ry, the day of the announcement,
"and I believe has done so until next session. He gave a curious
reason for this, namely, that I took part at the Westminster meeting
against the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act!"

At the next session it was again postponed, all the time available
for its consideration being taken up with a frivolous discussion as to
Lord Cochrane's right to give evidence. "They have gone the length,"
wrote his secretary, Mr. Jackson, on the 3rd of May, "of denying Lord
Cochrane's credibility in a court of justice. They had no other way
of answering his affidavit, which would have gained his cause in the
Court of Admiralty, as it proved that the French ships in Basque Roads
were destroyed by his own exertions in fighting without orders from
the Admiral. The denial-of Lord Cochrane's competency to give evidence
has excited a great deal of interest, and the Court of Admiralty was
quite crowded on Tuesday, when the question came on to be discussed.
I thought that our counsel had much the best of the argument, and I
believe the judge, Sir William Scott, thought so too, as he put off
his sentence to a future day." On the future day the judge admitted as
much. "We have gained a bit of a victory in the Admiralty Court," said
the same writer in a letter dated the 9th of June, "the judge having
been compelled to pronounce in favour of his lordship's right to
be believed on his oath." The time taken by him to arrive at this
decision, however, was so long that the case had to be adjourned to
November term, and thereby Lord Cochrane's enemies so far attained
their object, that it was impossible for him, in November term, to
renew the suit.

In the interval he had gone to France, preparatory to a much longer
and more momentous journey to South America, in anticipation of which
he was winding up his affairs and realizing his property during and
after the summer of 1817.

In this settlement of accounts there was at any rate one amusing
incident. It will be remembered that, on the occasion of his being
elected Member of Parliament for Honiton in 1806, Lord Cochrane had
refused to follow the almost universal fashion of bribery, but, after
the election was over, had thoughtlessly yielded to the proposal
of his agent that he should entertain his constituents at a public
supper.[A] This entertainment, either through spite or through wanton
extravagance, was turned by those to whom the management of it was
assigned i