The Sun.
London, England, 1856-09-30 00:00:00

deemed all their hustings pledges, by voting on the pope
lar side, when the ballot and Church-rate questions are
brought forward to undergo their annual discussion and
foreknown defeat. These questions disposed of, the vote,
of but too many members elected on popular principles,
which they had given ardent promises to support, are,
without hesitation, placed at the disposal of the Mikisters
and follow each condescension on his part, the members
trusting to the forgetfulness of the constituency, or to
their own hardihood in accounting for each bad vote, by
the bold and hackneyed assurance that it was necessary
for the security of the Ministry, who were, they affirm,
the only men in the empire fit to be entrusted with the
management of its affair's.

In placing before you, in the first instance, a record of
the Parliamentary conduct of three of the members for
the city of London (the fourth being still, it is greatly to
be regretted, excluded from his right of voting), and also
of the members for all the metropolitan boroughs, I trust
that I shall not be charged with making an invidious se-
lection ; nothing can be mare remote from myintention.
commence with them as representing localities best
known.

Four out of seven of these constituencies were enfra,n•
chisee the Reform Bill of 1831 ; and assuredly mai
thus returned to Parliament cannot object to have their
opinions tested Ly their votes.
It is clear that a constituency, having two naemberg,
is not fu!ly represented when only one of them votes in
a division ; still less can it be said to be practically re-
presented when they vote in opposite lobbies ; cone©•
quently one of the results at which we arrive by an ex,
amination of the following table is, that in the 198 divi-
sions of last session London was represented fully on
only three occasions ; Westminster, six ; Finsburf,
eight ; Tower Hamlets, thirteen ; Greenwich, sixteen ;
Marylebone, nineteen ; whilst Lambeth was represented
by both members voting together, seventy-five, and
Southwark, from a similar cause, seventy-three times.
A Return of the Votes of the Metropolitan Members
(including those of the City of London) during the
last Session of Parliament—showing the total number
of Attendances at, and Absences from Divisions, dis-
tinguishing, whether the Votes thus given were single,
in conjunction with or in opposition to the Colleague.
A Statement is annexed, showing how each Constitu-
ency has, by these Votes, during the Session, been
represented in Parliament.
Total Number of Divisions, 198.
On Public Questions, 193 ; on Private Business, 5.
Members. Constituencies
Row Represented.
Places r Total
and Absent Voted Votes Fully
Representatives BinglY of each
GRICENWICH.
Montagu. Chambers 132 ... 39 ... 66
Peter R01t...
Both absent
Both agreed
Both opposed ll H Nuzeeutdr.s.

SOUTHWARK.
Sir Charles Napier 89 ... 26 ... 109
Apsley Pellatt 55 tiO ... 14:3
Both absent
Both agreed
Both opposed lO

LAMBETH.
W. A. Wilkinson 37 ... 37 161
William Williams 51 ... 20 ... 144
Both absent
Both agreed
Both opposed
WESTMINSTER.
Sir De Lacy Evans lBB ... 4 ... 10
Sir John Shelley
Both absent
Both agreed
Both opposed

.. 96

. 98

MAAYLEBONE: -
Lord Ebrington l7O ... 7 ... 28
Sir B. Hall 7B ... 09 ... 120
Both absent
Both agreed
801 l opposed

_
FINSBURY.
Alderman Challis 160 ... 19 ... 29
Thos. S. Duncombe 177 ... 11 ... 21
Both absent
Both agreed
Both opposed

~ 160

...
TOWEit-HA3ILETS. ... -
C. S. Butler
Sir W. Clay
Both absent
Both agreed
Both opposed

~ 103

... ~. -
LONDON.
Sir James Duke ..... 154 ... ... 44
Thomas Mastsrman 161 ... ... 37 3
Lord John Russell.. 169 ... ... 29
Baron Rothschild... 198 ... ...

~ 137

For the City of London only one member attended is
43, two in 29, and three in 3 divisions. Oat of 29 times
that two members voted, they opposed each other on
14 occasions. London was! neutralised by absences 123,
by opposition 14—total, 137 times out of the 193 divi
sioas.

The members necessarily named in the preceding table
may possibly be able to account for their absences in a
manner satisfactory to their constituents ; but it seems
difficult to conjecture in what manner those who have
been elected on Reform principles will explain their so
often voting on opposite sides. One of the boroughs
being represented by gentlemen of different political
prisoners, must expect to see itself neutralised in the
great council of the nation, and whether its members
attend to oppose each other, or pair off, is of little prac-
tical consequence ; but in another we find two avowed
Reformers opposed on 10, and in a third, on no less than
49 occasions. The result arising from an examination
of these divisions is somewhat curious, for although the
attendance of the members for Lambeth has been more
constant than those of Southwark, the former borough
has had itself neutralised on no less than 66 divisions
(some of them of a most important character), whilst
Southwark has been in the same position only 39 times.
The localities enumerated in the preceding table con-
tain a population of 2,132,812, represented by 132,776
electors, of whom 58,048 did net vote at the last general
election ; many of those who have hitherto, from mere
apathy, ne;lected to record their votes, may, perhaps, on
the next opportunity, be stimulated to exercise the high
right they possess, by the reflection that millions have
demanded it in vain, and that it must be moat irritating
to the immense number of their intelligent fellow-sub-
jects excluded, to see the 'chosen few so indifferent to
the responsibilities and duties of enfranchisement, that
they will not walk a couple of streets' length to express
practically itheir judgment on the qualifications of a
person who comes forward offering to represent their
opinions and to manage their affairs.

•A reference to each note would necessarily occupy
toe much space in this communication ; but a complete
registry of tne votes of every member of the present Par•
liament is in course of preparation. I have felt that in
undertaking a revision of them, as they involve the iv'
litical conduct of all the members, and through theta,
that of the constituencies who elect them, the task wag
of too great importance to be dealt with in a hasty man'
ner ; but when it is completed, it will, I hope, be found
practically useful at the next elections, previous to which
I hope to have the pleasure of again addressing you.
Believe me, my dear Sir, yours very truly,
JOHN P. GASSIOT.
J. A. Roebuck, Esq., M.P., &c., &c.

An edition of the Dispatch will henceforth be pub-
lished every Friday, containing particulars of important
events, and price of the markets, funds, &c., up to the
moment of going to press, and may be received at the
most distant parts 'of Scotland and Ireland on the Satur-
day. The pages of the Dispatch will be so extended at
to allow the introduction of nearly six additional columns
in quantity, and the principal articles will be set inut new
clear type that will not fatigue the eyesight. Adver•
tisers, to insure the insertion of their advertisements
in each of the four editions, should forward them on
Thursday, or at latest before 10 o'clock on Friday
morning. —Dispatch Office, 139, Fleet-street.
[ADVERTISEMENT.] —Holloway's Pills a Certain Re'
medy for Liver and Stomach Complaints.—The (laugh'
ter of Mr. Thomas Todd, of Houghton-le-Spring, Wag
for a long time afflicted with a disordered state of the
liver, bowel complaint, indigestion, and sickness after
partaking of any food, however simple. She bad re-
course to a variety of remedies, but unfortunately
without being benefited. At last, like thousands of.
others, she commenced taking Holloway's Pills, and by
persevering with this admirable remedy for four weeks
she was perfectly 'cured, and now enjoys the best of
health.—Sold by all medicine venders throughout the
world, at Professor Holloway's Establishments, . 244,
Strand, London, and 80, Maiden-lane, New York ; by
A. Stampa, Constantinople ; A. Guidioy, Smyrna ; and
H. Hoods, Malta.