The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-08 00:00:00

MIT TEE.

The Committee met yesterday at 11 o'clock, Mr. PARING
TON in the chair.

Mr. TALBOT, who appeared for the petitioners, stated that
the uncertainty which existed yesterday in reference to the
witnesses, had now been removed, and he was ready to proceed
with the case. He trusted that he would be able to establish
a case which would render it impossible for the Committee to
arrive at any conclusion but one, and that unfavourable to the
return of Mr. Collett. The Committee had already heard that
an election was held for the borough of Athlone, on the 31st
day of March, 1843. At that election, the Hon. Gentleman who
now represented Athlone, and Mr. Beresford were the candidates.
The election was very actively contested. At the close of the
poll, Mr. Collett, the Liberal candidate, bad 114 votes, and
111 r. Beresford, the Conservative candidate, 108. The
Learned Counsel then proceeded to state, at some length,
several circumstances in connection with the elections for the

borough of Athlone. He said that Mr. Ferrall, who was for-
merly the Member for Athlone, was unseated by a decision of
the House of Commons, and that it was Mr. Ferrall who in-
troduced Mr. Collett to the borough. He also stated, that
a petition had been presented against the return of Mr. Collett
in the last session, which was decided against the petitioners.
It was with matter which was non-existing at the time when
that petition was presented that they were prosecuting the
present petition. The Learned Counsel then referred to a
sessional order, justifying the presentation of a petition within
three months after the return, if evidence could be given of the
payment of a bribe. There were two allegations in the petition ;
one that certain agreements had been made by the agents of the
sitting Member for the payment of bribes, the other that certain
sums had been actually given by the petitioner or his agents
since the last election. Ile would now proceed to the cases
upon which they meant to rest their case. He proposed to
prove a corrupt payment of 5/. to a person of the name of
Michael Curly, on the part of Mr. Daniel Ferrall, the gentle-
man who formerly represented Athlone, and who, at the last
election, was the zealous coadjutor, and, therefore, in law, the
agent of Mr. Collett. He should prove that Mr. Collett used
expressions to Michael Curly, with regard to the foul teen days
subsequent to the election, which were very material.
He would prove, with regard to James Roper, that
towards the end of July he received from a gentleman of
the name of Kilsoe, who was well-known as a Roman Catholic,
the sum of 5/. for his vote. There was a second payment
of the same amount. Roper had, up to that time, supported
the opposite party. He would prove, that Patrick flo3le also
received a sum of money from the same Father Kilsoe, as corn.
pensation for voting for Mr. Collett. There were two other
cases of bribery—that of John Broderick, who being in prison,
was canvassed through the medium of his son, and re-
ceived the half of a 10/. note, and that o'i Mark
Qain who had received the sum of 2/. ss. If the

witnesses called to establish the case were not respect-
able, it was accounted for by the fact that it was only persons
of that character who were accessible to bribes.

The poll books wrre then put in.
Michael Curly called and examined.—Witness lived at Ath-
lone. Mr. Ferrall and Mr. Collett came to him at his house
at the last election. Mr. Ferrall told him that Mr. Collett
was to be put up as a candidate for the town. Witness said in
consequence of Mr. Ferrell, he would give his interest
to Mr. Collett, and Mr. Ferrall thanked him.
Mr. Collett now promised him a halfpenny. Mr.
Ferrall afterwards told him that he would be kind to him in
consequence of the way in which he had acted. He voted at
the election for Mr. Collett. Saw Mr. Ferrall in the middle
of June last year. and told him that he was a little embarrassed,
and asked him if he would oblige him with a trifle of money.
At a former election, when witness voted for Mr. Ferrall,
the latter had promised him twenty pounds. On
this occasion Mr. Ferrall said he had no money. Witness re-
ceived 5/. on the 24th of October from the Rev. Father Wal-
lace, but never had any from Mr. Ferrall. Had seen the
agent for the petitioners that morning, who had spoken to
him about Mr. Collett and Mr. Ferrall calling on him at the last
election. He had not stated to the agent that morning that Mr.
Collett said, in the presence of Mr. Ferrall, that in fourteen
days after the election he would behave well to him, and give
him something. Those words were dictated to him, but he
would not sanction them. He had not seen Mr. Collett
since the election. When the 51. was given to him by Father
Wallace, the latter did not tell him that it came from Mr.
Ferrall. He had not seen Father Kilsoe that morning. Tra.
yelled with him both in the steam-boat and in the train, but
had no communication with him.

Cross-examined by Mr. AUSTIN—The petitioner Kelly was
not worth fourpence ; Fallahan (another petitioner) was
hardly able to give his wife and family a dinner of milk and
potatoes; Marshall (a third petitioner), was a pauper, going
about from house to house, and not worth sixpence ; Keeling►
(also a petitioner), was a cooper, hardly able to sell three
pails a-week. He believed the whole of them could
not pay even half of witness's expenses to London.
He had had no conversation with any of the agents of Mr.
Collett about giving false testimony. He had never received
51. for his vote. The witness then withdrew.

Mr. PICKERING (who was with Mr. Talbot) here proposed
to call the agent of the petitioners, for the purpose of contra-
dicting the last witness's testimony.
--.Attace, on being called, stated that he had been with the
witness Curly that morning, at an hotel in Palace-yard,
having had no previous opportunity of seeing him, and that he
stated, in reply to questions put to him by witness, that Mr.
Collett said to him before the election, in the pre-
sence of Mr. Ferrall, that in fourteen days after
the election Mr. Ferrall would give him something handsome;
that he explained to him that he could not give him anything
before: Curly also said that Mr. Collett observed, that what-
ever Mr, Ferrall said he would uphold, and he stated that he
had received 51. from Mr. Ferrall at the Athlone Assizes.
James Roper examined—Lived at Athlone, and knew Mr.
Collett. Voted for him at the last election. Saw him in the
street two or three days before the election, in company with
Mr. Ferrall and other gentlemen. Mr. Ferrall told him that
Mr. Collett would stand up for his country, but did not give
him any other reason for voting for Mr. Collett. Neither
Mr. Ferrall nor Mr. Collett ever promised him any money.
Father Kilsoe did not promise him money, and witness had
never told any person that he had doze so. Had never told
Mr. Hand, of London, that a large sum of money had been
promised him if Ise would vote fur Mr. Collett. 'fold him that
a promise of that kind had been made on the other side. He had
rebuilt his house after the election, but was not able to glaze
the windows. Having mentioned this subject to Father Kilsoe,
the latter, in a few days after, gave him Si. to get the windows
glazed. Had never said that he was disappointed at
not getting a larger sum ; never expected to get
a halfpenny till that time. Heard that money
was left but did not expect to get any of it because he was
never promised any.
By the COMMITTEE—Did not consider the money as a loan.
Father Kilsoe told him when he first mentioned the glazing
of the windows, that he would give bias Si. to get it done, and
that he would then use one of his rooms as a station. The
Roman Catholic priests go from house to house.
Mr. Sergeant WRANGIIANI (for the sitting Member) sub-
mitted to the Counsel fur the petitioners whether it would not
be a manifest waste of time for them to proceed any further
with the case, when such was the testimony already adduced.
Mr. TALBOT said it was vain to disguise that the evidence
adduced was not such as they could rely upon to establish the
case. The agent of the petitioners had the best reason to be-
lieve that the evidence of Carly would be very different from
what it had been, but they had now reason to think that
they were not likely to be more successful with the other
witnesses. Under these circumstances, and with the consent
of the gentleman by whom he was instructed, he begged to
withdraw the petition.
Strangers were then ordered to leave the room, and on their
re-admission, it was announced that the Committee had come to
the following resolation :—" That John Collett, Esq., had
been duly returned to serve in the present Parliament for the
borough of Athlone."

---
FOLKESTONE.—The opening of the railway has
caused a great influx of visitors to Folkestone. It has been
said that this is the only place in England that has been
benefited by a railway passing it, and we venture to predict
that the permanent benefit arising to the town is only be
ginning to be felt, and is not as yet halt' appreciated. That
the extraordinary rice in the value of property is the effect of
the railway, and the increase of population, is very clearly
demonstrated by the eagerness with which everything in
the shape of a louse is sought. But three years ago ninety-
six houses were unoccupied, and the new corners hired the
;best and most prominent establishments at a very low figure;
!now the houses are all occupied, and most of them perma-
nentiv so arm rents have ).isen doubly, and in many instances
in a treble ratio with what was paid in 1841. The trade of
Folkestone, which was at a very low ebb three years ago, has
increased wonderfully.—Canterbury Journal.
HAYMARKET TxuaraE.—On Wednesday night an
adaptation of Donizetti's opera, La File du Regiment,
written by -Mr. .Buckstone, was produced at this theatre,
under the title of Josephine; or, the Fortune of War. The
plot of this opera is, no doubt, familiar to most of our
readers. Though an adaptation of Donizetti's opera,
music forms but a very subordinate part in this drama.
'There are but three songs introduced, which are sung
by Mrs. Fitzwilliam, who took the part of Josephine. Of
these the best executed was theair commencin, " Oh, France !
Oh, my country !" which she sings, after the disbanding of her
regiment, and which is expressive of her regrets. Sergeant
Scalade occupies a prominent position in this (llama, and this
character was exceedingly well performed by Mr. Bland. Of
the other characters it is unnecessary to say much ; they
were purely accessorial. On the whole, it may- be said that
this adaptation—though not made so much of as the fertile
materials of the opera might have permitted—is very re-
spectably put upon the stage, and gave satisfaction to a
crowded audience.

Several of the Cabinet Miniete7s had interview; with Sir
R. Peel yesterday.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
110 USE OF LORDS, March 7.
•
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack
shortly after-Five o'clock.
Lord KENYON presented several petitions a.;ainst the
union of the sees of Bangor and St. Asaph.
The Bishop of HEREFORD presented several similar
petitions.
Lord PRUDHOE presented several petitions in favour of
the present corn-laws.
NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.
Lord BROUGHAM ?aid he had not had an opportunity,
owing to the state of the weather, to go over the new Hou,es
of Parliament, and therefore he should po tpone the question
of which he had given notice respecting them, to a future day.
Lord LILFORD postponed the presentation of a petition
from certain hand-loom weavers, to .t!onday the 1 Bth of March.
DISSENTING CHAPELS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR laid on the table a Bill for
regulating suits relating to chapels and other property held by
persons dissenting from the Church of England. The object
of thtt 13111 was to remove certain hardshil s under which Dis-
sentets laboured with respect to their chapels and burial-
grounds.
Lord BROUGHAM said he would not present a petition on
this subject to-morrow which had teen intrusted to him, if it
was intended that this Bill should extend to Ireland.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said lie should, on the second
reading of the Bill, state fully its objects, and he should then
propose that the 11.11 should be referred to a Select Committee.
Ile thought, therefore, that it would be better for the Noble
and Le,,rned Lord to present his peiitimi, and then move that
it be referred to the same Select Committee.
Lord BROUGHA.II slid he would take that course.
FEES TO CLERK'S OF THE PEACE.
The Marquis of Le NSDOWNE gave notice that he should,
to-morrow, move for a return of fees paid to clerks of the
peace, and to clerks in petty sessions, in England and Wales.
PRIVY COUNCIL BILL.
Lord BROUGHAM gave notice that, to-morrow, he should
move the second reading of the Privy Council Bill, with a view
to its being referred to a Select Committee.
The House then adjourned.