The Sun. — London, England, 1830-07-20 00:00:00

C.__./ ~~ /- - • 4 1. Ve • ~ . . 1:::-- • , ~„.' 4 04 411 P/ \ \ .` 3 :! • '" 2 ' -----' -- iig •'3 1 '.' I , I 7 if , : 7 -:Vjfit . ,',..,,,` ~•4 ; k-* , . ~ . . -- . -i - ' ._..,.., [ • 'k , .7.1 , ~ . 4 4 . ..., F 4 : 4 441 0 ' , 1- ~,• 1 ...,.. • , :, i•;' Vii' , Oh' c „,.... ...,.,„ ...:,.. - .. ; ... ~ • ' 1.. , 41111116,A ..,,,,, ~...... ( 7,! : * * *-... € ' 4 ' ' 'fr; c 4! t,f -'..• .- ./ / ..5 - ~..47./, - '." ir • - ‘...-.. ,10 -.iv jag, „,AtAtT il l;l' ,), to. I , .tIV .4i- . O/a CC 1 ------ ~,,,* .."..( , • - N ... S 1 , . ~ 1,800 guineas for a seat in Parliament ? fTe called on their Lordships not to practise: that species of hypocrisy any , longer, and not to deal with a particular borough, when,' with a aim"- lar Bill of Inderrinity, he woold undertake to bring before them many much worse cages. Was it just in their Lordships to deal with particular boroughs, when the whole system Will bad. The present proceeding' was either Otadicial act for the punishment of a particular boroughror it was, le- ROYAL ACADEMY, SOMERSET-HOUSE. LAST WEEK. if‘TOTICE is hereby given, thst the EXHI EITION of the ROYAL ACADEMY will finally, CLOSE on SATURDAY next, the 24th instant, at Seven o'clock precisely.• Admission (every day from Eight o'clock till Seven) One Shilling—Catalogue One Shilling. HENRY HOWAIID, R.A., Sc.. "gisiative enactment, with a view to ageneial rep- THE EXHIBITION of the NATIONAL REPOSITORY, Gallery of the Royal Mewi, Charing Cross, is NOW OPEN, anti will continue open •• to the Public daily until farther notic't. Admittanee 1.. Catalogues Is. T. S. TULL; Secretary. OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, ' JULY 5, 1830. THE PRINCIPAL OFFICERS, of his MAJESTY'S ORDNANCB do hereby give No tice, that they will SELL by PUBLIC AUCTION, at the Tower, on MONDAY the 2d of August next, and fol lowing day, at Eleven o'clock in the Forenoon, sundry' LOTS of STORES, viz.— Brimstone, Refined and Grough, 'Accoutrements, Bar nes", Sind Bags, Iron Bedsteads, Tools, Standing Vices, Clothing, Staves for Powder BarrQls, Smiths' Bellows, Sealing Ladders, Buckles, Shoeing Boxes, Old Serge Drums, Bugles, and Trumpets, Twined Hides, Oil Pipes mud Casks, Iron Tar Bartels, Old! Cured Paper, Old Match, and a variety of other Articles. The whole of which may be vis‘ved at the Tower, at Woolwich, and at the Military De,p6t, ToeleY-street, as expressed in the Catalogues, during Ithe V.l'vk previous to the Sale, film Ten o'clock till Four, upon application 'to the Storekeepers at those places, where Catalogues of the ' Lots, and Conditions of the _Sr"'.l::, will be delivered to those persons who may apply f'or the same. By Order of the Board, R. BYIIAM, Secretary. TO THE WORTHY AND INDEPENDENT FREE ' MEN' OF MAIDSTONE. olxnwriztri IT is with the utmost respect and gratitude that I acknowledge the kind and flattering recep tion I have experienced at your hands in my Canvass for the distinguished honour of being returned, at the ensuing ELECTION, one of the' REPRESENTATIVES in PARLIAMENT of your ancient and loyal ,BOROUGH, • and by which I am induced to believe that the principles upon which I offered myself to your notice are in unison with your own. Allow me, most respectfully and earnestly, to solicit a _ _ _ COntinuance of your exertions in my behalf; and I feel cOnfidetit that, with such powerful support, I shall obtain the honourable distinction to which, by your kindness, I have beetfled to aspire. I have the honour to he, Gentlemen, Your most faithful and obedient servant, HENRY WINCHESTER. Oakfield Lodge, Hawkhuritt, July 19. AT a MELTING to form a Local Com mittee, to support the }Election of MARTIN STAPYLTON, Esq: as one of the Representatives of the , . COUNTY of YORK, held at Myton, July 12, 1830, It was moved and carried. ;$ That the Rev. FRANCIS HENRY BARBER bele ^ spectfully requested to take the Chair, which being com plied with, the following Resolutions were passed unani mously ht. That this Meeting constitute a Local Committee for the canvassing of the Freeholders within 15 Miles of Myton, and communicating the result to the Chalrin'an of the General Committee in York. 2d, That this Committee meet daily at Myton Hall, and request that the Freeholders who may find it more convenient to come here, than to the Committee-room in York, will hvour them with their strenuous assistance to ensOrti Mr. Stspylton's Return on the ancient Principles of the Constitution, with strict adherence to all the exist inz Laws of Election. That this Resolution be sent to the General Committee in York, recommending it to be published in the Papers ; and it is hoped that this example of forming a Local Com mittee Will be followed by every Town in Yorkshire. (Signed) F. H. BARBER, Chairman. ' TO THE GENTLEMEN, CLERGY, AND. FREE HOLDERS OF THE COUNTY OF YORK. iIInITLIDIZIN, • , 'TO extinguish 'invidious Repprts, I pledge )11. my honour that I will not retire from the Contest, (if a contest should ensue) till every Freeholder, who by voting for me supports the ancient Purity•of Election, has been polled. My Canvass'exceeds eatery possible expectation. I trust that every Town iu Yorkshire will spontaneously form a Local , Committee. I have the honour to be, Gentlemen, • Your faithful and obedient Servant, ' • . MARTIN STAPYLTON. Committee-Boom, York, July 13, 1830. • pANTERBURY ELECTION. rip 11 E COMMITTEE .for conducting. the - 11 - ELECTION of Lord FORDWICH are requested by -his Lordship to convey to the worthy and independent FREEMEN of CANTERBURY, whom he had the , honour to meet at the Spread Eagle Hotel, on Saturday evening last, his moat grateful thanks fur the highly flat tering reception they gave him, and for their cordial and reiterated assurances of support at the ensuing election. These assurances, in addition to a most favourable canvass in the City of Canterbury, and to the promises which Lord Pordwich continues to receive from the out-dwelling Freenum in all directions, give him the fullest confidence that he shall be placed in a triumphant situation on the poll. Lord Fordwieli hopes to be enabled to pay his re spects personally to every freeman who he has not yet had the honour of seeing; but should the many calls on his at tention during the hurry of a general canvass, or the aliortriess of the period before the election, occasion any omission, he trusts it may be imputed to po want of re ' spect on his part. In the meanwhile any comihaunica , tion addressed to the Committee will be thankfully re ceived at the Committee.room, Spread Eagle, Grace church-street, Committee-room, Spread Eagle Hotel, ' Graceoltitech.street, e luly 19, 1880. his day was published, in One VoWine Bvo., price 145., Or, with proof impressions of the plates, price 214.1 r A N ACCOUNTof the GREAT FLOODS of August, 1829, in the Province of Moray and adjoining districts; exhibiting a View of their Effects on the rivers Nairn, Findborn, Lassie, Spey, Deverun, Don, Dee► and other streams. ' By SIR THOMAS DICK LAUDER, Of Fountainhill, Bart., F.R.S.E., . Interspersed with Geological Remarks, Traditional Arlec,lotes, lee., knd illustrated by Fifty-seven Etchings and Charts. " writers prevailed."—Genesis. Printed T he dam Buck, Edinburgh ; end Longman and Co., London. Just published, dedicated to the Right Honourable Lord ' Nick, FRE SPANIEL. orthw Engraved in'' the best Lige manner by JOHN SCOTT and JOHN WEBB, after a beautiful Picture by R. IL REINAGLEI R.A. Size 18 in c h ea by 16 high. Prints 12s. ; India Proo fs 21s. ; before letters, 1/. Ile. 6d. An Engravi ng of " The POINTER." (Gimp-- anion to the above), is in a state of forwardness. K u London : Moon, Boys, and Graves, Printiellers to the 4, a, Pall-mall. Of whom may be had, 1 . tREA KING COVER, and DEATH of the FOX la Pair). Beautifully engraved in line by the late JOHN Fsipoy2... front pictures by GILPIN and REINAGLE. Sire 44 Inches by 20 high. Prints, 3/. Ss. ; Proofs, 6/. 68. ; tacit Proofs, 71. 7s. the pair ; Splendid Sporting Subjects ever produced in this country. '2. The SHO OTING PONY. Engraved in line by W. HADDON, after A. COOPER, ILA. Size, 9 inches India Proofs, by 11 high. Prints, 101. 6d. ; French Proofs, 16s. ; 21 8 , 3. The MARK,En T PONY (c o mpanion to the above). graved in line by J. 11. SMITH, after a picture by WOODWARD. Prints, 7s. 6d. ; 10s. 6d. 1 4. The S HOOTER'S COMPANIONS. Engraved in mtnetinto by W. GILLEIt, after a picture by A. COOPER, ILA''in the possession of Sir George Phil ..lPart. M.P. Size, Ili inches by 14 high. Prints, 11s. 6d. ; Proofs, 154. • before letters, 21s. b. DRAUGHT HORSES. Engraved in rnezzotiete by W. C ILLER, after a Picture by A. COOPER, big. R.A. in th e possession of Sir J. E. Swinburne, Bart. Size, if; incliet.by 14 high, p r i nt% IN, 04, ; Proofs, 16s. ; before letters, 1/. ss. 0. PORTRAIT of JOHN WARDE, Esq., on his celebrated Horse BLUE RUIN. Painted by WILLIAM BARIIAUD ; Eng rave d , by T. LUPTON. Size, 19 iches by 15 high. P r i n t s , 12s. ; Prook 11.1 e. ; India ditte l I/. ; beim lets ;ten. 11. 1i . .. No. 11,811. LONDON ASSDUNCE. HOUSE. • • • Birchin•lane, July 14, 1830. THE Court of Directors of the Corporation of the London Assurance hereby give Notice, that a GENgRAL COURT will be heW at this. House, on WYDNESDAY, the 28th instant, at One o'clock in thk• Afternoon, to consider of an Address of Condolence and Congratulatibn to King William the Fourth, on the occasion of the death of 4tis• late Majesty, and the accession of his present Majesty to the Throne. • JOHN!LA.URENCE, Secretary. PRIVATE AVACANCYfor s-PUPIL is Now. Open in the *Family of a Married Clergyman, resident Twelve Miles from London; and whose number of Pupils is limited to Six. He can offer the most satisfactory - re ferences to Noblemen and Gentlemen, whose soushave been under his care.. Letters to be addressed to the. Rev. J. C. C., }Jr. Red well's, bookseller, 46, New Bond , street, London. : . PURSUANT. to a Decree.. of „the Niel Court of Chancery, made in a cause “FOGG v. WILD," the Creditors of PETER WILD, late of Stock port, in the county of Chester, Gent», who died on or , about the 20th day of July, 1820, are forthwith, by their Solicitors, to come in and prove their debts before Samuel Compton Cox, Esq.,' one of the Masters of the said court, at his Chambers, in Southampton-buildings, 'Chancery lane, London ; or, in default thereof, they will be ex cluded the benefit of the said decree. Just published, in One'Volume, Bvo. THE UNDYING ONE, and other POEMS. Ily the Bon. Mrs. NORTON, Authoress of " The Sorrows of Rosalie." 11. • In Two Vols. Bvo., with Portrait, PERSONAL MEMOIRS. By ''PRYSE LOCK HART GORDON, Esq. In Bvo., neatly bound, 10s. 6d., BURKE'S OFFICIAL KALENDAR for 1830. IV.. In Two Vols. Bvo., with Plates, TRAVELS 'tHROUGH the CRIMEA, TURKEY, and EGYPT. By the late JAMES WEBSTER, Esq., of the Inner Temple. The THIRD and FOURTH VOLUMES of BOUR RIENNE'SIPRIVATE MEMOIRS of NAPOLEON, completing that important Work. VL Complete in Two V 01.., CAILLIE'S TRAVELS to TIMBUCTOO, with nn onerous Ilintwations. Golburn and Bentley, New Burlington•etreet. Just published, in 3 vols. THE KING'S OWN A Tale of tile Sea. By the Author of the Naval Omcer." 2, JOURNAL of the HEART. Edited by the Au thoress of " Flirtation." In 1 vol. post Eivo. with Mug, trations. ' 3. CALEB WILLIAMS. By WILLIAM GODWIN, Esq. A New Edition. 3 vols. 12mo. 21.. 4. The OXONIANS. By the Author of " The Roué," 3 vole. , b. The DENOUNCED. By the Author of " Talcs by the O'Hara Famili," " The Nowlans," " The Croppy," Fze. 3 vole. 6. TALES of a TAR. By one of the Authors .ot " The Naval Sketch Book," 1 vol. post Bvo. CONTENTS : —The Breeze at Spithead—Jaek. a, Bio grapher—Command O'Mind—Sailor. Sal--Dreatns at Sea—A Brush in the Boats—A " Call" for the Cat, &c. 7. The MUSSULMAN, or LIFE in TURKEY. By R. R. MADDEN, Aq.' Author of "Travels in Turkey, Egypt," Br.`e.r, 8. The ENGLISH at HOME. By the Author of " The English in Italy," &e..81e. S vols. post Bvo. Colburn and Bentley, New Burlington•street. MIRACLES OF THE FIRST MISSIONARIES. Augustine cured a blind man, but without the immediate removal' of obstinate prejudice. Many such miracles, however, are related, to which happier consequences are ascribed ; nor ought the veracity of the narrators to be undis tinguishingly assailed, when a belief in mira culous powers was universal. A man of good understanding might easily ascribe to' his own prayers, or still more to those whom he, valued more than himself, those recoveries which im mediately follovved them. As the miraculous facts are seldom related by professed eye-wit nesses, the progress of insensible exaggeration, accounts for many of those narratives, without either assenting to the miracle, or disputing the honesty of the historian. Aj ust conviction of the excellence of the 'cause in which they were engaged, disposed them more readily to believe that' Providence interposed in its favour. One of the greatest men of the eighteenth century, has intimated his opinion, that such interposi tion . might have actually occurred. Whoever ascribes the order of nature to a supreme mind must indeed believe it to be possible for that mind to suspend and alter the course of events. But there is probably no miracle of the middle age which requires any other confutation than a simple statement of the imperfection and inade quacy of the testimony produced in its support. No form of Christianity was likely not to have sanctioned a doctrine so agreeable to the general feelings of a zealous and ignorant age as the CCM* tinuance of miraculous powers. It does not seem to have any connexion with the properly theological dogmas of the. church of Rome. Many Protestants were, some perhaps still are, favourable to it, Probably no Protestant esta blishment has expressly renounced it. It was the peculiar misfortune of the Roman Catholic church, that, however disposed some of its most distinguished members might have been to suffer such claims to slumber, and gradually to die out, their precise and rigid definitions of the in fallibility of the church have .placed the character of their religion too much at the mercy of every ignorant, credulous, or fraudulent Catholic, who may persuade himself, or others, that h e p eh . .esses those powers, which the universal church condemn, without renouncing t c h an os n e ot hig st h rolY pretensions ug which she once unfortu nately sanctioned.—Dr.Lardner'a Cabinet cV clopredia, Vol. VIII. r In the garden of Mr. • BENJAWN PARLBY, inahster, Nurthgate,, there, is new a large wasp's nest; built in the centre of a Whiti:CUrrant -bush, which stands full a - foot• from thet ,giound, a nd Which appears to be pretty well stocked with that destructive insect to fruit. It has a most singular appearance, as the bush u. loaded with currants, and several of the branches grow through the nest. It is well worthy the attention of the AT...n.4 Times. LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JULY 20, 1830. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOME OF LORDS-r(LAST:NIGHT.) The Dukes of CUMBERLAND and MARLBORQUaII and Lord ARUNDEL took the oaths. The Earl of ELDON presented a petition frpm the county of Pembroke, against the Welsh Judi cature Bill. • The Duke of WELLINGTON moved that the case of. Sir Jonah Barrington be taken into con sideration to-marrow.—Ordered. • Earl GROSVENOR rose for the purpose of.ad vetting to an important subject, which he was sorry to say had not been touched upon in the present Session—namely, the abolition of slavery. He had hoped, that after five years bad elapsed since the subject was pressed on their Lordships' notice, more would have been done than he found was the case. Instructions of a very important nature, it was true, had been sent out, but he was sorry to say had not been' acted, upon. Indeed he thought very little could be effected towards the attainment of the,,,, abolition of slavery, unless some measure for the emancipation of children born of slaves was agreed to and enforced. He therefore gave notice of his intention at an early period next Session to propose, first, that all children born of slaves be free, and next that slavery should be abolished altogether after a Certain period. There was another subject, respecting which be was sorry no measure had been submitted to their Lordships—he meant the reforma tion of the game laws. The Duke of WELLINGTON said, that as the Noble Lord -had given notice of his intention to move 'next session, that all the children born of slaves be free, he hoped the Noble Lord would at the same time be prepared with some measure to provide for those children ; for the expense to the country of taking care of them would be extremely great. The Noble Duke also stated that the colonial governments had proceeded to carry into execution all the measures which Parliament had directed, and he asked the Noble Lord whether, under these cir cumstances, it would not be worth while to allow those colonies which were governed by legislative councils to see the effect of what had been done by those colonies governed by.his Majesty in council. Lord CALTHORPE did not think that all that Parliathent required hid been done, particularly with respect to one point—the reception ofslave testimony. The Duke of WELLINGTON, Earl BATHURST, and Lord CALTHORPE said a few words, whiCh were inaudible. Lord WHARNCLIFFE said, that the reason he had riot submitted any motion to their Lordships on the subject of the Game Laws was, because had been introduced in the other House, with the enactments of which he entirely agreed. He had waited for that Bill coming up to their Lordships, but he understood that it had been overlaid by other business, and had never "got so far us a Committee. Earl BATHURST laid on the table a report from the East India Committee. - and Grampound, hi whieh Parliament had gone farther than they were called upon in this. instance to go. PI endeavouring to show their Lordships that it was proper that this Bill should be read n second time, he laboured under considerable disad vantage in this respect. Two Learned,Counsel had been employed against the Bill, and °se of them had been allowed to sum up and Comment* the evidence at considerable length, while the Learned Counsel who appeared. in support of the Bill had been prevented by the forms of their Lordships' House. But he considered it as manifest from the whole of the evidence" that the Majority of this borough had been corrupt :it former elections, and that the majority continued to ;be, corrupt to this day. The Corporation ought to be bound by the acts of the majority, and, therefore; although there might be a minority which was not corrupt, still, considering the description of the majority, he thoug4t that there was ample ground for passing this Bill. I.J . port a review of all the circumstances * .of the : proceeding, the only conclusion to which he could paisagx.xillaer..,aq, that the ease had been completely made out. With respect to the sub sequent disposal of the franchise, be would DOI' enter into that at the present moment, as a Noble Friend of his had a separate motion upon it ; but would confine himself to moving, that the. Bill under their consideration be read a second time. Lord DURHAM observed, that as he had been one of only a few Noble Lords who had regularly attended the examination of witnesses on this Bill, their Lordships would, perhaps, allow him to trouble them fur a short time on the subject. The conclusion to which an attentive examination of the evidence had brought him, was very. different from that to which it had brought the Noble Marquis. Their Lordships were now called upon judicially to pronounce on a Bill, the object of which was to deprive a great portion of their fellow-subjects of one of the most important of their civil rights. In cowling to their evidence they must be strictly guided by the rules of law and of evidence. In order to establish the justice of the. proposed mea sure, it would be necessary to prove that the great majority of the electors of the. borough of 'East Retford were corrupt. But what kind of proof ought to be adduced? If loose conversation in taverns, public-houses, and stage-coaches, were to be considered evidence, it would be another affair. But the question for their Lordship!' to decide had no reference to what might have passed among eer. tain persons over their ale or porter.. They had to consider whether it had been actually proved by legal evidenee at their bar, that the great majority of the electors of East Retford had corruptly received money for their votes. The principle by which they Were to be governed was, whether a majority of the voters had been proved ,to be corrupt, Th at was the. principle which had been justly laid down hist year in the Penrytt case, by the Noble and Learned' Lord on the. Woolsack. ft &mit 'be recollected that, the right of choosing Members of Parliament was not an individual right; it was the right of a corporate body. (In support of this po sition, the Noble . Lord read a passaage from Lord Halt). That being the case, the Elective'Fran. chise could be forfeited only by the misconduct, not of individuals, but of the. Corporation. It would in deed, be exceedingly unjust to punish a large body of men for the crime of a few members of that body. Were that not to be the principle of action, a ma jority would always be, at the mercy of a minerity_ proved in. the present case that: East Retford were Now, bc tl iori e rbreu rn py a t j h o h ;r d a i dtini been ietife)heneetlipcLrelectors prayed place, a of East maintained that no It 'was true that it had been stated that packets containing money had, after several of the . elections, been left at the houses of some of the voters; but. there was no' evidence to 'show that:they knew whence those, packets came,or for what purpose they were ietistidesl. It was only however, to the elections of 1812, 1818, and 1820, that even this imputation applied. -The 'Noble Lord here entered into an analysis of the evidence as it respected individuals, to show that, on the average of 218 'voters only 97 had been proVed, and that Merely by their own admissitm, to have received mo ney; and that of those only 2.1 could be said to have been habitually corrupt. No corruption what, ever had been shown during the last ten years ; so ' that, if any. existed before that time,' the presump ' tion was that it had stopped. On a reference to the cases of Crisklade, Shoreham, Aylesbury, and Orampound, it would be found that in those in stances a majority of the voters had been corrupt; whereas, in this case of East Retford, only a small minority were presumed to be so. He would now come to the meaning of the word bribery. He denied that in any one instance of the present case bribery had been proved. What was bribery ? The Bribery Act showed that money paid to a voter after an election, without any previous contract, was not bribery. All that could be alleged, therefore, was that there had been corruption, And what was the amount of that corruption? In some instances twenty, in other forty pounds. Was it not a -hi qtient occurrence after an election for a county or a borough, that the successful candidate, if a Mini sterial Member, obtained places ;in the Excise, 'or Customs, or Commissions, or Livings, for those by whom he had been supported in the contest ? Was that corruption ?,Again, if a MeMber of that or of the other House of Parliameot obtained the patronage of Ministers in retariefor his vote, was that corruption ? But what a distinction between the individual, Peer or Commoner, who received three or four thousand a year for ids support, end this voter at a borough 'with received twenty or forty pounds I Was the latter to be considered us corrupt and- disgraced, and the former to be proclaimed, in the language of Scrip ture, as a man , l 4 whom the King delighted , to ho- es n uu t tp ur is ?L. their dLte)eteti expended county le LordshipscriitSide e r e tols what iii, such s wasmnense Durhum and Yorkshire. Was that corruption ? Was it not in c o ns e q ue n ce o f t h e . a pp r eh en si on o f an expenditure that there were at present only two candidates for the representation of Yorkshire ?. With the exception of s Westminster, there was no place in the kingdom in,' which a candidate could hope to be successful without having a heavy purse. Ita voter were corrupt. who leceived money after an election, what was to be said of a man who sold 4 whole borough ? The market price now he un derstood to be 7,0004 for a seat for the whole Pat'. Insolent, taking all chances ; or 1,8001. a year RS long 49 the seat, was retained. Who were the cot rept persons in such cases as that? Peers, .Com. meows', clergymen. If their Lordships would give him such 4 bill of indemnity, its that which hail extracted the evidence in the East Retford case, he would prove what he had asserted by wit nesses at the bar. Adverting to the mode in which the evidence' on the East Retford case bud been extracted, it appeared to him to be most un just, by the ,eXereise of inquisitorial authority, to bring persons to the bar of that House to dis grace. themselves, and to break every tie of honour, confidence, and gratitude It was to monstrous tits justice, never equalled but by the proceedings of the Star Chamber or the Inquisition As to sole"' reformation, he had a decided , predilection ro but his partiality for reform could not l,ittud'l'tnt t" the feet, that while these unfortunetespeil e ", been brought to the bar, thers,,,sirdrotely, ss OISE 0 , Were permitted ' escape with junky. HV IV OUld read a second time that day six month s . therefore mo ve , ' as sawamendme trt, amendment, -that the be The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that be should feel that he was guilty of a neglect of duty if he failed to state the grounds on which he intended to vote for the secondreadingathe Bill. He did pot purpOse to travel through the whole of the evidence which had been heard at the bar, but he would take leave to state its principal points, and to , explain its bearing on the que.tion which their Lordships had to determine. The noble and Learned Lord then entered into a review of the whole of the - evidence with respect to the bribery at the elections of 1812, of 181.6, and of 1820, and contentred that, sad all these periods a great majority of the voters were proved to have received 20 guineas from Mr. Evans and a similar sum from Mr. Crompton. In the case of Penryn a majority bad not been proved te. be guilty of bribery. He believed, indeed, not more than fourteen persons were proved to have sold their votes, and, therefore, he bad on that ground resisted the Bill for disfranchising the borough, and it was ultimately thrown out by their Lordship% In the present (rase, however, out of. 120 voters which, with the 24 out.voters, made the whole number of the burgesses of Lust Itetfort, 96 were fully proved at the her of that House to have sold their votes . The Noble baron (Durham) had contended; that no bribery was proved since 1822, and that at the election of 182 G nothing of the kind took place; but the reason of that was, that the Member were petitioned against for treating, and their return was declared void. Although, therefore, the money was promised, it was on this account not paid; but the bribery took place, notwithstanding, in the same manner as before. The Noble and Learned Loid,concluded by declaring that the evidence had left no doubt on' his mind of the acts alleged in the Bill, and acting as jurors he .thought that all their LordshipS who Gould bring themselves to the same conclusion were bound to vote for the Bill. The Earl of ELDON stH it was new to him to hear from a judicial mouth that because bribery had taken place in one year, they were bound to suppose it to have taken place in another. What WRllthe case tried by a House of Commons' Committee ? Not whether bribery took place in one year or, in an other, but 'whether it took place at the last election; and yet in this case, because bribery might have taken place in 1822 or 1820, they were called on to AMMO, without proof, that it also took place 1826. • He contended that-this would overthrow all the doctrines of Lord Mansfield and the great men of former times, and that the Disfranchisement Bills Which he had always resisted would eventually be earned to a most mischievous excess, if they were to be supported through such a principle, and on such evidence at this. He had always opposed them ;he must continue to do so, and he should therefore vote against the Bill. Lord WYNFORD said he was satisfied that bribery had taken place in 1822, and that money was premised, if not paid,- its 1826.: The attempt to conimit a misdemeanour had alWays been, in his Opinioe, as much a crime as the commission of the misdemeanour itself; and there could be no ques tion that the attempt was made in 1826, although circumstances did not allow it to be :fully carried into effect. Ho would not go over the evidence, but he would state that, from - 1796 to - the last election, bribery had existed and cor rupt practices had been proved. Enough had beets proved to them, that at no period between 1706 stud the last election had any one election been cone ducted without bribery. Mr. Evans, on his exami• nation, showed that bribery was practised, whets he was returned. The Learned Lord also referred to the fact of u great number of halves of bank notes having been sent down at different times to East Retford. No question was asked the candidates as to their principles ; the only., question asked was, - could they deposit a sufficient sum and when that was answered in the affirmative the candidate wits the fittest man in the world. The Noble and Learned Lord went at considerable length into the evidence, to show that there had been bribery and corruption et every period, particularly at the elec tion of Mr. Evans. The same Was the case in 1826, when the only question asked Mt, Ogilvy was,could he deposit 3,600/. ? That gentleman was quite shocked at the question, and would have nothing to do with such corrupt men. At that period, how ever, the agents,employed told 'the electors that it shuuld be us usual,- which was understood to mean by all parties, that each elector should have twenty, guineas for his vote, lie contended that the,preamble of the Bill had been proved, and that, es corrupt practices had ; existed, there could be no doubt, unless some remedy were apPlied, similar practices , would continue in fissure. The only Way, in hip opinion, to make the eleetors pttre was to r introduce new electors into the . posseSsion of the franchise. He hid formed his opinion from the evidence given before their Lordships, and that was the conclusion he had come to. He thought this was just, because t 1 representative, though elected by is particular` body, was, in feet, a representative of the whole empire, the interests of which he was bound to ,consult, not excl u sively thoSe of the town he repre senteq. The .present Bill did not- punish those corrupt electors as severely as the electors were punished ; in the Shoreham case. The present Bill cwoaosli7ilto go not, in opinion, so much a punishment as it t means fie of securing a pure representation of a rlia• silent. To obtain that he thought their Lordships ‘po tar. At sing on - the principle fid lowed in this Bill, would, he thought, be the best. means . Uf reforming the Parlimnenr, stud ho should vote in its favour. Earl GRBY agreed with the Noble and 'Learned Lord, that their Lordships. could not go too failit-1 their endeavours" to secure for the country 'a pure represent a tion ,•_but he (lid trot agree with the Noble and Learned Lord that the best mode of accom plishing it was by Bills like the prrient, which,'. by agl ,Illy"rstio. : bi t i l l ee .tfigtete:tenli'lre they Lordship, doing away, with particular-corrupt itoroughsi aimed .to reform the representations, The power of pro ceeding with such boroughs depended on the oppor tunity offered by particular individuals of bringing such case* before ntrliament. When ho knew that . the great majority of the boroughs in the kingdom were liable to similar allegations of corruption, %vas he to wait before he proceeded against them till it suited some individual to bring them under their Lordships' notice ? That was not the principle on which he would advocate Parliamentary Reform; and he objected to Bills of that nature, as tending to check that general reform which was necessary. i) i r n o le ul s ltt s l o te n fle P P 4r a t r i l e ii t t i n l'i t r ent e . '" Th p e f fa c elo u Ptt '"j' gene ral corruption was not doubtful; and if their Lord ships were to proceed in other cases as in tkiii Hut would undertake to prove it. lie did not in all Cases object, to Ilills of Indemnity to seenre a will ing witness against tile consequences of his evi dence; but in this case there had been a departure from the . principle or justices and of the common i l ti , e o d , e t o x a t t a n k b e ie l4 p w e t?: E ng ii,i, t aw , .by passing a . Bill of Ind m e i t g n i i i i t ity b , e i c o u o in t i gat:ifoirad:rEassaktmlsi:delttiirino:Ll:tettotridsMosltneti piiistob.utterosilb,,oittrest ptm i. i,g,;(ttlitioleie,.o.l,,iiritoisiecritttliilateit.(l,,,ariiiittiote.tvitst.,fslio,csroroo.rf.ri4fiuisg,ro,o2ll,tleteicii,h;:ti:isse,":htiathrhineeseti iiivibt:wovi:ollitoire:oruit gwo tom such a Bill of Indemnity, and allow hirato more than half the Last Retford, because the purify when they were affecting to urif h thatl mome"t' took twenty ewxfol:nlidnenevt leireira y t u mrough of Peers and other pers lt—l:Idi:11u-ivs:;,e;ttvilirk:e kingdom,etntdriaflrttiihin eas were receiving 1,200 or lotion to correct abuses oit'greneral evidence. If iha latter were the ease, why ode& East Realm! ? Why not go to the general principles of the repro. sentations of the people and correct nbuses? If ,their Lordships were settling a judicial question—if they wer:‘ trying a case of delinquency, with » view o inGict punishment--it tuts necessary that the de ihqueney should be (idly proved at the Bar, and :hey would take tare that the criminal act was fully and completely made out to their .'satisfaction before: they pro . nonticed sentence against, it. The. Noble and Learned Lord (Lord Wynford)aasentetl, he oh served, to this. Their' I.nrdships were, thercfore. settling a jadicial questibit; and 'if the guilt . were not prnved, their Lordships .would not be jit-tified in passing. the Bill. ft was , said that the francliiw Was not t'. taken away; but he wa's sure that the Nohh. , Lui (1 . , in his late capacity, woul,l Fury to give, damages to the ~no n wh, a deprived of the exercise of the right of franchise. Before the Bill became u law, their- fore, the preamble ought to be fay made: out. In his opinion it was not justified by the evidence. In the eise. of Shoreham, bribery had been extensively . . .proved, and it was Atthe last'electioth In the ease of Cricklade, the majority .of the electors, it wit, proved, had. taken bribes,. penalties had been re covered in a Court of Law, and these oiren.,es Not taken place at the last election. In the case of Ay , les.. bury, 300:voters out of 4.50 were . proved to have been guilty of bribery and corrupt practices, at the lest election. There was a much stronger rase than the present ; but it was opposed in the House of Commons by very high ,authority by Sir William Grant and. Mr. Fox, anti by several othergentle men, who were high legal authorities. He did not mean to quote more than one of them, Mr. Set jeent Beet objected to the Bill on the groend tha it was 'partial, and that as, much as was charged against the borough of 4yieshury,ntight be proved Optima every borough in the:kingdom. In that case however, the great majority of the elector , bad bee. , guilty .of bribery, and adhering to the Nehle Lord'" (Wynford) former opinion, and taught by the sent ments he had then uttered, he should oppose the present: Bill. The . next case was. that of • pound, in which fifty out of sixty voters were proved to hive been guilty of bribery. In all these caw the kriberY was distinctly proved, and it had taki n place at the clection . immediately before the Bill was passed. In the 'present ease these two pciinta were both wanting--the bribery had not been distinctly proved, and none whatever-had been traced out in the last election, He was surprised at the doctrine. which' had been held on this point by his Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack and the Nohlo and Learned Lord, who 'inferred bribety at the lust election frorii the preceding conduct of the electors, eking out evidence by presumptions the most tot. warranted.; and he was the more surprised at thou two Noble and r Learned Lords, as they,imuq know that such a proceeding was contrary, to the practice of Westminster and if there.fulluwed, woulit shake all the property of. the kingdom. ,Such trines us he had that 'night heard from those two Learned Lords, appeared to hiM to be monstrou. and dangerous to till the rights of every man in the kingdom. They ioble Earl concluded by swill,: that'the present Bill was, ached been stated by th'. Noble Duke, a Bill of Pains .and ,Penalties--4 Bill charging delinquency, and hu was sure that their Lordship would require that delinquent ; to be distinctly , and completely proved, %villa, in !his opinion, it was not. The crime ler which punishment was to be inflicted, mush be fully made out before they would carry that Bill into effect. Ife 'hoped. that it would not be read a second time - as he objected to the principle of the Bill ; but if it Were, he should think it would 1,,• better to give the franchise to some manufacturbu town than to the Miighbouring hundred. There was, however, no proof of bribery, and he though, their Lordships could not conscientiously carry thu 13111 into effect. - Lord %V YNFORD explaitted, that he had pre , viol* stated to - their Lorthihips that he had voted against the Aylesbury Bill, and that he had. sine 4 '6111401 his opinion, because he regarded that vow, and the 'subsequent case of Grampound, as este- Wishing precedents for . the Legislature which it ought to follow. The Duke of WELLINGTON. said, that he la melted very much that the Bill had been brought into Parliament : it was not his att, but being there, it was his duty to consider Whet should ho done with it. He admitted that it was a Bill of Pains and Penalties. charged leupcontiened and notorious corruption to the electors of East Belford in electing represeutatives to serve in Perliament, and it enacted. a penalty as a misquotes of the Act stated in t2o o preamble. Before the. House voted against the ho. rough, it ought. to' be convinced that the preambl e lisd been proved. He had attended to the evidence .is much as hie other avocations would allow, and he must say that, in his opinion, the preamble hud been proved. Hawould not follow the Noble and Learned Lord on ,the Woolsack, or, the other Noble and , Learned Lord who had spoken, through all the evi, deuce; lie would' content; himself with referring to the proceeding of Mr. Thornton and the evidence of Mr. Evans to .proine .that, bribery was oetemOu, in every election since 1790—in the elections is 1802, 1800 1812, and 1818, in his opinion Ini. hery had been pro vett Thegette red corruption charged iii the pret: , oble of thillak haul been proved, utter if the el was not proved _eertainly their Lordshq,s would inflict Tuogptunaltment," There was no islohlt Lord who attended ,to ,the. evidence but must have Seen that, in.every_tsive where the candidate lodged 'the money :usually paid at elections, he succeeded, but that 'in - every .casts, where he failed to do so ho lust hisi•eleetiOn.—:Thefe was evidence before them that time soccesaftdalandidate always lode! the:money, and that no case it returned into his pocket, but uniformly went Witt the pockets of the electors. It was Contended on the other side, that the prookhr question : : did not come down to the last Session ; that might be perfectly true—it might he perfectly trim that there was no proof of money h av i ng been ut the , last election; but in point of: fact, slid any man doubt tliat the same tranvial. Lions were their ping un as at all previous elections —that money was .lodged for the same purposes,' and expended with the same . views ? tt Wits no. tOrions OW no Votvti could be obtained until the electors were assured that the money would be given. questiou was one s . of policy mid ex p e di ency, ati s of right. ThO iionse had to consider w h et h er ar . not they woUld, in this case, pursu e or deviate from the course which they pursued on cell similar ; occasions. It was to be remembered that • shey thsfranch4ed no 9ne . by the pres ent Bill ; t h ey merely, let in the votes of the adjoining hundred. lie concluded by saying t hat lie thought the preamble of the Bill fully proved, and that it should therefore have his support. AftOr a few words from the Marquis of SAW BURY in reply, the LORD CHANCELLOR and Earl GREY, mutually explained, as did the Earl of EL... DON. The Howie then divided for the second rein:- • ing of the Bill-- Fur the amendment That it he real this day six months..." 7 . Ljrrity. l er .o h r e tt l3 l) ll (7l l l, l l.l t t i _k ;e N fi l r t e -:ll:l Be t c hT id ut t t i e m ottm , o f their Lot clt•ltipt to the Admittitit t' Bill of« ion o up leo tterviog that it wittijui tilfit Hight, .nit it witti ptopo . ,eil, llr underitooti, to fix the third retpi. tA-morrow• it wait AO full or itrtorv, tliot 140 Uhler JWltieo tOtifitrit 4 1treetsury to introducto *ova- COAL TRADE. Earl BATHURST laid on the table a report , of he Coal Trade Committee. The Martinis' of LONDONDERRY congratu lated the House that a report from this Committee had been laid on their Lordships' table after its la bours of two years. It - was not his intention to en• ter at length into the consideration of that report on the preient occasion, but it might be proper to state some 'of the results at which the Committee had arrived. One of these was, that it was indis.„ pensible that the Coal Act of the 4th George 111. should be reversed, and that coals should be sold by weight instead of by measure, in order to prevent the frauds upon the consumer to which the measure ing system gave rise. Anotber result was, that the charges on coals in the port of London afforded the Corporation the extravagant surplus revenue of 60,0004 per annum. The coal meter system ought to be abolished, and a better and more economical , arrangement made and adoptedfor clearing the ships; and the improvident practice of consuming the waste coal without benefit to any ono ought also .to be abolished. Without at present entering into the merits or demerits of the proceedings at the port of London, he might state that the accusations and calumnies against the coal owners had been amply refuted by this report of the Coal Committee. It had been held out in some quarters that measures ought to ho taken to protect the public against the combination of the coal owners; but the Committee had declared, and justly declared, that as long as a 'free and open competition existed, as at present, be tween the coal-owners, it was impossibl e . t h at t h e public interests could be injured by an y com bination among the coal-owners. The free com petition a ff orded the public ample protection. He hoped, therefore, that was an end of the calumnies which had been circulated to the prejudic e of the coal-owners. He congratul ated their Lor dships and the country on the mass of evidence 'on this impor-, tant subject which they had now before them. Such a body of evidence with respect to the coal trade hid never been collected before. The evidence of was particularly valuable, and Mr. R—?—, the clerk to the Tyne and Wear 'No it to the special attention of their v h i e g ' a re ti c o o r m i C m o e m tid p e a d " Lordship with reference to the charges in the port of London. He again congratulated their Lordships on hiving such a report before them, and he hoped that means would be speedily found to do away with, what he might call the nefarious charges widen so much enhanced to the public the price of this in dispetisible article. The reduction of these charges to a proper and moderate rate would be one of the most -valuable legialative measures that could be adopted. There was one point, however, which, although a most important one,.had not been pressed 441* Committee so much as be thought it ought to have been. He meant the Government duty of six shillings the chaldron on the coals brouklit •tti the port of London. This duty was, in his opinion, by fur higher than it ought to be, and he was de sirous that the Committee should have introduced into their Report a strong recommendation mate rially to reduce, if not entirely to abolish, that duty. There were others in the Committee, however, who thought it best not to press that point, and the Re port had been framed accordingly, He hoped, how ever, that the calumnies against the coal-owners for their monopoly had been by this Report completely done away. Lord TEYNHAM presented a petition from a certain Company of creditors, as they represented, of the East India Company, praying that a clause might be introduced into the _Bast India Registry Bill, to oblige the CoMparty to pay the money due to them. The reason which they alleged was, that they had lost their security. by the-neglect of regis tration, and that the Company were answerable for the consequences, and on lit it to pay the debt. Lord ELLEWBOROUG observed, that the Company had nothing todo with the matter , and that no blame Whatever attached to them. The fault rested with the Supreme Court, which had neglected to take the proper security, and one "_" jot of , the Bill now in progress was, to remedy the inconvenience as far as could reasonably be done. But the Company Was not to blathe for the neglect of registratioe— Whatever fault there was rested with the Judges of the Supreme Court. • • EAST RETFORD.. The *Martinis of - SALISBURY,irctse to move the second refttling of the East Retford ment Bill. As to precedents for . measure of this kind, he had only to refer to the cases of Cricklade PRICE 7D. LIFE OF BYRON. Preparing for immediate publication, in 1 vol. price enlYISs. ' beautifully embellished and rinted in small Bvo., T HE LIFE OF L ORD BYRON. By JOHN GALT, Esq. Forming the First Volume of the LIBRARY of GENE-, RAL KNOWLEDGE. Edited by the Rev. G. R. GLEIG. Colburn and Bentley, New Burlington-street.