The Sun.
London, England, 1848-03-21 00:00:00

AYLESBURY ELECTION.

Mr. R. PALMER brought up the report of the
Aylesbury Election Committee, declaring Lord Nugent
to have been duly elected, and Mr. J. P. Doering to
have been unduly elected.
NEW WRIT FOR BEWDLEY.

Mr. F. M'KENZIE moved that a now writ be issued
for the borough of Bewdley.
Mr. TATTON EGERTON said he did not rise to
object to the motion, but he wished to draw the attention
of the House to the fact that the Committee to whom the
Bewdley Election petition referred reported specially to
the House, and he would ask the House whether under
such circumstances it would not be better to postpone
this motion?—(Hear, hear.) The circumstances under
which the Committee reported specially were these, the
Committee found that a vexatious system of carrying
away voters, treating, and making them drunk,
was carried on at :the last election, and at the
previous election of 1841, and he put it to the
House whether it would not be as well if this motion
were postponed till some steps had been taken to pro-
tect the voters themselves in their exercise of the elective
franchise? _

Mr. HUME proceeded to read several extracts from
the report of the committee, showing that a system pre-
'ailed in the Borough of Bewdley of keeping up nearly
nearly all the public-houses during the time of elections.
The motion was then withdrawn.
Mr. P. SCROPE gave notice of his intention to ask
a question to morrow on the subject of the forcible and
cruel ejectment of a large number of persons from
various estates in the county of Galway.
DISMISSAL OF ENGLISH SERVANTS.
In answer to a question put by Mr. B. COCHRANE,
Lord PALMERSTON said that he had received no
notificalion whatever tending to corroborate the state-
ments that the dismissal of English servants in Paris
had taken place at the request of the Provisional
Government.
COMMISSIONERS
ARLIAME OF THE
NT. NEW HOUSES OF
P

In answer to a question put by Mr. DUNCAN,
Lord MORPEREI said that the number of Commis-
sioners appointed by the Government to superintend the
erection of the new Houses of Parliament was three, one
of whom was Earl Grey, another Mr. Greene, and a third
Sir John Burgoyne.
RECEPTION OF THE ROYAL FAMILY OF
FRANCE IN THIS COUNTRY.
In answer to a question put by an Hort. MEMBER,
Lord PALMERSTON stated that there was no
foundation whatever for the statements which had ap-
peared in the newspaper, to the effect that the Marquis
of Normanby had waited upon M. Lamartine to
apologize to the Provisonal Government for the
reception by this country of the Royal Family
of France. No communication of any kind had taken
place between her Majesty's Government and the Pro-
visional Government of France, through the-Marquis of
Normanby or any other channel, on that subject. It was
quite true that the Marquis e F Normanby had addressed
to him (Lord Palmerston) a private letter, stating that
misapprehension or feelings of jealousy might be ex-
cited in the Government of France with respect to the re-
ceoprgntioanntbhyatrlmeiguhest beted ghivimen, not to the Royal Family, but
to the late Ministers of the French Government. He
had in a private letter addressed to the Marquis of
N
should arise, to state that thein
ense
receptionany
givensuch ttoeethoses
persons was, and would be,a reception which in this country
was always given to men who, from any unfortunate cir-
cumstances, were obliged to seek refuge in this country
the reception of hospitality suitable to the country, and
that the French Government might rest assured,
that in the dealings of this Government with France,
they would act firmly, honourably, and quite
ly, and that under such circumstances should
othpeernebe the slightest ground given for imputing any
thing like intriguing in any hostile manner against the
interests of the French Government.—(Hear, hear.)
In answer to a question from Lord DUDLEY
STUART,

Lord PALMERSTON stated that no communication
whatever had been received by the Government of this
country from the Provisional Government of France with
respect to the discovery of any correspondence affecting
the Duke and Duchess of Montpensier, and relating to
very peculiar and extraordinary circumstances. No
proposition or communication of any sort or kind
had been submitted to them t and with respect
to their departure, it was entirely the result
of their own choice, and so far from its being in accord-
ance with any communication made by the Government,
the House would at once perceive that there were many
reasons why the Government should have desired that
these personages should have stayed in this country in-
stead of going away.
STATE OF AUSTRIA.
In anar►er to another question from the same Noble
Lord
Lord PALMERSTON stated that be had received
a dispatch from Vienna, dated the 14th instant, inform-
ing him that Prince Metternich had ceased to be Prime
Minister of Austria. Beyond that he had informationito
give with reference to the state of Austria.—(Laughttr)

BRAZIL.
Lord PALMERSTON, in answer to a question from
Lord George Bentinck, said that he could not
hold out any hope, from the feelings that the Bra-
zilians entertained upon the subject, that any commer-
cial treaty could be retained with Brazil.
SPANISH TARIFF.
Mr. BANKS wished to know when the dispatch from
the Court of Madrid with respect to the tariff would be
laid on the *le of the Liam