The Sun.
London, England, 1849-05-08 00:00:00

LAMBETH.

Janes Webb, a master baker, was charged with
knowingly uttering a fcrged bill of exchange f,r the
amount of 25/., to Mr. John Tewey, a builder, in Willow-
walk, Bermondsey.

Tha prosecutor stated that, about this tame twelve
months, the prisoner, whom he had known for some
years, applied to him to know whether, if ho got his
relation, Mr. Abraham Fuller, to draw a bill upon Mr.
Henry Ashley, his brother•in-law, he would get it cashed
fur him; saying, at the same time, that he was without
flour, and could not get any on credit. Witness told
him he could get such a bill cashed, but must put his
own name to it to procure the money. In a few days
afterwards he met the prisoner at the Greyhound public-
house in Newington, and be then produced a 25/. bill,
which he said he had received from Mr. Fuller. Witness
took the bill, and at the time handed the prisoner 51.,
and subsequently advanced him other sums on the bill,
amounting altogether to 18/. 10s. When the bill became
due it was dishonoured, and Mr. Jones, its holder,
brought actions to recover its amount. Amongst others,
proceedings were taken against Mr. Abraham Fuller, the
alleged.drawer of the bill, and his defence was that it
was a forgery.
The prosecutor was examined at some length by the
prisoner's attorney, who endeavoured to elicit that he
was aware at the time he got the bill discounted that the
money was for Ashley, and not for the prisoner, and that
the prisoner had acted in the transaction as the mere
agent of Ashley. This the witness positively denied,
and declared he had been induced to obtain and advance
money to the prisoner solely on the faith and belief that
the bill bad been drawn by Mr. Full* r.

Ir. reply to a question from the magistrate as to why
he had nut before moved in the affAir, the witness said,
the forged bill with other bills had remained in the hands
of Mr. Jones as a collateral security until last week, and
he did not wish to adopt any proceedings until he be-
came personally possessed of the bill.
Mr. Abra'am
.Fuller was called, end deposed that the
signature to the bill was not in his handwriting, nor had
he authorised the prisoner or any other person to put
his name to a bill.

The prisoner Was fully committed for trial.
Mr. ELLIOTT refused to accept bail for his appearance
at the Oki

THAMES.
John and Thomas Ruyan, two powerful Irishmen,
were charged with a misdemeanor, and committing sa-
vage assaults on a variety of persons.
Mr. YARDLEY said the prisoners had been guilty of a
very serious outrage, and committed them, in default of
bail for trial.

Edward Keyzer, a German, lately waiter and touter to
a person named Antweiller, a lodging-house keeper in
Burr-street, East Smithfield, was brought up en remand
charged with stealieg 165 guilders from a Dutchman
named William Var.derdyle. •
Mr. YARDLEY committed the prisoner for trial.

/MPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMOiVS, May 7.
The SPEAXER to:)ic the Chair at Four o'el.:Jek.

EMBER.
Mr. ROLBUCK tok NEW
the'M oaths and his seat for Shef-
field. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman was introduced
by Colonel P. Thom Non and Mr. Hutt.
CALEDONIAN RAILWAY.
Mr. BERNAL having explained the difference which
existed between the report of the Committee and his own
expressed opinions with regard to this Bill,
The Bill fur the Lease or Purchase of the Glasgow,
Barrhead, and Neilsten Direct Railway by the Cale-
donian Railway was then read a third time.
OATHS OF SUPREMACY AND ABJURATION.
The Sherin of the city of London appeared at the
bar of the House to present a petition from the Corpo.
ration, under the corporate seal, against the oath re.
specting supremacy and abjuration.
DIVISION OF LIVING OF RICHMOND AND

K IN GSTON,UPO N-TH AMES.
'Mr. C. LUSIIINGTON said that the offensive parts
of this Bia having been withdrawn he should retrain
from any further opposition.
The Bill was then read a third time.
PARLIAMENTARY OATHS.
Mr. LACY presented several petitions, in favour of
an alteration in the Farliamentary oaths.
GLASGOW, KILMARNOCK, AND ARDROSSAN
RAILWAY BILL.
This Bill was read a third tirne.
COUNTY COURTS.
Mr. BROWNE and other Hon. Members presented
several petitions from Liverpool and other places, in
favour of the constitution of financial boards in conjunc-
tion wits the county courts.
PARLIAMENTARY OATHS.
Mr. PLUMPTRE presented several petitions against
any alteration of the Acts for this purpose.
REGISTRATION OF MARRIAGE AND DEATHS
(SCOTLAND) BILL.
Sir J. GRAHAM and several other Members pre-
sented petitions against this Bill.
REDUCTION OF BEER-HOUSES.
The EIGHT HON. BARONET also presented several
petitions in favour of some measure for the reduction of
the number of beer-houses.
MARRIAGE WITH THE SISTER OF A

DECEASED WIFE.
Mr. CUMMING BRUCE presented several petitions
in favour of Mr. Stuart Wortley's Bill for the alteration
of.the present law.
LIMERICK RAILWAY.

Sir 11. W. BARRON presented ; petition molt
numerously signed by the nobility and gentry, and
among others by the L?rd-Lieutenants of IVaterford
and Tipperary, and other residents in the southern
counties of Ireland, in favour of some grant from. Go•
vernment for the completion of this railway.
ASHTON-UNDER-LYNE LOCAL BILL.
The Ashton-under-Lyne Police, Markets, and Improve-
ment Acts Extension and Amendment, and Transference
of G is and Waterworks and other Property to the Cor-
poration Bill, was ordered to be re-committed.
PARLIA MEN VARY OATHS.
Mr. NEWDE9ATE presented several petitions
against the alteration of Parliamentary oaths.
Mr. STAFFORD presented several petitions to the
same effect.

EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY.
Mr. C EIARTERIS, in rising to ask the First Lord of
the Treasury whether his attention had been drawn to
the report which bad been recently published by a com-
mates appointed to inquire into the management of the
affairs of the Eastern Counties Railway Company, in so
tar as it affected the general character of the House,
claimed the indulgence of the House while he made a
few observations, as considerable misunderstanding ex•
isted with reference to the object which he had in putting
the question. It had been supposed by many persons,
that the question was directed against some individual
Member of that House, but he begged to say that nothing
was farther from his intention than that.—(Hear, hear.)
As many Members then present had not, perhaps,
directed their attention to the matter to which the ques-
tion referred, he would read an extract from the report
of the committee of shareholders as it appeared in the
Times newspaper. It was to the following effect:—
. In the investigation of the disbursements, under the
head of Parliamentary expenses, there appeared several
items, the character of which your committee could not
arrive at. The items were—

1846 —April 17. Parliamentary expenses (a) £ 500 0 0
April 24. Ditto (a) 3,000 0 0
April 25. Ditto (u) 2,406 17 6
Ditto (a) 1,700 0 0
(6) 2,000 0 0
1847—June 25. By "Extensions"

9,606 17 6
In reference to the amount of the items marked a,
namely, 7,6061. 17s. 6d., the explanation given to your
committee by Mr. 11, addington and Mr. Duncan was,
disbursed that the sums, as stated, were by the company
through them, for services rendered, and in
which did not leave them at liberty to give particulars, as
manner
these could not be given without implicating other parties.'
There were rumours prevalent that that sum had been
expended for what tees called facilitating the passage of
Bills through Parliament, in other words, in plain
English, for bribing Members of that House.—(Hear,
hear.) He could not believe that any Member of
that House had been guilty of conduct so disgraceful
and dishonourable; but as those rumours were very
prevalent, it appeared to him that not a moment should
pass by without some notice being taken of them.
They could not allow them to circulate and to poison
the public
i ear; and he conceived the House was
bound to institute some inquiry into rumours such
as those, which not only affected the character
of that House, which ought to be above suspicion, but
also the private and individual honour of every Member
belonging
to it.--(Loud cheers.) He felt confident that
the House on inquiry would find that there was little or
no foundation for these rumours, but if it unfortunately
turned out otherwise, the House would at least have the
satiataction of detecting the guilty parties, and holding
them up to the reprobation and contempt of all Hon.
Members.—(Cheers.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL agreed with the Hon. Gen-
tleman that the words to which reference had been
made had a tendency to excite suspicion, and
to affect the character and credit of that
House. He did not himself give the slightest credence
to the rumour to which the Hon. Gentleman had alluded;
but he (Lord John Russell) did agree with him that
it would not be right to let those words, reported as
they were by a public committee, pass by without inquiry.
—(Cheers.) Ile did not himself think there would be any
advantage in that inquiry being instituted by a member
of the Government, unless it were decidedly the wish of
the House; but his opinion was, that the Honourable
Gentleman having turned his attention to the
subject, and the question being one affecting
the character of individual Members of the Reuse,
he (Lord John Russell) thought it would be better that
the inquiry should be in the hands of the Honourable
Gentleman, assisted as the lion. Gentleman would be
by Members of all parties in the House, than that the
inquiry should be conducted by the Government. He
could have the advice and assistance of lion. Members
as to the best mode of facilitating the inqury—an inquiry
which should be pursued until the whole truth was
elicited.—(Loud cheers.)
Mr. WADDINGTON said that he was not at all
aware until he eau in the report the remark made
by the cow /litter, that after be had given evidence in
reference to the SEMIS C.] titled to, it wls stated that he
coull not arne.ver, lest his reply might junclic.-.to
di.4,1 11, tr.h,..rs iiith.tt thrise. IV -len he told Eloue
;hat h.. ul,dc 1711 ren Lt Fi 11, that et-e.:;lnitte, affeatz;
soy
:q.,ruber in that house, lie th,,ught thu house would
jinn pith him that there was no reason for such
a remark as that being made, inasmuch as he
did not by implication or otherwise allude to any