The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-15 00:00:00

MAJORITY-NOES, 84.

Allis, J. P.—Cambriegeshire Hodgson, Rd.—Berwict.con-Tweed
Antrobus, Edmund—Surrey Hope, G. W.—Southampton
Arkwrigh, George—Leorn.nder Howard, P. H.—Carlisle
Arundel and Surrey, Earl of— Jermyn, Earl—Bury, Sullislk
Arundel Knatchbull, Sir K—East Kent
Begot, Hon. W.—Denbighshire Lawson, A.—Knaresborough
Saline, H. D.—Honiton Lincoln, Earl of—Northumpton-
Baring. W. B.—Thetford shire, South
Bentinck, Lord G.—Lynn Lockhart, William—Lanarkshire
Boldero, Henry G.—Chippenham Lowther, Colonel— Westmoreitnd
Borthwick, P.—Evesham Lygon, Major-Gen. Hon. H. B.—
Bottleld Beilah—Ludlow Worcestershire West.
Brarnston, T. W.—Essex South M.Geachy, F.—Honiton
Broadley, Henry—East Yorkshire Mackenzie, W. F.—Peeblesshire
Bruce, Lord E.—Marlborough M'Niell, D.—Argyleshl.re
Buckley, E.—Nevreastle.on-Type Manners, Lord C.—N. I.eicestersh
Clerk, Sir G.—Stamford Manners, Lord J.—Not vark
Clive, Viscount—Salop, North Masterman, J.—London
Colborne, Hon. W.—Richmond Maxwell, J. P.—Cavan County
Corry, Hon. H. L.—Tyrone Co. Neville, R.—Windsor
CriPps, Witliam—Cirencester Nicholl, Right Hon. Six John
Danner, Hon G.—Portarlington Northland,Viscount—Dungannon
Denison, E B.—West Yorkshire O'Brien, A.—N.Northarnptonshire
Dickinson, F. H.—Somerset W. Oswald, Alex.—Ayrshire
Douglas, Sir C. E.—Warwiek Packe, C. W.—Leicester, South
Duke, ir James—Boston Pakington, J. S.—Droitwich
Egerton, W. Tatton—Cheshire Peel, Rt Hon. Sir R.—Tamworth
Eliot, Lord—Eat Cornwall Peel, Col. Jonathan—Huntingdon
Escott, B. —Winchester Pringle, lAlexander—Selkirkahire
Flower, Sir J.—Thetford Rash leigh, W.—East Cornwall
Ffoßiott, John—SligolCo. Renton, G. W.—St. Alban's
Forester, Hon. G.—Wenlock Rushbrooke, Colonel—Suffolk
Fox. S. L.—lpswich Scott, Hon. F.—Roxburghshire
Gardner, J. D. Shaw, Right Hon. F.—Dublin On
Gaskell, James Milnes—Wenlock Sibthorp, Colonel—Lincoln
Gladstone, W. E.—Newaric-on Somerset,Lord G.—Monwsouthsh.
Trent Sutton, C. M.—Cambridge
Gordon, Hon. W.—Aberdeenshire Tennent, J. E.—Belfast
Goulburn, Right Hon. ll—Cam- Thesiger. F.—Woodstock
bridge University Trencn. Sir F.—Scarborough
Greene, T. G.—Lancashire Wortley, J. A. S. —Buteshire
Hamilton, W.—Newport, Isle W Woralay,_ Lord—Lincolnahlre
Hamner, Sir J.—Hull Young, John—Cavan Co.
Hardinge, Right Hon. Sir TELLERS.
Launceston • • Fremantle, Sir T.—Buckingham
Henley, J. W.—Oxfordshire Baring, H. B.—Marlborough
Herbert, Hon.l.S.—South Wilts

STATE OF THE STREETS.—Tuesday the Court of
Sewers, Guildhall, met at the usual hour for the transaction
of business, Mr. Alderman Gibbs in the chair. At the last
meeting of the Commissioners the Court directed summonses
to be issued to Mr. Gore for having neglected to have cleansed
about 200 streets within the City of London, by which he had
incurred penalties varying from 20s. to 40s. for each neglect.
The inspectors, Messrs. Bowler, Paynter, and Mortimer, were
called in, and also Mr. Gore. The latter, however, was re-
presented by his foreman. Mr. Dawse, the chief clerk, then
read the !reports, from which it appears that Mr. Bowler's
complaints for neglect amounted to sixteen, Mr. Mortimer's to
thirty, and Mr. Paynter's to sixty-seven ; in addition to
these they each had second summonses for a number of the
streets. The foreman, in reply to the various summonses,
said that he had been but a few days in the contractor's em-
ploy ; his predecessor, whose duty it was to see that the
streets were kept cleansed, had, without notice, left Mr.
Gore. The neglect arose from that person not doing his
duty, for Mr. Gore had authorised him to put on a sufficient
number of men to clean every part of the city ; and as the
same powers were given to him (the foreman), he could
assure the Commissioners that neither they (the inspectors),
nor the 'public, should in future have to complain. Mr.
Williams observed, that 'looking at the conduct of the late
foreman, and the promise that no further grounds of com-
plaint should exist, he thought the Court would deal fairly
between the contractor and the public if it inflicted, instead
of double and treble penalties, only a single one. Mr.
Christie thought that the neglect was intentional, for it cer-
tainly appeared to him that the contractor saved. more money
by neglecting the streets than what the, penalties would
amount to. Mr. Alderman. Gibbs then put the question that
but one penalty be imposed for the neglect which had taken
place in cleansing the streets on Saturday, Monday, and
Tuesday last, which was carried unanimously. The amount
of penalties inflicted by this decision is about 1201.
A MOST EXTRAORDINARY NURSE.—III the room
in which dinner was laid out, a fine-robust-looking woman
was walking up And down, carrying on her arm an oblong
basket, covered with a cloth, out of which there proceeded
at intervals little plaintive cries and whinings, not unlike
those of a very young child. This puzzled me a good deal,
because the basket was so small that any infant contained
in it must have been a Lilliputian phenomenon, fit only to
exhibit at a fair. The riddle, however, was soon solved.
The nurse—for such she was—sat down in a corner, took
a little, coffee-coloured dog out of her basket, and began, very
gravely, to suckle this extraordinary nursling. She was a
peasant woman, from the province of Santander, and was
proceeding to Madrid, where she was engaged as wet-nurse.
Fearful of being disqualified by the interval between leaving
her own infant and joining her foster-child, she had provided
herself with this canine substitute.—Gautier's Travels in
Spain