The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-12 00:00:00

EXPORTS.

In reply to Mr. ANSTEY,
Mr. LABOUCHERE said a return had been
prepared by the Board of Trade with regard to
foreign tariffs, and to the tariffs of our own
colonies, and the reason it had not been laid on
the table was that some of the colonial returns had not
been received. The Secretary for Foreign Affairs had
sent instructions to our consuls abroad to send copies of
all foreign tariffs to the Foreign-office.
CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.
In reply to Mr. ADDEBLEY,
Mr. HAWES said that according to the letters patent
both Chambers in the Cape of Good Hope would be
elective; but he could not say what construction lawyers
might put on the Charter.

PUNISHMENT OF DEATH.
Mr. E WART, after presenting petitions in favour of
the abolition of the punishment of death from
Liverpool, Brighton, Shrewsbury, Sunderland, Glas-
gow, Colchester, Edinburgh, King's Lynn, the
Liverpool Peace Society, and other places, proceeded to
bring on his motion for leave to abolish the
punishment of death. He said he assuredly should
not again have brought forward that motion, if it were
not for the increasing conviction in his own mind of
the justice and expediency of the measure he advo-
cated, and unless he bad been convinced that there was
an increasing public opinion on this subject through-
out the country, and that that public opinion con-
tinued to receive accessions from day to day.
On former occasions this question had been
argued by figures, which had been triumphantly ap-
pealed to on both sides. He believed that on both sides of
this question it was a drawn battle; but be thought,
on the whole, the weight of statistics was on the side
of the abolitionists, and that the mitigation of the
punishment of death, wherever it had taken plug', had

pith
been attended not only without danger, but als°osld
security to society. On this occasion he -do.
take no statistical view of the subject. He bh"eld or
your to show that the present system of retaining
odds;,
t
nishment of death was inconsistent with that great
,„,„ t,
of all punishmnnt—nnmely, the certainty of Punis"--nper
which was laid down by Blackstone as being the Pr°,rii.
principle of all punishment, and with which no
mint could be said to he effectual for its egir• -fis
He believed if any gentleman would consult the
n he
which were laid upon the table of the IDlse„nsti
would find many cases of murder in which pained
had been acquitted, not because juries enterainOe
doubt of the crime, but a dread of the punishment' d st
would refer to the cases of Jane Mitchell,
Newcastle tritely.
b on the 20.11 of February, 1849; that ° , is
eecca Smith, tried at Devizes on the 9th of Aug9"of
th
same year; and Sarah White, tried at the 0;0 the
Criminal Court on the 10th of January, 1850.
two first cases the jury recommended th.%Prios°lltbet
to mercy in consequence of their antipat..7 it
punishment. In the last case the same feeling.iti.
ducod the jury to return a verdict of not guild'
When we have such cases of the law becoming P°`:-coat• i
for
its own severity, he thought the time vre-f Jur
or some interference. They bad the testimony ° belt
tices Coltman and Alderson that juries often gaveuteice
verdicts in the teeth of law and evidence in e°ll;eci,sod
of their great dislike to the punishmeny,;rour
tbeyond this the prisoners were oftentimes more ueiessel
being tried for murder rather than for a smaller:: beg'
b ecause they had a feeling that juries would actrir :feet
They had the opinion of Chief Justice Wilde. oti-ofibe
Wightman and Coltman, besides several meMberedestb;
Irish bar, against the punishment nt.
tinc
If eo
there was one thing on which he was more nenoich
than another, it was the purity of the motives fst
influenced
the Right Hon. Gentleman the Seeretandublit'
the Home Department, but it did happen that the robs;
were very much perplexed to know lb& so°
reason one criminal was reprieved by 'OO
another criminal punished. He was at a loss Otleisoll
on what ground the Right Honourable 0°404,
would oppose the motion which be now Prnoorteu
On a former occasion the Right Hon. Baronet suri'ai tly
capital punishment ought on the ground of a eetoftbe
finite idea, which he supposed existed in the 133iriLt See,
population on the subject. That, however. WS "tiott!,
the case. Another opinion which he formed wag,' if °A'
public were in favour of capital punishment, 7,1-I°'
were to call public meetings all over the touli„;iteli
take their opinion on the subject, he would find t• °.
were
hdecidedly opposed to retaining this 51:%-oliti
manf t. D
r.The
Johnson, lion.
toe t
pthuemismes ofstibou
capital punishment:—

Shall then these fears await, no wishes rise.
No prayers assail the justice of the skies? •
Enquirer cease-petitions still remain, ; est
Which Heaven may hear, but speak to 1135°
He moved for leave to bring in a Bill for the s
of the punishment of death. teeirrd;
Mr. HUME seconded the motion. It was illaidted
collection that punishment of death was ievers
trifling offences, and so they continued until:js oism'
oaths refused to find verdicts sanctioning suelfessue:i
ments. They saw the same occurring in cases
der. For five years ending in 1844 the nuneher_ds pet
of murder and acquitted on the ground of ilis'reforliii
twenty-three, and from 1845 to 1849 there *toed h.',
eight so acquitted; whilst last year sixteen bbv-dpesil/frol
murder were permitted on that plea to escape t'A 'fre;
ment of death. Look what improvement theYhf/t-e 0;1
by abolishing the punishment of flogging is -beeet
and the navy, and yet that mode of punishe'bodswf
been strongly advocated in that House. lie dlrs
efficacy of the capital punishment, and he 'was %s,"di
might do far more good to society by giving, P.:A Orty-'
pie of a merciful spirit on the part of the u°orlsSi°,,,;,
itself. That would tend to humanise the P°Pores''t
All should be taught that life was given by theii
and that no man had a right to take it awsPe ifeoia,ento
that revenge ought to be altogether exclude. ht
legislation, and that the safety of society cut see
to be the rule and guide, he should be bawl the
punishment of death abolished. :eke t
Sir G. GREY conceived it to be his duty to 00/eet
same course upon that which he had taken tWel.ls
adeie
tote
occasions when the Hon. Member for
Ewari) had brought forward his motion, nanie,l/,' oft
the House not to entertain a Bill for the abce-berte
punishment of death. The grounds upon which peSS•dt
this request were these : that he believed the of 10"
nance of that punishment as a part the ri
penal law was indispensably necessary for abet
terests of society, and imperatively demanded Elie 0,1
Bard to the protection and security of hums°, 'loofei
the community had a right to expect from ,itue„
ment and Legislature of this country.--(o'inesre'
They were not now, it should be remembered` veis,nr;
with those cases in which capital punishree°,"tett
flicted fur crimes of a comparatively light charged tlek
since the year 1841, not one person had sufferede tle!;
in this country, except for the crime of wilful s„,beqp
berate murder.-(Hear, hear.) The Hon• IgewiesheiP
Montrose said we had no right to take 1011,0,70,
wbich God had given; but upon that point he be Pv
to express a totallydifferent opinion. Did ; to ti)
Gentleman mean to say that if a person cam"lee'',o9
away his life he would not be justified by the 't per; if
of God and man in taking away the life of tus-jerd
in order to preserve his own?-(Hear, hear.), no.°
so, did it not necessarily fellow that the state 11P- lig'
fled in imposing capital punishment for the Pre,,veso;be
of innumerable lives; for he believed that theird'elcd
Lion of innumerable lives was the result of conti",-la°l
punishment of death. The abolition of this Is'eteissl
have the effect of increasing the destruction of be
life, and he contended that human life was °,.11-700:1
sacred by the maintenance of this law as a Pnilti-lilLeil
criminal code.-(Hear.) It was said that this,P,Telosf roe
had no terrors ; but, judging from the opiss2('-neis'-el
eons who were the most competent to form als 1;001
he believed that it was the most terrible, attes-d; tPci
dreaded, of all punishments that could be ieueeP-for8"01
he thought, therefore, it should be preserle"ditSdeno,
crime for which alone it was now inflicted-4bl'; e
wilful and deliberate murder.-(Hear, hear.) ;;;bllo"dte
Gentleman said that it was a most uncertain P°:„-seiltill,-ef
but test it as he might, he would find that it "n-v oSP
certain in its application and infliction than i'-e'ss_eee.ill
1)
penalty on the statute book. Out ofnineteed-
capital conviction last year fifteen were execs_ro-ereehif
regard to the remaining four, he was ne'in'e 'OO
with the particulars to explain the reasons ';
not being carried into effect. He could sg-furVeet.
House that the duty of the Secrete), °-tei
was not that which it was supposed: nu l
His
Honourable Friend seemed to eeded
it was a mere lottery whether the capital de
Ped lb
was carried into execution or not; that it -of kelt;
upon the indvidual character of the SecreterY easgf
who, if ha were a person of benevolent cheraetell'eelli"e
supersede the law altogether and refuse 10 s'fdioA,l
capital punishmf nt to be enforced. But aectine" efv,llo
his (Sir G. Grey's) view of the duty he had t°,nr jade.
he conceived that he should be grossly vlO of Ped-
trust reposed in him if he allowed the feelingsjni radli
volence to interfere with the execution of she hlit'll_dird
less after full consideration and communication " writ
judge he was satisfied that the case was such,.°oBlsi
justify, according to the principles upon whie% reSfe
ought to be executed, either a commutation or eve
00,
sion of the sentence.-(Cheers.) What eiroul,dhe 0,1
result if this punishment were abolished?
Gentleman said that revengeful and vindictive 10,10:0
ought not to enter into the execution cf,ibliatii,hil
but vindictive feelings formed an element
dw
nature, and the Hon. Gentleman must be an.,'„"-,,
vindictive passions existed in human nature. I.'„iteSid
Gentleman said that a murder was never e°',(l
without calling forth expressions of abhorrence Ineil:1ta
01.
cration against its perpetrator on the part of tb,.";e0,,,d,
But what was the effect now? The public saw tß:rrer,ol;
of justice towards the offender. They saw hisog:;" SPA
It was known there would be a public and '..-trbei
that the evidence for the prosecution and fe'l 0°011;
fence would be brought before ajury, and that Aides
.d(J
viction took place the law would inflict s Ph-13, ',if
punishment. But suppose this law were abelis'heoesn'ot
that it was generally known that a murder, -,014"01
atrocious or revolting She circumstances of it, fin-„tistled
be followed by the capital conviction and eiel'h"dtiSs.o' d
the criminal, then private revenge would be Isl.; efrdld
for that legal adjudication which now took Pcovd-•
personal violence, as the result of that reverige'ar‘
follow. Having quoted an extract from the mil- or alt
Committee of the House of Ccmmons in fa v°'-dref'
taining capital punishment for the crime of sour; to
Right Hon. Gentleman proceedei to say, in anasl;;raste"%'
Hume, that he denied that public opinion was lacif
continuance of the punishment. True, the ell".'„
bl
lc; eusbste di t owpaisn ion
easierW was in
abolition of the • - a
ginetfavpourmoefetiintsg
ianbofaliftoi°o:o,:iceof,yej
punishment of death-and he refereteio
it-than it was to get up a meeting in favour e, pee
isn g the punishment. Never in his expelle,;oo"-to
ecretary of State had any individual, or el," de3ol
of individuals, asked that the sentence °;.;00,,,11
passed upon a person convicted of the 13- rchtt
murder should be carried into execution. foreece
a thing had never been heard of. And there Ato
asked the House not to be led by the petitions CPIS
had been presented, by applications in particalsr,boll,
or by public meetings on the subject, to believ'eL stP9,
general feeling of the country was in favour Of wiees°,4l
lion of the punishment of death. He had strong
for believing that such was not the case, 6130011'
very great terror would be spread abroad thr°be
eB
the country if the crime of murder were not t° tbe
CO tio
lowed by the punishment of death. F°l.,
reasons he trusted the House would not asses'
de
motion. t 00, if
Mr. BRIGHT said, that though the subjee-ja `f1)014
discussion might not have made much progressed 13,44
House, yet that out of the House intelligent s;•,oe3Poil
men in vast numbers were of opinion that the irti
come when capital punishment might with 69,e„ of
propriety be abolished. Admitting, for the ssineis°,,-,i
guinent, that society had the right to take aw°Jeatte
life, ho would ask, was it politic and expedient t'bt la've
punishment of death should continue? The 1"011 ees
Baronet had told the House that there was now "bOtoe
crime punihhahle with death in this count*. ;.„ee tff
must be aware that within the last 90 years, at
°f ibo
accession of George 111., the criminal cecleesber,eil
country had excluded capital offences to the eu-et
not less than 240. It was found that the wholo.ol, toi
brutal and cruel system was an entire failure: 1,01
cordingly, during the last 90 years capital eir:ll.-e sect of
of
been reduced from 240 to one. But le- o".e.
P. were
eceocri
now than we were 50 or 60 years ago on 0 n'io'
the mildues of the criminal code?-(Cries sed
hear.") The Right lion. Baronet bad drawn
_.,°„eo sty
tare of what would happen if the punishment 11000 n 0
fished. Let him remind the Right Honourable ef'"
man that the same arguments were used, s'coboll:4le'
more fearful picture still of the consequences 0^ ae 0
trig it was exhibited by the Right lioeourataeee Yee(
man who filled the office of Home Secretary aucor
ago ; but these was no ream whatever r

thfit
person and property were more secure now than
fl , flues this i
sanguinary punishment was so mercilessly n-
When the R;get Honourable Baronet made the
same speech next year that he had made to-night, he
hoped he would add another branch to the subject, and
live
,_ the House some particulars relative to the effects of
the abolition of capital punishment in other countries, in
order to show that human life and property had been
rendered less secure in those countries than they were
4t
the time that capital punishment was in
'Nue. In Tuscany, in Belgium, in Prussia, and
believed in Russia also, capital punishment
hel was
tactically abolished, and it would in all pro-
abihtY be soon put
esa S an end to in the Ameri-
ttotes of Michigan, Ohio, New York, and Massa-
usetts. The Hon. Member then proceed to argue that
e▪ prac'ice of banging did not deter from the commis-
of
the crime of murder. Soon after the spring eg-
:te In the year 1844, four men were hanged for murder
titilenagh, Tipperary; but within one week from that
efi murder was perpetrated on the high road close to
'mitt t
t°rin, and in the course of six months of the
.follow.-
e Setunan and winter 16 murders were committed in
nte same neighbourhood, 16 attempts at murder, and 52
inses of firing into dwelling-houses. Again, was there
hl Yeomen to suppose that the hanging of the poisoners
of, °gland had in any degree deterred from the crime
tleseniag? For his part, looking at the character of
•
kuPetrsons by whom this crime was committed, he
tile gut they might fairly come to the conclusion. that
bi infliction of capital punishment was not likely to
hity,ree the effect which it was desirable that it should
tie there was one view of the clues-
", lith,,"tioh was altogether fatal to the argument
eittit" tight Honourable Gentleman, and that was the
the ,erdivary inequality of the punishment, and
Lae,Yitable injustice which arose from that inequad-
-01 In 1849 a woman named Mary Ball was hanged
innrentry for poisoning her husband, and another
ebilaan Wall hanged at Devizes for poisoning her. infant
son.,;„,_4_, third woman, named Charlotte Harris, was
be eZa Of murder and not hanged; she happened to
ebili:Plent, and was respited until the birth of her
Ilsron V to have hanged her then the Right Ho
Hon.
Ith ichei thought would fail in produing the good results
%bile,es seemed to anticipate from hanging other per-
/40 Again, there was the case of Mary Ann Hunt,h
tee i.:844 convicted of the murder of her mistress.
40eaeen11ainPregnant, though an unmarried woman, ang'thleet
minute
~01 the sentence was respited, and subsequent y
!IteeTk• But a practice like this was not in accord-
he tilt the principle upon which punishment should
dad vet °. It was playing fast and loose with the law
lth the lives of the unfortunate criminals who came
• aßithillinsthe operation of the law. Mary Ann Hunt's case
4holea-4, Get an exactly parallel one to that of Sarah
'Rind"' who murdered her mistress and was hanged at
alsno.; under the most awful and appalling circum-
of h:. kary Ann Thomas was tried to be coaxed out
a oat ged cell hy the clergyman, and failing that was drag-
°f it by a policeman, carried to the scaffold
hin
nealt-,'„. of screaming, and there executed before t e
!Nth,' many thousands of persons. The other.
i,ertt,,,_was not hanged at all. There was no dif-
%lN; between their crimes, but there was the utmost
aobeernFe Possible between their punishments. When
klbje„alllg some time ago with a learned judge on the
I,kJed,-; the learned functionary told him never to take
fat oPinion on the abolition of capital punishment,
4111gf4'ney had done so they would have been still
Yeinl g for sheep-stealing and forgery. Having for
!Nestle" the System in operation, they believed it to be
tor tart, and defended it accordingly. Let them not
a t the innocent were sometimes hanged. There '
,141tatre el, taeea:e° of Michael Howard, who was hanged in
'e3ses 41 September, 1847, on the evidence of wit-
eesBi„ °O, on the trial of another Michael Howard, his
le the following spring, also gave
toetstimony on
he woolthe latter was likewise sentenced death; and
,the afh,•" have been executed but that it was proved that
wilie-"eases had perjured themselves on the first trial,
hegel% 'exulted in the execution of the first Michael
ro,ed• The respite for the other only arrived two days
teNthe time fixed for his execution. The uncertain
.the evidence on which capital convictions
of eietinl„ obtained, as shown in the recent case
41.4 erritt, charged with poisoning her husband,
Nit), the man
Denny, charged with murdering his
hrtt bet was another element of wrong. It would be
11Losilt,iler, to adopt the system of punishment which
fri tt! 1783 mentioned as being more effectual
Zahlteno-taLIK in the repression of crime than capital pu-
nschlad been—viz., imprisonment f)r life, with
Zh, he .":IPPing; and though he was no advocate of the
'milt et-. still thought that that system was preferable to
thltt ftialaLiag in this country. It would be easy to show
mesa ;"ectt of deterring from. the commission of crime
capital punishment was the most untenable
thetteeventtathle•he execution of Rush, at Norwich, did not
tjoe °f e: Ilan Gleeson from murdering several mem-
-1114 yin Liverpool. While the country was
h„elistlg with
„'
that affair, and in a very short time subse-
Fri emiwhile Gleeson's affair was still fresh in the
Pnci' the Mannings were not deterred from mur-
;o ()
4;11, the nor. What they were bound to do was,
People that human life was sacred—that
leth °mei not to raise his arm against his fellow man; but
1V ::); cb) se they must withdraw from men's eyes
41 of a law which proved to them that human
tainit 44,,et_eacred.
to peel f';."EY explained that what he had stated with
alge 14t-ilLe_feorring to the judges was, that he referred
*iv. fitly n doubtful points,. but he never implied
hh 4484 gree of responsibility rested upon the judge
r,,C)111114- to the execution of the sentence, but solely
e44nr, le,ererary of State.
Ofteerdi with‘leuiril, I R believed that human life might be se-
al, 21is. [laving recourse to taking away the lives
tesejeested Experience proved that neither amongst
ther`pf deav°l' the uneducated classes did the unish-
it' Tote ean operate as a preventive to crime.. He
hit'°litior; 71 en the House to assent to the motion for
eta'a tlogre; teeling assured that by so doing the would
, Anted th, iiilmPair the
.security which the law threw
Tira• EW4,,,, the subject.
e "
ied.
For
e divided, when there appeared—
,the Motion 40
appeared—
Against it •"
46
MaPrlt
* • ' ' . •••
Y against the motion ... 6
ttg 1", 0, THE CHARTER.
of CON
Win • NOR moved a resolution to the follow-
the th That this House, recognising the great
the Leh'llle fir labour is the source of all wealth; that
his n-uutiret %the only legitimate source of power; that
t;wn bnould be the first partaker of the fruits of
the;reaey, :atrY; that taxation without representation
Itee'escure„'" should be resisted; and believing that
elblereeee 0.131 the country would be best developed by
Pets !inc....! representatives chosen by the labouring.
hit ults; t`7l°Junetion with those who lire byother industrial
Satiense eadt (in recognition of the above great truths)
sleet' entitledPtil the principles embodied in the docue
„iee„ the
Alt 0,
People's
Charter—namely, annual
arealble~d~ suffrage, vote by ballot, Equal elect-
4etabll ".
qs.,, Property qualifications, and payment of
thei cis 8, Ile regretted to see the Ministerial
It lthltt if .ttraPty, and he begged to remind
kre.„" D; "ie people were tranquil on the subject
anee-ai rl,:ea,t moment, while trade was pros-
'A6Bl' °Y no means certain that they would re-
p4-aet to en ri time of depression arrived. It wa
procotuipPoint to the relative proportions of the re-
thi, ,e the n for England, Ireland, and Scotland, to
441 eeessitof
e Ybe d. Y a change. Their attention might.
lic‘,oljtte., irected to the example of France, where
hiteeurthat pl despotism had been estib-
61e.is ehattcLec ththoue of the President and the Legis-
freal' began::: were alike protected by soldiers with
finedgreti,.' • No such results need be apprehended
was e,,,uifi the charter in England, where the public
IE4I his in'n't'ig_btened and ripe for free institutions. He
frcnn the
would fail, as it had failed in former
th„, eve. e opposition of a Ministry backed by capi-
e .
%hie king r
eitts.), to oppose any mea,ure antagonistic to
linbi.et to He knew that, interesting as the
4041 c,
am etch his
motion referred was to the
be hie would every class out of doors, the
I,ifo.ad an toportProibably be counted out before
Wealeturthe. Altnisttletly't antf concluding, and he could
equire no the House that the people
„freeire wh;_h h stronger
e.„"tihito Proof of the necessity for the
rna'kue theew there to advocate. His only object
refusunderstur richer, and the poor rich. He
the conduct of the Protectionists in
-oir ng
their support.. to the motion of the Hon. Mem-
tlie 41,j:rest Sure
power • tilterai fray the other night for the extension of
ion the h
b,v°ted age it,t4ds of tn.
Th Mat Look aat hey were for placing all
%lid 13 Wienssttatieditig elms, and yet to a man they
wh: Bath for t the result of the present aye-
'ha, And theY would' "ch
°I. Yorkshire,
returned one Tory and one
:t itself could ,„ no hat a house thus divided
not stand
. What he desired to see
Plllistfir°ollnlier rtheqeeliarnadnasehauld be cultivated according to the
*era t:ge; and h_ ats, and not according to political
ithport become the Was convinced that if the Charter
law of the land they would cease to
Portin. agricilltural produce, and, in fact, become an ex-
Klee: C°Watt
A 4 thp Souse,Y• The Hon. Member was continuing to --411:1when
opalon
ranger,:".•MßEit moved that the House be counted.
kt went were ordered to withdraw, and there being
If.ptuft-4z,ne members present, the House adjourned
Eight o'clock till to-morrow (this day).

SUNDAY POST. .
are
il.''''''', 1.10 TRH EDITOR OF THE TIMEa
A h residence being 120 miles from Dublin,
~.,
net
t esh,. only the mortification of having all my
days and
4rotti C'n(lence detained from England two
14 b :„Jublin one by the new Post-office regulations,
ef:e`g instances Placing me in a worse positionetthroa!
herkilorftilvieYe were in operation—in short,
.r
Year,,! civilization to the state of things existing 60
blitil °, but, in addition, I have to witness the
ce..?l, travelling by my gate on every Sunday
Pcsaill,'"lll employing men and horses without any
/'o4",,u'antage, as the mail-bags are not opened.
atairse e exercised a great influence over the
)"011 east
this unhappy kingdom, and in this instance.
If oasibl, In but confer a benefit on it by replacing us,
ceatu '0) at least in the same position as in the last
, ry.
ouly 7 Your constant reader,
GALVABESIS.
110 v ...............................,
Int S 7;llUtiql. ---;77, A-1-7---4.--The p's°following is the
flee-sit;4ol,,
11%
1,...ere 011,„Peorliththe stone -The
.placed by the Earl of
e grave of Addison in Westminster Abbey
lulrfeT,ePiristartea..b,3, Tickell. The Montague alluded to was
" of Halifax :—.,
"N
to 41- 4 ADDISON.
Sittee thZ4ese cha‘rabers, where the mighty rest,
Nor eer'wir foundaio, came a nobler guest ;
A fairer .8 to the bowers of bliss conveyed
Oh, go1;31?,t, or more welcome shade.
Alid else"pr ever, take this long adieu,
l) In peace neat thy lov'd Montague.
c, b
" Born, 1672—Died, 1719.
'artropi 41 0 Elltatatre) P.C.; 1849,"

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.

(From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.)
WEDNESDAY, JULY 10.
MARRIAGES BILL.

Order for Third Reading read ; Motion made and Question
proposed, " That the Bill be now read the third time :"
Amendment proposed, to leave out the word " now," and at
the end of the Question to add the words " upon this day
three months :" - Question put, " That the word now' stand
part of the Question." The House divided :

, - MAJORITY—AYES, 144.
Ahdy, Sir T. N. Grenfell, Charles W. Price, Sir R
Adair, R. Shafto Grey, Sir G. Rawdon, Colonel
Aglionby, IL A. Harris, Richard Repton, G. W. J.
Anstey, T C. liatchell, John Ricardo, John L.
Bagshaw, John Hayter, W. G. Ricardo, Osman
Baines, M. T. Headlam, T. E. Rice, E. R.
Baring, Sir F. Heald, James Rich, Henry
Bating, Thomas Heathcote, G. J. Rohartes, T. J.
Barnard, Edward G. Heywood, James Romilly, Colonel
Barrington, Vis. Heyworth, L. Romilly, Sir John
Bass, M. T. Hobhouse, T. B. Rumbold, C. E. i
Bellew, R. M. Howard, Lord E. Salwey, Colonel
Benbow, John Howard, C.W.G. Sandars, G.
Berkeley, Henry F. Hudson, George Scholefleld, William
Birch, Sir T. Jackson, William Sidney, Alderman
Blewitt, Reginald Johnstone, Sir J. Smith, John Abel
Bright, Joan Jolllffe, Sir N. G. Smith, John B.
Brocklehurst, J. Kershaw, James Smith, M. T.
Brockman. E. D. King, P. J. Smyth4John G.
Brotherton, J. Lennard. T. B. Somers, J. P.
Brown, H. Lewis, Sir T. Somerset, Captain
Brown, William Littleton, E. R. Spooner, Richard
Bruce, Lord E. Locke, Joseph Staunton, Sir G.
Bunbury, E H. Loveden, Pryse Strickland, Sir G.
Buxton, Sir E. Mackinnon, W. Stuart, Lord D.
Carter, J. B. Mangles, R. D. Stuart, Lord J.
Chaplin, W. J. Marsh 11, J. G. Thompson, Colonel
Clay, James Marshall, William Thornely, Thomas
Cobden, R. Martin, C. W. Tollemache, F. J.
Cockburn, Alex. Masterman, John Tufnell, H.
Coke, E. K. Matheson, Colonel Vivian, J. H.
...
Copeland, Ald. Milner, W. H. Waddington, H. S.
Crawford, W. S. Milnes, R. M. Wakley,lThomas
Currie, Raikes Mitchell, T. A. Wall, C. B.
Denison, Edmund Molesworth, Sir W. Walmsley, Sir J.
D'Eyncourt, T. Moody, C. A. Watkins, Colonel
Dodd, ii. Morris, David Wawn, J. T.
Ebrington, Lord Mostyn, E. M. Westhead , J. P.
Ellis, John . Muntz, G. F. Willcox, Brodie
Elliot, John E. Noel, G. J. Williams, John
Evans, William O'Brien, J. Wilson, James
Ferguson, Sir R. Osborne, Ralph Weod, Sir Charles
Fitzwilliam, G. W. Owen, Sir John Worcester, Marquis
Foley, J. H. Paget, Lord George Wrightson, W. B.
Forster, Matthew Parker, John Wykl, James
Fortescue, J. W. Pechell. Sir G. Wyylll, Marmadeke
Fox, W. J. Pelham, A. D. TELLERS.
Galway, Viscount Pendarves, E. W. Wortley, J. S.
Greene, John Pilkington, James Hill, Lord Mama