Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—It is not evidence of the fact: but it is a proper question to refresh her recollection, as to whether she did not receive a letter which she believed to be the hand writing of the defendant. By Mr. MARRYATT.—Whose hand writing did you think that letter to be?—I rather think it was Mr. Church’s, but I could not be positive, as there was no name to it. Do you now believe that letter to be Mr. Church’s writing.—I cannot say whether it was or was not. It is not in my power. By Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—You are not asked whether it was or was not: but what your belief was then, and what it is now?—I believed at that time, I must own, that it was his hand writing, and I still believe the same. By Mr. MARRYATT.—Did you not then believe it to be Mr. Church’s hand writing?—I did rather think it was. Did you, or not, believe it was?—Is there any difference between _thinking_ and _believing_? That is a phrase we sometimes use in courts of justice. I could not be positive; but I rather think it was his hand writing. When you opened it, did you read it as a letter coming from him?—I was very much struck with the similarity, for it had very much the appearance of his hand writing; but, as no name was subscribed at the bottom, I could not be certain. It had the appearance of his hand writing. Is it your belief now, that it was or was not, his hand writing?—It is exactly the same as it was then. And it is now your belief that it was his hand writing?—I cannot say I firmly believe it, because it was not signed. You are only asked whether you so acted as if it was his hand writing?—I did not communicate it to anybody but Mr. Patrick. Did you communicate to Mr. Patrick that you had received a letter from Mr. Church?—I did. _Cross-examined by the_ COMMON SERJEANT. The search which you made for this letter was not until last Thursday?—Exactly so. For any thing you know, might it not be in your house now?—I have no reason to believe that it is, for I did not leave a drawer or place unsearched. Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—As far as evidence can go of the loss of an original letter, to let in the copy, we have it in this case; for I asked her whether she made diligent search after the original, and she says, she has made diligent search. Mr. Patrick _examined again by_ Mr. MARRYATT. Were you acquainted in October last with the hand-writing of Mr. Church?—Yes. You told us you made this copy from the letter you had from Mrs. Hunter. Was the letter from which you made this copy, and which you returned to Mrs. Hunter, in your belief, the hand-writing of Mr. Church?—It was. Mr. MARRYATT.—Now, my Lord, I propose reading this copy of the letter in question. The following letter was then read in evidence:— “_October_ 6, 1816. “DEAR MRS. HUNTER,