The Sun. — London, England, 1830-03-02 00:00:00

Commissioners to inquire into the public revenue arising in Ireland.--:=Agreed - to. Mr.• G. DAWSON presented the Miscellaneous Esti mates, and moved that they be printed.—Agreed to. CONSOLIDATED FUND BILL. On the motion of Mr. G. Dawsotr, this Bill was read a third time and passed. THE COLONIES.—MISREPRESENTATION. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the Roman Catholic inhabitants of the island of Grenada, posing for the removal of all colonial disabilities. On tie motion that the petition be read, • Mr. BROUGHAM rose and said, Sir, I do not rise for the purpose of supporting or opposing the petition which my Hon. and Learned, Friend has just presented ; nor do I propose to offer any observations upon it. .I take the opportunity, and I hope the House will not consider it a strange tine, of correcting a misrepresentation of the grossest nature I ever heard of, even amongst the many gross and unjustifiable misrepresentations of the conduct and motives of public men, which it has been my fortune to observe. I am quite sure, however, that neither of the Hon. Gentlemen who alluded to me after I had le:t the House, entertained the least intention of stating any thing which might injuriously affect me in my public, per sonal, or pro:essional character. The Hon. Member for Westminster certainly meant no such thing; but the Hon. Member for Colchester made the greatest possible mistake respecting facts, when be alluded, in so extremely an un pleasant way, to me and to the profession to which I have the honour to belong.—(Hear, hear.)--For the profes sion I have no doubt it was intended, because I am aware many think there is no better way of promoting a reform , in the law than by degrading the legal profession ; and therefore, that whenever an opportunity of vituperating any member of that profession offers, there is so much gained towards the accomplishment of the great object they had in view. I know this is the opinion of many conscientious and erilightended men. It is not mine. They, however, have a right to entertain these opinions, and to act upon them whenever they may find occa sion so to do ; but, Sir, they have no right to make Ras . statements ' • and this brings are to the fact. I under stand, that during my absence, allusion was made to a cir . cumstance which I have' reason to believe was often men tioned out of doors, but which 'now, for the first time, Las been brought before this House. Before this time, I had accordingly no opportunity of justifying myself by answering to this charge. Now it is stated, if a Member of this House, who is also a Member of the legal profes sion, he retained in any cause, that, according to the eti quette of the• profession, lie is debarred from performing his Parliamentary functions. As, fur instance, if he gave notice in his place that lie would impeach a public ser vant, and that afterwards this public servant gave him a retainer in some other cause bearing upon it never so re motely, tl,e effect of this retainer would, according to the etiquette of the profession, be to stop all proceedings in Parliament, and consequently compel him to give up the charge he had contemplated as a Member of this House, but which was now incompatible with his duty as an ad vocate. The inference from this, and the fair logical in ference, I al:ow, is that a lawyer is incapable of discharg ing his duties a Member of Parliament. But, Sir, on he half of myself and on behalf of the profession, I beg di.- . tinetly and peremptorily to disclaim all such rules, princi ples, and privileges, whatsoever.—(Hear, hear.) And if it can be shown that one lawyer in England, Ireland, or Scotland, ever dreamt of any such thing, I will at once withdraw my disclaimer.--(Hea-, hear, hear.)—Well, Sir, this was the position —now for the illustration, which is said to be—that in the sear 1825 I presented a peti tion complaining of certain malversations upon the part of Lord C. Somerset at the Cape of Good Hope ; and that upon the occasion of presenting it, I intimated an intention of going further, and that I even spoke of impeaching Lord C. Somerset of high crimes and misde meanours ; but it is added, that after I had taken this very decided course in my Parliamentary capacity, I was retained by his Lordship in a cause more or less connected with the subject-matter of the petition ; and that this for th with stopped my mouth, and prevented me from pursuing the Parliamentary proceedings to which I had alluded. That is the allegation. Such may be sometimes stated for the purpose of attacking the profession to which I belong as perhaps in the present instance—or it may be directed against myself. But 1 care not what is the object, nor what the shape of the charge. I give it now—the first time I have the iipportunity—the most positive, un gitn.dified, and peremptory denial; awl if, without violating tluz l'ecoruru of this House, I could find words sufficiently strong wherein to couch that denial, so as to make it the more searching and overwhelming, I would not hesitate to use them.—(Loud cheers.)—l never had a fee—l never had a retainer from Lord Charles Somerset. I never was • —W use the words of the Bill of Rights—engages! or ern ploYed in any Court. or place by Lord Charles Somerset, . during the whole course of my life.—(Cheers.)—l never was retaiiied, or employed, or consulted by Lord Charles Somerset, or any snember of his family, in any matter whatsoever, during the whole course of my life.—(Cheers.) —On the contrary, I haveheen repeatedly concerned—and no later than last term, fer instance—against several near relations of Lord Charles Somerset. It often happens that , fentlemen At . e retained without their knowledge. Indeed rt eeldoto occurs that they know by whom they are re , tainsi at the snoisrent the retainer is given. Not trusting, therefore, to my own knowledge, I, to make assurance loudly sure, bad my fee-books searched for the last ten yews. I did this, not so much in justice to myself as to Lord Charles Somerset ; for if I could vary—though it was not very likely—my Parliamentary comfit: for a fee of guinea (the thing is so ridiculous it hardly deserves that a moment should be wasted upon it), it was at least . proper to ascertain whether the Noble Lord had thrown even that temptation in my way. I say, then, that I caused my hooks to he searched for the last ten years, and the re sult is that which I have given. That being the denial to this cainplaiut, I really do not see how it is possible so go farthest' into it.—(llear, hear.)—The House, how. in s 's, will favour me with a few moments' indulgence, and they will then see how very unjustly towards Lord Charles Semerset (for ale it does not affect)—how wry unjustly towards Lord Charles Somerset has this - . colour been given to the transaction. The cir cumstances of the case ace simply these :—I pre sented a petition to this House on the subject of the Go vernment at the Cape, and that petition contained one very grave charge against Lord Charles Somerset—it was that of having indirectly taken a bribe from a party to a suit which he was about to decide. It was alleged that he had called on a party to buy A horse at the sum of 10,000/, a sum greatly exceeding, course, the value s* the animal, and one witicls was supposed to have been given to influence the judgment of the Noble Lord in a suit its d i * Court in which lie presided, the real valise of the horse Lein's; stated at '7OO/. ; and it was alleged, that after this traniita Lord Charles Somerset decided in . favour of the party who was the purchaser.—Though this charge was in a. parenthesis of the petition, I said at once, it was so inuceasurably saore important than the rest, that if I found there was any tiaslation'for it (which did not believe, but about tO‘ielt I woord inquire), I should myself, in the capacity of a Member of thisfiussaa— which I coold do without a seconder or a support, arid, ins deed, without a majority of the House—impeach' Lord Charles Somerset. 1 was then counsel in a eatice, in which, was trite, Lord Charles Somerset was in some way con cerned ; but lie was not a party to the cause, nor did retain sae as Counsel ; nor was I retained after the charge I had brought against him on the petition in this House. The fact was, he had been the Judge in a cue in which an appeal was brought against his judgment ; and though I was engaged to support his judgment, I was no more connected with him than las with any Judge in support d whose decision I may have to plead in this country. Of worse having to defend the judgment appealed from, I WAN boned to look into the ease, and it turned ont that that caw ,lrose from the same in which the transaction of the horse was stated to have occurred. 1 looked into .the ease to see what it was, I was Counsel for the respondent, acrd it therefore becasae a matter of necessity that as such Counsel, I should support the judgment which had been s ',,s s st in favour of my client. r was bound to support the judgment before the Privy Council,. As soon as I found this oet, I stated to the House the ,contlicting duties I had to perf o set; I was in what oar hei,phbours, the French, salt a false aosition ;" that is, I had ;la the morki,ag to argue as c eas ' uss st ).n favour of Lord Cltarlsas Somerset's judgment before a C s 'ilfts attended frequently by Members of this Ilouse, and in C . l'e ,evening I had to come down here, and bef ore many of the s sque Members, to impeach thatjudgment as a Member of this ii‘.!wr'e, I ask whether under these circumstances, there was a. - v th,,C•7g. very strained or v er y re f ine d , i n stating to the House 1: 1 "• , ?°° - tion iu which I stood, and in asking whether th e re wer f s . not some Hon. Member who would not relieve me troll the difficulty of my position, and undertake the management of the matter of that petition, for if uot, I would give up the case, and do my parliamentary duty ? lam sorry to take up the time of the Mute, but I must beg the attention of lion. Members, for it is an easy thing to attack any man, and he ought to be allowed every advantage in making his defence. I have stated that it was alleged is the petition that on a certain day the horse was sold for the large price of 10,000/. If that state ment had even the shadow of a foundation, I should have been bound to bring the impeachment; but when I looked into the case, I found in the first place, that the sums tAted were wrong. The horse was rust said for 10,000/. nor fir any sum of the kind, nor was its value 700/. or 3001., but 300/. or 400/., which I bel'eve is a usual price for such animals as these. That was the first error. In the next place, it was physically impossible, as I will satisfy the House if they will do me the honour to attend, that this transaction of the purchase of the horse could have had any effect upon the judgment of Lord Charles Somerset, for it occurred some months after the judgment had been deli vered. The judgment was delivered on the 30th of April, and the sale of the horse took place on the Ist of Septem kr. But that was not all : for if the purchase of the lows e had been made to influence the Judge, his judgment was all the wrong way, for it was against the man to whom the horse was sold. Now, after this, suppose I had had ever so great a reason, in the first instance, to confide in the sta , eirents in the petition, I ask whether I was bound to go on with it, after I had thus discovered its material errors ? lam bound to say, on behalf of that gentleman whose petition I presented, that I thought then, and think still, he was ill used ; and I should be willing to present the petition of him, or of any other man, under similar circumstances ; but it is one thing to present a petition, and another to go on and im peach the Government mentioned in it. I cross-examined the gentleman who furnished me with the petition, and did what I could to assure myself of the truth of the state ment in it ; but it was not his own case, and of course he could only speak to the best of his belief. When I found I must fail in that cl.atge I resolved not to go further; and within a wed: afterwards I stated to the House that it was too late that Session to put a public officer on his trial, and that the question must therefore be postponed to the next Session—it was so postponed ; in the next nothing was done ; but in the Session after I gave the same expla nation which I have now given, and which I hope I shall not he called cn to give again.—(lfear, hear. )—I acquit the Hon. Member who has brought the matter forward of any intention of attacking me personally ; but I must put in on behalf of the profession of the law, not of myself, a doubt whether a more complete and perfect and satisfac tory answer could be given to any charge brought against one of its members.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. D. W. HARVEY said that the Hon. and Learned Member who had just addressed the House had b u t done him justice in saying that he had no intention of attacking any particular body of men. He bad no such intention ; but he would not abstain from doing his duty under the dread of falling under the exercise of the powers of any Hon. Gent., even of the Hon. and Learned Gent. himself.— (Hear.)—He confessed that he thought that it was impos sible for a man to be in such a situation without having his judgtnent influenced by it in the performance of his duty in that House ; and it occurred to him the more strongly, from the peculiar locality of the Hon. Member in that HouFe—for it happened just about that time that the Hon. and Learned Gent. took a conspicuous situation on the other side of the House. After he had expected to have seen the .Noble Lord impeached, lie was surprised, and his surprise was not singular, at the course the Hon. and Learned Member so peremptorily and ❑nexpectedly took; but it was obvious then, and it appeared now to be the fact, that he was engaged professionally in the same matter, arid the result appeared to be that it produced in his mind an impression the most perfectly different front that which be had expressed when he read the pe tition in that House. He (Mr. Harvey) had never given any opinion on that case—h e entertained none: but he had no doubt, after the satisfactory statement made by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, that he had exercised a sound judgment on the subject. There was only one cir cumstance which was at variance with what the Hon. and Learned Gentlem to had observed, and that was an ob servation which amounted to this—that it was prepos terous to suppose that any gentleman in the profession could be Counsel and Judge in the seane cause at the same time. Did the Hon. and Learned Gentleman forget that there were fourteen Courts, or divisions of a Court—for such were the lists of Commissioners of Bankrupts—sitting at the same time, and that as ahnost all the persons mini. posing these Courts were practising barristers, each might he retained to plead before the Court of which he was a member. Ile would not say that that was a seemly prac tice, but so it was. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had asserted that he (AL.. Harvey) was ready to join with the crowd in raising an outcry against his branch of the profession, and assaulting the magnitude of their fees. He really had no wish to do any such thing; but at the same time he must say, that he felt there was ample room for amendment in that respect, and that no reform would be effectual that did nut place that portion of the profession under controul and regulation. If a solicitor charged 13s. 4d., and the Master struck off 6s. Sd., the party got the benefit of the disallowance; but if a fee of fifty or one hundred guineas was marked on the hack of a brief; and the Master disallowed one half of the sum, or even if the barrister was not present in Court, he knew no means of getting back the sum that had been disallowed. That statement of Lis opinion was certainly not an attempt to run down a branch of the profession incapable cf defend• mug itself. He was, however, a reformer ; and being so, he was desirous that reform should be carried into every department where it was required. Mr. BROUGHAM said, that the Hon. Member for Colchester was mistaken as to his supposed locality in that House at the time in question. All the transactions took place in 1825, when he occupied the very saute place in that House as at the present moment, and the discussions then began and ended in eight days. It was two years afterwards that the subject was renewed, and that he gave the explanations which he had now repeated.—The pe tition was laid upon the table. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the Inha bitants of the Parish of St. Andrew, against the Select Vestry Act. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the Roman Catholic inhabitants of Naas, in Ireland, against the Vestry Act. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the town of Drogheda, complaining of distress, and praying that some Charitable Funds now held by the Corporation of that town might be appropriated to the relief of the poor there. The petition stated that a great number of persons in the town were destitute of food, fuel, and clothing-- that 25/. a week were collected, which only gave five farthings per head to each of the poor—that the Corpo ration possessed charitable funds to the amount of 20,0001. a year, and that the same might be advantageously ap plied to the relief of the poor.— Laid on the table. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the tanners of Drogheda, against the Excise upon Leather. The lion. Member then postponed his notice of motion respecting the Law of Libel, from to-morrow to the 29th April. DEPUTY SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS. Mr. C. PERGUSSON moved for certain returns front the Court of Session, and took that opportunity of ask ing the Right Hon. Secretary of State a question, in re lation to the late Learned Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas. That Learned Lord had retired, and had, as ha honeyed, obtained a pension, on the ground of infirm health. By the 29th of Geo. 111. his Majesty was empowered to grant to the Judges of the Courts of Westminster Hall certain annuities, upon their retiring orn the Bench. That power was limited to cases in which these Learned Persons had been fifteen years upon the Bench, with the excepted case of persons who re tired f;-,:o permanent infirmity. The question he put was—wilt:thew 1 , !t•It Noble and Learned Lord was about to be appointed to an.:,ther office—to one of high trust, great responsibility, and consideraWe labour—he meant tiria office of Deputy Speaker of the House of Lords. Mr. I.4F.EJ, raid that the Government had it not in con templation to n4,r any special appointment of Deputy / Speaker. The Chief Baron of the Exchequer, by virtue of his appointment ;is such, and the Master of the Rolls in the rime mantrer, would sit in that house in the ab sence of the Lord Ch4ncellor, MALT DUTIES. Mr. SLANEY presented a petition from 1000 persona, compii,ing the principal land-owners of three hundreds in 4.11,e e:ounty of Salop, praying for the repeal of the Act reliding to the Duty on Malt. Mr. PORT lAti reminded the Chancellor of the Ex eliciiier that, early in last Session, he agreed to bring in a Bill to regulate the Malt Duty. Ile bad not yet pressA the Right lion. Gr ►lt, to per4onn that promise, because he wished and expected that the delay wpuld itvitice him to change a Bill to regulate the Malt into a. Bill to repeal the Malt Duty altogether. Ur, S. RICE gave notice of his intention to move for ilev,a; to hring in a Bill to remove certain civil disabilities still exting,winct Roman Catholics in the Corporation of Gtiii M,V4. Mr. P. 'IIIO3ISON, in prcsent;ni; g p.aition from certain inhabitants of Newark, apologised for being obiligizil to make that .„-ietition the subject of some remark.. The hcro,4l :`:waist F.6..7ltained 2,000 houses, and 10,000 inhabi, tants. Much 'it „;roperty was held under the Duke of Newcastle, who wag a gie..:t proprietor there, holding, in his own right, aiaut tvp'lsuniirp,'.l4ouses. A similar number was held by individuat,a . over wby, .the Duke could exercise an inguence, Another very large pp;;; - ion of the property belonged to thi.! Crown, which possessed th e right of taking tolls, and had ‘Le duty of 'repairing; roads and bridges, aiid regulating the 2isiang nn the ma nor. He mentioned thee eirepmstii,nce to shsw, that however consider:2We might lie the property :of ,tlie Duke, it could nor, under ens cirei.susisnres, possess any great degree of power. But if such was: the stato of the town, the lauds swum' it were A flillor4 The lands enclosed it a 3 a belt, and contained 960 acres, which belonged to the town. Those lands not only went a considerable distance round the town, but branched out upon the road, especially on the London-road. He only wished that he was privileged by the usages of Parliament to lay the map of the place upon the table of the House. The very privilege conferred upon the inhabitants of Newark bad, in tact, been the cause of their recent suffer ings; the highest and most inestimable advantage that could be conceded, and to obtain which such plaCes as Leeds, Manche ter, and Birmingham, had long in vain struggled—the power of returning Members to Parlia ment—had been converted into a source of the most grievous calamity. An individual who was a lessee Of lands and houses under the Crown had thus of tained in Newark so immense and so injurious a power, that he had turned the greatest advantage into the greatest disadvantage to the people. That in• dividual was the Duke of Newcastle, and the manner in which he had accomplished his object was quite clear.— The principal trade in Newark was that of dealing in meal and malt ; and if a gentleman wished to obtain a field for his horse—if a flourishing tradesman wanted a garden for his family—or a mechanic a piece of ground for recreation, he might indeed obtain it by applying to the Crown lessee ; but on what condition. He was required, in the first place, to pay for it its full value, a monopoly price, but in addition he must be bound both body and soul to the Crown lessee—be must abjure all right to think and act for himself on questions of politics, and, in the words of the Crown lessee, to give hi►n his entire confidence and zealous co-operation. He (Mr. P. Thom son) should be the last man in the world to gainsay the natural and mutual bond between landlord and tenant-- arising from confidence on the one side, and gratitude on tlie other ; but here the relation was rather like that be tween the slave aml his West India driver. The last Me►nber for Newark had been singularly tinfOrtunate--he lost his seat in consequence of not being able to vote accord ing to the wishes of his patron, and his office for not being able to attend to the wishes of Government. Though unfortunate, his situation was most honourable, and his conduct reflected upon him the highest credit. The re. stilt was a vacancy in the representation of Newark, - and on that occasion an individual was sent down by the lessee of the Crown. He (Mr. P. Thomson) did not mean in any way to accuse the present Hon. Menthe'. for Newark (Mr. Sadler) ; but, without offence, he might say, that l►e went down as the nominee of the lessee of the Crown, and that in that character lie was presented by the agents of -the Noble Duke to the inhabitants. Those inhabitants, however, thought that they had an equal right to choose for themselves, and they selected, as the object of their choice, an individual of whom it might be said, without disparagement to the present Mem ber, that he was well qualified to discharge his duty to his constituents, and to communicate instruction ;0 those with whom he might have been called upon to sit. A contested election was the consequence, although the inhabitants had before their eyes the woeful effects of former struggles of the same kind. One of these occurred in 1796, and another as recently as 1826, and he was happy to say that on the last occasion, there were found 587 independent ►nen, who, - although their efforts were unsuccessful, endeavoured to liberate the borough :of Newark from its thraldom. The Crown lessee again triumphed, and it might have been hoped that he would have rested satisfied with his triumph ; but those who entertained any such hope, it seemed, knew little of the individual with whom they had to deal. Venge ance only slumbered—it was the slumber of the cat waiting to seize its prey. Every voter for the unsuccessful candi date received notice to quit—or rather (for he would not exaggerate), every voter but one received that notice. The exception was remarkable ; the voter went to the agent of the Crown lessee and stated that he voted. for Mr. Serjeant WilJe by mistake. " Then (replied the agent) your notice to quit was a mistake also."—(Hear, and laughter.)—The Noble Duke, overflowing with philanthropy, had, on snore than one occasion, lamented the sufferings of his miserable countrymen ; but, in this particular instance, the general kindness of his nature seemed to have deserted him. He (Mr. P. Thomson) might attempt to pourtray the wretched condition of those who, by this edict of the Crown lessee, were dr ven from their once happy homes into banishment, but it would be impossible for him to come up to the re ality. No term of service and subserviency, no dot ation of occupancy could Pave the unhappy tenant from this act of relentless power ; no rent was in arrear—the Crown lessee had no just cause of complaint against his tenants on the score of morality and propriety of conduct, unless he had a right to object to the impropriety of his tenants refusing to vote against their conviction. That deter mination could not lie passed over with impunity; and in older to deprecate the wrath of his Grace, or to take measures to avoid its consequences, a Public Meeting was called, and letters, respectfully worded, were sent to the Duke of Newcastle, and to his nominee, inviting them: to attend. Neither of them did attend ; but his Grace sent a letter, containing what he considered h s justifica tion. What was that justification? A bold avowal that be considered the franchises of the voters his property:— that they possessed the privilege of sending a Member to the House of Commons only for his advantage ; and, in short, that as a Peer of Parliament he had a right to do that circuitously, which, by the Resolution of the House of Commons; he could not do directly, without a breach of privilege. In other words, the Duke claimed to do what he liked with his own. He (Mr. P. Thomson) denied that right. The Government had placed in his possession Crown Lands, which were public property, for the benefit of the public ; but the Noble Duke bad per verted that public property to the injury ef the pith; and to do that he could have no right. Had the Patron of the Borough but read a single passage in the work of his no minee, lie would have seen in direct terms a refutation of the very right he claimed to do what he liked with his own. " So far, perhaps (said the Hon. Member for Newark in his work on Ireland), it will be said that the owners of land have a perfect right to do as they like with their own. I will not pause now to discuss it further than to say that it has probably been the apology for more cruelty and oppression than all other excuses put together.— (Much cheering.)"—lt remained for him (Mr. P. Thom son) to show the grounds on which he was anxious that this petition should be referred to a Select Committee, in order that upon the Report of that body an address to the Crown might be founded, praying that the power formerly given to the Duke of Newcastle might not be renewed Those grounds were twofold--1. The pecuniary loss to the public.-2. The manner in which the privileg e of electing a Member had been perverted. As to the first, it could not be denied that Government was bound to lease or dispose of the Crown lands to the best advantage. Th e lease to the present lessee, besides houses, consisted of 960 acres of most valuable land about Newark, quit rent., copy_ hold rents, tolls of markets and bridges, and influence over certain charities. The first lease was granted in 1760 to the Earl of Lincoln, by the Duke of Newcastle, then Prime Minister—(Hear, hear, hear)—and for what an nual sum did the House suppose? For no less than the enormous and extortionate rent of 361. per annum.—(tfear, and laughter.)--After some intermedi ate negociation, the lease having expired nine years, it was renewed in 1815, and the rent was then raised to 2,060/ per annum, showing, at all events, that the Earl of Lin coln, who first obtained it, had at least had a pretty good bargain. Even this increased rent was not nearly the value, which he (Mr. Thomson) believed to be from 3,0001. to 3,5001. per annum. Nor was the mere pecu niary loss all that should be considered, because the Crown lessee was interested in preventing the improvement of the Borough : no new houses were allowed to be built, because their occupation would create new voters ; and no leases were granted by his Grace for a longer term than twelve months, in order that he might keep his tenants in proper controul. A short time since, only four acres of land be longing to Lord Middleton were sold for no less a sum than 4,0001.—( Hear, hear.)—He did not mean to say that the whole nine hundred and sixty acres held by the Duke of Newcastle were valuable in proportion, but they were at present, worth much more than the SUM for which they were let, and might, on a different system, be greatly enhanced•in price. He saw no reason why the lands should not be sold at once, subject to the right of the present lessee. No opportunity ought to be lost of putting money into the Exchequer, and in this case the sale would have the additional inestimable advantage of freeing voters from a state of political subjection. By the course that had been taken with respect to the Crown lands, Govern ment had violated three great principles. Ist, They had prevented the relief of the people from a proportion of their burdens ; 241, They had permitted the possession of these lands to be turned to the great pecuniary injury of parties residing in the borough and neighbourlio«l; 3d, They had permitted the Crown to give a Peer the power to rOrirn a l'lember to the House of Commons. He had no wish to call aieawn indignation upon the present Noble Patron of the borough ; and after Iyhat had been done, and what had been said, it was net neceasari to inv ; *ke public opinion upon his conduct. He sought no venge ance, he only called upon the House to interfere, to pre .ecti,:: the recurrence of such evils, and to vindicate the reivea iron; the obloquy that at present attached. to it. lie moved that the ketition be referred to a Select Com mittee. Lord LOW FLIER was aware after the moit i-,wwing and pathetic appal of the Ifon. Gentleman, that his state ment of a few plain facts would not be heard to advantage. of course avec! v4th the lion. Mvuber, as to the right of presentiq the petition; hut, he must remark, that if it did not contain g ross mis-statements, it gave such per versions of the truth as would tend to mislead the House. He would not go through the allegations in detail ; but _ _ upon two or three of them he felt called upon to make a . . few observations, and in the outset to mention that the Hon. Member on some points had been less cautious than tl:e petitioners, whose petith n contained few charges, ex cept by inference and insinuation. He had talked of 960 acres surrounding Newark, of tolls, of markets, and bridges, and various other municipal revenues ; but some of these did not belong to the Crown, and would not revel t to it at the end of the term of the present hssee. They were granted by Charter of Charles 11. to the Corporation, and the whole amount of these boasted tolls and revenues was about SO/. a year, part of which belonged to the Cor poration of Nottingham. The 960 acres were scattered in villages round Newark, and part was in certain fens three or four miles distant. The right of voting was in the inhabitants paying scot and lot, and the possessions of the Crown in dwellings in Newark were very inconsidera ble. Twelve houses and twenty-six cottages were all it owned—(Hear, hear !)—and after the Hon. Member had taken the trouble to visit the Office of Woods and Forest., in order to inspect the map of Newark, it was singular that he should speak of the 960 acres as if they sur rounded Newark on all sides like a belt ; whereas, if the place were attacked, and be defended on Crown land, on three sides it would be open to the enemy.— . -(Hear, hear.) There were no less than three or four other proprietors who had larger property. What had fallen from th e lion. Member would induce the House to suppose that under the lease the tenant to the Crown only paid 36/. a-year ; the f tct was, that the lease was renewed in 1806, and the rent was then fixed at 2,200/. a-year, although the actual receipt was only 2,026/. ; but, in addition, a fine of 2,500/. was also paid. It was alleged that his Majesty's Government were interested in supporting one candidate more than another, as relying, in return, upon his support in that House. Now it turned out that the gentleman supported by the Duke of Newcastle did not generally support the Government. He had now but to add, that he wished all tLe circumstances of the case to come before the House previous to its coming to any decision. Acting -upon this view of the question, he should reserve himself till the time should come for replying, before the petition was brought up. Mr. FYNES CLINTON would not follow the Hon. Member for Dover through all the various topics upon which he had thought proper to declaim at so much length. He intended merely to confine himself to facts, and he re gretted that the petitioners had not done so. The petition was full of mis-statements and exaggerations. The House must have heard with much satisfaction the statement made by the Noble Lord that the lease by which the Noble Duke held the lands spoken of, a lease originally granted so far back as the reign of George 11., and said to have been conferred upon his nephew by a First Lord of the Treasury —an observation made, he might be allowed to say, with the view of casting imputations upon the Noble Duke—it was very gratifying (he continued) to learn from the Noble Lord opposite, that in 1806, the petitioners said 1815, that lease was renewed at a rant of 2,0001. a year. He did believe that that rent was at the time a perfectly fair rent. Such being the fact, it was rather hard that circumstances of that nature should be made the ground of insinuation against the Noble D u k e , th a t h e l et the lied in queetien to tenants at will solely for electioneering pur poses ; that, in fact, the property of the Noble Duke at Newark was so managed as to serve those purposes and none other. The nature of the tenure afforded no ground for such an assertion ; any one acquainted with the county of Nottingham, must be perfectly aware that by tenancy at will was the customary mode V letting land in that part of the country, and in many of the adjacent counties. Could there, then, be a more unfair ground of insinuation against the Noble Duke than that he adopted the mode of managing his property usual in that part of the country ? It was said, that in consequence of the conduct of the Noble Duke, houses were not built in the town ; that not one of the inhabitants was i nabled to enjoy a comfortable house. It was said that the property of the Duke encom passed the town, than which nothing casuld be more with out foundation. It was further said, that he gave all the accommodation land near the town. How stood the fact ? The laud all around the town did not form any part of the Duke's estate—the greater part of the accommodation land belonged to other families. Ind e ed, th e f am il y w i t h which the Chair was connected possessed a considerable portion of that land. Persons acquainted with the town must know, that so far front its being true that persons debiting to reside there had the slightest difficulty in ob taining residences, there was no town more over. built —at the present moment there were many new houses uninhabited, and the natural effect was, that ground for building could now be bad very cheap, though it had been alleged that the purchase money of one acre was 4,0001. He could state a circumstance well calculated to cast a doubt upon that statement—ten or twelve years ago an acre of laud for Imi'ding brought only 1,0001., and in twelve months afterwards another lot of land was put up to auction and there were no bidders for it—could it then be supuosed that an acre in the present times, when there were more houses than could obtain tenants, II ould bring such a price as 4,0001. ? At the late contest be tween the present Member for Newark and a Learned Serjeant, it was made matter of accusation against the present Member, that he was unknown to the town—from which one would suppose that the Learned Serjeant was well known and well connected in the town of Newark ; yet the fact was, that he never had been in that town till he went there on an electioneering adventure. The pre sent Member was returned by a large majority ; but though the Learned Serjeant was not successful, yet he left behind him a large body of active and zealous partisans. It was not, however, till Michaelmas that an opportunity presented itself for a manifestation of that zeal and activity when the tenants of the Noble Duke received notice to quit.—( Hear, hear, hear.)—lt was well understood, that a lease for a year required that notice to quit should begin six months before the time at which the lease would ex pire; but a landlord was not bound to give any more than six months notice—it was not fair to say, that because the Noble Duke waited till the proper and regular time came round, that, therefore his motive in waiting was to allow the time to elapse within which it was practicable to pre sent an Election Petitien. Soon after those notices to quit the Learned Serjeant circulated hand-bills, calling together the several persons who had received ;latices to quit in that way—they had the means of knowing that the number did not exceed 40 ; yet it was announced to the public that no less than 200 families were turned front their houses. Upon that announcement a meeting was called, and the Learned Serjeant came down—the Noble Duke was invited to attend that meeting. It need scarcely be said, that tint invitation was not accepted—that the meeting was attended by few except the very lowest rabble of Newark, and nothing but abuse was poured out against the Noble Duke for not being present to answer for his contumacy to the people of Newark.—(hear, hear.)—These speeches, however, were not thought sufficient—the present petition was got up, and he begged the Reuse to observe the mo desty of its prayer—it prayed that that House would ad dress the Crown, intreating that the lease of the Noble Duke be not renewed. If they acceded to such a prayer as that, the next step would be to prescribe who the par ties were in future to be to whom the Crown would grant leases, and to whom it should not—and at length they would come to tell his Majesty the persons in whom they had confidence as candidates for the situation of Crown tenants, and in whom not. In the end, the House would tell the Officers of the Crown that they were not to make the best bargain they could, and obtain the highest rents and the most eligible tenants; it was impossible but that the House must perceive that the present was a petition merely fur electioneering purposes—the objects being to destroy one interest and raise up smother. It was not contended for a moment that there was any ground of com plaint—at least there was no complaint contained in the petition, that the Noble Duke haul done wrong, otherwise than in defeating the claims of the Learned Serjeant, by inducing the occupiers of Clown lands to vote against him. How stood the fact ? The electors of Newat k were in number 1.385, the tenants on the Crown lands having votes were only 74, seven voted for the Learned Serjeant, yet it was said that the 74 Crown tenants decided the election in favour of his opponent. Had the whole 74 voted in Ids favour, he would have still been far indeed limn success. It wits one of the most novel proceedings that had ever been proposed to that House, to interfere with the choice of the Crown tenants—for all these rea sons, then, he should oppose the motion of the Honourable Member for Dover. Sir FRANCIS BURDETT considered that the matter was of so much importance 3.4 to deserve the appointment of a Committee. When a petition was presented to the House, the statement of any individual Member was no answer to such a petition, especially upon a subject of so much importance. But before he entered upon the dis cussion of that topic he wished to say a few words upon a subject of e. snore personal nature. The Noble Duke had addressed a letter to tho Editor of a Newspaper, which it well suited an idle man to have to do with, for, fortunately, it was one requiring no answer. In what he had said he entertained not the slightest idea of offering the Noble Duke any offence. He had not applied to Lim per sonally the appellation of borouglimonger—he had simply stated it matter of fact. In the present state of the House he was ready to admit that he considered it no crime to purchase tv seat iA that pope was ready to 14- come so far the friend of corruption as to acknowledge that the purciase of a seat was in the present times less an evil than a palliative of an evil. The purchase of which he spoke was made at a time when the Noble Duke was an infant, "mewling and puking in his nurse's arms"_long before he had attained that maturity of age and wisdom for which he was now distinguished. At that.time he (Sir F. Burdett) thought of nothing so little as of coming into a Parliament; the representation of Boroughbridge was pressed upon him by his friends. One of the parties was an infant in law, and the other (him self) was, at that time uncontaminated by politics—they were both, therefcre, entitled to be called Simon Pure. He knew almost as little about the matter as did the Noble Duke. Ile found himself placed in that House by a sum of money, 40001., and no very great payment it was, considering that the seat was secured to him for a period of six years, notwithstanding any dissolution of Parliament that might occur within that period. It was a fact that he sat for Boroughbridge in consequence of the payment of 4,000/. on his behalf to those who acted on behalf of the Duke of Newcastle. But in stating that he surely meant—nor did he convey anything offensive to the Noble Duke, he spoke of a Duke of Newcastle for the time being—Pelham, Duke of Newcastle, or any other, it made little difference to him. Mr. Portman, the father of the present Member for Dorsetshire, succeeded him in that borough ; and so strictly honourable was the con duct observed towar's him in that matter, that in conse quence of a dissolution of Parliament shortly after his return, he was returned a fair proportion of the pur chase-money, though he had made no stipulation to that effect. In speaking of transactions such as that--he meant no blame to the individual, whether called a bo roughmonger, a boroughmaster, a boroughforcer, or procunque nominee yaudet—there was no blame to the individual, the blame rested upon that House, and it was for that House to vindicate its own privileges and the liberties of the country. Me had listened with much pleasure and attention to the char, lucid, strong, he might say, irresistible statement of the Hon. Member for Dover, and he could not understand how the House could refuse to accede to his motion: He hardly knew in what way to consider the petition—whether as an ordinary election petition, or as one affecting - the rights and privileges of that House, and the right of election particularly; and it complained, too, of what very nearly concerned the House—the interference of a Peer in the election of a Member. That interference was, in the eye of the com mon law, a high crime and misdemeanour. A maxim of that law was, ileetiones fiant liberce—it was an acknow ledged principle of the law that elections should be free. Again, the Statute of Westminster, which was but a col lection and interpretation of the common law, asserted the same principle—the offence of a Peer interfering with elections, was specially noticed in that Act, and pro nounced to be a high crime and misdemeanour. It was absurd to call aoy thing an election that was nut free—it was either free, or it was not an election at all—not only were elections by the law to be nominally free, but they were to be practically so, and without interference. There was nothing which our forefathers guarded more jealously than the freedom of election—elections of every kind ; for in ancient times the dignitaries of the church were e ected, au 1 by them the interference of a Peer was re garded as the highest offence. Since then nothing could be more indisputable than the freedom of elections, and in that light, perhaps, the petition might be considered a petition of privileges; at the same time it was substan tially an election petition from the defeated candidate.— In whatever light it might be regarded, the petition was one of considerable importance. The petitioners alleged that the present practice was most injurious to the interests of property in Newark—to the progress, the wealth, and prosperity of that town. With that aver ment before them, the friends of the Noble Duke ought to be anxious to have the matter inquired into. There was a Bill before the house for the disfranchisement of East Retford; and here was one where a Peer was accused not only of using undue influence, but of using threats and force. Could they, with any show of consistency, dis franchise the one and allow the other to escape? Further, a crime accompanied with violence is greatly aggravated by that violence. Now, if, upon examination, it turned out—and examination was most necessary—th a t th a t Peer had interfered, they could not allow one borough to escape and inflict punishment on the other. In justice then to all parties, he thought that the House could not refuse a Committee. Mr. HARVEY—Having always been an advocate for fair play, in all things, he saw no difference between the Duk e of Newcastle returning Members to that House and any other Noble Duke, or Lord, or Borough Proprietor doing the same thing. But it had been asked—Did they snean to interfere with the right of the Crown as to what terms Crown Lands should be let ? He answered boldly— yes; they did intend to do so; and they ought to intend to do so.—(Hear, hear.)—These lands were not the property of the Crown ; for they had been bought at a perilous price by the people of England. Ever since the time of Queen Anne the nation had been paying 600,0001. or 700,0001. year for what did nut produce as many pence. It had also been asked, whether, except in the times of the Common wealth, there had never been an instance of the House of Commons interposing -in this way ? He would give an instance of such a thing. After King William was esta blished in this country, he proposed signing a Grant, giving to the Earl of Portland five-sixths of the county of Denbigh. In that case the House had interfered, and ad dressed the Crown, praying that it would not so deal with the public property ; and, in deference to thisfeeling, Ki❑g William undertook to compensate the Earl in another way. lie only wished to have this dealt with in the present in stance as a mere question of finance ; and this petition having reached the House, he thought that the Noble Lord should seize the opportunity of advancing the produce of the Crown Lands. Had not the petition been presented somewhat earlier than he had expected, he would have been provided with a letter front a respectable inhabitant of Newark, who in it expressed his opinion that the Crown Lands there, if now sold in toto, would produce 200,000/. —(Hear, hear.)—The people there were now cons plaining of manacles which they wished to throw off; therefore, a sale effected at the present period would pruve pre-eminently advantageous. But, perhaps, it would be said, that though individuals might thus eventually have a claim to property, they might for the next five or six years be expelled front what was virtually their own by the Duke of Newcastle. Tu avoid this the House should interfere, and pass a Bill, fur the purpose of enacting that the tenantry should not be thus violently divested of their rights. But let him ask one question. Why should they not buy up the Duke of Newcastle ? (A laugh.)—A man who would sell a seat for 4,0001., could of course have no objection to sell any interest he might possess.—(A laugh, and hear, hear.)—The Sur veyor of the Crown lands would easily be able to find out the value of the bargain, as his experience in the neigh bourhood of St. Martin's-lane had given him sonic oppor tunities that way.—(A laugh.)—Thus two or three hundred captives would be set free, and a substantial value would be given to the Crown property. He would not now say further on the subject, as he should on the 30th of March take an opportunity of unfolding such a train of abuses and corruptions as would astonish every one—even those best acquainted with the system. Mr. SADLER begged to ask the Hon. Member far Dover whether the petition he had presented was carried at a town's meeting, and whether the full notice of that meeting had been given ? Mr. P. THOMSON—The petition was carried at a public meeting, convened after full notice, not only to all persons residing in the town, but one of the notices was even sent to the Hon. Gentleman himself.—(A laugh.)— The letter, however, which contained it, travelled in the most extraordinary way about the country, and it was not till long after that the Hon. Gentleman wrote a letter to the Chairman of the Meeting, stating that he should have written before on this subject had the letter come to hint so:iner. Mr. SADLER—The Hon. Gentleman, in his opinion, had not given a specific answer as to whether the petition emanated from a public meeting—(A loud laugh.)—lt was of importance to ascertain this point, because the principal p of tilt voters of Newark had already expressed their opinion of the petition, as he looked upon it to be to all intents and purposes an election petition. As the Hon. G en tl eman in answer to the question just put, had alluded— and somewhat facetiously—to the circumstances by which the notice was prevented reaching hint (Mr. Sadler), he would say a word or two on that subject. All the travel that that letter had had was entirely owing to accidents; and had it reached him in time he should have hail no he sitation in answering it in the negative. Besides which he said that he should have had to appear before a Com mittee, every one of whom. had been his opponents at the d ee ti o n._(Hear.)—The letter, however, as he had al ready stated, was delayed by sonic mistake ; not that he made any accusation against the postmaster.—(A loud laugh.)—But first it had gone to Leeds, and then to Man chester ; then it was sent en to Gaineborough, by !nig take—(A laugh)—and after a delay at all these places he Lead got the letter. He hp.d now to make a few observa tions nn the conduct of the Hon. Gentleman himself, who, though he, no doubt, intended to be courteous, had not been very much so in this instance. It was not till the Wednesday that he had received notice from him that he intended to propose the petition ; and he certainly had ex peeted that a copy of it would be sent to hint ; he, how ever, had had no opportunity 9f perusing it till that evening. That petition representeJ that he was not knoll in Newark : that, however, was not true, for bed been known to several influential persons there for many years. It was erroneous—it was false.—(Hesrp hear, hear.)—He thought, as the petition had been concocted in London—sent to Newark to canvass for subscribers—and then back to town—he might have been furnished with a copy sooner, so as to have been able to make some inquiries on the subject ; in which'ease be should have been able to approach the House with some' thing beyond mere impressions. What had fallen front the Noble Lord coincided with the impressions on his mind. It was certainly not fur the House to deal with leases already in existence; they could never admit an ex post facto law, such AS the Hon. Member for Colchester had proposed. There had been a great deal of gross ex aggeration about the conduct of the Noble Individual to whom so much allusion had been made. If that was the proper place for explaining, he could state many circum stances infinitely to that Nobleman's honour. The quota tion which had been made from his book had been unfairly applied, because it was only levelled at the prituiple of clearing. The inju►tice that had been done to the inha bitants of Newark had been dwelt upon by the Hon. Gen tleman in strains " most musical—most melancholy." 16 however, he (Mr. Sadler) were anxious to mike apologies for what the Duke of Newcastle had done, there were many at band which he was sure would appear valid if addressed to any landlord in the kingdom.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.)—He had been represented as a mere no-. mince ; but he begged to deny this, though he would nal disguise that when he aspired to the honour of represent ing Newark, he ha I been favoured with the good opinion and influence of certain individuals.—(A laugh.)—He had sought the influence of the property of the town and the neighbourhood, and he had gained it ; and he would boldly say, that if all the Noble Marquis's measures oa Reform had been carried into effect, be (Mr. Sadler) should still have been the Member for Newark. They had heard much vituperation of the Noble Individual alluded to, and from the commencement of the late election to its termina tion, the character of that Noble Person had been made matter of unceasing abuse. It should be remembered that Newark was not a close or corrupt borough ; it.contained 10,000 inhabitants, and all above the condition of , a mere pauper had a vote. All this taught them a very different lesson, and showed that the only influence which the Duke of Newcastle bad was through kindness. During his (Mr. Sadler's) canvass in Newark, he had ample opportu nities of seeing. this, and that his property was not de based or made use of for election purposes; he knew of many of the Noble Duke's tenants who gave no vets,- be cause they had no vote to give.—(A laugh.)—And why was this ? Because they were widows whom the Duke did not clause to remove for the sake of strengthening hi' numbers at the poll.—(Hear. )—Of that Noble Person it might be said that there was no act of hie life which re flected the slightest dishonour on his character. The Duke, consulting the pure principles of his own unsullied mind, had had respect for his (Mr. Sadler's), and left him to the free expression of 1114 own unhiass:d opinions. If the House intended to destroy that Noble Person's influence , they must destroy the influence of a man seated in the hearts of every one in that neighbourhood If there was . anything in this that could be regarded as corrupt, there was not a sound spot in the kingdom. Lord HOWICK would confess, that were he a borough , propiietor, lie should, while the prexent system continued► use the power he thus possessed, for the purpose o f se . curing the return of himself or his nominee. lie, there fore, did not wish to deprive the Duke of Newcastle, as the case stood at present, but he would ask whether it was not exercising a right greatly to the prejudice of the country ? The Hon. Member for Colchester had stated that the Crown lands could be let at much greater advati tage.—(Louil cries of " Question, question.") He took it for granted that the House intended to adopt the m otion of the Hon. Gentleman.—(" Question, question.") Mr. HOBHOUSE.—It appeared to him that the Hon. Gentleman who had spoken last but one, and the Nel'l' Lord (Lord Lowther), had left the question exactly where they found it. In the early part of the speech of the Hon. Member for Newark, he began to think that that non' Gentleman was about to proclaim that he was setting tiP for himself; but at the latter end he bad fairly confessed that he came in on the interest of the Duke of Newcastle , confessing at the same time that he was sitting there iu defiance of all the rules and regulations of Parliament.-- (Cries of "No, no," and " Hear, hear.") The Hon. Gentleman had been sent there by a Peer, am! had avowed it.---(" No, no.") Did not the Hon. Gentleman tell the House that he had received his seat from a Peer of Par liament 2—(" Hear, hear," and " Order, order.") Mr. SADLER—I did not say sc. Mr. HOBHOUSE.—I will make bold to ask the Hon. Member is it so ?--(Order, order—question, question.)--• Did not the Hoe. Member say, on a former occasion, that his Grace the Dike of Newcastle had allowed him to vote as he pleased ?—(Loud cheers.)—What was the inference (Mr. Hobhouse continued) to be drawn from this? Whet other inference could be drawn from this declaimer other than that which the petitioners say—that the lion. Member is returned by the Duke of Newcastle? He would not say whether it was by 79 votes or any other number derived from the Crown Lands, of which the Duke was the lessee, but he would say that by the admission of the lion. Member the allegation of the petitioners was proved, and that a cabs was made out that a Peer of Parliament bad dared, in via , lotion of the privileges of the Commons of England, to use his influence in sending a Meinber to that House. —(Hear,) This was the question ; and his Noble Friend, at the heal! of the Woods and Forests, had not properly considered it. It would have been proper to give the Magistrates of the town all the details which were to be found ex.utficio i 0 the office of the Woods and Forests, but that had nothing to do with this constitutional question. his Noble Friend was not disposed, as he ought to be, to acknowledge the fact of a Member having been sent into that House by the influence of the Duke of Newcastle. That was the fact, and he would not say that other individuals had not also been sent there by the influence of other Peers. That assertioo however, was no defence of the single instance, but rather an increase of the offence. He was sorry that the Right lion. Gent., (the Member for Liverpool) was not then present, for he had stated that when the House found 0 blot, it should take care to hit it hard, and take care that the people had no reason to reproach the House. Here was a blot, and if it were not hit—if the great Duke of Newcastle, though lie were the best of all possible Dukes, and the best, too, of all possible patrons—if he were allowed to escape, the House would tell the people deprexti4 miserum est ; and it might as well at once tear up the resolution which was then lying on the table, and put the mace under the bible, and not allow the resolution to he repeated Session after Session, that no Peer of Parliament ought to have any influence in returning Members t° that House, nor ought to dare to meddle with the elec tions of the people. He was sorry to hear the Noble Lord—wkom he had long known, and the kindness a whose nature he was well acquainted with—he was sorry to hear that Noble Lord make a taunt o f hie Honourable Friend's pathetic account of the suffer ings of the men banished from their homes, and represent the picture lie had drawn as not connected with the quee tion. Ile was not astonished at what had fallen from the Learned Gent.—it was hiscalling—he was bound to advocate a particular cause; but the Noble Lord was nut sent to Par liament for such a purpose. It was well to talk ; but be would put a case which would illustrate it. He would suppose that the Kia b &s? Government should send a rues sage to his Grace the Duke of Newcastle, that he should no longer be the beneficial lessee under the Crown, and that all his valuable possessions should be contracted 0 960 acres. He would suppose that this individual should be ejected because he bad given an adverse vote On t'W losing side of a defeated question; and if this were done 0 the Duke of Newcastle, how would they hear of violated rights, of an infringement of the best birth-right of Erie' lishmen—the right to do with his own as he liked.—(A laugh.)—lle would compare this case with the conduct charged against the Duke of Newcastle. Tht people 01 Newark were turned out of their houses because they did not vote as his Grace wished. The Hon. Member said/ Let them go to the other untenanted houses in Newark‘ that had been thrown up on the occasion. They were to leave all that was clear to theme—their own housed, their own homes and happy fire-eides—(Question, question)/ which were, perhaps?, all their comforts --because thel did not vote as his Grace bade them. Was this a picture that the Noble Duke would like ? Could it be coin' pared to the case of his Grace, whom he had posed ejected from the Crown Lands ? lie coul d a n it(o.ctwo ras c d o i n n tg l i l l ) e a t t o v .4t t ni li e e persons, i rtob ,ir.ing. v7ti t givenMayes were their similar' ? end not according to the wishes of another. His Grace mi g ht fi n d ot h er h ou ses tf he were ejected, and find other lands ; but when tliceo ejected,banjs banishment where weres ve were they severe t o punishmentfin d other t ip f n a rie r sP ic e? h m n E :a l n i , lvee b aren u d t to a poor man it might be death--it might deprive him of all the means of subsistence, and was so severe that no person could wish to inflict it. The Hon, Gentleman said that the case was exaggeratede-tbat it hail been represented that 200 persons had been ejected , and that in fact only forty hail been made miserable; Sup pose there was only one, that would be sufficient to make out the case, and would prove the interference of his Grace. lint the allegations in the petition had not been, end could not be denied. His Grace might say with 0 ' turnout tagi of antiquity, exam vellrut ltescire Woven... it would Paper. Were all, of that • 11 .esoItiti 'ere otl in 1701 tl.at Ha that he the persi the Ho" Bishop Bishops. and an tram ref reported terferenc Pol ved I Crown, • of his could be Anne? 6 there' ie Worcesti longer er •hut anol tl served, a kind cou oat the Were oth Wards ea roaster o of &Ara ter ferenc, influence twined N Whole to was pass roan was Dukes 0 the Pe11:, Alernher so great , , Presented voted for Case. election county ; Placed or plieated, in a C►n which yr . Rouse, i gent,- pal them w a things reoried y i, sion on t to sendil the Duki to send ii was that the covet gation lii freemen vented tli true ? people of greatest 1 badge of eery of the Au Excise di) so, w a with infa Crown w t that q pe r Noble D u Noble Du deprive al their ow n . Petty ae ti secured t o en) oy 'nem t be proved proved—i not take t how it cot liinyid4iluaerinrcees4ll(l- th e 1, u. , etat iulluenCe c Sir the cue, 1 11 '". "I appropriat' "Yo, niik t Thi Lett Le k, nitik,t,, 44 vi Fie rr , lie st lie would had been a view to Ferrel t o a Mr, s ec f:Tt makin of 4 , 0 ofeweio' hchtvoura' at the sato a d itteren t go to vote !ion. The in relation bee!, made and the ut ierence of it:voCt to 1