The Sun.
London, England, 1828-03-04 00:00:00

NEW BRUNSWICK THEATRE.

Sir J. NEWPORT.—As I see the Right Hon. Secre-
tary for the Home Department at present in his place, I
will take the liberty of asking him whether it is the inten-
tion of Government to propose to Parliament any measure
which shall tend to guard the public against the recurrence
of such a calamity as that which has recently taken place
at the New Brunswick Theatre? It appears to rue that
the parties authorized by law to grant a licence to such
places of public entertainment, should be compelled to as-
certain the stability •f the buildings for which the licence
is asked, before they proceed to grant it.
Mr. PEEL said, that a petition had recently been pre-
sented to him, :requesting him to undertake the revision of
the Building Act. With respect to the observations of the
Right Hon. Baronet, relative to the necessity of obtaining
by some legislative enactment security against the recur-
rence of such a calamity as had recently taken place, he
thought that the Right Hon. Bart. would agree with him
in thinking that the House ought to discuss the propriety
of such a measure after due deliberation, and not upon the
impulse of the moment, when their feelings must naturally
be excited. He assured the Right Hon. Bart. that he had
not neglected the subject to which his question referred.
He had already had it under his consideration ; but he
thought, that it would be better not to legislate upon it till
they had learned the cause of the recent catastrophe.

Mr. TENNYSON asked at what time Government in-
tended to introduce their promised measure for the altera-
tion of the Corn Laws?

Mr. PEEL could not, in the absence of his Right Hon.
Friend (the President of the Board of Trade), give a de-
terminate answer to that question. He had no doubt that
his Right Hon. Friend, as soon as he was re-elected, would
give the lion. Member the information he required.
On the motion of Mr. BramEs, a new writ was issued
for County of Longford, Lord FORBES, the present
Member, having since his election accepted the office of
Comptroller of the Household to the Lord Lieutenant of
Ireland.

On the motion of Mr. Dawson, the House went into a
Committee on the Stamp Duties' Act.
In the Committee, Mr. DAWSON observed, that the
object of the present measure was to amend such parts of
the Stamp Duties' Act, as related to the levying of duties
on the insurances against fire. The present measure was
necessary in order to meet an evasion of the duty which
was practised in Scotland. It is the custom with insurance
offices there, to enter into insurances upon separate portions
of the same premises, and to pay the duty upon all the
insurances effected as one. Thus a saving is made by them,
and the duty is in some degree evaded. The Hon. Gentle-
man moved that leave be given to bring in a Bill for the
further regulation of the issues of stamp duties upon
insurances.

After a few words from Mr. Woon (of Preston), who
trusted that the duty payable upon small receipts would be
abolished, leave was given to bring in.the Bill.
EAST RETFORD DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
Upon the motion of Mr. TENNYSON, the order of the
day for the ilouse to resolve itself into a Committee on the
East Retford Disfranchisement Bill was then read.
Mr. G. BANKES, in pursuance of the notice which be
had given, moved that the inhabitants and freemen of East
Retford be heard by Counsel against the Bill.
Mr. TENNYSON conceived that this motion, which
he did not rise to oppose, wits premature, if not unprece-
dented. The House had resolved to go into a Committee
on the Bill, and his Honourable Friend proposed that
Counsel should be heard against the resolution of that House.

Mr. I). W. HARVEY considered the application pre-
mature.
Mr. PEEL was anxious to afford every fair opportunity
and facility to the petitioners to be heard, and he was
therefore of opinion that they should not adhere to any
precise and particular period for the hearing of Counsel.
Mr. W. W. WYNN conceived that Counsel should not
be heard until all the evidence was laid before the House.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was for lea;in,,rit at
the option of the petitioners whether they should be non,
heard by their Counsel, or whether they should postpone it
to a future period.
Mr. BATLEY was against hearing Counsel until all
the witnesses were examined.

Lord J. RUSSELL would leave the matter at the op-
ion of the petitioners.

Mr. PEEL conceived it would be hard to say to the
petitioners that they should be only heard once, and that,
no matter what might arise hereafter, their Couusel should

not have another opportunity upon a future occasion to ad-
dress the Committee respecting any new points in evidence.
Mr. CALCRAFT would leave the matter at the discre-
tion of Counsel.
Mr. W. W. WYNN conceived that the question now
before the House was not whether Counsel should be
heard, but whether the House would resolve itself into a
Committee on the Bill.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said a few words amidst
cries of " Spoke."
The SPEAKER called the attention of the House to
the state of the case. According to the order of the day,
the preamble of the Bill was now to be read. The peti-
tioners could only be heard against the enactments of the
Bill in Committee. After the preamble was read, then the
course would be to move that the petition be referred to the
Committee, who would decide whether they should, as was
customary, allow the petitioners to be heard before them by
Counsel.
Mr. BANKES shaped his motion accordingly.
After a few words from Mr. BARING, Mr. SvKas, and
Lord ALTHORP, the House resolved itself into a Committee
on the Bill ; Mr. ROBERT Gonnosi in the chair.
It was then moved and carried, that Counsel be called in.
Mr. Denman accordingly appeared at the bar.
The CHAIRMAN inquired for whom he appeared?
Mr. Denman replied, that he appeared on behalf of the
petitioners against the Bill.
BANKES moved th a Counsel be now heard.
Mr. TENNYSON having risen, Counsel was ordered to
withdraw. The Hon. Meissner proceeded to oppose the
hearing of Counsel at the present stage, and until all the
evidence had been heard.
Mr. LITTLETON argued to the same effect. The
House should pursue a similar course here, as in the case
of private bills.
Mr. PEEL was not for limiting the petitioners as to the
time when they were to be heard against the Bill.
Mr. BANKES was only anxious to discharge his duty
to the petitioners, and he would be governed by the opinion
of the Committee.
The CHAIRMAN said the question was, whether the
preamble of the Bill should be now read. It would be com-
petent for the Committee to read the Bill paragraph by pa-
ragraph afterwards, and hear Counsel against it.
Mr. W. W. WYNN argued, that the proper time for
hearing Counsel on the part of the petitioners was after
evidence had been heard in support of the Bill which they
oppnse.d.
The CHAIRMAN was proceeding to put the question,
" That this be the preamble of the Bill," when
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL expressed it as his
opinion that the petitioners' Counsel ought to be heard ;'rst.
Mr. TENNYSON objected to hearing Counsel in this
part of the proceedings.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL conceived tbut the way
in which the House was proceeding was unconstitutional.
If a Member's seat were attacked, lie got or, made his de-
fence, and called his witnesses ; and here they were about
to disfranchise a borough without giving the petitioners a
similar privilege. Counsel ought to he called in and heard
in their defence.
Mr. W. W. WYNN said, that all the evidence against
the petitioning parties should be gone through, before the
evidence for the defence was begun. This was not only
the most convenient, but the most just mode of proceeding.
Mr. G. BANKES observed, that with respect to what
had fallen from the Honourable Member for Stafford-
shire (Mr. Littleton), who wished to assimilate this
case to the case of a private Bill, there was this dif-

fetence to be noticed—that in the present instance
considerable portion of the evidence had liven given, and
was in the hands of the Members of that House. Nay,
many Members, awl amongst them his Hon. Friend (Mr.
Tennyson), had declared that there was in that evidence
sufficient to support the Bill. There was not, therefore, a
shadow of argument against not hearing Connect at pre-
sent. It was a mere point of convenience, whether Coun-
sel should or should not now be heard ; and therefore he
wished that Counsel should he called in now, to know
whether he wished to proceed.
Thu CHAIRMAN—I must first read the preamble.

Mr. LITTLETON submitted that the preamble ought
not to be read in the absence of Counsel. He ought to be
present to hear it.
Mr. TENNYSON—The petitioners pray to he heard
against the enactments, and not against the preamble.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said they were then in the
middle of the plaintiff's case, and he thought it would be
very strange if, before the plaintiff had sustained his case
by all the evidence be could produce, he should be set aside
fin• the purpose of allowing the defendant to come forward
in order to be heard by Counsel. It would be an act of
injustice even to the defendant himself.
Mr. PEEL was of opinion, that the learned Counsel
ought to he allowed to decide for himself, whether it
would or would not be prudent for him to address-the
House.

Mr. G. BANKES moved that Counsel he called in.

The CIIAIRMAN.—The original motion was, " that

the preamble of the Bill be now read," to which an amend-
ment has been moved, " that counsel be called in ;" and
I apprehend that the amendment has been carried.
Mr. Denman then appeared at the bar.
The CHAIRMAN informed the learned gentleman that
the Committee had decided on hearing him on the sub-
ject of the disfranchisement of East Retford, and that they
called on him to state the course he meant to take,—
whether he wished to be heard before the evidence was
entered into, or whether he was desirous that the evidence
should be given first, and that be should be permitted to
make comments on it hereafter.

Mr. Denman would much rather be guided by the
sense of the Committee on this point, if he possessed any
means of ascertaining their opinion. Accidental circum-
stances had prevented his attendance on Monday, to ob-
ject to the principle of the Bill, and he was afraid, if his
time for addressing the House were postponed, that he
most probably would be in another part of the country.
He considered, under all the circumstances, that it would
be extremely convenient if he were now allowed to make
such observations and adduce such arguments on the mea-
sure as might suggest themselves to his mind.
Mr. PEEL said, what they had to consider was, how
they could proceed so as to act in the manner most con •
formable with the interests of justice. The Learned
Gentleman had not stated that his addressing the Committee
at this period was at all necessary to the interests of his
clients. His (Mr. Peel's) own judgment was, that the
Chairman ought to be re-instructed to state to Counsel
that his arguments should be heard after the whole of the
evidence had been gone into. It was not for them to take
into their account any consideration of the private conve-
nience of Counsel. The Petitioners - ought to have pro-
vided Counsel who could have conveniently attended to
their interests. The Right Hon. Gentleman then moved,
" That the Chairman'be instructed to state to the Counsel,
that, in the opinion of the Committee, it was better not
to hear any observations en the merits of the case gene-
rally, until all the evidence in support of the Bill was
adduced."

The CNAIRM A N having notified the decision of the Com-
mittee to Mr. Denman, and the preamble of the Bill having
been read,

Mr. Richard Hannam, the first witness, was called in
and examined by Mr. TENNYSON-Witness stated that he
lived at East Retford, and was a solicitor. He had lived
at East Retford for 33 years. He was a burgess of East
Retford, and, during his residence there, had witnessed
three or four elections. He knew a practice at East Ret-
ford of paying election money. It was generally under-
stood that 26 guineas were paid by each Member to the
party who voted for him.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected to this evi-
dence—" Generally understood" was a very vague phrase.
The witness ought to speak more decidedly.
Examination resumed.—Witness had been employed in
the election of 1812. It occurred in March. He was
employed, and assisted in paying the election money.—
That did not occur in the time of the election, but two
years afterwards. The money was paid for Mr. Osbaldis-
ton. Witness saw money paid. He had an account of
persons who'received election-money, which was made out
at the time, and was in his hand-writing.—[Witness pro-
duced the account.] That paper did not contain a list of
all the burgesses who were paid on that oceaaion, but only
of those who lived in East Retford and its neighbourhood.
The number of names contained in witness's list amounted
to 75. The account was drawn up to show who had been
paid, and those who had not. Part payments had been
previously made. Some of the electors had borrowed
small sums of money, which were set off against them.—
Most of them received 20 guineas from each of the mem-
bers. Others who did not promise till the last morning
of the election received less. Mr. Dickinson furnished
witness with a list, setting forth the proportion of pay-
ment to be made to each person. Mr. Dickinson was
a magistrate, and is now dead. The list furnished to
witness was in Mr. Dickinson's hand-writing. The par-
ties were paid by Mr. Pickett, agent for the election.—
The sum to be paid was arranged at the Angel Inn,
before the parties came. The witness then read a list of
21 persons who had received sums for their votes. They
were divided into three classes, denominated whole men,
half men, and quarter men ; the most numerous party, the
whole men, received 20 guineas; the half men ten guineas,
the quarter men five guineas : of this last class there were
but two.—(We understood that this distinction indicated
those who had come forward early, those who bad offered
themselves in tolerably good time, and those who did WA

stir till the last moment. )—Witness said this and similar
papers were drawn up for the purpose of knowing who was
paid. This bargain was not made before the election. He
could not say whether the electors expected this money
without any bargain beforehand, but there was no bargain
that he knew of. None of these persons refused the
money offered. The witness here banded in a paper. It
contained 29 names. There were sums written against
the names. They were the sums he was to pay the per-
coils. He did not supply Mr. Pickett with money nor
Thomas Appleby. He knew George Hudson, who was
now an Alderman of the Borough. The name of George
Hudson was not upon the paper ; Samuel Burton's was.
Did not know what became of the other voters who were
not paid at the Angel. William Grant was at the Angel ;
he had seen him there. Stephen Lawrence was paid ; did
not know if he was here. He received several letters from
out-voters, persons who were out of town at the time the
others were paid. He had six of those letters about him,
he received them by the mail; regularly by the post; they
were post paid.—(The witness being asked to state the
contents of these letters, was, upon the motion of Mr. G.
BanKss, ordered to withdraw.)
Mr. G. BANKES said, his objection was this,—the
witness had not yet been asked the names of the persons
who wrote the letters ; and even if that question had been
asked him, the letters would prove nothing. The witness
had said that he was not acquainted with the handwriting
of the persons whose names appeared at the bottom of the
letters ; he therefore, could not prove they wrote the let-
ters, and the letters, therefore, carried no proof at all.—
An offence of this nature ought to be proved by sufficient
evidence.
Mr. N. CALVERT observed, that if it turned out that
these letters could not be proved to have been written by
the persons whose signature they bore, then they would
go for nothing with the House.
Mr. BRIGHT suggested that the witness might be
asked " if he knew of the existence of any such men ?"
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought much more
time would be Raved by deciding now what was and what
was not evidence, than by allowing the examination to
proceed, and striking part of the evidence out of the
minutes afterwards.
Mr. A. BARING said the Committees of that House
had always been in the habit of resisting the lawyers, and
thought that their strict rules ought not to be binding
open the House.
The witness was then recalled, and the examination
was continued.
Witness then read the letters. (They were all to the
same effect, being written by out-voters who claimed pay-
ment for their votes. One stated that he had not yet re-
ceived his money, which would "be extremely agree-
able," and begged an early attention to his application.
Another hoped that he should be used the same as the
other voters, and suggested that his mother was entitled to
her deceased husband's share. Another took the liberty
of writing to witness, as he was informed that he had the
doing something for the friends of Mr. Osbaldiston, and
begged an advance of Si. or 101„ as he was at that time in
want of money.) Witness continued.—He thought it pro-
bable that many of the burgesses were not paid. He knew
Thomas Butler : he came to his office to pay his rent, and
witness talked to him about the election, when Thomas
Butler said, " I don't want any member; I want forty
guineas ; that's all I want." When Mi. Pickett
came to him to pay the voters, he did not come
in secret. Several whose names were upon the list
were not paid. There was a mark or writing
against their names. One had been transported, and
two wero dead. He believed that Mr. Marsh did not pay
anything for his votes. It was impossible for him to say
that the candidates did know that money was paid. Was
not aware that the candidates made any contracts with the
voters. He lent money to several of the voters after the
election. Expected to be paid out of the money which
the voters were to receive from the Members. He was
nut aware that the same practice had been coutinued in the
elections subsequent to 1812.
The CHAIRMAN here asked the Counsel if he wished to
ask the witness any question.
Mr. Denman would only ask witness how many of
those persons, to whom payments had been made, he know
to he alive now.
Witness said he could not exactly say. Some of them
he knew to be dead.
Henry Pickett was then called and examined by Mr.
TENNYSON-He keeps an inn. Was employed in 1811,
by Mr. Osbaldiston, to go to Retford, and pay money to
the voters. Witness believed that the voters received 20
guineas a-piece at that time, hut had no papers relative to
the transaction. What papers he had, he had given up to
Mr. Osbaldiston.
Mr. Jonathan Fox—Was a clerk in the Retford bank
in 1818 and 1819, and received 100/. from Mr. Cromp-
ton, for his services in the election of 1818. In 1819, a
sum of 2,840/. was paid into the Retford bank on Mr.
Crompton's account. His (witness's) impression was, that
the money had been paid into the bank, and paid out for
election purposes. Received the 100/. from Mr. Cromp-
ton as a present. He could not charge his memory with
having himself ever paid any money to voters. He bad
every reason to believe that the whole account was an elec-
tion one. Mr. Crompton kept no account with the Ret-
ford hank before the election. He kept a book with the
bank while he had his account there, in which the entries
were made by witness.
On the motion of Mr. D. W. HARVEY, the day-book of
the Retford bunk for 1819 was called for.
In answer to other questions the witness stated, that his
impression was, that part if not all the money paid in on
Mr. Crompton's account, had been made up in parcels,
and given to a person named Ledbeater ; but this he could
nut state positively. Some parcels were made up and given
to him. Ledbeater was the bellman of the town. How
many parcels he got, be could not say,—whether they were
one hundred, or twenty, or five, or one ; but his impres-
sion was, that some parcels, containing money, were given
to him. Could not state how often. Ledheater, the bell-
man, bed no account at the bank.—(A laugh.)—He be-
lieved the parcels were directed to freemen. Ledheater
had since died. Did not know how be (Ledbeater) had
disposed of the parcels he got. Witness told Mr. Ten-
nyson's solicitor to apply to Ledbeatcr's widow for in-
formation on that subject. Witness had made no entry
of the particular items for which the sums were paid.
That course would be troublesome. He could not state
any other reasons for not having made the entries.
Could not say whether the draughts made on account of the
2,8401. were paid in cash or notes. Witness got the 100/.
for himself, for his trouble in paying out the several sums.
A sum of 100/. had been paid to him on a former occa-
sion for his trouble in paying out several small expenses :
could not say what they were for. The amount of the
whole was somewhere about 7001. The payments were
made from June, 1819, to April, 1820. The names of
the parties to whom the several payments were made did
not appear in the posting of the account. It was posted
under the bead of " sundries." This was not the general
way in which accounts were kept.
By Mr. BARING.—You say that some parcels of money
were made up and given to Ledbeater, the bellman. Do
you think that if you had paid any sums to that person, at
any period of your life, you would have forgotten it as long
as you live ?

Witness.—l did not say that I gave any sums to Led-
beater. I stated my impression was, that he had received
some parcels ; but I cannot state how much.
This question was repeated to the witness several times,
but his answer was the same. He could state only that
his impression was some parcels of money had been given
to the bellman. In answer to another question, witness
said parcels were made up in sums of 20 guineas. He then
went on to state, in answer to other questions, that he
was not 8 freeman of East Retford ; if any of the freemen
took money for their votes, he did not believe that all did.
He had got the 100/. solely for his services as clerk to Mr.
Foljambe. He had never beard Mr. Foljambe state any
thing about sealed packets. This money had been paid on
Mr. Crompton's account, after the election of 1818. He
remembered another instance where money was paid in on
account of a party, after an election, who had not kept any
previous account at the bank. That was paid in on ac-
count of Lord Fitzwilliam. It was 500/. (as we under-
stood, on two occasions.) Witness could not speak as to
the dates. He supposed the money was paid with refer-
ence to election transactions, and for election purpose.
By Mr. PEEL—Suppose you did give packets of money,
who would make them up ?—Myself.
Supposing you did make them up, would you seal them 21
—I cannot say.
Would the packets consist of gold ?—I cannot say; pro-
bably
of notes of our bank ; but I cannot say.
Were they paid at the banking-house ?—I cannot say.
At Ledbeater's house ?—I cannot say.
By Mr. D. W. HAavEv.—Witness asked Crompton to
lend him the vouchers to aid his memory; his answer was
be had put them in the tire.
The witness was here directed to withdraw.
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN observed, that
thcom-
mitteeccom-
mittee could not suffer its dignity to be trifled with in this
way. He should move that the witness had been guilty
of gross prevarication, and that he be sent to Newgate.—
(Hear. )
Some difficulty here occurred as to the form of the
motion.
Mr. BARING asked, how, if the inquisitorial power of
the House was to be exercised, that power could ever be
exercised if it Mt treated, in this manner ! One phrase

was perpetually in this man's mouth. - In a sr ell-14,1161va
case, a poor man who came from Italy, got great disgrace
for using the same phrase. Here was a man from a short
distance, who had entertained the committee for an hour
and a half, with the same answer. He had been guilty,
in his opinion, of grass prevarication.
Mr. LUMLEY made a few remarks, amidst cries 'of...—.
" Question."

Mr. PEEL thought it doubtful if the witness had been
guilty of prevarication ; it seemed a wilful [suppression of
the truth. They should not act hastily, but weigh exactly'
the terms of the resolution.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL concurred with Mr.
Peel. Gross prevarication is not the character of the of-
fence ; it is refusing to answer questions. Ile was not
aware that the witness had been guilty of absolute contra-
diction.

Mr. WYNN olwerved, that the term " gross prevarica-
tion" was commonly applied to :many things to which
was not applicable.
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN thought, that a man who
would not answer questions, but fenced with them, was.
guilty of prevarication : he knew no other name for it.
Mr. PEEL accepted the terms of the Hon. Alderman
the witness had fenced with the questions, and concealed
the truth. He should not therefere be charged with pre-
varication, but with wilfully suppressing the tratb. This
House should show inferior jurisdictions that terms ware,
of importance.—(Hear.)

Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN would adopt the sugges
tion of the Right Hon. Gentleman.
After a few words from Sir M. W. RIDLEY and Mr..
FERCUSSON, the Committee agreed nem. dis. to the fol-
lowing resolution :—" That Jonathan Fox had attempted.
to defeat the investigation of the Committee by wilfully'
suppressing the truth."
The CHAIRMAN was ordered to report forthwith ; the
House resumed, and Mr. GORDON reported the resolution
to the House.

Mr. Alderman WAITIIMAN then moved, that " Jo-
nathan Fox, for the said offence, he committed to his Ma-
jesty's gaol of Newgate."
Mr. WARBITRTON thought that the witness shoal&
be called again to the bar ; if he went to Newgate, and
experienced the utmost the House could inflict, it would
be hopeless to expect further evidence from him.
Mr. PEEL observed, that as the witness had been pro-
nounced guilty of suppressing the truth, be mild hardly
be expected to give further evidence upon which the House
could place any reliarce.

A division was called for, but none took place; the
motion was agreed to, and Mr. SI.EAKER was ordered tn.
issue his warrant accordingly.
Margaret Thornton was the next witness called. Het •
examination was conducted by Mr. Taxxvsm.r.—For e.
few minutes this witness's answers were quite inaudible in
the gallery, She is the widow of the late Mr. Thornton.
Her husband was in the habit of employing others to pay
the election money. A memorandum-book, which stated
certain payments made by him on those occasions, was pro-
duced. At the elections of 1818 and 1820, he had giver►+
21/. to the voters respectively. These gratuities were made
to the burgesses generally ; the Alderman received none..
Several out-voters received a part. After specifying the•
sums•given in 1818, the witness deposed that at that elec-
tion her husband had personally disposed of the money iow
votes, but in 1820 he employed others for that purpose.
William Baker was next called, and chiefly interrogated
by Mr. TENNYSON.—He is a burgess of East Retford, and
has been one for 16 years. Remembers three elections iR
that borough before the last. He received 40 guineas for
his vote at each of the elections in 1818 and 1820. Mr.
Colton, since dead, paid him with his own hand the consi-
deration for Isis vote, enclosed in a letter. In 1818, Mr.
Thornton called on him, and came afterwards in the corn-.
pany of a stranger, who gave his money for Ills vote. Att•
the last election be was paid by Mr. Fulton.
In answer to a question from Mr. J. WOOD, the tvitnew
said that he had expected money at the last election, be-
cause it was usual on such occasions for the freemen to,
receive payment. He was canvassed by Mr. Bolgham,
who told him that all would be right if he should give his
vote to Sir Robert Dundas. He interpreted this expres-
sion as conveying an intimation of forthcoming election mo-
ney. Sir Robert Dundas was present, close at hand, and
must have heard what passed. Believes that most of the
firemen in East Retford would expect money for their
votes. He could not, nevertheless, say positively that any
received payment, except himself : but the practice was a.
matter of notoriety, and he had heard it frequently men-
tioned in public conversation. He himself got the sum of
40 guineas on two occasions, and heard some of his bro-
ther burgesses speak of their having received a similar
suns likewise. He is not acquainted with the handwriting
of Mr. Fox.

Sato!. Hamden examined by Mr. TENNI-SO/P...41a is a free-
man of East Retford ; is also a Magistrate in that berongh•
He was present when Mr. Thornton canvassed his jour-
neymen. They were given assurances that all would be
made right in the event of their vote. This was under-
stood to convey the same import as that which the last
witness had mentioned. He beard similar expressions
made use of upon former occasions. He had received 4c
guineas for his vote at every election previous to the last,
at which he did not vote. There were, he understood,
about 40 freemen who would not receive bribes. Being
examined afterwards upon this point by'a " Member," he
said he did not believe there were 40 freemen who would
not receive bribes.

The House then resumed, and the other orders of the
day being disposed of, the House adjourned at a Quatter-
past One o'Clock. ,

The Duke of ST. ALBANS visited the Lon-
don Hospital on Sunday afternoon, and relieved the poor
sufferers from the late accident, for which they express
themselves in very grateful terms. The widow of poor
MILTS was prevent, and his Grace gave her 51. Prier to
this, the whole of the sufferers and their families had been.
relieved by the Rev. W. VALENTINE, the Almoner of the
Samaritan Society, an appendage to the London Hospital.
ELECTION OF THE RECTOR OF MARIS..
COAL COLLEGE..--SATURDAY, ONE O'CLOCK
JAMES M‘GarGoe, Director- General of the Medical De-
partment, who has filled the distinguished place of Rector
of Marischal College for these two last years, with the pe-
culiar favour and approbation of the Professors and Stn-
dents, has been succeeded by our highly and deservedly
popular Representative in Parliament, JOSEPH HUMP,
Esq. who has just been elected to that important situation.
—Aberdeen Chronicle.

D RTJRY-LANE TITEA TRE..—A Mrs. DUFF,
from the Theatre Royal, Dublin, made her first appearance
here last night, as Isabella, in Sournms's long dull Tra-
gedy of that name. Ahe was warmly received, and evinced
tragic powers of no common order. Her lungs also were
very respectable.

COBURG THEATRE.—This Theatre pre-
sented last evening an unusual selection of good pieces.
The first, a new one, entitled the " White Spectre," a
translation of La Somiaatnbule Villageoise, which poesosses
more of the character of the Vaudeville than is usual with
" Translations from the French," the music of the ori-
ginal being preserved, and more of its general spirit. It
is by far the best translation of the piece that has appeared.
The hackneyed piece called the " Bear Hunters" followed ;
and, as a wind up, " Tom and Jerry," with new scenery
and dresses, concluded the evening's entertainments, in
which Miss AIERIT made her first appearance this season,
and was warmly received. She is certainly a great ac-
quisition to the Company. Messrs. DAVIDGZ, Row-
BOTIIAM and LEWIS, appeared as Tom, Jerry, and Logic;
and Messdames DAVIDG a and Rovraarmax asKateand Sne.

MURDER OF AN INFANT AT FULHAM.--
Yesterday morning Fulham and its vicinity was thrown
into the greatest consternation, in consequence of a fine
little boy, apparently about a month old, having been die-
covered lying in one of the numerous brooks with which
the neighbourhood abounds. The body was found tinder
the most suspicious
circumstances
h
parish, who was attracted by curiosity to the spot, seeing
a
constableaatream oifnt the
disordered fir en d(c 'ns
enquired Hisi traversingf ssuhsep i iaodn el
lost
et i
anngy aroused,thithing
whiwhich
sb
young e
her with respect to her object in being in such a lonely
place,
replied in the negative. The constable not being satisfied
with her answer, determined to sift the matter to the bottom,
mciailaergiednfa
thent infema
asletawteitohf
andin,eu
dity
yh
theo shortly
tyd
he afterestrboryo,
edo
riks
ofc; o vbteehr
eeinstantly
,
which she denied ; he
however felt it his duty to take her into custody, and on
conveying her to the watch-house she endeavoured to make
her escape but was soon overtaken. The alarm being
spread in the neighbourhood that as infant had been inhu-
manly murdered, hundreds of persons soon assembled, the
principal part of which were females, and the body being
taken out was conveyed to the White Horse public house
at Parson's-green, when, on examination, it was discovered
that there were several marks of violence on the head and
face. On further search by the inhabitants the clothes of
the poor child were found in a neighbouring gentleman's
garden close to the fence. The female WAI taken to the
workhouse, and on being interrogated, gave several inco-
herent answers as to her place of abode. She was detained .
in custody to await the decision of the Coroner's inquest*.
which will be held too-morrow.

sank '
- 3 per
3 per
34 Pr
Ditto
4 per
Ditto
sank
Irti;
Ditt,

A'
F gni
hlh
ich.4l

dts;l‘
iiran

'Orel
Tu
Crua
111 0,4
Do.

BT4II
Met

Beni
(btl4
0-OV,
Thtt,
Oor.
&yr
(3rat

city
tta r¢

Arrit
ti
I)
0
1
0
1
0
0

-- =

k 1.1

Ai
of y 4
anooi

fc
range
weigh
creasi
our s'
bouts
cariou

viler
the m

An
first, 1
and s
llham
by his
riistrY
great

No,
Unkm
have

Harlin
—he

tion o
what
would
it was
Tory
Admit
Grace

to sere

SUCCCS
gone (
public
Auini
We

the c
where
your
.tbis pi
ability,
therair
not (.1
lighter
eountr

•ell-14nbwn
at disgt ace
inn a short
n. an hour
en

cries of

had been
pression of
igh exactly

with Mr.
of the of-
le was not;

ate contra-

prevarica—
o which

x man n•h*
them, was
le for it.

Alderman ;
conceale4

I with pre-
rad,. 'Di"

sugges—

and Mr,
to the fol-
attempted
ioy wilfully'

with ; the:
relol u Pion

that " Jo-.
:0 his Ma—

ess should
vgate, and
it would

I been pro-
ad hardly-
the Howe

pint; the
ordenvel tn,

led. Het
x.—For e.
'audible in
Thornton.
ers to pay
licit stated
was pro—
had gireur
were madr

ive3 none..
Vying tilt-
that eke—
money /ow
tirpose.

terrogated
!tford, and
lections in
;nineas for
20. Mr.
the consi-
-818, Mr.
the corn-.
vote. AA

he witnem,

!ction, be-
Freemen to,
13olgham,
Id give his
is expres-
ntion mo-
hand, and
iost of the
for their
that any
rice was a.
qtly men-
he sum of
his bro-
a similar
ndwriting

:sisa free-
tberongh.
hie jour-
wonld be
ras under-
h the lot
rpressions
eeived 4c
i the last,.
lderstood.
5.. Being

nber," ti;
wonld

Ts of the
Quarter.

le Lon-
the poor
y express

r of poor
Prior to
had been
ier of the
Hospital.
lieal De-
of Rector
h the pe-
and Stu-
eservedly
[ Hama,
situation.

DUFF,
)pearance
dull Tra-
d evinced
also were

e pre-
pieces.
ectre," a
possums
sual with
the ori-

iirit. It
Lppeared.
011 owed ;
scenery
ants, in
13 season,
great ac-
t, ROW-
I Logic;
and Sne.