The Express.
London, England, 1849-03-22 00:00:00

or similar plans, but placing the docks on the north, or '
Moak Wearmouth, side of the river instead of on the
son. h. The contest between the North and South Dock
parties breams most violent and atrimordoos. The
ant session the South Dock Bill was carried in the
Commons, but thrown oat in the Lords,throughtbe in-
tuitive mainly of Lord Ravensworth. The nexty ear the
North Dock Bill was brought in, and preyed to a di-
visim ; and that we■ lost likewise. Sir Hedworth
' Willainson and his friends then said, " We will ac-
cept a bill for the construction of them docks at
Monk Weermouth, without the clause imposing a
passing toll." The bill, thus curtailed of its fairest
feature, was assented to by parliament. The North
Decks were conetructed. They proved a m'serable
failure, and scene years after (such lathe mutability of
human affYrs) ware bought up by Mr. Hudson, at a
small cost, for the use of the York, Newcastle, and
Berwick Railway Company, to which concern they
now belong.
In the midst of this great dock contest occurred
the general election of 1837. Alderman Thompam
and the Sunderland ship-milers wine for the South
Docks ; Sir H• dworth Williamson and Mr. Barclay for
the north. As regarded the peoile of SunderMndi
there can be no doubt that the feeling was in favour
of the south &eke ; indeed, as circumstances have
since proved, that scheme is one of no
small importance to the town. Partly with
a desire to turn out the tory, and partly from a
wish to have a townsman in t':e House of Commons,
it was determined to bring forward a third candidate.
The party selected was Mr. Andrew Wlft., a chip.
owner and konmaster in Sunderland, so greatly
esteemed there both for his private and public conduct,
as to be popularly known by the appellation of
"Rout at Andrew White." This contest proved a
most severe and expensive one. The treating, espe-
cially by the friends of Messrs. Barclay and Thomp-
son, was general: were we speaking of a town of lee
size. than Borderland, we should say that
every public house in the place was opened.
It is estimated that little less then 7,0001. went in
this way upon th's occasion ; in fact, to two of the
candidates "money was no object," as they Lai on
previous occasions abundant'y tmtifled. The town,
which had been ecbased sualcient'y before, now
reached almost the lowest point of political degrada-
tion.

Under any other combination of eircums'ances
there can be little doubt but that Alderman Thomp-
son would have be n rejected ; but the Dock feeling
was in his favcar, and his friends made the most
of it. At the close of the contest the North Dock
member was thrown out, and the South Dock mem-
ber end Mr. Andrew White returned. The numbers
on this occasion were—for Thompson, 688; Wtite,
628; Barclay, 591. The election is supposed to have
cost the three candidates nearly 10,001)1.; of which
amount Messrs. Thompson and Barclay did net ex-
pend far short of 8,000/.
In 1841 " Honest Andrew White," who had made
a very useful member, refrei from the represeutat;on
His private circums'ancet, and the probably cost of a
second severe contest, were the cones of his resigna-
tion. Those who appreciate a sincerely honourable
and consistent member regret his loss to his
native town and to the House of Commots.
On this occasion there was no third candidate.
Parties had had enough of fighting, and were glad
for once of a peaceable election and a compromise to
obtain it. Alderman Thompson and Mr. Barclay had
fought the town four times: on this occasion they
were only too glad to be permitted to come in without
another contest for the victory.
So things stood when Sir Robert Peel toA office.