The Sun.
London, England, 1831-08-20 00:00:00

the petitioe, Wit not an account of any of the reasons
urged against its reception, but he should withdraw it
tor the purpose of returning it to the petitioners, iu
order that they might couch their prayer in more
appropriate. terms.
• u
The petition was then Withdrawn.
The How. MEMBER then presented fair petitions, one
from the operatives of Glasgow, praying the House wotild
withdraw the tax on Newspapers and cheap publications,
and afford the petitioners the same opportunity of acquir-
ing information which the rich possessed. Aso from the
07-oper Itive Association of Lisson-grotel fts ths, same effect.
A petition from the First Birmingham Co-operative Society,
and one from the printers of the Rolls printing-office,'
Stating that, by the existence df the present , law, they
were • depriVed of the means of gaining a liielihood.
The Hon. Member concurred in the prayers of all the
petitioners, and trusted that the Chancellor of the Excite- 1
quer would give them his best attention.

After a few words from Mr. CRESSETT PELHAM, do
petitions were rrad.

Mr. HUME.presented a petition frornWhitchurcb, county
Cork, praying that the College of the Holy Trinity, Dub-
lin, might be made national, and that fellowships might
be conferred by it without distinction of sect.

After a few wordy from Mr. WISE, the petition wa.
read.

BISHOPRIC OF DERRY.

Mr. FIUME postponed his motion respecting the Bishop-
ric of Deny to Tuesday week, on account of its inter-
ference with the Reform Bill.

The Marquis of CHANDOS withdrew his motion
which wood for to-morrow, for copies of communication.
from ihe King of Belgium to the Governments of France
and England, relating to the entry of the French troop
into Belgium.
GREAT GRISISBY ELECTION.
_ . _ _

On the motion of Sir G. CLERK, the order of the day
for the attendance of the returning officer of Great
Grim.by at the bir was read, and the officer being cailed
to the bar,

The SPEAKER said, what is your name, Sir?—John
What are you, Sir?
Grimsby.
Are you returning officer fn. that borough ?-1. am.
When did you receive the precept from the High Sheriff
of Lincolnshire?—On Friday, the sth August.
Did you give a receipt for that precept ?—I did.
When did you make the precept for the election 2—The
day following.
When did the election take place ?—Wednesday the 10th.
When did it conclude 2—About eight or nine o'clock
the same day.
When was the indenture of the election completed ?
—The same evening.
What did you do with the precept and indenture of the
election ?—I handed it to the Town Clerk, for the purpose
of his conveying it to the High Sheriff of Lincolnshire.
Did you receive any directions when the precept was di-
rected to you, that you were to return it as soon as the
election ended to the High Sheriff's office ?—I don't recol-
lect that I did. •

P--. Mayor of the borough of Great

• Are you sure that such direction not part of the direc-
tion transmitted with the precept of the High Sheriff's
office ?—I can not take upon myself to say.
After having put it into the hands of the Town Clerk, do
you know any thing further of it ?—I do not.
You never made inquiry whether it was returned to the
Sheriff or not ?—I took it for granted that the Tnwn
Clerk had done so. I thought it was the province of the
Town Clerk to convey it to the High Sheriff, and I did
not take any further notice of it.
What is the Town Clerk's name ?—George Burke.
Does he live at Grimsby ?—He does.
Had you any communication with the Town Clerk
with respect to the delay in this business ?—Yes,
I went to the Town Clerk's house to know for what
purpose I was to attend the Hon. House, and he told me
he believed it was in consequence of the precept not having
been returned in due time.

Did the Town Clerk take part with any of the candi-
dates at the late election ?—I cannot answer that question ;
I don't know.

Did the Town Clerk vote at the election ?—I believe
be did.

For what party ?—For the Blue party I believe.
Did the Town Clerk give any reason for delay ?—Yes,
he said, when the writ was delivered to him to be returned,.
he put it into a drawer, and afterwards quite forgot it. -
Was the Town Clerk concerned on the late Grimsby
Election Committee ?--I don't know that he was.

Was he employed at the Committee?—l don't know,
but I believe he was in town for about three weeks about
that period.

Is the Town Clerk employed as agent for Lord Yar-
borough ?-1 don't know that be is.
Have you with you the letter or instructions which ac-
companied the precept for the Under Sheriff?—There was a
letter directing the return, and I acknowledged the receipt
of it by return of post. I don't know that it contained
any particular instructions.
Have you that letter with you ?—I have not the letter
with me.

Do you remember hearing it put to the Town
Chrk, when he tendered his vote at the late
election to say whether he was agent for either party
or not?—l believe the question was put to him.

Do you remember what the answer was ?—I think his
answer was that his services were gratis.
Ordered to withdraw.

CLERK said, though from the explanation
which had been given at the bar by the returning
officer, it perhaps appeared there was no great degree
of blame attaching to him, yet it appeared that he had
placed the precept in the hands of the Town Clerk, trust-
ing that be would forward it immediately to the High
Sheriff, and took no further notice of that which it was
his exclusive business to see properly done. He therefore
thought the returning officer was not altogether to be
exonerated from blame ; and though he was unwilling to
propose any severe step, yet he thought the returning
officer ought to be called to the bar again, to receive the
admonition of the House from the mouth of the Speaker.
The Hon. Baronet said he intended to follow up the pro
ceedings by moving for the attendance of the Town Clerk
--(Hear, bear)—which was indispensable to the inquiries
which were now making into this circumstance. At
present be should move that the returning officer be
admonished by the Speaker, and cautioned as to any future
negligence, and then discharged.
After a few words from Sir THOMAS FREEMANTLE and
Colonel Dawes, which were inaudible in the gallery,
Mr. TENNYSON trusted that the Right lion. Gentle.
man (Sir George Clerk) would not persist in the view
which he had taken of the conduct of the returning
officer. That officer had merely pursued the course
which was usually pursued in the borough of Great Grim-
stead, viz. by putting the returns in the hands of the Town
Clerk, to whom it was left to be returned to the Sheriff.
He was sure the House did not wish that any thing in the
nature of a reprimand should be given from the Chair to
so respectable an individual as the Mayor, fur a reprimand
carried with it feelings of a very unpleasant nature. As
to the Town Clerk, a more respectable individual did
not exist, nor one • more incapable of doing an act of in-
justice. Immediately the delay was known the Town
clerk wrote to the Mayor, admitting that- he had re-
ceived the return, and that it was his duty to
send it to the Sheriff, but stating that from his
I ong attendance in London, there had been a great accu-
mulation of business in his office, and that he had forgotten
it, It bad not been usual to make an immediate
return for
how
ey theof t Townhree
or Clerk
four
d had the
cou
have
Great Grimsby, and he forgot that the present Pediment
was actually sitting.--(Hear.)
Ile (Mr. Tennyson) did
notow Isie
slightestfaivnoteunredtionanoyf
violating the law ; and indeed be was at a loss
to know
party.

. -
Mr. W. WYNN, without intending to exaggerate the
case, said it was certainly one well deserving the considera-
tion of the House, for it was clear that the borough had
remained unrepresented for some time. He did not impute
anything to any individual, but he could easily conceive
that the delay would give a longer time to prepare a
petition against the return ; fourteen days were usually
allowed for petitioning after the return ; whereas, in this
case, owing to the delay, the period was extended to twenty
days. He thought that the Town Clerk should attend the
bar of the 'House, and that the Mayor should remain
in attendance also, because it might happen that the Town
Clerk had orders for what he had done. The returning
officer was the responsible person, and it appea►ed he had
turned over his duty to another. He should propose there-
fore that the Mayor attend again on Tuesday next
and that the Town Clerk be requested to attend on the
same day.
Lord ALMORP had no objection to the proposition,
but added that if the Mayor had only conformed to
the custom of the borough, it would be too much that he
should be reprimanded from the Chair. He thought it
would be more advisable that the Town Clerk should he
in attendance.

After a few words from Mr. CROKER and Sir GEORGE
CLERK, it Was ordered that the Mayor should attend tht
House again on Tuesday, and that the Town Clerk• shouh.
attend on the same day.
Lord ALTHORP moved the order of the day for tln
House going into a Committee on the Reform Bid.
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES, seeing the Honourable

Sletulisr for Stamford in his place, bilged to refer bin!
to a WI! of sale of sand land and other property at San-
down, and asked if the sale was to take place on the du%
named, andif so, whether ti,e r. ctolitions would not be al
tered, gi as to afford see urity to the pat:hatters against the
inundation of at eta?

Mr. TENNYSODi stated/ that the site wag postponed
for ,the present, until some ificinity tvl+ 'nide upon 64.
subject:

REFORM BILL.

'ne 1-I,,use then resofved i±!elf into a Cornmittce on th •
Reform Bill, Mr. BERNAL in the Chi:,
Lord ALTHORP said that afier the vote of !a..t night,

it was necesaaty,to make some alterations in the Wdrciing
of the Bill, and to intiotitine Berne provisions which that
vote had in effect declared to be tectt•qtry. Jt had now
been determined to admit tenants at will of is :d to vote in
counties. He supposed that it was not the intentien of th.
House to exclude tenants at will of le uses without land,
but paying the same amount of tent, from the eiijoymen•
of the same franchise. That would he unfair, and he be-
lieved that the House did not intend t, make that distine-
mien. With that view he had drawn up some words which
he thought ought to be inserted in the clause in the room
of those which had been omitted. The words, as they
appeared in the printed Bill, were, " Or by any lease,
assignment, or other instrument, for any term not less than
seven years, whether detertninable on a life or live, or not,
whereon a yearly rent of not less than 501. shall he re
served, or for which a Ike or premium of not less than
pounds shall have been paid." These words were
now left out. As in the case provided by the Bill, as it
originally stood, the term of seven years was inserted as a
protection to the occupying tenant, and as the motion of the
Noble Lord had given to ail tenants of that amount of rent
the right of voting, if they paid that rent on land, lie now
proposed that tenants who paid that amount of rent should
have the same right of voting if they paid that grnourit on
houses, withnit lands attached to them If such houses
should happen to be let out to sub- tenants, be proposed
that they should still enjoy the right of voting, and the
value of the premises would -be easily ascertained, by
finding the difference betwen the amount they received
intl that which they paid. There would, perhaps, be some
little difficulty as to the time of registration and oecup '-
Lion, hut he believed the clause, as lie had frame,l it, would
be found sufficient for all purposes. He proposed, after
the words in clause 16, " rot less th in ten pounds above
reprizes," to add these words :—" or demised for a term
of not less than twenty years, whether determinable on a
life or lives, or not, and whereon a yearly rent of not lees
than 501. sha'l be reserved." After this he should pro-
pose to add these words—" or who shall occupy and farm
for the space of twelve calendar months, before the Ist of
November in the present year, or before the Ist of August
in any succeeding year, any lands at an annual rent of not
less than 501., or who shall occupy on his own account as
tenant thereof, for twelve calendar months before the Ist
of November in the present year, or before the Ist of August
in any succeeding year, any lands or tenements for which
he is Loan, fide liable, at the yearly rent of 501."

Colonel SIBTHORPE rose and said, that the motion

upon which the division took place last night respecting
clause 16, he (Colonel Sibthorpe) should ever consider
as his motion. Such he know was the feeling and opinion
of the House; it had happened on this point alit had often
done in military life, that one led on the troops, planned
the battle, bore the brunt of the campaign, and another
stepped in and carried off the medal, as the Noble Marquis
had done in taking the division.

Mr.•ESTCOURT said there was a species of e,tate of
copyhohl, for instance, leased out at twenty-one years,
perpetually renewable every seven years, at a pepper-corn
rent, and on which a 6ne of less than SOO/. was paid. To
cover that objection, he shou'd propose these wordq, or
of which the clear yearly value shall at the time of grant-
ing the same he equal to the sum of SOL"

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought that the clause,
as it would stand upon ' the introduction of the Noble
Lord's amendments, would sufficiently meet the case which
the Hon. Gentleman seemed to contemplate.
Colonel WOOD said, that it seemed to him some words
were necessary for the regulation of the registration of
votes. As the matter of registration would be a great ex--
pence to the clndidates as well as to the country, he should
take an opportunity of expressing his opinion upon it.
Sir. C..WETHRELL thought that it won!d he found
that the dates now mentioned by the Noble Lord would be
productive of inconvenience. He believed it would be
found necessary to alter the dates in the Bill. •
Lord ALTHORP had inserted some of those dates
.merely pro furnta to fill up the blanks, as the precise dates
could not in those cases be yet determined. The last day
of August had been fixed on for the registration ; at that
season the Barristers, who sheuldirmulate the-registration,
would have most leisure to attend to.that duty. The object
of the registration itself wu to prevent the „delay and in-
terruption which would be occasioned by an investigation
of the elector's qualification at the poll. The only ques-
tion to be decided at the poll .would then be, the identity of
the voter.

Sir J. SCARLETT thought that the Bill would give
rise to more disputed elections than occurred under the
present law. As the clause then before the Committee was
expre,sed, it would enable a person who had been twelve
months in the occupation of a house to vote after he had
ceased to be an occupier, if the overseer was so accom-
modating as to leave him upon the list. Now, if such
cages could not be decided at the poll, there would neces-
sarily be petitions against a great many returns, after every
general election.

Lord ALTHORP moved an amendment in the same
dance (the 16th), for the purpose of giving a vote to the
original taker of a lease of 50 or 20 years, so long as that
lease shall be to him of the value of 101. a year, even
though he should not be himself the actual occupier ; and
giving a vote also to the occupying tenant of the same
holding, provided that such tenant pay to the original
lessee the rent of 501. a year.
Sir JAMES SCARLETT, in a conversation across the
table with the Attorney-General, proposed some verbal
alterations, but in so low a tone that we could not collect
what was the object of his amendment.
Sir C. WETHERELL said, that the amendment of his
Hon. and Learned Friend was necessary, to prevent nominal
lessees from voting.
Lord ALTHORP thought that his Hon. and Learned
Friend, the Attorney-General, had given a satisfactory
answer to that objection on a preceding evening. He had
stated, that it was only when the lease was of the real
value of 101. a year to the original lessee, that it should
confer a vote; but that if the lessee paid as rent himself
the full amount which be received from the under-tenant,
then he should have no vote.

Mr. FERGUSON thought, that if the word value
was clearly understood to mean a profit above the rent
paid by the original ltssee, then the amendment of the
Noble Lord was perfectly correct.
The amendment was then carried.
Mr. DENISON asked whether it was intended by that
clause to give a vote for the county to a person having a
house in one part of the county and a piece of land in
another, of which the rents taken together amount to 50/.
a year, whether these tenements be held of the Win or of
different landlords?

Lord ALTHORP answered, that separate holdings, of
which the rents together amounted to 501., were intended
to give the qualification ; and that it a man occupied in
the town (that town not being a borough) a house at the
rent of 201, and also held a piece of land in the county at
the rent of 301., or paid in any other proportions two se•
parate rents for such house and field, amounting together
to 501. a year, that should be. a qualification to vote for
the county.
Mr. DAVIES GILBERT (whose observations were
inaudible in the gallery) moved a further amendment in
the same clause, restricting the right of voting on the qua-
.
interestiificat ofh °nofinf°erritty-asnvbL.
forty.shilling freeholds to persons seized of an

Lord ALTHORP said that if the effect of the amend-
ment would be to exclude from voting persons purchasing
freeholds of the value of forty shillings, he certainly could
not agree to it.
Mr. BARING said the clause would increase the faci-
lity for creating fictitious votes. He could command one
hundred in Wiltshire on a very small property, if no alte-
ration Were made in the clause.

Mr. FERGUSON supported the amendment. He hoped
that the Hon. Mover would persevere in pressing it upon
the adoption of the House, for be had no doubt it would
be carried.

Lord ALTHORP said that as the proposition then
stood he had no objection to it ; for it was quite fitting
that a distinction should be made between persons voting
from leaseholds, and those who held freeholds: be doubted
however, whether an interest for life should have the saint
effect as leaseholds fur the lives of others. He also a
difficulty as to whether freeholds of inheritance included
those derived from marriage settlements. He wished that
the Hon. Member would for the present withdraw
amendment, and he should undertake, on the part of ti
Government, that a clause effecting the o'iject which tli,
Hon. Member had in view should be brought in before tl.
Bill went through the Committe.
Lord MILTON said, it was not worth while to mak,
any arrangement for so small a class as those affected h)
marriage settlements.
Mr. FERGUSON said, there were no settlem-n'
under 101. a year.
The amendment was then withdrawn. Some amend-

and discussed by the At-
hVit';etlierell; and Mr. Setleant
I rffe.nts in tbe clime,nter!'y technical and reenit, were
ittolsrenupTvroGpto.nseadoh,ysihrl.
Cr.
hl(a
rnh.i.s.
Wild-,
Lord ALTHOHP said, that the time fir trilling, amend-
in rits in that clause had passed away. and that none (cold
, now be made, except, upon the bringing up of the report,
;le clause could be altogether rejected or adopted; one cr
the other' was the only course the Commit,ee could pursue.
Mr. BARING then addressed the onus, upon the
whohi clause, obses ying that it was torT irrp,;r,.-nt a duty
for oveiNrr, to be entrusted with making out the lists.
Really., lo'.ii•gg at the whole clans', he mugt b.* -allowed to
, say, that he thought it impossible td et7nFcive that intelli-
geet men should in the nresent time adop. snrk a patch-
work of smitrity as the clause under ronsideron: and the
whole system of constituency under the Dill. He did not
expect that the Committee world yield to any amendment
of his, and he therefore should not propose one, bilt he must
enter li:s pr....test against the whole framing of the County
constituency as proposed by this 131.1. It tvoull be the
means of complication, expence, awl fraud, by patting into
the bands of attorneys, who wculd 'have to hoot-cut the
voters, a power which ought not to Le possessed by them ;
while, on the other band, if a proyar system had been
adopted, all the diffieulties which now presented themselves
would have ceased to exist.

Lord ALTHORP eangenteltted the Hon. Gentleman ou
having become a staunch Reertner—( A laugh and cheers)—
for he had proposed a still more sweetiina clinn7,e than had
yet been ventured upon.—(Cheers.) Great as had been
the opposition to this Bill, he was convinced that, if the
Ministers had come down with such a me.:sure as that
pro-
posed by the Hon. Gentleman, the opposition would have
been ten times greater.—(Hear.) With respect to the pre-
cent plan being the means of throwing power into the lands
of the attorneys, he begged to observe, as one who bad had
some experience in contested county elections, 'that when
a candidate wanted to know who had votes in a parish, it
was not to an attorney that he applied, but to some respect-
able farmer who was on his side, and irom this s,uree lie al-
ways found that Le received the mos,. erent.nt,
Mr. HUNT said, thatatter what lit,l p,,ssA last night,
he was sure that his favourite eyst-n of the tee
adopted.
Mr. S. WORTLEY thought that the Committee was
not at present in a situation to say whether this. clause
should stand a part of the Bill or not. He, ih'etefore,
thought that it ought to be postponed till the Committee
was cotepletelyuware of it, purport.
Sir E. SUGDEN remarked, that an alteration in one
clause might require alterations in other clauses, the
consequence of which would be, that unless those 'latter
alterations were made the Bill would rot dovetail. He
was, therefore, also of opinion that the chime ought to be
postponed.
Lord ALTHORP thought that the chu'se Lad better
be printed as amended, and then there 5,:114 be an op-
pot tunity for any alteration on bringing up the report.
Mr. BARING contended that be bad not shown him-
self a staunch Reformer by advocatieg this: altention.
The clause, as amended, was then agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN then read the 17th clause.

Sir E. SUGDEN thought that the elan Se Wag unne-
cessary; and that, indeed, there was danger in its en-
actment, lest, in re-enacting one of the provision's' that
existed under the present law, and omitting 'anoti,et.,
it should be deemed that the one not re-enacted had ceased
to exist.

The ATTORNEY •GENERAL thought that it wculd
be safe to hap this clause in the 13W.
The clause was then agreed to.
The CIIAIRMAN then proceeded to read the 18th
clause, during which some conversation took place across
tlte t dile between Lord ALTLIORP and Sir E. SUCDEN, the
result of which, we believe, was that the .Nohle Lard con-
senttd to postpone the clause fur the present.
The Committee then reverted to the Bth clause, Which
has reference to the appointment of returning officers by
the Sheriffs.

Mr. MACKINNON thought this clause most objection.
ab'e, because the Sheriffs having to appoint the returning-
offic,r would give rise to the greatest inconvenience. And
yet there were twenty-five boroughs to be placed in' this
situation, so that there would be fifty Memberi returned to
that House by officers so appointed ; and though lie'
no doubt that the Sheriffs would endt•avonr to act
yet it was manifestly opening the door for undue inepittice
being shown towards the one candidate or the other. In
the boroughs that had been disfranchised by this Bill there
had been no such power in existence, and he therefore
thought that it was most extraordinary, that in a measure,
the object of which was to take away manage. a system
should be introduced, the effect of which might be to `give
it to the Sheriffs in the case of twenty-five boroughs ; espe-
cially as the power of the House might be se: a; defiance
by the returning officer, after having made on undue pre-
ference, taking his departure for America or elsewhere. and
so getting beyond the reach of punishment. The Hon.
Member moved, that the words he had already given notice
of in the eighth clause be struck out. He was proccedirg
to read the amendment when he was interrupted. '
Some observations then took place as to the proper time
of proposing this amendment, which was attain inter-
rupted by—

Mr. STUART WORTLEY, who asked whether the
Noble Lord had inquired into the propriety of appdnting
the Master Cutler returning officer of Sheffield? lie
conceived that person was not a proper returning officer.
Lord ALTEIORP stated, that inquiry had ken made,
and the Master Cutler was supposed to ho a proper person.
Lord ALTHORP, in reply to an observation made by
Mr. C. W. Wynn, stated that the duties cf the returning
officer would be imperative ; and though he wonld have a
duty to perform, he must perform it as ether duties were
performed, gratuitously, and he might do that very Well,
for the duty would last but a short time. If it were ne-
cessary that the returning officers should have magi-terial
authority, and they had it not already, a clause might be
introduced to give it to them.
Mr. ROSS thought the returning offi era in semes:-
tuvions were not persons of sufficient authority. He ob-
jected also to these persons 'having no remuneration. Ia
old corporations there was the honour; there would be
none in the new boroughs; and he hoped, therefore, the
Noble Lord would alter his determination, and give these
officers remuneration.

Sir J. WROTTESLEY said, that the Han. Member
under-valued the constables of certain places, to whom be
believed the II n. Member al,uded, and who were chosen
by the Leet Jury, and were respectable men. The Hon.
Baronet defended the mode of appointing returning officers,
particularly as regarded Wolverhampton, Walsall, and Bir-
mingham. The Sheriffs had an onerous duty to perform,
which they were obliged to undertake against their will.
He saw no reason, therefore, for deparoing from the an-
cient principle of the Constitution, in appointing new re-
turning c fficers, and giving them a salary.
Sir C. WETHERELL said, forty Members would he
reared up by this Bill, and he thought therefore, that the
returning officers should be responsible persons. The per-
sons named as returning officers in the schedule were net
compellable to tike upon themselves that office. They
might refuse, and, therefore, the new House might, perad-
venture, be short of some of these Members. Some strin-
gent words were therefore necessary to Ue added to the
clause, to compel these officers to do their dote. The
clause had been twice amended, hut it was )et so deeetive
that it would not answer its intended purpose. As to the
returning officers to be appointed by the Sheriff, he
shared the opinion of the lion. Nlemb,r who proposed the
amendment. The Sheriff was never the returning officer
of any borough. It was his duty to eontronl the return-
ing officers. There mieht be some difficulty in selecting
such officers for some districts, like Saffron-hill, for ex-
ample; but be objected strongly to the returning officers
being appointed by the Sheriff. He thought the clause
should be further adjourned, and if any person would
move such an adjournment he would support it.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, if at the end of
the Committee any gentleolan entertained any doubt of
any of the clauses, they should be ready to take such clauses
into consideration, with a view to remove those doubts.
This did not imply that he himself had any doubts as to
the meaning of any clause. He contended, in opposition
to his lion. and Learned Friend, that the clause did compel
the returning officers to do their duty. They were ap-
pointed to do duties by the Inv, like overseers, or con-
stables, or other persons. They wore appointed by the
Act of Parliament, like the returning officers ; and if
they did not do their duty they would be subject to indict.
nent for it, and might, perk cps, be I.reogbt to tie bar of
that House. As to the persons appeintedAiy the Sheriff,
they would he appointed also mailer the authority of the
Act, and would be obliged to do their duty. .Sher fn
were likely to be good judges of the capabibues of pers. ns
proper- to be returning officer., and those et orning tflc. ra
or Sheriffs who did not do their duty were liable, under the
Act, to be severely punished. His Hon. and Learned
Friend's mention of Saffron-hill was intended °lily as a
passing joke on the Bill, for be was sure tiat in that dis-
trict there were a great many persons quAified to fulfill the
duty of returning officers.
Sir CHARLES WETHERELL
he or fist
his Learned Friend stated! that ti ti! cf
i;:iiet ~,
nc
Attorney-General cvas wrong ; but if l,a,lesitif,f,e.:: wrung he
.vas wr, n, with the At orncy-Gen rid l i
returning officer did nit confer on his noinnue alt • sr•ce:-
,ibility of the Sheriff. He affirmed, for his own p
that a users dcclarati9n of an Act of Parliament that