The Sun.
London, England, 1828-03-08 00:00:00

CASE OF JONATHAN FOX.

Mr. LIJMLEY, according to notice, moved that Jonathan
Fur, in colotody.at the order of the House, should be called
to the bar and discharged.
_ _

Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN thought it iMportant that
the House should defend it's privileges in cases like the pre-
bent. Every one must have perceived that it was-impos-
sible to get the truth out of those witnesses. It was not
because of their ignorance that they were so incommunica-
tive, for though they were Yorkshiremen, they had as much
cunning' as any Member of that House. He thought it
would be wrong to discharge them without a reprimand at
least.

After, a few words from Mr. ST*WART and Sir C.
BURRELL,

Mr. BARING moved, as an amendment, that Jonathan
Fox he .brought up: to the Bar of the House on Monday
next, in order to be discharged.
Mr. PEEL thought the House ought not to acquiesce
in any proposal for greater lenity. •He trusted that if the
Hon. Alderman (Waithman) had any prejudices against
Yorkshiremen, he need not display them on the present
'occasion. The witnesses who were to be examined that
night came from the town of y..aat Retford ; and with all
deference to the topographical knowledge of the Hon.
Alderman, he begged to inform him that East Retford was
not in Yorkshire, but in Nottinghamshire.—(A laugh.)
After a desultory conversation on the subject, between
Mr. W. SMITH, Mr. N. CALYERT, Mr. C. W. WYNN,
Mr. LUMLEY, and an unknown Member, who spoke to
the indisposition of Fox whilst under *examinatioo, the
original motion was withdrawn, and the amendment was
agreed to. •

Fox was then ordered to be brought to the bar on Aloti=
day nut, to_ be reprimanded and discharged.
The CHANCELLOR of. the : EXCHEQUER post-
poned the Committee of Supply till Monday next.
WAYS AND MEANS.
On the motion of the CROCE LLCM of the EXCIIEQUtIt,
the House resolved_ itself into a COmmittee of Ways and
Means.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that
though has Hon. Friend the MeMber for Loiadonderry had,
by hif„tlesire, given notice that he would,-on the present
even*, propose certain • resolutions relative to the sugar
duties, it was plat his intention to propose them on the pre:
sent occasion. The resolutions- which he intend& to move
were, the annual resolutions for granting td his Majesty the
duty of 4s. id:the pound, ou all pensions and places, for
enabling him to apply to the service of the year the Sum of
60,0001., received from the East India Company, on ac-
count of half.-pay, for appropriating a certain portion.of the
unclaimed dividends, and for payment of a certain number
of Exchequer Bide.

Mr. 11 THOMSON asked whether there was any truth
in the rMuour that it was the intention of Government to
increase the bounty on the exportation of fine sugar, thereby
taxing people for the benefit of a particular interest.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER must de-
cline to answer the question of the Hon. Gentleman. To
enter into such an explanation at present would - lead to
'nue!' useless discussion. " •
Mr. P. THOMSON did not wish for silty discussion;
all he wanted to know was, whether such an arrangement
as that to which be had alluded was under discussion.

Mr. HUME was oropinierTti;at the Chancellor s( thc
Exchequer.' had acted with sound discretion in declining
,to answer the question of•his lion. Friend, whilst the
amount-of
-the sugar duties WM under consideration.
Sir J. NEWPORT 'trusted that the Right lion. Gen-
doyen would take under consideration the policy of pre-
venting sugar from Wing refined in the West Indies.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER implored
the House not to enter into a consideration ofquestiuns con.
nected with the sugar duties, on a vote which had no na •
tural connexion with them. •

Mr. BRIGHT said that the produefons of the West

Indies laboured under such a load of taxation, that it would
only be prudent to adopt some measure which would tend
to weaken the pressure of it.—The resolutions were then

put and carried.
The CHAIRMAN reported the reeolutions, and the

'd‘rat* report was ordered to be =en into farther COnsi ion
on Monday next.
EAST RETFORD DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
On the motion of Mr. TENNI-sots, *the House resolved
itself into a Committee on this Bill. Mr. Gosport was
in the chair.
The first witness called in was Edw. Cromwell Brown.
Edward Cromwell Brown was then imtoduced for-exami-
nation at the bar.
Mr. Tmorysox proceeded to interrogate him. In your
examination of.the 4th of March, you stated that you knew
in some of these elections, there wereqdpove tO electors who
would not take money.' I shall now put into your hands
the lists of the burgesses for 1818, 1820, and 1826—will
you mark off, in any of these lists, the 40 names you have
alluded to.
Mr. WYNN suggested that as the witness had in his
former examination, merely given his opinion, they had
better not, dwell on an answer so given, but go into the
real evidence of the particular fact now sought to be esta-
blished.
Mr. TENNYSON wanted to show bow far the fact
would, or would not, justify, the witness's opinion on there
being 40 who would not take bribes. If the names were
marked, then the opinion could at once be brought to tho
true test.
After a few words from Mr. D. W. HARVEY, Mr. W.
W 1 NN, Mr. FERCUSSON, Sir E. KNATCHELILI, and Mr.
Srxxs, •
The witness was recalled, and asked if he had compared
the lists, and marked off the names that had not taken
money ? He replied be had examined the lists of 1818,
1820, and 1826, and he found '7O in 1826,.wh0 did not
take money. In 1820 there were 22 unpaid, and 23 in
1818.'
By Mr. B. COOYIR—Did those who are marked off as
unpaid, refuse a bribe when directly offered, or merely say
they would not take money 2-1 merely told them that Sir
Henry Wilson would only do what was just and proper.
I gave them to understand Ise would not pay for votes.
Did you directly represent that he would give no money?
—I meant that be would give no money ; he only said he
would do what was just. The witness proceeded to state
_ _

that the electors would support the candidate if he pledged
himself against Catholic Emancipation, and that by the
expression." he would do what was just and right," they
understood him to mean that.

' Being asked whether, if the electors were ignorant of
the candidate's sentiments reverting emancipation, and
that this expression were used, they would understand it to
imply that be would pay them what was usual 2—The
wituess believed some of dint would se understand it.
There are 219 voters in East Retford. Of these the wit-

near stated that i 0 had not received the money at the elec-

tion in 1826 ; he was not sufficiently acquainted with the
remainder to say that they. would not take money.
There 'were 104 burgesses resident in East Retford. There
were only 42 polled, and of these, 20 voted for Sir H. W.
Wilson, the popular candidate. Of the 70 voters, who, in
1826, had not received a bribe, 51 of them had been made
burgesies since 1820
•
By Mr. TENNI79Ow--If Sir IL W. Wilson had inquired
from you. what was the proportion of the voters' at East
.Retforr/ that,. as you conceived, would require money from
hiirt, what is the proportion you would mentionito him?
Witness.—Three-fourths.
The witness was ordered to withdraw.
Mr. Richard Haunam was then called in and re-examined
--In reply to questions from Counsel (Mr. Denman), the
witness stated that no complaints had been made. against
him for not paying money after the election in 1812. It
was Pickett who received the money and paid it. There
was one man, of the name 9f Buxton, who did not attend
when the money was distributed, aud'who afterwards com-
plained that he had not been paid. No Money was given
to witness for. the porpese of distributing to the electors.
Witness did not received any money from an attorney of
the name of Clarke: Tint Mr: Clarke .was ,the person
who ade such a figure , some yeail ago, in the case of a
forgekivill" Mellish v: Rankin."
By a illamexer.-On that occasion, the election of 1812,
he paid a part Of the election rnonex'. ghat took place
after: the ;election was 'concluded. paid one er two
person's himself; but not more.
By-Mr. LUMLEY-Witness bad received letters'on the
subject of Payment. That, he supposed, arose front the
general idea that he was the paymaster.
By Mr. D. W. liaavEY-1t was known, in 1812,
that Mr. Osbahliston wished to get in fur the borough—
and, be believed, small sums were distribnted to, keep up
his interest. :Witness saw Pickett pay the burgesses, but
no mcniik wag 'given to him.
By Mr. Citomerori—Witness conceived that it would
be useful to extend the franchise, and he bad signed a
paper on that subject which bad been left: at his office.

He wished the franchise either to be removed or extended,

the'present moment wished for some such alteration,
and he believed there was not a man in the town that did
not. It was not his habit, when employed by people, to
come and disclose their secrets without their concurrence.

He believed he had not discovered any secrets
not recoll,eet to whom he gave the first information relative
to Mr. Oshaldiston's election. He gave information to
nobody. He came to the bar in obedience to the order of
the House, and he would- no, have come otherwise: He
had conversed on this suluect with Mr. Gregson. That
individtial wrote hima note, and witness called on him.
Witness told him he apprehended that the freemen would
bi paid. That'occurred just before the petition came on
here. He hail disclosed nothing to him, except that,the
freemen would be paid as usual.
Then you called on a complete stranger to disclose your
employer's affairs, without any prospect of advantage?—
(Several Members said that this question ought not to be
put.)

Mr. CROMPTON—I will put that question. I have a
right to put it.
, The CHAMMAN.—The Hatt. Member cannot put any
• question without. the permission of the Committee, and
they seem to object to it.
By Mr. C. P. TuomesoN—lt was notorious that bribery
existed in the borough ; but be could not recollect the
na if the differnt candidates since 1812 who had been
gui
,oibery. I.le believed, is his own mind, that
every gei an who was returned did give money. He
only knew one peisian who did not pay, and he never stood
again. _
By Mr. Luau:a-sr.—Re had not, as clerk to the magis-
trates,' received any penalty or fine; and converted it to
his own use. Penalties under the Game Laws came to
his hand, and he paid them over to the clergyman of the
parish. He paid overall the money which he received.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY and Mr. Alderman WarrimaN
objected to this line of examination.
By Mr. W. D. HARVEY.--The name, of the hundred
in which East Retford "Ts situate was Bassel-law. It con-
tained 74 parishes. If the elective franchise were exten-
ded over the tower and hundred, the number of votes
'would be about 1,200. The Duke of Newcastle had a pa-
ramount interest in the hundreds. • Taking the freehol.
ders of the hundred at. 1,200, he thought that a conside-
rable portioa of them 'would be under the influence of the
Duke of Newcastle. He believed that the Duke of New-
castle as a landholder; would have a paramount influence
in that hundred. There was another nobleman who had a
similar influence to that of the Duke of Newcastle. He
did not know' that the influence of the Duke of Norfolk or
the Duke of Porthind, was very extensive. There was,
in the hundred, a pretty sprinklittg, of small freeholders. •
By Mr. Davattroax7-You have stated,, that the voters
were told that all was " just and:tight," What was meant
by these terms? Witness—Tlie ineanieg wita, that tbey
-would be paid 40 guineaa.—(Linghter.)
• By Mr, G. SMlTH—Witness knew 2,240/. to be paid at
an election for eating and drinkitto; " •
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said, it unw became his duty to
.introduce a question of considerahle delicacy, on which he
wished to have the advice and assistance of the Committee.
It bad been stated in evidence by Jonathan Fox, that in
1818 or 1819, he had received
.'2,800/. from a gentleman
who was at that time a candidate for East Retford, and
had at present a seat in thes,House: .:,What money was
to be distributed amongst 'the voters.; Wand, it appeared
that he entered an 'account of. its expenaitiire in a book,
which official voucher for ,the manner in which he had
employed the sum so intrusted to him, he had subse-
quently given up to the gentleman by whom the money
had been advanced. Now, it would not only be
portant, as forming part of a regular chain of evidence, to
call that gentleman, and to examine him, for the purpose
of ascertaining whether that voucher was still in existence;
hat it was still more important to take that step, for
the purpose of removing any unfavouraMe impression with
respect to their proceedings that might be entertained out,
of that House by the public. He thought they were bound
in the discharge of their duty, to place that gentleman at
the bar, in order that they might have the benefit of his
examination.—(Hear.)--Under ordinary circumstances, he
might feel a good deal of delicacy in advising such a course
to be adopted ; but lie confessed that any delicacy which
he might entertain on the subject, was softened down, if
not entirely obliterated, by the part which the Hon. Gen-
tleman to whom he alluded had taken on this occasion:
The evidence giiren :before the Committee, and the matter
contained in the report which had been laid before the
House, prayed what the conduct of the Hon. Member had
been in these election transactions. The Hon. Gentleman
then moved, " That Samuel Crompton, Esq. formerly
member for East Retford, and now a Member of this

~~«

f

. .
House, be called to the liar of this novae, to give evidence
touching the Etist Retford election."'
The CHAIRMAN—The question for.the Committee t•
.consider is,- whether; if-the Hon. Qentleman be called el
the bar, he will, feel; disposed to 'answer any questioe'
that may be put to lain, and if not, what power the Co
mittee possesses to enforce answers ? The mee of colliel
a member of the House to the bar, is apt,: I believe,
Very common one. Bit instances have oceurted , where
Members who were called upon to he examined were the'House of Peers haVe refused to answer certain question&
My impressime is, that the Hon. Gentleman may also re'
'fuse to answer.
Mr. W. WYNN seid, it was in
.the power of the Coto.:
mittee to demand answers to such queetiotts as might be
put to a Member.
Mr. CROMPTON did not mean to say any thing at an
on this question. He did not think it was neeemoary„ ile
felt ashamed of nothing he had elOne..e ;-(Heare,hear..) M
to what the Hon. Member for Colchester had said about
his conduct, he would make no observation on it. He had
been elected for this borough in 1912 .and 18113; and, if-
that House determined to call on him for information, he
hoped it would be found that he. never had. swerved from,
the right line of duty..-.(Her, hear.) It must be abetter
man than the' Hon.. Member for Colchester who would:
bring him to disclose his private affairs: (Criesd -" Order"
and " hear.") He would not be examined by that 'Non.
Member.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY rose to order. The Hon. Member
for Derby had chosen to state,. that, while he was willing
to be examined by other persons, he would notallow.hime
self to be examined by the Honn Member for Coldwater. ,
Mr. CROMPTON—"'I won't; I won't." -
Mr. D. W. HARVEY—I say, that ifs-(Here the
greatest confusion prevailed.) • • • .
The CHAIRMAN requested the Committee to hear
Mr. -Harvey to order.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY—I say this, thatif the Com-
mittee come to the. resolution to examine the Hon. Mem-
ber fig Derby, or if any other Non. Member shall be exa-
mined, I, as a Member for Colcinotere•willstatervngate
W
that man, and it will not, be' in the oe, entlemates
power to prevent me,.
Mr. W. -WYNN said, the Hen.. Member cer-
tainly have a right to examine any wino:soot-the bar.
Mr. CALCRAFT said, his Hon. ,Friend (Mr. Cremp-
tou), whom they all knew and respected for a great num-
ber of ',Sire, evidently spoke under [the impulse of very
strong feeling. He should therefore recommend to the
Committee, and he hoped the suggestion would be adopted,
that, in the state of excitation under which his Hon.
Friend laboured. at this moment, the question should be
adjourned, and his Hon. Friend's examination - Wren on
Monday next.
Mr. CROMPTON could assure his- ilon...Friead and
theCnnnittee, that.,he never would dispute the power ,of
the House. They were deliberating upon a veryiinpor-
taot atieietieneon 'which they were justified in procuring all
theinformation ehey could ; but he would not be bullied
into any thing leyeetny individual. (Cries of. " Hear," and
et order.") -.14;,,fiC not wish be set himself up against
the House, but: against an individual ; and to that indivi-
dual he would lay, " -When you are ready to lay open all
the trensactiont of youilife, and let the public judge of
them, 'I am .heady to do, the,sante." (Cries of " Hear,"
and " Order. 7) . • ,
The CHAIRMAN. must again suggest to the Connelite
tee his opinion, that no Member could. be exmoinedean-
trary to-his inclination. . •
-Mr. W. W. WYNN thought env could be no- doubt
that the House had the rnost complete joyisdictiou over its
own -Members. - Y.
,111 C. D.. W.. HARVEY, in answer to what had fallen
Om the Hon. Member for Derb specting the trans-
actions. of his life, would tell that' Member, that not
confining the investigation merely ribery and corrup-
tion, if he chose to move for an in y into all the trans-
actions in-which he (Mr. D. W', ervey) had beet' en-
gaged, from his cradle until the pr;- t moment, be should
be ready andwilling t, o into the inquiry. (Loud cries 01
" Order.") - •
Sir R. WILSON, , the best way of
.eettling this
question, and of put an end to these irregular proceed-
ings, would be to eee'lltat the lion. Member for Derby
be examined in his 'e!tee. .
Mr. PEEL was sorry that the lion. Gentleman who had
proposed that Mr. Samuel Crompton—(he believed that lie
IA now a right to name the Hon. Member)—should he
examined,' should have prefaced his motion by the observa-
tions which he had'inade. It was not his wish to throw
any difficulty in the way of the Hon. Member for Derby
being examined, if the House wished that he should be
examined ; butrlte really thought it would be better to post-
pone that examination, _when it was considered that the
Hon. Member was under a degree of excitement, from wgich
he ought to be entirely free, when undergoing any exami-
nation, but more (specially when tindergOiug -the *minima-
tion of the Hon. Member for Colchester.—(Hear.)
Mr. D. W. HARVEY explained. .
Mr. CROMPTON attempted neaddrein the House, but
sat down amidst loud cries of " Question."
Mr. TENNYSON had no intention to call the lion.
Member for Derby.. He had ether witnesses whomehe
could call if the House pleased, but hccOnsidered his case
fully established;: and was ready to close it iltetey-time:
It was no longer his case, but that of the Committee.
(Loud cries ef " Go on.")
• The motion was then (as we understood) withdrawn,
and the examination of witnesses continued.
William Leadbetter was then called.
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN desired the evidence
which this witness had given on a preceding "occasion,
which he denied having received any me eto be read.
The evidence was read.
Witness examined by Mr. Alderman., ITIMAN—Iie
reedleetedhaving given that evidence. 11 'e'hut to abide by
it. Persisted in it. Had said that he never received loo-
ney in the presence of Mr. Hannan, , and. would pow abide
by that.
- Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN desired Hanuam's eti•
deuce to be read; in which he stated that Leadbetter hid
been paid in his presence.—The evidence was read ac-
cordingly.AlAderman r 'AITWILAN—iWitat have you to say to
that evidence?
evidence? 11
Witness.—l positively deny it.
Hannam was then called, and identified. Leadbetter.
Mr. Alderman WAITIBIAN then moved that it was
the opinion of the Committee that Leadbetter had been
guilty of givfng Wee evidence.
Mr. PEEL opposed the motion.
After a few words from Lord J. Rusezer., Mr. W. .
Wytetr, and Mr. PEEL, all the evident* relititig to the. .;
witness was read. -
BENETT thought the punishment of this indi-
vidual necessary to the dignity of the House.
Mr. PEEL thought the dignity of the House would be
best consulted by seeing- first if they were justified iu
punishing him.
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN said, the •case was so
clear against this man, that he thought the. House won'd
not do its duty if it suffered hint to escape.'
- The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said a few words, which
were not heard in the gallery.
Lord J. RUSSELL, observed, that-the House was not
bowed in its . proceedings by the same strictness of rule
which governed a Court of Law.
Mr. G. BANKES said that the Home would do well
to be extremely cautious in its-proceedings.
Sir J. WROTTESLEY protested against the ends of
justice being, defeated by any legal subtlety.
Mr. 'miss contended thaeno man, either in the House
Of
SirCO J. WROTTESLEYmmonsoreleewhere, explained.
Mr. tonbedeclared guilty upon
any charge without having an opportuaity of being heard
in his defence. -
Mr. Alderman WAITHAI4* should move as a resolu-
tion on the part of the it
31.P.44 *A, Leadbetter had beau
guil4tyneof
rge:lrCrafnaltiVstilie!NHont44e''Alii2lan;:el rwesaoslustwioffinci.
evi-
denceleir. PEEL was,bound to say, for his own part, that
howeVer the evidence before '
the Howe might , warrant a
moral conviction, it did net weal to him sufficiently clear
to send a man to Newgitiaketnen liel", It was just possible that
the witnesses who deposelol, *Tact of •••,.!better'e haring
received money, Might 1110t4 int,. ;44. .;Za Li:.l the;
stated. He confessed that he was die , lee.; -
better was committed to Newgate, to elez e iteesatee
who had contradicted him, and
person had distinctly said—identifying eieeeeer-
had absolutely paid money to him.
' After a few words from Lord JOHN W.
W. WYNN, and Mr. Luetety, which s. ere net ,Itetinetiee
heard in the gallery,
Mr. A. DAWSON said, .it wouOltAlttfair to ~saint •
the wituese until he was heard in 14,414 rliefee' !ee.
WilliaM Leadbetter was then reCilletY;lnad ee'l by the
CHAIRMAN, that there was strong evidence which Indeeett
the Committee to -doubt whether he had not wllfelly stated,
that which was false. - He therefore cautioned hiin bow 110 ..F
r..
answered in the re-examination to which be W. 9 shops t ,
be subinitted. e
Mr. PEEL then examined the witneas at cocstaeraide-
length. The substance of , his answers was,--That Ivo
a burgess of Retford before the last election. He bad
never heard of such a thing as "election-money. 7 Ye!,
he had heard of it once, but he did not know whist it
meant. He never ;squired. He had never the eerieeltys'

f :~,~~

to iu qui

tion-aw
meant.
any eon
him.
time ag
Did not

the otb,
hia nem
not mall
any elee
given t,
given ;
never fa

house ;
wan of

about si
In at
said tha

money
did not
Witt]
It tw,
mittee t
falsehuc
On t

On c
the eh&

Mr.
inittee,

A cc
sued;
GEO.
took a
Mr.
more
Mr.
calling

Mr.
half of
Afte
rectum
brough
again c
The

time, a

The
The Iv
The
the Ili

Or tir
LIKAL
Atkins,
liatley,
/Irucien

fioulds
Lowthi

1. p
*. R
U. C
4. p

b. L
6. S
7. J

8.
9.v
10. 1
11.
12. C
18. A
14. A

Lord

Sir .h

Mr. 1

Rank)!
Z?er(
„oar t
5,14 poi
Ditto ]
4 oar (
\ Ditto.
Bank
India
Ditto]
r
Austri
Brazil
Buena
Cpilla
• Colom
Ditto.
Danis]
area
Ditto,,
Guatii
Maxi(
Do. It

Colu
United

• Hank
Congo
• I, (jov. 1,
, • 1 Ditto,
4 per i
, • Gov.]
; • 1, Iloyal
r . Grand
' CitT I
Balla'

TO /3
T

PRO
131.13
QOt
Pater
made
Sale

Vital

gate,
the fl

••••-•••t:.

T 1
stroll

Lion

arms,

fairs.
ber

' •

give ev;deneei
Committee
as be called ti
any queetioo
ewer the Co
wee of calling
7; I believe,
.curted wbere
nets before the
aim questioni.
may also re'

r of the Coal'
I RS might be

kr thing at all
,eeessarv. Ne
r, hear..)
iad said about'
it. He bad
818 ; and, if
formation, ha!
swerved frousl
,ust be a better
T who would
sof " Order"
by that Hon.

On this the Committee divided—

lion. Ilirenaber
20 was willing
of allow him-
Colchester.

17-(Here tLt

Mee to hear

; if the Cain-
'lon.lera-
shall be exa•
it !interrogate
Gentleman'e

r would vet.-
the bar.

:Mr. Cretup-
a great num-
mlse of very
mend to the
d be adoptLd,
at hie Hon.
ou should be
on taken on

I. Friend and
the power 44
h very itnpor-
procuring all
g be bullied
" Hear," and
If up against
that indivi-
) lay open all
blic judge of
of " Hear,"
the Contwit-
It:mined con-

be no doubt
ctiou over its

►at had fallen
1g the trans-
her, that not
and corrup-
►ll the trau,-
bad been en-
,nt, he should
Loud cries 01

settling tliis
liar proceed-
er for Derby

•
am who bad
ieved that be
—should be
the oinervit-
sh to throw
er for Derby
should be
otter to poit-
red that the
, from wbieh
; any exanai-
be examion-
ear.)

House, but

Xll the Hon.
whom he
gyred bis eAie
,mmittee.—

withdrawn,

le evidence
Occasion, iu
be read.

H )tA N—lle
to abide by
'owed too-
-1 pow abide

Inaufa eti•
ibeaer had
La read ac-

to say to
" 7.

[better.
hat it W
rr had been

T., Mr. W.
ting to the

this hull-

;e would be
justified iu

FR WAS Fla
)uge wutilit

)rds, which

to wai not
ma of ruts

Id du well

he ends of

the Houie,
uilty upon
reiug ?lewd

It a nsoln-
r bad

ficient evi-

part, that
warrant a
!utly clear
)saible that
:r't hat4r

; ,
far.. :
Lem. Nu

r—tlo.t_Le

Mr. W.
(11e•inCtir

to ecru it

0i by Lir,
• iy sunvi
bow lot*,
▪ vhogs cot`,

hat be rte•

..._ ___
tie bad - ,
} V
V,.bat it.
I ;:u1 Itw:le

.~~~~.

t• iuquire.P- He afterwards said that he heard of " tlee-
tion-money" four times ; but did not know what it
meant. He had not seen Mr. Pickett. Never had
any communication with him. He should not know
him. He had been at Mr. Hannam's offices son'e
time ago. Saw a paper in his hand. Did not read it.
Did not .see Mr. Newton there. Went on business to
she office. Did not recollect what business. Was told
hie name was 'on the list, in Mr. Hannani's hand. Did
not make any inquiries on the subject. He never received
any election money. Heard •f 20 guineas having bee❑
given to some voters: could not think for what it was
given ; never received any money from Mr. Thornton ;
never found any packets sealed up and left for him at his
Louse; did not know what it meant; his father wa's bell_
man of the town of Retford ; never heard of his going
about with packets, or of his giving money to voters.
In answer to a question from Lord JOHN RUSSELL, he
said that he had a notion that if he confessed the receipt of
money for voting lie would be Heide to punishment. He
did not think he should if he spoke the truth.
Witness was ordered to withdraw. _ _

It was then moved, " That it is the opinion of this Com-
mittee that William Leadbetter is guilty of gross and wilful
falsehood, in his evidence before the Committee."

For the Resolution 106
Against it l5
Majority —9l
On our return to the gallery we found the SP.EAKER in
the chair.
Mr. GORDON reported the resolution of the Corn-.
rnittee, which being read and agreed to,
Alderman WAITHNIAN moved that the witness, for
the e.freoco stated in the resolution, be committed to New-
gate, and that the Speaker do issue hie warrant accordingly.
This was put, and agreed to without a division.
The House having resolved itself again into a Committee,
Mr. TENNYSON said it would be useless to multiply
evidence, and therefore he now cloned his case.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY did not see how the case could
be closed without calling on Mr. Crompton.
Mr. PEEL said if the case should be found deficient
without the evidence of Mr. Crompton, he would not ob-
ject to his being examined.
A conversation then ensued as to the course to be pur-
sued; in which Mr. W. W. WYNN, Mr. CALcitArr, Mr.
Gao. Blames, Sir R. Wir.soN, and Mr. W. D. HARVEY
took a part.
Mr. BANKES expressed his intention of calling for
more witnesses.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY gave notice of his intention of
calling on Mr. Crompton as a witness on Monday.
The CHAIRMAN now called on Counsel.
Mr. Denman proceeded to address the House on be-
half of the borough.
After the Learned Gentleman had concluded, the House
resumed, and the Chairman of the Committee having
brought up the report of its progress, obtained leave to sit
again on Monday.
The Penryn Disfranchisement Bill was read a second
time, and ordered to be committed on Friday, March 14.
The Marine Mutiny Bill went through a Committee.
The report to be received on Monday.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at One o'clock.

LIST OF THE mixonrry
or tIfTESIN Tfilo FOIRD AULIXST TIII XOTIOX riLtiLARING
Lii•DBITTSX lII:LLTY OF UO3aa FAIJILMOOD IX HIS ItIDENCii.
Atkins, Alderman Lumley, J. S. Strutt, J, H.
.Batley, C. H. Mundy, E. Twiss, Horace
Brudenell, Lord Perceval, S. Wetherell, Sir C.
pundits, lion. H. Ranclitle, Lord
tlouldsworth, T. Smith, C. Ald. TELLIIII..
Lowther, Viscount Stewart, Bankes, •I

PARLIAMENTARY PROCKiEDINGS.
ROusE,or COMMON&
NIOXDAY, 10.---ORDERS OF TUE Day.
1. Parochial Settlements (Scotland)Rill—Second reading.
*. Roman Catholic Land Tax Bill—Committ,e.
S. Cities and Boroughs Polls Bill—Second reading.
4. Pauper Lunatic Bill—Second reading.
b. Lunatic Regulation Bill—Second reading.
6. Stamp Duties Bill—Committee.
7. Jonathan Fox to be brought to the Bar, and dkcharged.
8. Supply—Committee.
9. Ways and Means—Report.
10. Ways and Means. -Committee.
11. East Retfortl Disfranchisement Bill—Coattuittee.
12. Cities and Towns Lighting (Ireland) Bill—Report.
"13. Mutiny Bill—Report.
14. Marine Mutiny Bill—Report.
No-ricx or NOTION.
Lord Nugent--On the Report of the Mutiny Bill to move
a Clause fur preventing Corporal Punishment iu the

Nower.a GIVEN YESTERDAY.
Tuesday, March 18.
Sir John Newport—Consideration of State of Admiralty
Court, Ireland.
Tuesday, April 29.
Mr. Brougham—Consideration of the Petition of Emma
Catholics of Ireland, coinplaining of their exclusion
from Parliament.

DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK.
S.uth Sea Stock
Old Ansmities •,hui
New Ditto

Ex. Bills, £l,OOO 2d. Ml ACI pm.
Ditto 5OO 21. 50 60 pm.
Ditto Small
Ditto C0mmercia1......... —pm.
Bank for Account ......
India for Account
Cons. for Ac. KV,V;