The Sun.
London, England, 1832-12-05 00:00:00

MEMORANDA.

The christian names of Ensign Lord A. Chichester, of the
Seth Foot, are S. Algerno.
. . .

The half pay of the under-mentioned Officers has been can-
celled from the 4th instant, inclusive, they having accepted
commuted allowances for their commissions :—Lieut. W. H.
Backe, half•pay •1:3(1 Foot ; Lieut. W. Jones, half-pay 60th
Foot ' • Lieut. T. Alcoa', half-pay ‘24th Light Dragoons ; Lieut.
J. 111‘Carthy, half-pay 6Sth Foot; Second Lieut. G. Townley,
half-pay Rifle Brigade; Staff-Assistant-Surgeon G. Gregory,
half-pay Hospital Staff:

BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED.
WILLIAM and ROBERT MAUD, common-brewers, An.
dover, Hampshire.

BANKRUPTS.

HARRY GOUDE, seedsman, Leicester, and Harper-street,
Red Lion-square, London, to surrender Dec. 15, at one, and
Jan. 15, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Walker and
Rickards, Lincoln's Inn-fields ; Clark, St. Swithin's-lane, official
assignee.
ROBERT WHITBURN, brewer, Esher, Surrey, Dec. 19, at
half-past one, and Jan. 15, at twelve, at the Court of Bank-
ruptcy. Clapham, Great Portland-street ; Lackington, Basing-
hall-street, official assignee.

BOSWELL HENI AN, money-scrivener, Queen-street-
place, Dec. 11, a, two, and Jan. 15, at eleven, at the Court of
Bankruptcy Taylor, Great James-street, Bedford-row ; Ten-
nant, King's Arms-yard, official assignee.
WILLIAM It EDG AVE, wire-worker, Grosvenor-street
West, Pimlico, Dec. 19, at eleven, and Jan. )5, at twelve, at
the Court of Bankruptcy. Robinson and Sons, Half-moon.
street, Piccadilly.
WILLIAM COLES, jun., broker, Mincing-lane, Dec. 14,
at one, and Jan. 15, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy.
Groom, Abchurch-lane, official assignee ; Knox, Gray's Inn-
square.
BERNARD PINNEY, picture-dealer, Stafford-place, Pim.
lico, Dec. 17, and Jan. 15, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy.
Green, King's Arm's.yard, official assignee; Rogers, Manches-
ter-buildings, Westminster.
RIJODA GREEN, hosier, Bristol, Dec. 12, and Jan. 15, at
one, at the office of Messrs. Bevan and Brittan, Bristol. White
and Whitmore, Lincoln's Inn, London; Bevan and Brittan,
Bristol.

BENJAMIN SHAW, hat-manufacturer, Rochdale, Lanca-
shire, Dec. '2O, 21, and Jan. 15, at two, at the White Bear Inn,
Manchester. Norris, Allen, and Anthony, Great Ormond-street,
London ; Heaton, Rochdale,
HENRY SPARROW, ironmonger, Wolverhampton, Dec. 21,
and Jan. 15, at ten, at the Whiston Cross Inn, Albrighton, Shrop-
shire. ('apes, Raymond-buildings, Gray's Inn, London; Holy-
oake and Robinson, Wolverhampton.
011A$ DAUBNEY, grocer, Portsea, Hampshire, Dec. IS,
19, and Jan. 15, at one, at Totterdell's Hotel, Portsea. Bullen,
Gray's Inn-place, Gray's Inn ; Long, Portsea.
WILI.IA 31 SIMS, grocer, Penzance, Cornwall, Dec. 15, and
Jan. 15, at one, at the Commercial-rooms, Bristol. Poole and
Gamlen, Gray's Inn-square, London; Livett, Bristol.
WILLIAM BUTLER, painter, Little St. Thomas Apostle,
London, Dec, 15, and Jan. 13, at eleven, at the Court of Bank-
ruptcy. Hewitt, Tokenhouse-yard, London.
JOFIN OLIVER. KD'ITLE, tailor, Southampton-street,
Strand, Dec. 14, and Jan. 15, at eleven, at the Court of Bank-
ruptcy. Hopwood and Foster, Chancery-lane, London ; Edwards,
Pancras-lane, official assignee
WILLIAM FENTON, farmer, Woodhouse, Leeds, Dec. 17,
at twelve, and Jan. 15, at eleven, at the Court-house, Leeds.
Strangeways and Walker, Barnard's Inn, London ; Black-
burn, Leeds.
THOMAS TUNNICLIFF, lace.manufacturer, Sileby, Lei-
cestershire, Dec. 24, and Jan. 15, at eleven, at the Punch Bowl,
Nottingham. Messrs. Pa) ne and Daft, Nottingham ; G. T. and
R. Tayl,r' Featherstone-buildings, London.
THOMAS pEAKE, grocer, Shrewsbury, Dec. 17, and Jan.
IS, at eleven, at the Talbot Inn, Shrewsbury. Charles Ronalds,
Crown-court, Old Broad-street, London ; Cooper, Shrewsbury.
FRANCIS LEAR, tallow-chandler, Bitton, Gloucestershire,
Dec. 18, and Jan. 15, at two, at the Commercial-rooms, Bristol.
Wasborough and Stanley, Bristol ; Evans, Bristol ; and Poole
Gamlen, Gray's Inn-square, London.
H NICOLS HEN\VOOD, victualler, Penzance, Cornwall,
Dec. 17, and .140. 15, at eleven, at the Mount's Bay and West-
ern Hotel, Penzance. C4,,,0de, Guilnford-street, London; Payn-
ter, Penzance.
DIVIDEND&

B. Clever, victualler, High.street, Shadwell, Dec. 27, at half-
past two, at the Court of Bankruptcy.
C. F. Woolcot, plumber, Tunbridge, Kent, Dec. 27, at one, at
the Court of Bankruptcy.
R. F. Hindle, innkeeper, Boroughbridge, Yorkshire, Dec. 27,
at eleven, at the Greyhound Hotel, horouglibridge.
J. Lucy, builder, Bedwardine, Worcestershire, Jan. 3, at
twelve, at the Crown li.n, Worcester.
J. Hamilton, innkeeper, Bristol, Dec. 29, at eleven, at the
Commercial-rooms, Bristol.
It. J. Greetham, ship-chandler, Liverpool, Dec. 27, at twelve,
at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool.
W. LI, Edwards, malt,ter, Norwich, Dec. 27, at eleven, at the
White I ion inn, Norwich.
J. Mansfield, mercer, Billingborough, Lincolnshire, Dec. 28,
at three, at the Mail Hotel, Grantham.
It. Kay and J. Niittall, paper-manufacturers, Dec. 26, at twelve,
at the Bridge Inn, Bolton-le-Moors.
T. D. Thorp, linen-draper, Dec. 27, at eleven, at the Palace
Inn, Manchester.
CERTIFICATES, Dec. 4.

C. Roberts, miller, Liverpool.
16d, eaatir-merchant, Lawrence Pountney-place.
B.Powis, merchant, :it. Helen's-place.
It. Cripps, wine-merchant, Aloersgate-street.
C. T. Webb, coal-merchant, Newport, Monmouthshire.
It. C. Battyll, tavern-keeper, Doctors' Commons.
T. Taylor, silk.mercer, Clifford-street, Bond-street.
T. C. Williams, tea-dealer, Norwich.

W. .)fascord, grOcer, Oxford.
R. Smart, licensed victualler, Upper Southampton street, Is-
inkton

VARTNEUSHIPS DISSOLVED.

J. Jackson and M. Jen!ing, hone,boilers, Old Haggerstone,
Shoreditch.
W. and G. Jackson, maltsters, Lancaster.
T. M'Cabe and R. Pearson, pump-makers, Liverpool.
Tringham and W. Marshall, glovers, Beaford, Devonshire.
G. J,ohnson and T. Troughton, joiners, Liverpool.
J. Hick and J. Abbey, tallow-chandlers, Huddersfield.
W. Knatclibull arid Co., merchants, Gracechurch-street (as far
2,,.$ regards R. Paterson).
A,. Archer and M. Brook, wheelwrights, Osset, Yorkshire.
E. Yarket and J. H. Deeley, jewellers, Birmingham.
J. Ellis and 0. I.ewiz, ;Oilers, Liverpool.
J. Barber and J. H. Bromley, hatters, Rochester.
A. Wollerafen & Co., engravers to calico printers, Manchester.
C. and W. Webster, woolstaplers, Fazeley, Staffordshire.
J. acid 1. F. Wright, calco-printers, Manchester.
G. Wilby and 4. Saxton, cloth-manufacturers, Ossett, York-
,
shire.
H. Bury and J. Painter, stock-iir.4,t7s, Broad-street,
W. V4lier and Co., diapers, Lewes, Sussex.
W. Harratt And R. ,Goggs, saddlers, Huntingdon.
S. Hudson and E. 'T.n,mlinson, saddlers' ironmongers, Walsall,
Staffordshire.
W Kerr and Co., Liverpool (as far as regards R. Thom).
J. a adbury and Co., coach-proprietors, New Mi:ls, Derbyshire.
P. Dillon and Co., earthenware manufacturer, Bursiem;
Staikhrdsh

It is with regret vie have to state that the dan-
gerous condition of Sir GYOKGE Bltic-HAzt'e health has
obliged him to relinquish his command in cork, and to
retire to private I.fe. —Limerick Chronicle.
LrETTER. FROM EARL GREY.—At a meet-
ing of the friend!: of Capt. WOOD, at Huddersfield, on
Friday last, a letter was read from the Premier, addressed
to a gentleman at Huddersfield, one of those who had op-
posed the address against the Dutch war. This gentle-
man had thought it proper to express to the Noble Earl,
R' that, though the purpose of the Huddersfield men was
fit m not to embarrass the 'Ministry, yet that if any steps
were taken by the latter ti pursue hostilities beyond the
purpose first entertaiced—in fine, to adopt a warlike po-
licy—they would rise, ns one man, against Me measure."
Earl Gagv, in his reply, calls to mind the original prin-
ciples on which the Ministers took offic.., one of which
was " peace," and declarer their iliflexible determination
to pursue the course they had then tracked our. At the
satire time lie adverts to the peculiar circumstances in
which they had found the Belgian question, and expresses
a hope that all will yet conclude in peace. The reading
of this doctunent was followed by deafening cheers.

TIIE ELECTIONS.

CITY OF LONDON.

A public meeting was holden last night in the great room
in the College of Physicians, Warwick-lane, of electors of
the Wards of Farringdon Within, Cheap, Bread-street, and
Castle Baynard, as the advertisements and placards de-
clared, for the purpose of taking into consideration the best
means of securing the return of tried and uncompromising
Reformers to the next Parliament. From the same autho-
rity the public were informed that al the candidates had
been invited to attend.
Mr. PRITCHARD was called to the Chair.
Mr. WILLIAists said—We were now about to enter
upon an extensive experiment in the exercise of the Reform
Bill, and it must in a great measure rest with the electors
themelves whether or not the experiment prove efficacious.
They must not be overcome with mere professions, but make
judicious choice ; and one mode of security towards this
was, to adopt the system of demanding pledges. Pledges
he knew were objected to by some, hut he was sure that
no thorough honest Reformer could refuse. He had heard
all the arguments spoken, and read those published on the
subject, but he did not see any thing to change his mind
in this, that when a man sought to be intrusted with
the interest of the lives and fortunes of the public,
it was but fair that he should at least pledge him-
self to such questions as his constituents considered
necessary for the well-being of their lives and property.
He said two of the candidates present were well known
to the citizens, and were richly entitled to the respect of
the citizens—these were Aldermen Wood and Waithman—
he would much rather give them his vote, as he had always
done, than any others, from recollection for their• past
services ; but they had as yet, on the present elec-
tion, withheld their pledges, and he was the more stir-
prized at this, as they bad each on the previous election,
been returned on special pledges, and they must have
known, that unless they had made such pledges at that
time they would not have been then returned. He went
on to state the nature of the transactions of the last city
election, when the candidates were called upon to pledge
themselves to support the Reform Bill uncurtailed, and as

a stipulation that they should dismiss their committees.
In the meantime Mr. Grote, one of their present candi-
dates, had on that occasion been ready to come forward;
but on the then candidates complying with the stipulations
of pledging themselves and dismissing their committees,
instead of a contest being instituted, all parties had joined,
made one common cause, and carried into effect a resolu-
tion, declaring the then present can idates to be re-elected
On that occasion Mr. Alderman Wood was the first called
into the room at the Guildhall to give his pledge. He
said the questions upon which pledges were required
from the candidates were :—.the repeal of that daring
act of usurpation, the Septennial Act, vote by ballot,
abolition of ail tithes, the repeal of all taxes that im-
peded the free circulation of knowledge, the repeal of the
house and window tax, as well as all taxes that press
upon the industry of the people, and a thorough reform of
all corporation abuses. He would ask Alderman Wood,
in particular, as regarded the abuses of the Corporation,
why the election of Aldermen ought not to be once a year,
and why the Court of Aldermen should seek to deprive
the cit zens of their right of election, which they had en.
j:.yed for so many years ?—(Considerable confusion.)
He would not further trespass on the time of the meeting,
but propose a resolution, which was to the purport,
" That the Parliament of the Boroughmongers having
ceased to exist, it now becomes the imperative duty, as
also the interest, of the electors, in the exercise of their
newly outlined rights, to make a wise and judicious selec-
tion of teen to be returned as their representatives to the
reformed Parliament, whose opinions are in accordance
with those of the great body of the people on the all-
important questions which have so long agitated the whole
community, viz. :—the repeal of that daring Act of usur-
pation called the Septennial Act;' the vote by ballot;
the unqualified abolition of all ti hes ; the repeal of all
taxes that impede the free circulation of knowledge ; the
repeal of that odious impost the house and window tax;
as well as all taxes which press upon the industry of the
people ; and the thorough reform of all Corporation
abuses."—lt was received with immense cheers.
Dr. HOLMES seconded the resolution.

Alderman WAITHMAN appealed to the meeting if it was
right they should be called upon to pass a resolution having
in view tbe prejudice of particular individuals, while that
resolution hail not been framed upon the sense of all the
Wards assembled, but had been concocted within the circle
of a limited correspondence.
There was a great uproar succeeded this remark. Alder-
man Waithman appeared to speak with much energy ; but
it was impossible to hear him amidst the noise. The Chair-
man seemed at the same time to be expostulating with tbe
Worthy Alderman, and in the midst of this boisterous
scene of noise and confusion, the Chairman put a mii!ion,
which we understood to be the resolution, and it was de-
clared to be carried. Alderman Waithman then sat down.

Alderman Noon, for whom there had been repeated
calls, rose. He said that, as to the questions proposed from
the resolution that had just been read, he had no difficulty
in answering them—(Hear, hear),--but he was not then
going to pledge himself. Had he been asked the ques-
tions in the House of Commons either regarding triennial
Parliaments, or vote by ballot, he would give his voice
decidedly for them both.—(Loud cheering.) Nor for th,
Value of the seat he had the honour to fill in that House
would he pledge himself ; hut he would do his duty. With
regard to the ballot, he had in every debate in the H 'use
of Commons when it was alluded to, as well as invariably
when it was mooted in Committees, given his opinion in
its favour.—(Cheers.) He had had such strong evidence
of the necessity, both in the city and county of Gloucester,
where he had taken an active part, not for himself, but for
the great cause, that, humble individual as he was, in the
House of Commons, if no one else did, nothing on earth would
prevent him from twinging forward the question. He would
give them one instance of many he could enumerate, to
snow the necessity of it.—(Hrar.) In Gloucester, there
was a poor man with a family of six children, and he
earned his living by carrying about a sedan-chair, or ply-
ng in a fly-carriage, and this man had actually given his
pledge to the two liberal candidates. Some of the opposite
party one day after called upon his wife, who was a wo-
man that hail had a good education and was well in.
formed ; they asked her if she was not in debt, and if she
had not pawned all her clothes. She acknowledged that
such was the case, but begged to know fur what purpose
they asked the questions ; they replied that it was for the
purpose of obtaining the vote of her husband, and they
would obviate her difficulties. the replied, then she
hoped he would never give his vote to them. He had
gone to the man and obtained a n ritten statement of the
facts. About the other parts of the question of abuses of
every kind, he had always been opposed to them. As to
the window and house assessments, he had always argued
for the repeal of these very taxes, and he had invariably
declared his opinion that a tax on property would t thee-
ciously replace them and remove the weight from the la-
bouring classes.—(From the crowd, " Now about
tithes.) 0, tithes ! I always voted against tithes.
—(4. laugh.) Tell me what I have not voted against.
—(Cheers.) About spending the money of the Carpors-
tion, he had been 25 years in the Court of Aldermen, and he
never knew that they had a guinea ; but if they wanted to
get rid of their chartered rights, and to institute stipendiary
Magistrates, he had no doubt they would find Government
ready to comply with their wishes; perhaps the present would
nut so readily, but the list Government would gladly have
gratified them in that respect, and given them stipendiary
Magistrates. Once for all he would say, find a man who
would do more than he had done, and he would cheerfully
resign his seat immediately.
Alderman WAtTIIMAN then rose. He had always had
to struggle against the Tories, and now he found that at
such meetings there was always some one to start such
questions as would divide the friends of Reform. He al-
luded to Sir John Hubhouse at Westminster, and said, that
if he was turned out, the electors could not possibly give
the Tories a greater triumph. lie (Alderman Waitninan)
was once. considered the head of a party, not that he was
capable of leading them, but he was useful in carrying
their measures into effect—in keeping down the rash and
dragging on the slow ; and after a man having done so
moo], and for so many years, because of objecting to such
a proposition as had been made, were they to forget what
he hail done, and turn round upon him and turn
him out.—(Cheers.) He had no objection to give
pledges, but that it was a distrust of his conduct, and be
had never shrunk from his duty. If his seat were to
cost him half-a-crown he would not give it, for it was
only valuable to him in the esteem ha had of his fellow-citi-
zens. He complained of the resolution being brought in,
seeing that only himself and Alderman Wood could be af-
fected them-
selves,e
been advocates
fecteri by
Hite,
rteh;eoattltderthcaartadtihdeaytehs
aldiavailn4yalsl
for all the principles of the questions. He regretted to see
that there were so many fond of playing at the game of
their adversaries, but his weakness would of course be
their strength. lu alluding to the affair of the Court of
Aldermen (Portsoken election), he said he had acted
conscientiou•ly, and it was not for him to defend a whole
Court.—An Alderman has the life of a dray horse—he is
always in harness.—(A laugh.) It they would at any time
show him any existing abuse, he would vote for its cor-
rection, as he had always done.—(Hear, hear. )
Sir JOHN KEY was loudly called for, and on rising was
received with great cheering. He could not refer to forty
years of past services, for he was not forty years in ex.

istence ; but he could refer to his public life from its
commencement, and say there was not an act which he
could not avow, or of which he had reason to be ashamed.
—(Cheers.) A great deal had been said on the subject of
pledges ; he did not appear as their advocate, but he would
freely state his principles, and opinions, and views, and
if they should call them pledges, he would not object to
the term.—(Great applause.) The first reform he should
mention was the duration of Parliament. The Septennial
Act took from the people the power they should possess
over their representatives, for the restoration of which he
should supporta return to triennial Parliaments.—(Hear.)
On the question of vote by ballot, the systematic oppres-
sion now exercised to deter electors from voting according
to their consciences rendered the protection of the ballot
indispensable.—(Great cheering.) He thought it the duty
of every one who sought the honour of representing in•
dependent electors, to promote economy and retrenchment
in the public expenditure; and should he be sent to the
[louse of Commons, it should be his anxious endeavour to
diminish the burdens of the people.—(Hear, hear.) The
house and window tax pressed most unjustly and unequally
on the inhabitants of the metropolis, and ought at once to
be repealed.—(Hear, bear.) Tithes was an imposition
so unjust and so impolitic, that they ought immediately
ta be abolished.—(Great cheering.) On the subject of
the corn laws, lie would confess that his mind was
not fully made up, whether there should be a low fixed
duty or whether they should be wholly abolished. His
present opinion inclined to their total abolition.—(Great
cheering.) The renewal of the Bank Charter was a sub-
ject most important to the metropolis, and to the country
at large ; his opinion was not yet perfectly formed, but he
thought that no power should be given to a small number
of individuals to increase and diminish, at their pleasure,
the currency of the country, and thereby raise or lower
the value of commodities.—(Hear, hear.) On the ques-
tion of slavery, he felt the deepest conviction that no indivi-
dual had a right to keep his fellow• man in bondage—
(Hear, hear)—and that slavery ought to be abolished the
earliest moment it would be good for the slave himself ;
for it was his interest that should be aloiae considered in
decoding that question.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to
the Court of Aldermen, he had no otjection to state his
opinion, that no body of men had a right to interfere with
time elective franchise of others.—(Great cheering.) After
he had sat down,
An ELECTOR asked, whether he thought that the
Bishops should have seats in the House of Lords ?
Sir Jona; KEY thought there could not he a second
opinion on that point; he thought they should not.
Mr. Alderman SCALES said, was it to be endured that
the men who sought to represent them in Parliament
should refuse to pledge themselves to the performance of
their important duties.—(Hear, hear.) Was not the
whole system of Government a system of pledges ? Had
not the gentlemen, who now repudiated pledges, pledged
themselves by an oath on becoming Common Councilmen?
—(Hear hear)—by an oath on becoming Aldermen ? by
an oath on becoming Sheriffs and Lord Mayor ? and by an
oath on becoming their representatives in Parliament ?
And were they now to refuse pledges?—(Hear, hear,
hear.) Where would they find the ballot in full opera-
tion ? Why, in the city of London, amongst the greatest
bodies; the East India Company, and the Bank, and all
other public bodies. If it was necessary for the rich, why
should the poor be refused its protection ?—(Hear, beat,
hear.) On the subject of tithes and the repeal of the
assessed taxes it was unnecessary for him to say any thing
now, he had often declared his opinion.—(Hear, hear.)
Alderman Waithman had said that he had a motion on the
books of the House of Commons for two Sessions, for the
repeal of the house and window tax, and could not get an
opportunity to make it. He would pledge his existence
that, if they sent him to Parliament, he would make it the
first Session.—(Cheers and laughter, and cries of " Ques-
tion.") It was his opinion they would never have any
relief from a change of taxation ; it must be from aboli-
tion.—(Hear, hear.) Seeing them all with smiles on
their countenances, he considered that they were deter.
mined to vote for him.—(Great laughter.) On the corn
laws he would only say that it was impossible for the
workman in this country who eat dear bread to compete
with the workman of other countries who eat cheap bread.
(Hear, hear.) Tithes were an abuse that must be abo-
lished. It was an infringement of the rights of citizens,
many of whom paid from 101. to 15/. tithes for their
houses.—(Hear, hear.) Were not the Dissenters as moral
and religious as Churchmen ? They paid their own clergy,
and why should Churchmen call on them to pay theirs?
(Hear, bear, hear.) He would persevere in resisting
every abuse till he had a complete conquest over the Cm-
potation.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Did they suppose he
would be satisfied with obtaining his own rights ? No—he
would complete his conquest, and obtain true rights of all
his fellow-citizens, if he were to abolish the Court of
Aldermen.—(Great cheering and laughter.) Westmin-
ster had no Aldermen, and it did very well without them.
Mr. GROTE rose to address the meeting, and was re-
ceived with great applause. He felt no objection to have
the term " pledge" applied to his declarations, except in
one sense ; it was understood by some that a person
pledged was hound unwillingly. He could say with truth,
that he hell all the opinions he had stated for years and
y ears,even when it would not have been safe to divulge them.
fhe vote by ballot lie censidered necessary to procure to
the people the full benefit of the Reform Bill.—(Hear.)
Mr. Alderman Wood had mentioned instances of the op-
pression to which the electors were subject in Gloucester,
and they might see by the newspapers, that similar prat
tices were resorted to by the enemies of freedom all over
the country. These facts strengthened the general rea-
sons for the measure which were previously cogent.—
(Hear, hear.) Septennial Parliaments far exeeesed the
reasonable limits for which the trust should be con-
fided; triennial he thought should be the longest duration.
The Septennial Bill was one of the grossest usurpations
ever resorted to. He need not go over the particulars
of his address ; he had fully stated his opinions on tithes
and the corn laws.—(Hear, hear.) There was one sub-
ject he had not mentioned—Corporation Reform.--
(Hear, hear.) He did not mean to make any invidious
remark on the Corporation of London; he took the ques-
tion on the broad ground in reference to all the Corpora-
tions in the kingdom ; and in his opinion an extensive
municipal Reform was roost necessary.—(Hear, hear.)
He could not sufficiently express the abomination aud hor-
ror in which be held the practice of slavery, nor his
astonishment how it could enter into the minds of humane
men that it should be allowed to exist.—(Hear, hear.) The
extension of education to all the people would he one of
his greatest objects.—(Great applause.) (An elector
called out, " The Bishops.") He had no difficulty
about the Bishops ; he was decidedly of opinion that they
should not have seats in Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) The
Hon. Gentleman sat down amidst the loudest cheering.
Mr. ASHURST would move a resolution that representa-
tives were bound to resign their trust when called on by a
majority of their constituents to do so.
The resolution was seconded by Mr. Mansal, and carried
unanimously.

Thanks were voted to the Chairman, and the meeting
oepanted.

WESTMINSTER.

To the EDITOR of the ;MORNING CHRONICLE.

Sir,—The Committee for conducting the Election of Sir F.
Burdett and Sir J. Hobhouse trust that your sense of justice
will induce you to give insertion to the enclosed Address to the
Electors of Westminster, having this day inserted a letter which
contains a severe attack upon one, at least, if not on both, of
the present Members.
Dec. 3, 1832. THOMAS DE YEAR, Chairman.

A letter signed Francis Place has appeared in the
Chronicle, and is now circulated as a pamphlet, contain-
ing a charge against Sir John Hobhouse, which those who
do not know the writer may think it necessary should be
refuted. The accusation is spread over fifteen pages, but
the basis of it is contained in the first page, and is as
follows :

Sir John Hobliouse, in his speech at the Crown and An.
chor Tavern, on Monday, the 26th of November, is reported to
have said (and my inquiries have satisfied me that he is con_
rectly reported), that from the letter of the Colonel (Evans), it
appeared that he, on Friday, the 16th, had given his pledge to
stand, and it was not for two or three days afterwards the
pledges were demanded from him (Sir John)—it was a mere
trick, not of the liberals, but of some of the electors, for whose
enmity he was not aware of having given cause. He would ask
the meeting from how many of the electors of Westminster did
they think this demand originated? From Six/?—No. From
30 ?__No. From 10 ?—No. But from one individual, whose
letter he had in his pocket, in which he says to the deputation,
public meeting, and be sure you Mind you ask him before the
publish his answer."'
Having given this in this pamphlet as an extract from
Sir J. Hobtiouse's speech, and having satisfied himself of
the correctness of the report, Mr. Francis Place pro-
ceeds to foun I a charge of untruth, conveyed in ihe coarsest
language, against Sir John Holthouse, by stating that
Colonel Evans did not enter into an engagement to stand
on the Friday, and that his standing was only provi-
sionally agreed upon on the Saturday. Now what is to
be thought of Mr. Francis Place, when it is proved, by
appealing to the Times, the Chronicle, and the Morning
Herald, and it might be added, to all whom Col. Evans's
supporters would allow to hear Sir John Hohhouse, that
he (Mr. Place) had put into Sir John's mouth words
which he never used ; and that this person, who says he
had ‘• satisfie 1 himself of the correctness" of what he
attributes to Sir John Hobhouse, could not have looked

into either of tlie6e papers, or if he did took into them,
could not find a single phrase to justify his slander ; the
Times gives an accurate report, the Morning Herald does
the same, the Morning Chronicle omits that part of the
speech altogether, but does not give one word of Mr.
Francis Place's correct report. In the Morning Herald
of November 27, we find as follow

" It was not true that the opposition to him (Sir J. IL)
arose from his refusing to give pledges. The opposition, ac.
cording to a letter written by Colonel Evans, had been settled
on Saturday night ; the Gallant Colonel had accepted the
offer of being put in nomination on the Saturday night, and
the pledges were never proposed to him (Sir J. H.) until the
Sunday morning."—Extract from Sir J. Hobhouse's speech.
The report of the Times is to the same effect :

" It is not true that the opposition to me has arisen from
my refusal to take the pledges ; it began before that refusal oc-
curred. It was on the Saturday night that it was settled (as
appeared from the letter of the Gallant Colonel himself) that
he should stand in opposition to me ; and the pledges were
never put to me until the following Sunday morning."—Ex_
tract from Sir John Hobhouse's speech, Times, Nov. 27.

It will be perceived that, by the substitution of Friday
instead of Saturday, and by the insertion of two or three
days, instead of the following day, Mr. Francis Place has
ingeniously contrived to put a falsehood into the mouth of
Sir John Hobbouse, for the sake of afterwards accusing
him of that crime. After the exposure of this forgery
(where the mis-report given by Mr. Place is found we
know not), it will be scareely necessary to reply to any
other portion of this libel. But, besides the main inven-
tion on which Mr. Place depends for producing the in.
tended effect with the electors of Westminster, his letter
contains two or three other fictions, which it may be as
well to expose. He declares that even en the Saturday
night it was agreed upon (only provisionally) that Col.
Evans should stand, and that his coming forward depended
upon Sir John Hobhouse's answers to the questions put to
him on Sunday.
What says Colonel Evans ?
Here is his letter :

" My Dear Sir Francis,—For some time past various corn-
' munications have been made to me by electors of Westminster,
expressive of a desire to bring me forward as a candidate for
its representation in the next Parliament. Last night a meet-
ing was held on this subject, when, it having been determined
to put me in nomination, measures were taken to carry that
determination into effect ; and I, having conceded to the
wishes of the electors, am now a candidate, without, as I full•
understand, being in any way opposed to you.
I hasten to communicate this to you, and remain, yours, &c. &c.
" D. L. EVANS.
" To Sir Francis Burdett, Sunday, 6, Waterloo-place."
The words are positive that the arrangement was made
on Saturday—not provisionally—but an actual determi-
natio❑ to nominate Colonel Evans the night before Sir
John Hobhouse was asked a pledge. There is no doubt
that Sir John's refusal to pledge was mentioned as adding
to the Colonel's chances. And it is repeated, that the
Colonel's letter to Sir Francis Burdett states the fact
broadly that the determination to nominate him (Colonel
Evans) and the consequent measures were agreed upon on
the Saturday. Sir John Hobbouse called this a trick.
We repeat that it was so, and when Mr. Place wrote the
letter which was picked up in the street, and which, when
sent t) Sir John, was returned, unread by that gentle •
man, to the writer, through Mr. Warburton, he knew
that Sir John Hobhouse would give no pledges, for he had
said so in his address to the electors of Westminster, pub-
hailed a few days before; so that the specifying four ques-
tions to which answers were to be given was neither more
nor less than, as it was called by Sir Francis Burdett, " a
poor contrivance" to injure Sir John Hobhouse on these
four p articular points with the electors.
Another of the tricks was to request Sir John Hob-
house to be a member of Mr. Hume's Committee, which
it was well known he could not, with the slightest regard
to personal character, concede to. Accordingly, his re-
fusal has been made another charge against him.
Again, Mr. Francis Place complains of Sir John Hob-
house not having read his (Mr. Place's) letter to the
meeting, and states that it would have disproved his as-
sertions of the pledge deputation originating with him.
Fortunately, that precious document has been published,
and we are quite content to abide by it. Messrs. Michie
and others ask Mr. Place, " Shall we demand pledges from
Sir John Hohhouse?" Mr. Place answers, 6' Yes," and
aids them go about it directly, stating to them what these
pledges ought to be.

They go accordingly and advance these very same
pledges, and now Mr. Place has the amusing effrontery to
pretend he did not send the deputation, and may wash his
hands of the pledge trick.
But Mr. Place, not content with dealing thus honestly
by Sir John Hobhouse, tries his hand with Sir Francis
Burdett's letter. Here also he says what is unfounded—
he states, he hears that Sir F. Burdett, in a letter read
from him last night, said, that " none but fools asked for
pledges, and none but rogues gave them," and adds in a
note, " This, as I am assured, was the fact; and as the
letter was intended for publication, it was returned to Sir
Francis by Messrs. De Vear, Thurston, and A'Beckett,
to be altered in this and some other particulars, and it
was altered.'" Now upon referring to a copy of Sir
Francis Burdett's letter, taken before it was returned to
Sir Francis to be altered, according to Mr. Place's in-
Tinant, " in this and some other particulars," we find
no such remark as that " none but fools asked for pledges,
and none hut rogues gave them." So much for the ac-
curacy of Mr. Place's informant.
We cannot conclude without stating that we have heard
of the report alluded to by Mr. Place's postscript, namely,
that he (Mr. Place) had got up thin opposition to Sir
John Hubliouse, because that gentleman refused to pro-
cure for Mr. Place the office of Official Assignee under the
New Bankruptcy Act. It probably originated in the
same quarter as Mr. Place's false report of Sir John fhb-
house's speech.

To the EDITOR of the :HORNING CHRONICLE.

Sir,—Reluctant as 1 am, and ever have been, indivi-
dually to obtrude myself on the public, I cannot remain
silent under an imputation, which, though having the
semblance of an attack upon my public conduct, is, in
fact, one upon toy private integrity. I allude, Sir, to a
handbill published by the friends of Colonel Evans,
headed, " Twelve Questions for the Electors of West-
minster," &e. The eleventh of these runs thus : " Who
cares not s fig for the electors of Westminster, so long as
he is supported by the contemptible little faction of elec-
tors and non-electors, the Rump of Lisle-street, who
manage matters very snugly, and never publish or exhibit
their accounts?" Surely, Sir, the publication of this bill
cannot have received the sanction of Mr. Place, because,
after the close of my account as Treasurer at the election of
1831, is the following note : " The foregoing account has
been examined by us, and the documents of the Treasurer
compared therewith, and found to be correct. Signed—
Francis Place, D. Newton Crouch, dated September 13,
1831." And also in a statement to the electors of West-
minster, printed and circulated September 14, 1831,
giving a succinct account of the elections of the preceding
24 years, is the following notice :—" Mr. De Vear having
laid his accounts and vouchers before auditors, who have
examined and attested the same, the said accounts and
vifitchers now lie for the inspection of subscribers, at his
residence, 44, Lisle-street." I beg to conclude by staing,
that those documents now lie at this Committee-room,
for the purpose of exasuination.—l am, Sir, your very
obedient servant, THOMAS DE YEAR.
Central Committee-room, 43, Covent-garden,

Dee. 3, 1832.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,— A paper is inserted in your journal of to-day from
a correspondent (in other morning papers it is officially an-
nounced as from the committee of Sir Francis Burdett and
Sir John Hobhouse, under the signature of Mr. De Vear),
in which a passage is quoted from toy " Letter to the
' Electors of Westminster," and pronounced to be a forgery.
The best reply to this calumny is the statement of a fact.
On the evening of Monday, the 26th of November, I re-
ceived a copy of The Sun newspaper ; it contained
what to me, who am well acquainted with newspaper
matters, seemed an excellent report of the proceedings at
the meeting held that day at the Crown and Anchor
Tavern ; in it I read the words I copied in my letter ; I
did not however copy them ❑ntil I had made inquiry as
to their correctness, not, as is insinuated, of casual hearers
who, amidst the shameful uproar, might have mistaken
Sir John's words, but of men of character, accustomed
to such scenes, whose station enabled them to hear, and on
whose accuracy I can depend. On their assurance lam
satisfied Sir John used the words I have quoted. So
much for the " forgery."
Another accusation is conveyed in the words—" A let-
ter 'signed Francis Place' has appeared in the Chronicle,
and is circulated as a pamphlet, which those who do not
know the writer may think necesaary should be refuted."
The inference is, that they who do know the writer will
not think any refutation necessary. Men who think meanly
will seldom hesitate to lie boldly.

Mr. De Vear is the tool used on this occasion. He is
a good-natured man, easily made use of by those who will
take the trouble to operate on his vanity. He, poor man,
is made to represent me as not worthy of beliet ; yet, in a
letter signed by him, and inserted iu your paper, he says
I audited his accounts, as Treasurer of the Westminster
election in 1831. True, I did so, and so I will those of
the present election, it he will lay them before me, and
nothing improper shall he found in them. But mark the
inference from the charge he has made and the conse-
luence. Mr. De Year, who says I shall not be believed

by those who know me, tells you that my certificate
necessary as an assurance to the electors of Westminat
of his honesty, and the correctness of his aC&t ints.
much for my not being worthy of belief.
The remainder of the complaints, lamentations, in
nuations, and accusations, of the Committee of the ti
Baronets may he safely left to the unprejudiced readers
my i 1 Letter to the Electors of Westminster."
Tuesday, Dec. 4. FRANCIS PLACE.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,—Two or three errors have crept into the ~iddr
to the Electors of Westminster, probably from the but
of copying. In the last paragraph the word " neve
was omitted, which completely alters the sense of f
passage; it should have been " we have never heard
the report," 8.-x. Could we beg of you to insert a line
correction of it ?

1 have the honour to be, Sir, your obedient servant,
THOMAS DE V EAR.
Central Committee, 43, King.street,
Covent garden, Dec. 4.