The Sun. — London, England, 1821-05-10 00:00:00

forward his Resolutions, diverge from the usual way. in which such propositions *ere brought forward. The Usual way was to say that the Rouse did not represent the people ) and that this was proved by their Resolutions, which did Lot accord with the sense of the people. This course, however, involved them in invidious dis cussions. It imposed on them the necessity of saying, that they who were the minority in the House, were the majority, in the country, and that independent Gentlemen on the other silk, -though connected with a majority in the House, were in a minority in the country. He should not-take this way. But he - did not wish to con ceal or deny that he was in principle a Reformer; that he thought the House should represent the people, and that it did not.--(Hear, hear, hear !) " -- -He did not agree with those who said that all the acts of the House were conformable to the wishes of the people, nor with those who said that the House should be a mixed sort of body, re presenting the Crown and the Aristocracy or higher orders, and not the people at large. But ha ving said this, he should endeavour to spew that there prevailed such practices—that whether they had yet discovered themselves in their reso lutions, could not fail ultimately to manifest themselves in discrepancies between the people and the House ; and he would call on them to Stop these practices before they went further to .Poduce their inevitable effects. The first prac tice which he should bring before the House, was that of bribery and corruption. Respecting this Practice, there could not be two opinions in the Rouse, as no one would venture to deny that it w as highly criminal and pernicious. it would b e just as readily admitted that it prevailed to a great extent. When he had brought before the House a motion for an Address re sPecting the punishment on Sir M. Lopez, he had daily that b r ib er y an d corru pti on was carr i e d on ti ailY to a great extent. In that assertion he had "net with no opposition. The Noble Lord on The other side (Lord Londonderry) had not ven tured to deny that proposition, and he certainly `would have surprised his supporters and the l louse consid er ably if h e h a d ven t ure d t o d o so. ~ his practice was so notorious, that when the late Mr. Sheridan was a candidate for a'seat in Parliament, and told one of the voters that he Was a friend to Reform—" Yes," said the voter, is and so am I, for I am told that there are some candidates who don't give their poor voters a Sin gle guinea —such men as these need reform." -" 1 t was well known that in 'the Boroughs its Cora: wall this practi ce prevailed to a great extent.— e people in a Borough there would engage so me person in the n e ighbourh o od, as patron of too Borough, who would maintain the poor, - and incur other expences in behalf of the town, and for this would get one seat, while the other was 'sold for a sum of money., The consequences of s uch practices were most pernicious. The first e ffect Was to promote drunkenness and profli gacy; to encourage a disregard for the duties imposed by the Constitution, and to keep the People in a state of ignorance and brutality. Be 'sides this, the internal affairs of those small `towns were often, in consequence, shamefully mis anaged. In one town in particular he knew tb loat a revenue of 2 or 3001. a year, which should b e expended for the benefit of the poor, was, e( 3 i de ans of the parliamentary influence, employ th.l,4 feasting the vot er s. Anoth e r e ff ec t was , -I :4xecutive Government was enfeebled by the c essity of conciliating the voters and their pa .4,Tis• It was w e ll k nown , th a t i n th ose b oroug h s t ere there are only 20 or 30 voters, these voters a h ve Obtained plac e s t o w hi c h th e y wou ld never ot • e fwise ha ve had any pretension. He had in deed received l e tters, which stated that in these 7 Pghs Government offices were . regularly T°ti ; that is, when a voter obtained a promise 4 °l / 1 a patron for a pl ace w hi c h h e did 'not I L s b himself to h o ld, h e s o ld it t o some one 1% 1 , 4 " 0 wished t o ge t it. Thi s c h arge was not ma d e ; for in the evidence on the Grampound l o ec tiou, it was stated that SOU bad been paid 1 ,, a voter- f or • an office in or connected the navy. A: fdtther consequence was, tl~ the Ministers 'were obliged to look to boroughs and their patrons for support in Rouse. He did not attribute to this Mi ll, tr y in particular, more than any oth e r, th e con 144tion with these persons, bat it was in the I, ur e of things. There were 80 County Mem-, t4l s, and 300 returned by boroughs with less final2oo voters. The necessary consequence that th e Mi n i s t ers mus t l oo k t o th e 300 ttii more anxiety -than to the 80 who were re ‘l,,l'ed by great dist r icts. If th ese 300 p ersons h b. '" not returned by independent voters, but If Then wh o h e ld th e i r pr i v il ege on l y as a mar 4table article, like their cheese or wool ; if th a. W aS the miserable infatuation o f th e v oters, 1 0 : ef fect must be felt from the highest to the lowest depart men t o f t h e St a t e . H e came now thi c°ll sider what remedies had been applied to ar t : ev il by the Legislature. In the first year e x ` r the Revol u ti on an ACt p asse d t o re g u late the Ar er r e i nces at elections, f or thus early was it disco ieq that almost at the very instant when, after' ts b I'7 struggle, the freedom of Parliaments was h,7lished, attempts w ere ma d e t o corru pt Parlia tits themselves. The corrupt practices at elec nfls Were then declared to h e a " great scandal kingdom ;" and it was enacted, that any , ar ": 4l dat e who should give any money to a voter, tr eat him a ft er th e t es t e o f t h e wr i t , s h ou ld b e eli c4- Pable of sitting in that . Pailiament. But this. Ine4ctrnent was not- efficient, for by an arrange ia...4.ut between the candidate and v o t ers , th e 4/,'" were paid their b r ib e s a y ear or h a lf year ter the election, which operated just as effec uaii Y as if they had rece i ve d t h em b etween th e A:e of the writ and th e e l ect i on. B y anot h er „.. 4 of Geo. 11., a p ena l ty of 50W. was imposed Zevery one who gave or took, a n d th e vo t er was t rcle incapable o voting. But h i thi s St a t u t e rs _gere . was room for' evasion, for there, was an ex- Leytton from the penalty in favour of a person t w t l : discovered an accomplice within a certain t :rn oit , .so that candidates had often after an elec b'rib ( indicted some persons whom they had There was also an Act against the sale ,sof, brib e persons from which, however, the Hon. author ` (Mr. Curwen) would by eff ect was to be expected. this time see that The question was) ' what course should now be adopted—should they make the penalties on bribery more se vere ? In his opinion, decidedly not. These small boroughs were placed in a situation in which they could not exercise their franchises independently. If, he said, forty or fifty persons almost upon the parish, who were indifferent as to the conduct of that great Coun cil of the nation, who did not at all care what legislative measures were taken, if such men as these had the power of electing Members, and if, on the other hand, persons possessing plenty of money wished to obtain seats, it was almost impossible that the two classes should not come together and make their bargain, be the penalties of Parliament however severe, be its declarations however solemn, or its hypocrisy however well maintained.—(Hear !)—They must look to the franchises of these boroughs. It appeared that as early as the first year after the revolution which he had mentioned, in 1689, corrupt practices were discovered in the borough of Stockbridge, and a proposal was made to take away its franchise, and give the right of returning the Members to the County of Southampton. The proposition being then new, the debate was put off and was never resumed. In 1695, the election in the same borough was declared corrupt and void, and a Bill was brought in to disable the borough, and to send the election to Basingstoke. The Bill was read a third time, but it then dropped. It was singular that at the end of the-18th, as well as the 17th, it had been declared by a Com mittee, that there was notorious bribery and cor ruption in the elections there. The next borough was Aldborough, which was declared corrupt - in 1696, and no writ was issued. In 1697 the voters petitioned, confessing their fault, and praying to be taken into favour, and the wri was issued. In 1698, Bishop's Castle was de Glared corrupt, and no writ was issued that Ses sion. The same was the case with Grea Grimsby. The House would observe that some of these boroughs had come lately before them in the same character, the inhabitants not forget ting the wholesome practices of their ancestors. In 1701, there was a great influx of corruption, one Shepherd having practised it on a large scale, and corruptly procured returns for his connections, for Bramber, Wootton Bassett, Andover, and Ilchester. For the investigation of this conduct, a Committee was appointed, in the business of which Sir Edward Seymour took an active part. It was voted that Sir Edward Seymour had made good his general charge against Samuel Shep herd, senior, for corrupt practices, and the thanks of the House were delivered to Sir Edward Seymour for his exertions, by the Speaker. The result was, the punishment of several persons concerned. The elder Shep herd was sent to the Tower. In 1792, a Bill was brought in for the disfranchisement of Hindon. The modern and more successful instances of these Bills were well known, but they by no means formed a vigorous and sufficient corrective to the evil. Only three of these Bills were pass ed, though there were generally fifty or sixty Boroughs before them for Bribery every General Election.—But the case disclosed with respect to Grampound upon_ a very recent occasion, fully', illustrated the inefficiency of the law as it stood, for the prevention of bribery and corruption. By the Grenville Act, which was no doubt a just measure, there was no inquiry as to bribery or corruption before any Committee, unless imme diately referring to the return. So that if the parties concerned in that return should make up their differences in any way, the house would hear nothing of the bribery or corruption in any case to which petitioners complaining of an undue election might allude. The Committee to which the Petition as to the election for Grampound was referred, reported that the Petition against the return was not frivolous or vexatious, and that the sitting Members were duly elected. But the nefarious practices at Grampound were brought to light through the, bribery practised previously to the election, some of the voters having re ceived such sums as Sir Manasseh Lopez refused to pay. Yet Sir M. Lopez was punished, while those who paid most, and consequently contri buted most t 6 the encouragement of bribery, were allowed to escape. Thus, it appeared, that additional guilt was a protection against punish ment, and Sir M. Lopez was the victim. It was said, that when a Mahometan crew happened to be in a storm, it was generally thought by them a good expedient for their safety, if they had a Jew in the ship, to fling him overboard ; and hence, perhaps, the dealers in bribery at Gram pound thought it expedient, when detected in difficulty and danger, to fling this unfortunate Christian, Sir M. Lopez, overboard. He himself believed that Sir Manasseh was entrapped into the general practice of Boroughs from its general impunity, without any peculiarly criminal motive, and hence he felt himself called upon to move the extension of clemency to that individual.— The means which he proposed for the full discovery of bribery and corruption, the Noble Lord stat ed to be the appointment of a Committee, distinct from that prescribed by the Grenville Act, the province of which Committee should be fully to inquire into such practices alleged to exist in any particular borough. To this Com mittee, as a distinct tribunal, he meant that all such investigations should be consigned, and that upon its Report both Houses should be called upon to decide. Great advantage would, in his view, result from the constitution of such a tribu nal, and particularly in preventing any partial in quiries, either in that or the other House of Par liament, in tlfe latter of which inquiries of this nature should not at all be gone into. There was some precident for this proposition in the Gran - Ipound ,case for an itxpiry with respect to bribery, after the return was decided upon. On that occasion he recollected that the Noble Se cretary for Foreign Affairs followed patiently the course of the inquiry after it was gone into, and therefore he calculated upon the Noble Lord's acquiescence in a resolution for pursuing a similar course upon any similar occasion. If the Reso- lutions which he had to propose should be adopt ed, he meant to move their reference to a Com mittee, by which the details of a Bill, founded upon thern,rnight be framed. In the course which he pro posed to follow, he meant no innovation which was. not impdriouslycalled for byexistingcircumstances, or innovations upon the practice of the Constitu tion ; for his objects were, first to provide against the practice of bribery ; and, secondly, for an adequate representation in that House of the im portant interests of the large manufacturing towns. It was to be remembered that when, in 1816, the Gentlemen with whom he had the ho nour to act objected to large military establish ments, they were answered by a call from the Ministerial side, to look at the increase of the manufacturing population of the country. This, indeed, was the answer of the Prime Minister himself, who had recently made a declaration to the' same effect in reply to those who opposed the extent of our military establishment. Hence it appeared that the only difference between his and the other side of the House ivas this, that Ministers for the governmentof our increased po pulation preferred a system of force and coercion, while he and his friends preferred conciliation and Reform.—(Hear, hear!)—But it was said on the other side, that the manufacturing people were so virtually represented in that House as to render any farther or more immediate representa tion quite unnecessary. Of this virtual Represen tion, however, he would say, that it was rathera fiction somewhat like that in Courts of Justice, where it was said that the Judge was always Coun sel for the prisoner ; but he remembered a'case where a Judge put such a question to a witness, that the prisoner exclaimed C 4 my Lord, if you were my Counsel, you would not put such a ques tion ;" and so the people would most likely say to what were called their virtual representatives, " if you were our representatives, Gentlemen, you would not give such votes as you do."— (Hear, hear, hear!)—But every man must think that no virtual representative could have the same degree of information to communicate, or could' possess the same influence or authority upon local questions, particularly in that House, as a direct representative from any manufactur ing town. How, for instance, could the Repre sentative for Warwickshire be entitled to the same attention upon any question connected with the hardware manufacture as a direct Represen tative from Birmingham, who was so much more likely to be acquainted with the particular and general interests, as well as with the pecu liar views of .the manufacturers ? But the adop tion of the Bill for transferring the right of voting to Leeds upon the ground of its important manu facturing interest, had in fact done away altoge ther with the principle upon which the argument rested, as to virtual representation ; for in the case of Leeds, the principle_ and propriety of direct representation were directly required, and therefore the argument as to virtual representa tion, if good for any thin.' at any time, could now. be no longer urged. It was indeed quite clear, that for the purpose of understanding the best interests of the country, the great manufac turing towns should have their direct representa tives sitting within the walls of that House. Among the evils, too, belonging to the present system 'of representation, was the manner in which some of our great manufacturing towns were governed. The government of Manchester Was in a steward or bailiff, and that of Birmingham iu a high constable or headimixough; There being then no Parliamentary Representative for either of'fhese great towns, the inhabitants had no one of importance to look up to, either for the formation of political opinions or for the ingto redress of politi ca l gr i evances . Th ey were not i n t h e s i tuat i on knowntheir R th e r p o r u es g e h nta th t e i of the people of 'Westminster, who had an opport u nity of appeal ing anvesfyorgriadevviacneceaisiodfawidh,icohr theywho coild make might complain. Manchester and Birmingham, , then, like other ma nufacturing towns, deprived of these advantages, and having no Representatives to look to, were but too likely to attend to any Hunt or Knight that offered to hear their complaints and promise them redress--(Hear, hear, hear !)—But when such persons were listened to by the manufacturing districts, to whom, he would ask, did the Government resort in order to counteract the machinations of demagogues, and to guard the . people against being misled ? Did Ministers refer to the Magistrates, or to the Lord Li eu t enan ts of Counties, to advise the people, or to inform them of their real wants and views ? No.—On the contrary, one Lord Lieutenant rather ap peared to have been suspected by them of revolutionary pur poses.---(A laugh, and hear, hear !)—and therefore, instead of resorting to the aid and counsel of Magistrates and Lord Lieu tenants, to defeat demagogues or to put down disaffection, this object was confided to the care and judgment of Oliver the Spy.—(llear, hear !)—No one was appointed to go into the manufacturing districts to inquire into the grievances of the people, or to guard against disturbances, but this Oliver, who was, it appears, the virtual representative of the Government.— (Hear, hear !)—He was the arbiter of peace and war, whose interest, and whose purpose it was to mislead and to inflame those whom it was the duty and professed object of Govern ment to undeceive, ,and to tranquillize. Thus, while the demagogues were left to impress the people, as it was said, with a belief that the only redress for their grievances was in the overthrow of the Government;, that Government itself superadded. the influence of Oliver, the spy, to tell them that a vast body of armed men were actually marching to assist them in accomplishing that overthrow.—(Hear, hear !) Was this the System which ought to be pursued by a wise Go vernment at the head of a free nation ? lint what had Govern ment gained by coercion, or blood-shedding at Manchester, or elsewhere ? 'With all the experience of their coercive laws, and severe punishments, and multiplied standing armies— what, he would ask, had the Noble Lord in reserve for insuring the tranquillity of this country under the existing system ? What could he extract from his budget of resources for coer cion to supply the means of meeting any new exigency ? He could not, indeed, imagine any farther expedient of restraint upon public liberty which the Noble, Lord could produce, unless he meant to impose a Censorship upon the press, and that was a measure to which he hoped and trusted the people of this coun try could never be persuaded or compelled to submit.—(Hear, hear, hear !)—With respect to the effect of coercion upon the people of this country, he referred the Noble Lord to a recent event at• Glasgow; for the purpose of teaching him that there was no safety in such a system.' As coercion then was found so ineffectual, it only remained to try the influence of concilia tion, by giving the people those rights which they.universally demanded, and which could not be fairly withheld. , In pro posing that the large towns should be directly represented in that Honse, he was only acting upon the principle of the Con stitution, as that principle was disclosed in our history._ His wish was . that Parliament should have the merit, and that the King should have • the 'grace, of conceding to the will of the people—that the redress of grievances, and the grant of supplies should, as in better times, proceed pari passu. He proposed that that House should origin ate the extension of voting which he had in view, ac cording to the precedents established in the cases of Wales, Chester, and Durham. As to the compensation which he thought ought to be granted to any boroughs which might be disfranchised, in order to transfer the right of return to • large towns ; he lainented that he differed upon this point from his Honourable Friend the Member for Durham, who had expressed his determination never to grant any indemnity in • compensation to persons who carried on a white slave trade ; , but as his Honourable Friend proposed to disfranchise London as well as Old Sarum, his view was at least consistent. As he ' (Lord R.), however, meant only that the smaller boroughs should be disfranchised, they wouldhave good ground of com plaint if no compensation were granted , particularly as they might point at larger boroughs, allowed to retain the right of return, against which, perhaps, more corruption could be P roved. But there were cases in which the right of return ing Members to that House was granted as a favour, as in the case of Wenlock, which obtained that right for ser.: vices rendered to Edward the 4th, and therefore to deprive that borough of such an advantage without compensation, would be an act of injustice. But the principle of compensation for boroughs disfranchised was distinctly recognised by the Irish Union. Such compensations were, indeed, of little compara tive consequence, to the propriety and necessity of extending the bases of popular freedom and representation, in ord4r to aug ment tlie interest of the people in the maintenance of free and popular institutions. All history served to illustrate the policy of this principle. When the popular returns for Spain were re duced from 200 to 70 places, the people became indifferent td what remained, and the free Constitution of Spain did not long survive that indifference. But there was another example, and it was that of Italy. In the 13th century there were 1,800,000 persons enjoying the privileges of freemen in Italy, and, in the 15th century, that number was reduced to 18,000. What wes the consequence ? Why, the immediate fall of liberty in Italy, to which event might be ascribed the easy conquest of that country by the Emperor of Austria. But, if freedom, or any remnant of the spirit which it inspired, had existed in Italy, it was impossible that such a spectacle of abject submission could have been exhibited, as had recently disgusted the people of this country, as well as all that were manly among the people of Europe. And what ,ouarantee could any reflecting English man calculate upon, that, if the smaller boroughs were allowed to have a preponderance in the Parliament of the country, to the exclusion of the large towns, and the mass of the popu lation from the right of voting, that the people of England might not _sink into the same state of indifference or apathy, with respect to national or individual freedom, which had lately marked the degraded character of the people of Italy ? (Hear, hear, hear!)—For what was more degrading in the history of mankind than the conduct which those Italians had presented to our view at the beginning of the 19th century ? If the Italians were free, no such scene could have occurred, and he exhorted the Government of this country to consult the lesson which the scene afforded—to identify themselves with the people--to conciliate their affection and confidence by ex tending their liberties. Such, he assured the House, were the only ends which his proposition had in view. His desire was to preserve and strengthen every link of connection between the people and the Government--to render the Crown and that House the peculiar objects of popular at , tachment. He .was aware that he was opposed by different I parties, and upon different grounds, in the course which he felt ' it his duty to pursue on this occasion, one party being alarmed at his propositions, from an apprehension that he went too far, while he was ridiculed by another . party for not going far enough. • The former urged that his views would endanger the institutions of the country., while the latter maintained that they would produce no change at all.. But he should only say to those parties, that he pitied the alarm of , the one, while he con temned the ridicule of the other ; and that whatever might be the animadversions or the impressions of both, he would pursue that course which was dictated by a sense of duty to his country, and by an anxious solicitude for the preservation of its liberties (Hear, hear !)—The Noble Lord concluded with proposing the following Resolutions : . . . " 1. that grievous complaints are made in the kingdom, and manifestly appear to be true, and undue Elections of Members to serve as Burgesses in Parliament, by gross Bribery and Cor ruption, contrary to the laws, and in violation of the freedom due to the Election of Representatives for the Commons of England in Parliament, to the great scandal of the kingdom, dishonourable, and' may be destructive to the constitution of Parliament. " 2. That in order to strengthen and maintain the necessary connexion between the Commons of this Kingdom and their Representatives in Parliament, it is expedient to give to such places as are greatly increased in wealth and population, and are not at present adequately represented, the right of returning Members to serve in Parliament. " 3. That a Select Committee be appointed to consider to what places, according to the principle of the foregoing Resolu tions, it may be advisable to extend the right of returning Members to serve in Parliament, and the best method of effect ing that measure without an inconvenient addition to the Mem bers of this House. " 4. That it be referred to the same Committee, to consider further of a mode of proceeding with respect to any borough which may hereafter be charged with'notorious bribery and corruption, in order that such charges may be regularly and effectually inquired into, and if proved, that such boroughs may be disabled from sending Burgesses to serve in Parliament.for the future." Mr. WIHTMORE seconded the motion. He was by no means an advocate for what was called Radical Reform, for be looked upon it as pro- ductiVe of revolution, and the Constitution of England he thought had been too glorious in its effects to require revolutions. Radical Reform went partly upon the basis of the 2d and 3d Par liaments, during the protectorate of Oliver Crom well. That politic Chief having known that the smaller boroughs had, under the sanction of the great landed proprietors, entertained affection for the Royal . Cause, had regulated his Parlia ment so as to have it consist of 400 Members, 270 of whom were elected by the counties of England, and one hundred and thirty by the maritime counties. To the introduction,of any such he would be always averse, for while the elector would, as at the time of Cromwell, be compelled to possess an estate of the value of 2001. the 40s. freeholder and the trader would be compelled to forfeit their natural privileges. Though he was opposed to revolution, he was an advocate for useful reform, such as that proposed by the Noble Lord. Great changes had taken place among the people since the House had been constituted as it then was; and a change was therefore necessary in that House, in order to make it suited to the age and to the state of the people. Instead of the Members of it being the tools, they ought to be a check upon the Aristo cracy ; and instead of being subservient tb the views of Government, the House ought to have its constitutional controul over the acts of Minis- ters. Ile , had no doubt but an effectual controul might be established over the pernicious conse quences arising from bribery and corruption ; and the admission of the large towns to a parti cipation of the elective franchise would tend to legalize the people. The Hon. Member con cluded by seconding the Resolutions. The first Resolution was then put, and stran gers were ordered to withdraw preparatory to a division, when Mr. B. 13,1THURST rose, amidst loud cries of " Withdraw ! Withdraw !" The llon. Member addressed the House at considerable length, but the noise that prevailed during the whole of his speech prevented his being heard in the gallery. We understood him to say, that he had always recognized'the principle, that when any case of bribery was established, it was proper to deprive it of its franchise, not only as a punishment to the offending borough, but as a warning to others. He understood the Noble Lord to contend that it was desirable the larger towns should be repre- sented, and therefore the boroughs, whether cor rupt or otherwise, should be disfranchised. He did not see that the Noble Lord had shewn that e House, as at present constituted, was not ade- quate for the discharge of its duties; nor had he shown that merchants, who now represented the 'oroughs, would, if returned, or that those who might - be returned from the larger towns, would he better qualified than the present Members. Now with respect to the qualification of voting, supposing - that it was confined to persons possessing property amounting to 10/. per annum, he much doubted , whether out of the number of persons .assembled at Man chester, to the amount of several thousands, one hundred would have been found who would be entitled to the right of voting. Could it there fore be expected that this reform would remove their discontents, or the - grievances of which they complained'? Nor perhaps would the Members returned stand higher in the estimation of the Noble Lord than those that might be removed to make way for them. And. if the Members re turned from these towns should be solely qua- lifted to advocate the local interests of these places, they would, so far from being an useful addition to the house, be in fact pernicioui ; inasmuch as they would preVent Members from being returned possessing more general and practical information. He concluded by moving the previous question. Lord J. RUSSELL and Mr. BATHURST MIltU4 ally explained. Mr. BARHAM, amidst loud cries of 0 . Ques , tion !" presented himself to the House. He hoped, as the borough he represented (Stock bridge) had been alluded to by the Noble Lord as an instance of gross corruption, 'he might be permitted to say a few words. He knew that, 130. years since complaints of that nature hid been made ; but from some cause or other it had not been disfranchised. That borough was now pure, and there was not a greater share of inde pendence in any city or county than at 'present existed in the borough of Stockbridge. He came down to the House to support the Resolution, and the Noble Lord would not find any one more zealous in doing it than himself. Should the plan of the Noble Lord be agreed to, the state of all the boroughs would be brought under the notice of the Committee, and in that case he had no objection that Stockbridge should be placed first on the list. The SPEAKER then put the question, and tjie House di vided-- For the original motion - - . 124 Against it - - - 155 Majority against Lord J. Ruessll's motion -31 On our re-admission, we found Mr. MABERL'IL' speaking against a Bill brought in to sanction a loan from the Bank of Ireland of 500,0001. at 4 per cent. The Bill was opposed on the ground that 4 per cent. was given, when the money might be had in England for 3 per cent. Mr. BARING, and Mr. CALCRAFT also opposed it on a similar ground. The CHANCELLOR of the ExcHtouEdexplained the object of the Bill, and observed, that it afforded no favour to the Bank of Ireland. It was to raise a sum to pay another debt, to enable the Proprietors to divide a sum among them which they had just claim to. Sir, JOHN NEWPORT intimated that he should, in the Committee, add a clause having a restrictive operation. _ _ _ The Bill was then read the first time, and ordered to be read a second time this day. OR the motion of Mr. DAVIES GILBERT, the Metropo lis Road Bill committed pro forma, and the Report ordered tO be taken into consideration on Friday se'nnight. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Two o'CLocE. FOR THE SUN. GEOGRAPHICAL ERRATUM. Ma. EDITOR,—I wish to correct an ERRATUM in your Paper of the 6th ultimo, where you detail a most extraordinary occurrence:at a place of semi-barbaric name, Strathbora, I think, and of such a nature as, in my humble opinion s could never have happened in a Christian country. You tell us of a whole body of tenantry driven from their farms by the agents of the • Land owner, aided by the civil and military pOWer ; of their flying to some neighbouring heights, and from thence witnessing the devastation of their humble, but till then peaceful abodes—at least suppose them to have been peaceful, for you tell us not of any crimes there committed, thins tify a proceeding of _such a distressing nature ! All this too you give from the Inverness Paper, when it ought most certainly to have been -- the Constantinople Gazette, the Algiers Chronicle, or the Pez Courant ! Really, Mr. Editor, this must be a mistatel Could such a thing happen in Great Britain, the land of liberty, of humanity, of benevolence, of charity ? Well ! if it could; what has happened once, - may happen again ! Now, let us suppose that a - certain Earl, who once talked, of throwing the Church Prayer book at his Sovereign's head, were to order all his tenants off Grosvenor-square, and the streets in the vicinity, and to drive them to the top of Primrose or Constitution Hills, by the aid of the Guards and Bow-street officers, whilst his workmen were busy in pulling down all the mansions in that district, is it not possible to sup pose that , some people might venture to imagine that the Noble Lord was a little in danger of a strait waistcoat ? Then, are not law and com mon sense in London also law and sense in the Highlands? Is not such a statement a libel on the Noble individuals implicated ? Is it not their duty to step forward and to wipe off the opprobrium ? If there is law to prevent such measures, ought it not to be enforced ? And if there is not such a law, ought it not to be in the power of the Sovereign to say, " I will not have my people driven to desperation ! I will not smile upon him who forces my subjects from their humble yet happy abodes ; forgetful that. rank and power, even in the days of feudality, were given to the few for the good of the many !" Your's, BOREAS. BISHOP AND CLERKS.-Those perilous rocks at 'Scilly, called the Bishop and Clerks, are' said to have derived their name from an incident which happened 200 years ago,' when a fleet of merchantmen coming from Spain were ship.. wrecked upon them, and only 'Miles Bishop and John and Henry Clark were preserved on a fragment of a mast.,.. Ma. ALDERMAN K ING.-The official ePlana tious which have got into the public prints, re lative to some irregularities - committed by minor agents, in the service of revenual stationery, &c. prove, most clearly and conclusively, that the remotest imputation does not attach to the charac ter of Mr. KING; than whom there is not a more honourable and high-Minded man in the commu nity. Whether the publication of the inglikry. in the newspapers was prompted, in all cases, by the love of truth and a regard to justice, it would be difficult to say ; but the friends of Al derman KING could desire nothing more calcu lated to exhibit that Gentleman in the pure co lours of his genuine character; and to confirm to him that high and unlimited esteem and confi dence so justly accorded to him through his whole life by his friends and the public. That there was something dark and vile lit the origina tion of this business, there is but too much rea son to suppose, but the pure gold comes out of the ordeal uninjured ; the worthy Alderman stands justified to the Government and the Coun try, and the shafts of malice or corruption fall blunted from the shield of his integrity. We should not have noticed the subject but that it haS been so much treated of by cotempprar:c prints.—(From the Warder.)