The Sun. — London, England, 1827-05-29 00:00:00

teetion that could be afforded would balance the advan tages which the foreign grower and manufacturer derived from the cheapness bt food and labour. If such measures as were advocated by the opponents of the Right Hon. Gentleman should be carried into effect, the'woorgroWers of England would get prices inferior to those which 'they now obtained. He should think that the House would no -more appoint a Committee upon this subject, than they would to inquire into the regidation of the price of labour, - or rate of wages. If the country .were ; to-thrive, it could only.be upon the sound .and true. principle of commerce supported. by the Right_ Hen: Gentlernan, and it aver highly desirable that the_ country should be. convlneeir'br the fact This was not anew fangled doctrine the ftg• importation of ram materiali was an old - Prineipre policy of this onnitry. Mr. WESTERN explained. Mr. DAVENPORT attributed • -thi'distresiel" of Aht wool trade, and of other branche!if trade fiftbe . :tain*liit' with the currency. Fit had had a motion upon the sub-" ject, which he had no( lircinght forward from a fuah td accommodate the.Mini!iiters. hid, therefore, been referred to a day on which thetg_fiippezied'hof to' he a House. . The-petition was thenrecew ;itY .a d ered_tohe printed: The SPEA KER.. put .thequestion, Wheeler if" wee the .. . • pleasure of the House to . receive aiy . oldrepep . tions? -- Mr. L. KEC/4.• waived the `uitivnig" the - 'Order 'Of the Day for the Howie resolVing ; itseif Ito . a Cm miittee of the whole House upon the Penryn DiatranChliencentliifi;•tintil an Honourable Member who sat 'for • tharliorough pre= rented a petition to which he wished' to call the' attention of the House. Mr. D. BARCLAY eien presented a petition, which he went through in so low a tone that it was 'impossible to hear him. As far as we could collect what fell from him,- it was a. petition from, a person, stating that he understood the House was about to prosecute him for perjury, com mitted as a. witness at the bar ofthe House, in the inquiry into the Penryn Election. The petitioner prayed that the House would not pass such a resolution, until they had heard him in his defence. The Honourable Member then expressed his doubts, whether the petition Gould be re ceived, as it contained allusions to Resolutions which the House intended to pass. . - After a few worda from Air.' L. Kiser, Mr: BARING, And Mr. C. W. Mr. BROUGHAM said that he was oae of the last per sons who would wish to throw impedimenta in the way of the House in their. efforts to attaintbe 'Ada of justice, in punishing individuals; biteVe - diati g ht there 'could be no difficulty in waiving - technical objeetioni,ln order to ar rive at substantial justice: Question were adjourned ) . anopportittiftrWould •thus be given . to the individual to ancertain what were the inten tions of the House. Another mode, stilt more easy, was, for the individual to assume, that be might, by possibility, be the subject of the proceedings of the House. The petition was then withdrawn. PENRYN ELECTION BILL. Upon the SPEAKER's putting the question, that the Order of the Day upon the Penryn Election Bill be read— Mr. MANNING did not deny the right of the House to look into former offences committed "at Penryn; but he denied the justice of punishing the present electors for what was done so far back as 1807." Only five persons had been proved to have taken bribes at the last election, and this was not sufficient to induce the House to disfranchise a whole Borough. If the punishment of those electors was to be increased in reference to what had taken place in 1807, he did not see why the House might not refer to any period, hnwever remote. He denied that Joseph S owe l had been employed'ai hie agent, or that he was authorised to_ perform or do any act upon his account. He regretted that the Hon. Member for Leicester had not called other witnesses to the bar of the House. Mr. L. LECK would have been glad to have called Sorrel to_ the Bar, but for the disinclination of the House to hear evidence at the late hour to which the examination had been protracted. He, however, had not any expecta tion of getting much Information from 4irn. In 1819, the House laborlously endeavoured to elicit from him evidence, but in vain. The Hon. Member for Penryn, who had just sat down declared tint this Sowel was not an agent em ployed by He congratulated the Hon. Member upon the fact, for had it been otherwise, he would not now have have had the opportunity of addressing the House. That Hon. Member ought not to refer to the former corruption of Petrryn, when the last examination fully established the present system of bribery in its worst sense. This was proved as well by direct evidence, as by the efforts which ether witnesses made to misrepresent facts, or to suppress truth. He was astoniihed that the Hon. Member was bold enough to say, that the proposed measure rested upon former examinations.—(Hear, hear.)—lf this were not a case which required Parliamentiry interference, it was beyond his conception when Parliament conkl interfere to check corruption. lie had been truly astonished at the concurrent streath of teetiniciolfteriosels' eorroptioin m v so small a borough. Mr. FERGUSSON said, tharlf, , in• the spgtteof" only nineteen years, hardly the space of three Parliaments, not lees than three notorious east of bribery had been proved against this borough--if this' west not a case in which Par liament ought to exercise its Tamer of disfranchisement, he would say, that it would'be utterly impossible to conceive circumstances in which that mode of proceeding ought to be adopted.—(Hear.)—He could not agree with the Hon. Member for Penryn, that nothing was proved against the borough. He thought the evidence material. It was established that an agreement for the sale of the borough had bean signed by a Member of that House, who had sti pulated to give each voter 21 guineas for voting for an Hon. Baronet and for Mr. Swan. This infamous system was confirmed by three Committees; yet in 1826, so far from any amendment having taken place, the same open practice of bribery continued to exist. Mr. Swan bad given each voter 51., but he had refused to give them the breakfast, by which was meant a bribe of 241. This :e -duced the price of the votes. The last report of the Com mittee proved a great variety of instances in which money was paid for votes. After alluding to the evidence of Stanbnry, the Hon. Member went on to express his surprise that Mr. Freshfield, who was unknown in the b oroug h, an who, it was said, had employed no agent, should hare mei , with such signal success. It was clear from the evidence of Eady and Weedon, as well as from the other testimony a•Muceo, that it was impossible to repre sent the Borough of Penr3rb, without bribery. This fact was also amply proved by Capt. Pellew, a gentleman who had been for years a resident in the 1 3.2 rough. If he (Mr. F.) were called upon hi■ oath to state his opinion, he should declare, that he did not think pnritf of election could exist without disfranchising this Borough. If then, they should decide upon -disfranchising that corrupt Borough, the next question would be, to what district they Would transfer the elective franchise. For himself he thought it would be right to give it to Manchester. If they transferred it from Penryn to the adjoining Hundreds, the whole power would, he understood, be vested in the bands of two or three great men (a Member said across the table, "Into the hands of five or six.").-No matter whe ther into the hands of two or three or five or six, the objec tion held eft malty good. • Mr. J. DENISON said, that there never was a grosser case of bribery and corruption than the present brought under the consideration of Parliament. The Borough of Penryn had been guilty of similar practices in 1t 07 and in 1819, and ought no longer to be pasted over. The Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Canning) now at the head of his Majesty's Government, had, on a former occasion, stated, that if a case was made out against any,Borough, he wcagd support a ;notion for its disfranchisement. He (Mr. Canning) was, he said, ready to sacrifice Grarapound in order to pre serve OM Sarum. He (Mr. Denison) now called upon the Right :lon. Gentleman to adhere to his promise, and to attend to t;;e. recommendation of the Committee, and to disfranchise this corrupt borongb. If this was not done, they could net]cr atte.7 l l )t to assail corruption, however un disguised, on any future Pccasion. He wished to add only one word more. If they din" decide upon the disfranchise ment of Penrvu, then he should advise that the right of returning two Members to Parliament thould be transferred to the large, and wealthy, and intelligent, and populous town - of Manchester. Transferring the right of goting to the two adjoining hundreds of Penryn, would be of little avail; and they all knew that Cornwall, as a County, had already more than a sufficient number of Representatives. .-.—(llear, and a laugh.) " Mr. A. O'NEILL objected to the course pursued with respect to Penryn.' Allusion had been made to what took place in that Borough in 1807 and in 1519. Now this, he thought, unfair. Were they to keep a paltry running account against this, and that, and the other Borough?— Were they to' say—" To corruption in 1807-- . -to corrup tion in 1819, and a total disfranchisement in 1827." He called upon the House is put out of their recollection the details of what took place in ISOTand in 1819, and to de cide upon the evidence net' beforetlieni - Sir C. BURR ELL said that the evidence now before the House was conclusive, although, perhaps, it would be rendered more Satisfactory in the other - House, as their Lordships could examine witnesses upon oath. - It was a singular anomaly,, that a - Select Committee of the Howse of Commons should have power' to eiamine witnesies upon oath, and yet that the whofelioitse possessed no such power. This, be thought; was i'mattee which called for immediate alteration. Mr. D. BARCLAY addressed the House in a low tone. Ws understood him to ny, that the present electors of Pen ea were about to be. unished for the acts. of those 'who had gone before them.,,. •Heedmitteerthateekertuer periods geeat corruption prevailed 4t . Pentyti, littt a Velat - refortu had taken place in,thel3oredigh sinus that: period. It was rather too bad thatt&ySlithild attPmpefo condenin this Bbrough upon hearsay evidence, and not upon that which was - established before theme If the process of disfran chisement was ernployedagainst Penryn, why was it to stop there? Why wasit - not to be carried into effect with re - spat-to : other beeenghs--with respect to . Appleby, Gat tOn,_ and_ a hnndred others that were infinitely more eoriiipt hear. - )L.alloai could the Home deter mine t 'Venry . n 1 where there were tiv . e huddred voteii, and delay to prOceed against Gatton, whike ttiere - Wete two 'seats afiat were:abvays openly sold ?---- (Hear.)--Ldrthe Tiouse proceeded in the one case,it was irn- - pbseeible thit',"y.lth any degree if itneiatency, they could re-- fuse in the other.' He thiiright- that the proposal to transfer to Manchester had only 'been introduced to preju dice the discussion. The Committee that had sat to . de eidethe Merit's of the present election had agreed that there was no proof of corruption against either him (Mr. BirelaY) or his colleague. Il;. beved to meal to their recollection, that, out of th e five last elec tions, three had passed without. any charge of bribery being made ; and when they remembered these circumstances, he did trust that the Nellie would not suddenly lend itself to the dis franchisement of a borough, without something more than hearsay evidence. Lord MILTON thought the Borough bad been so well defended by its present Members, that, in the first instance, he really believed the favour of the House had been trans ferred from the Hon. 'Gentleman who had just sat down to the Borough itself. But that effect had been weakened by every further consideration of the case. He did not think it proper to look merely to a few recent elections, or en account of the purity of ' the Members to screen the Bo rough ; the plain common sense of the matter was, to look at the General History of the Borough. If, from such an examination, all the elections, or even nearly all, were found to have been !purely conducted, lie agreed that it would be an act of injustice to disfranchise the Borough for one accidental offence. But the examination would pro've exactly the reverse ; and he did think that after the gross instance of Corruption proved against the Borough hi the year Iso7, its often repeated practices of bribery ought not now to bioverlooked. In the instance to which he referred; a Committee on behalf of the elector s a n d Si r C. H aw ki ns (whom he should not hesitate to name, as that gentleman 4-as now a Menilier of the House for another place), ac tually entered into an agreement, counterparts of which Were executed, and remained in possession of the respec tive:parties. In the present instance, the bribery bad been as real, though it was not conducted with the same forma lity. It was said; that there were 500 voters, but it should be recollected that of these, not less than about 150 came in from the heighlionring parts on the approach of an elec tion, attracted by the speculation of the 24/. and the break fast.—(Hear, hear.)—The general system of the place was corrupt. He trusted, that if the Committee thought fit to Consent to the transfer of the franchise to the neighbouring hundreds, they would, at least, much modify that measure; hut he thought they ought rather to avoid such a course, and to 'act upon the principle of creating an enlarged basis for the representation: When the franchise in any parti cular place was so abused as to justify the destruction of that franchise, be thought it 'would be the wisest course to act upon that policy which*was the wisdom of our ancestors, rather than be drawn away by any new -fangled principles. He hardly knew whether Cornwall was or was not over represented ; and it was not on that ground that he should support the motion to transfer the franchise to another Place; but in taking it from Penryn they were not taking it from Cornwall, any more than from Jamaica ; for, though the place was locally situated in Cornwall, the Representa tives were net practically chosen there. Mr. VAN HOMRIGH had been cue of the Members of the Committee that sat upon the Penryn Election ; and be thought it his duty to declare that no bribery was proved against the two Hon. Gentlemen who represented that place. He thought it would be a most extraordinaryact to disfran chise a Borough, When there was no proof of corruption against its two Representatives..L.-(ai laugh.) Lord ALTHORP thought the argument just advanced by the Hon. Member for Drogheda e'as at least a very ex traordinary one ; and the more so, when that Hen. Mem ber must have well recollected, that although the Commit tee exonerated the two Members from the charge of cor ruption, they hid unanimously decided that gross bribery had been practised in the borough. He agreed with the Noble Lord who had preceded him, that the House ought to revert to the former acts of the borough. The case of it borough was not like that of a man on trial for a parti cular crime, when it would certainly be most unjust to set the former acts of life in array against him. The case of n borough was to be determined on its constant practice, end in the present instance there was a practice of corrup tion for the course of twenty years. As a Member of the ommittee that had sat bn the Penryn Election, he felt it his duty to declare it as his opinion, that Penryn furnished )Dne of the grossest cases of corruption; and one in which that corruption was, of the longest Continuance. Lord JOHN RUSSELL stated, that after what had been said on a previous occasion, as well as in the debate, !about Manchester being introduced into the discussion, to 'prejudice the question, he should think it the more conve nient course to declare, first, that Penry-n ought to be die 'franchised ; and 'then, when the Bill was again in the Committee, the proper time would arise for considering the place to which its franchise should be transferred. After a few words from a Member who spoke from un der the gallery, the House resolved itself into a Committee. Lord J. RUSSELL then proposed, by way of Amend ment, that in the first clause of the Bill the following words should be introduced—" That the Borough of Pen ryn be hereafter excluded from the privilege of returning Burgesses to serve in Parliament." • He observed that the question of disfranchising the borou g h w ou ld d epen d upon 'the House being, or not being, satisfied that great corrup tion had taken place. He thought that after the evidence which had been given before the Committee, there could be no doubt upon that subject. The abuse of the Elective Franchise had been sufficiently great to justify the House in taking it away from the borough. The next question then, to be determined, was—to what place it should be transferred ? Some Hon. Members had intimated that it should be transferred to a large town now unrepresented,while others had proposed that it should be given to the inhahi , tants of the adjoining hundreds. It would aggravate the defect to give the franchise to the hundred, as it would throw the right of election into the hands of a few large proprietors. This mode of reforming corrupt boroughs in fact created little counties, and contributed nothing to the general extension of the right of election. It had often been said that trade and manufactures were not sufficiently repi - esp..nted in Parliament ; and when cases of this kind occurred, a.oantage ought to be taken of them to afford Representatives to large and industrious masses of the po pulation. A remedy would thus be gradually supplied to the acknowledged and prevailing defect of the House. He therefore proposed by one Bill to deprive Penryn of the elective franchise entirely ; and by another and a distinct measure, to transfer that franchise to Manchester. He moved, as an Amendment, " That the Borough of Pen ryn, hereafter, be excluded from returning Burgesses to Pa rl ;amen t. " Mr. LEGIT KECK observed that the present Bill was the same as that passed by this House in 1819, and thrown out by the House of Lords; and it was now supported by additional evidence, taken before the late Committee, and at the Bar, to show the existence of bribery and corruption. In his conscience he was satisfied that the best and safest mode was to give the franchise to the Hundred. He con- tended that the manufacturing interest was already well and sufficiently represented in Parliament; and, that al though the Resolutions; passed at Manchester were most eniperate and proper, yet, it became the House to beware of establi4hing an evil precedent. If, on every occ.ulion of this kind, the franchise were given to some populous ma nufacturing town, what would become of the much talked of balance between the manufacturing and landed interests in Parliament ' The experiment proposed by the Noble Lord (J. Russell) was dangerous in the trial, would be found injurious in the practice, and, above all, disadvan tageous to those who were anxious that the right of elec tion should he transferred to them. He had no personal interest in the question, and had most unwillingly under taken the of - 4z of a public accuser; all the reward he hoped for his services was, never again to be placed in a similar situation.—(Hear.) Mr. C. BARCLAY advised his Honourabio Relatire not to press the qyestion to a division, seeing that it was undoubtedly the opinion of a decided majority of the Com mittee that Penryn should be disfranchised. He should give his aupport, to the j )roposition of the Noble Lord (J. Russell) as he was satisfied that, to transfer the right to Manchester, under certain restrictions, would bo highly beneficial. One limitation was, that no person should have the power to rote for a Member, who was not rated to the support of tha.poor to z certain amount. In South. wark, which he formerly represented, this plan was found to work well ; for there, by certain local Acts, on all houses under the rate of 201. a year, the landlord paid the poor rate, and the tenant, consequently, had no vote. Yet S out h war k was considered a scot and lot borough. He had bad no reason to complain of the electors of South wark, and. certainly be never knew a body of men better able to think for themselves, and to decide upon any great •• • • •••• political question. Lord MILTON said, that by the disfranchisement of Penryn a vacancy in the representation would be occa sioned, which vacancy might be supplied upon two prin ciples—population and taxation. With reference to both it might be urged, that a large and wealthy district of tha metropolis was unrepresented—the parish of MarylebOne; and he thought that it had, perhaps, as good a title to the franchise now to he disposed of, as any other place. 'He protested against the principle which the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last wished to establish—that of confining the right of voting to an aristocratical portion of the community. The abandonment of the ancient systeM of the Constitution in this respect, as far as regarded Leeds, and by wishing to confine the right of voting to a certain rental, had had the effect of depriving that important town of the opportunity of returning Members, and had given it to the County of York at large. He objected strongly to these fanciful theories and devices to exclude the inferior orders from re presentation, whose interests Most required protection. He liked to witness the influence of the inferior orders in the House; and the more extensive the right was made, the less chance there was of- corruption. if the franchise were general, votes would not be worth purchasing. Mr. G. PHILLIPS called the attention of the Com mittee to the changes in the value of property since the period when the right of voting for Counties was given to Freeholders to the extent of 40s. per annum. He did not profess to speak from authority, bit he believed he might say that the general feeling in Manchester was, that the right of voting should be given to such only as were rated to the poor, for houses of the annual value of 15/. or 20/. It seemed to him that the present was a very favour able opportunity for introducing the principle of such a qualification ; and the constituent body in Manchester would then consist of from five thousand to seven thousand persons. The fear of the Honourable Member (Mr. Legg Keck), lest the manufacturing should overbalance the landed interest, in the House of Commons, was absolutely chimerical ; and it was a fact, that the trading and menu• factoring interests, although so greatly extended, had few or no Representatives ; all other great interests were specially represented. He suggested that the Bill for dis franchising Penryn might be passed is the present Session; and the question, in what manner the franchise should be disposed of, might be reserved until next year. Lord ALTHORP recalled the attention of theeCorn mittee to the real question before it ; the only point now to be decided was, whether Penryn ought to be disfranchised, and regarding that, he apprehended, little doubt could retrain.--(Hear.)--He concurred with the Hon. Member who spoke last, that it might be expedient to defer until =other Session the discussion, whether the franchise taken from Penryn should be thrown open to the Hundred, or given to some large commercial and manufacturing town. Mr. WARBURTON objected to the placing of any ad ditional power or influence in the hands of the landed interest. Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN expressed his high appro bation of the principles which had been mentioned by the Noble Lord (Milton), the Member for Yorkshire, as actu ating his conduct. He fully concurred with him, that according to the true constitutional system, representation and taxation ought to be combined as much as possible; and that the influence of the lower classes in the House ought not to be diminished, but should be placed beyond the reach of corroption'by the numbers•to whom the elec tive franchise was extended. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed, that looking to what had on this and on former occasions occurred, he thought, that although the degrees of guilt in these cases were different, enough had been proved against, Penryn to call for the notice of the Legislature; but he did not think that it had been proved that the proportion of guilty persons was so large as compared with the whole population, as to justify the complete disfran chisement of the Borough. In a question of this kind, which was, properly speaking, no party one, but a matter rather of a judicial nature, each Hon. Member would form the opinion which he might consider as that which the state of the case most called for. In such a state of things, per haps, the opinion of any single individual might not be held to be of any great consequence ; but the unanimous opinion of the Committee up stairs was so weighty, that it • certainly would require very strong evidence to rebut it. Upon the principle which he had already mentioned, namely, that the case was one of a judicial character, he would abstain from going into any general discussion, but decide as if lie were upon a Jury, and bound to give a verdict strictly according to the me rits of the case. He did not think that such a degree of guilt was established as to warrant a total diefrancli.ec meat. Many were, no doubt, innocent; but, in the si tuation of Committees of this description, the innocent must sometimes suffer along with the guilty; and, upon the whole, he believed that he should do his duty best by supporting the motion of the Hon. Member for Leicester. As to the case of Grampound, with reference to which so much has been said, he had only to observe that, when it was judged proper to resort to a measure of this kind, and, to a certain extent, to trench upon the franchises of any particular place, the most constitutional mode was, not to adopt an entirely new representation, but to confine, - as much as possible, the franchise, which, though strictly. a public privilege, was still, in an innocent sense, a valuable private possession, to the same description of interest as that from which it was taken. He admitted the conve- nience, iai point of debate, of separating- the disfranchite rnent from any other question; but,- in another view, he thought it was material that the question of partial dis franchisement, and that of fixing the manner in which the franchise should be subsequently settled, should be dr_cided together, instead of leaving the ulterior question to form the subject of a new vote ; and, therefore, as he before stated, without entering upon a discussion of the general principle, either one way or the other, he thought, upon the whole, his vote ought to be given for the motion of the Hon. Member for Leicester, Mr. lIOBHOUSE was always ready, when a case of corruption was made out, to take advantage . of it, and to cut away as much from the body of corruption as he pos sibly could ; but, as to degrees of guilt, that matter affect ed bins and the Chancellor of the Exchequer very differ ently; for that Right Hon. Gent. appeared unwilling to look into these cases, whereas he (Mr. H.) was always on the look out for them—having a view to that general re form for which he had always contended. When he met with such a strong case as this, his object was to take ad vantage of it in order to infuse fresh and sound blood into the constitution ; but the proposition of the Hon. Member for Leicester would infuse no fresh blood into the constitu tion ; and if such were to be the result, he saw no use in the disfranchisement of a single corrupt borough, because his objection was to the whole system of corruption. The Right lion. Gent., no doubt, acted r7gl; tly according to his cern notions ; but according to his (Mr. Hobhouse's) views, it would be wrong in him to support the proposi tion of the Hon. Member for Leicester. He wished the discussion to be conducted without entering on the general question of reform at present. His object was simply to disfranchise this corrupt borough, and then to leave it for future consideration what was to be done afterwards. He hoped the Right Honourable Gentleman would not press the immediate extension of the franchise to the Hun dreds. He, himself, had said, that this was in the na ture of a judicial question ; and that question was, wise- tlier enough had boen proved to show that this borough ought to be disfranchised ; and why should that question be hampered with any other? If it were to form part of the proposition that the franchise should be extended to the neighbouring Hundreds, he and many others inthe House would be disposed rather to vote against the disfranchise ment altogether, although they wished that the borough should be disfranchised. He contended, that they ought first to go to a vote on the question, whether the borough should be disfranchised ; and next, if it should be car ried that the borough ought to be disfranchised, they ought to consider how and for what place the two Members which had before represented.this borough should be elected. He thought it necessary to say this much, that his vote, in cue he should be compelled to vote against the disfranchise ment of the borough should not be misunderstood. Lord MILTON remarked, that his Hon. Friend, the Member for Westminster, appeared to mistake the state of the question. Mr. HOLHOUSE explained, Mr. WYNN said of the guilt of a great number of the parties in this transaction he had no doubt. It was true, that criminality had been directly brought home only to 16 of them ; but there was moral evidence of a much more ex tensive system of corruption. The meeting of the voters, and their refusing to come to the poll until arrangement should be made, was strong presumptive evidence of the system ; and the House must be aware that one candidate had stated, that no success was to be expected at Penryn without bribery ; and another had said, that he had resigned all pretensions merely on that account. He could not but look back upon what had formerly happened with re ference to this borough. They might perhaps have in dulged a hope that the punishment of individuals might put an end to this practice. That experiment had been tried, but still the system was carried on; and this, there fore, was a case in which the House ought to legislate.— He would prefer supporting either of the propositions which had been suggested, to. leaving matters to go on in this bo rough as they had done. But he was anxious that the proposition of the Hon. Member who introduced the Bill should be adopted, as the Bill would then be less liable to the risk of being lost in another place, where four Bills of a similar description had already failed. An Hon. MEMBER on the Treasury Bench, whose name we could not haw, said, that they w an t e d no tional Members for the County of COrnwall—Cifear).—and if this plan of extending the franchise to the neighbouring hundreds were adopted, it would form a most mischievous precedent, and he would vote for the Amendment of the Noble Lord (Russell.) Mr. WOOD (of Preston) said, that if the hundreds were to be taken in, he would not vote for the disfranchisement of the Borough ; for upon that plan it was in evidence that that the paramount influence would be given to two great neighbouring proprietors, Lord De Dunstanville and Sir John St. Aubyn. Reformer as he was, he regarded the great landed proprietors, who sent the rich Members into the House, with as much contempt'as he did these corrupt Boroughs. They ought not to look at what the other Howse might do, but attend to their duty. Mr. LAMB adverted to the strange change of opinion which had taken place among the Parliamentary Refor mers, tbr they now cried out against increasing the influ ence of the landed interest, and the great object of their general plans of Parliamer tary Reform had before been always stated to be to increase that influence. Such had been the alleged object of the Member for 'Westminster (Sir F. I3urdett) and others, and yet they now appeared to be extremely averse to the extension of the influence of the landed interest. He concluded by declaring, that in conformity with . the views of his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Canning) he should support the original motion. Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN opposed the proposition to throw open the elective franchise of Penryn to the ad joining hundreds. He would prefer having the abuses of the representation left untouched in their hideous defor mity, to the delusive farce proposed to be played in this instance. Lord RANCLIFFE war glad of an opportunity of giving his support to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had that evening, in his opinion,• very properly stated, that though he was opposed to the general question of reform, he would assist in effecting any practical good. Sir J. NEWPORT 'said, if ever there was a case that called for the intervention of that House; it was the case before them. Penryn had been proved to be thoroughly corrupt, not at the late election merely, but for a series of elections during the last twenty years. Considering the anterior practices, and the evidence of their continuation given before the Committee this Session, he saw - no other mode of dealing with the corruption of this Borough, than that of rooting it out, by transferring the elective franchise to some wealthy and flourishing town.at present unrepre sented. He differed with reluctance from his Right Hon. Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; but he thought it absolutely necessary for the due consideration of the whole question, that it should be separated as his Noble Friend (Lord J. Russell) had proposed. Mr. BROUGHAM could not help rejoicingexceedingly that the debate had, been brought back by his Right Hon. Friend (Sir J. Newport) to its fit and proper tone and temper. The speech of his Right Hon. Friend, the Se cretary for Ireland .(Mr. W. Lamb), had partaken of the generous warmth of that part of the empire to which his official cares were directed.—(A laugh.)—He (Mr. Brenham), in entering on the debate, would remind them what was properly before them—what was excluded from their consideration—and what, though not excluded by the form of the vote, it was, nevertheless, expedient to exclude altogether from the present discussion. In the course of this debate, both sides had assumed the - guilt of Penryn. The only question was, whether that guilt should be punished by letting in the Hundreds to share the elec tive franchise, or by transferring it absolutely to some other place? The latter mode implied a greater degree of guilt, but the former was not consistent with guiltlessness. It was clear there must be some fault in Penryn, else why sluice them with the hundreds?—(A laugh.)—lf the elec tors of Penryn were innocent—if they had done no wrong —if there was nothing faulty about them—why all of a sudden let in on the 200 voters, who, for the purposes of bribery and corruption, had been made 400 voters, the t,OOO voters of the neighbouring hundreds?—(Laughter.) --That form of punishment assumed that they were ' con demned, though not so deeply as by the other. The dif ference of these forms to them would, however, in effect, be very slight. The skilful voter, who, in estimating the value of a borough, looked at the property with an eye to borough objects, and regarded his vote only with a view to sell it—one of the Stanburys and Sowells—would not be at the trouble of thanking the House for the mitigated form which would only let in upon him the 2,000 voters in his neighbourhood. Men of that stamp did not love their neighbours as themselves.—(A laugh.)---They would rather continue the monopoly of votes. He be lieved firmly that Sowell or Stanbury would just as lief have the borough wholly disfranchised, as retain their votes if they shared them with their neighbours. What would they sell their votes for when they were only one of twenty-five hundred ? They were - worth something indeed when they were one of five hundred, but the value vanished when the numbers became too extended for purchase. He thought, therefore, - that if his Hon. Friend the Member for Westminster (Mr. Hobhouse)xpplied his mind to this question, he would see that the disfranchisement was as complete and entire by letting in the hundreds, as by trans.. ferring the elective franchise elsewhere. The corrupt interest of the parties punished was just as fully extin guished in one case as in the other. He would not then enter into the enquiry, whether Penryn deserved to be pu nished. It was admitted on 'all hands, that it had incurred guilt. The question was reduced simply to this : whether the House should, by the one form, operate a general dis franchisement, without making any provision as to the parties who should succeed to the exercise of the franchise; or whether the House should adopt the proposition of the Hon. Member for Leicestershire (Mr. L. Keck), and by throwing the right into the Hundreds, admit them to share it with the Borough ? This was a question of the utmos. importance ; and he would not, for the sake of catching a few careless votes, conceal his sense of its great moment. It was important, not so much in itself, as with reference to its ulterior consequences. If he voted for the proposition of the Hon. Member for Leicestershire, he stopped all fur ther legislation on the subject, and left crowned a com plete measure without any thing lurking behind it. If he voted for the proposition of his NAle Friend (Lord J. Russell), he loft an unfilled canvass on which the artists of Reform might hereafter sketch a figure which should at that stage be unknown to them. He felt that he should not deal fairly by the House, if he did not endeavour to impress upon them his sense of the importance of this question, With the careful deliberation which that sense of its importance had imposed upon him, he had applied his mind to the subject, and he had to state as the result, that he was entirely of opinion with his Noble Friend, that the franchise ought not to be opened to the hundreds, but disposed of generally to some distant place.—(Hear, hear, hear.)—This propoiition would not bind the House to any future course, and that alone was a sufficient argument in its favour. It neither pledged the House, nor any Hon. Member who supported it, to any one line rather than to ----- any other.--(Hear, hear.)--With perfect consistency he might vote against the Hon. Member for Leicestershire at that time ; and afterwards on the report, the re-commit- • •." .... meat, or the third reading—or at the last stage, b y way of rider —or, finally, in another Bill, he might deal with the forfeited franchise us he judged most fitting. That course . was certainly the most Parliamentary, the most legislative, and the most expedient, be cause the most consistent with the fullest delibera tion. The question, then, was what should be done with the franchise. The trial of the party accused was only proceeding—the verdict was not, in point of form, pro nounced ; but all were, in fact, agreed. The guilt was admitted ; and the question was, whether they should transfer the elective franchise from those who had not once merely, but time after time systematically, habitually, grossly, shamefully, and to the constitution intolerably abused it.—(Hear, hear.)—He for one would meet the exioney of the occasion at once, by disfranchising Penryn. As to the amount of punishment, whether it should be total or qualified disfranchisement, or whether, if total, it should consist in transferring the franchise from the wrong doers to those who ought to have had it before, but that the opportunity of giving it bad not presented itself; these were questions for future consideration, which could be most satisfactorily discussed in a separate Bill. There was another ground on which he had a positive objection to the proposition of the Hon. Member for Leicestershire. It was quite consistent with the course he was supporting, that in another Bill, or in a future stage of this Bill, he should vote, if he saw reason, for letting in the hundreds; but he would fairly tell the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. L. Keck) beforehand, that his vote should not be- given to that mea sure in any possible case ; for he regarded it, as the gross est of all delusions—he was sorry he had no other name to apply to it—for any Honourable Member to flatter him self that he was doing any real, substantial, effective good, by reforming these abuses on the old plan of throwing the right of election into the hundred.—(Cheers.)—He mar velled much to hear his Right Honourable Friend (Mr. W. Lamb)—for whose opinions he had a respect, hardly sur passed by the affection he bore to his person—charge the Reformers with inconsistency, because, as his Right Hon. Friend alleged,-they had always hitherto been desirous of giving the preponderance to the landed interest, and now they were turning round upon the landed interest. This vrt i su tety no well-grounded - accusation. The Reformers deserved fair play, , on .the same principle that a certain historical perrnage was, said to deserve it. But this at tack was anything but a sample of fair play. He objected further to the plan of letting in the hundreds, because Corn wall was already well enough off in regard to repreeenta- tion. lie concluded by arm:s*lla wish, that in this stags of the business, they should avoid any allusion Manebtiter, or to any other town to wish it might be thought desirable to transfer the franchise. On the prin ciple of confiding the debate to its - I:mi. - est limits, he had for the same reason avoided any,remarks on the general question of Reform. Mr. Secretary BOURNE agreed with the Hen. and Learned Gent., as to the guilt of Penryn, but he differed from him as to the degree of that guilt, and on that ground he opposed the proposition of the Noble Lord (J. Russell). If he was satisfied that all, or the great majority of the electors of Penryn had been guilty of bribery and corrup tion, he would vote at once for transferring the elective franchise to another place.. He felt the objections that ap plied to the proposition for opening it to the hundreds ; and if he could have transferred it without working what he deemed an injustice to those who had not partaken of the evil practices, he would have adopted that remedy._ The corruption had not extended, according to the evi dence, to above one-half of the whole number. Ile could not, therefore, consent to take away a valuable franchise from two or three hundred persons who had not been of fenders. He wished to punish the guilty, without, if pos.; sible, involving the innocent. He granted, that by opening the hundred to a certain degree, some of the electors would be punished for offences, in the commission of which they had not participated. But ha preferred that course as alto gether the freest from objection. The House then proceeded to, a division, and the num bers wera—. Ayes 124 Noes 69 Majority for the amendment 55 ELECTION EXPENCES BILL. Lord ALTHORP moved the third reading of the Eke don Expences Bill. Mr. CALCRAFT opposed the Bill, as be was not aware that it had ever been discussed : and as it disqualified a num ber of persons, such as Counsel, Agents, Attornies, Con stables, and others, who ought not to be deprived of their elective franchise on the mare ground of receiving fees for their professional services. The Bill conveyed an unme rited reflection upon Barristers and other professional mea, who, so far from deriving any extraordinary emolument from their services at elections, were rather losers than gainers on those occasions, inasmuch as their time might, in general, be more profitably employed. The measure would tend to do away with all the gaiety, and destroy all the spirit of elections, and render them dull, monotonous, puritanical assemblies. He was no advocate for disorder at elections ; he did not vindicate the propriety of breaking heads on those occasions ; but he maintained that the constitutional exercise of the rights of electors ought to be characterised by a certain degree of cheerfulness and spirit. Mr. H. GURNEY expressed his intention of moving that this Bill be read a third time that day six months.— Many of the grounds of disqualification in this Bill had been declared illegal in Ireland, yet the penalties were easily evaded. If agents were disqualified for receiving fees, all that could be effected by this Bill would be, that the fees would be paid to them after the election. This was Irish Legislation, and from Irish Legislation God deliver the electors of England. The effect of this Bill, if it were passed into a law, would be to render an English election as demure as a Methodist love feast: There was a most extraordinary clause in this Bill, disqualifying any man who had a ribbon upon his person from voting, and ren dering him liable, if he ventured to vote in a ribbon, to a penalty of 101. He could scarcely conceive any thing more objectionable than such a clause, if it were possible to carry it into execution. He had, however, already received a letter from an electioneering agent, assuring him that he saw very clearly how every clause in Lord Althorp's Bill might be evaded. He was of opinion that any City or County in England might, if proper means were devised, be polled in two days. Conceiving that the Bill would unnecessarily go to disfranchise a gre-t number of voters, and that every one of its provisions was mischievous, frivolous, and absurd, he felt it his duty to move that the Bill be read a second time this day three months. Mr. SPRING RICE defended the provisions of the Bill, and declared that there was nothing contained in it which could possibly disfranchise a single individual. The Bill provided merely that no canvasser, fiddler, flagman, or messenger was to be employed for money ; but he might engage himself in any of these capacities for the benefit of the candidate, if he chose to do so without demanding any recompense. He concluded, by declaring his intention to support the Bill, if the Hon. Member pressed his amend ment to a division. Sir R. WILSON thought the Hon. Member (Mr. Gur ney) had committed a slight mistake, when he said that the wearing of ribbons at elections prevented the necessity of swearing in many constables. He would ask him to look at the late proceedings at Coventry, the city where ribbons were made, and he would find that the wearing of ribbons did not prevent the most disgraceful riots. Mr. R. GORDON thought the Bill an instance of very petty Legislation, which would tend to increase rather than decrease the expence of Elections. There was one clauae, providing that no person was to wear these favours, or do any of these things, for six months before the Election, which would be thought so comprehensive, that it would lead to a thousand inconsistencies. The Treating Act had created more expence than any which was incurred before its enactment ; and he was convinced the provisions of the present Bill would have the , same effect: Under this im pression he would vote for the Amendment. Lord ALTHORP defended the Bill, and declared he knew several instances of the employment of seven hundred constables, at an election. He concluded by declaring, that he had heard no reason which could prevent him from pressing his Bill to a third reading. The House then divided—. For the Third Reading, 26 Against it, 10 Majority, 16. The Committee of Supply was postponed till Friday next. The Committee of Ways and Means was postponed till Wednesday next. Mr. ESTCOURT postponed his measure on the subjact of Alehouses, till Thursday next. SLAVE TRADE IN THE BRAZILS. Mr. HERRIES obtained leave to bring in a Bill to carry into effect the provisions of the Treaty with the Govern ment of Brazil, relative to the Slave Trade. The remaining Orders were then postponed, and the House adjourned at Half-past One o'clock till Wednesday. MAJORITY AN. tO OP LORD ♦LTHORP'S XPENCES •T RLECTIO) MAJORITY. Hume, Joseph Smith, W. Jephson, C. 0. Talmash, J. Kennedy, T. F. Tennyson, C. Wilson, Sir It Lombe, E. Wood, J. Maxwell, John 'Wynn, R Palmer, R. Palmerston, Vise. Robinson, Sir G. Shelley, Sir T. MINORITY. Courtenay, P. Gordon, It. Forbes, Sir C. Herries, J. C. Gordon, Captain Lowther, Viscount Grant, Right Hn. C. Petit, Grant, R. [The above is a cop but Iv( LIST OF THE ON THU THIRD RRADIN, D MINORITY BILL POR PRZYENTING Corbett, Panto's. DaTies, Col. Dneaine, M. Easthope,- J. Estcourt, J. Elliot, Lord Fleming, John Graham, Sir J. Gilbert, D. TELLERS. Althorp, Viscount Rice, T. S. Gran;, Sir A. 1 81 a"eY, Admiral TE14,E1113. Calcraft, John , Graves, Lord IT of the Majority and Minority sent to us e suspect it to be incorrect.] A dry old chip of a carpenter, who has num bered upwards of four score summers in Chiches ter and its suburbs, when fencing off a partition of his garden, was accosted by a gentleman with " Hey ! Richard, what are you about ?" He replied with a smile, " What I ought to be ashamed of at my time of life, sir ; I'm railing against my neighbours.--Hants Chronicle. BRAHAM.—AII must acknowledge that Bra ham's voice is of the finest quality, of great power, and, occasionally, sweetness. It is equally certain that he has great knowledge of music, and can sing extremely well. It is therefore the more to be regretted that he should ever do otherwise, that he should ever quit the natural register of his voice by raising it to an unpleasant falsetto, or force it by too violent exertion : that he should depart from, a good style, and correct taste, which he knows and can follow as well as any man, to adopt at times, the over-florid and fritted Italian manner ; at others to fall into the coarseness and vulgarity of the English. The fact is, that he can be two distinct singers accord ing to the audience before whom he performs, and that to gain applause he condescends to sing as ill at the play-house as he had done well at the opera. His compositions have the same variety, and he can equally write a popular noisy' song for the one, or its very opposite for the other. A duetta of his introduced into the opera o f " Gli Orazi," sung by himself and Grassmi, had great beauty, and was in excellent taste.--.- Musical Reminiscences. to FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE. FRENCH PAPERS. (From the Etoile, dated Sunday, May - CONSTANTINOPLE, APRIL 26.—The Ramon hae! .; hindered th e A m b assa d ors o f E nglan d , Russ i a , a nd 'Fr from making fresh applications to the Reis Effendi OP . : subject of th e i r p ro p osa l s f or t h e pac ifi cat i on o f Gf . eZ f On the 18th the Dragomans of these Ministers waite", to the Reis Eff en di, a n d, after hearing him invoke the Judi of God, and the assistance of the Prophet, receivetij answer, that " the words arrangement, pacification , suspension of arms employed, with respect to the 0 7,, appeared t o th e Di van to b e express i ons out of P1'71,1 that the revolt o f some G ree k s scattere d a bout Ottoman Empire, would have been put down longl,: t , but for the assist a n ce th ey h a d rece i ve d from Ent Sse." This answer did not appear to the Dragon; to be of a nature to be reduced to writing; tot they inferred from anoth er equ i voca l d ec l ara tion, -' tb , formal answers in writing might be expected fro' s, Porte after the Bairam (Ist of May). N eve rtheless , ' English Ambassad or i nv it e d t h e ot h er two Mi n ist repeat their applications on the 20th. But, whettel f ,it design or cha nce , th e Russian Dragoman arrived sooner'7 o . those of the two other legations, and not •finding &Oh, turned to Bujuckdere, where M. de. Ribeaupierre sided ever since the answer given him at the begitTliii the Ramazan. N o f art h er step h as b een taken, suu.,,ti accident appears to have occasioned some di::: kiss i9 "' little importance among the European Ministers. (From the Augsburg Gazette.) The Greek Govern men t h as pu bli s h e d the following `, elaration of Admiral hliaulis, relative to the chief co of the naval f orce , w hi c h h as b een g i ven to Lord COP',- " CHIEFS OF TIM'GOVERNMENT.--I come hither, cording to the orders which I have received, and I errs new ones. But I first think it my duty to express to Superior Go vernment my t h oughts, my sentiments, and desires, that it may b e a bl e, as well as the nation, to :1,70 of me and my i ntent i ons. For these seven years, IL, combatted without int errupt i on , a l ong with my .bre'„ and with all my p ower , aga i nst the enemy of our e 00041: Neither the Consciohsness of my incapacity,'. nor the gre l , ness of the burden imposed on me by the country, have wi t able to terrify me, or to make me hesitate. Izonsider as the first duty of a citizen, to do his utmost for the teetion of his country, and I- have always endeavelanii, fulfil this duty. If I h ave no t always succeeded,-it" not been for want of good will. r " As well a s a ll 'th e nat i on , I h ave l ong foundaf—ifii hopee on the arrival of the great man whose pqq°"7, splendid deeds promise our country a happy i s sue on •• the long and arduous struggle which it maintains. man his arrived, and I congratulate the Government` the whole nation on it. The Greek marine may 17 2 expect every thing troth such a leadei, and I amthe•Pil to declare myself ready again to combat, and Wit ll my might, under his command. This task will doub less be difficult for me, on account of my age a nd , •t want of experience ; yet my h eart is contented, for has never desired any thing b u t t h e happiness 0' ..to country. Begging the Supreme Government nOt doubt the sincerity of my sentiments, I remain, w ith t, most profound respect, the very obedient patriot, „ " ANDREW MIAUL FRYNCH rUNDS, 11AY 26. f 65C.; Five per cents. 100 f. 65 c . ; Th ree per C ents. 70 • s 4, Bank Stock, 2023 f. 50 c . ; Neapolitan, 77f. 80e• ; b l e nigh Loan (1825), 55i. Exchange on London. Month, P a p er , 25f. c . , ; Money, 25f. 40c. ; . 1 * Months, Paper, 25f. 27ic. ; Money, 25t. 25c. AMERICAN PAPERS. CIRCULAR TO COLLECTORS. Treasury Department, April 28, 18 '' r et - Sir,--By direction of the-P res id ent, I h ave to inf o m. „0, you, that the prohibitions of th e act o f the 18th o f APB 1818, are not considered as extending to passengers lc * may arrive on board o f B r iti s h vesse l s . Those, the n orb : who are bona fi de such, m a y b e a ll owe d to land, w ith sTi t baggage, care being taken that this construction of the ~ be not abused to a vi o l a ti on of any of its prov i s i o °o I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant, RICHARD RUSH, Secretary of ow TA COLONIAL TRADE. of MAY 7.—The following letter from the Secre i tsl.. to the Treasury, to the Collector of Boston, is pubis the sake of these to whom its contents may be of import ance, in the other commercial districts of 'the Union Treasury Department, May 2, 182: 7 •_, • Sir,--In reply t o y our l e t ter o f t h e 24th of Apr il, I n to state, that a remission of the forfeiture that attacm; in the case of the British brig Belfast, and cargo, receaa arrived at Boston, from Bermuda, having been granor on satisfactory proof, duly laid before the Departments % : no intentional violation of our laws Ins committed in case, it follows that this vessel may now be permitted depart with a cargo, in like manner as any other 13 . 4 7,0 vessel could lawf u lly d o . 'B ut i t i s very dear that . cannot he permitted to take a cargo to any British to 1 , - / port, from which the vessels of the United States been by that nation excluded ; to guard against you will take care to require the penal bond spiciallY f r o s scribed in such cases, by the Act of C ongress on t h e 1 5 of May, 1820. I remain, your most obedient servant, fr • H. A. S. Rearborn, Esq. Col. Boston. E. RUST LATE AND IMPORTANT PROM RIO JANEIRO. .. 4 44 Naw Your, MAT. B .—We learn by the ship d ifine'",,, e Capt. Hammond, arrived yesterday from Rio, which P i i r she left on March 17, that the country was in a plorable condition. The paper money of the country greatly depreciated, and business, generally, was con:Wil e d at a stand. Th e b r i g S park, Clark, of this port, aa' from Rio on the second of March for Montevideo, an d sv ,he captured the sam e day by a steam b oa t (which left 0 , port for the p ur p ose ) on susp i c i on of being bono u to Buenos Ayres. A p r i ze crew was put on board, Oa be brig brought to ancho r . O n t h e sea b reeze setting i n' cables were cut, and s h e was carr i ed into port. After );.* ing nearly a fortnight, an d every attempt to obtain b ee r lease proving ineffectual, she was abandoned. After her capture some of her crew were hupres 96l A ; carried on board a Brazilian 74, and put in irons. C 41 :17 Baguet, E sq ., t h e A mer i can Charge d'Affaires, and "* Wright, the American Consul, had demanded an, exP ll l - ; tion of th e cause o f t h e i r i mprisonment, which was t'sit only refused, but it was understood they were treated ds ,. indignity by the Minist e r of Marine. M r . B ague t 4a 00 mended his passports, which w ere granted , and he v9 l '. return home the first opportunity that offered. A 11 7,y count of the facts connected with this affair have been misted to to our Government. - bee The French and Colo m bi an A m b assa d ors , had net well received by the Brazilian Government. tlerseolyuthanvon Herald,. , ~„, CHILTERN HUNDREDS. -----The Chilte.i Hundreds, so frequently mentioned as being a', whencepte (I they b y w Memberswish to a re ahri" sions of counties made by King Alfred, and no.` annexed to the Crown, although they still r etail' v o a f ea t t h e e t l h l e o ir use se o at f s C , Commons' their peculiar courts. The stewards of tile s .: courts are appointed by the Chancellor of Exchequer, and their salaries are twenty O.; lings per annum ; this sum, however, small as 1 is, being derived from an office under the Crov fn . ; is 'sufficient to disqualify any person who aciee it from retaining his seat, unlesS re-elected' Accepting . the stewardship .of the Chiltern WI. when a Member wishes to re" a formal manner'° trdierrsee A idgi:olinms discovery,g,Patilesrrieeia. Parliament. ree interesting and to the ge o l og i ca l stu d ent , was made lt,i`of days ago in the Moat Colliery, in the 1;036 5 ! .... Tipton, in this county. A p e t re f ac t i on . . L l ie sembling part of the trunk of a considers l : t h sized tree towards the butt, measuring in hei l ,. two feet f o u r i nc h es , an d i n circumference I°Aj,, feet ten i nc h es , w ith t h e b ar k f orme d i nto cf..- was found i n n ear ly an upr i g ht position, airytt „ A r the strata of ironstone, at the depth of.up--_,a of two hundred yards below the surface, s r which, in the ex t ra ction of it, was b ro ken 1 . 6) . " the upper p a rt of the trunk, w hi c h st ill rernaT g o in the earth.. . On the exposure of this- fosa the atmospheric. air,. the coal formed fro' , tbe. bark, shivered from - the t run k. S o great g;o: rioaityais thii specimen considered, that tlie'.'"'". prietors - of the Colliery,- a t t h e i r .4 . tiarferly. To et. ing, passed a resolution, generously offering it a present to the Tru s t ees of the British Muse t; and there can be. no doubt that: it will'!3e deer.e",_ a.valuable acquisition' to . the numerous kis!: ditutiGn....St a jO r d s hi r e Advertiser. which are a l rea d y d epos i te d i n t h a t National 1