ot sell, although he might have sold much, outweigh the
inference of guilt, arising from what he actually did sell; what he did
on this day, it is not only possible but probable that he might have
done, and yet be innocent of the conspiracy with which he is charged;
what he did not do, he could not have omitted to do, if he had been
guilty.

My learned friend, Mr. Gurney, has told you, that the circumstance of
his selling out as he did, proves his privity to the conspiracy. Men who
were unconscious of the risk, says my learned friend, did not sell on
the first rise in the market, but held their stock in the expectation of
gaining still higher prices; but the defendant, knowing that the
falsehood of the news would soon be discovered, and that its effect on
the funds must be of very short duration, sells his whole stock on the
opening of the market. I should have felt the force of this argument,
had you found Lord Cochrane on the Stock Exchange, pressing his brokers
to complete their sales; but when you find that his lordship was not
present, and gave no directions for immediate sales, but that his stock
was sold under orders given before the fraud could have been thought of,
I trust that you will find it not worthy of much attention. If, however,
you are to decide on the guilt or innocence of Lord Cochrane from the
transactions of the 21st of February, you will look at the whole of his
conduct, and when pressed to find that the circumstance of his selling
is proof of his guilt, you will say, that the circumstance of his not
selling more than he did, is a still stronger proof of his innocence. My
learned friend will have an opportunity in his reply, of accounting why
his lordship and his supposed co-conspirators did not sell more; and I
think he will find it a task that will transcend even his powers, to
account for it in a manner compatible with their guilt.

Gentlemen, the only remaining point relative to Lord Cochrane is this;
that on the morning of the 21st of February Mr. De Berenger went to the
house of his lordship. Gentlemen, it is material for your consideration
how the Stock Exchange got the knowledge of that fact. Gentlemen, but
for my Lord Cochrane, the Stock Exchange never would have known of the
existence of any such person as De Berenger; but for my Lord Cochrane,
it is impossible that the Stock Exchange could have instituted this
prosecution, because it was by Lord Cochrane's affidavit only that the
name