The Sun.
London, England, 1840-10-13 00:00:00

BOW-STREE7'.

THE FORGERY ON THE COMMERCIAL BANK OF ST.
PETEassuann.—Yesterday Paul Itlazeau and George
Ramuz, who were examined on Saturday on a charge
of causing to be engraved certain plates :intended to
resemble a note for twenty4.ve roubles of the Commer-
cial Bank of St. Petersburgh, were again brought be-
fore Mr. Hall, for the purpose of having the following
evidence added to the depositions.
M. Louis Roussel) stated that the notes, with the
exception of the genuine one produced by the witness
Salt, were imperfect, and not negotiable ; and that
the Commercial Bank was a State Bank, the Emperor
being liable, in his opinion, for any deficiency that
might arise.
The entire of the evidence being read. over.to the
prisoners, they were. told that they were not bound to
make any statement, as whatever they did say might
be used against them. The prisoner Ramuz then
expressed a wish to give an• explanation of the transac-
tion, and said that he would be satisfied.with 'a state-
ment which he understend-Mazeati':iVould make.
Mr. HALL obseriTed•that.he'WaS'akaid the, prisoners
expected on' making' a ?staieinent that they would be
liberated on bail, which eould npt.bc-doue: o
The prisoner Mazeau then said that if such was the
case, it would be no ,use_ to enter into any explanation.
The prisoner Ramuz declared that the aufhor.of the
whole transaction was in Court, (meaning the prisoner
Rault.) -

They were then remanded until the 28th November,

The prisoner Itault was then brought up, and_ the
evidence being read over to him, he was remanded until
the same day.

REGISTRATION.

MIDDLESEX.

Messrs. Coventry and Shadvvell, the Revising Barris•
ters, held their Court yesterday, at the White Horse;
Uxbridge. _ _

(Before Mr. COVENTRY.)
The list of electors for the parishes of Grcenford,
Hillingdon, Perivale, Hareficld, Northolt, and Hayes,
were revised by Mr Coventry.
MrY-.Ady Objected to the list of objections furnished
by the overseers of the parish of Northolt being re-
ceived—.it not having been made out in the form re-
quiredly Act of Parliament. The names of the par-
ties objected to, had been written on a piece of paper,
without any descriptions or places of abode attached to
them, and pinned to the original list posted on the
church doors.

Mr. COVENTRY was afraid he must consider the ob-
jection list invalid.
Mr. Coppock then submitted that if the objection
list was bad,, the original list was equally so, for it was
only signed by one overseer ; whereas the Act of Par-
liament stated the list should be revised by a majority or
the major part of the overseers of the parish.
Mr. Gurney, one of the overseers stated that although
there were two overseers for the parish of Northolt, lie
himself was the only acting ►nsn.
Mr. COVENTRY observed that the effect of Mr. Cop-
pock's argument would be to disfranchise the whole pa-
rish. It was clear that Mr. Gurney was the only acting
overseer, and therefore must be considered, for the pur-
poses of the Act (there being only two), as the " major
part."

Mr. Coppock then submitted that the original list
was invalid, on the ground that it was dated the 1201 of
August, the Act of Parliament stating that it was to be
made out on or before the 25th of August.
Tile Overseer stated that no claim had been scut in
since the date of the original list, ar.d

Mr. COVENTRY overruled Mr. Coppock's objection.
In consequence of this blunder of the overseers the
objections made by the Reformers could not be gone
into. Sir Lancelot Shadwell, the Vice-Chancellor, was
one of the parties objected to.
(Before Mr. SHADWELL.)
Mr. Shadwell revised the lists for the parish of Ux-
bridge, Ruislip, Ickenbam, West Drayton, and Cowley,
without any point of public interest occurring.
It?sult of the day's proceedings :