The Sun.
London, England, 1835-07-15 00:00:00

grounds of bribery and corruption, but nothing of the sort was
shown. He, therefore. thruiffht it very unfair of the Hon. and
Gallant Member, in the face of the Commons of England, to
designate the individual who had been the object of that in-
quiry, which terminated in a total failure on the part of those
who petitioned against the return. He would now say let
there be a case brought forward on a large or a small scale
against any place, and every facility should be afforded for its
investigation. The Hon. and Gallant Officer seemed very
anxious to discuss the appointment of the Committee, but his
Hon. and Gallant Friend was very wrong when he chose to
be so very angry.
Sir H. HARDINGE said that he was aware of the dex-
terity of the Right Hon. Gentleman in debate, but the
Right Hon. Gentleman should have recollected that he (Sir
H. Hardinge), in the observations he made respecting the
election of the Solicitor-General, alluded to the constituency,
and not to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman himself. He
had-attributed no blame whatever to the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman individually. What he had said he said from a
conviction that the proceedings of that night were full of
peril.__( Cheers.) He had made no accusation against the
Hon, and Learned Gentleman ; but he had said that this in-
quiry would be likely to lead to others.
Mr. PRAED said if it was the case of the Penryn election
no Committee would be granted.
Mr. ROLFI?, declared, most solemnly, that he knew of
nothing in the slightest degree improper practised at the elec-
tion of Penryn, beyond some mere gossip that he had heard
about some person, perhaps, getting half-a-crown, or some
trifle of that sort.—( A laugh, and cries of " Oh, oh.")
After a few words from Mr. Wason, Lord Sandon, and
Colonel Lowther,
Lord J. RUSSELL concurred in postponing the nomina-
tion of the Committee until to-morrow (this day.)
Mr. AGLIONBY moved that two petitions from York,
which had been entrusted to him, complaining of the corrupt
proceedings at the last election there, should be referred to
the same Committee.
Sir H. HARDINGE said that in this case not more than
five out of forty signed the petition. Now he would ask the
Noble Lord opposite (Lord J. Russell) whether in the case
of Tavistock for instance a petition signed by only ten in
four hundred would be considered worth inquiring into by a
Committee of that House?
Lord J. RUSSELL said that might depend upon the na-
ture of the complaint. In this case specific acts of bribery
were alleged. He should not consider perhaps that mere
general charges of corruption were a sufficient ground for in-
quiry.
Sir H. HARDINGE said he had represented Durham
and other large places, but on his honour he never had any
knowledge o bribery having been practised. If the prin-
ciple now put forward were to be acted upon there was no
reason why the petition of five out of a whole constituency
should not be acted upon as well as that of ten. No Member
would then be safe in his seat. It was desirable that all per-
sons should know precisely what was the principle to be acted
upon.
CAYLEY said this petition was signed by five or six
Aldermen, by the Town Clerk, by a Clergyman, and by other
respectable individuals, not on one but on both sides of the
question. The parties, therefore, must be in a great measure
considered neutral.

Mr. L•OWTHER did not mean to impute blame, but
certainly the parties could not be considered neutral, for they
were all violently opposed to him. As to himself, he denied
that he ever paid sixpence towards the expenses of the
election.

An 60N. MEMBER said that in answer to the observation of
the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir H. Hardinge) he would merely
ny that the borough of Tavistock was just as ready to court
investigation as the borough of Launceston.
Sir R. HARDINGE sail he only alluded to Tavistock,
because he saw the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) opposite to
blm• As to his election for Launceston, he could assure the
Hon. Member that no election could be conducted with more
Purity than it had been.
After a few words from Lord EBRINGTON the motion
Was agreed to.
Adjourned at ten minutes past two.

ietc,ors
ROUSE OF LORDS, JuLr 14.
propr
theT he Duk,
v of CUNIBE RL AND presented a petition from
age
of land in the neighbourhood of Hanmore,
against the ureat Western Railway.
niversity of
The Duke OXFORD UNIVERSITY.
the U • of WELLINGTON presented a petition from
subscription Oxford, against the Bill for abolishing the
Lo of the 39 Articles when entering the University.
frd rd KENYON presented a petition to the same effect
t. ra the B. A.s and undergraduates of Oxford. The applica-
_loons had been made to the non-residents, and not one out of
I had refused to sign the petition..
The Earl of RADNOR wished to know from whom the ap-
plication for signatures proceeded ?
Lord KENYON said he believed that nothing more was
"tiveyed than an intimation that such a petition was in exist-
ence. He could assure the House that no influence had been
Used of a higher grade than those who signed the petition.
Tho Bishop of EXETER said his son was one of the peti-
tionejs
Vately , and he assured him that of the petition he was pri-
informed,because
beads of houses were against their petitioning.
, A Message from the Commons brought up the Seamen En-
listment Act, the Offences against the Person, and other bills.

NEWSPAPER STAMPS.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Bradford,
praying for the abolition of stamp duties on newspapers, and
4,,.180 petitions to the same effect from the Provost,
magistrates, and Town Council of the town of Greenock,
and Stoke-upon-Trent. Also one from the letter-press
printers of Westminster and London, to the number of 1,700,
praying for the reduction or abolition of the tax upon paper.
He did not wish to see the whole of the duty abolished ; he
Would be perfectly well satisfied with a reduction to one half,
because he knew it would do good to the public, and also
benefit the revenue of the country, as was proved by all ex-
perience, which he was sorry to see thrown away on the
Government.
The Noble Lord withdrew the petition in consequence of
its being found out to bo without a heading.
The Earl of ABERDEEN presented petitions from the
Merchants, &c., of Glasgow, Aberdeen, and Greenock against
any alteration in the timber duties.