The Sun.
London, England, 1825-05-10 00:00:00

wise in spite of his Hon. Colleague, by which means two booths Question. Nothing, in his opinion, but a delusion of mind
he (Mr. - M.) wished to close, were kept open, and a loss sus- could have mixed it with the Catholic question. It had nothing
tamed by him on the whole • pall of upwards of 60k) votes.= to do with it. He said so on a former occasion, and repeated
(Hear!)—Now men, lie.contended, who braved so much to fol- it; but he could not .say with the Members for Uoston and
low their own feelings and principles, were perfectly indepen- Durham, that the passing of this Bill was sufficient reason for
dent free.holdtre, and deserved to enjoy the rights they so man- altering his opinion with respect to the Catholic Bill. He
fully exercised.—(Hear!) could not give up the impression that the Catholic question was
Mr. DALY (among Loud and general calls to rise) addressed one founded on justice, and that the measure was absolutely
the House and said, he was taken somewhat unexpectedly by necessary firethe salvation of the country. lie conjured the Hon.
the speech of his lion. :Colleague. Having heard that on te -.friend by hie ,attachment to his duty, to_consider again what
former night. during his (Mr. Dely'S) absence, his Hon. cot- .was his duty, and to do it.. if they did not Vine for the Catholic
league had mentioned an election for the county of Galway in Question, it would appear. that they did nOt follow their own
which he was concernednlia-thisoneninn asked the Hon. Gene. opinions :-That,they.were not free agents—that they. voted for
tleman (Mr. Martin) whether he intended to allude to him or lit one day, and against it another. lie urgently put it to those
not in the course of the present debate, and the answer was Hon. Friends to reconsider what they had said ; lay their heads
that he dithnot. The Hon. Member might certainly have re- on :their pillows, etrid before to-morrow they might retract the
plied correctly; • for he had not: alluded to him (Mr. Daly), opinionit they had expressed.
lust had directly obliged him with, being .a Party-to she Pro, -)tr• LAIVIBTON said, his Hon. and Learned Friend was
ceeilinge he teed just stated:---(Hear Hort. Member auneemisfakeri a Suppoeinghe could retract what he had given
then proceeded to explain the transaction we have endeavoured:. as his fixed opinion, ton-norrow night. • He said some time ag.o
to relate above, add to show that 'he' was rot Cognizant of the that he never WoOld vote-for the question of Catholic Ernanci-
oenduce which his tenantry pursued in that instance before it
_potion whilst it was distorted by being yoked with the Disfran-
occurred, and :that he had acted throughout confornialely to the chiseinent. Bill. Rather than the forty shilling freeholders
pledge of neutrality given in the outset,' The Hon. Member should be deprived of the right of voting, he would consent to
then adverted to the question- under debate, and said he be. 'let the Catholic Question be lost. So long as it was coupled
as-
lieved the evils of the system of forty shilling freeholders w with the Bill then under consideration, he should give it his de.
correcting itself, and if a Committee were appointed, which tided opposittnii: Hee could assure his Hon. and Learned
would suggest guards against the existin.g abuses, lie should Friend, that ehe vote he snot ld,give:Would he founded on his
rejoice at the Circumstance, and give such a 'measure his hearty 'opinion. Ile liad'never given a vote in that House from inte-
support. rested motives. Since-he had occupied a sear he Parliament he
Mr. R. MARTIN' explained. He begged to assure 'the had acted with sincerity. The determination he had formed
House and his Hon. Colleague, that he never mean to impute not to vote for the Catholic Relief Bill, coupled with the suf.
to hint a guilty foreknowledge Of the conduct of his- tenants to trage measure had occasioned some pain, because a man did not
. •I
which he had referred.—.(Hear!) lire to give up ltii friends, but he lied given them notice of his
•
Mr. DALY, after each a declaration', -thought any Gentle- intention. His Hon. and Learned Friend concurred with him
man must be satisfied.—(Hear!) in saying that it was a most objectionable measure.
Mi. S. BICE congrattilated" the House upon the episodical r.- BROUG HA M—(Hear, hear!)
dialogue, between the two Honourable Members for Galwaynn- Mr. LA MiI.TON continued:—His lion and Learned Friend
if the Hon. Member for Staffordshire wanted evidence to sup- had then no right to object to his conduct. His Hon. and
port his Bill, that dialogue-supplied it. What was meant by Learned Friend said he could vote for both measures. He did
voters " breaking loose," and by a compact between Gentle- not . think so: Another reason for coming to this conclusion
men to exchange- two voters for one voter ?' He should "not, was knew the mixing of the two bills was opposed
however, discuss the topic further, but beg to call the attention by -persons appointed to, bring in the Catholic Bill. There
of the Hotise to an observation of his Honourable Friend the were symptoms of a design to disunite the best friends of
Member for Aberdeen. lie-Was extremely pleased to find his freedom, and he would trot be reproached for doing that which
lion. Friend echo in that House sentiments respecting the mo- was not -criminal. He had- refused to abandon the principles
• tives of some Gentlemen, for the tenour of their evidence before he had professed. His opinion was, that carrying the Disfran-
the Committee, which sentiments he grieved to say had already chisement Bill would do more injury to the people of Ireland
by means of letters to Hon. Members, and writings in the 'than 'not carrying the Catholic Ouestion. The' Honourable
Public Papers most lamentably estranged Parliament from -Member could. not foresee that the expression of his opinion
a favourable view of Emancipation. He now denied in the would lead to debate, and much less that lie should be told to
strongest terms the justice of such imputations. In Ireland they retract, for he had come to a wrong conclusion. Ile was not to
had no existence; they obtained no credit ;. and in this coun- be brow-beaten. He had formed a conscientious opinion, and,
try they 'emanated from—nothing less he could call them than "SO help Me God !" -said Mr. Lambton, I will pursue the line
incendiaries and persons who thus endeavoured to give vent to which I consider my duty, though it may lead to the genera-
fet lings of disappointed vanity.— (Hear !)—This, however, was tion of the dearest interest.
a painful subject, and lie should not dwell on it further.— Mr. BROUGHAM could not suppose that any Member in
The Hon. Member then argued to chew that the evidence al- that House would say he had endeavoured to controul or brow-
ready before Parliament, sufficiently justified the measure beat his-Hon. friend. lie was not conscious old-laving attempt.
under immediate consideration, and instanced the testimony ed to put any restraint on his Hon. Friends. en
of Judge -Day betbre the Hon. Committee of last . year, in Colonel JOHNSON repeated that he should not vote for the
c, r:ohoration of his opinion. He also alluded to the evidence third reading of the Catholic Bill, if it were connected with the
of Mr. Cooke, of Mr. O'Connell, and Mr. Wallace, to prove Bill then before the House.
dlr. the Irish forty shilling freeholders voted at present froM Mr. JAMES feltit necessary, as he was a friend to the ex-
compulsion,. and were subservient to the will of their supe- tension of the elective franchise, to state why he meant to vote
riari. lie also adduced the same evidence to chew that for the disfranchisement Bill. He would do so, because it up-
every really independent 40s: freeholder would become a 101. :peered, from the evidence now before the House, that the
f; Beholder under the proposed measure, and - that its only Roman Catholic 40s. freeholders were nominally, but not really,
operation would be to remove a mass of voters who had no -freemen.
will or conduct of their own in returning Members to Parlhi- The House then resolved itself into the Committee.
ment. If, however, the bill attempted to interefere with 40s. • Mr. LIT"I'LETON said, lie merely wished the blanks. to be
freeholds in fee he should regret it, even though he should at filled up, pro forma, the report to be received, and to be taken
the same time regret 'emancipation. One meanie why he ap-• into further consideration on Thursday next.
proved of the alteration was that he thought it would conduce Several members called out, "Go on." • -
to the growth of a body of independent Constituency in Ireland, Mr: FITZGERALD did not approve of' the course recom-
by encouraging the poorer classes to purchase small estates.— mended by the lion. Member for Strafford.
Upon these principles lie gave the Bill his complete. support, Mr. HUSKISSON Ktid, that the course proposed was the
and in doing so let should address one word. to -the friends of most proper one. By adopting it, they wmild come to the dim-
Ireland. This measure- had produced an approach to unani- cussion on Thursday next, with a perfect -knowledge of the
mity among all classes of Irishmen, and therefore gave a sure Bill, instead of proceeding now, in the absence of that know-
indication that the great question with which it was connected 'ledge.. Whatever-objections the Hon. Members bad to offer
would be carried at no distant day—for when the people of Ire-. could be submitted to' the House on Thursday, with as much
land were onceimanimeus, their voice and wishes would lie effect as if they were urged now..
complied with .by the British Legislature. For that .Union the Sir J. NEWPORT said by allowing the Bill to pass through
country was much indebted to the Hon. Member for Armagh, the_Committee, proforma, the Hon. Member would not pledge
whose conduct had. rendered the name of Brownlow doubly himself to approve of any particular case.
deer and valuable to Ireland. After a few more observations Mr. PLUNKETT said, that all the clauses had not as yet
in justification of the passage from the-letters of J. K. L. re- been opened by the Hon. Member for Stafford. There were
(erred to by the lion. Member for Montrose, the Hon. Gentle- some clauses of which the lion. Member who wished to pro-
man sat dawn by declaring his decided opinion in favour of the treed now, could not at present-know any thing.
1 till.—( II !) • • - After a few words from Mr. FOSTER, Mr. V. FITZ-
,
111`NAGHTEN rose to oppose the Bill altogether. If • GERALD, and Mr. CALCRAFT, the Bill went through the
the House wished to proceed -judiciously in such a course, it Committee. The Report was received, and ordered to be
ought first to inquire what the abuses of the existing system taken into further-consideration on Thursday next. The other
really' were,
,and then. legislate to remove them. Would it be Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and at ONE O'CLOCK
fait because the Borough of Grampo.und was corrupt that they the House adjourned.
slionld disfranchise the whole people of England ? He consi.
tiered the Bill so unjust that he could not vote for it. -
Sir F. BLAKE supported the
Capt. O'GRADY rose with reluctance to speak his senti-
ments, but lie could not avoid saying that the county. which he
represented was tree f one the excesses which had been stated
to-prevail in other counties. The Hon. Member adverted to a
statement made on a former night by the Hon. Member for Ar-
magh. He alluded to the circumstance of a Gentleman going
over to Ireland to serve the office 'of Sheriff. It had been said
the Gentleman divided-his estate into 40s. freeholds for the pur-
pose of returning' himself a- Member- to serve in Parliament.
tie was enabled to say, from the best authority, that the Gen-
denied alluded to denied the statement.. The Gentleman did
not divide his estate, -or add one -more voter to his tenantry.—
With respect to the Bill, he should not vote for it, but support
the Catholic Relief Bill,- believing it would 'do much good for
Ireland.

Mr. D. BROWN supported the measure, because he thought
the present system of voting for 40s. freeholds, perpetuated the
misery and degradation of the people of Ireland.
Colonel TRENCII gave .his opinion that this would be a
honest measure and a blessing to Ireland: He should support
it upon its own merits. •
Lord MILTON said he should support the Bill because it
would promote the object of the great measure. He thought
the benefits supposed to be derived 'from this measure were
much exaggerated. Out of this measure great evils might
arise. Those who divided. their estates into forty shilling free-
holds, would divide them into 10/. freeholds. He was not dis-
posed to doubt the- independency of the freeholders of Ireland;
but he should vote for the Bill, because it would check the Oli-
garchy- An Hon. Member who represented a borough in -Eng-
land, and who so strongly opposed.the Bill, some years ago re-
presented the county of-Antrim, in Ireland. When the heir of
a Noble Family came of age he carne in for Antrim, and the
Hon. Member represented the Borough of Orford.• That was
certainly no proof of the independence of the Noble freeholders.
He should give the measure his support, but it did not go the
length of preventing fictitious votes. The great object was to
put an end to fictitious voting. - The Noble Lord suggested
whether that might not be accomplished by making the term
longer for registering votes. _ A man should not vote until a
number of years had expired, and his land was made valuable.
In the Committee it was probable he might submit a proposi-
tionon the subject.

Mr. , MACNAGHTEN explained. The Noble Lord had
spoken of him as the Representative of a Borough, as if he had
no right to vote.—( Here a loud and general exclamation was
raised of " Spoke, spoke !—Order!—Chair !")_
The SPEAKER said, an Hon Member who had spoken in
debate was only allowed to explain. •
Mr. MACNAGHTEN again in explanation said the Noble
Lord was wrong in,l4is statement.
Mr. W. HECHEA was sorry more infoirnation had not' een
y)focured, bit no man who was Impressed with the importance
.01 the great question;, could refuse to vote for the Bill then
before the House. It was called for by the Protestant land-
lords, and the Roman Catholics gave their consent to it. He
snotild vote for it, because it would facilitate the Catholic Re-
lief. Bill, and thereby-promote the interest of Ireland. The
question then being loudly called for; the House then divided:
For going into the Committee - - 163
•*- Against it —•— 53

EFFF.CTS of sr ENLO usy.--A trial for murder
took place at Auch, near Bourdeaux, about a fortnight ago,
which demonstrated in alad degree the lamentable effects of
jealousy. The accused was an interesting female,-Josephine
Dupral, about twenty-two years of age, and who was charged
with the murder of her husband, a man twenty-four, to whom.
she had been married about eight months, after a mutual attach-
ment of some standing. Josephine, however, was inclined to jea-
lousy, and her husband, although not absolutely unfaithful, had
frequently,. by his assiduous attention to other females, given
her cause to vent her complaints, and accuse him of incon-
stancy. He seldom took an notice of these reproaches, and
only ridiculed her for the unfounded and unjust suspicions to
which she abandoned herself. About a month previous to the
death of the unfortunate husband, he became acquainted with
a young man, whose sister, 18 years of age, was remarkable
for her beauty and fascinating manners. Josephine was ac-
quainted with this young female, although, since her marriage,
she had had but few opportunities' of meeting with her.
On nne occasion, ,however, chance brought them to ; the
innocent and unsuspecting girl spoke of the other's husband in
terms that raised all the jealous passions irrthe breast of Jose-
phine. The husband had not informed Josephine that he had
even seen or spoken to the young female. She reproached him
with his deceitful conduct, and added that she was convincd
he had bestowed his affections on her friend. He made no answer
to these reproofs, but walked quietly out, of the house, saying
that he would return in an hour. He proceeded to the residence
of the young girl, for the put pose of cautioning her how she
trifled. with, the feelings of his wife, and also to ascertain
what conversation had passed between'-'them relating to him.
The. young girl was absent from home.: with the intention of
waiting her return, he sat down by a table, on which preparations
for a dinner for two persons had been made. He had not been
in the house more than half an hour, when his wife rushed into
the room, frantic ,with passion, and oleserving him sitting at
table, apparently waiting for the arrival of his supposed mistress
to dine with her, instigated by the demon of jetdousy, seized
a knife that was on the table, and plunged it into,his breast.
He fell upon the'floor, and expired in two hours. She was un-
animously found guilty, but without premeditation, and sen-
tenced to hard labour for lite.

•
Majority • - - - -- 115
When The Gallery was opened, we found • Mr. HOB1101:0:
on his legs, entreating those Hon. Members who had expressed
their intention not to suppoft the Suffrage Bill to give their
vote for the Catholic Relief Bill.
Sir. HUMS: said he formerly declared, when the two ques-
tions were coupled together, that he would give up the CatbOlic
Question, rather than disfranchise the Irish Freeholders, In
that view he had wished the Bill then before the House to. tie
separated from the Roman Catholic Relief He could not
vote for both.
W. SMITH had voted on various occasions for the Ca-
tholic Question, and also for Parliamentary Reform. Ile saw
nothing inconsistent in following that course of duty.
Colonel JOHNSON could not support the Bill before the
House, and as it was coupled with the-Roman Catholic Relief
Bill, he felt hiMself bound to vote against that measure on the
third reading.
Mr. BROUGHAM rose with pain, because he was induced
to speak of difference of opinions. If he had any
weight with
his Hon. Friend the Member for Durham and other Hon. Gen-
tlemen he should recommend them not to continue the view
they had taken. If he felt inclined to differ from them his
hope was that he should meet their. kind 'consideration. He
thought a man might vote without any inconsistency for the
Bill then before the House, and also support Parliamentary Re-
form. Like the Hon. Member for Boston,
he was against the
Bill. He lamented it had been coupled with the Catholic

••
EXTRAORDINARY I.,ATASTIIOI.IIE.--,A Coroner's
Inquest was on Thursday held at Amersham, on the body of
Charles Hollis' aged 15, who came to his death under the fol-
lowing extraordinary circumstances :—The lad, it appeared,
was employed in the business of a weaver, at his father's house,
and having neglected his work in the beginning of the week,
and appearing idly inclined on Wednesday, his mother locked
him in a room.about nine o'clock, and ordered him to weave
seven yards in. the course of the day. At ten o'clock he had wove
one yard, but complained of being locked up, and kicked and
threatened to break open the door. At 11, his mother went up to
him, and asked him if he had got any bobbin, when he said he
.would not work ; and she told him that if he did not weave ano-
ther yard, he should have no dinner. At half-past twelve, his
brother' came home -to dinner, and having gone up stairs,
looked through the key-hole, and saw the lad smiling, and at
work. After the brother had dined, he went up stairs with his
sisters; she went into the room, and saw the lad sitting by his
loom, but thought he looked ill. She then went to his
brother, to make him see what was the matter with him,
when the brother, on approaching, saw a cord round his neck.
He lifted him up, and took off the cord ' • medical Akistance was
immediately obtained, but the poor lad was a corpse, and
every means to restore animation was without effect. From
the evidence. of the witnesses, who consisted of his own
family, there appeared no reason to suspect his sanity ;
the attempt was believed: to have been made only for the purpose
of exciting alarm. The opinion of the medical men was, that
the cord, being very small, had caused strangulation to take
place, so quick that the deceased had no power to recover him-
self. The Jury, on this evidance, unanimously agreed, that
the deceased had no intention of committing suicide, and re=
turned a verdict—" Accidental death, by his Own hands."

On Sunday morning, as a mechanic was arg-
ling in the Regent's Canal, near the Rosemary Branch,
he observed a bundle floating in the water, and on drawing it to
land, discovered that it contained the body of an Infant, but a
few days old. From the appearance of the child, it could not
have been long dead. It was at first carried to Mr. Heath's,
a surgeon, residing in Hoxton, but as the vital spark was to-
tally extinct, the body was by his directions conveyed to Shore-
ditch church, till a Coroner's Jury could be. summoned to exa-
mine into the cause of its death.