Lord Ellenborough. It is prima facie evidence. I do not speak now of the communication from De Berenger (supposing he is the person) of the letter to the boy. I do not say any thing upon that objection of yours, but that the letter which reached Admiral Foley was the letter the boy brought I think no human being can doubt.
Mr. Park. But still upon the original point, I submit it is not so proved as to be read in evidence.
Lord Ellenborough. Yes, you may resort to that if you please, the witness said he wanted an express horse to send to the Admiral at Deal, and then an express horse was got, and something was carried to the Admiral at Deal. That is the evidence as it stands.
Mr. Serjeant Best. So far the evidence goes my Lord, they now want to make the contents of that letter evidence, but before they can do that they must either prove that letter to be the hand-writing of Mr. De Berenger, or trace that Letter regularly from the hand of Mr. De Berenger: they have no such evidence, but all they say is, that Wright, the Landlord of the inn, took the letter out of the inn and delivered it to the boy at the door, the boy never having seen Mr. De Berenger, nor they having the smallest evidence whatever to connect the boy with him.
Lord Ellenborough. If there had been, the question would not have arisen.
Mr. Serjeant Best. I submit there is nothing to connect that letter with this person, and if it is the hand-writing of Mr. De Berenger I should think they would have no difficulty in proving that, there were other gentlemen waiting for information from France, as we hear from the witnesses, and if this letter is read Mr. De Berenger and the other Defendants may be made responsible for that letter which may have been written by one of those other persons.
Lord Ellenborough. I only want to get first all the facts relating to this letter. I cannot find any thing beyond that that he wanted an express horse to send to the Admiral at Deal.
Mr. Gurney. And that a sheet of paper was brought to him to write.
Lord Ellenborough. That he was preparing to write a letter and that he wanted an express horse to carry it, but as to the immediate identification of that letter you lose the intervening proof by the absence of Mr. Wright.