found by the grand jury for Middlesex, against Elizabeth duchefs dowager of Kingston; that a copy of that indictment, together with the certiorari, had been laid before their lordships agreeable to order. The agent for the profecution had been asked, "Whether he was apprifed of the existence of a sentence obtained from the ecclefiaftical court?" He had answered affirmatively, "That he was apprised of the existence of such a sentence, but nevertheless he meant to pursue the indictment."

Such being the intention of the profecutors, it remained with their lordships to settle only the time and place of trial. This was a matter entirely within their own jurifdiction; their lordships poffeffed the rights of adjufting every formality neceffary to the trial of peers, and they were competent to the exercife of that right in a manner most suitable to their own ideas. The king and peers of the realm formed a court of judicature altogether confonant with the fpirit of the conftitution; but, whether the trial of a peer was carried on in the parliament chamber, in Westminster-hall, a church, or any other fpacious building, was altogether immaterial; immemorial ufage had vefted the choice of place and time in their lordship's breasts. If the trial of the lady whofe indictment had given rife to this deliberation fhould be fixed in the house, the lord high steward would act only in the capacity of fpeaker, the interrogatories mutt be propounded through him, but he would have, in other re Spects, no authority whatsoever; he would give his fingle voice like any other peer.

The afcertainment of time and selection of place being thus within the power of their lordships, it remained only to state the fpecies of crime alledged against the lady, the better to guide their lordships in their judgment on the occafion.

There were crimes for which (if on their arraignment of peers were found guilty) the Jegiflature had denounced terrible punishments. Their lives were forfeited to public juftice; their noble blood was corrupted; their eftates were either al enated by forfeiture to the crown, or they escheated to the parties, of whom they had been held. Such were the punishments inflicted on peers, whofe offences were of the capital kind. For the trial of fuch offenders, too public, too awful, too ceremonious a mode could hardly be adopted. For the fake of example, this was neceffary; for the fake of terror, it was perhaps useful. But with refpect to the cafe before their lordships, it was a charge, not of bigamy but polygamy; it was a clergyable offence. The indictment was inftituted, not really at the fuit of the crown; it was the profecution of private individuals. There were offences of a public nature, of which the attorney general, as an officer of the king, and of the public, had a right to take cognizance. He might exercife his difcretionary judgment, in determining what fhould and what should not be subjected to a judicatorial tribunal. This would not apply to the cafe before their lordships. The attorney general had not, in virtue of his office,

taken cognizance of the fuppofed offence. It came fimply before their lordships as a matter, although of a criminal complexion, yet entirely of a civil nature. It was connected with other difputes about property. The indictment was to be pursued in defiance of the sentence obtained out of the ecclefiaftical court, which fentence to this hour remained in full force; no attempts had been made to invalidate the fentence; nor had the decree affirmed by the court of Chancery, grounded on that fentence, been yet appealed from. This should feem as if the lady's opponents were too confcious of the force of the fentence to attempt an invalidation. They might be juftified in this apprehenfion, for the noble speaker had himself determined a cafe, wherein a gentleman of the fame family with the earl of Bristol (the late Thomas Harvey) was concerned: it appearing by a fentence of the ecclefiaftical court, that he had been married to a lady who claimed him as her husband, a verdict had been given on the ground of that sentence.

There was a still stronger cafe to evince the validity of ecclefiaftical sentences. A man had been tried for the forgery of a will. The forgery was clearly proved, but a probate of the will was exhibited, and allowed to be a fufficient bar to conviction. These cafes operated ftrongly. They operated, not only to fhew that the trial fo far from being as public, fhould be as private as poffible, but they gave rise to this objection,

"Whether, in point of justice, there should be any trial at all?"

A peerefs of England was to be tried by her peers, The curiofity of Europe would be excited. Admitting her to be convicted," cui bone?" What good would refult to the public? What advantage would accrue to the profecutors? Her conviction would not in the smallest degree affect any civil fuits now pending, or that might hereafter be instituted againft this lady. And, as to the public at large, would her conviction operate as an example? By no means, for no punishment could be inflicted on her. Say that he was arraigned at the bar of that houfe. Well! The ecclefiaftical fentence would be exhibited in defence, and perhaps put an entire ftop to the trial. Admitting, however, that this was not the cafe; fuppofe the lady found guilty. What then? Why then the makes your lordships a curtefy, and you return the compliment with a bow."

There is, to be fure, for clergyable felonies fuch a thing as burning in the hand. To the hand of a lady this might be very difagreeable; but there happens to be an act of parliament which will not permit peers to fuffer corporal punishment for any thing under a capital crime. The lady therefore pleads her peerage, and takes her leave.

Can there be no forfeiture? Yes, of the perfonal effects. But if the lady should be convicted, the earl of Bristol has a claim to her personal effects; and, as he has formally renounced all title to the lady, he will scarcely contradict himself, by laying claim to effects which can be his only in virtue of marriage.

The

The profecutors therefore cannot acquire the fmallest advantage from the conviction.

This being an exact state of facts, the trial neither being attended immediately with any fervice to the public, nor eventual with any advantage to the profecutors, if, nevertheless, there was yet to be a trial, the more privately it was conducted, the more prudent would be the meature. His lordfhip would not move to have the trial waved. There were several modes of effecting that purpose. A Noli profequi was fometimes obtained by an authorization under the fign manual: fometimes the fecretaries of state directed the measure. In the cafe before their lor fhip, the houfe might be moved to addrefs his majefty, "That he would be graciously pleated to give directions to the proper officer to grant a Noli profequi." His lordship did not intend to move for fuch an addrefs; he threw the measure out only as matter for future confideration. For the prefent, he should submit the following motion to the confideration of the peers, viz.

"That an indictment having been found by the grand jury of Middlesex against Elizabeth (calling heriel the duchefs dowager of Kingfton, but indicted by the name of Elizabeth, wife of the hon. Auguftus John Hervey, now earl of Bristol, and one of the peers of this realm)

"Moved, That the faid Elizabeth be tried at the bar of this house on Monday the 18th of December next, at eleven o'clock in the forenoon, and that all the judges be ordered to give their attendance."

The motion paffing, feveral oth rs, relative to modes and regulations to be obferved during the trial, were entered on the minutes of the houfe, and here the business must rest. The Trial of Mrs. Margaret Caroline Rudd, on an Indictment for forging; and uttering, knowing it to be forged, a Bond, in the Name of William Adair, Efq; for the Sum of 5300l. at the Seffion Houfe in the Old Bai ley, on Friday the 8th of December, 1775. Counsel for the Profecution, Mr. Lucas, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Howarth. For the Prisoner: Serjeant Davy, Mr. Davenport, Mr. Cowper.

A

S foon as Ms. Rudd was brought to the bar, Sir Richard Afton reported the opnion of the judges upon the reference to them on her cafe, informing her that eleven judges attended, nine, of whom were of opinion the ought to take her trial, and that lord chief justice de Grey concurred in that opinion. She was then arraigned, and her indictment read over to her, to which the pleaded not guilty, and declared the would be tried by God and her country.

The indictment confifted of two counts; the first charging her with having falfely made, forged and counterfeited a bond, purporting to be the bond of William Adair, Elq. for five thousand three hundred pounds; and the other charging her with having uttered and published the said bond, knowing it to be forged and

counterfeit, and with intention to defraud Sir Thomas Frankland, baronet.

Mr. Lucas opened on the part of the profe cution; and after fully ftating to the jury the feveral facts which were alledged in the indict ment, and obferving upon the great enormity and criminality of each, he then proceeded to call the witneffes in fupport of them.

The first witnefs worn was Henrietta Perreau (wife of the unfortunate Robert Perreau, now under fentence of death) As foon as the had taken the cuftomary oath, the was asked by terjeant Davy if he did not hope that the conviction of Mrs. Rudd would be the means of having her husband; the replied in the affirma tive; the ferjeant then warmly contended, that he was an incompetent witnefs, for that the had confessed an intereft in procuring the conviction of the prifoner. Mr. Cowper (who was likewife of council for Mrs. Rudd) maintained the fame argument, and obferved, that the law had wifely laid it down as an invariable maxim, that no evidence fhould be deduced from any perfon liable to the imputation of being influenced. That the present witness, most clearly, was very materially interested, and that therefore the ought not to be admitted, as her teftimony would be highly incredible. He quoted a precedent which had occurred in the court of King's-Bench, the preceding day, when lord Mansfield had refufed to hear a jour neyman flocking-weaver, merely becaufe be had declared, that though at present he was not under an engagement to either of the parties who were plaintiff and defendant, yet he believed he should return to the, fervice of one of them after the trial-this declaration, Mr. Cowper faid, had, by the learned and noble judge, been construed a confeffion of an inte reft in the determination of the caufe, he had the man as a witness; and that as it would be even therefore, with great propriety, refused to admit

criminal for Mrs. Perreau not to confefs that the Rudd, the ought on no account to be examin was deeply interested in the conviction of Mrs.

ed.

M. Lucas replied to these gentlemen, and very pointedly obferved, that if fuch arguments prevailed, no felon could be convicted; for that every profecutor had evidently an intereft in the conviction of his defendant, by the hopes of recovering his property; and that many of the witneffes in cafes of burglary and highway robberies had also an intereft, from the hopes of obtaining the whole or a fhare of the ftatutary reward. Sir Richard Afton took up the matter in a more particular manner, and fhewed, that although Mrs. Perreau's declaration of her hope that the conviction of the prifoner would be the means of her hufband's obtaining a pardon, might affect the credibility of her teftimony, it by no means went to its competency. That to be fure her hope was a general one, and not particularly confined to the event of the prefent trial; that the certainly must hope, on every account in the world, that her husband would be laved from an ignominious death; but that the jury would be sufficient to judge how far her evi

dence

Upon his crofs examination, he laid he was now the fervant of captain Gore; that he formerly wore the livery of Daniel Perreau, and that he had not feen him after he left his fervice, till he fent for him to the New Prifon, Clerkenwell; that then the coachman came to him at a gentleman's house at Edgware, where he was fervant; that when he faw Daniel Perreau in prison, he was afked by him if he eyer remembered to have given him any let ters as from Mr. Adair, and then he replied he did, that his mafter then fent him to be examined by his attorney, where he difcloted all he knew: and that his mafter when he law

him in New Prison, said he was ignorant where, Mrs. Rudd was.

·

you

Chriftian Hart declared that the lived fervant with the prifoner, and that in July laft the fent for her to Newgate, where the found counfellor Bayley with her in his gown; that the pritoner afked her if the could let a gentleman and lady lodge at her houfe; that the replied, nothing was more ealy; that they had foma conversation about the lodgings; that the prifoner had been the best mistress to her in the world; and that when the faw her in Newgate, the clapped her hands, and faid, Oh my dear miftrefs, let me but once get you out of this place, I'll not part with till I leave you either in Scotland or Ireland. That the wrote her down directions to enquire if Mr. Robert Perreau was in town, and to enquire after different perfons; all which the performed, and returned the next day at nine in the morning to Newgate, where the faw fome written papers lying on the table; that the offered the prifoner two guineas; which the latter refufed, faying the could have a room full of guineas if the wanted them; that fhe only wished for a true friend, for if she had one, he could fave her life.' She then asked the witness to confent to ftand to the matter written in the papers upon the table, which The faid was all as true as that God was in Heaven,' but that she wanted her to fwear that the matter happened at her house.

[Here the papers were produced by the witnefs, and read by Mr. Deacon, clerk of the arraigns for Middlesex. They contained in the form of an affidavit, a statement of charges again! Mr. Robert Perreau and Sir Thomas Frankland, afferting that they repeatedly had meetings at Chriftian Hart's houfe, where the baronet promifed the latter to obtain a pardon for her hufband, upon condition of her fwearing away Mrs. Rudd's life.]

The witness further faid, that the prifoner delivered her the papers, but that he told her the propofal was very extraordinary, and when the came before a jury the first question afked her would be "What a bond was " which the declared herself incapable of anfwering. Mrs. Rudd, the depofed, inftructed her how to answer this, and how to act in feveral other matters which would probably be the confequence. She then fent her home, and bid her not thew the writing to any but her husband, and to return with him the next day and give her an answer; that when the got

home, her husband abused and beat her for ftaying fo long out,-that coming down ftairs her child dropped a guinea, when her husband afked What was that?" Upon which the replied, "A guinea my wicked mistress has given the child" He demanded an explanation, and fhe told him, "That the wanted to hang her and him, and all the world," and then informed him of the whole affair; that she the next day carried the paper to juftice Wright, and that thofe now produced were the originals; fhe declared that no foul was in the room but Mrs. Rudd and herfelf during her converfation on the fecond meeting, and that a man in a blue coat and laced hat, and a woman, who waited on Mrs. Rudd, came in when she was there, and that Mrs. Rudd concealed the papers as icon as the faw them.

Mary Wilkinson, who had lived as fervant with Mrs. Rudd, confirmed part of Moody's telimony.

John Hart (hufband of Chriftian Hart, abovementioned) depofed, that he went with his wife to Newgate the firft time, that Mrs. Rudd talked of fettling her children with them; and that the second time he was not suffered to go up, but that his wife went up, and came down pale and trembling; he confirmed what his wife had flated, as having happened after her return, and added, that counsellor Bayley called at his house at night, when he was in a violent paffion, and told him, if ever his wife went to Newgate again he'd cut her legs

off.

The bond and the draft of Sir Thomas Frankland were then read by Mr. Reynolds, clerk of the arraigns for London, and found to correl pond exactly with the record.

After which Sir Richard Afton called upon the prifoner to make her defence, when the read a paper, written by herself during the trial, in which the decla.ed, that in confequence of her complying with the law, and appearing in that court as a witnels, fhe was then a prifoner; that as fhe could not know what was to be fworn against her, he did not come prepared to obferve on the evidence given by the feveral witnesses, she should only the efore remark, that Mrs. Perreau's bias was too evident to be denied; that Sir Thomas Frankland had acted in a manner fufficiently disgraceful to himself; that Moody was the only evidence as to the forgery, and that what he had fworn was fo vague and contradictory, that she need not fear the jury's placing any confidence in what fuch a treacherous and bad man had faid; that as to Chriftian Hart's ftory, the was a woman of infamous character, and that no perfon could imagine he was weak enough to truft her life in the hands of fuch an ignorant unthinking wretch. She complained much of the cruel confinement which he had fuffered, and concluded with faying, that as the thought the jury were honest men, the trusted that the was fafe in their hands.

John Bayley was then sworn, and deposed, that he was originally Mrs. Rudd's counfellor in the affair; that he was prefent at her examination at the Guild hall in King-street, Westminster;

Westminster; that he frequently vifited her in Newgate, and once while he was with her, a note was brought up, in which was written, your's Christian Hart till death," which made Mrs. Rudd fmile, and throw it over the table to him; that the refufed to fee her, faying, the wanted no fuch vifitor, and when the wanted her, she would fend for her; that on or about the 5th of July laft, he called on her, when she told him Chriftian Hart had been there, and proposed to give the evidence in her behalf stated in those papers (fhewing him a tranfcript of writing produced by Chriftian Hart) and had defired her to write down the particulars of what she stated, that she might thew it to her husband, as both he and him were fo fcrupulously confcientious, that they would neither of them fwear a falle thing for the world; that Mrs. Rudd further said, Chriftian Hart was to return with her husband at five the next day, as at that hour his work was generally done; that the defired either the witnefs, or Mr. Denton, her folicitor, would attend; than he did attend in confequence, but Hart and his wife not coming, in the evening he went to Hart's house, in a court in Wildftreet, faw him at the door smoking his pipe, and finding him out of temper, took him by the button of his waistcoat, and faid, " don't be in a paffion, when the trial comes on, do you fpeak the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, refpecting the papers your wife brought from Newgate.'

Arabella Wright, who waited on Mrs. Rudd in Newgate, was fworn, and in part confirmed counsellor Bayley's affertion, but prevaricated ftrangely..

The two laft witneffes were confronted by Hart and his wife, but each perfifted in their separate stories.

Mary Nightingale depofed, that the prifoner had a legacy left her in the year 1770, and that the faw her receive 4000l. in cash and notes in October 1770, and 3700 pounds in the beginning of 1771, but this witnel's would neither tell the name of the teftator, nor the name of the trustee who paid the legacy.

One or two other perfons fpoke in her behalf, but faid nothing to the cafe in point.

Sir Richard Afton recapitulated the evidence with remarkable accuracy, miffing only one little circumstance, of which he was reminded by Mr. Walsh, a juryman, who had during the

Р

trial attended with uncommon care to each matter related by the witneffes, frequently afking very fenfible queftions, and making pertinent oblervations. After Sir Richard had fully and most impartially gone through the long feries of notes which he had taken, he obferved to the jury, that there were two circumftances only for their confideration-The fact of forgery and the fact of publication :With regard to the former, that the bond was forged, was fully proved, but that the prisoner had forged it refted only upon prefumption. Sir Richard obferved, that where a perfon accufed of forgery was innocent, but where it was proved that they held the forged inftrument, it was incumbent on him or her to remove the fufpicion arifing from a concatenation of circumstances, by proving how he or she came poffeffed of the forged inftrument; With regard to the publication he remarked, that Mrs. Perreau's evidence was in part corroborated by Caffidy, who proved the impati ence of Mrs. Rudd to fee Mr. Perreau after his return from Sir Thomas Frankland; he further remarked, that the note had been obtained on the credit of the bond, had been fully established.-After pointing out the flat contradiction in the different evidence of Chriftian Hart, John Hart, Counsellor Bayley, and Arabella Wright, and fhewing that, let which ever party be forefworn, it did not materially affect the verdict, although it gave the conduct on that fide who were wrong a very bad appearance, he obferved that the whole matter was at the difpofal of the jury, who would duly weigh each circumstance; and if they had any doubt in their minds of the validity of the proof of criminality, they would naturally incline to the fide of mercy. After being out half an hour, they brought in their verdict.According to the evidence before us, NOT GUILTY.

The four other indictments against Mrs. Rudd, were then read over, and the verdict of Not Guilty, returned immediately to each of them: She was in confequence difcharged, amidst the loudeft, and most extravagant plaudits ever heard.

Mrs. Rudd appeared neatly dreffed in fecond mourning. During her trial the wrote near fifty notes to her counfel, and difplayed the most aftonishing compofure ever feen on a fimilar occafion.

Seem pleas'd with her own praife. And when, as feftal meetings ufe,

The friendly ftrife arofe,

What name to take, and what refuse, "Twas grateful love' fhe chose.