The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-02 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,—ln your report of the debate on Thursday
evening the result of the division is expressed in
these terms :
For the second reading of the bill
For Lord John Russell's resolution 330

Majority for the resolution 39
As this ;node of stating the case is calculated to
give an erroneous impression as to the real meaning
of that division, I beg your permission to correct it.
I am one of the 330 who voted against the Govern-
ment, but -I did not vote in favour of Lord John's
resolution. I simply voted against the question
put by the Speaker—" that the words proposed to
be left out" (i:e., that " this bill be now read a
second time.") should " stand part of the ques-
tion." In saying " No" to this proposition, I did
not say " Aye" to any other; consequently I did
not affirm Loid To'in's resolution. Indeed, as soon
as the first division was over I left the house, in
' order not to vote upon it at all. That resolution was
put in a substantive form after the division on the
Ballot, and was carried without a division. I have
thought it necessary to be thus explicit, because I
well know that great misconception is apt to occur,
not only in the minds of the public,' but even in
those of their representatives, as to the precise
meaning of the questions" put by the Speaker,
and of the divisions consequent .thereon. I have
frequently seen members in the utmost perplexity
as to whichlobby
.they were to go into, from not
hav,ing fp,ripp4 distpct idea of the meaning of the
question" proposed to them.---I am, sir, your obe-
dient servant, X.

' . TO THE EDITOR OF TUE MORNING HERALD. .
Sir,---When Lord herby was defeated in 1852 it was by
a compact entered into by the Whigs with the 'llish Bri-
gade (and the Russian war was the result), who I believe
number at present about 40 seats; and it will be well that
the people should see on the present occasion, if they have,
or how many of them, banded with the new firm of John,
Pam, John, and Co,;* for a similar purpose, and I hope,
sir, you will give your readers a list of them separately to-
morrow.

In 1852 they voted to "a »lan" against Lord Derby;
then, as now, no Meat; but a factions manoeuvre.-:-Yours,
April 1. ANTI-DESPOTISM AND JESUITISM.

Juhn Ijuk,sell, Pain, John Bright.

. . ,
APOTHECARIES HALL.—The following gentle-
,' men having passed ;The:. necessary examinations, were ad-
, mitt:,d Licentiates of the Society of ApothecarieS ata meet-
ing of the court of examiners onThursday, the 31st March.
—Messrs. Edward, Cheshire, Ilirmingharn ; Claude Clarke
Claremont, Camden Town ; John Alfred Illingworth,
Mainder, NeWport, Monmouthshire; Edwin Sparhawke,.
Jotham ; Alfred Lower, Morley Hall, Whaborne, Dorset-
shire; David Henry Ogden, Skipton-in-Craven ; John
Cooper, Quennell; George Janes Symes Saanders,. Char-
mouth ; Charles Joseph _Oliver Smith, Keyworth, Notting-
ham ; Francis Smith, Walter Stephen Smith, Sheffield;
'Arthur Edward Woolrych; and Otho Francis Wyer, Lea-
minitou Priers: ;.
At the Court 'of Common Council, yesterday, it
was announged that the Emperor Napoleon, as a mark of his
appreciation of the flattering reception which his Imperial
Majesty and the Empress Eugenie experienced on their
visit to the city during the shrieValty of Sir 11.,Muggeritige
and Sir C. D. Crossley, had bestowed on these gentl2tnen
the cross of the Legion of Honour.