The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-05 00:00:00

GRANTHAM.

The Town Clerk of Grantham was then called in, and examined by
Sir Charles Wetherell.
Of what members dons the Corporation of Grantham consist Y—Of
the Mayor, Corporation, Aldermen, and their Clerk.
How many common freemen are there in the town of freemen ?-4:io.
Is there an estate belonging to the freemen of that corporation exclu.
sive!), ?—There is.
What is the present amount of that estate?—About 1481. a year.

Are there any leases upon it ?--No ; but there are certain individuals
who have long licences upon it.
Have you heard that the corporation of this borough have expressed a
wish to give their votes in a different manner to that which they have
done ?—Certainly not.
Were you present at the hall when the Commissioners came there ?
Yes, I should say so, when I was under examination for the best part cf
two days.

You gave them all the information you could give P—Yes.
Did you hear the inhabitants profess any disapprobation at this meet.
ing P—No, I did not.

Is there a proposal to divide the part which is now the jurisdiction
of the borough, and add it to the county ?—There is a proposal to take
it away.
Is there a private debt that affects the whole ?—Yes. I believe to
the extent of upwards of 5601.
Have the Corporation always applied their funds fairly, discreetly,
conscientiously, and honestly P—They hare.

The witness was then ordered to withdraw.
Lord BROUGHAM—Are you now going to cal another witness
Mr. KNIGHT—Yes, my Lord.
Lord BROUGHAM—Then we will adjourn ti•e consideration of this
until six o'clock, as there are one or two Peers to ba sworn; and after
that we will go on with the divorce case.

The Earl of SHAFTESBURY resumed his seat on the Woolsack
shortly after 5 o'clock.
The Earl of ALBEMARLE presented a petition from Doncaster in
favour of the Prisoners' Council Bill.

Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Doncaster, in favour
of the Corporation Reform Bill, signed by 020 persons, which was
much more numerously than the one which had been presented against
the Bill from the same place. Also one from Bath in favour of the
Bill much more numerously signed, but that was only because the
place was larger.
The Processions Act, Ireland, was read a second time on the mo.
lion of Lord Duncannon, and ordered to be committed to-morrow.
Lord FARNHAM complained of the state of the law respecting the
elections far Irish Representative Peers. At the late election two Peers
had voted, without being duly qualified.
Lott] DUNCAN NON was glad that the matter had been mentioned;
it was very desirable that the law upon the subject should be declared.
Lord BROUGHA M had very considerable doubts upon the subje?,r,
and thought that a short declaratory Bill should be introduced, in order
to settle the matter.

Lord FARNHAM moved for a copy of the writ issued for the
eli,ctionyf a Peer in th:, room of the late Lord Longford.

Lord PO WIS presented a petition from the Corporation
of Shrewsbury against the Municipal Corporation Reform
Bill.

THE EVIDENCE.

Counsel and witnesses were then called in, and the bear.
ing of evidence re,umed against the Corporation Reform Bill,

SUTTON COLDFIELD.

Mr.. Holbeach stated that he was deputy steward, under
de. high steward, Lord Middleton, of the..borcugh of Sutton
Coldfield ; he had been for forty years acquainted with the
boil ugh ; the real property of the Corporation amounted to
between no/. and 900/. a-year ; the Corporation also pos-
sessed nearly 30,000/. in Consols, part of which were charity
funds, held in trust by the Corporation; that part of the Re-
port of the Commissioners which stated that the inhabitants
were not satisfied with the distribution of the Corporation
funds, and that there was good reason for dissatisfaction with
the management of the corporate revenues, was not accurate.
He had twice attended the Commissioners to give evidence in
contradiction of evidence taken by the Commissioners, but it
was not put upon the face of the evidence.
• Mr. KNIGHT took occasion to state to their Lordships
that he felt a very difficult task had been imposed upon coun-
sel, which he much !doubted their ability adequately to dis-
charge. In their attempt to do so, counsel at least would re-
quire the utmost indulgence of the House.
Mr. Brown, the warden of Sutton-Coldfield—He had heard
the evidence of the preceding witness, and believed it to be
true ; there were five resident Magistrates in the town, of whom
four were members of the Corporation.
Mr. Bedford, a Clergyman, resident in Sutton- Coldfield--
He had heard the evidence of the two preceding witnesses, and
completely concurred in it. He had been resident in the town
for thirteen years, and was not aware of any ground of dissa-
tisfaction against the Corporation. He approved generally of
the working of the system in Sutton-Coldfield, but he should
like to see one or two improvements—among others, the an-
nual publicity of the Corporation accounts. Such a publica-
tion, he believed, would tend most materially to remove any
discontent against the Corporation. He believed that, gene-
rally, no men could conduct themselves more honourably or
honestly than the members of the Corporation. The dissatis-
faction of the town had principally arisen from the nature of
the proceedings in Chancery for the regulation of the Colleges,
and other corporate property.
By the Marquis of SALISBURY—There were about 700
houses in Sutton-Coldfield, of Which about 200 might be 10/.
householders.