The Sun. — London, England, 1842-07-29 00:00:00

cnta - in the ion ; and se claims, in the confidence tted by s i i our, would be made, y more op !r had el; stion only , sted, hotir• t construe ch he had :e as-to the ntent NN-0 the assay ed to sleep ent. cool' vs a Goverl; p m tpones , rich, hat' as.sure lad .fferings of ..) What' sure that )ond to th,e, 'ranee and [LL. 4uER, the 1) _, 1 said tio' )lving t he a . Prq er in unicatio n esent sta te ortance of he found a into - thi s at he ills° 'ceme nt 01 Bill which 'resent one, 3 which be Iropriety ,stponed• '0 T.IO the Ilon' was o° ll ' ast. -eportiP o er give De? 0 A : L rel imPrrj 11 0 1 , a D er to 0 ," 3ill th sive tb v lat sin ce . ~nsive t till th e stituevd e2 c : F ractis t periv- ill wel4 of 1 4°1 5e of t" ems'd e f ; ieral -° to brim b ecOl'' •Id O S ' 1/4 t CO g rf e ' , by !_vteu s it . con' there a nd !t tool' obrnen t u pon. ig 0 P" artber, hol,V • c • of en W as T ( '" A i 2 51 ).- 1 abject. easure er of th the that ti the it in ion of ought .t7 , 2•' T.H.E SUN, LON DON, FRIDAY MORNING, JULY 29, 1842. l l crhaPs by some that it was sufficient if the ship- Owner or merchant himself was satisfied with the c oMmander's capacity, but' let the House bear in 4411 -1 that passengers who went out in ships, 40 (1_:the country generally, were interested in the, ; c apabilities and qualifications of captains of vessels. 4 „ . _• t oe length of a passage depended almost en- Autay- -upon the judgment, skill in navigation, 444(1 -2practical seamanship of the captain, and from the 1410 e the vessel left the shores of our country 10;itil its arrival in a foreign port, the • s of all ou board were in his hands. • once met a ship in the Pacific Ocean, which was 'or seven degrees out of her longitude, and upon ~lus asking the Captain how it was, he replied, " why, we do not come here to navigate, we come here .to fish." Wh a t h e wou ld pr o p os e wa s, th a t B o ard s o f "a miners should be appointed in England, Scotland, ' z edireland, consisting of three examiners each ; that there s h ou ld b e a p r i nci p a l exam i ner , an d a secre t ary ; that that principle examiner should have the choice 4 f the execu ti ve managemen t o f th e w h o l e s y s t em , that system to be approved by the Trinity House and Put under the control of the Board of Trade. These '4Ol1 -liners to be all of them practical seamen, having tr memanded ships in the merchant service a certain d umber of years ; one of the three should have been in t he southern hemisphere, another employed in the °lasting, and the third have been employed in steam leuels. This was in order that they should c bine practical knowledge and experience. ' l ce expenses to be defrayed by moderate tte s, and be paid by each officer examined upon re eivinghis certificate of qualification. The fee for a mast er to be for a certificate entitling him to go to 44 .!Partof the world ; the master of a coasting vessel, "ingshort-voyages; 21., and mates 30s. ; and the mates ` I t F toasting - vessels 11. No one could complain of these fies when they considered that the pilots in the river hainespaid three guineas for a less time, it being t hree guineas annually, and in other parts of the tigdom they paid three and two guineas annuallyfor • e• tr license, therefore no one could complain of a " 0 of three -guineas for a lifetime. This Bill would 4 '2 t apply to persons now in employment ; they '°,old only be required to furnish a certificate of exa lpea.tion, f or w hi c h th e y wou ld p a y 10 s . an d ma t es s s . tovisio n would be found in the:Bill, for meeting, as It toch as possible, all the objections urged by practical me n ' on the subject, and he thought he might go so as to say, that some who were averse to the ,„l e asure had, in consequence- of the various Pins that had taken place, and the -,, r441 s proposed to meet the ola:ections, given • all their former opposition. They all felt it not a measure that should be dealt with by any rate individual, but one that ought to be taken up t the Government. The Hon. Member concluded K Y: asking leave to bring in the Bill to which he td . referred, not with a view to proceed with it her in the present session, but that it might Printed and circulated through the country, in 'tiler that the objections entertained to it might be 7 1 3: considered. 11: 4 1*. A. CHAPMAN seconded the introduction of Ze Bill, but in doing so he begged 'to be understood li t to pl e d ge hi mse lf t o th e d e t a il s o f th e measure . e would take its provisions into consideration, and, 41the course of the next session, when the measure 010),.4 again b r o u ght forw ar d, h e wou ld s t a t e hi s opi upon them. 41 • 1 *. GLADSTZ)NE said it was desirable that d i ne l ne measure like the present should be passed to b a law by Parliament, but he thought the Ject ought to be duly considered before Par ;Zent was. called upon to adjudicate on the .11 Jeo. He thought the course proposed by the 1:11ourable Member was the best the House could tir f s tle, and he should, therefore, most cordially con ?-ff the motion of his Hon. Friend. -,,„1r T. TROUBRID GE a pp rove d o f th e c o urse pro ''''sej to be pursued by the Hon. Member. ~• HUMFI thought they would derive great be e from the experience of the Gallant Officer, and e ,hould, therefore, R give the measure his support. _ir G. COCKBUN said it would be necessary to 71n Sir ly into . * question, before giving any decision 14 °4 , it. If the Bill was brought in, printed, circu eQ(l) and read by th ose i n t eres t e d in it, he should v e no objection, but should be quite prepared to tlicler it, and, in another session, give his decision 1341 0 it. • . - -.4eaVe was given to bring in the Bilk Ro E E L B ECTION COMPROMISES. 'hi c h h e h ROEBUCK K rose to move the resolutions of said he shouldad have notice on the previous day. He having to o ave been glad, if possible, to have but avoided come forward on this occasion; t 4 it was abs o l u t e l y necessary , a ft er th e urse that h a d b een taken, that some steps should taken at th e c l ose of the session. When he • t stated iii . the House that he had heard certain 1. 1 1 1 0 , ours respecting certain individuals in that llOuse, itliouse believed those statements to be so extraor- Zry, so remarkable, and so important in their that it appointed a Committee of inquiry to aseer- Civhether they were well founded or not. The House t'Z'further passed a Bill giving some extraordinary jiZers to the Committee so appointed. He conceived tdionse would not have taken that course unless it had •#;l,7_tved•the'inquiry was an important one, and he felt t e 7 1 . 1 they came to the close of the proceedings that N,._°light not to shrink from a , necessary duty.. He N w came down to the House to ask it to say aye or to the assertions he then made, to ask it whether knot h e had made out all the statements he had made hat House a few-weeks since, and whether, if they been so made out, the House was now willing to It t t contented with those assertions, or to proceed flir t!, and adopt measures to protect the honour and "Kuity o f the House.—(Hear, hear.) When he first s, i tle that statement, much surprise was expressed by t kin parties, and various exceptions were taken as to tnode of proceeding. It had been said that the first 4:kn.:te n t he made was scandalous on Hon. Members. tl i tll e Hon. Members came down to the House with I v 4 0 words on their lips, that they were slandered. It 1 43 now for the House to determine whether those Hon. T ,:rnbers were slandered or not.— (Hear, hear.) But, Ai l the other hand, it had been said, supposing this was true, yet all the world knew is :t e lt !' a thing done every day ; there was ne harm 11 ,, • But the House did not take that view of the sub ‘. The House thought it was a very serious subject, l et its character was very much compromised by it, and i t 4 t it ought to be inquired into, and now it had been litlitir e d into accordingly. Let him then recal to the b u llse, first, the statement he had made, then very sue tirtly the proof that he had laid before them, and upon trot l et hi m as k t h e H ouse w h et h er any course cou ld b e i i,l ) osed better than he was about to submit to them, t, O a due consideration for the parties implicated, and Ilgeep sense of the honour and dignity of the House. Le,stat e d that in one of those cases a compromise had i ; sq . , that one of the Members had agreed to retire from t,h 4 seat. He recollected the indignant denial made b) . 4, 1 10 n. and Gallant Member opposite (Major Beres e'). lie (Mr. R.) was almost startled by the dignified tude of the Hon. and Gallant Member ; for, not con 0. with the simple negation which he gave, he sZinit to make charges against others, charges A o "teh were neglected at the time, as they ought L a be, and which had n o w p a ss e d by.— (H ea r, b i a t) Were not the charges he-made substantiated ? 40 (1 not one of the Hon. Members for Harwich—he was 1: obliged to -distinguish them by their names—did ia Mr. Attwood pay 2,5001., as he said, " out and out," eerder to withdraw from the consideration of the Com ei(ltce that disclosure which afterwards took place? and t „,, he not bind himself to retire from his seat by ac eting the Chiltern Hundreds?—(Hear, hear.) Both }, i ts had been proved, and they were the facts which he ,N stated could be proved. He would now enter upon consideration of the spirit in which the inquiry was t",?(Ie. When he first made those charges, lie was met angry hostility; still he persevered, and he now be b*lVecl that many of the Hon. Gentlemen who entered 41trl those compromises were unwittingly and un the victims of a vicious system, and 41 they did well to lay bare the system, g for himself he felt no enmity to those Hon. Gentle- I t e h, but feelings of sympathy with them.—(Hear, bear.) bl o , ; ' Was glad to say that most of those Hon. Gentlemen, (th slight exceptions, had cone forward and stated in tadid manner to the Committee, and voluntarily v cqt, that evidence which they could not obtain from kl 5' other source.—(Hear, hear.) For this they de ttavod well of their country, and, if being made the vic q4 of a bad system, they had done wrong to enter into ° 4 O compromises, they more than justified themselves tt Y 4 teming forward in 'the manner they had done, and ting to the House and the country such evidence as ".s tein. them to have ?tern. Therefore, as a perception of the mischief of the far as he was individually. eon ;‘,Tled, he had no feelings of hostility, and the resolutions ti, , ch he would lay before the House were of a prospec n nature, not referring back to any proceedings which 4 , 4 taken place, but- directing their future conduct, _, casting no blame nor reflecting in any way those who had been concerned in those (ompromises, 0 providing against future mischief.—(Hear, hear.) tYery word he had uttered with respect to those corn nilises had been justified before the House. lit Bear, exaggerated in on e tittl e o f wh a t he h a d sttied 41, 11 ear, hear)—and that be had fully prove": 3 ,—more trri proved— a ll hi s asser ti ons . Th e Hon. 7 14. ember for : 6 1, 1 criti was particularly conspicuous in throwing a broad .` 4 !eitl over those practices which had c;nne before thce bi u jnitittee, and bad come forward P„d their first cham• --(Cries of " Hear, hear.") He stated that 'that kh _,ltse had really nothing to coo with those practices, -Co_ that the dignity or character of the House the not impugned by them. But what would t .' country say to bribing the poor constituenc ktte t s lins disgracine;, debauching, and destroying, anti th- 'wards shiele.ting themselves by quibbling or buying W o ril .e elve s out of the difficulty ?—(Cheers.) Would the w A s the eaoughtful people—the really honest people te the cour.try consider such conduct either honourable th e "Ise ) .ves or beneficial to the country ? lie believed o,.:°„un:cry would say that the grand and chief criminal ‘,„2 4 '.0 briber.—(Hear, hear.) They could not expect %,;,:rt,ellous morality in the people, unless their leaders, IV,', those who sat in high places, had an exalted Leo %goy ; and if those who represented learned bodies, and to g_e Who represented high constituencies, exhibited a (lif_tipt morality, they would have a cotrupt people.— h o „!_ar, hear.) No matte,' how great was the ttbility— tu: a respectable the reputation of the Hon. Gentle ""' " ( 11 4. Roebick) would be the first to brand with indignant reprobation any person who would be found defend such a base and pitiful morality.— (Hear, heif.) The briber was the great (Hear, heir.) Who was the greater crimintd—toe great man who went down to a poor constituency, and, finding some man pressed with want, having a large family, offered him a bribe to sell his conscience and his country—(Hear)— or the poor unfortunate wretch who yielded to the temptation held out by his base corruptors "—(Cheers.) Let them have a high morality and they would have a virtuous people; and let them not sneer, and refine away, as the necessary results of the circumstances under which they were labouring, or any other vague and rounded generalities, those practices which had taken. place.—(Hear.) If they did the people would under stand them. If they did not think the giving of the bribe was a crime, the people would not think the taking of it one ; and if they were content with bribery let them have no bribery laws—let them have no hypo crisy about it.—(Hear, hear.) They had far too much of that. They passed from half-past four o'clock in the evening until early next morning discussing a Bribery Bill, notwithstanding which, a candidate would go down to-morrow to bribe a constituency.—(Cheers.) Dis guise it as they would, cloak it as they might, the fact was, that as regarded bribery they had hitherto been a band of hypocrites.—(Cheers.) He had stated in his place, that cases of the grossest bribery, flagrant breaches of the ordinary rules of law, had escaped froni detec tion. Whit had been the reply to him ? You are tell ing us nothing new. Why do you snake such a fuss about it ?—it is nothing but nlhat we all knew before. Go into the Lobby, and every Member will laugh under your nose at you. When the Committee was appointed, it was asked, what will you do with your Committee ? We wish you joy of the inquiry. The House would have thrown him overboard, if the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Goveimnent had not stood by him. — (Opposition cheers.) He (Mr. Roebuck) was not in clined to flatter, but the thanks of the country were due to the Right lion. Baronet for his conduct on that occa sion.—(Opposition cheers.) If the Right lion. Baronet had not done so, he (Mr. Roebuck) would never have got this Committee.—:Continued cheering from the Opposition,) He nevei should have got it, if the Right Hon. Baronet had not stood by him • and the Right lion. Baronet was deserving of the applause of the country for his conduct on that occasion. —(Loud Opposition cheers.) In spite of everything, they had been enabled, by means of the inquiries instituted by that Committee, to obtain a complete 'account and ex posure of a most base and degrading system. They should lay aside everything like personal consideration ; with individuals they had no concern ; they ought not to look back to the past but forward to the future. It was necessary to refer to some of these cases—he did not refer to them as matter of personal consideration, but as illustrative of a system. An Hon. Gentleman goes down to a borough with 5,000/. in his pocket ; the constituency consist of 150, and he. takes an Hon. and Gallant Friend with him. He wants no bribery—he knows nothing at all about it—he never intended it. His eyes are so delicate that he cannot see it ; his sensibility • is so acute, his sense of honour so nice, that he will not hear a word about it. Elect me Member for the borough, he says, but do not let me know the means by which I am elected ; there is I,oool.—there, take it—go away, ind let me know know nothing more until you let me now that I am Member for Harwich.—(Cheers.) No doubt such an Hon. Gentleman was correct in stating that he knew nothing of any bribery. No doubt he might .say that he did not know it ; but he would ask, could any one, as an ordinary man of business, not know to what purpose it was intended to appropriate that money ? It was as clear as the sun at noon-nay, that he must have known that that sum must have been put as into conduit pipe, through which it descended into several smaller pipes, until it percolated through the whole con stituency.—(Cheers.) Who but must have known that it was employed in the grossest and most debasing bribery? The Hon. Gentlemen goes through the streets, he sees his colours displayed at beer-shops, he knows nothing about it—no doubt he has his opinion that so large )'sum of money must have been employed in that way, but he knows nothing about it. Doubtless, legally speaking, he knew nothing about it ; but was not that man just as wrong as if he had gone more openly, More avowedly, more barefacedly, and bribed the constituency with his own hands? The late law suffered this state of things, but ti.e Act introduced last year by the Noble Lord the Member for London, had had the effect of leading to the. detection and exposure of this system. But having been so far successful in one attempt, should they not go still further ? He believed that the Bribery Bill passed last night, shorn though it was of its most efficient clauses through the somewhat over-technical feelings of his Hon. and Learned Friend the Solicitor- General, would have a beneficial effect. But if they went on in the course they were now pursuing without making any change, bribery, which the Hon. Member for Oxford said he did not consider as so very great a sin Sir R. INGLIS appealed to Hon. Members who had heard him, if such were his words. He had said that he odridimninotalrietgya_rdthbartibheorydiads notthe concentr a ted look ur oi essence i b r i bery as being great a sin as murder. • Mr. ROEBUCK •was obliged to the Hon. Gentleman for his explanation. He was sure the Hon. Gentleman would give him credit for not having any desire to mis represent what fell from the Hon. Member. He (Mr. Roebuck) must have an inaccurate recollection of what he had heard. But he still felt that there was a sort of turning given to the statement of the Hon. Gentleman of which he (Mr. Roebuck) could not approve. It was not the concentrated essence of crime —it was not equal to murder ! That was -a sort of exaggerated phraseology which went far, by a side-wind sneer, to, depreciate the value of the operations against bribery. He did not like that mode of speaking. The question was, was this bribery a thing to be put down, or was it not ?—was it mischievous to the community, or was it not ? If it were mischievous to the commu nity, let them see if they could put it down, and do not let them use such exaggerated language as that he had just quoted. Was it a matter to take into their con sideration for the purpose of remedying it ? That was the simple reasonable view of it. If so, why was that vast farrago of language launched against him ? Why should they not rather join together and endeavour to put down the practice ? There was one argument used on this subject to which he gave every possible atten tion—he meant the argument advanced by those who as signed 'as a reason for retiring from the icontest the enormous expense to which they would be subjected. But that should not draw off others from the inquiry. He would refer to the five boroughs to which his inquiry ,extended to explain his views on the question—to show that it was fear of discovery, not fear of expense, that deterred persons from pursuing the contest. At one of these cases the party having learned from his agent that bribery would be proved, paid 2,000/. to get rid of the inquiry, and the 'agent employed was so strongly pressed with the danger of the inquiry, that he added 500L—(Hear, hear)—so that at the present moment 2,5001. had been paid to get rid of the inquiry. —(Hear.) Was it not, he would ask, a remarkable thing that a person like the Hon. Member for Reading should agree to pay 2,0001. upon that which was not certain ? This showed that the inquiry was dreaded ; • the thing dreaded was the inquiry, and nothing else— (Hear, hear)—and it was as clear es the sun at noonday that there was something behind hand of which all were afraid. Was it not, therefore, he would ask, the duty of the House to come Forward and say that it was determined that in all such cases as he had mentioned, it would deem the proceedings he had described as a gross violation of the rights of the people, and a gross breach of the privileges of the House? 'Now, he would take the case of Lewes, there the party who was placed at the head of the poll, was, at first, far down in the list. Now, how, he would ask, was such a change effected ? Why, one witness stated that it was done by shuttlecocking the votes. Was that, he would ask, the way to deal with the franchise, and was the House prepared to give such a measure its sanction ? It was wise for the House to consider in the first place the great interests of the nation—the interests of the voters ; and in the next place, as representing the peo ple, they ought to consider such proceedings on the part of any one as a gross infringement of their privileges. He would ask the House to consider for a moment the danger to the character of that House from the exposure which had been made of the mode in which Members were elected. The Hon. Member for Pontefract, whom he did not see in his place, had said that his (Mr. Roe buck's) object was to bring that House into contempt. Now that was not his object. His object was to bring into contempt a bad system. He did not care whether that House was or was not affected by that proceeding ; if the House was implicated in a bad system he could not help it. He would ask the House what the world would think when they found men, in private life, of un blemished honour on both sides—men who might be trusted with untold gold, going down, and for mere party ptirposes, in the heat of party politics, debasing, debauch ing, destroying the whole constituency; and not a whole constituency alorie, but a whole town ; promoting drunkenness, crime, confusion, terror, and every species of immorality, under the sacred name of making laws for the people ? The evil had come to a crisis, and it could not be suffered to continue, for it would bring the House into con tempt with the people. If they hoped to do any good for the nation it must be by ruling the minds of thu people, and lead ing them to love the institutions under which tbey lived. But their love for the Institutions of the country would be converted to hatred, if, after the scenes which had been described, after the terrible secrets which had been evolved by this Committee, the House did not feel it incumbent on them to do something more than indulge in a sneer and a laugh at the painful expo sure which • had been made. He thought he had now said enough, though he had avoided, as much as pos sible, going into a dissection of the evidence, believing that all his charges had been proved; but he thought he had said enough for his justification in bringing forward this ques tion, and in support of the two propositions which he had sub- I mitted to the House. He now asked whether it would be wise, in the peculiar circumstances of the case, to issue a writ for any one of the five towns first submitted to the consideration of the Committee, before they had further safeguards for the protec tion of the voters? He put it in that form designedly. He did not want to protect the candidates, they could protect them selves ; but he wanted to protect the voters against that system which was employed for the purpose of debasing the constituencies. What was there to protect the voters of Nottingham from the same scenes described in the present evidence ? Let them get a better state of things, and then they might issue a writ, but till then he would call on them to pause. He alluded to the readiness with which the inquiry of the Committee had been met by the different parties, with one exception (we believe the Member for Reading, but the Member for Bath was very indis tinct), and he believed that the recusant gentleman was quite as guilty as the rest. He concluded by moving the following resolutions:—" That the compromises of election petitions, as brought to the knowledge of this House by the Report of the Select Committee on election proceedings, must, if for the future they be allowed to pass without punishment or censure, tend to bring this House into contempt with the people, and thereby seriously to diminish its power and authority. That all such practices are hereby declared to be a violation of the liberties of the people, and a breach of the privileges of this House, which it will in all future cases strictly inquire into and severely punish. 'Tina whereas in • cuens for Har wigh,Nottingham, Lewes, Reading, Falmouth and Penryn, and Bridport, the present lain; have been found insufficient to pro. tect the eetere frlim tha misehievoiit teriiptetions of bribery. it be ordered that Mr. Speaker do issue no writ for any election of Members for the said towns, till further legislative enactments have been adopted to protect the purity of elections." Mr. C. RUSSELL said that as long as his conduct wts under consideration he had abstained from making any obser vations. When the Honourable Member for Bath thought proper to interrogate as to certain transactions 'to Whitn he was pleased to affix the epithet of corrupt, lie had refused to answer the question, because he believed it was the only course he could adopt consistently with his own inde pendence; the Speaker ton had decided that the Member for Bath had neither right nor precedent to put the question. He had offered no opposition to the appointment of the Committee as he had no wish to shrink from investigation, but he did now enter his solemn protest against this unjust and tom cedented proceeding. He felt it to be his duty to his consti tuents to resist any resolutions that might be founded upon them. He objected to the Hon. Member for Bath, as an Weft person to be entrusted with such an enquiry from his strong predetermined opinions; he having declared that he wonlit fix and crucify them before the people. Had not the Hon. Mem ber for Bath, also, sold his Parliamentary services for money ? (" No, no," from Mr. Roebuck.) Did he mean to deny it ? Mr. ROEBUCK—Certainly, I do. Mr. RUSSELL—It was universally believed that he had done so. Mr. ROEBUCK said whoever had told the Hon. Member so had told him a falsehood. Mr. RUSSELL said it was universally believed that the Hon. Member for Bath had sold his Parharneetaxy services to the Canadian rebels. Mr. ROEBUCK said the best answer to that was that he was rot in the House when Canada was in rebellion. The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member for Reading must withdraw the expressions he bad used. Mr- RUSSELL would unquestionably do so, if the Hon. Member denied it. He proceeded to object to the constitution of the Committee and the manner in ss hich the inquiry was conducted ; it was secret, was not sworn, nor could swear others, and was totally irresponsible. The Hon. Member for Bath made himself their accuser; and the House had consti tuted him their judge. He allowed that he and the. Members of the Committee had showed the utmost personal urbanity, but he believed it proceeded as much from policy as disposition. He would ask, not offensively, how. many of the constituency of the country were entitled to cast. the first stone ?—( Hear, hear.) It was notorious not only that thousands, but hundreds of thousands, had been spent in contests for counties.—( Hear, hear.) \l as it not a fact that Roman Catholic families had become rich, because the law had prevented them from spend ing their wealth in contested elections? Were not the large constituencies, such as Bath, bribed by the promise of their in tended representatives ? He did not mean from these observe.' tions to say that bribery was a crime the House could not touch; he meant no such thing. Let them improve the law, but let them not select a few private individuals and wreak their vengeance upon them. He was as anxious as any man to suppress bribery, but he was not prepared to break through one great principle for the purpose of establishing another. He was _prepared to legislate with the Noble Lord the Mem ber for Tiverton, but not the inverted maxim of the Hon. Member for Bath, that they should bribe in order to punish. —( Hear, hear.) He believed for these evils there was a sure remedy. Let them surrender a privilege they could not exer cise with satisfaction to themselves or justice to others ; let them give to the Judges of the land the exercise of the ordinary law. —( Hear, hear.) If they would adopt these measures they would ensure the confidence of the people of England. Major 13ERESFORD said, that the object of the on and Learned Member in moving for the Committee, and in drawing up the Report, might be said to be to make the country dis contented with the representative system, and to endeavour to bring the House into disrespect. He would not attempt any further to discover what were the motives of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, but he would state what, as far as he (Major Beresford) was concerned, were the real facts of the case. The Hon. and Learned Member in relation to him (Major Beresford) had got Up and talked about slander, and said that he (Major B.) had alluded to what had passed on a former occasion when he (Mr. Roebuck) had put questions to different Members. On that occasion, he (Major ilereeford) had said that the Hon. Member had no right to ask him such a question. The Hon. and Learned Member had accused him of slander. Now, if the Hon. Member would procure him a Committee armed with the same stringent powers as the Com mittee he had procured for himself, he ( Major' Beresford) would undertake to prove every accusation he had made.—(Cheers.) The first day the Hon. and Learned Member had brought for ward his accusation, he had accused him (Major B.) of a cor rupt compromise of bribery and of treating Now, he would call upon the Hon. and Learned Member to point out what portion of the evidence he relied on to bring that charge home to him. He denied that he had had anything to do with bribery and treating, and he denied that he had had anything to do with a corrupt compromise. The only compro mise he had engaged in was this : He certainly did engage to retire rather than that his colleague should be forced to do so, in the event of one of them being obliged to resign his scat, because his colleague had been at all the expense of the elec tion, and he felt, that if one must go, it ought to be the per son who had not paid.—( Opposition cheers.) He repeated, he was utterly innocent of bribery in any way, and, if he had chosen to defend his seat, he could have done so with suc cess, for he felt that he was innocent of bribery, corruption, and treating. He would just call the attention of the House to certain parts of the Report and evidence. At page 4of the Report it was stated that a compromise had been entered into between the agents of the parties concerned, with the consent of the principals. Be denied that any compromise had been entered into between his agent and the agent of Sir Denis Le Merchant. He had never entered into any negotiation with the agent of Sir Denis Le Merchant. Ho had written a letter to Mr. Attwood, which he had given to Mr. Currie, as Mr. Attwood's agent, stating that if one was to retire he (Major Beresford) would be that one. He denied that he gave that to Mr. Currie as his ( Major Beres ford's) agent. In the evidence of Mr. 1. Parkes, p. 24, it would appear as if Mr. Currie was his agent; but Mr. Currie was not his agent, and, as a proof, he would state that while the Committee required Mr. Currie to bring tip the names of the persons who had been briVed, which were stated in his brief, he refused to give them up withotit the consent of his principal, but having got the consent of Mr. Attwood, he gave up the names without consulting him (Major Beresford), which was a proof that. Mr. Currie did not consider himself as his (Major Beresford's) agent. He, therefore, trusted the House would consider that allegation as unsupported by evidence. He denied that he had been any party to a compro• miss, except by that letter to Mr. Attsvood. He had given up his seat because he had not the means of defending it, and because he felt that, in honour to his colleague, he was bound to re sign rather than suffer his colleague's seat to be perilled. He was not ashamed to confess that he was not a wealthy man, and could not afford to defend his scat, but if he could have af forded it he bad no doubt he could have done so successfully, for he felt that he was innocent himself, and he kmew that the petitioners had not come before the Committee with clean hands. They had asked for the seats. If they had asked for a void election he should have felt secure of his re election, for he should have felt perfectly secure, as he felt now, in again going before the electors of Harwich, The Hon. and Gallant Member then commented upon that part of the evidence relating to the late Mr. Cox, who was said to be a medium through which bribes were conveyed. He (Major Beresford) knew that Mr. Cox was incapable of such conduct, and if he knew that such evidence was to be adduced before the Com mittee, he would have taken means to contradict it. The Committee had, by their Report, cast a brand into the breast of a young and interesting female, and who was about to be come a widowed mother. The evidence showed that only about 80 individuals had been bribed; but if even so many were bribed, that was not a large portion of a constituency consisting of 182.—(Much laughter.) The Hon. Member then referred to Question 205, page 18, of the evidence relating to an answer giver, by Mr. Parkes, to the effect that he knew a person who was offered 5001. for his vote in 1837. The only person to whom he could refer was Mr. Rumnacles, who gave his casting vote in favour of Mr. Herries and Captain Ellis. Mr. Rumnacles held a situation in the Board of Customs, and, tearing that he would be brought into trouble if he gave his vote, he hesitated for some time, but towards four o'clock, being a person of Con servative principles. he at length gave his vote. He voted for Mr. Herries, in order to conciliate strong assistance, in case his voting brought him into any trouble ; and for Mr. Ellis, in order that the expense and trouble of a petition might be avoided. The Hon. Gentleman then read a letter from left. Rumnacles, denying that he was ever offered any money. It had been the talk of every Club in London, that the Committee of the other candidate had been bought for Mr. Attwood and himself; and this had not been denied by those who knew it to be false. He begged to state that the Committee of his adversaries voted for his adversaries. The woids " veni, vidi, viei " had also been applied to him. In reply to that he begged to state that he was in constant communication with 182 of the electors for fourteen days. He trusted that the Home would excuse him for having detained them so long with his own private affairs, and that they would come to the conclusion that as all was not gold that glittered, so all was not corrupt that was calum niated.--( Hear, hear. ) Captain FITZROY wished to correct one or two misstate• merits in the Report. He would particularly call the attention of the House to the item 'elating to the agreement that all actions and indictments for bribery on both sides should be a ithdrawn. Any one who read that agreement would imagine that it was from fear of personal con sequences that he consented to the compromise. Now in page 1140 he stated to the Committee that the only arrangement entered into was that Mr. Harford gave up, and after that all cross actions for bribery should cease. Mr. Briggs, the lawyer for the °posing party, when questioned with respect to the indictments and cross actions being dropped, stated that that was not the basis of the agreement. There were two cases of actions for bribery. In one of those cases he caught the party in the act of paying the bribe. The instant he discovered it, the opposite party got up a sham action against him, to prevent him from being prosecuted by those who had caught him in the fact. He thought it rather hard, under these circumstances, that that should be stated to be part of the agreement. Now, he must say he thought it rather strange that the Committee - bad neither ex amined his agent in London, nor his agent in the conduct of the petition. They had called Mr. Clark, who was a partner in the same firm as his agent, but they appeared to kave stu diously avoided calling the agent himself. He thought it would have been only fair to have examined his agent in Lewes, and his agent in carrying on the petition, to see whether his statements were borne out. As to the statements which had been made with respect to the constitution of the clubs, the hardship in that respect aeose from the manner in which the investigation had been dlalducted, namely, with closed doors. With respect to treating, he begged to state that he bad received a letter from Lewes that morning, stating that there had been no hot, suppers since the time of the Reform Bill. Mr. ESCOTT said he had been opposed to the mode of conducting the inquiry, but. the House having sanctioned it he did not think he would be justified on that account in voting against case, the except twofir th st atof h resolutions. islon H. Friendethou (Captaingh ttheeviden evidence in every Fitzroy) was perfectly satisfactory ; he did not think there was any proof that his Honourable Friend had been cognisant of corrrupt practices ; on the contrary he thought he came free from the inquiry. The other cases were totally different, and it appeared to him that the gravest part of the charge was that such compromises went to turn over a constituency to parties whom they did not elect to represent them, and this trifled with the rights of the electors of England. He would now state why Ile could not vote for the first resolution. He could not do so because he believed it would be a virtual disfranchise ment of those towns, and because there was no proof that the majority of the electors had accepted bribes. He could not understand how, with a view to public liberty, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman could now propose to dis franchise the electors of those towns, without having proved the majority of them guilty. And even if the majority were proved guilty, why punish the whole of the electors? The Compro mise Election Committee had entered upon its duties with a view to further legislation ; but the evidence brought before it had not been made use of for that purpose. Under all those circumstances he thought' it inexpedient to withhold the fran chise from those towns. He would vote for the two first reso lutions, because he thought the proceedings they referred to ought not to pass without censure. PLUMRIDGE asked whether he ought to be included among those subjected to the censure of the House, when, ac cording to the Report of the Committee, the arrangements which were condemned in his case were made without his knowledge. If the Right Hon. Baronet., at the head of the Government, were in his place, he would ask him whether, after the Report of the Committee, he (Mr. Plumridge) ought to apply for the Chiltern Hundreds, and thereby carry out the compromise. Mr. BLACKSTONE could not, as there was such a tri bilnal in the House as an Election Committee, consent to the sweeping denunciation of compromises as being a violation of the liberty of the subject and of the privileges of that House. The Hen. Member for Harwich had stated that he was not a man of much wealth, and that it would be impossible for him, in case of a petition against his return, to- defend his seat on account of the extraordinary expense which his doing so would entail on him. He (Mr. Blackstone) could not, therefore, agree to the last resolution. Mr. LASCELLES, who was thoroughly inaudible from the low tone in which he spoke, was understood to say that the reso lutions had been agreed to on the authority of the Chairman and not of the Committee generally. The Committee had been appointed to investigate certain charges, without its being intended that any criminatory proceedings should be taken against individual parties. He bore testimony to the impartiality with which the Chairman had conducted the investigation and drawn up the Report. Lord CHELSEA, who was also very indistinctly heard, complained of certain parties being selected in this matter for the purpose of their being held up to public contumely. If any Hon. Member bad complained of the prevalence of such prac tices as it was now sought to condemn, and had called on any oth.r Hon, Members to aid him in carrying a measure to pre vent. the continuance of those practices, he was sure no Hon. Gentleman would refuse so to do. In the present case, he must say that notoriety might be bread and meat to the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, but was poison to him (Lord Chelsea). ib,e. r l eb r p . ,:an W t efl: r th eu s a ern i d ao that dra ,alc tol e e ra n a g,enre,a in allegations s o i n r e, b int r dh i b ot e uh r te y a as m yi e i e g mo h e - t proceeding to a legislative remedy i n consequence , if it had ot oi her for Bath coming forward as he had. He never knew of any person having such a ta-k to perform who bad acquitted himself with the concurrent favourable testimony of all, as the Hon. Gentleman had. He asked now what was to be done with the Report ? Could anything be more indispensible than the proposal of his Hon. Friend ? Corrupt practices had taken place, and was the House to pronounce no opinion upon them? If the Right Hon. Baronet were here, he believed his opinion would serve to guide other Members on this occasion; and, indeed, from what had fallen from him last night, he expected he would do so in the right direction. He trusted her Ma• jesty's Government would support the resolutions ; and whether ther they did so or not, if the House did not wish to destroy the whole ilillitiminary proceedings which had taken place, it would support the resolutions of his Hon. Friend: If the House did not pronounce some opinion, in condemnation of such practices in future, he did not see what was the use of the inquiry at all. If the writ fur Nottingham were issued to morrow without taking steps in the cave, it were better the in quiry never had taken place.—( Hear, bear.) He supported the inquiry from the beginning, and he was now prepared to support the resolutions, as the necessary compliment of that in quiry. And if the House would not go with him, he thought they were only evincing another instance of that hypocrisy with which they were charged.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. HA WES said he could not support the resolutions of the lion. and Learned Member for Bath. The object of the inquiry was to lay before the House the facts of the cases which had been referred to the Committee, and not for the purpose of expressing what legislative enactments ought to be passed with regard to them.—( Hear, hear.) He confessed that, as a Mem ber of the Committee, he did not think he could travel out of the order of the House, under wlich the Committee was ap pointed. —t. Hear, hear.) He thought the value of the Report consisted in bringing to light, upon authentic evidence, facts which existed before upon mere surmise, and which furnished grounds for legislation. The second resolution was one which he found it difficult to support, but, when he came to the third resolution, he had no doubt at all as to the course he should pursue. He considered that the Committee which brought those facts to light, was in the nature of a preliminary Com mittee, and that to take further steps, a judicial inquiry ought to be instituted. He, therefore, differed from his Hon. Friend the Member for Bath, in thinking that legislative measures ought to be founded upon and proceed from the Committee which sat merely to investigate certain cases which hadbeen referred to it, though he agreed with him in the general substance of his resolutions. He admired the energy and courage with which his Hon. Friend pursued his inquiry, and what was, he believed, a singular fact, there was not a single dif ference between any Member of the Committee.--( Hear, hear.) The only point in which he differed from him was the one he had stated. Mr. AGLIONBY said that if the resolutions which had been commented upon by the Hon. Member for Lambeth, were much stronger than they were he would vote for them. —( Hear, hear.) An inquiry had been instituted by that House into certain compromises which had taken place, and the Report of the Committee who made that inquiry was now before them. He had carefully read the evidence over, and he did riot see how the Hon. Member for Lambeth, who had been a member of the Committee and agreed to the Report, could oppose the resolutions of the Hon. Member for Bath. Mr. AWES—The Hon. Member did not understand what he ( Mr. Hawes) had said. He agreed with the resolu tions, but as a member of the Committee he could not support them. Mr. AGLIONBY confessed he did not see the distinction of the Hon. Member for Lambeth. But the real question was, would the lion. Member vote for the resolutions ?—( Hear, hear.) The evidence showed that the system which bad been pursued was a disgrace to the House of Commons. With re gard to those who, he might say, were convicted by the evidence given before the Committee, he thought the resolutions ex tremely mild, and he hoped that would induce the House to adopt them. If any Hon. Member moved stronger resolu tions he would support him with all his heart.—( Hear. ) The SOLICI I OR-GENERAL said he quite agreed with his Hon. and Learned Friend as to the nature of the com promises which had been made. But that was not the question they had then to discuss. The Hon. Member for Lambeth and the Hon. Gentleman behind him, who were members of the Committee, could not shut their eyes to the fact that the Committee was not one of a judicial character, but was con ducted by evidence given in a manner altogether at variance with the usual course.—( Hear, hear.) What was the purpose and object of the inquiry, and upon what grounds did Mem bers on both sides consent to the inquiry at all ? The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then referred to the grounds upon which the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath obtained the Committee of Inquiry, and said, that although it was clear from the evidence that compromises had taken place, and could not be denied to have taken place, for the purpose of preventing investigation—( Hear, hear)—the Hon. and Learned Alember .for Bath could not thereupon the inquiry not being of a judicial charieter, and .not granted for that purpose—ground his present resolutions.—( Hear. ) He was reluctant to vote that anything was a breach of the privileges of the House without following it up by punishment. He thought the adoption of such a course as had been proposed would be a farce, but in his opinion it was perfectly clear that no such thing could be done by the House. There had been no legislative measures adopted since the Report; it was true, there had been a measure brought forward by the Noble Lord the Member for the City of London, but that was founded, not upon the Pirrt, but upon the facts stated by the Hon. Member for Ba .—( Hear, hear.) The Bill now before the House, it must be remembered, was retrospective only in its operation, and the resolution, therefore, which the Hon. Member ought to have proposed to the House, supposing there had been no measure proposed, was, that what had been dis closed showed the adoption of a system that was calculated to prevent the investigation into charges of bribery, and it was therefore the duty of the House to adopt some legislative remedy on the subject. To such a resolution he should have been prepared to assent. Such, in his opinion, was the proper course to have pursued. and not to call upon the House to pronounce all the compromises that had taken place to be criminal.— As to the last resolution, calling upon the House to issue no writ, lie wished to ask the Hon. Member if hi was prepared to introduce any other measure than the one brought forward by the Noble Lord the Member for the City of London ? be cause if he was not, was it just to keep vacant twelve seats in the House of Commons.—( Hear, hear.) He (the Solicitor- General) doubted the right of the House of Commons to adopt any such course, it was but one branch of the Legislatut e, and unless the other branch assisted, he believed it would be dangerous for the House of Commons to suspend the issuing of a writ. unless it was intended to found upon that suspension some legislative measure. He believed if the resolutions of his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Bath were adopted, they would afford a precedent which might be taken advantage of in worse times for evil purposes. He trusted, therefore, the House would not countenance the resolutions of his Learned Friend, as they were totally u nnecessary, and if they were persevered in he should move the previous question. Sir R. INGLIS objected to the resolutions altogether, and would have been much better pleased with his Hon. and Learned Friend the Solicitor-General if he had met them with Election h y a a direct negative. The Ho n . Member seemed to have forgotten that Committees trialspesrwaesreeeatoe; a of ma theypriv had no right right, not conducted to ray that a person withdrawing a petition for his private ad vantage was guilty of a public wrong. He took the three resolutions together on account of its greater convenience. The Solicitor-General had stated his objections to the third resolu tion so forcibly that perhaps he ought to be satisfied with it. He had stated that when the House met again they would be as far from any legislative enactment that would content the Hon. Member as now. What did he fancy to be " purity of election?" He believed it consisted of Universal Suffrage and Vote by . Ballot.—( Hear, hear.) That, he hoped, was a purity of election that would never be realised in that House. Llelieving that the practice mentioned in the second resolution was not sustained either •as violation of the liberty of the people, or the rules of the House, it would be most un advisable as a precedent to g what had been termed a ty rant majority the power of deciding what places should or should not exercise the franchise. He should cheerfully meet the mo tion of the Hon. Member for Bath with a direct negative. Mr. HUME defeeded the course taken by the Hon.. Mem ber for Bath, who had acted strictly according to the instruc tions given to the Committee by the House. The Hon. Mem ber for the University of Oxford seemed to have forgotten that fact. lie had not understood the Solicitor-General to make any motion. The SPEAKER said he believed the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said he should move the previous question, if the Hon. Member for Bath did not withdraw his motion. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL then moved the previous question. Mr. HUME said he was sorry that the Hon. and Learned to put an end Gentleman should have put the House in that situation, since he had admitted the practices proceeded agai nst . All that ted from the honour and dignity of the w to a . ces House. Would it be denied that such practi tended to produce duce that effect? Then why refuge to_condemn them ? The object of the motion of the Solicitor-General was to prevent isffpareotpieoessedthtoatbdeedroognae by his Hon. Friend w as , and it would appear a direct encouragement the House from n that of And on what authority would they so refuse?_ of the legal officer of her Majesty's Government?_ How could they recon cile the openly stated opinion of the Right _ Hon. Baronet the passing an opinion t upo t n o them Member for Tamworth with this motion? The Member for the University of Oxford sa id he wa.t at a loss to know hnw these practices could be called a violation of the liberties of the people. Why, everything that interfered with th e f ree and fair exercise of the franchise by the people was a violation of their rights and liberties ; and they were equally a breach of the pri vileges of this House, since these compromises were for the ex press purpose of preventing justice being done. And would it not tend to bring the House into contempt to let them pass un punished? Such language on the part of the Solicitor-Ge neral was a direct encouragement to their continuance. It would appear to the public a complete farce if, after all the trouble that had been taken, it should turn out to have pro duced evil instead of good. They would neither pass censure upon them, nor provide a punishment for them for the future, and he apprehended the Government was about to support tke declaration. Then, he suppose& since they were not to re ceive the censure of the Government, they were to receive its praise and sanction. 'That seemed to him the alternative. They might at least concur with the third resolution ; if they issued the writs under the present declaration, it would only be issuing them for a renewal of the bribery. He thought the House ought to agree to the resolutions. He believed that, under the present constituencies, there might be purity of election ; but he thought it would be much better secured by Universal Suffrage and Vote by Ballot. However, he would support the resolutions. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE would not occupy the House many moments. But he wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether it was his intention to grant the Chiltern Hundreds to those Members who had agreed to apply for the Stewardship, in pursuauce of the corrupt compromises that had been exposed? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that no application had been made to him as yet. When applies- tions should be made, it would be time enough for him to say what answer he should give to those who made them. Captain PLU.IRIDGE begged to ask the Chaneellor of the Exchequer whether he would give him the Stewardship, in order to carry nut the compromise to which he was an innocent party? —( Laughter. ) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he would give the answer when the application was made. Captain PLUMRIDGE—I make the application now,— (Great laughter, and cries of" Order.") Mr. 13. CO CHRANE strenuously denied that any charges against him or his agents had been made out. He had refused to give evidence before the Committee upon principle, and not from any fear of inquiry, Sir ROBERT PEEL said that in the course which he had pursued in respect to the inquiry he saw no reason in the slightest degree to regret it. He believed that the inquiry and the development of the facts would lead to the discontinuance of the practices which had been exposed.—( Hear. hear.) He thought that the Hon. Member for Bath bad been hardly dealt'with.—( Hear.) The Report of the Committee was not the Hon. Member's Report, but that of the eight gentlemen whom the House had appointed to carry on the inquiry with him.—(Hear, hear.) He could not. however, rime with the resolutions proposes( by the Honourable and Learned . . Member, for he thdught that it was under a distinct on deNtanding that they were to be indemnified Honourable Members — came before the Committee, and gave that evidence of which the frankness was acknowledged in strong terms by the Committee itself.—( Hear, hear.) If the Hon. _ _ . and Learned Member for Bath applied for a legislative measure to prevent such . compromises in future he mould vote for it. But he did not think it right to pass a resl lutien of censure upon those gentlemen. As to the suspen sion of the issue of the writs for particular boroughs, he thought that it was right to suspend the issue of a writ when it was in tended to disfranchise a borough, or to institute an inquiry with a view to disfranchisement. But he could not consent to a suspension of writs for an indefinite period until some law should have been enacted for the more effectual suppression of bribery. In other words, it was saying that, suppose on that subject some future conflict should take place between the Houses of Lords and Commons, they woulddeclare by this reso li in that those boroughs tushould forfeit their right of returning Members to Parliament until the Houses of Lords and Commons should consent to some Bill whish,in the opinion of the House, should have the effect of preventing the commission of bribery. Therefore he could not support the rt solution calling upon the House to consent to a suspension of the writs in these cases. Throughout the whole of these proceedings he (Sir R. Peel) had taken that course which he considered must consistent with lustie;. He feared he should gain little approbation for . the course he had pursued; but throughout he had adopted the course whicli he had considered most consistent with justice ; and those Hon. Gentlemen who had acted with him had been actuated by the same motives. He had supported the Hon. aneLearned Gentleman in his motion for inquiry for those rea sons, but for the same reasonshe could not support the resolu tions ; at the same time he would declare his intention of sup porting any Bill which would have the effect of discouraging and preventing these compromises for the future. Mr. VERNON SMITH protested against the doctrine at. tempted to be inculcated, that every person was bound, in order to show his detestation of bribery, to vote in favour of any resolutions that might be proposed against it. The Com mittee had done all that had been expected from it; it had brought to light facts for the purpose of future legislation— true, it had not carried out the speech made by the Hon. Member when he moved for it; but the grounds on which it had been ultimately granted, were very different from the grounds on which it had been first moved for. He denied that all compromises were illegal—he questioned if they were breaches of privilege—and he was not prepared to say that they were in every case improper. One fact had been brought prominently forward, in the evidence taken before the Commit tee, and that was the expense attending the prosecution and the defence of election petitions. In the Nottingham case, it appeared the expense would not be less than 20,0001. Under such circumstances, he was not prepared to say that a per son did wrong who, rather than incur such an immense expense, consented to enter into an arrangement. It was an evil, he admitted, but it was an evil that had arisen from the mode of trying election petitions. He objected to the second resolution on the same grounds. With regard to the third resolution, he had more doubt than with regard to the others. The resolutions ought tohave applied equally to Bel fast and Southampton. He objected to keeping the writs sus pended an indefinite time, but he doubted whether the writs ought to be issued pending legislative proceedings for the pre vention cf bribery. He should vote against the resolutions ; but if any lion. Member would in each individual case move the suspension of the writ until the Bribery at Elections Bill should have passed, lie (Mr. V. Smith) would support such a motion. Mr, AGLIONBY rose amidst cries of " Spoke, spoke,' which rendered him at first inaudible. The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member had spoken to the original question, since which an amendment had been moved to which the Hon. Member had a right to speak. Mr. AGLIONBY said this debate would not be without its results. A tree had been planted which would bring forth good fruit. The Right Hon. Baronet had assisted at the planting ; he was sorry that the Right Hon. Gentleman had refused to assist in culling the fruit. It had been said that they had on this subject been engaged in acting a farce, and this was the second act of the farce. If the Solicitor-General had been disposed to adopt a straight-forward course, he would have taken the sense of the House on the resolutions seriatim, instead of attempting to give them the go-bye, by moving the previous question. The moving the previous question was, in fact, admitting that the propositions contained in the resolu tions were undeniable, but that it was inexpedient to entertain them at the present moment. There was nothing in the first resolution from which any one could dissent, and yet they were about to g ive the go-bye to that resolution. He warned the House tobeware lest by their own act they should do more to bring themselves into contempt and, disrespect, than anything could bring them that might be said at public meetings, of which they entertained such horror. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD would vote against the previous question, as he was not for throwing overboard all the resolutions. He approved of the first and second resolutions, but he was opposed to the third, because, as the parties before the Committee were not punished, he thoughtit wrong to punish the electoral bodies by thus indirectly disfranchising them. Mr. TURNER alluded to the disreputable character given of some of the witnesses in the Penryn case, and contended that it would be unjust to disfranchise a borough on the testimony of such witnesses. He supported the amendment. Mr. ROEBUCK rose, but was for a considerable time inau dible, owing to the extremely low tone of voice in which he spoke. He said the Hon. Member for Reading had chosen to speak in a way he (Mr. Roebuck) thought he would, upon cooler reflection, be rather sorry for. It was certainly in a very pompous phraseology, and not bearing upon the matter in question. He would not reply . to his exclamation concerning the principles of the Constitution or of the administration of the law in England. He took upon himself to attack him (Mr. Roebuck), but he would not answer it. The Hon. Member for Harwich's objection was, that he was not a party to the compromise. Now there was nothing like coming to the book. Mr. Currie was asked, " You were treating of two principals, Mr.' Attwood and Major Beresford? Yes." " Had you any previous communication ? Yes; a letter from Major Beresford." Major BERESFORD—That letter was addressed to Mr. Attwood, and not to the agent. Mr. ROEBUCK—The Hon. Member for Lewes's objection was, respecting certain actions. The question was, " You were concerned in certain arrangements respecting actions pending ?—Yes." Now this was the class bf objections to these practises. Now he would answer to all those sort of declara tions about English principle, that these facts had been detailed voluntarily by the parties themselves, before that Committee. He could not understand bow the House could doubt that these compromises had been entered into, when the parties themselves had stated that they had engaged in them. Major Beresford was asked, " You were concerned in the arrangeinent to give up all actions pending ?—Yes; but I do not know that I was consulted." So that the Hon. Member sactioned it. Major BERESFORD—I beg your pardon. I did riot know that I should have consented if I had been consulted. Mr. ROEBUCK—Was that the way in which the Hon. Gentleman would object ? HeX Mr. Roebuck) had stated that compromises had been entered into by the Hon. Gentleman to escape bribery, and these were the objections. He now came to the real and serious question, and he would at once state how far he agreed with the Right HOnourable Baronet. He perfectly agreed with him in saying, that the arrangements of this Committee were made to inquire rather into the system than to inculpate individuals. He (Mr. Roebuck) went further, and said, that if he conceived that the resolutions which he had proposed had the effect of inculpating individuals, they would not have been proposed by him. He believed they did not go further than was suggested by the Right Hon. Baronet himself. The Right Hon. Baronet wished him to propose a legislative mea sure, but there being a legislative measure then before the House, he did not do it. He wished an additional safeguard. Ile could not conceive that there was anything more essential than this second safeguard. When he brought in those reso lutions, as he had stated at an early period of the afternoon, his object was to guard against a system, and not to inculpate indi viduals. The House said it would do no such thing. The House wanted a legislative safeguard, and all the speakers on that side the question said that there was a Bill before the House. He wished them not to issue certain writs until that Bill was passed. He wanted to know where was the danger of that proceeding. If they got that additional safeguard, they might frame a Bill, and do no harm to the con stituencies. He would leave the resolutions such as he had prepared them to the House. He asked, then, if these compromises did not tend to lower that House in the estimation of the people, they would despise their influence and their power? The Hon. Member for Oxford had alluded to Universal Suffrage and Vote by Ballot. This was one of the best arguments in their favour.—( Hear, hear. ) Ilue they on the opposite side were thoroughly imbued with the vice of their position. They were so thoroughly mixed up with all those bad practices by which they were elected, that they ware ashamed to declare against them, and so they acted one with another. Major BERESFORD rose to explain. He had yet to learn, that being in conversation with a man constituted him his agent. Air. Currie did not, as he had stated before in his ( Major Beresford's) evidence, act as his agent, although the Hon. Member for Bath wished to impugn his statement. The Committee examined Mr. Currie, and he said he would not give certain evidence unless he had the consent of his employer. Mr. Attwood was sent for, and Mr. Attwood was willing for him so to do, and he (Major Beresfori) was never asked at all. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the resolutions Against them Majority against them.... -89 On our return to the gallery we found Mr. HUME, who said, then the Government will sanction all those abominations ; and I wish to know whether they will grant to those Hon. Members connected with those corrupt cases the Chiltern Hundreds, to enable them to resume them ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—If the Hon. Gember makes that application on his own behalf, I shall be most happy to grant it.--(Loud laughter. ) Mr. HUME understood, then, from that answer, that they would grant those lion. Members the request, as what they would grant to him they had no right to refuse to any one.— ( Laughter.) lie understood that, after all the trouble they had had in bringing those practices to light, her Majesty's Govern ment did not think them worthy of punishment, or worthy to he inquired into. He supposed, therefore. that her Majesty's Government had no objection to grant those Hon. Members the Chiltern Hundreds to enable them to carry on those cor rupt practices. The question was then put on the resolution that it was de cided that the original question had been carried. Mr. ROEBUCK said he rose to move the third resolution. He wanted to know why the writ for Nottingham had been sus pended. The Right Hon. Gentleman had laid down the rule ! just row why the writ should be suspended, namely, that while there was an inquiry going on with respect to certain practices, that inquiry had not terminated, and yet the Right Hon. Ba ronet had sanctioned the withholding of the writ for Not tingham, and he wanted to know how he could get over the. difficulty of withholding the writ ? The remaining resolution was then negatived without a division. SLAVE-TRADE. Captain PECH ELL rose to call the attention of the House to the operation of the Act 2 and 3 Victoria, cap. 73, for the suppression of the slave-trade. He said that by re. sliming the bounty upon the capture of slave ships, the Government bad not only done an injustice to the parties engaged in the laborious service of watching for slavers, but at the same time they had given an indirect encourage ment to the nefai 'tons traffic. The Gallant Officer concluded by moving that an address be presented to her Majesty, praying for returns of the s !vent sums of money paid to the Registrar of the High Court ( Admiralty on account of the proceeds of the slave vessels and their cargoes captured under the Act of the 2d and 3d of Vi. Morin, cap. 73, and the dates when such sums were paid, ane, if any and what instructions have been issued by the officers of the Vice-Admiralty Courts relative to the remittance of stigith sums. Sir G. CLERK said there was no objection to give the Gallant Officer t he returns which he moved for. After a few ob tervaticns from Capt. Pechell, Sir C. Napier, and• Sir G. Cockl men, motion was agreed to. MEDIC AL . CRAMTIES (IRELAND). Lord ELIOT obtained leave to bring in a Bill to regulate he medical charitiee in Ireland. MIDNIGHT LEGISLATION. Mr. HUME moved for a return " of the numbs of days on which the House of Commons sat in this Session of Parliament, stating the total number of hours occupied in the sittings of the House, and the avers ge time, and also dict.inguishing the number of nights on whit t the House sat, and the number of hours after midnight (as p rinted in Parliamentary paper, No. 254 of session 1834." He stated that he should bring forward a motion cn the subject ne: session.—Agreed to. STAMPS' AND TAXES. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE rm wed for a return of " the names of all persons who have been al ipointed since the Ist day of Sep• tember, 1841, up to the present day, to any office or situation under the Board of Stamps and Taxes at Somerset House, specifying the nature of each office or situation, and whether occasioned by vacany or the creation of additional office, and if the same is to be: permanent or temporary, and the annual salary to he paid in respect thereof."—Agreed to. LAW COURTS (IRELAND). Mr. SHEIL movest for copies of all letters or written com munications made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the Chief Judges and Puisne Judges of the Courts of Queen's Bench and Common. Pleas, and Chief Barons and Puisne Barons of the Court of Exchequer, in Ireland, in relation to the Common Law Courts (Ireland) Bill, or the Report of the Commissioners on which the said Bill purports to be founded. The CHANCELLOI: of the EXCHEQUER said that he had already stated his intention of postponing the Bill for re gulating the Law Courts an Ireland until next session. He objected to producing the correspondence moved for, as it would be setting a precedent which might be inconvenient to the public service. He was himself responsible for the Bill, and therefore he did not think he was called upon to produce the correspondence. Mr. F. FRENCH thought the Bill would inflict great indi vidual hardship. He hoped that it would be altered next year. Mr. SHE 1L would riot press the motion. He would ask if both the Judges, and the Attorney-General of Ireland, had not objected to the abolition of patent offices without compensation. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had endea voured to frame the Bill so as to satisfy the demands of public, and at the same time not to disregard vested, interests. The motion was then put, and negatived without a division. The Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at One o'Clock. LAW INTELLIIiENCE. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, July 28. (Before Vice-Chancellor GRA M. ) OTTEY V. PENSAM. His tiONOUIt gave judgment in this case, which came before the Court on two petitions, for the purpose of having it de clared whether a solicitor, named Burton, was entitled to a lien on the fund in Court. The case was wholly devoid of public interest, the principal question being one of costs. His Honour referred the case back to the Master. His Honour Vice-Chancellor Bruce sat to-day in the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. INSOLVENTDEBTOR'S COURT, July 28. IN RE HENRY GOLDSMID. The insolvent was described as of no business or profession, residing formerly at Vine-hill Cottage, Henley-upon-Thames. The amount of debts in his schedule was about 3,500/., and in which appeared the name of his brother, Colonel Albert Gold amid, as a creditor for 2,800/. Mr. Nicholls opposed on behalf of several tradesmen in Hen ley, and Mr. Cooke supported the insolvent's petition. It appeatond from the evidence of the opposing creditor, and the insolvent himself, that he had been made a bankrupt in the year 1827, when the docket was struck against him as a wine-merchant ; and although 9s. 3d. was paid in the pound he never sought his certificate. Soon after that time he went on the Continent with his family, and his wife, who possessed an annual income of 2141., which, along with an allowance from his mother and sister, who accompanied him, and were persons in very independent circumstances, enabled him to move in a respectable sphere of society. In the early part of the year 1840 he returned to England, and took Vine-hill Cottage, upon which he expended a considerable sum in improvements, and his style of living there, and the respecta bility of those with whom he associated in Henley, induced the tradespeople to give him credit to a large amount. He attri buted his inability to meet his debts to the fact of his mother and sister not having come to live with him according to a promise they had made previous to his contracting those debts, most of which were for furnishing and repairing the cottage, The balance of debt remaining with his brother, which was not claimed, was about '7001., and the sale of the lease of the cot tage and furniture realised a sum which would afford a dividend among the creditors of about bs. in the pound, and had been lodged in the Court by the insolvent immediately after his arrest. Alr. NICHOLLS addressed the Court, and contended that the debt had been fraudently contracted, under false appearing, for that his clients would never have given the insolvent credit had they known he was an uncertificated bankrupt, or that his means of ,support depended upon property which was solely his wife's. Mr. COOKE spoke in favour of the insolvent's petition to be discharged. The Learned CHIEF COMMISSIONER said there were cer tain dates in the schedule which he wished to see amended, previous to gassing judgment ; and also it would be more favourable for the insolvent, if some evidence were to be pro duced establishing the facts to which he attributed his insol vency. He should therefore order him to come up again on next Saturday week. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. OXFORD ClRCUlT—Stafford, July 26. CIVIL SIDE.—( Before Mr. Justice TINDAL.) WILLIAMSON V. ADAMS. In this case, which lasted from five o'clock yesterday after noon to the same hour to-day, it being an action brought to re corer damages for the improper mode in which the defendants, owners of a mine adjoining the plaintiff's, had cut away the barrier of coal dividing them, and so permitted the water from their mine to run into the pits of the plaintiff, the Jury re turned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 1,6001. PHILLIPS V. GORMAN. This was an action to recover front the defendant, as stake holder, the sum of 251., being the amount of a stake paid to him by the plaintiff, to abide the event of a foot-race between the plaintiff and one Scanlon, to which the defendant pleaded that he had paid the same to Scanlon, by the direction of the plaintiff. Mr. Sergeant Ludlow and Mr. W. J. Alexander appeared for the plaintiff. The defendant was represented by Mr. Sergeant Talfourd and Mr. F. V. Lee. It appeared from the evidence produced for the defendant, on whom, from the form of the pleadings, the affirmation of the issue lay, that a wager of 251. a-side having been made between the plaintiff, Boulton Phillips, of Newcastle, and Charles Scanlon, of Macclesfield, on a foot-race for 200 yards, the match came off on the turnpike-road near Leek, on the 6th of June last. It was agreed that the signal for starting should be the discharge of a pistol. They started accordingly ; the race was a very close one, but finally Scanlon came in two yards ahead of the plaintiff. The plaintiff then raised an objec tion to the fairness of the start, and a written notice was in the course of the same day served on his behalf upon the defendant, directing him not to pay over the stakes to Scanlon. Upon the same evening all the parties meet at the Red Lion at Leek, when the umpire, agreed on between them, having declared that Scanlon had fairly won the race, the plaintiff was urged to withdraw his objection, and admit that he was beaten, upon which the plaintiff said, "Then, if he has won, pay the money over to Scanlon." The money was accordingly paid to Scanlon in the presence of the plaintiff, who subsequently stated that he had nothing to do with this action, which was brought by his backers on the lace. _ The Jury, after a little hesitation, returned a verdict for the defendant. MIDLAND CIRCUIT—Derby, July 26. (Before Mr. Justice PATTESON.) EXTRAORDINARY CASE.—John Radford, jun., aged 16, was charged with having feloniously and maliciously cut and wounded Ann Hicklin, at the parish of Walton-upon-Trent, on the 17th of March last, with intent to kill and murder her. The case excited extraordinary interest, as well from the connexions of the prisoner, who is the son of a gentleman farmer, as from his extreme youth and the romantic details of the case. Mr. MacaULAY, having addressed the Jury, called the fol lowing w itnesses : Ann Hicklin, the prosecutrix, a fresh good-looking country girl, said—l am in my sixteenth year—(the witness looked more like five-and-twenty.) I was in the service of Mr. John Radford, of Walton, in March last. I went into his service last Christmas, The prisoner is a son of Mr. John Radford. He lived at home. He became acquainted with me, and frequently spoke to me. He asked me if I was willing to talk 'to him, and to have him. I said his father and mother would not be willing, and I would much rather he would let me alone. He several times afterwards asked me to have him, but I always refused. He said if I had any conversation with any one but him he would cut my throat. He struca me with his fist several times on different occasions. He has struck me on my side till I could not breathe. About three weeks before he committed the offence with which he is charged I was in the kitchen ; the rest of the servants were out, and the family were in the par lour. The prisoner came in, and asked me if I intended to have anything to say to anybody else. I told him I should have nothing to say to him. I then saw a razor in his hand. I don't know where he got it from. He told me he would cut my throat, and then he opened the razor. He laid my head on the side of the table, and held the razor over me, when Mrs. Radford (his mother) came out of the parlour, and he 19t my head go. Soon after I went out in the evening, about seven o'clock, to get some fuel. He came to me, and asked me if I intended to talk to any one beside himself. I made him the same reply as I had before. He then took a razor from his pocket, and, taking hold of me, said he would cut my throat unless I would promise to have no one but him. He was in a great passion. He took hold of me round the shoulders, and I promised him what he wished. The same evening he came to me in the house, and asked me if I would do as I pro mised ? I said I should not. He then struck me several times. Mrs. Radford came in, and I told her what I had promised. I cried out, and I suppose she heard me. Some time after he knocked me down in the yard. On the evening of the 17th of March, I was cleaning a room up stairs between six and seven o'clock in the evening. The prisoner came into the room, and asked me again what he had before. I said that I should have nothing to say to him, wh e th er h e cu t my throat or not. He said he would cut my throat if I would nut promise him, and keep my promise. He then opened a razor and asked me if I wanted any repentence. I told him I did not, because I thought he would not do it. He then took me round the shoulders with his left arm, and put the razor to my neck. I remember feeling it touch my neck, but Ido not remember anything after. Mr. Sharpless, a surgeon, was sent for. I had recovered my senses when he came. I had never given the prisoner any encouragement at all. My neck is now quite healed up, hut it is very tender. At times I have a great pain it, and it swells much. lam not now in Mr. Rad ford's service. Cross-examined by Mr. HILL—I first discovered the wound when I was in the kitehin, whilst trying to turn my head. , Thomas Henry Sharpless—l am a surgeon residing at Burton. I was called in to see the prosecutrix on the evening of the 17th of March. I found a superficial wound about two inches in length on the left side of the neck. It was about the eighth of an inch deep. I dressed the wound three times. It was nearly healed when I last saw it, which was about a week after I was first called in. Abraham Lyon—l am inspector of police at Portsmouth. I apprehended the prisoner on the evening of the 31st of March, in Portsmouth, a disturbance at some low house. He was taken before the Magistrates. On the way to Portsmouth gaol, he said, " I'll tell you all about it." I cautioned him. He replied, " You may tell Mr. Jones, ,, the Magistrate ; but don't make more of it than I ha v e said. He then said, "1 was jealous of my father's servant ; so, I cut her throat with a razor ; but she's better now." 'Phis being the case for the prosecution, lir. HILL proceeded to address the Jury for the prisomer. He was not there to justify the act which the prisoner h v4l committed, neither did he (the prisoner) wish to do so him self. He knew that he had plunged his respected family into. the deepest sorrow; they had expended large sums upon him , to fit him for coming out in life, but this strange passion having; seized him, he had acted in this unintelligible manner and blasted his prospects in life before he knew their value.—(The y . prisoner was deeply affected at this description of his position. and wept bitterly. )—The Learned Counsel proceeded to say that the prisoner's only object was to highten the girl into love with him ; and, in the course of an eloquent address, en dearoured to convince the Jury that they could not not find the prisoner guilty on either of the counts in the indictment. The Learned JUDGE having summed up, The Jury found the prisoner Guilty of an assault only. Sentence was deferred. NORFOLK ClRCUlT—Norwich, July 26. (Before a Special Jury,) CROCKFORD V. YOUNG AND ALLEN. This was an act i on i n w hi c h t h e p l a i nti ff soug h t t o recover a large sum o f money by way of compensation from the de fendant fer damages consequent upon their breach of a contract entered into by them with him under the following circum stances : —The plaintiff is a men of wealth, whose name is familiar to all the habitues of St. James's, and the defendants are two gentlemen in whose hands was entrusted a poser of selling the perpetual advowson of the living of Neeton, in this county. Being desirous of purchasing; a living as a gift to his son, who had entered holy orders, Jr. Crockford entered into a negotiation with the defendants, which terminated in a con tract of sale of the ad vowson an d right of presentation to the rectory of Neeton, with all thu great and small tithes of the whole parish, for the sum of 11,980/. The plaintiff accord ingly paid 1,7901. by way of deposit money, and 430/. for auction duty, after which the lawyers were set to work to in inve,tigate the title. During this inquiry it turned out that instead of all the tithes being at the disposal of the defendants, which was the main reason for the interference of the plaintiff, they had only one-half, the other moiety being impropriated, and in other hands. Upon this the plaintiff withdrew from the further pursuit of his object, and insisted upon a return of all moneys paid by him on the faith of the con tract entered into by the defendants, who, he contended, were also bound to make good a large sum of money which he had given as a " fancy price" for several acres of profitless land, which he had been induced to purchase solely by reason of their contiguity to the glebe and rectory. The claim being resisted, the present action was brought ; but when the facts were stated to the Jury, the Learned Judge interposed, and suggested that the difference between the parties ought to be adjusted at once by a private rather than by a public inquiry. In his (Mr. Baron Alderson's) opinion, the plaintiff could not maintain his claim in respect of the losses consequent upon his other purchase, as he thought the damage was too remote. He, however, was as suredly entitled to recover the deposit money and auction duty, with interest thereon. as well as the costs attendant upon the investigation of the title, and as far as those sums went the de fendant would do well to meet the plaintiff and consentto a ver dict to that amount, whatever it might be. In consequence of this suggestion, the Learned Counsel laid their heads together, and a verdict was taken by consentfor the plaintiff—Damages 2,400/. NORTHERN ClRCUlT—Appleby, July 25. (Before Lord DEN:HA N.) COULTHA RD V. DIRNEY AND OTHERS. This was an action to recover damages for an injury re ceived by the negligent driving of a coach by a servant of the defendants. Mr. Dundas and Mr. Watson conducted the case for the plaintiff; and Sir G. Lewin and Mr. Monteith that of the de fendants. It appeared that the defendants are the proprietors of a coach, called the Engineer, which runs between Edinburgh and Lancaster on week days, and between Carlisle and Lan caster on Sundays. The object of the coach seemed to be to meet the increased demand for passage, occasioned by the rail way to Lancaster. It was horsed with three horses, and, as ap peared by the license from the Stamp-office, was licensed to carry four inside and two out. On Sunday the Ist August the plaintiff and six others mounted the coach to came south. There was a pile of luggage on the top from three to five feet high. The coach started at a quarter before nine o'clock, with orders to travel as fast as the mails, and keep ahead of them. The mails started at nine o'clock. All went safely till they came to a place called Hax House, near Kendal, where the went down a hill not very steep, at the rate of from thirteen to fifteen miles an hour. One of the traces of the tore horse came off, which occasioned him to pull with one shoulder only, and he became unsteady. As they were beginning to ascend the opposite hill, the coach rocked to such a degree as toin duce a Mr. Haywood to lump off on the left side ; he was killed by the fall, and the coach almost immediately went over on the right side. The plaintiff was so much injured that Le was taken up insensible, and carried to Kendal, where he re mained seven weeks, under the care of four doctors, whose united bill amounted to 271., which the defendants paid. A pro posal had been made to settle the plaintiff's further claims, which went off, on the ground that the parties could not agree upon an arbitrator. Sir G. LEWIN addressed the Jury for the defendants, and called the coachman who drove the coach on the occasion. At the suggestion of the Court, however, a verdict was taken, by consent, for the sum of 1501. VIOLENT THUNDER-STORM. (From our Afternoon Edition of Yesterday.) About half-past twelve o'clock last night the metro polis was visited by one of the most awful thunder storms that has occurred here for many years. The weather during the preceding day was very cloudy and sultry, and towards eleven at' night vivid flashes of lightning - were seen in quick succession breakinc , through the dark clouds in the east. On the Surrey side of the river it commenced a little after midnight, and towards one o'clock a flash of lightning, which illumined the streets in every direction, was followed almost in stantaneously by a tremendous peal of thunder, which shook every house in the streets. Three or four similar shocks followed in succession, and by the tremendous crash of the thunder and the bright flashes of lightning the greatest alarm was created throughout the neighbour hood. The rain for a short time fell in torrents, and towards two o'clock the storm appeared to have passed away, but about five in the morning it commenced with increased fury, and loud and almost continuous peals of thunder prevailed for more than an hour. We regret to say that it has done considerable damage to steeples and houses, but we rejoice to say that, as far as yet known, the loss othuman life has been small. The spire of St. Martin's church in the Fields was struck by the lightning about half-way down, and a num ber of stones were dashed down upon the roof, but the amount of injury has not yet been ascertained. Sur veyors are now engaged in examining the injury, and serious fears are entertained that a part of the spire has been seriously damaged. The following are the accounts received from different districts : _ About six o'clock this morning an alarm of fire was raised in Vincent-square, Westminster, by the inhabi tants of Nos. 1 and 2 (the former occupied by Mr. Howell, surveyor, and the latter by a gentleman named Cooper) appearing at the windows and cry ing for help. 'lnc fact was, the electric fluid had struck a chimney stack, which was thrown on to the roof of No. 1, end forcing its way through to the top floor. The lightning appeared to enter by the chimney, and descending to the drawing. room, scorched the paint. and paper, and scattered the furniture about in all di rections, breaking chimney-glasses and windows in almost every part of the house. The furniture is nearly destroyed, and the building extensively damaged. No. 2 escaped with slight damage to the building. Mr. Howell is insured. The old clock tower of the Fishmongers' Almshouses, at Newington, was also struck, and the clock - shattered to pieces ; the bell was also torn down, and the windows round the tower broken. The storm was more violent at the western suburbs, particularly about Battersea and Wandsworth ; also Putney, Mortlake, Roehampton, and Barnes. In the two latter villages a number of houses were unroofed, and several valuable haystacks almost wholly destroyed. A number of barges on the River between Vauxhall and Putney bridges were sunk. About half-past five o'clock, a boat in which were two men, named Holmes and Farley, was swamped, and melancholy to state both perished. This occurrence took place off Wandsworth Meadows. Both the men were lightermen. In various neighbourhoods, stacks of chimneys, and also roofs of houses, have been thrown down. Great damage has been sustained amongst the different craft in the Pool, many of which have had their masts and rigging shattered by the lightning. It is reported that the steeple of Barking church, in Essex, has been totally de molished but our informant has not been able to ascer tain► the truth of the report. About 20 minutes past 12 tin extraordinary escape of a whole family took place in New-street, Vauxhall. A thunderbolt went down the chimney of a Mr. Moss, a greengrocer living in the street ; every article in the house is broken to atoms, and the house itself shattered, but neither Mr. Moss, his wife, nor four children, received the slightest injury, although the thunderbolt passed through that part of the house in which they were sleep ing. From an early hour this morning the premises have been. visited by hundred of persons. The trees in front of the Magdalen in the Blackfriars-road, are very much scorched by lightning. About the same time a working man, named Jarvis, was struck with lightning while crossinc , Kennington-common, but, most providentially, the only injury he received was a slight scorch on the left cheek. The damage done, both in London and the country, wilt no doubt be very great. On the various bridges numbers of persons viewed the storm, notwith standing it was so wet. St. Paul's, with the surrounding churches, were seen as plainly as in the middle of the day. Since the above was received, we regret to learn, that about a quarter before six o'clock, a labouring man who was going to his work, was killed by the lightning in Hammersmith New Road. We have also heard that the spire of Holloway church was struck, and con sich-rably damaged. All accounts agree that such a destructive and alarming thunder-storm has not occurred in the metropolis in the memory of man ; and we fear that more disasters will be communicated. Some of the inhabitants were quite frantic with terror. The inmates of the same houses in many streets rose from their beds, crowded together in one room, and 'offered up prayers for their safety. HOP INTELLIGENCE —We have this week a better report of appearance Ntill'oeitcasr o u improving; the blighted g rounds, which at one time were con sidered to be incapable of doing anything , have in many in stances thrown out fresh shoots, and with favourable wea th er may Y ; while th ose t h a t altogether d ha t l h f a crop, o the blight, and even more ndcihore the land i s hi g hl y c ultivated, have done wonders, and are likely to pro d uce an a bundant crop. In our market there is scarce l y any b as i ns's doing. The best 1842 's are nominally wo r th 61 . per cwt. , b ut et produce aPe a few lots have been disposed of by forced sales at considerably less. The duty is now doing at 12 to 13,0001. Weighed on Saturday 93 pockets, and during the week one. KENT AND SUSSEX.—Various are the opiaions as to the re sult of the crop of Hops ; they have decidedly improved within this fortnight, but there is much slack bine, some fire-blast, and the burr appears as if it would not come thick in some grounds. An alteration in the weather, however, would make mach difference at this particular tin:. OFFICE Or HIGH BAILIFF Or SOUTHWARK.— The following gentlemen are, we understand, candidates for the office of High Bailiffof Southwark :—Mr. D. W. Harvey, Mr. Pritchard, Mr. Payne (Coroner), Mr. Ledger, Mr. Jupp, Alderman Brown, and Alderman Sir Wm. Heygate.