sleep then?" Majocchi: "I do not remember."

Mr. Brougham: "Where did Bergami sleep on those three voyages of which you have just been speaking?" Majocchi: Majocchi: "This I do not know." 1

One of the neatest effects ever witnessed was produced by a single question put by one of the young leaders at our bar in the course of an inquiry on habeas corpus as to the sanity of an interested party. A medical expert had testified to his mental unsoundness, and had detailed with great clearness the tests he applied to his case, and the results which established to his satisfaction an advanced stage of paresis. He finished his direct examination one afternoon, and next day was cross-examined for the purpose of eliciting that many of the conditions he described could be found in every sane person. After

being questioned as to the first indication of mental feebleness he had specified, he was then asked what was the second feature of the cases he had mentioned as indicating paresis. The witness was unable to recall which he had mentioned second.

"What, Doctor, you can't recall the second indication of progressive mental decay which you spoke of yesterday?"-"No, I cannot, I con

fess."

"Well, that's funny. Your second indication was 'loss of memory of recent events'!"

The doctor admitted cheerfully that he had the symptoms himself in a marked degree.

[Since the Revolution of 1688, Roman Catholics had been kept

under serious disabilities, political and religious; and a movement was

begun to abolish these discriminations. Popular prejudice against popery was thus revived; and a monster petition was presented to Parliament to dissuade it from legislation. Lord George Gordon was a prime mover in the Protestant Association formed for this purpose. But the movement was believed by many to tend to violence and the overthrow of government; and in fact, on the night when the petition was taken to Parliament, a vast mob formed, burned the Fleet Prison, and other places, and pillaged the city. The important issue was whether Lord George Gordon's action was that of encouraging this violence, or merely of presenting peaceably a lawful petition.] Examined

William Hay sworn. by Mr. Solicitor-General.

Do you know the prisoner, Lord George Gordon? - Yes.

Do you remember seeing him at any time at Coachmaker's hall?—I saw the prisoner at Coachmaker's hall on the 7th of January, 1780.

Did you see him at different times at that meeting between the 7th of January and the 2d of June, the day the multitude went to the House of Commons? - Five or six times, but not at that place, the association.

What association?- The association, called the Protestant Association, was adjourned from place to place. It was adjourned to Greenwood's rooms, in the Hay-market; to the Old Crown and Rolls, in Chancery-lane; to the London tavern, in Bishopsgate street; and to St. Margaret's hall, in the borough of Southwark.

Did you see the prisoner at all or any of those places? Not at all, but at most of them.

Do you recollect which of them you saw him at?-I saw him at St. Margaret's hall, at Greenwood's rooms, at the Old Crown and Rolls tavern, Chancery-lane, and at Coachmaker's hall.

Do you remember seeing him at

Coachmaker's hall, at the last meeting previous to their going up to the House of Commons?—I remember it very well.

Do you recollect at that time anything said by the prisoner, and if you do, mention what it was ? - It was on the 29th of May I heard the prisoner announce to a very numerous assembly, the hall was crowded, "That the the Associated Protestants (as they were called) amounted to upwards of 40,000 in number; that on Friday the 2d of June, it was resolved, they should meet, at ten o'clock in the morning, in St. George's fields, in four separate divisions or columns, arrayed or dressed in their best clothes." His lordship gave orders

how these four different bodies should take their ground, and what fields they should assemble in. I cannot charge my memory exactly with the positions of those four columns, but I think the London division were to go to the field on the right of the road.

Did you go to the meeting in St. George's fields, on the 2d of June?I went there, but did not mix among the people.

Did you see a multitude of people gathered together there?-A vast multitude.

Had they any particular marks or badges? They had all cockades, and there were banners.

Was anything written upon the banners or the cockades?-Nothing on the cockades that I observed. On the banners I think I saw Protestant Association; and one banner I believe had No Popery! on it....

Which way did this multitude march?—I can say nothing of their marching, further than what I saw in Fleet street. I came home and saw them come through Fleet street, and march by St. Dunstan's church, in their way to the House of Com

banners? - Yes, the same cockades, and one or two of the banners.

Did you afterwards on that day come down towards the House of Commons? I did.

Did you see a number of the same people about the house?-I did; they appeared to be the same people. Had they the same cockades and banners? Yes, they had.

Did you get into the lobby of the House of Commons? - I was there about three hours.

Was that filled with some of this multitude? - The lobby was crowded with them.

What was their behavior?-Very riotous. The noise was generally occasioned by chiming of Lord George Gordon's name.

Do you remember the mob crying out to the people in the lobby? -I cannot pretend to say, there was such great confusion and noise. .

Do you recollect seeing any flags at any other place in the course of the mischief which followed?—I saw one of the flags at the burning of the Fleet Prison; that flag which had the words No Popery! on it.

Could you perceive whether the person who had the flag at the Fleet Prison was one you had seen in St. George's fields, or about the House of Commons?-I am very clear it was the same man, for I looked at him.

Where was it you had before seen that man, you saw with the flag at the Fleet Prison ?—I saw him carrying that flag in Fleet street.

Do you mean at the time when the multitude marched to the House of Commons?—Yes; and I saw that very man at Westminster. . .

What was the cry of the people who were employed in that business? - It generally was, No Popery ! . . . Did the people with blue cockades join with the people who were crying No Popery? It was while I was within the chapel, I heard the cry without the chapel. The person who did all the mischief, whom I saw in the chapel, had no hat on; there

You were at several places where Lord George Gordon did not attend? - Yes.

You have mentioned one place where Lord George Gordon was, at Greenwood's rooms; now I desire you to recollect, and say, whether you saw him at Greenwood's rooms?

-

- I think I saw my lord once there, and I was there once when he was not; I was there twice.

I caution you to be upon your guard. I will; it is a very serious matter; I think Lord George was once at Greenwood's rooms, and that the association was there once without his lordship.

Then you cannot speak with certainty? Unless I look at some notes I cannot tell; I have some notes here.

Did you make them at the time? Yes, I generally made them that evening.

Court. You may refresh your memory with them. (Looks at his notes.) On the 21st of January, Lord George Gordon was not, I find, present at Greenwood's.

Then you were mistaken in that part of your evidence?—I was mistaken.

How came you, from time to time, to make notes of what passed at these several meetings?—I shall be very free in telling you, that I had an idea then, that this would be the consequence of these meetings, I went almost purposely to take notes of them.

And you went on that account to take notes of what passed ? — A curiosity first led me there; but, when I saw what sort of people they were, I was willing to look farther after them, for I dreaded the consequence of their meetings.

How soon had you this foresight of what would happen? In the month of December you foresaw what would happen?-I did not, I said no such thing; I foresaw it on the 20th of February.

Then the first time you foresaw it was on the 20th of February ?— I had foreseen the evil consequences, as far as man could, before that time, but on the 20th of February I had even written my thoughts upon it.

Then the 20th of February was the first time you began to draw your conclusions? It was.

Then how came your notes and memorandums to have a date prior to that, you have notes so early as the 21st of January? - Without those notes, I could not come to that conclusion in my own mind about the consequences; I took notes on the 10th of December.

I must return again to the question I asked before; how came you first to take notes? - I never go to any public meeting but I have an errand; I wished to learn what those gentlemen would be at; I put down then what occurred, and then entered it down after I came home.

That is your constant course in all occurrences of life? Yes.

Can you tell us any one occurrence of your life, where you have committed to writing everything that passed? - I do not know any one meeting of that kind, but I have put down as much as my memory would help me to.

How many meetings of this kind have you resorted to? - I never resorted to any others of this kind.

You said you never attended any meetings respecting this kind of business, where you did not commit to writing what passed; now I want to know, what other meetings besides the Protestant Association you have attended? I have attended a great many meetings, but I cannot pretend to recite them.

Have you, upon your oath, before God and your country, put down everything that passed at those meetings?—I do not comprehend the nature of your question.

Have you set down any transactions at any other meetings, except those of the Protestant Association?

I have many times undoubtedly. Tell me when and where? - The first notes I made in my life, were in the general assembly of the church of Scotland, the very first church I was ever in, in my life.

How long is that ago? - Twentytwo years ago; so early as that, and in 1765 and 1766, I took notes again.

vidual, that stood distinguished from all the rest who were there?

There were more than I there; there was that man M'Millan, and an apprentice of my own, I took them on purpose with me.

That they might be of what use? -I wanted to inquire after some particular friends; I was afraid they might be hurt, I was afraid of myself.

Being afraid of yourself, you who were not in the crowd before, nor in danger of being hurt, under ideas you might be hurt you went into the crowd in the lobby?—I was willing to see what they were about.

Which of your friends did you conceive to be in danger? - When an alarm of that kind is gone out, one cannot but have some friend in danger; I cannot charge my memory with any particular friend. . . .

In St. George's fields, you were a considerable distance from Lord George; how near were you to the persons who carried the two flags ? I saw one of the flags carried by a constable on my left hand; I was in the road; I did not go into the field. . .

By what good luck then did you happen to see the flag in Fleet street? Where is your house? Next St. Dunstan's church; I went upon the leads on purpose to see them with this Mr. M'Millan.

One of the persons you saw with a flag in Fleet street you saw afterwards? - Yes; at the Fleet Prison and in Westminster.

vant when he is in his best clothes from another man? It is out of my power to describe it better than I do; he appeared to me to be such.

I ask you how, by what mark, do you distinguish a brewer's servant from another man? - There is something in a brewer's servant, in his condition of life, different from other

men.

There may be, for what I know; but tell me how you distinguish a brewer's servant from another man?

Be so good as to state the question again.

If there can be a doubt what the question means in any one of this audience, you shall have it repeated; you said this man was like a brewer's servant; I asked you by what mark you are able to distinguish a man to be a brewer's servant rather than of any other trade? I think a brewer's servant's breeches, clothes, and stockings have something very distinguishing.

Tell me what, in his breeches, and the cut of his coat and stockings, it was by which you distinguished him? I cannot swear to any particular mark.

Then you had no reason upon earth to use that word which came so flippant over your tongue, that he was like a brewer's servant? — I cannot answer that question if you put it to me a hundred times.

The Hon. Thomas Erskine (for the defense):

Gentlemen of the jury: Mr. Kenyon having informed the court that we propose to call no other witnesses, it is now my duty to address myself to you, as counsel for the noble prisoner at the bar, the whole evidence being closed. The first witness to support this prosecution is William Hay - a bankrupt in fortune, he acknowledges himself to be, and I am afraid he is a bankrupt in conscience. Such a scene of impudent, ridiculous inconsistency, would have utterly destroyed his credibility, in the most trifling civil suit ; and I am, therefore,