The Sun. — London, England, 1830-03-08 00:00:00

SPIRIT.OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. The House of Ciimmons heard for the first time (we believe) on Friday evening, a proposal to substitute the election of Members of Parliament by ballet for the practice of open voting, which has Ling arid universally prevailed amongst Englishmen. At first sight there appears to be something plausi ble in the expedient which allows every man to act as he thinks fit, without being called to account fer it. The Member for Clare is reported to have said, that of the two inducements for voting—namely, terror and corruption—neither could have so much force with electors whose votes were secretly given. This may be possible, but it is not certain ; and uu doubredly it is not the whole of the case. The above argument for the secret ballot applies only to corrupt or intimidated voters, who might be pre sumed to feel so much repugnance in supporting the Candidate to whom their votes were given as could be overcome no otherwise but by menaces or bribes. But is there no mischief done by depriving the virtuous and popular candidate of the credit fairly resulting from an open manifestation of the class of support which he receives ? or by robbing the up right electors of that separation from the base, which their birthright, and which nothing but pub licity can secure to them ? Under a system of ballot there can be no confidence, or co-operation, or mutual encouragement, between candidate and elector, in the pursuit of great public objects. At present, in Eng land men can distinguish theirfriends from their oppo nents. Every Man avows his preference, and maintains it in the face of day. Fawning speeches are not had recourse to by voters, as a mask for underhand hosti lity. The generaleharacter of an English election,with every allowance both for bribery and for bullying, is one of boldness, frankness, and self assertion in the constituent body. Nor does it seem to us that the en abling a sordid fellow to skulk like a thief in the exercise of a political franchise, would indemnify the country for what it lost by the degradation of the manly and high spirited electors to an apparent level with the worthless. Hypocrisy there may exist at pre sent., no doubt, and treachery is not without example in the conduct of voters, as well as candidates. But by the ballot scheme both would be fiicilitated, and in a manner authorized, and the habitual and pre dominant spirit throughout our election politics would be a distrust of amicable professions ; or, in other words, a want of confidence between man and man, than which we do not know how any more un fortunate revolution could befall the public character of England. It is said, that in our clubs the system of ballot universally prevails ; but the reason is ob vious—because there the objections to individuals being on personal grounds, would always be pro ductive of soreness and offence if made openly ; and on the other hand, if not permitted to be secret, might deprive those members already composing the society of the free exercise of their will and pleasure, in cases on which their own social comfort might depend. On the whole, it is no recommendation to us that the ballot exists in France and in America, because we are by no means sure that the relation between constituent and representative in either country stands on a footing more generally favour able than here. As for bribery, there is no question that without much ingenuity it might be practised wholesale, under the ballot scheme, in such a way as to act upon the sympathies of a mass of voters, by holding out the prospect of a collective sum to be distributed among them in the event of a certain candidate's return. The influence of property, though sometimes abused, we believe as a whole works not iijuriously. It does riot, therefore, strike us that all tvould be clear again, by leaving the lower orders of electors without standards round which to rally.— Times. Connected with the subject of Sir J. Newport's important motion, three curious petitions were pre sented against the same individual, the Rev. J. O'Roerke, vicar of the five parishes in the union of Foxfors: (county of Mayo), by different bodies of his numerous and ill-tended flock, complaining of different grievances. No less than 4,888 of them in one parish of this quintuple charge, represented that, after agreeing to receive 3141. 13s. 4d. in lieu of his tithes, under the regulations of the Tithe Composition Act, the Reverend Gentleman drew back, and refused to confirm the agreement, his diocesan having in the first instance declined to ratify the contract. The second petition complsined that since the induction of the said vicar, in 1817, the petitioners have not enjoyed the residence of a beneficed clergyman, though from two out of his union of his five parishes he exacts the enormous income of .5001. a year; and the third, which seems to come fcom members of all the parishes, contains a whole budget of grievances against the said Reverend Gentleman, the chief of which is, that during the last three years, though he has neither administered the rites of religion, nor attended to the business of education, he has instituted 2,521 suits fur his tithes. This petition represents to Par liament some striking facts, which, if they can be proved, deserve the severest reprehension. It states that Mr. O'Roorke has never resided in one of his five parishes of the union of Foxford, containing, by the last census, 19,234 mike—that he usually lives in another diocess, where, instead of performing his clerical duties, he is engaged in the secular occupa tion of a tithe-farmer and a grazier,—that in the season of distress, in 1822, he never visited the poor, and refused to subscribe for their relief,—that his demands for tithes are fourfold those of his pre decessors, though he does no duty,—that he has proceeded for tithe on hay and wool, never before demanded in those parishes,—that he summons his parishioners in arrear for his tithes to an Episcopal Court, 35 miles distant from their residence, where they are obliged sometimes to appear without ob taining a hearing,—and that he has hitherto refused all composition, theugh often tendered, These may be great hardships, but it is quite evident that Par liament can grant no relief but by a general measure, which would prevent the recurrence of similir evils. Mr. O'Roorke may drive the best bargain he can, under the provisions of the Tithe Composition Act, or he may resist all accommodation with his parishioners ;--he may reside in Bath instead of Moylough, in Galway, leaving his parishioners to die and be buried without his assistance, if his dio cesan permits his absence; and ho may institute as many suits for tithes as he finds resistance to his elaims, without in any of these eases fearing the jurisdiction of the House of Commons. The evil is m the system, and the system must be rectified, if the Protestant Church of Ireland is to be restored to that state of purity and efficiency which, consti tuting its only title to respect, afford the only guarantee for its permanence.—Times. The question agitated on Friday last, whether e k e iees should vote by ballot, is one of the greatest importance, if it be intended that Parliamentary Reform should be effectual. It strikes us as singular how a doubt should ever have arisen as to the su periority of voting by ballot over every other mode. If the object be the exercise of a free and inde pendent suffrage, whatever tends to secure the elector against the chance of pecuniary injury, in consequence of his vote, and to diminish the strength of the temptation on the part of the candidate to have recourse to corruption, must, of course, be highly desirable. We are utterly at a loss to know what is meant by the influence of property in elee- Owls, except bribery. This was very happily shewn by Mr. Wyndham, in his opposition, in 1809, to Mr. Curwen's Bill for the punishment of direct bribery. Mr. Windham contended that the inflin , ence of property, in buying and selling seats, was as legitimate as any other, and that the distinction at tempted to be set up by Mr. Curwen and others was one without a difference. " How (said he) if the, sale of a seat, or any other commutation of services connected with such an object, be gross cor ruption, can we tolerate the influence which property gives in biassing the minds of those who are to give their votes ? How a landlord, for instance, should have any more influence over his own tenants than over those of another man ? How a large manufacturer should be able to bring to the poll more of his own workmen than of these employed in the service of his neighbour ? How an opulent man of oany de scription, spending his fortune in a borough town, should be able to talk of his influence over the smal ler tradesmen; or be at liberty to hint to his baker, or his butcher, that laying out every week such a sum with them, as he does, he expects that they should oblige him by giving a vote to Mr. Such-a one at the next election ? If all this is not corrupt on the principles on which we are now inquiring, I know not what is. What has money spent with tradesmen, or work given to manufacturers, or farms let to tenants to do with the independent exercise of their right, and the conscientious discharge of their duty, in the election of a Member to serve them in Parliament ? A fine idea, truly, that their decision in the choice of a Representative is to be influenced by the consideration of what is best for their separate and private interest ! or that per sons, the advocates of purity, arid who will hear of nothing but strict principle, should attempt to !Its tinguish between the influence which engages a man's vote by the offer of a sum of money, and that which forbids the refusal of it, under the penalty of loss of custom, or loss of work, or of the possession of that on which his wife arid family must depend for their bread ? I shall be curious to hear in what man• ner, not the advoe.::s of this Bill, but the advocates for the prig :ip'es on which this Bill is enforced, will defend themselves against these questions ; arid be able to show, that while it is gross corruption, gross moral depravity in any one who possesses such in• fluence, to connect his own interest with the use of it, even though he should not use it improperly, it is perfectly innocent to create that influence by the means just described." What Mr. Wyndham here says is unanswerable. The influence of property is therefore bribery. And why should a man, because he has property sufficient to influence, that is, to bribe a number of voters, be allowed to contribute more to the return of a representative of the people than another ? A man of limited means has a deeper interest in the welfare of his country than a rich man, because the latter can leave his home whenever he pleases, and his wealth will everywhere procure him a comfortable existence. But the man of mode rate means is bound by a hundred ties to his coun try, which he cannot sever. His sphere of utility is confined to his neighbourhood; lie cannot abandon his farm or his shop, and enjoy himself like a rich man in Paris, Rome, or Naples. Why should the opinions of a hundred men, possessed of from five hundred pounds to five thousand pounds each, with every motive for patriotism, be of less amount than the opinion of one man possessed of one or two hundred thousand pounds, whose patriotism must he much more feeble (for the more easily a man can dis pense with his country, the less ardent will his pa triotism be). But if you allow a great landholder or rich man to purchase, by means of underletting land, or by other well known means, the suffrages of a number of persons, you disfranchise in the ratio of such preponderance, other persons better entitled to a vote than himself. Ludlow, in his Memoirs, men tions a case in which one man disfranchised in this manner the independent inhabitants of a borough. To this end," he says (vol. I, p. 169)," I en deavoured that my uncle, Mr. Edmund Ludlow, might be chosen for the borough of Hindon, where though he was elected and returned by the principal burgesses and bailiff, yet the rabble of the town, many of whom lived upoa the alms of one Mr. George How, pretending that they had chosen the latter, the Sheriff returned them both. By this means. Mr. How got first into the House; but they being informed of the matter of fact, commanded him to withdraw till the cause should be de cided by the Committee of Privileges." When men talk of the legitimate influence of property in elections, they mean that the wealthy few should tyrannise over the less wealthy many. Till it can be shewn, that the welfare of a man of limited means, and his interest in the welfare of those belonging to him, are of less importance to him than the welfare of a rich man is to such rich man, we contend that every plan for giving preponderance in elections to the rich man is tyranny, however it may be disguised. What is wanted in a Parliamentary Reform is, that the interests of the nation, and not the interests of any particular portion of the nation, should be seemed. A nation cannot bribe itself. When we hear of bribery, and undue influence, we may be sure that those who return the Representatives are not identified in in- terests with the nation. But even supposing the franchise to be communicated to the bulk of the population, it would still be necessary that the electors should be protected by the ballot, because in this country property is so very unequally distri buted, that, without such a protection, a man pos sessed oflarge property,must,by his influence over the numerous proletaires, every where to be found, defeat the suffrages of i iridependent voters. Besides whether he be able or not, or whether a combination of rich men be able or not, still where is the justice of ex posing poor men to the temptation of voting against their conscience, or subjecting themselves to punish ment, by being expelled from their farms, or losing the employment on which the existence of their fa milies depends ? When a Member of Parliament talks of hypocrisy being promoted by the ballot, it is unnecessary to reason with him. Why in electing the office-bearers of Companies, in admitting members to Clubs, is it always deemed necessary, in order to secure an independent vote, that the ballot be re sorted to ? If men possessed of property, and of cultivated minds, are afraid to expose themselves to the consequence of individual resentments, and choose to take shelter in the ballot, why should it be hypocrisy in more humble individuals to pro tect themselves in the same way ? We contend that the only circumstances which ought to influence voters are the characters and talents of candidates; that all other influence is illegitimate; and that whatever tends to add to the protection of the voter, against suffering in his person or property in con sequence of his vote, is desirable. But when gen tlemen talk of the legitimate influence of property, and at the same time of their wish for economy and retrenchment, they are in contradiction with themselves. This is admirably shown by Mr. Wynd ham, in the speech from which we have just quoted. A. gentleman at the eve of a General Election, or on some vacancy in a Borough or County, is ad dressed by sonic one who is, or who, he hopes, will be his constituents—some full-grown; manufacturer or opulent brewer, or eminent attorney—who says, You know my son Tom, who is in the Navy ; he has been for some time a Lieutenant; I should be very glad if you would get him made Master and Commander . . The Candidate or Member bel,ys assent (Mr. Such-a-one is not a man to be diso bliged) ; he speaks to his friend, the Minister; the Minister speaks to the First Lord of the Admiralty, and without further inquiry the thing is done ; no body being able to divine of those who are not in the secret, and onjy know our son Tom professionally, for which of his good qualities or meritorious actions he has been made, so much out of his turn, and over the heads of so many old and deserving dicers, Master and Commander. Here, then, is a complete job, passing through several successive stages, and disgraceful enough in its progress to all the parties concerned in it, including the Member, the Minister, and the First Lord of the Admiralty, but certainly not excluding the constituent, the corrupt consti tuent." We here see how all the profusion follows as a necessary consequence from the first evil, the influence of property in elections. To secure the nation against corrupt expenditure and excessive taxation, it is indispensably necessary that the elec tions should be free and uninfluenced. We are unable at this time to enter further into this imports ant subject.—lllorning Chronicle. Mr. Huskisson, in the last debates on the East Itetford question, is stated to have said that, " in his opinion, the Members of the House should not represent the population but the property of the. country," This, if correctly reported (which we have no reason to doubt) is one of the most extra ordinary avowals which was ever made within the walls of the Commons' House of Parliament, We had thought that the very term " House of Corn s rr►on9" meant that third estate of the realm corn ' posed of the Representatives of the people; and so •,tie shall continue to think, till we have some better reason than this gratis dietwn of Mr. Huskisson for changing our opinion. But, though Mr. Huskis. son's be a new avowal in theory, we have not to learn that in practice it has been long adopted to a dangerous, not to say alarming extent ; and the me lancholy state of distress in which so great a mass of the population is placed, affords but too convincing a proof that what Mr. Huskisson asserts ought to he the case, unfortunately, is so. That property ought to be represented in Parliament no man can doubt; but then it can only be fitly and constitu tionally rep sented through the persons of its pos sessors; and to say that property and not persons should be represented, is little short of avowing that legislation, if not government, exists for the benefit of the rich alone—for the strong to the exclusion of the weak. Such places as Gatton, Old Sarum, and a few others, are the. only avowed and acknowledged instances of the truth of Mr. Huskisson's doctrine, both in theory and practice. Here a terminus at the one and an old barn at the other constitute the symbols (for pi.operty they can hardly be called) which the Members for these places represent ; unless, indeed, the wealthy, or needy owner of this spurious description of property, as the case may be, should be held to be the part of the popu lation there represented. Blackstone, in his definition of " The Commons," would seem at first to bear out, in some measure, Mr. Huskisson's idea, in stating them " to consist of all such men of pro perty in the kingdom as have not seats in the House of Lords ;" but one of his editors corrects him in a note, wherein he states that the " word ' Coln moos,' in its present ordinary signification, com prises all the people who are under the rank of Peers, without any regard to property." Mr. Huskisson himself, we apprehend, represents the whole popu lation as well as property, of Liverpool, though really elected by the freemen only; and the main, and, indeed, only reason of any constitutional weight against the claim of the people to universal suffrage, is that it would give to mere population too great a weight over the influence which property is enti tled to have in the Legislature. But that is quite a different matter from excluding the former altoge ther; and, looking with lively jealousy to the con stitutional liberties of the people, we could not bring ourselves to pass an alleged remark on this head, coming, too, from so high an authority.—Morning Herald. We have reason to believe that a party has at length been formed, with Lord Althorp at its head, which will speedily compel Ministers either to re trench to a great extent or to dissolve the present Parliament. The union, we understand, already consists of upwards of an hundred members—most of them county members, and, as a matter of course, considerable landowners. On retrenchment and a reduction of taxes, to the amount of several millions, they are unanimous, and their numbers are increasing daily. It is expected that before Mr. Davenport's motion comes on, the ranks of this intrepid party will be swelled to nearly two hundred. We wish them success from the bottom of our hearts. Tories, Radicals, Liberals, and Whigs, must all agree that, unless some change is effectc-A, and some remedy administered, the country, from actual suffering, will be in a state of fearful convulsion before next winter. If the Duke of Wellington should resolve upon a dissolution he may gain time, but he will not gain supporters. Come what may it is plain that his Administration is tottering. If he surrender not now he must surrender soon. By resisting reduction, arid he is pledged to resist it, he will find himself in a minority, and then there is an end of him and his mad career. A dissolution would weaken him, for new men would be more inveterately opposed to him than the present. In either case his peril is great and his shipwreck not far distant.—Morning Journal. We hazarded a few observations on Saturday on the proposed measure of the Chancellor of the Ex chequer for throwing open the trade in beer; and we a g ain revert to the subject in the hope that th e remarks which we have to make, if calculated to serve the interest of the Licensed Victuallers, may not be wholly lost upon the meeting of the trade which takes place this day. And, in the first place, we trust that the meeting will be characterized by union and cordiality among the different branches of the trade. The attack, though apparently upon a part of the trade only—the dealers in beer—is in reality an attack upon the whole ; for no .sooner will the measure now proposed have been passed into a law, than those whose principal business is the retail of spirits, will be subjected to similar ruin. There is, therefore, every reason, in point of interest, why the whole trade should unite cordially in opposing the present mea sure ; and there is yet another reason—that in their union is their strength.—Secondly, we trust that a strong, but temperate, position against the proposed measure—pointing out the ruin which will be brought upon the trade should it pass into a law— will be unanimously agreed to, and universally signed.—Thirdly, the meeting ought not to separate without appointing a Committee to watch over its interests, arid selecting some forty or fifty of the most intelligent men in the trade to be examined as witnesses before the Select Committee, and to give evidence respecting the amount of private property invested in public-houses in the faith that the pre sent law would continue to be the law of the land, and the ruin which the contemplated alteration would produce.—We throw out these observations as mere suggestions for the use of the meeting ; but the in telligence of those present will, no doubt, give rise to others better calculated to promote its objects.— Morning Advertiser. ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY. At a meeting of this Society, holden at their house in Bruton-street, on Thursday last, the Dean of CARLISLE in the Chair, _._ Several new members were elected.. The monthly Report of the Council was read by Mr. Vigors, and showed that the Council had, in accordance with a late Resolution of the society, appointed Mr. Rees es Assistant Secretary, with a salary of 2501. for the first year, and 300/. for the succeeding years. The Council further reported that they had, by the sale of 2,0001. Three per Cents,, been enabled to pay off all the debts owing by the Institution up to the end of the past year, and a considerable portion of those incurred during the present year. Mr. ROBERT GORDON, M.P. said that- nothing could be more satisfactory thaw the• arrangements which had been submitted to them by the Council. There was a point which he looked upon with con siderable distrust and fear ;—that was, the Society's farm at Kingston. He did not know on what grounds that establishment had been formed, but he was certainly fearful that it would, in time, lead the Society into difficulties of a similar nature to those now involving the Horticultural Society. Lord AUCKLAND said that the Council had made such arrangements with regard to the farm, that if found too expensive it might be relinquished. The Council had also computed the probable annual cost of the whole of the Society's expenditure, which they rated as follows :—For the museum in Bruton street, including the office, 1,0001.; for the farm at Kingston, 1,0001.; and for the garden in the Re gent's-park, 5,000/. ; and he hoped that the Coun cil had not calculated beyond their income when the Members were informed that the income of last year amounted to nearly 14,000/. Mr. VALENTINE DUKE asked whether it was the intention of Mr, Sabine to resign the office which he held in the Society ? If be did not, he for one, though he knew nothing of Mr. Sabine's private character, should call a public meeting of the Society, and move the expulsion of that person from his office, as he conceived that what he had seen of his condUct in the public prints, with 'regard to the Horticultural Society, rendered him unfit to fill any office in any other Institution. Lord AUCKLAND conceived that the language which had been made use of was quite unwarranted. After some routine business bad been disposed of, the Meeting adjourned. CHAI3ERT, THE FIRE-KING. In pursuance of a pledge which he had given to several medical gentlemen of the first character and celebrity in the metropolis, M. Chabert attended at Cox's Auction-rooms, in St. James's -street, on Saturday afternoon, for the purpose of proving that he had discovered an antidote to prussic acid. The time fixed for the trial of his antidote was half -past three o'clock, and at that hour Dr. Harrison, Dr. Holland, Dr. Walsh, Mr. Brodie, Mr. Bransby Cooper, Mr. Callaway, and several other surgeons of eminence were in attendance. It had been pre viously arranged that Mr. Williams, the lecturer on chymistry at the London Institution, should provide the prussic acid, and Mr. Bransby Cooper the two dogs to which it was to be administered. After it was announced that the poison and the dogs were both in the room, some discussion arose as to the mode in which the experiment should be conducted, and it was at last agreed that after a dose of prussic acid had been administered to one of the dogs, and had produced its death, an equal dose taken from the same phial should be administered to the other dog, to which M. Chabert should then give his antidote. This arrangement having been made, a question arose as to the strength of the prussic acid to be used.— M. Chabert wished to administer his own, which he stated to be of Scheele's strength, but an objec tion was raised to this, on the ground that as it had been repeatedly exposed to the air and light, much of its strength must, from its volatile nature, have evaporated. Mr. Williams stated, that in the short interval which had elapsed since the last experiments were tried, he had found it impossible to provide himself with any prussic acid of his own making, but that he had brought from Plough-court a phial of it; which had never yet been exposed to the light, and which was concentrated to such a degree. that one part was equal to twelve parts of the ordi nary strength. Mr. Williams, and the faculty in general, were desirous that the experiment should be tried with the latter specimen; but M. Chabert stre nuously resisted this arrangement, contending that he had never undertaken to provide an antidote against prussic acid thus highly concentrated. Some time was wasted in settling which of these two poisons was to be employed ; and the point was at length decided in favour of M. Chabert, on the ground that if such a dose of his prussic acid were given as would produce the death of one dog, and he could save the life of another dog which should swallow an equal dose of the same poison, the efficacy of his antidote would be brought at once to a test. M. Chabert was then called upon to declare the amount of the dose which in his opinion would destroy the canine life. He said that three minims and a half or four minims of his mixture would be sufficient. Many gentlemen expressed their doubts as to the correctness of his assertion, and with a view of satisfying them, M. Chabert proposed to administer that quantity to a poor weakly (log of his own, which formed a melan choly contrast to the two fine and powerful animals provided by Mr. Bransby Cooper. The proposal was acceded to. Mr. Williams accordingly pro ceeded to place three minims and a half on the dog's tongue, by means of a graduated glass tube, which M. Chabert lent them. After its jaws had been tightly pressed together for a few seconds, to pre vent any part of the poison from escaping, the dog was left at liberty. It attempted to run away, but it fell down before it had got many paces, as if its legs were paralyzed. It then rolled on the ground for some time in great agony, and made many inef fectual attempts to rise. After a few indistinct moanings, it laid itself down and gasped some time for breath, its chest and flanks heaving most violently. At the end of three minutes, the force of the poison seemed to have exhausted itself. The dog raised its head from the ground, gradually regaining its legs, and used them as soon as he was able, which was in about four minutes and a quarter after administering the dose, to fly from the murderous society by which it was surrounded. It was evident, from the issue of the experiment, that M. Chabert's prussic acid was much weaker than he was inclined to admit, and in consequence an opinion very unfavourable to M. Chabert's pretensions was beginning to pervade the room, in spite of his repeated asseverations in broken English, that it was most extraordinary that the dog had not been killed by the (lose which it had swallowed. It was then proposed that one of the dogs which Mr. Bransby Cooper had provided should he introduced upon the platform, and should receive a much larger dose. All present agreed to this proposal ; and it was as strenuously urged by the faculty, as resisted by M. Chabert, that upon this second occasion, the prussic acid to be administered should be provided by Mr. Williams. Indeed, some gentlemen went so far as to state their opinion that Mr. Williams would npt be doing justice either to himself or to the public if he administered any other; for it was not clear, they argued, that M. Chabert's prussic acid was prussic acid at all. It would be only wearying the patience of our readers to give an account of the various hickrings which took place upon this point. Suffice it to say, that they terminated in Mr. Williams's consenting to give the second dog 10 minims of M. Chabert's mixture. M. Chabert declared that this was too large a dose, that' it would kill the dog before it would be possible to administer an antidote, and that as he had never pretended to work miracles, he would only undertake to provide an antidote forjitst such a portion as would destroy life. To this it was replied, that it was impossible to determine exactly what that pOrtion was, as it would vary according to the nervous system of different dogs, and that it was consequently necessary to fix the dose at such an amount as would render it probable that in all cases death would ensue. It was also contended, that in case the dose given was only just sufficient to de stroy a dog's life, it would be insufficient if any the smallest quantity of that dose was spilled or other wise lost in administering it ; as, for instance, if 100 parts and one-third of another were only just sufficient to kill, the 100 parts would be insufficient if the one-third were taken away. To these ob servations it was rejoined by M. Chabert, that if so much prussic acid were given as would make a dog drop lifeless upon the spot, it was quite hopeless to expect any benefit from his antidote, as no antidote could recall an animal to life after it had once lost it. After much time had been wasted in discussing this point, M. ( behest consented to let 10 minims be given, predicting with great vehemence that the dose would kill the dog almost instantly. Again M. Chabert was disappointed—for the dog did not even drop instantly after taking the portion. It staggered across the platform on to the floor, and did not fall until sufficient time had been given to ad minister any antidote. For the first four minutes it appeared to be in dreafful agonies—its limbs were convulsed—its eyes rolled frightfully in its head, and it occasionally uttered shrieks of pain. It then be came quiet, and M. Chabert persisted that it was dead ; but the indistinct moaning which proceeded from it almost at the very moment at which M. Chabert was speaking, proved him to be mistaken. Immediately afterwirds Mr. Bransby] Cooper and Mr. Callaway felt the pulsation of its heart, and both of them declared that they had little doubt that if ammonia were applied to it, the dog would recover. M. Chabert expressed a different opinion, and as serted that the dog was even then on the point of instant death. Here again, he was wrong ; for it was not till the end of ten minutes from the time of giving the poison that the pulsation of its heart ceased, and the dog was declared to be unquestion ably dead. One point was now established in the progress of the experiment, and that was that ten minims of M. Chabert's prussic acid would produce the death of a dog; but there was, and is still room for doubt, whether they would produce the death of i any, or rather of every dog. A second dog, and a nobler animal c ou ld scarce l y b e f oun d, was t h en pro -' duced ; arid as Mr. Williams measured out his ten , minims of prussic acid, M. Chabert Caine forward with a cup, which contained his antidote, The dog's jaws were opened—the poison was placed upon his tongue—and almost before the eye could be aware of:it s M. Chelsea de had Isis antidote into its mouth, and as many were inclined to suspect, dashed the poison out of it, at the same time the dog was then set free, and though he appeared frightened, did not exhibit any symptoms by which it could be supposed that the poison had affected its nervous system. M. Chabert contendeds.that his antidote had been corn pletely successful, but was met with a disdainful laugh, as he looked proudly round to claim the ap plause of the spectators. He was told that the joggle was too evident to puss for any thing else than 11 juggle ; that he had efther washed the poison out of, or decomposed the poison in, the dog's mouth ; and that if he wished to satisfy the public that he was in possession of the antidote which he alleged himself to have discovered, he must wait till the poison had seized on the dog's constitution before he applied it. To this plea in abatement of the merit of his antidote, M. Chabert instantly put in a demurrer : but lie was assailed by such an outcry that he declared it to be his opinion that the meeting were detei . mined not to him justice because he was a foreigner. This assertion met with an indigent denial from several of the medical gentlemen present. They p.rotested that they had come to see his exhibition of that day in the most perfect spirit of impartiality ; but they were com pelled to do justice to the public as well as to him. Nothing, they added, could be more unsatisfactory than the experiment by which M. Chabert asserted that he had proved the efficacy (Ibis antidote. All that he had hitherto done was nothing more at best than to decompose, by some chymical process, the prussic acid into some harmless mixture before it entered into the system. Every tvedical gentleman could perform that feat—the di'fficulty was to neutralize this dangerous poison aft er it had begun to effect the nervous system. Considerable discus sion took place upon this point betti . een several of the medical gentlemen and M. Chatl)ert—and M. Cliabert, with great tacr, endeavoured to enlist the non-medical part of the spectators on his side, by challenging any of the faculty, who thought so lightly of his performance, to repeat it, it •they could. By desire of several gentlemen present, who con sidered that M. Chabert was trifling with them and with the public, Dr. Harrison, Mr. l3ransby Cooper, and Mr. Callaway, were appointed a Committee, to bring the question at issue to a speedy determina tion. Having previously fixed their plan of opera tions, Dr. Harrison proceeded to inform M. Chabert that they could not pronounce any opinion in favour of his antidote, until they had seen it tried upon a dog, which was evidently suffering un tier the effects of prussic acid—that every body kn ew that alkali Neutralized that poison—that if his initidote con sisted of alkali, and was applied to the ,prussic acid, as soon as the prussic acid was placed on the ani mal's tongue, the prussic acid was instal ttly neutra lind, and never entered into its constitution, and that it had therefore been agreed that he sr,Chabert) should not apply his antidote to the nett dog to which prussic acid was administered until he (Dr. Harrison) should give his intimation, by signal, that the effects of the poison upon the dog had become visible. As M. Chabert expressed some reluctance to agree • to this arrangement, Dr. Harris on put several questions to him, which it is only justice to M. Chabert to state that he answered very candidly. M. Chabert admitted that he decomposed the prussic acid—that he had mingled his ant:dote with that poison, and given it so mingled to 7ari one animals sithout its producing any injurious effects upon them—that he did not conceive that his antidote would ever be useful to society—thut he had never applied it after the poison had entered the constitution, but that he was of opinion, though he could not say that he was certain, that even then it would be an antidote. He was therefore asked whether he had any objection to make experimen of it upon the terms which Dr. Harrison had stated. After some slight demur, he asserted that he had not, and in consequence a demand was made for the pro duction of another deg. Unfortunately, no other dog was to be found upon the premises. It was therefore determined to take, as a dernier resort, the unfortunate dog on which the bane and antidote had been already tried—a determination which M. Chabert considered to be very unfavourable to a fair decision of the merits of his nostrum. 'When the dog was brought once more upon the platform, he seemed to have some presentiment of the trial which he was to undergo; for several efforts were made to get his jaws open to receive the poison, but ineffectually. It was, however, administered at last, and though Dr. Harrison gave the signal for . M. Chabert to advance with his antidote as soon as he saw the lower extremities of the dog paralyzed, M. Chabert was impeded for a moment, very uninten tionally, by some of the spectators, as he was ruching to the assistance of his four-footed patient. Hav ing forced his antidote into the dog's mouth, it was at liberty to proceed where it pleased, : and M. Chabert was told that he might do all he could for its preservation. The symptoms of distrsis whick . . it at first exhibited were nearly the sam e a s ' those ex hibited by the dog which died : it lay at one tittle almost insensible, but was revived by a quantity of ammonia, which M. Chabert - administered' to its nose ; by degrees its pulse grew stronger; mid as it began to wag its tail and show symptoms of reco very, a burst of applause broke from the spectators, and rewarded M. Chabert for his exertions. Still the dog's respiration was impeded, and thoughii was gradually getting better, and was declared, at the end of half an hour, to be out of danger by the medical gentleman, it had by no means regained its high condition when we left the room. M. Chahert paid it every attention in his power, and his lan guage and gesticulation, as he stood over it, encou raging it sometimes in French, sometimes in Eng lish, and sometimes in a party-coloured dialect of both French and English, to get better, were the only entertaining parts of his Saturday's exhibition. After the applause which greeted the dog's recovery had a little subsided, Sir R. WILSON, who had en- tered the room shortly after the death of Mr.Bransby Cooper's dog, and who appeared to take great inte rest in at* different experiments, moubted the plat form, and called upon the meeting to express their opinion upon the experiment which they had just seen performed. Without at all pretending to give any opinion upon the subject as a medical question, he would call upon the meeting to bear witness that they had seen one dog die owing to its having taken ten minims of prussic acid—that they had seen the same quantity administered to another dog—that they had seen that dog affected by the poison so ad ministered both in its respiration and in the paralysis of its lower extrernities--that they had. seen M. Chabert administer a something to that dog, and that that dog, instead of dying, was gradually re turning to a state of convalescence. He had no doubt but that this result would send medical gen tlemea to their laboratories in order that they might discover the drug which M. Chabert used, and, if possible, improve upon his valuable discovery. Mr. BRANSBY COOPER admitted that the last ex periment had been very fairly performed, for the signal on which M. Chabert was to advance to ad minister his antidote had been giVen, as he thought, rather too late than too early.—(Applause.)—He could not, however, admit that the experiment was conclusive, for the dose was so small that the dog might perhaps have recovered without the antidote. He had repeatedly seen cases in which dogs had re covered without any antidote at all, after being quite as much affected as this dog was. Dr. HARRISON expressed a similar opinion to that of Mr. B. Cooper. Mr. WILLIAMS (not the gentleman who admini stered the prussic acid) said, that as Sir R. Wilson had moved that the meeting should testify its ap probation of M. Chabert's conduct, he must beg leave to say a word or two in opposition to the motion. Sir R. WILSON denied that he had made any motion. Mr. WILLIAMS reminded the gallant General that he had called upon the meeting to express an opinion in favour of what they had seen performed that day by M, Chabert, Now he could express no opinion in favour of M. Chabert's conduct that day; for he had not consented to make this last experiment which was any thing but satisfactory in its result until he was absolutely forced to do so. In forming hii opinion respecting M. Chabert, he had never eon' sidered whether he was an Englishman or a French man, for science knew no distinctions of country. He spoke without any personal hostility to 1 44 ' Chabert ; but after all the shuffling which M. Chr bert had used in order to get his own prussic acid administered, he felt himself bound to say, that be looked upon M. Chabert's conduct that day a s so attempt en his part to continue his system of bam boozling the public.—(Great disapprobation.) A spectator—Who is the gentleman who g ives this sweeping opinion ? Is he of the medical pro' fession ? Another spectator—No, he is a reporter. A third spectator—Then I think he had better hold his tongue, and leave those to give opinions on M. Chabert's merits whose opinions are worth Mr: WiLLlAsfs—l am here, not as a reporter, but as one of the public interested in the progress of science, and as such I have as much right as any gentleman who hears me to give my opinion.--(Hear.) Mr. CALLAWAY thought that as M. Chaberee present exhibition had been quite gratuitous, the medical gentlemen present should enter into a sub scription for him, in order to prevent him from being a loser from his attention to their wishes. M. CHABERT must decline the kind offer of Mr. Callaway,—he would take no remuneration ; his , object in appearing that day was to show that he was not an impostor, as some persons had repro• seated him.—(Cheers.) The medical gentlemen then retired. It is only proper to observe, that to prevent the practice of any collusion which might lead to change of the bottle containing the prussic acid, the Mr. Williams, who declared his conviction that M. Chabert was still attempting to bamboozle the public, tied a tape, to which he h a d a ffi xed his seal, around the neck o f it—arid that Mr. Williams, the chymical lecturer, took charge of the bottle, thud easily identified, during the whole continuance of the experiments. . In the course of the day, we heard M. Chabert tell several of the medical gentlemen that he would take 60 grains of phosphorus at his usual time in the afternoon —that he would then go and drink wine, &c., with them—and that he would stay w ith them, or they should accompany him to every pl a ce he went, till the next morning, in order to convince them that he neutralized the poison by, an antidote, and that he did not get rid of it by the stomach pump. We did not hear that his challenge w a s ac cepted. _ BOARD OF EXCISE COURT, MARCH 0. Charles Wright, a licensed beer and sp i rit retailer► of the White Swan public-house, Bunhill-row, was charged upon an informaiion preferred against him by the solicitor of Excise for having in his posses sion a quantity of colouring matter and other ingre dients for adulterating and mixing with beer and spirits. There were no less than nine counts in the infor mation, varying the character of the offence, a nd, upen each count the penalty was 2004 Mr. Douglas, a surveyor of excise, and other excise officers, deposed to finding in the beer cellar of the defendant's house, on the 27th of October last, a quantity of salt and water, sugar and treacle, used for colouring beer, and there were appearances from a large funnel which had been recently used, that a considerable quantity of the mixture had jn?r before been put in a butt of beer. There were other unknown ingredients in the snixture, and in a jag` was found a solution of green vitriol and Copperas,. which, upon being evaporated by heat, left a err' tallization of that poisonous mineral. The copperas was then produced, as well as some of the drugged beer and the mixture. Mr. Robert Hanbury, of the firm of Truman and Hanbury, had tasted the beer produced, and that 4 was not in the same good state that it had been sent by them to the defendant. There was a mixture . of other ingredents, not malt and-hops, in it. Th e de fendant had considerably improved the business of the house, and sold about nine butts a month. The Commissioners, after an attentive considera tion of the case, mitigated the several penalties to the sum of 1001., which they adjudged the defendant to pay, observing, he was well off in not having to pay the full penalties. _ William Eraser, of Brick-lane, w as conv i cte d in :he penalty of 50 1. upon seven counts, charged with laving colouring matter in his possession for adul .ering beer. HUNTING INTELLIGENCE. ♦PPOINTME2(TS FOR THE !RESENT WEEK. Mr. Jolliffe's Hounds, on Monday, at Reigate-hill; Wed nesday, at the Somers Arms ; sad Saturday, at Platt green—at Eleven. Sir Richard Sutton's Hounds, on Monday, at Ho!too Village and Blankney ; Tuesday, at Scamblesby ; Wed nesday, at Thonock.hall ; Thursday, at Saxilby ; and Sa turday, at Brant Broughton and Branst on W oo d— a t Eleven. The Comic Harriers, on Tilonday, at Beckhampton Furze ; and Friday, at Chittern Meadows—at Eleven. The Craven Hounds, on Monday, at Harewood-house ; Wednesday, at Bqwin Braila; Friday, at Rantsbury ; aid Saturday, at Newton Cross-roads.--at Half-past Ten. Mr. Wicksted's Fox Hounds, on Tuesday, at Checkley Village ; Thursday, at Stableford-bridge ; and Saturday, at Chainee—at Half-past Tea. . - --- The Montgomeryshire Fox Hounds, on Tuesday, at Cae Howell ; and Friday, at Kilkewydd-bridge—at Ten. Mr. Drake's Hounds, on Tuesday, at Charndon Com mon ; Thursday, at Bieester Windmill ; and Saturday, at Hornton Common—at Half-put Ten. The Duke of Grafton's Hounds, on Wednesday, at Stoke Plain ; and Friday, at Drayton Cross-roads—at Half-past Ten. Mr. Berkeley's Hounds, on Tuesday, at Knotting Fox ; Thursday, at Kempston; and Saturday, at Clapham Turn pike —at Half-past Ten. The Quorn Hounds, on Tuesday, at Bardon-bill ; Wednesday, at Gumley-hall; Thursday, at Queenby. hall ; and Friday, at Owthorpe, Notts—at Half-past Ten. Lord Anson's Hounds, on Wednesday, at Croft-hill ; Thursday, at Wharton Village; Friday, at Croft-hill; and Saturday, at Newbold-gate--at Eleven. The H. H., on Tuesday, at Beauworth ; Thursday, at Abbotsdon Down, and Saturday, at. Tunworth Down at Ten. Sir Jacob Astley's Deer Hounds, on Monday, at Holt ; and Friday, at Duker's.bridge—at Eleven. The Brighton Harriers, Monday, at Patcham ; Wed nes lay, at the Race Course; and Friday, at the Dyke--at Half past Ten. The Brookside Harriers, on Monday, at Newmarket hill ; Wednesday; at Asheombe ; the diternate Wednesday at the Kennel ; and Ftiflay, at Telscome Tye—at Half•past Ten. BIRTHS. On the sth inst. at Lambeth, the lady of J. C. Stahl echmidt. On the 6th inst. in York-street, the lady of the Rev. C. Barton, of a daughter. On the sth inst. at Islington, Mrs. T. Eldrid, of * daughter. MARRIED. On the 6th inst. at St. George's, Hanover-square, William Ratcliffe, Esq. of Pimlico, to Miss Bassett, of Maidstone. On the 4th inst. at St. Leonard's, Shoreditch, J. IL Sharpe,. Esq., of !Raton, and Windsor, to Thomasint daughter of Dr. Kelly, of Finsbury-square. - On the 6th inst. at Islington, Mr. J. Thorn, of Brisitol► to Margaret, third daughter of R. Chapman, Esq. of Islington. DIED. On the 6th inst. in the sth year of her age, Euphonies Jane, eldest child of Peter Hunter, Esq., of netebanis Leatherhead. On the 4th inst. at North-bank, Itvgent's-park-, Mar riette Jane, the second daughter of Mr. Sedeant Goul burne, aged seven years. .On the 6th inst. at Herne-bill, Surrey, aged 41, G. Hundleby, Esq., /ate of Freeman's-court, Cornhill, and of Denmark-hill. On the 4th inst. the Rev. R. Kedington, M.A., of Babergb, Great Waldingtield, Suffolk, Rector of Brad.- field, a magistrate, and formerly Fellow of Caius Colitges Cambridge. TABSTRO AND PI:MI.1111BD B 7 MURDO YOUNG, AT 71.** dax Ovnex, 112, &MAX% LONBOnt ) l~` v .7y 1 Lvet❑ Alan th e E chap. Likra Alon ti p rese i, given Priye; tenotir terms age."_ e, 1[ ITlity, tlemi r l 6 than ft earth, chaogi to sod Pourtr doa jj Lett This fl r Part Enzlisi well-a t tionarii words, repute, cop, ra pl Englisi °magic. Part Popull Diction tented , Diction The and Ar a guide " TI inGnitc perseve viceabli may ad atveunl either idioms, elas‘ie , 'lime is is distir some, t •ny Ge doubt h dembly mutt h wewk.". Lond and soli AT its vicin on Mon sth. Place in hated to rednetioi Wines, .5. tion of t brewing, by Brew allers, bt exempt. 6th. consump he found makin g t rate of d whomtol 7th. tlon e be mono ai wbereof op en . Sth, presentec ALL to the Sc mentio n inittee of h re gime . h e -Y, ae ril l loth . el4 ir i T lg a hlorn r TritVeller. Th e ci mouldy, That t that they the ch a i r the realot intereata c tude in cr he has pr, The CI tition aril the Lon( Csatle ara phin, Aiit Skoe-lene bruee re COlll inc r Cl Mr. Larhy, 13 1 ?qr. Sprit King's He and Threr Read, D r Oxford-at Soathurar Chelse a --;"; where ale( be receive( The aul