The Sun.
London, England, 1822-03-22 00:00:00

it referred. He (Alderman Waithman) sent a private note to
sheriff Williams, the- evening before her Majesty's funeral,
stating his intention to attend. That note was given to Mr.
Butterworth, and made a ground for attacking him (Alderman
Waithman) in the House of Commons, when he could not de-
fend himself.—(Hear.)-4le would read the note he sent to Mr.
Williams.

31r. OLDHAM rose to:order. lie said, if the Worthy Alder-
mad.had not given Mr. Williams notice, it was unfair to at-
tack him in his absence.

Ald. WafTHYLAx said, he had written to Mr. Williams
several letters on the subject, but received no answer ; and had
given him notice that he would take the first opportunity of
bringing the matter before the Court. But he did not wish to
press the matter ; his public conduct was open to the world,
and if it were now necessary to defend his motives, he should
feel himself unfit to appear before any virtuous assembly.—
(Ilear !)—The Worthy Alderman having noticed an opinion
given by Sir Wm. Curtis, that one Sheriff could not act with-
out the other, which showed great want of information on the
subject,
Sir W. CuRTIS said, one Sheriff might act in London, but
not in Middlesex ; and it was happy for him (Aid. Waithman)
that he was but half a Sheriff, or he might be in Newgate.—
(Cries of Order !)
Mr. OLDHAM said, the Hon. Baronet was bound to attend
the Court, and give good counsel, when the Report of the
Committee was under consideration ; instead of which, he made
no objection to the Report in the Court, but went to the House
of Commons to impeach it. The lion. Baronet said, the
Committee had no right to inquire ; but suppose the Sheriff;
instead of quellipg a riot, had abetted it—would not the Hon.
Baronet be the first to call for inquiry?—(Hear, hear !)
Sir CLAUDIUS HUNTER observed, that it was unfortunate
that Sir William Curtis should, in the heat of argument, have
said quite so much as lie had done. Sir Claudius recommended

the previous question as the proper question to pursue.
Mr. WELCH said, if the Court did not support the original
Resolutions they did not deserve the name of Englishmen.
Alderman ATKINS said, it was impossible what Sir W.
Curtis had said of the Corporation could injure that great body ;
but the Resolutions, if carried, might injure him. lie sup-
ported the previous question, as more dignified.
Mr. TAY I.Olt said, it was not the first insult the lion. Alder-
man had offered to the Court. _ .

Sir IV. Cunvis said, it might not be the last.---(Loud cries
of Order !)
Mr. GALLOWAY said, he felt it his duty to support the mo-
tion of censure on Sir Wm. Curtis. He hattallowed the Reso-
lution of the Committee to pass the Court without observation ;
but in the House of Commons there was no end to his libels
and slanders.—(Hear !)
3lr. FAVELL shortly replied ; after which the previous ques-
tion was put, but very few hands were held up for it. The
question on the original motions was then carried by large
majorities.
Mr. FAVELL then moved, that the Resolutions should be
signed by the Town Clerk, and published in the newspapers;
iihich, after some observations from Sir C. If U NT ER, and Al-
dermen ATKINS and lIEvGATE, was agreed to.
Some unimportant business was then transacted; after which
the Court adjourned.