The Sun. — London, England, 1835-08-04 00:00:00

form, because it comprehended a revolutionary crintiple. The country had gone a vast deal too far, in these treasures of Reform. To pass the Bill, would be a violation of Magna Charts. He objected to the measure altogether. He w ould wait to , see what course was taken by other Noble Lords ; but Unless sonic (me else did so, he should move that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. Lord MONSON understood Mr. Parkes was secretary to the Birmingham Political Union. Viscount DUNCANNON said that Mr. Parkes not only was not the Secretary, as had been represented, of the Bir mingham Political anion, but he never held any official situa tion connected with the Union, nor was he ever a member of the Colo - refl. When he joined the Union, almost all the in habitants of the town were connected with it.--( Cries of " No," from the Opposition Lords.) He entered it late—a considerable time after its formation. Lord MONSON believed that Mr. Parkes was an active cent of the Union. He wrote letters, and was personal!) Ra th,: for them for a iota" period. Whether he held office, and aetet: ostensibly for them, :;!..a Lordship did not know. Lord HA . T!IERTON said that, oia pre occasion, Mr. Parkes was consitlteal. Professionally by the onion. The Earl of HARE WOOD contended ahat their Lord ships ought not to be satisfied, without calling evidence.— (Crics of " Question.") Lord PLUNKETT thought it his duty to address a fee observati:ns to their Lordships, notwithstanding that this was a question with which he was not so well acquainted as some others. It was very satisfactory to the public mind, that it should be ascertained by a solemn inquiry —(laughter)—by a solemn inquiry—he should repeat his words, until the inter ruption which had been offered, not by their Lordships, but by certain persons in the House should cease—what the na ture of these Municipal institutions was. It was not, he be lieved, questioeed at any side of the House, that extensive and substantial reform cras necessary. Suppose everything which had been said by counsel could be proved at the bar, would it alter the nature of the real question which they were now called upon to decide ? The question before the House did not turn on the contemptible points mooted by Counsel ; it every Commissioner had been aWhig, or more than Whig, and committed acts much even more reprehensible, than the most serious of those charged against them, would there be any grounds for refusing the reasonable and determined wish of the people of this country?—(Cheers.) There were two courses which they might pursue. If they thought that the principle of this measure were unjust, and that the demands of the country as expressed through the Commons of Eng land ought not to be complied with, it was their duty to say so, and to say so manfully.—( Hear, hear.) But if they were of opinion that the feelings of the people could not be abused, and that their wishes ought not to be resisted, he for one could not venture (he spoke advisedly) to expose himself to the consequences of such an opinion being acted on.—( Hear.) "Do not, my Lords, disgrace yourselves in your own minds --(loud cheers)—do not lessen the character and dignity of this House by having recourse to a contemptible expedi • ent, which if you consider objectionable, you are bound to meet in the first instance, by fair discussion.—( Cheers.) I have a perfect right, my Lords, to warn you against the adop tion of a course, which in my mind, will have the effect of impairing your self estimation, and losing your character with the public."—( Loud cheers.) What prospect was there, if evidence were allowed to be taken ? There would be no end to their proceedings. The Crown had no right to withdraw charters once granted to corporations ; and if Ministers had so advised the King to adopt the course pursued by Henry VIII., when he procured the voluntary surrender of several charities, what criticism the conduct of those who should au thorize such an inquisition would call forth? If the only ob ection to this measure was, that it tended to introduce a de mocratic principle iuto the constitution of these bodies—that so far from constituting any objection, would form with him a ground of approval of the measure.:—( Cheers.) It was to the fact that the Crown was in this country based upon the perfect favour of the people that its safety and honour was to be attributed.—( Cheers.) The experience of the last four or five years should, he thought, weigh with their Lordships on this decision. He did not think that the course pursued for some years past by that House, was calculated to raise its character in the judgment of the country.—( Hear, hear.) He could not help expressing it as his conviction, that most of those now engaged in opposition to this measure, had not (when they first warmly opposed emancipation and reform, and then turned round and proclaimed themselves the advo cates of these measures) done much to raise that House in the estimation of the country.—( Cheers.) The Duke of WELLINGTON said, that at first he felt disposed to go into Committee on the Bill, and endeavour to make such alterations in its provisions as he hoped would take from it many of its objectionable qualities ; but he felt at the same time that counsel should previously be heard, and baying heard those Learned Gentlemen, and taking their ob servations in connexion with the appendix to the Report of the Commissioners, he found it impossible to avoid arriving at the conclusion that the evidence which they tendered at the bar of their Lordships' House ought to be received. And further, he. could not think it possible to adopt a general and sweeping measure of Corporate Reform without that examina tion of evidence for which the Learned Gentleman had con tended at the bar. After noticing in terms of strong appro bation the conduct of several Corporations throughout the kingdom, and especially that of Liverpool, he declared him self surprised to find any Bill founded upon the Reports of the Commissioners to which such frequent reference had been made ; but, apart from the imperfect foundation upon which they rested, he entertained a strong and decided objection to the Bill. He objected to it as not being a general, but a partial measure, and directed against 180 out of 300 Corpo rations. He would put it to the House to say was it fair or equitable to repeal all the old charters ? Should such a sweep ing proceeding as that be founded upon such a Report from Commissioners as it was then proposed to make the basis of their proceedings ? If individual Corporations had miscon ducted themselves, the proper mode of dealing with them was by proceeding in the Court of King's Bench. The King was the proper visitor of all such bodies, and - the place wherein be visited was the Court of King's Bench. If they were resolved to proceed with a Bill thus partial in its cha racter, they must proceed by enquiry at their bar. Feel ing convinced of this, he was resolved to support the mo tion of the Noble Earl, and his vote should be given from a strong conviction of the necessity of enquiry before they proceeded to deprive those Corporations of their charters. He would contend that those Corporations had a right to bold their privileges in the fullest extent, till deprived by due course cf law. For_ all these reasons, then, he should vote for the enquiry, and therefore support the motion of the Noble Earl. . The Earl of RIPON had arrived at the conclusion of the necessity of Reform in Corporations, not from the Report of Commissioners, but from a general view of the subject.— (Cheers.) He must confess he was not disposed to pass this Bill upon the Report of the Commissioners, in which Report lie had detected many errors. The Noble Lord in stanced some trifling errors in the Report upon the Corpo ration of Ripon, of which he and the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack were Aldermen. The Corporation of Ripon was a burgage tenure Corporation, and had nothing whatever to do with the election of Members of Parliament; yet the Commissioners laboured throughout their Report to connect the Corporation influence wiai political objects. At the same time, he did not see his way clearly through the profound enquiry at the bar, which it appeareJ to him would be endless. He thought there were adequate grounds for some measure of Reform similar to that before the 'imuse ;.. anal feeling that although that measure was not exactly one Cf justic:, it was one of expediency, he should vote against the motion of his Noble Friend, Lord Winchilsea. The Marquis of BUTE rose amidst cries of " Question." He could only say for himself, that if he were to entertain this Bill without hearing the parties whose interests and characters were affected lav it, he should expect a Bill of pains and penal ties to be brought in against himself, confiscating his property, and should deserve to fall unpitied, Lord MELBOURNE said, at this late' hour of the night, I shall detain your Lordships with but very few observations upon the course which this debate has taken. The Noble and Learned Lord, a late Lord Chancellor (Lord Lyndhurst) has thought fit to condemn the precedents quoted by my Noble and Learned Friend, against the motion of the Noble Earl opposite. lie has told us that his precedent of the course taken by this House upon the Slave Trade was not in point, because, upon that occasion, the evidence offered was evidence of opinion, not evidence of fact. Now, my Lords, I think there is some reason to doubt the accuracy of the Noble and Learned Lord's statement ; anti although he represents that he has taken it from the reports of the proceedings, it is to be observed that the reports of those days were not taken with that accuracy which distinguishes those of the present time. But, my Lords, the Noble and Learned Lord, not content with this manner of getting over the difficulty presented by my Noble and Learned Friend, goes further back in Parliamentary history, and finds out that in the year 1793, this House did hear evidence at the Bar, upon a Bill for the Aboli tion of the Slave Trade.—( Hear, hear.) They did so, indeed, my Loi ds ; but that was when the House swamped the Bill sent up from the Commons.—(Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches.) When they wanted to Oestroy the Bill, they took the course now proposed with re garJ, to the Bill on your Lordships' table, of hearing evi dence against it. But in 18io when they wanted to pass the m east we for the abolition of the Slave Trade, they refused to hear evicic - nce, as has been already stated by my Noble and Learned Friend.—( Loud cheers.) - I must say, my Lords, t h at I cannot l o ,* upon the means taken to perpetuate the ne farious traffic in hu,:lan flesh as a fit and proper precedent for your Lordships to folls..w with regard to the alleged abuses in Corporations. The NoNe and Learned Lord had also gone into a general argument agai,:st the whole Bill, describing it as of such a nature, so affecting property, and so fraught with evils of various descriptions, that in his opinion your Lordships ought not to pass it without hearing evidence. The Noble Duke also took the same objections to the measure, which he described as partial in its operation. This, my Lords, I say is unfounded, as the general character of that measure, which includes, fairly and impartially, every Corporation having a certain amount of inhabitants—all above '41, 1 90. The Noble Duke says that this measure ought to have originated in the Court of King's Bench. Indeed, I could not out marvel at the murderous objections urged by the Noble Duke after lie had declared himself friendly to the principle: of the measure. But if I had cause to he surprised at any thing in the conduct of that Noble Duke and she Noble and Learned Lord, it was at the time taken by Them for the statement of their objections.— (Cheers.) I ceKainly, my Lords, should not the other night AthayakCkallikted to t;:e postponement of the discussion, if I tact-not: ,been m i s l e d 3 1 :d deceived as to the intention of the 'c *-- , '. opponents of this measure.--(Loud Cheers.) I ask if there ,tr p , was not a clear understanding; whether, if not in precise I' '' ''' terms, there was a distinct feeling amounting to an irnpli • ( 2. ett un d erstanding that no advantage was to be taken for the ir I"' purposes of delay ? I state, my Lords, that I so understood Ve fit s and tint such Ivo the fooling of tb. Hew ; and I beg , , it, and that such was the feeling of the House; and I beg :'or once to declare that I will not again enter into any such .nderstandings with those who afterwards may riot have the yin,- or may want the power, to give effect to them.— Cheers.) Observations have been made against the preamble of this Bill, and much stress laid upon the fact that certain words in it have been taken from the Report of the Commis zioners. I beg to state that the words which arc identical in she preamble and the Report, were taken from the Report of Cie Committee of the House of Commons, in which Report the whole proceedings have bad their foundation. Your Lordships should know that a Committee of the [louse of Commons was originally appointed to consider the state of the Corporations. They were convinced of the necessity of Corporate Reform, but considered that they could not enter into the investigation by taking evidence here or in Lon lon. Upon this ground a Commission was recommended —and I must say that the opinion of the Committee of the ether House, against taking that evidence, which your Lord •hips arc recommended to take, ought to weigh with your Lord ships as en argument against such a proceeding. 1 have many idler observations to make upon what has passed in the dis cussion this night, but I will not now trouble your L0rd ...,;;;;,.1 with them. I think you did wrong in hearing counsel.—. ( Hear.) :ou will do further wrong in hearing evi fence. This Bill has keen eaiLd a Bill of Pains and Penaties. It is neither in form nor in substance such a Bill. It has nothing in common with a measure of that description. It is a Bill of general legislation ; and I tell you that by the course you are now pursuing you ai e tearing up your own legislative powers by the roots.—(Cheers.) No Bill can be presented to your Lordships, against which some persons may not allege, and with truth, that ho has rights and interests involved in the issue of it ; and if you are never to pass any Bill without following the course fur which you now propose to establish a precedent, you will destroy your own legislative power, and most effectually tear up your own authority in the State by the roots.—( Cheers.) I know not, my Lords, to what facts we are called upon to hear evidence. If counsel are to he con fined to the proof of those facts set forth in their speeches, I am quite sure that we need not waste our time by hearing their witnesses. Those facts will not affect the Bill, but the prov ing of them will be productive of interminable delay. It is e roposed, however, by the counsel, that a copy of this Bill shall be served upon every Corporation in the kingdom. The object of this is clear ; but I beg leave to state to those who are the abettors of this proceeding, that I am not to be beaten by delay.--( Prolonged cheers from the Ministerial benches.) The Noble Lords who are the abettors of this proceeding will take upon themselves the conduct and marshalling of the evi dence. I, for my part, will attend in my place, and do the best in my power to advance the progress of the Bill, and pro mote the interests of the country.—( Hear.) My Lords, the Learned Counsel at your bar has told you that this Bill will prove the destruction of this House. I think, my Lords, that it may. " illa dies utramque, Ducet ruinani." Why, my Lords, every - one who knows the passage thus quoted by the Learned Counsel knoWs that it alludes to a case of self-immolation—( Cheers)—of self-destruction---( Cheers) —of suicide, my Lords—( Loud cheers)—and so, my Lords, I can agree with the Learned Counsel, in thinking that if you follow the advice offered to you with respect to this Bill, it may indeed prove the destruction of your House.—( Loud and continued cheering.) The gallery was then cleared, and their Lordships divided, when there appeared— For ilie amendment 124 For the original motion 54 Majority against Ministers —7O Upon our return we found Lord BROUGHAM protesting against Couniel being , al lowed again to speak on the introduction of evidence after being already heard. For his own part he was resolved, after what had already taken place, not to permit Counsel fo address one word more to the House. So determined was he on this point, that he would divide the House continually, even if he stood alone, rather than have the business and the wishes_ of the country defeated by the insidious delays pro posed by the other side.—(Cheers.) Lord ELLENBOROUGH moved that Counsel be called in. Lord BRO UG HAM, in reference to their future proceed ings, proposed that they should go on with the evidence from eleven o'clock until seven.—(No.) They should proceed in this case, not like holiday work, but as men of business. The Duke of WELLINGTON said he was ready to si until twelve o'clock. The Earl of WINCHILSE A reminded their Lordships that he had concluded his observations in the early part of the discussion, by expressing his opinions of the illegality and the unconstitutional character of the Commission, and he could not therefore vote to go on with evidence founded on that Com mission. The Noble Lord's resolution against the principle of the Bill was then put. Lord KENYON begged his Noble Friend not to press the amendment, at that moment, after the division which had taken place and the decision to which the House had come. Lord WINCHIL SE A said he would, at the suggestion of his Noble Friend, withdraw his amendment, with the deter mination, however, of proposing it hereafter. The amendment was accordingly withdrawn. Lord L YNDHURST—Sir Charles Wetherell, the House has decided on hearing evidence, and Counsel are to attend for that purpose at 11 o'clock to-morrow. Lord BROUGHAM—That is, at eleven this day, Sir Charles, and the House will probably sit till twelve o'clock at night.—( Laughter. ) Their Lordships then adjourned at twenty minutes past three o'clock. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT, THIS DAY, TUESDAY, Atm. 4. HOUSE OF LORDS. The VICE-CHANCELLOR took his seat before the Table of the House at eleven o'clock. Mr. Carter, Town Clerk of the city of Coventry, was then brought to the bar, and sworn. Examined by Mr. KNIGHT—I am Town Clerk of the city of Coventry, and have been so for the last twenty-two years. The office is for life. The Town Council consists of a Mayor, ten Aldermen, and twenty-two Common Councilmen. They are all elected for life. Besides the former, there are a few persons who have the right of turning their cattle upon the common belonging to the Corporation. All these have the right of voting for Members of Parliament. I sin not aware of any persons besides the mem bers of the Corporation who claim the right of voting. There is another class of persons who have the right of turning one head of cattle on the common—they are the licensed victuallers. They purchase that right. The proportion of freemen to the rest of the inhabitants is about twenty to one. The right is enjoyed for life, and is considered a very great privilege. Their commons are close to the city, and their superficial extent is about 2,300 acres. The property is very valuable, and the lands, in my opinion, would let for more than one pound per acre. I consider that these rights operate advantageously upon the morals and conduct of the young men of Coventry. The Judges have frequently complimented the Grand Juries on the paucity of crime, and which, in my opinion, arises from the rights which the freemen enjoy. I have the popu lation returns for the city of Coventry for the year 1831. Are they similar to those made by the Corporation Commissioners? —They differ materially from the Commissioners' returns. I should wish to refer to them. In what points do they differ? Lord BROUGHAM thought that was rather a clumsy way of proving discrepancies. He had no objections to its being done once in a way; but the proper course would be to hand in the returns to Housi., and let their Lordships compare them. Mr !KNIGHT replied that he was not going far into that question, and should _not persevere in it.—[The witness here went rapidly over the returns of the population of Coventry, pointing out the dis crepancies between them and the returns made by the Commissioners.l What is the duty of the Chamberlain ?—He had the care of the Lammas funds. Did the Chamberlains formerly collect that revenue ?—They did. Is there a Recorder for the city of Coventry ?—There For what period are they elected ?—They are elected annually. Under Sir Thos. Whyte s estate do the. Aldermen take anything? —Yes, under a decree of the Court of Chancery. A decree of-the Court of Chancery affirmed by this House?— No, upon appeal the House reversed the judgment of the Court below and confirmed the right of the Aldermen. Then I am to understand that the Aldermen of Coventry take under the decree of the Court of Chancery. In what proportion do they take ?—Four-sevenths are divided between the Mayor, Re corder, and Aldermen. Is the Mayor an annual officer ?—Yes. The Aldermen arc for life ?—They are. And of course have a life interest in the charity ?—Yes. By whom are they elected ?--By the thirty-one persons forming the great Leet. Who are the persons that form that great Leet—from what class are they taken ?—By persons who have served the offices of She riff, Chamberlain, and Wardens, according to seniority. From whom are the aldermen chosen ?—From freemen, and tha class called free-citizens What is the difference between the two terms?—Tho free-citi zens are persons who are free of the incorporated companies of the city. Must a free-citizen be a freeman also ?---He must be a freeman, but not seven years' roan, as they are called. Do any of the incorporated companies interfere with trade in Coventry?—The butchers and bakers sometimes do, but very seldom ; the others never do. Few of the people free of the com panies belong to the trade designated by it. In point of practice, up to this time, from what class of men have the aldermen and governing officers been chosen ?—Most re spectable tradesmen. Are they men of property ?—lnvariably. There have been in stances of a man being overtaken by misfortune after his election, but those are always first chosen from the most respectable class ; men who contribute to the burdens of the town, more than any other individuals in it. I believe, now, that there are not to be found more then twenty individuals who pay more in rates than the present aldermen do. Then, am Ito understand, that they have not only the interest of duty, but also a personal interest in keeping the burdens of the town as low as possible ? Certainly, it is the invariable practice. In whose hands is placed the general administration of justice in Coventry ?—ln the hands of the Aldermen, who are Justices of the Peace in the county of the city of Coventry. You, as an old inhabitant, and having much experience, will be enabled to say what has been the administration of justice by them F...--Fair and upright. Has there .ver been any well-founded charge brought against them ?—I think not; but others were of a different opinion re . • . specting the election of 1826. That was an election matter—l mean as to the administration of justice?—l have never heard of any complaint, and there has never been any attack upon them in any of the Courts. There was a re port against the mayor in 18'26. A report by a Committee of the other House ?—Yes. Was there a Bill founded upon that report ?—There was; that Bill passed the House of Commons. An application was made to this House, that we might appear by counsel and witnesses at the bar. You were not heard, I believe ? Were you ready, or how was it that vou were not heard ?—We were prepared, but the Noble Lord who had charge of the Bill gavo it up. What was the nature of the 5i11..-was it like the Nottingham SUN, LONDON; ' Bill of 1803?-..Yes, it. was to opal the c:ty of Coventry to the Warwick * Magistrates. Are you aware of the number of rate- payers in C:ventry ?—I should think there are some thousands. I wish a more explicit answer. By referring t 3 these documents, cannot you so refresh your memory as to give us an idea of the actual number of rate-payers ?—I should say upwards of 5,000. Have you formed any judgment of the number of those who are rated under 10/. ?—I should say four out of five. I might say five out of six rated under that sum. Suppose for any purpose the rated and the rateable were to vote, do you mean to say that 4-sths or 5-6ths would be rated un der 10/.?---Yes, I think so. Now 10/. is the only limit I have yet taken. Have you the' means of forming an opinion of how many may be rated under Si. —No. The artizans, especially since the introduction of the French loom, require a great deal of r oom , an d f or t h e prem i ses t h ey have usually to pay 81 . - or 9/. What is the reason of the rent being so high ?—lt has increased in consequence of the great increase of the population, and their not being able to extend the town. Can you tell whether bribery is very prevalent ?. considered that it, is not. Can you speak upon your own experience also ?—I never knew a bribe to be offered in my life, and I never offered one myself. It is impossible for me to say that no such thing has taken place. The people of Coventry are of a higher caste ; they are governed by local as well as by general politics. Were there men of different political opinions in the governing body ?—Yes. Is there a decided and marked preponderance of any one class over the other ?—Lately one class has rather preponderated; a few years ago the other preponderated : the preponderance now is in favour of what is called the Tory or Conservative party. When did the scale turn ?—About eight or ten years ago; but the people of Coventry are more governed by local than by public politics. The people of Coventry took both sides at the election and this not only among the body Corporate but among the Alder. men. '—l certainly The Aldermen being such as you have described, have they great influence ?—No. Are you acquainted with the Charters of the City? Yes, I have read the Charter of James, which recites all the others. What is the date of the earliest Charter ? There is one shortly after the conquest—it is recited in the Charter of James, the go verning body of the City consider the Charter of James the First the governing Charter. Has there also been a subsequent Charter ? I am inclined to think there was, but I never saw it—it was, I believe, a char ter of confirmati on o f th e t i me o f Ch arles the Second. What Police Establishment is there at Coventry ? About 70 or 80 constables, but in consequence of very considerable excitement at the election about three years ago, the Magistrates deemed it ex pedient to have a chief constable, and they requested Viscount Mel bourne, then Secretary of State, to do them the honour to recom mend some person to be appointed by them. I think the Noble Lord referred the matter to some Board, the Municipal Board, and a chief constable was then sent down. Was he recommended by the then Government and by the Mu nicipal Board ?—He was. Did the Corporation act upon that recommendation ?—Yes, they appointed the person sent down to the office and gave him a com petent salary. How much was that ?-1401. a year. Is hestill in the office ?—Yes. By . a NOBLE Loan—Then , in point of fact, the Gov ernmen t appointed thi s officer ? The Corporation not knowing of themselves a person thoroughly competent to discharge the duties of the office applied to the Government and acted upon their recommendation. Have you a copy of the letter or application sent to Government ? Not with me. When you said how the police was administered, did you mean that it was administered efficiently and satisfactorily ?—Perfectly so. When are the sittings held ?—The magistrates sit on every day in the week, with the exception of Tuesdays and Sundays ; every other day two sit in rotation. What is the reason that they do not sit on Tuesdays? They have to attend courts of common council, which are held on the first and last Tuesday in the month, to receive the claims of the freemen and to answer them. They have also to sit on the inter mediate Tuesday. [We did not hear for what.] Are the aldermen men of property, such as enabl. s them to withdraw so much time from their private concerns as is necessary for the due discharge of their duties ?—Certainly. Is Mr. Cope a fair sample of the magistracy in point of pro perty ?—No. Mr. Cope is a man of very considerable property. Some of the magistrates have not quite so much. Generally speaking, they are warm men ?—Yes. Could a man, carrying on a small retail business, however other wise competent to do the duties—could he devote sufficient time, under these circumstances, to perform these duties ?—I certainly think he could not. Are you aware of the extent of the property possessed by the Corporation of Coventry ? I don't speak now of that devoted to the enjoyment of the freemen, but that belonging to the Corpora tion as a matter of general right, nor do I allude to charity pro perty ?—I should think pretty nearly2,oool. per annum, perhaps not quite so much, but I don't speak accurately. It can't be expected that you should ; but I understand you to describe that sum as general property, not devoted to any particular purpose, but in the situation of ordinary property ?—The Corpora tion have not so much disposable property as I have mentioned, because there are some existing debts, and therefore they have not 2,0001. a year to dispose of. In what manner do they devote their surplus income, after pay ing the interest of the debt ?—By entertaining their friends, and the people of the town generally. They are also occasionally in the habit of attending charity sermons, and give 101. to each o f th em . They contribute also to so me o f the schools, such as the Lancas terian and National, _occasionally ; and have subscribed a consider able sum to the building of the new church. Independently of what they have expended in entertaining their friends and the general body of the town, and for public purposes, I understand you to say that they make payments in voluntary cha rities?—Very frequently, indeed; and there is also a portion of that money applied to the payment of the salaries of their servants. What salary do you receive ?—Twenty pounds a year, with cer tain fees and emoluments ; and by that decree to which I have ad verted, lam entitled to 1-70th part of the rents aris ng out of Sir Thomas Whyte's charity. Besides that 1-70th, you have other fees and emoluments ?—Yes. What are your duties ?—I do all the business professionally re quired by the body corporate ; I draw out all the cases and deeds that are necessary. Have you ever consented to have your office valued by the Lords of the Treasury ?—[ We understood the witness to answer, No ; and several Noble Lords directed him to speak in a louder tone. ] Do you happen to know , the nature and sources (I do net ask you as to the particulars of title) from whence the Corporation have derived their general property of 2,0001. a year ?—Principally by purchases made from time to time by the body corporate, as ap pears to me upon looking over their documents. Have there been any grants from the Crown ?—I am not aware of any. The whole, then, of that general property has been made by purchases—made by the body corporate from time to time?-1 believe so. Does it at all appear, from documents to which you refer, from what sources these sums were derived ; whether from private con tributions or subscriptions, or from public sources ? These books are silent cn that subject ; there is no entry that I know of, show ing how this money has been acquired, but there are orders for the purchase of property. Do you know how any money for the purchase of property has been obtained ?—ln some instances of making purchases they have applied the charity money, and repay it afterwards ; but what the sources were from whence the money was obtained, does not appear. Do you happen to know of any individual subscriptions or con tributions towards general purposes ?—I do not. The Corporation have purchased no estates since I became Town-Clerk. Are there within the City of Coventry any general trusteeship s ? —Yes ; there are Commissioners for paving, lighting, and watching the town. Are they independent of the Corporation ?—.Yes, they are dis tinct from them. Are there any others ?—Yes, there is a Board of Commissioners appointed under an Act of Parliament passed in the year 1790, under which they have a power of rating Is. 6d. in the pound for the purpose of lighting and watching the town, and regulating the wells, sewers, and pumps. If there are any other public bodies have the goodne , s to state them ?—There are guardians of the poor, incorporated by an Act of Parliament _passed about thirty years ago, and they appoint 18 persons called Directors of the Poor. Can you form any opinion whether convenience or inconveni ence, advantage or disadvantage, would follow from incorporating and merging these bodies in the Corporation ?—I should say that it would be better to keep them distinct. Then I understand you to say that the Corporation have enough to do already ?—The magistrates certainly have enough. Supposing these public bodies were required to surrender them selves to the Corporation, so as to become merged and absorbed in it, would that be productive of advantage, or disadvantage ?—I should think that it would be productive of great inconvenience. Perhaps you are not able to state the extent and variety of the powers and properties which these bodies possess ?—I should say I know them pretty nearly. Is there any qualification necessary in point of property ?—None for the Paving Commissioners. Is there any for the Guardians of the Poor ?—They must be ratedat 201. per annum, o r p ossess a certa i n f ree h o l d. Who are generally appointed Street Commissioners ?—The prin cipal persons of the town. Are you aware of the powers of rating possessed by the Corpora tion ?—They have no power of rating. Would it be acceptable or not to the people of Coventry of sub stance and property, to vest in any body an unlimited power of rat ing and taxing the town for the purposes of improvement ?—I should say, it would be an extremely dangerous power which I, as a per son of property and substance in the town, would object to. Probably you would not object to a tax for building a theatre I should.—( Laughter.) Are you at all acquainted with the charity property under the administration of the Corporation of Coventry ?—I know a good deal about it ; but there is another gentlemen who knows greatly mcrie than I do, because I did not keep those accounts, nor are they kept in my office. Perhaps you can inform us of the total amount of the property devoted to charity. Can you venture to say that they amount to several thousands a-year ?—Yes, most certainly. These charities are regulated by the governing body ?—Yes. Can you speak of the manner in which they have been generally administered since 1828 ?—I should say moot impartially. Can you add prudently and discreetly ?—Yes. How have they been administered ?—The general rule has been that the Aldermen of the district have associated themselves with such of the Common Council-men as resided within their Wards, and these latter produce lists on the day the charities are given away, and they have directed me, as town clerk, to record the lists as made out. The record is kept ?—Yes. Are you at all acquainted with the Report of the Charity Com missioners ?—I am somewhat acquainted with it ; I furnished them with numerous documents, and permitted them to inspect the re cord books of the Corporation. They had full liberty of inspection ?—Yes, they had. Mr. Eld is Mayor of Coventry ?—Yes. He is the person so highly complimented in the Report of the Charity Commissioners ?—Yes. . . Is that Report correct?—No doubt it is very correct. Who were the Commissioners ? There were two sets of Charity Commissioners. Do you recollect their names ?—Mr. Robert Grant, the barrister, and Mr. Smith of the Chancery Bar were the latter, and Dr. Marsham, of Oxford, and a barrister were the former. Did you ever hear them express their opinion as to the mode in which the Corporation had met their inquiry and views ?—I heard them speak in the highest terms of it. Did the Charity Commissioners conduct their inquiries in a ju dicial, impartial, and orderly manner ?.—Very much so, while I was with them. Did you also attend the Nuaiicipal Corporation Connuisliorters ? —I did. tShA Y, AUGUST 4, - 18a5. Did they conduct their enquiry in a like manner ?—Not in a way that was satisfactory to me; quite the reverse. • You mean the reverse of judicial, impartial, and orderly ?—I do. You attended them day by day ?—Yes ; every day and - hour they were in Coventry. Was there much tumult or disorder during the examination of witnesses ?—I can't say there was much tumult, but the people conducted themselves very differently from the manner in which they conduct themselves in Courts of Law. Did they commit any person?—No. Did they ever exercise any power of repressing disorder?—l scarcely ever heard them say a word on that subject. I did see a gentleman contradicting an assertion that was made, and they or dered him to sit. down. On whith side did he wish to address the Commissioners think he was on the Corporation side, but he was not a corporator. Was it to correct misrepresentations of the acts of the Corpora tion ?—lt was. Did he do so in a respectful and - gentlemanlike manner ?—Yes. Are you acquainted with what is called the Municipal Corpora tion Report ?---I have read it. Is it correct and true, from beginning to end ?—I should say not. Did you take down the evidence ?-1 did take down in writing some loose minutes from time to time, but I was so often called on myself by the Commi sioners, that I frequently gave it up. Did the Commissioners take notes ?—I thought they took every thing that appeared to militate against the Curporation, and that was the general opinion of all the persons there, on both sides. Did you see the judicial pen moving faster at certain periods, when charges were brought against the Corporation, than at others ?—% ery much so. When garbled statements were made, they were taken down. Were the witnesses sworn ?—I can't say whether they were all sworn or not. I think the Commissioners adminis!ered the oath. Do you mean that they took down every thing that any body chose to say against the Cerporation, whether hearsay or not ? Decidedly it was hearsay in almost all cases. As a professional man, do you say that the evidence was legiti mate ?—I scarcely heard any legitimate evidence given. I suppose you have attended the Warwickshire Assizes for the last 30 or 40 years have not been absent from the Coventry Assizes since I was admitted a solicitor in the year 1791. I forget in what year you became town Clerk ?—ln 1812. How many days were the Municipal Commissioners engaged in Coventry ?—About nine or ten, including parts of days, and I think I wa s un d er exam i nat i on seven hours during the first day. Were they collecting information during all that time ?—Yes; parties came forward very freely. What was the preponderance as to class and character, of the parsons who came there to give information?—l should say the lower classes preponderated ; some respectable tradesmen came there, and communicated some one thing and some another, but almost all of what was stated was hearsay. You have read the Report upon the Corporations ?—I have. Is it very long ?—lt occupies 27 pages of original matter, besides extracts from the Charity Commissioners' Report. How many witnesses are named in that Report don't know more than one—Richard Marriott. Judging, as well as you can, what was the number of persons examined ?—I should say 30 or 40; but certainly not more than 45. Would it not, in your Judgment, as a professional man, have been useful to know the names, qualities, and ages, of the witnesses ex amined ?—I think it would be extremely right ; and if the Report was put in a more tangible shape, the Corporation would have been very glad to have answered it. Was it visible to you that the evidence against the Corporation was taken down more carefully than other parts?—That is my de cided opinion. Had they any book before them ?—Yes, there was a book and papers before them, but they were very much elevated above the people, as they sat where the judge sits. What ! did the Corporation give them the use of the County Hall ?—Yes, and they directed me to give them information, which they thought might be important, as I was examined before the House of Commons. Did the Commissioners meet with any opposition ?—No ; the Corporation thought their conduct was exceedingly partial, as they suffered persons to come in and make the grossest possible state , ments with impunity ; and they deemed it expedient to draw up a protest against it. Did they do so ?—Yes. Have you a copy of that protest ?—I have not. Then you had better furnish yourself with one.—l will. On your oath, was that enquiry conducted fairly and properly ? On my oath it was conducted unfairly. Was the evidence taken down ?—lt appears to me that all sorts of gossip was taken down. Who and what is Richard Marriott ?—He is a solicitor. Was he ever in the Town Clerk's office ?—He was in my office for nine years as a scrivener. Since he left your office has he been opposed to the Corporation ? —Distinctly. Had he while in your office means of getti ng access to the papers of the Corporation your had ample mea ns o f doing so t Did he not make use of information which he had acquired in your office on his examination?—Certainly. Was that usual and professional, or not ?—Most unusual, and most unprofessional. {;,;Did you make any complaint of it ?—I did at the close of the evidence, to Mr. Whitcombe, one of the Commissioners. (To be continued in our Second Edition. ) HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Twel;e(';loci. — On the motion of Mr. BARCLAY, Mr. Lowther was excused from attending the Carlow Election Committee, on account of illness. CHELSEA WATER WORKS. Mr. CLAY moved the second reading of the Chelsea Water Works Bill. The hon. member also moved the insertion of the Lords' Amendments. Sir S. WHALLEY objected to one of the amendments which re stricted the public to the supply of water by the proposed Company only. Mr. CLAY said this was not a point upon which he would divide the house, but consent to the omission of that part of the clause. Sir S. WHALLEY objected to the amendment, which removed the penalty in the clause originally agreed to for net keeping the main always charged. Mr. CLAY thought the Company needed no penalty to force them to do that, inasmuch as they were compelled to keep the main always charged to supply the smaller pipes. Mr. Alderman WOOD said it was very essential that the main should be kept charged. The deficiency of a good supply of water had been the cause of a most lamentable devastation at a late fire in the City. t was agreed that a penalty of 101. should be attached to the clause. Sir S. WHALLEY objected to the amendment on clause 9, which restricted the Company to take water from a place near Teddington. Mr. CLAY said that the Lords did not introduce this amendment until after having heard witnesses for several days. They then decided that the Company should not go lower than the 350 yards above Kew_ bridge, where the water was considered free from pollution. The water at Teddington was not purer, and if the Company were compelled to go to Teddington, it would cause a difference in t'eir expenses of 300,0001. Sir F. BURDETT considered the public would not be satisfied with water taken lower than above Richmond. A plan had been proposed for rendering the water at Teddington easy of access, and conveyance, and every company ought to avail themselves of that plan. If the water was not taken from the purest spot, the rublic would be tricked out of the object for which they were induced to support the Bill. Mr. CLAY said, there were no common sewers (which rendered the lower part of the Thames corrupt) above Kew Bridge. Mr. WARBURTON was of opinion that the water at Westminster or Waterloo-bridge was as good as any above Kew-bridge. Sir F. BURDE'FT was anxious that the working classes, who per haps did not drink water enough—la laugh)—should be able to get good water, and he hoped to see the time that they would have it, and that without being compelled to pay for it—(hear.) The Lords' amendments were then agreed to, and the Bill was ordered to be reported. WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. On the motion of Lard EBRINOTON, the House went into Com mittee on the Weights and Measures Act, Mr. PRvMe in the chair. Clause 19, as amended, was agree.' to. Clause 20, for providing copies of stamps for the inspectors at the expense of the county, haring been read, Lord ERRING TON read some extracts from the evidenc:"! taken be fore the Committee, to shew the necessity of providing copies of the Exchequer standar:is, in order to secure uniformity of weights and milt- SUreS. Mr. WALLACE supported the system of stamping, as necessary to protect the public both from fraud and informers. But to prevent the use of unstamped weights and measures, either the inspectors must visit every town and village, or they must take up central positions, to which the public can go. But he thought the manufacturers would soon be in a condition to accommodate the inspectors at their factories, where the weights and measures could be stamped before they were issued to the public. His opinions had entirely changed in favour of stamping since last year, and rather than it shou!d not be adopted he would have the expenses paid out of the Conso:idated Fund. Mr. WARBURTON contended that the stamps were no security without a constant system of inspection. The Noble Lord ha .I said, stamps was a better mode than that recommended, in 1830, by the Committee, viz.—that every weight and measure should be stamped with the name of the maker. He thought diff,rently, for when a fraudulent weight was discovered, it voted put the person using it on his defence, and he would be compelled to prove how it be came fi audulent after it came from the maker. Mr. MILES supported the clause. Mr. ESTCOURT had heard from every person out of doors that the stamping clause was a perfectly useless provision. The object of the Bill wai to secure uniformity, and the means taken by appoint ment or Inspectors to stamp them. Then it became necessary for tradesmen to carry their weights to the inspectors' stations, and as they were gene rally numerous they were conveyed in carts and waggons, and in the tran sit were liable to be knocked about and injured, so as to become defective even the very instant after they were stamped. The Hon. Member referred to the evidence given before the Parliamentary Committee selecting extracts to show that there was no security against frauds in the stamps. Mr. WILKS supported the stamping clause. Mr BENNETT opposed it, on acoount of the enormous expense which it entailed on the trading public, especially in country districts, where shopkeepers were compelled to carry their weights and measures 30 or 40 miles to the stations of the Inspectors. Sir S. WIIALLEY said, that it had been the practice for half a cen tury` in Mary-le-bone, to have the weights and measures stamped by parochial inspectors. The protection was not in the mere stamp, but in the force of public opinion, for a weight having been stamped, was known to have been once correct, and if any man dared to altar it, and was discovered, he would be treated by the public accordingly. (Hear, hear.)--Tliough not a Mem ber for the county he was the representative of a large borough which paid a large quote of the county rate, and was therefore anxious to have that rate reduced, but notwithstanding this he supported the stamping clause. Mr. ESTCOURT said that at the last meeting of the Committee the stamping clause was negatived by a majority of one. Sir G. CLERK said he was the author of the r, , port referred to by the Hon. Member, and at the time it was issued he was in favour of having the makers name stamped, but subsequent reasons had induced him to doubt the utility of stamps of any kind. After the decision come to on a former day, he thought the Noble Lord should not plass for the use of stamps. Admiral ADAM had found the trading people in that part of the coun. try from whence he came,availed themselves of the opportunity of having their weights adjusted and stamped with great avidity. Mr. WALLACE found that to be the case in Scotland also, but the stamping would be useless, he repeated, without the inspection. The Gallery was cleared for a division, when there appeared—. For the clause ............... 60 Against it Majority ............... 54 On clause 21 being proposed, Mr. JEPHSON asked whether the number of inspectors was to be ncreased. Lord EBRINGTON replied, that he intended to leave it optional with the magistrates as to whether there should be any fresh appoint ments. Clauses 22 to the end were then agreed to with amendments. It being 3 o'clozk, the kink adjourned. LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING. AUGUST 4, 1835. it is with shame, sorrow, and indignation we record the fact, that a majority of seventy Tory and Ultra-Tory Peers came last night to the resolution of defeating the Municipal Corporation Bill, by one of those under-hand in `xigues for which the House of Lords is proverbially noto- By this resolution they have to all intents and pur poses—whatever they ma y a ll ege to the contrary—flung down the gauntlet of defiance to the people. Nay, more, they have actually drawn themselves up in battle-array against them. They have declared that, so far as they are concerned, Reform shall henceforth be a dead letter. True, they will give us the name, but they will deprive us of the thing. The shadow is ours, and welcom e ; but if we presume to ask for the substance, their Lord ships' answer is ready Come and take it ! We accept their challenge. We will come. But not in arms, but with the book of the Constitution— a far more effective weapon—in our hands !We will come, clad in the panoply of justice ; and thus cased in adamant, and backed, besides, by the moral influence of three King doms, we will not only wrest our dues, \o the la s t f ar thi ng , from their L or d s hi ps ' tenac i ous grasp, Aut take care also that for the future they are deprived of even the temptation to defraud us. The question has now come to such a pass, that either the House of Lords or the people must give way. No intermediate steps can be taken. We must either clap a muzzle on their Lordships, or else consent to see the fruits of the Reform Bill snatched at once and for ever from our grasp. rious. We can conceive nothing more jesuitical--nothing more discreditable, considering the forbearance the people have shown towards them for the last four years and upwards, than their Lordships' conduct last night. Under pretence of advocating the rights of freemen, they are striking the dagger right to the heart of freedom. Under pretence of proceeding with deliberation, they are striving to strangle the Corporation Bill, by a series of vexatious delays for which, with all their sophistry, they cannot find even the shadow of a justification. How poorly off for argument must they have been on this head, whe❑ Lord LYNDHURST, their chief spokesman, was compelled to fly for help to the town clerk of Leicester ! This illustrious functionary " was dis tinctly of opinion," observed his Lordship, "that the Corpora tion Commission was illegal !" And so, because the town clerk of Leicester—a most disinterested evidence no doubt —happens to be of this opinion, the people are bound to adopt the same. We are to have no Municipal Reform, because the town-clerk of Leicester deems it inexpedient. No matter what Ministers may say, no matter what the House of Commons may say ; the town-clerk of Leicester is against us; and therefore we must submit ! And is it thus that the people of three kingdoms, but of or;, 'neart, are to be insulted ? When they thunder for Municipal Reform, are they to be referred fcr an answer to a town clerk ? Since when have such provincial mushrooms been authorities with their Lordships ? Really democracy must have made prodigious strides, when the opinions of a mere creature of yesterday, one of the very lowest of the Cor poration functionaries, are preferred to these of such con summate legislators as Lords BROUGHAM and MELBOURN E ! But, perhaps, their Lordships may allege, in justifica tion of their preference, that these last are interested par ties. Well, and is the Leicester town-clerk disinte rested ? Has he nothing to lose by Reform—nothing, to gain by its delay ? But to press this point fur ther. Is the Tory section of their Lordships! House so wholly uninterested, that they can afford to give a dispas sionate consideration to the Municipal Reform Bill ? Have they no eye to a future election ? No fear that when once this measure is paSse:l, down will go their last prop from as them ? Wliativer they may think on the subject, tae tell them that the people know and feel that their pre opposition is the result of intensest self-interest ; and girding it in this light, are resolved, at all hazards, to 11 tralize it. But to recur to the debate. Lord BuciuGHAm's spo' was in his happiest style of mingled sarcasm and argunte Ile cut and carved HoGG, as never poor porker was mangled. He literally flayed him alive. As for LYNDHURST, who atternl:ted a reply, he cut just the s of figure that a man may be expected to cut, who gots, in a public assembly to prove that black is white. only fact was a fiction. For instance, he stated that i! PARK - Es was once Secretary of the Birmingham 0 0 1 , Now it so happens that he 'never was. But what of chi It was necessary to his LAiship's case, in default of all went, that he should make this statement ; and aceordi!ll he made it, For he is not one to stick at trifles. By the b ; his Lordship's attack on Whig consistency was sonictbl indiscreet, to say the least of it. Has he no recollection the days when he himself was all but a Radical? A l e ctute, this subject comes from him with as bad grac e , as it 7°' from that episcopal Proteus, 'Dr. PHILLPOTTS.. The Duke of WELLINGTON observed, " that he had at been disposed to go into committee with a view of making nice! tions in the Bill, b ut w h en h e came to hear counsel et the u' he saw it was impossible for him to do otherwise than a gree the motion of Lord CARNARVON." A more miraculous version than this, is not recorded in sacred or profane lust His Grace expressly states that he was converted by 601 1 1 quence of couns e l ; b ut i t un l uc ki ly happens that durinlV; major part of Sir CHARLES WETUIERELL'S speech, on So.to day, he wa s f ast as l eep ! A y, and not only fast asleepi v.; snoring --actually snoring !--in a way that must have conyil the most i ncre d u l ous h ow profound was the attention w hit he, sentence by sentence, paid to the arguments of Learned Gentleman ! A fact like this needs no comment', Lord NIEL BOURNE ' S speec h w a s one of the finest display; stern, straight-forward eloquence it ever fell to our lot hear. It was worthy of a Spartan senator in the best dat Spartan integrity. Hi s L or d s hi p b roadly stated that b e Pi been " deceived and misled" —emphatic words from oaq i i never says more th an h e means, or is prepared to by--" as to the intentions of the opponents of the poration Bill ;" and that he would never again " into such an understanding with those, who afterli may not have the will, or may want the power, to give etroe t A ; them." Bravo, my Lord ! The people to whose inflo' , " you here indirectly allude, will stand by you thror gh. your struggles. Let the thunder howl—let the ' s i g ht . flash—no matter, you have still the means, tk oi migh tit allaying the storm, and purging the at its impurities ! England is with you. Ireland is tip you. Scotland is with you. 7..osphere 0 ' y then with an, ' s p apprehensions. Scatter distrust the armour of the Constitutio:- . , ; uplift the oriflamme of _T i p dom ; and thousands —m . 4 ..0 the winds. Buckle ';:tions shall hasten from all goal: 4 to rally under the last year, by august banner. The insult passed v.,':ur unceremonious dismissal from offioel, not fore:-.;(ten by us. You were the Minister of j? free, unbiassed choice; and we felt and still feel, _ . „„4 in the affront then l e v e ll e d at you, we ourselves ris affronted. We subjoin his Lordship's closing ob se rratinosP lo t they are f u ll o f emp h asis. A more solemn warning 10_01 been pronoun ce d w i t hi n the walls of the House of Lords, '`. t CHATHAm's famous declaration against the American war `• My Lords, the Learned Counsel at your bar has told you that Bill will prove the destruction of this House—' ilia dies utra7di ducet ruinani.' Why, my Lords, every one who knows the P P° 7 thus quoted by th e L earned Counsel, knows that it alludes toad ) self-immolation—of self-destruction—of suicide, my L or d s; an d 0 ' d Lords, I can agree with the Learned Counsel, in thinking that 0 , 0 follow the advice offered to you with respect to this Bill, it may ta d! prove the destruction of you. House." AO - We close these hasty remarks with a few words of to the people. Meet -- petition—remonstrate I D o not dress the House of Lords, for it is useless; but Del your appeal •to the KING and the Commons. them, in respectful but decided terms, that as demand nothing but what is your's by constitutional right i to you will ac ce pt o f no compromise —of nothing short of a s wholesale restoration of your privileges. Tell them, also, th at ~ ,5 will not be put d own b y a f act i on ; that iftheir Lords hipstri"s" to cut their o wn th roats—so b e it, they shall not cut yorio; that you respect them, but you have a still greater renpe l o yourselves: th a t, i n s h ort, you arc as unanimous—as ren°o —and as determined to have justice done you, as e ver Id your patriotic ancestors in the days of CHARLES the 1 "1,; Use language of this sort, and possibly their Lordships ols1„ 0 0 induced to throw away the axe with which they have just ' s o, furnished th emse l ves , f or no other purpose, as it rryid ne e than to strike at the roots of their own existence. The Irish Church Reform Bill was re-committed night, and the Report ordered to be brought up this (I A discussion of considerable interest arose on the j, clause, by w hi c h it i s proposed to remit the million ; vanced to the I r i s h Cl ergy i n 1833, to be repaid (y of the tithes. Mr. D. W. HAnvEY opened the y bate in a s p eec h o f cons id erable ability, in which or shewed the hardship imposed upon the people of land in b e i ng so unceremoniously called u p on to lt the debts due to the Irish Clergy by the people of that c°: is stytry. Th ere can , we th i nk, be but one opinion on this s ject—th e h ar d s hi p o f the case is universally admitted; iv difficulty is how to avoid it. The Government advanced money to the Clergy, taking its chance of repayment from arrears of tithes then due, which it thought it had the P°L of recovering. It tried to recover these arrears, and got 1 2 .u:i s t at an expense of 28,0001. ! Such a mode of repayment to not likely t o b e very a d vantageous if persevered in, and 0 Government wisely desisted from enforcing the claim. L t d, now proposed t o convert tithes into a rent c h arge on the il k payable by parties never before liable for tithes, and theoe blem to b e so l ve d i s w h o is to pay the arrears? Werflo question to be decided in a court of law there would by 1101- 0 1, culty whatever. The judge would tell the jury that the ' de , tivator of the soil is the party liable. But these parties 0 , dare, one and all, they wont pay, and they are SEVSN S o o LIONS. This settles the matter, as far as they Y 6 concerned. The Clergy aga i n say to the Gov ernmen t, oti agreed to take our tithes as security for your money- 4 11 have no oth er means o f pay i ng you, and ex nihilo ,ihi,l.4 The only other party was the landlords, and theyo not without reaso n , " I s i t not enough' that you pel us t o t a k e u p on ourse l ves the future payment of ti Must we also be answerable for the del:.is of the former uri o payer? This you may force us tom, do, but it is contra/ every principle of justice." It is not easy to see h ow ' t h e Government, in such circd~~ stances, could have acted otherwise than it has done, unin i had been possible to burden the benefices or stipends of clergymen who received the money, with the interest of t ot respective am oun t s . H e w h o has had the benefit of the 90 ought not to complain of this, and his successor can have right to do so. The original cl a u se was carr i ed by a majority of 227 ; 0 01 1 numbers being -252 to 25. • oe It will be seen b y our P ar li amentary report that a diogof took place last night in the Commons on the ques tion to THOMAS M OORE K EITH ' S di scharge. This person, o, readers readers are aware , was d eep l y concerned in the ae.) rious attempt to' hush up the bribery job by o ' l° DUNDAS and KELLY got into Parliament for the borougof of Ipswich. He it was who first hit upon the plea ty of sending PILGRIM ou t o f t h e kingdom to avoid p SPEAKER'S warrant, an d th en trumped up a charge of felc'dy against him to pre ven t hi s return. CLIPPERTON ° SPARROW who we re i mp li cated, though in a subordilTtobi degree, in the same transaction, have been imprisoned , : e j, one seven weeks an d the other five, and it was proP°;.„, by Lord STORNIONT, the representative of a kindred the rough—indeed, h e h a d g i ven notice of a motion to Obi effect for to-morrow--that this man, t h e princ i pa l in tof transaction, should be discharged after a confinemen t o seven days. On th e S PEAKER ' s intimating to the / O m last night that he had received a letter from Member for Norfolk, stating that KEITH was quired to go before the Grand Jury of that elt u ;s to complete the evidence against PILGRIM, tbe Mr. moved th a t K EITH s h ou ld b e permitted to go before 5 , Grand Jury in the custody of the Sergeant-at-Ar m when L or d S TORMONT proposed his own motion .9013'A, for a f u t ure d ay , as an amendment on that of Mr. fluPj. namely, that K EITH b e b rought to the bar and dischargeko A debate ensued, in which Lord J. RUSSELL stated that b was favourable to the amendment, as he thought that enongo had been done, in the way of example by s ending. aid persons to N ewga t e . W e are sorry the Noble Lord 00,, not enter m ore f u ll y i nto the merits of the (Inefitivot and state hi s reasons more at large ; for we ennuor help thinki ng that lie must hav e h a d b e tter r oc ! sons than th a t on w hi ch he professed to fuuce his con c l us i on . I t i s utterly impossible to belts $ that a man of Lord JOHN RUSSELL'S stamP --- ,,, man of an enlightened mind and a sound understfwaing'bo could sanction the principle that the ends ofi.astice caning answered by punishing a portion of the gi:'ittY, and le t t o the rest escape, or to put it as this case warrant s . no t• —by punishing the accessaries, end setting the fl i e d pal free. We are happy that toe Noble Lord's mise t be lenity was overruled by +Lc more salutary severity al cße s House of Commor , ,;. There is no class of off eri ,, of whom we thin!: more deserving of a rigoroui mea sur e - the punishm.Lnt, than those who demoralize the portion % ro t e'2 ,- dimunity entrusted with thy guardianship of the cl i e be is rights of their countrymen ; and we are sure it Will 0 to the high es t d egree sat i s f actory to the electors at largo'ch find th e i r representat i ves determined to put a stoP.t° t he infam ous an d b ane f u l pract i ces, by every means In power. (ADVERTISEMENT.) 11 0 ' NEW SILVER WAITE Round, with e l egan t Shell-pattern edges. A L J. Plain Centres X s d. Chased Centres. Silver Waiter, 8 in. di ame t er Silver Waiter, Sin diainfte` . 5 j4 0 I2oz. a Os. A 8 0 . .12.0 z. a 99. tx-i• 0 9 Ditto 10 ditto 2Poz. a 9s. •.. 9 0 0 Ditto 10 ditto 20oz a 9s. n 1 : 40 11 Di! to 18 ditto, 86oz. a9s ...35 14 0 Ditto 18 ditt", 86oz. a 9s. 0.. _ frow Also a variety of Second-hand Waiters, 6s. to 7s. 6d. per ounce. varying in P ricy T. COC SAVORY, Working Gold sm ith an d Silversmith' 41' —a Cornhill, Lond o n . London : P r i n t e d an d Published by_MURDO YOUNG, o il 112, Strand, a t Th e Sun O ffi ce, No. 112, Strand, in tbe c° of • of Middlesex. - . • " Zhe MAJC On Lord Carnarvon'g the nCillit , mor. Canterbury BISUOPS. Carlisle Exe:er Linen n Li) don 'rd St. David'R Corol,erland Lccd Dorset Wellington Ni.%nQuist:s. Aberc,ro A yleshury flute Camden `.:ll,lrnolleley Hert ford tiry W, stmea h EARLS. Abingdon A irk, A ylesford Bathurst Beauchamp Beverley Bradford B ro ten low Carnarvon (i, , r , sterfield l)artmouth Do (ore Delawarr Doc on BISHOPS. Pristol Chichester liereforil Limerick DUKES. Cleveland Grafton Portland MA WrISES. Breadalbane Conyngharn Lansdowne orthampton Westminster EARLS.RIdnor Spencer Ripon Athematic S!radbr.,ke 1 RICE OP ...... 3 ,er Cent. Red 3 per Cent. Cons ni per Cent Ditto Red New 3.4 per Cent 3 per Cent. sAsscuted 1 ih,sented Bank Long, A nnuities toexoire Jan. 5, i. 460 l6 7-16 7-16 to, 11459 l6 5-16 lan. 5, 1860 Jan. 5, 1880 April 5, 1880 J.ln. 5. 1870_ Omnium , CKS "I'tllti 215 1 4 90 1 ,:; .% 14 90 893 , ,, ..09 1 4 1 4 i ~...• 98% DAY AT ' New 5 per() India Stock - Ditto Bonds 5 8 pm. South Sea Stock -- Gld Annuities New Ditto - 3 per Cent. Annuities, 1151 - Exch. Bills, £l,OOO lB 24 pm Ditto 500 ::0 21 pin. Ditto Small Ditto Commercial 2O 21 pm. Ditto Advertised pm Bank Stock for Account -- India Stock for Account - Cons°lc for Account B9N % % ONE O' C LOCK etit 2 W4 pm• dIUES OF FOREIGN FUNDS Austrian Bends Belgian Bonds Ditto Account Brazilian Bonds Ditto Account Bdenos Ayres Bonds • Ditto Account — Ch:limn Bonds Ditto Account ......... Columbian Bonds 3O Ditto Account Columbian Bonds, :824. 35% 5 Ditto Account hinds I )itto Account Greek Bonds Dram Bonds, 15•25 Ddto Account Mexican Bonds, 5 per cent — Ditto Account —l Dit'o, 6 per cent. Ditt , Account Neapolitan THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLoCk., Peruvian Bonds •• Ditto Account Portuguese Bonds 67 1 4 8% Ditto Account Ditto New Bonds 90% Ditto Account 90% Prussian Bonds Ditto Bonds, 182 , Russian Bonds, 1821 Ditto Account Ditto Metallic Spanish Bonds 49,4 9 ;. 2 Ditto Account 49% 3 4 Ditto Bonds, 1834 Ditto Account French, 5 per cent c --- 4 per cent. f. ---- 3 per cent. --- Exchange —f —c. Dutch, 2% per cent. 51%1% 4 Ditto Account Ditto, 5 per cent. lOl% Ditto Account I'itICES OF SHARE:, THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK. Paid. Per Share. Alten Mining Company £lN P2W ( andonga Mining Company 7k.,; 7 • MAILS Arrived. Due. Arrived. Due Arrived, Due. 0 America 0 1 France 0 0 Lisbon 0 1 Brazil 0 BuenosAyres... 0 0 Hamburg 0 0 Mexico 0 n Cartlixgena 0 0 Holland 1 Dublin 0 0 Jamaica 0 Flanders 0 0 Leeward Islands 0 1 Waterford 0 • HIGH ATEEt AT LONDON BRIDGE klorning... ...... 12 minutes after 11. f Evening.... ~.51 minutes after 11 HAMBURG, Jinx 21, 1835. NOTICE is hereby given, that the Tickets of the 66th HAMBURG GREAT LOTTERY, guaranteed by the Hamburg State, at 81 . a Ticket, that w ill b e d rawn on t h e 12th of next month (August), ARE NEARLY ALL CLEARED OFF; And that the undersigned Contractors decline, as usual, to take any English orders for any thing less than a whole Ticki.t, the Corre spondence for single shares being too troublesome, and not worth the postages. To persons remitting 101. without delay, 2/. will be returned on executing the order by return of Post, and without much increas ing the postage. HEINE BROTHERS, Direct, Heine Brothers, in Hamburg. P. S.—ln the last (65th) Lottery, the Capital Prizes came up to the following Tickets!— Bancomarks, No. 2,328 sold in Hamburg 3,277 sold to Limerick 5,427 sold to Riga 1,620 sold in Hamburg for account of a London house 3,451 sold to Liverpool ... lO,OOO The Prizes of the Hamburg Great Lottery, are since the last Lottery payable without any deduction whatever, and at the present Exchange Bancomarcs 55 are equal to 4/. The publication of THE SUN NEWSPAPER commenced this day at 5 minutes past 4 o'clock. t <~~ )lIITY AND MINORITY, Amendment, that Evidence be heard against Nlunieipal Corporatiori MAJORITY. FA It t. 3 nolleaSter Falmouth Glengall Harduicke I larewood llarnngton Hai row by I i illshorough 1 ewe Jersey Lune. :ck Liverlwol Lon dale Mansfield Movers Morton POWis I'oulett Ross • Itosslyn Sandwich Shale-bury Selk'rk St (.:r: - main's ken. il le Vane Vet slam Westmoreland Wicklow Wilt. n LORDS. Colville Cowlev De Tablcy lkitigbis of Douglas I)ownes Dynevor Fl;lenborough Farnham Fitz_er.ihl Fit z g . &Jon Foi Les I'err ,ter Gage Harris Ha, leytesbury Kenyon In first iMaiiners Marvborough ;Well os, Monson North wick Ormolu le Pensh,rst Prudhoe havensworth Ileay Iteclesdale Saltoun Sheffield Sinclair Skehnersdale Stewart of Carlies ;quail de liothsa .:iterden Wharncl Ire \Vi Hoeg .Ie Willoughby d'Eresby LORDS. Alvanley Ashburton Bayning Berwick Bexley 13(hton Cm,len Carl cry ColLhester MINORITY. EARLS. Charlernont Thalia Morley Scarborough Minto Lich field Ilchester ISC °PMTS. Dui icannon 'fort ington Hood LORDS. PoDimon!. Howland Say and Sole Dude Kra Ills Howard of Effingham Li ford Sornerhill Hatherton Foley Gknelg Sefton Segrave Seaf rd Mostyn Clements Templemore Salway Loftus. Auckland Brougham Teynham Plunkett Stratford Holland Howden Falmouth Ti That resign, Office Success Court o tort of ' DAT A 4.] T the c 4u WOOL ,eight, i z iounds 'the 11t1 A M. etttble, the oret %Is of 54 the ,0 ''‘`ehol Partil an Sout Cl nn Inn ; W oodbu NI Inns Vacation Ede Geo 4 Pplic Übkers, GE . ~,~tH -4 111ist, ers '''bger I R ater di 3 1 . Per ( -4ose n • I Powders, 4 tllers ar; "W Ftr av ," B Cfilit 4 met with Porer,. llac the p ac an ordi n and at / I "e!d sin Articles their p A p atent i ° l_Purit snort ea th e a nd physicia 4 . `"ce it: ") It the y raatterou Ported'fri " Ar r ani urit Y of natty9ll I'. • Itigi titieS, VV Peculiar agreeabl tlfyi nrr 4 1. Th e street w ,,ere tl cotou. Per t ra l ent to delivery