The Sun.
London, England, 1829-10-07 00:00:00

street all the tenants now remaining there who voted
for Mr. Serjeant Wilde (four in number), have re-
ceived notices to quit; and none of the others who
voted for Mr. Sadler. In Constantinople, arid Cot-
ton-square, the same. In Depot-yard, out of twelve
now residing there, who polled at the last election,
all the seven who voted for Mr. Serjeant Wilde have
received notices to quit; and not one of the remain-
ing five who polled for the Duke's nominee. In
Hen-and-Chickens-yard, a similarly marked distinc-
tion is observable, as also in Mill-gate, Lincoln-
row, Water-lane, Tomlinson's-row, and Tallent's-
row, &c. &c. In Slaughterhouse-lane, the only
person who voted for the Serjeant, is Thomas Bell,
who has received a notice to quit, notwithstanding
that he resided in the same house six years before it
was purchased by the present's Duke's grandfather,
and notwithstanding that he is now seventy-seven
years of age, fifty-two of which he has lived in the
same house, never having been during that time, a
day behind with his rent, and owing none until next
Michaelmas-day (old style). He has always borne
a good character, and lived out of that time twenty-
four years with one master, and twenty years with
another, and against him there has been no worse
imputation than that of having, on the last election,
voted for Mr. Serjeant
" We are happy, for the honour of the borough,
to have to report that there does not exist the least
pretence for the proceeding of the Duke on account
of the backwardness on the part of the discharged
tenants in the payment of their rents ; they were
principally old, respectable, and well-paying tenants ;
in most of the cases no rent whatever will be due un-
til the 12th instant, and in the remaining instances,
not more than one-half year's rent, which will be
duly paid.
" With the preceding statement of facts we had
intended to conclude our report, but the extraordi-
nary assertions contained in his Grace's letter to our
Chairman compel us to further explanations, unless
we were to allow the inhabitants of Newark to la-
bour under the unmerited imputation of ingratitude
to his Grace.
" We confidently appeal to the experience of our
fellow-townsmen for the truth of our assertion, that
we are not indebted to his Grace the Duke of New-
castle for any of those acts of beneficence to the
poor, or utility and liberality to the town, for which
in his letter he takes credit; on the contrary, the
arbitrary and exclusive principle by which the let-
ting of his property has been governed has impeded
the march of improvement, checked the progress of
wealth, and confined (for election purposes), within
narrow and inconvenient limits, a town, which from
its local situation, the fertility of the surrounding
country, and its proximity to the best markets, is
well calculated to become, and in despite of every
impediment is, to a considerable extent, the granary
and storehouse of a large portion of the manufac-
turing districts. The acts of benevolence adverted
to in his Grace's letter are, like himself, entirely
unknown to the inhabitants; he neither contributes
to their charities, nor does he promote their trade
—he lives in their recollections only from the pe-
riodical visitation of his rent collectors, and
in the rare case of defalcation in rent it is
exacted with the strictest severity ; particularly so if
the unfortunate defaulter is suspected of holding
sentiments adverse to the Duke's political influence
in the borough. The Duke has also long been ac-
customed to provide the town with Members of
Parliament, which from the power the crown lands
have given him, he has been able to get elected ;
and although they have nominally represented the
town, they have ever been insensible to the promo-
tion of its interests, holding their seats but to swell
the number of his Grace's claims upon the Minister
of the day, for the advancement of his own per-
sonal and 'family interests; and so completely have
such Members been the puppets of the Duke, that,
at his pleasuse, he has displaced and replaced them
without notice to, or the knowledge of, those to
whom they nominally were indebted for their ele-
vation. Had the conduct of the Duke been such
as in his letter be is pleased to represent it to be,
his property, and virtues would have been surely
suifieient to confer influence within :the borough
equal to every just and rational expectation, with-
out attempting to dragoon his tenants into a com-
pliance with his will, by the present undisguised
attempt to reduce the town to the degraded con-
dition of a rotten borough,
" We repel the supposition that those tenants of
the Duke who voted for Mr. Serjeant Wilde held
their property upon conditions of giving to his
Grace the disposition of their votes, a contract
which, in every case, would subject both parties to
criminal punishment, and if proved extensively to
exist, would subject the borough to disfranchise-
ment for general corruption.
" But the Committee call upon the inhabitants
of the borough, of all parties, to repel the imputa-
tion, to resist the present attempt to enslave them,
and to join hand and heart in asserting the honour
of the inhabitants, and the independence of the
borough.
(Signed) SAMUEL BRISTOWE and Others."
Mr. T. GILSON again came forward, arid said that
previous to his moving a resolution he wished to say
that he had been an inhabitant of Newark for up-
wards of thirty years, and during thgt long time a
tenant of his Grace. He now came for,vard be-
cause three red-hot shots had been, as he thought,
unfairly fired at him first, because he was a Whig,
although up to a recent period he had riot proclaimed
hie sentiments in public,—an error of silence of
which he trusted he should not in future prove guilty.
It was known that he was a tenant of his Grace the
Duke of Newcastle for a part of hie Crown property,
on which he had gone to some expence io making
erections of different kinds. To quit this tenement
he had now received three notices, because, as his
Grace said, he was at liberty to do what he pleased
with his own. True, he was, to a certain extent;
but he thought the Duke's power over his own was
limited like any other man's, arid that he was re,
stricted wiien he attempted to do other persons an
injury.—(Heal', hear.)—The Duke had declared an
unwillingness to oppress any body, yet what was it
but oppression to eject tenants because they yoted
according to their consciences ? It was his poli,2y
at one time to support the Duke of Wellington's'
Government, and at another to oppose it; but be-
cause
there were those in the borough who wished
to be loyal to the King and faithful to his Mie;sters,
it seemed they were to be ousted from their houses.
They were met on the present occasion to see what
the people ought to do when thus attacked, and he
congratulated them on having present at this moment
an eminent lawyer (Mr. Serjeant Wilde) who would
give them the best advice in that condition. For his
own part, as a friend to civil and religious freedom,
he should always express his sentiments regardless of
their consequences. His object at present was merely
to move that the report be adopted by the meeting.
Mr. W. KELK' in seconding this moti,o,o, said he
had a few remarks to make on the style arid ma„;ner
of the Duke of Newcastle's artzwer to their com- !
munication. His Grace said, that il,aither lie nor
his ancestors had ever been oppressive or tv:xinical
landlords.—(A laugh.)— He really knew not wile,
ther they had been such ; but ha wished at the ,
same time to know what acts of bounty er bene-
volence they had heaped upon the borough ?-,-(4
cry of "Isione.'')—Was it benevolent for his Grace
to eject a long roll of tenants who had for many
years honestly paid their rent, and for doing marply
what the law enjotied them to do ?—(Hear, hear.),
They were bound to send fit and honest representa-
tives to Parliament. Was it noble in the aulte,
because they wished to do so, to Aome down upon
them with the penalty of ejectment 1?
--(Cries of
" Shame I")—Did the Constitution bind. eti44.71 to
send only his Grace's nominee ? Was that what
he called his rights ?—(" Perish the thought," ex-
claimed an old man in front of the hustings.)_
There was the case of Thomas Bell, who had for
53 years paid four times the value of the fee simple
of the estate he held under the Duke, now about to „
be ejected. Was that what his Grace called
.6i even-handed justice ?" When his Grace, then,
,cod of hie bounty, he should have specified what