Star. — London, England, 1821-05-10 00:00:00

.'O , . . . a ngeapli r and tkat bam'br4fing to make any reparation for fit' iftml; gcrIZZA• • Dlr. !MN , let tne Sicaxra—Can you state who the person is that gave you this paragraph ?—lt was not given to me. Do you know to whom it was given ?—I am not aware. I y id not see it. I wish t 6 know who is the person that is charged with the management of the press in your absence?—The Editor. 'What is his name 7—Cooper. , ni.Cbri.4tiat name ?—1 lenry, I believe. Is he the sole Editor ?—That I cannot answer, because newspapers are in the habit of receiving communications from others ; it is so here, and I can't say, therefore, that he is the sole Editor. • Where does Henry Cooper live 7—Somewhere in the neigh bourhool of Olackfriar's-road, as I am inf trmed. Is the House to understand that you don't know where he Eves except generally in the neighbourhood of Blackfriar's-road ? I don't know exactly the place where he lives; I believe in Blackfriar's-road, or near it. When does he come to the office?—He is generally there every day. , Hose long has he been the Editor?—For some time past; I can't say exactly. If you wish to communicate with the Editor, where do you send to hint ?-1 never have occasion to !end to him, as he comes every day. At what hour?—At various hours • between ten o'clock and o' half-past seven or eight clock gene rally. Is he there now P.—For aught I know he is. Was he there When you came away 7—No. 'When did you see him last?—At three o'clock. Did you tell him that you were ordered to attend this House? No, as there was a Gentleman with him ; but of course he could not be ignorant Of it. Aire you printer, publisher, and sole proprietor of the paper? I am. How long have you been printer, publisher, and sole pro-1 prietor ? I cannot exactly state the length of time. Question repeated—lt is a considerable time; since Christmas. Were you printir, publisher, and sole proprietor, from the 'beglnting ?—I was printer and publisher. And who was the proprietor or proprietors?—Their names are at the Stamp Office I believe, 'Newts. Shackell and Ar sowimith. Rid you purchase the proprietorship of this paper, and, if so, of whom P—Of Messrs. Shasta and Arrowsmith. Is not the name where it ii published that of Arrowsmith? —Yes. •Is it not where be lives7—Yes, for the purpose of business. I wish to know it you are nut in fact a journeyman to Arrow smith, and do you not receive from him three guineas a week for the work you do ?—I taive arrangements with them. As to the three guineas a week, 1 arnsmicerned in other branches of business for them. Then am I to understand that you arc not sole proprietor, but that you share it with Arrowsmith?-1 lave arrangements with them, but not as to the paper. Then you persist in saying that you are the sole proprietor, and that Arrowsmith has no share in it 7--As to that, arrange ments have been making in respect of my purchasing the paper, but they are pot yet concluded, therefore 1 cannot be said to be the sole proprietor. • Did you not, on the 10th and the 24th of February last, swear that you was the printer, publisher, and sole proprietor of the newspaper called John Bull, at the Stamp Office did. What sum did you pay to Arrowsmith for his giving into your hands his share of the proprietorship?—As to the price, the arrangements have not been finally determined on; there being a multiplicity of business between us. How then, under these circumatances, the price not settled, could you swear that you were sole proprietor P-1 did so, con ceiving that I became sole proprietor on Mr. Arrowsmith agree ing with me to give me up the paper on a final arrangement. Was the agreement in writing, and if so, where is it 7—lt was not. _ _ Was there any memorandum taken of it, or was It merely verbal?—k was verbal. What was the nature of it ?—I was to become the sole pro prietor of the paper, giving them a certain sum; but the sum was not fixed on—(lsiogkicr). I ask you, Sir, if any prosecution was commenced against the paper when this arrangement was made ?—Yes, there was one. Who receives the profits of the paper now T—l do. • Do you keep them to yourself, or do you account for therm With anybody P—l - aecount in various ways. As to the proceed l of the paper, do you account with Arrow smith for the proceeds ?—No. With whom then do you account 7—Sine I became proprie tor I account with nobody, the purchase-mousey not having been exactly settled. Do you receive the whole of the profits, and keep them The profits go to an account; some have not been received. Such as have been received do you keep ?--I do. Was there any witness to the agreement between you and Arrowsinith ?—No. What do you pay the Editor?—.(The answer was not heard In the gallery.) Do you keep by you all the manuscript copy which is sent to be printed?..— I do not ; but I believe the Editor does. Do you know that the Editor now the copy of the para. graph which is complained of ?-1 cannot say for certain; it is posaible he may. fly 31r. M. A. TAYLOR.—in whose name was the house taken, where this Paper Is printed ?—I can answer readily by. whom the house neat dour, which is alao part of the office, war taken; for this happened within my own knowledge. 'ln whose name then ?—Shackell and Arrowsmith. By lease?—Yes. Can that lease be produced?—l do not know tbat it is in •thteuce. Dut witness cannot misunderstand the question. In whose came is the house rented, which is the immediate °lice of the paper T—Shackell and Arrowstnith. Who is the landlord T—l don't know; I believe a widow lady. Then the original house is in the name of Sbackell And Ar rowsinith ?—Yes ; it is their general printing-office. Who, were you understood to say, took the house?—Shackell and Arrowbmith. And continue to pay the rent?—The same. They took it or i ginally?—They did. lias . witetesa any banier?—Tlie affairs of the paper are not of that extensive nature to require a bauker—(.4 laugh). By Mr. MCNN Err.— lb it understood that you are to AC- count with Mr: Arruwsrnith fur the psuceeds of this paper.'—. Tere is an agreement of that sort between us. By Mr. B - ENNETT.—Dot:s witness keep an acco=unt with Mr. A m•wstitith ?—I do. Will witness sell the House the nature of that agreement ? I must account with him finally, but no precise time or sum has yrt been stated. Had any sum been Mentioned fur the purchase of the Paper, and what suns?—No sum was mentioned"; 1 souk it fur a time, on a chance of profit or loss. Then there was a simple transfix of property, but no arrange ment made as to the time or sum of payment ?—No sum has been stated. Ily a klastinut 7 -Is the sum to depend upon the extent of the sale?— I have said before that no sum was mentioned, but I pre sume it was intended the sale should govern the payment. • By Mr. BENNETT—I ask the witness, did he not swear, on the 10th of February lagt, that the printing-officeof the paper was then at No. 9, !)yen's-buildings,pasish of St. Andrew, 1101. burn certainly did. Was the paper ever printed there in fact, or was it always printed at the office in Johnson's -court, Fleet-street ?—ft is. no unusual thing to set down a man's address as printing a paper in one place, and the business being dune, in (Act, elsewhere.— The paper was composed on my premises, but the forms were taken elsewhere to be worked by a steam-engine, so that in fact the paper is nut printed where it is.said in the advertisement to be printed. ' You have stated your belief that there was no copy of the paragraph in question preserved. Were you at the office the day this paper was printed ?—What day does the Honourable hleenber mean? Sunday, the 6th of May ?—I left the office early on Saturday. To whom, then, was this copy given ?—To the • Editor, I should imagine. . . . Loos the witness know whether the compositor is.in the habit of composing such matter as conies in, without consulting his sup: rior ?--Perhaps be may, sometimes. Is the *pas to be. understood to say, that h e d ues not kadw. who raKlit this manuscript to the . Ake, or to whom this unkaown wain delivered it 7-1 have before Stated that 1 do out know. s I What is the name of the compositor to whota witness Andes. —There are five or six of them. And ate they all at liberty to insert what they please, without consulting the FaMot ?—Not all ; but it may happen that some of the compositors remain behind on a Saturday after the Editor goes away, and in'this way scone/tint may get in with out the privity of the Editor. By Mr. W. WYNN—Did witness ever make any inquiry as to the quarter from whence this ParaltraPhcanse? -1 ; was not my business. Does he know which of the five compositors it was that directed the insertion of this paragraph 7--I do not. Do you mean to say you never, since the appearance of this paragraph, made arty inquiry as to the quarter from whence it came, or by whose authority it got into the paper?—l have not. I Indeed, if I did inquire, I should be taint out of my way in some degree, for I rely with pelted confidence on those about the paper, that•nothing improper will make its way into the paper. I could not take the inquiry upon me. With regard to this particular piragraph, not being able to state how it found its way to the paper, I can only say that it is a falsehood— (One of Ortkr !)—and if I knew any man capable of writing a deliberate falsehood, scathi n g upon earth should induce me to I conceal his name. Then you never made the inquiry to which I have alluded ? —I did not. By Mr. SC A ELETT—Was any money paid for printing this paragraph?—l do not know of my own knowledge. Do you believe that any money had been paid?—l do. Does witness mean to say that be is ignorant of the name of the compositor who received this parscraph 7—There are five or six of them, and it is infeasible for me to say. • The question is not whether it is possible for yon to say or not, but whether you know the compositor's name?—l do not. Witness has said there were five or six compositors ; would he name them, and their addresses, to the House 7—Witness named four, sad said he was uncertain as to the where. here was a fifth, what was his name ?—I thought I had given the names of five, but we often have extra hands when I w e are pressed with matter. Who pays these extra hands?—l do. Were any extra hands engaged on the Paper on the day in question 7—l rather think there were; but it depends entirely upon what matter we have on Saturdays. But the time is not so distant but that you could recollect dis tinctly whether you had any extra bands on Saturday last. Did you pay any extra hands 7—There are so many compositors off and on, that I cannot Say which of them were there that day. Who is the Editor ?—blr. Cooper. Was he in the office when this paragraph came in ?—I think he was. _ _ _ By Lord NIX ENT.—Witnevs would please to answer one question as to the proprietorship of the Paper. Did be recollect at what time and where the verbal agreement was made by bins and Mr. Arrowsmith ?—I think it was about seven weeks ago At the office. Does be mean to say that it was so long as seven weeks ago? —I cannot say precisely. Was it so long as a month or two ago ?—lt was nearer two months than one. Where did it take place ?-18 the office. In Mr. Arrowintith's office ?—Yes. Who appointed Mr. Cooper Editor?—He was appointed by the proprietors when the paper was first set up. This was not an answer to the question. Who now employed him ?—Mr. Shackell; _ _ Who pays him? —There are money transactions in another way between Mr. Cooper and the proprietors, and I really du not know how his services are remunerated as Editor. Has Mr. Cooper been tare Often paid by witness than by )k. Arrowsmith7—Not often by Me. Have You ever paid Hr. Groper?—Yes. How often 7—Once or twice. By whoin are the regular outgoing expenses of the establish ment paid 7—The Stamp Office is settled with by Mr. ShackelL Who pays the other current eapenscs ?—lt sometimes happens that I pay the Stamp Office. That is no snorer to the question. What i ask is, by whom are the other outgoing current expenses of the paper paid ? Mostly by Mr. Arrosismits. Who pays the workmen?—Mr. Arrowsmith. By Sir ROBERT WILSON—Do you keep a clerk 7—No. By Mr. U. A. TA YLOlL—%Vhose business is it to examine the proof sheet of the press?—'le reader ► but I do it also sometimes. What is the reader's name?—Duckwortd U be ready to come fonrard?-1 suppose so. h tbere a book *where entries of advertisements, nd of monk s paid out are regularly made ?—There are such books at our once. Who receives the money for the advertisements and the sale of the papers?—ft goes principally into the bands of Mr. Ar rowsmith. Then he receives the weekly ptoceeds of the paper?—No. What 49e1 witnos mean ? Will you say, Sir, whether Mr. Arrovismith receives the proceeds of the paper or not can not say as to the whole, but I think he does the principal pan. When the witness says books are kept fur entering advertise ments, will be say who keeps them?—l do sometimes, some times Mr. Arroirsinith, and sometimes Mr. Cooper. To whom is the money paid?—To eack of us. Lord NU GENT.—Is any one at your office authorised to receive paragraphs after you and the Editor have gone away ? I cannot say that any one is absolutely authorised, but they un dertake it sometimes When we are nut in the way, and they may happen to want copy. aU the compositors enjoy this discretionary power?—No, not aIL Arc there any private marks by which the compositor may know what copy ofikheto pt in when the Editor is not at hand ? None that I know uf. I wish to know from the witness whether be was ever before engaged at any cf the weekly or daily papers ?—I have been en gaged occasionally at the Traveller newspaper. Lly. Dr. PH I Lid Mt ICE.—Were there extra hands at the office who would undertake to put in a paragraph without the sanction of the witness or the.Editor?—Thhi I cannot say, but it is possible they might. Can witness say that a compositor has ever ventured to put ha a paragraph without the sanction of the Editor ?—I cannot say that I have known any instance of the kind. Would you not instantly dismiss a compositor who bad acted in that way ?—I certainly should. Have you any 'reason, and what, for thinking that such a thing had at any time be en done ?—Yes; (tons the fact of seeing in the paper neat day some matter to the insertion of which I was not a party. Did you not then make inquiry as to the moans by which such a paragraph had got into the paper ?—1 did not. I said before it was no part of my business, and I left it entirely to the Editor. Was the House to understand then, that though these para graphs had crept in, without his (witness's) knowledge, yet they might have been previously in the Isandsad the Editor?—l can not say that : I Can only say that they got into the paper with out my knowledge. By Mr. SCA itI.ETT.—Is Mr. Cooper sole Editor, or Is the office divided between him and another?—l bare no share In editing the paper. But has the Editor an assistant?-11e is sole Editor, unless occasionally that he calls in an ..bistant, which is not minima in newspapers. Do you pay Mr. Cooper have paid him once or twice, You have said you du not know where Mr. Coupes. lives?— Not positively. Thut answer is ambiguous. RIG you state whether you know where ?.Ir. Cooper lives ?—I cannot say positively. I once asked how far he _had to go ' and he said it was , a good way of Then you say you do not positively know where Mr. Cooper lives?—Not positively. By .51r. BERN A L.—Witness had said that a Gentleman was with Mr. Cooper, which prevented his communicating with him. Could he state whether that Gentleman had any connection with the paper?—Nut any, Do you know his name2—l do not. By a MEMBER.-4s it part of the reader% duty to examine the paragraphein the pruot sheet ?--The manner in which the thing is done is this : the reader has the proof before hint, and the boy reads over the copy to hites if any Merest& occurs between the printed matter and the manuscript, the reader then makes the alteration in the proof. By Mr. W. SMITII.—By what means does the manuscript copy get into the reading's-boy hand Z---Through the compositors. And who gives it to the compositors T.—Generally the Editor. But when the Editor does not give it, from what hands does it then come ?—Sometimes from mine. There still remains somebody else from whom the copy May come. Now answer; . when the copy comes neither from you nor the Editor, where does it then corn.: from ?--,oh, that never happens; but when we go away, and the copy, is !said before, comes in late; then the compositor take it directly from the hands of the person who brings it. Is the... House then to uoderst and that the compositors would venture to take in any paragraph from whatever hands, and in sert it without the sanction of wittiest'. or the Editor ?—I do not think they would put in anything of a criminal nature. What is the reader's name ?—lhickworth. Did witness think the paragraph in question was printed by any of the compositors upon their own authority'?-1 do not — (Cries withdraw). By Lord NUGENT.—WiII the witness say he " never com municated with the Editor by letter or by note ?—1 never did; any communication% which i lud with him were verbal— ( Witheinno). Mr. BENNETT now moved, " That the witneu should Withdraw ; but not depart without leave. from the House. The witness having withdrawn (in custody), Mr. BENNE'I7 said he would not trouble the House by any comment on the evidence which the House had just heard; it was unsatisfactory in the last degree. He would, therefore, confine himself to moving, that Thomas Arrowsmith, of Johnson's court, Fleet -street; William Shackell, of 2, Gough-. square; and Henry Cooper, be ordered to attend the House forthwith —(Hear, hear). An order to that effect was.made by - the SPEAKER, and the Serjeant at Arms instructed to take those persons into custody. The Honourable Member expressed a wish, at one time, to have ail the Gompositors, with the Reader, called to tii2e Bar, but he was understood not to have included them in his Motion. COURTS OF JUSTICE. Sir JOHN NEWPORT then rose to call the atten tion of the House to a subject which .had been ire-• grimly before them already—namely, the system of fees taken in the Court of Chancery, &c. It was re commended by the Commissioners, that because cer tain fees were paid in the Court of King's Bench, they should therefore be continued in the Court of Chancery. In another -case, the continuance of the fees was justified, on the ground that the money was not to be regarded as a fee, but a gratuity. The. Commissioners, since 1815, had only made three Reports, and a su . plemental one. The money paid to the Commissioners, in all, had amounted to forty thousand pounds, and the fruit to the Public had been four Reports. No answer had, in many cases, been returned to the inquiries of the Commissioners; and in that, though armed with rower s to enforce compliance, the Commissioners had acquiesced. He h•td to complain of the Appointment of two Masters in Chancery among► the Commissioners; and now, at the end of five years, the Lord Chancellor proposed to submit the Reports to further consideration. Al ready £ 6,000 had been paid, and when the sum amounted to £200,000, the Lord Chancellor might be ready to give an opinion. By a letter from the ' Chief Justices of the King's Bench and Common Pleas, to the Secretary of State, it appeared that no communication had been made to them of the lie ports. He should place on the Journals certain Re solutions relative to the subject, and should move, " Ist, That it appeared to the House that the Commission appointed in ICS had been compostt of five persons; two of them were Masters in Lliancery ; and had, on one occasion, tu ceived 1 50,000 as a remuneration for their services, at the rate of Z 1,200 a-year each; and, subsequently, £6.000 enure. " Vally, That it appeared that the Lord Chanctilor had adop ted come of the recommendations, but had thought that others required mute Consideration; and that it appeared no communi cation had been made to the Chief Justices of the Klug's Bench and Common Pleas. " That this House saw, with extreme regret, the delay that had taken place as to the object of the Commission ' and that no conumanication on the subji et had been made to the Chief Justices of the king's Bench and Common Plrai, whose duty it was to have carried the recommendation of the Commissioners into effect." The AT contended, that no persons could be so proper to be appointed as those best acquainted with the practice of the respec tive Courts. The fees in the emit of Chancery had been sanctioned from the time of Lord Hardwicke, in the year 17-1.3. Upon compaling the labours of the English and Lich Comniissioneis. it appeared that much more had been done by the former, whose Reports amounted.to five hundred folio pages, while those of the Irish were only four hundred. The Com missioners had uo compulsory power to enforce obe dience. When the House looked to the Court of Chancery, they would find, that over many of the fees the Lord Chancellor bad no controul; but he had done all in his power—and, in the case of; the Officers holding .situations at pleasure, and over whom the Chancellor had controul, the recommen dation of the Commissioners had. been carried into effect. Over the others the Chancellor had no con troul, as maoy of them had purchased their situa tions. He - conceived the complaint against the Lord Chancellor was wholly unfounded. It was not the duty of the SeCretary of State to communicate the Reports, as they had been seta ned to the Petty Bag Office, and thence the communication should have been made. Had it been deemed necessary, there would have been no disinclination on the part of any of the members of Government to have made the necessary communications. He should move the previous question, as no case had been made out [against the Commissional. Mr. ABERCROMRY observed,. that a more se. vere charge could not be made against a Govern ment collectively than had been made now. After a long delay, the Report had been laid before the Judges by the Secretary of State. The Public had a right to expect that the Government should see that some benefit should. be received from the money expended. He lamented that individuals having , other important duties to perform should be ap pointed Commissioners, as they, could not bestow undivided attention on .the business committed to them. He thought that in the Returns made to the House, the Lord Chancellor lAki not done himself justice, as he , believed he carried the recommenda tion of the Commissioners into effect to his own dis advantage, as would have appeared had he chosen to enter into details. Mr. BATHURST defended the conduct of Go-' vernmedt, and•contended, that the Right Hon. Ba ronet was mistaken as to his facts. It was hard to blame the Government for the expense, as Govern ment had opposed the appointment of the Commis sion, aware that no rood could re,ult from an in quiry into the English Courts, however much it might have been wanted in Ireland. He believed, as to the Courts in Westminster-Hall, that the whole inquiry would be wound up in the course of the 'ne wt summer. _ _ • _ Mr. BARING said, that it would appear, from the language of the Right Hon. Gentlemtn, that it was the duty . of no one to attend to the Rgports. If it was not the Secretary of State's duty to attend to . - - such Reports, he should like to know in what his duty consisted ? Mr. Serjeant ONSLOW defended the conduct ot the Commis,ioners. Mr. WARRE stated; that none of the Ira 'Com. Inissioners were Masters in Chancery, though th q . had inquired with much success into the abuses , of4it Courts of Chancery in Ireland. Sir J. NEWPORT replied, and contended ihattikt motion for a Commisvion having been carved, it w ar the duty of'Government to have made it effeotur.. The Resolutions (except one) were then ncgatiwat without a division. On the Resolution cf Censure on those 1;4 not laid the Report of the Commis.ioners before its Chief Justices of the King's Bench and the Comm Pleas; and also for the delay in acting on the 11Ie- - port, the House divided.--For the Resolution, .56..*- Against.it, PETITION FROM CAT(Llgrts Mr. JAMES presented a Petition tiOns CarliSleike favour of Parliamentary Reform and Retrenchment. The Hon. Gentleman •ex pressed his regret that tut House had pertinaciously resisted eveoy attempt to introduce a system of economy and eetrenchment.2.. Instead of being the friends and supporters of . tio people, they seensetl tobedf no other use but to Ask the .Rsecutive Government in imposing iestraints‘el the country—Wear, hear).—lle felt, that tiff tie people obtained a Reform in Parliament—mitt& they would eventually obtain it, ise•had , ner doub t ..,, thecountry could not lope for permanent prosperito. While he had a seat in that House, he would elide; your to pre,enve those privileges atria still remained to them, as well as lo procure a restoration of arose rights which had been bartered away .Fox pnwer. im a emolument. It Retrenchment and Reform mere nit conceded, the Government, he was at raid, would be changed by violence—Wear, hear).—lt wA, mot k that Ministers should suffer things to rem.an in their present state, and run the hatard whole country into anarchy and contusion. li much wiser would it be to do something for the pea. ple, to prove to theni that their complaints had nut been made in vain ! Ile, and others mho sat on the (the Opposhion) side of the House, would be tali that'they agreed on iar precise pan of Retorm—tic no two Reformers coincided in opinion on this great question. That yerhaps was true; but it was iii wise true, that they all agreed that some Within was necessary—(/fear, hear). —Every man who did pa live on the tases was assured of that—(llear, 4au), And whatever plan would make that House, oh* its name declared it should he, a real Represe:aariee House—whatever plan would fill that Howe altk individuals who would express the sense and feelings of the people—any plan of that nature would best. tisfactory to the Petitioners—(hear. hear). Mr. CUR WEN Said, the Peti.ioir was nun fiet °ally and respectably signed. The inhabit:tinsel the Cousty which he represented, if he exce,,ted those also tieu paces or received pensions, were itnanimousi)ofopi. nion that Reforni was necessary to sase the country from the fatal calamities with which it wu Ores ened.—The Petition was then laid on the table, sad ordered to be printed. PARLIAMENTARY REFOBSI. Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose, and .t it though circumstances ss hich had lately occurred, aad the state of the House, wei e se, , discouraging to any one who brought for ,ard any iopositioucd lfe form, yet he could say that he should BC* solutions with which he intended to with considerable confidence. It was necesary lot bin to .say, that the business of Goveinment come much more difficult than it had been; that Government depended on opinion ; that the eyes of the People were fixed upon the House, and that d their acts were viewed as through a microscope, and that the difference of even a thousand pounds, mere or lest:, in the expenditure of the public money, au very minutely scrutinized. Instead of that upersti• torus reverence with which they were formerly re garded, there was a disposition to deny them ern the acknowledgment of the aptitude which habi gave them in to.iducting the public affairs. Odd all questions which were brought before them, those which attracted the most attention wore questions affecting the Representation of the People, as thei decisions on those questions were taken as the tests of the integrity of the House. He should, in bring ing forward his Resolutions, diverge from the ustiii way in which such propositions were brought far ward. The usull way was to say that the Elousedi not represent the People, and that this was preyed by their Resolutions, which did not accord wilds sense of the People. This course, however, la• volved them in invidious discussions.. It itnposoin them the necessity of saying,- that they who roe the minority in the House, were the majority in de country, and that independent Gentlemen on dos other side, though connected , with a majority kith' House, were in a minority in the . country. should not take this way. But he did. not wish' , conceal or deny that he was in princi i le a Refound —that he thought the House should represent tar People, and that it did not—(/tear, hear, hear) He did not agree with those who said that all de acts of the House were conformable to the wisbcS the People, nor with those who said that the Mad should be a mixed sort of body, representing Crown and the Aristocracy or higherorders, audiet the People at large. But having said this, he wail endeavour to shew that there prevai:ed such Pox' tices—that, whether they had yet discovered tb selves in their Resolutions, could not fail ultitnetell to manifest themselves in discrepancies between,' People and the House; and he would call 00 7 0 to stop these practices before they went rura tt ..,,„ produce their inevitable effects. The first pro 7 i which he should bring before the House, was i lia ! bribery and corruption. Respecting this pratalc_ e r there couhl not be two opinions in the House , as .f un one would venture to deny that it was highly cr nal and persticious. It would be just as rea dil y 4 L , milted that it prevailed to a gre at extent. When d. had brought before the House a motion for an t.r dress respecting the punishment of Sir M. had said that brioery and corruption was c..rnen em_ daily to a great extent. In that assertion h e bad t with no opposition. The Noble Lord on the e ar !,7, sick (Lord Londonderry), had not ventured to am_ that proposition, and he certainly would. haves er prised his supporters and the Home constderably, s he had ventured to do so. This practice was . to • torintr,, that when the late Mr. Sheridan was A CI . C le 11