The Sun.
London, England, 1831-03-22 00:00:00

,
ra At
•

LONDON,
TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 22, 1831.

The discussion that took place last night in the
House of Commons on the subject of the Time:
newspaper, can deceive none but the wilfully blind,
or the profoundly and incurably bigotted. It was
evidently an attempt on the part of the borough.
mongers to punish a public spirited Journal
for having presumed to expose the humbug anti-
Reform petition now lying for signature, we believe,
somewhere in the east end of the metropolis, a little
west of the Whitechapel shambles. This, we be-
lieve, was the real—sole motive for the attack made
on the Times;. but as it would not be altogether
politic to have confessed as much, it was resolved to
get up a clamour about the libellous insults offered
to the more than virgin purity of the boroughtnon-
gers, who, headed by Sir R. INGLIS, and tailed by
Mr. PERCEVAL, made a stout, but of course, a
hopeless, fight on the occasion. Sir FRANCIS
BURDETT defended the conduct of the Times in
one of the manliest—the most convincing—
the most argumentative speeches we have read for
some time, and Lord ALTHORP having moved the
previous question, the squad—notwithstanding the
sanctimonious declamation of Mr. PERCEVAL, and
the absurd rhodomontade of the Hon. Member for
Boroughbridge—were defeated.
In the course of the evening Mr. SHEIL made
his maiden speech, which was attentively listened
to, and throughout much admired. His arguments
in favour of Reform were pertinent and forcibly
put. The House did not rise till nearly four o'clock
in the morning.

In consequence of the factious division on Friday
night, a hole and corner meeting was got up at the
University of Cambridge, for the purpose of peti-
tioning again%t Reform. So indecent—so precipi-
tate was the haste with which the whole affair was
conducted—that it was actually brought to a con-
clusion before many of the heads of colleges
had the slightest intimation. How discreditable is
the sight of men of learning—grave Professors of
public institutions, clubbing together for the pur_
pose of defeating so salutary, so patriotic a measure
as the Ministerial plan of Reform

The following Parliamentary Paper has been
published this morning, and is highly seasonable at
the present moment. The number of petitions pre-
sented in favour of Reform, frem the sth of
November to the 4th of March, is 645; but we
have no doubt that ten times that number have been
presented since the 4th of March, from which period
the Ministerial plan of Reform was fairly before the
country :
REFORM OF PARLIAMENT PETITIONS.
REPORT.

The Select Committee appointed to examine the Peti.
tions in favour of Reform, distinguishing those praying
for Vote by Ballot, and to report the same to the House,
have proceeded to examine the subject referred to them,
and beg leave to submit to the House the following Clas-
sification

CLASSIFICATION of PETITIONS presented to the Honour-
able the House of Commons, on the subject of Parliamentary
Reform, in Session 1830-I ; distinguishing those praying for
Reform, Election by Ballot, and Short Parliaments ; and,
eomplaininf of the exaction of Tithes, of the burden of Taxes,
and of the System of Elections of Royal Burghs in Scotland.-
sth November, 1830-4th March, 1831.

Reform. BalloParliaments.
t. Short
Tithes. Taxes. Royal
Burghs.
----- ----
-........--- -
045 280 182 70 239 179

In the French Chamber of Deputies, on Friday
last, the President of the Council, together with
many others of the new Administration, entered at
length into an exposition of the system on which
they were resolved in future to act. They are de-
termined to persevere in a course of energy arid de-
cision, and to preserve peace—so long as there re-
mains the slightest possibility of their being enabled
to do so. The doctrine of intervention is to be up-
held, and all popular tumults are to be repressed
with promptitude and severity. M. CASIMIR
PERIER, we suspect, will have considerable dif-
ficulty in carrying his thsigns into execu-
cution. By the Express, however, which ar-
rived this morning, we learn that the precautions
of the new Government had already had the effect
of overawing the disaffected. Fresh troops were
continually arriving in the capital and its neighbour-

hood, on the plea that Louts PstiutrPr would re-
♦iew them on Sunday next, " when the Parisians
would see the degree of discipline to which the
young army had attained."

German Papers have been received this morning;
they contain nothing of importance.

We understand that the cause of his MAJESTY'S
deferring his visit to the Opera House this evening,
arises from the intelligence just received of the death
of the Hon. Captain ERSKINE at Pisa, who married
Miss AUGUSTA FITZCLARENCE.

SIIIPPING INTELLIGENCE-(THIS DAY.)

FROM LLOYD'S.
DEAL, MARCH 2l.—Wind N.E.—Arrived, and sailed for
Chatham, the Redman, Freebody, from Sierra Leone ; and
Thames, —, from Jamaica.
RAMSGATE, MARCH 2l.—Sailed the Hope transport, for
Portsmouth.
LIVERPOOL, MARCH 20.—Arrived the Comet, Richardson,
from New Orleans.
HOLYHEAD, MARCH D.—Arrived the Hope, from Liver-
pool, with loss of rudder' having struck on a bank off Wexford,
hound to Newfoundland.

Extract of a letter from the Agent to Lloyd's, at Rye, dated
the '2lst inst. :--" The vessel sunk off Fairlight, as reported by
the Trinity House in the notice of the 11th inst., has drifted
about four miles to the eastward, with her mast about six feet
out of water at spring tides, and lies in four fathom water with
no buoy, and in a very dangerous situation for vessels bound up
and down channel."

The Rose, Hom;e11, from Boston, has arrived in the river.
The Triton, Fogwell, from Dartmouth, has arrived at Almeira.
The Thames, Brown, from London, and Bermuda, has arrived
at Savannah.

ELECTION COMMITTEES.-(THIS DAY.)

LIVERPOOL.

The Committee met again this morning at eleven o'clock.
The Committee being all in attendance, the examination of
Mr. Francis was resumed—l was a member of the Old Committee
Club. I was present at several dinners given by Mr. Swart.
The witness here shewed somereluctamtb in giving by evidence.
The Chairman (Mr. BENETT) requested the witless to give
his answer as quick as possible.
Mr. Francis said that it was his wish so to do. He could not
recollect the conversation at the dinners which he attended at the
time Mr. Ewart was present. The remainder of this witness's
evidence was of the same nature, and to the same effect as those
examined yesterday.
Mr. Forshaw was next called, but before giving his evidence he
requested_ to have his expences paid.
Mr. ADAMS—We have paid him 101. 'on leaving Liverpool,
and any other sum the witness requires that is reasonable shall
be paid him. This arrangement satisfied the witness, and he
proceeded with his evidence.
lam an accountant, residing at Liverpool. I was frequently
at the King's Arms during the election. I do not remember that
the committee-room was called ‘. the pay committee-room." I
took an interest in Mr. Ewart's election ; that interest arose en-
tirely from friendly motives. I never assisted Mr. Ewart in his can-
vu, neither did I attend any of the clubs with him. I did not even
solicit a vote in his favour, I confined myself entirely to the
books. The room No. 16, at the King's Arms, was called the
pay-room. I used sometimes to go into that room, this was when
the paymasters required some explanation of the lists of freemen
that I had certified as having voted. I generally found the same
persons in the room. I saw gold and bank notes on the table, it
was kept in wooden bowls, the bowls were not always full. I
will swear that I never saw any money paid to the Captains or
Lieutenants, but on one occasion I saw some paid to the
electors, but I cannot say what the payments were,
or on what account they were paid. The Bank notes were tied
up in bundles, but I do not know, nor can I form any opinion of
their amount. I remember a woman, named Barber, bringing
me a card to sign, certifying that her husband had polled for
Mr. Ewart. Ido not know that it was for the purpose of enabling
her to be paid. (The witness here appeared very unwilling to
give distinct answers to the questions.)
Mr. ADAM—You appear, Sir, to be very unwilling to tell
what you signed the card for. Upon your oath, don't you know
it was for the woman to receive money ?
Mr. Serjeant SPANKIE objected to the question, as it was a
leading one.
After some discussion between the Committee, strangers were
ordered to withdraw, and were not re-admitted when our Re-
porter left.