Star.
London, England, 1825-06-21 00:00:00

• CAUTION.

TAYLOR and Co. (succetsors to M'Adam and Co.)
beg to Caution the Public against the use of any Paints pur-
porting to be MINER A L l'A I NTS which are not supplied from
their Manufactory, or furnished by tl.eir appoit:ted Agents, as many
persons are imposing upon the Pulilic the re(pse of the Gas Works
(which- has been proved by the highest authorities to be most inju.
rious, particularly as a cooking for wood work) by pirating the
name of their Paints, which have for'upwards of twenty years (not-
withstanding the great and open competition) received such extended
patronage from Government, who still continue to use it, and the
following Certificates, granted by the highly distinguished Officers
in his Majesty's service, will fully prove its durability and economy,
notwithstanding the apparent cheapness of these spurious and ineffi-
cient imitations. The ingredients these Paints are composed of are
Manufactured at the Works erected and conducted under the late
Earl of Dundonald's Patent, to which no other house has access.
The Mineral l'aints are a cheap and durable coating for all out-
door work, such as Wooden, Iron, and Canvas Roofs, Sheds, Barn,
Out-houses, Fences, Palings, GateA, Boat and Barge bottoms, Ships'
sides and upper works, Wood and Iron Bridges, Docks, Chain
Cables, and all Wood and Iron Work under water, or exposed to the
weather; for Tiles on Roofs, to prevent them imbibing water and
being injured by frost ; and for coating Brick walls to prevent damps.
No wood coated with these Paints will be worm-eaten, nor will
insects or vermin of any kind inhabit hot-bed frames, or other
places, coated with them, and they will be loom] an effectual cure
for the dry rot; beitig composed entirely of Mineral substances they
::re insoluble in water. and thereby resist rani:tore in a manner su-
perior to all other preparations.
PRICE, READY FOR USE.

Mineral Green Paint . . 3d. per lb.
Mineral Brown Paint . . 21d. per lb.
Mineral Black Paint . . 2;1.4. per lb.
Manufactured and Sold by Taylor and Co. (succesiors toll' Adam
and Company), Mineral and Chemical Colour Manufacturer',
♦Dillow Wharf, S 7, Bantbi4le, London, and of their Agents in mote
Provincial Towns.

Government Certificates of the cheapness and durability of
Messrs. Taylor and Co.'s Mineral Brawn Paint, granted to biebsrs.
Adam and Co.

" Barrack Office, March 14, 1814.
" We hereby certify, that the Wooden Barracks in Great Britain
hive been, for several years past, covered with Messrs. M'Adam
and Co.'s Mineral Brown Paint, for the preservation of the wea-
ther boarding, and it has fully answered the purpose for which it
was applied. .
(Signed) " JOHN SANDERS, Architect.
" TEIOM AS J P.A NS, Architect."
" The above Certificate made by order of the Commissioners for
the Affairs of Barracks. "JOHN STAPLETON, Sec."
" Plymouth Lines, May 26, 1807.
" This is to certify, that by order of arneral Mercer, at the
desire of Messrs. M'Adam and Co. we made experiments with
'their preparations of Misteral Brown Paint in April and Sep-
tember, 1806. The Cta:ttion of the wood and iron work made use
of in this experiment is very high, and entirely exposed to the
wind from the Chaone', where it is difficult to find any coating
able to resist the weather. The paint, after having withstood the
winter in the above situation, has formed a very hard and corn*
pact body on both wood and iron work; the wood when cut is
bard and very dry ; the iron free front every appearance of Lust.—
From the present appearance of the Mineral Brown Paint, its
hard, solid, and impenetrable state, there is every reason to believe
that it will defend the wood and iron work for years against the
effect of weather and the moisture of the atmosphere; and we give
it as our opinion, that it is a useful coating for wood and iron
work exposetl to the weather or to damp, and consikr it to be
cheaper than any other that can be procured.
'6 Certified by HENRY 81 IN")N8' } Overseers of the Works.
" JOHN PHILLIPS,
" lIOIIEIIT WAKEMAN, Serj. Maj. Master Carpenter.
" JAMES MOIR, Serj. Master Smith, R. Artificers."
" Plymouth Lines, May 26, 1807. '
"6 I confirm the above certificate or statement.
" ALEXANDER MERCER,
" Lieutenant-General Commanding Royal Engineers.
" Royal Engineers' Office, Plymouth Dock, May 9, 1815.
" We hereby certify, that Messrs. M'Adam and Co.'s Mineral
and Brown Paint has continued in general use in this Department,
for all kinds of fences, since the date of the above certificate of
May 26, 1807, that it has also latterly been used on sentry boxes,
travelling magazines, side arm racks, carts, and other wood work
exposed to the weather, with every probability of success; we,
therefore, after nearly eight years' additional experience, have no
hesitation in confirming that certificate, as to the general good qua-
lities of the Paint in question, for the preservation of wood and
iron work. " BEN. JONES, Clerk of Works,
" JAMES simutAH, Overseer."
" Royal Engineers Office, Portsmouth, May 15, 1815.
6' We hereby certify, that the Mineral Brown Paint, prepared
and sold by Messrs. M'Adam and Cu. has been used in the Ord.
nance Department at this station fur thr:e years, for purposes,
similar to thoee.beforementioned; and we are of opinion that ti
• has fully answered the purposes for which it was applied.
"JOHN HASSARD, Lieut.-Col. It. Engineers, Commanding.
" G. BUCHANAN, Captain Royal Engineers.
"JACOB OWEN, Clerk of Works.
JOHN OWEN, Assistant Clerk of Works.
' Messrs. M'Adam and Cu."
Innumerable certificates may be seen upon application.
Paton bright Gresns, genuine White Lead, Oils, Varnishes,
an 4 Colours, dry and ground, of every description.

THE PRESENT' GAY SEASON has given a ..(•%% at:
mulus to the Fashionable World; and the enhancement of per-
sonal charms Is an object of anxious solicitude. The two greatest
auxiliaries and promoters of Beauty are ROWLAND'S KALVDOR,
which possesses incomparable virtues in removing all imperfections
of the skin, arraying the neck, hands, and arms in inatchltss white-
ness, and communicates a Celestial and Juvtnile Bloom to the
Coatplexioas The Beauty ot the Countenance is alsuillumined by
the tasteful arrangement of the' flair, produced by the use ot Row-
LAtrell MACASSAR OIL. The tratisc,ll.lant excellence of this ad-
relivable article imparts to the Hewing. tresses a delightful, snum:b,
the Head Dress truly enzhantii.g. and !mindful gloss, tendering

The Gazett.s f Leghorn and Genoa announce the
arrival in those ports of ez.,sels f om the lon'an Isl,tnds,
:Ouch .:onfi•m all the accounts bioniht to Trieste by
the Corf9 packet-boat, viz.—the tleAructi,n of the
Egyptian fleet, and the ,huttirg up of the remains t,f
Ail tn's army in 21.1.)d0n.

PARLI,IMENTARV PRUCEEDI GS.

lIRU6E OF LORDS, JUNE 20.
T!TE GARDNER PEERAGE.

Mr. ADAM summed up on the evidence adduced in this awe
against the claimant by the brat marriage, Henry Fenton Jadies,
calling himself Gardner. He Contended that he could not be the
son of Lord, Gardner, but of Mr. Jadies. The usual period ref
gestation wa;-hiue months or forty weeks—a day or two before or
after. The opinion of several eminent physicians supported him in
that assertion, and the eases cited against left the question un-
touched. There was a physical impossibility that the child could
have been Lord Gardner's, for he left this country in January, or
early in February, an the child was born on the Bth of December.
It was besides in evidence that a criminal intercourse had been
carried on between Mrs, Gardner and Mr. ladies, previously to
her going on board her husband's ship before be left this country,
and it was plain that she was with child in July, when he came
home. When she found that the ehild might be born so as to bring
it within the proper period, she used every means to forward the
d' livery by riding over the stones, &c. and she gave it out to the
family that she was pregnant; hut finding, as the time drew near,
that she could not be delivered in time, she denied the pregnancy,
and said rh it She had the dropsy and spasms. Lord Gardner never
slept with her after his return. On tille fl
December, finding
that she w .s near her-time, she sent for err brother, anal told hint
to take o:ie Lord Gardner on the following day. On the night of
the 7th, or morning of the Bth, she was delivered without her bus-
band's knowledge. Then there was first the concealment of the
pregnancy, next of the delivery, and afterwards of the child, who
was carried away privately, and brought up end educated as the
son of Mr. Jadies. He was entered at Westminster, School as
Jadies, and subsequently was put into a public office under the
name of -ladies: The case of the Banbury Peerage was exactly in
point, as if it had been got up as a precedent for this case, for there
;.viy Banbury married Lord Vaux, as Mrs. Gardner slid Mr.
.la.'ies. ile concluded by trusting that the House would guard
the purity of the Peerage, by not entertaining the claim of Mr.
Jadies. Ile added that the preamble of the Bill for dissolving the
marriage or Lord Gardner, stated that the child was not legitimate.
Mr. TYNUAL objected to the preamble, as being that of a pri.
vate Bill, and not therefore evidence.
Mr. ADAMS said there was a saving clause.
The LORD CHANCELLOR never knew of such a thing aa a
saving clause in Divorce Bills, touching the legitimacy.
The Bill was sent for, and
The LORD CHANCELLOR looking at it, said, there were
some words in it which ought to have been struck out, •• that
Henry Fenton Jadies was not begotten by Lord Gardner." These
could not be received as evidence, being in the preamble of a pri-
vate Bill to which the claimant was no party.
Mr. TYNDAI. was then called on for his case, and asked what
be meant to prove ? He said that he had witnesses to prove that the
period ef gestation was longer than stated, and he prayed for time.
The LOlt D CIIANCEI.LORsaid,that it was very proper that
these Medical Gentlemen should be called forthwith, because it
might be necessary to call back the other Aletlical Gentlemen, who
differed with them in opinion, in order to contrast them. In a week
medical men could be had front England and t'cotland.
The Earl of LA UDERDA LE said, that a steam-boat would
bring up as many accoucheurs front Edinburgh, in three days, as
Learned Counsel might choose to have—( Laughter) or even
front Paris.

The Earl of LIMERICK said, they could (men be got from
Dublin in a shorter ;Triod than from Edinburgh.
Tne LORD CIIANCRLLOR said, that as Doctors might die
as well as other people, it was most important to have those ex-
amined who were to come, in order to confront th.zin with those
all eatly examined.

BAUGA NY CAusto'.
The LORD CHANCELLOR proceeded to give juJgment in
this case With his ustrd t.cctfracy and tbs‘inctriess,ll4 Lordship de-
tailed the procedure, co::clusions of the summons, nature of the
defences and arguraents,pro and con. both in the former action, asl
it then stood on different grounds; and. on this the new action
brought by Mrs. Follett:sr, that resting on grounds different from
the former. The Judgment of the House of Lards in 1801,
wherein the title to purse; and title to exclude, were considered and
settled; and the action as at 1816. His Lordship referred to the
opinions of the Judges in the division where the cause was tried
and to the collected opinions of the whale consul!ed Judges,
thirteen being of one opinion and two of another; and these two,
Lords Robertson and Craigie, whose opinions he had attentively
weighed with the re.t. In all cases, their Lordships were to look
to the opinions of Judges, pot from majority or number alone; but
whether they best unfolded justice and the law of Scotland.
Thus he had weighed and considered the opittioni on the.prosent
occasion ; and Upon the whole,* their Lordships, he would propose,
ought to aflirm the Interlocutors of the Court of Session in this im-
portant cause, on the ground that, by the legal construction and
effect of the deeds in question, which Mrs. Fullerton, however, had
challen ;ea, such Interlocutors embraced the correct view in point
of law and justiceofthecause.
_ _

The liar; of LA UDER DA LE could not avoid addressing their
Lordships, merely to say how heartily he agreed in all that had
been stated.
A great concourse of persons attend below thi Bar On this as
on former occasions when the cauas ryas beard.
Counsel were heard in part i■ the.Apyeal D'Arcy v. Kelly.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE presented a Peritiim from an
individual of the name of Brodie, who had been employed oh the
Journals of the House, and prayed for reniun.•ratiou.—Laid_on
the table.

Mr. TiLuton-, from the Tax Office, presented an account of the
expenses incurred under the Act for the Sale and Redemption of.
the Laid Tax in I tid on the table.
Ur. BROG DEN, and othris from the Commons, brought up
the Excise Duties Bill, the Judges' Salaries Augimmtation Bill, the
Office Courts Bill, the Bubble Act. Repeal Bill, the King's Bench
Offices Sale Abolition the Goods Warehousing Bill, nd a
number of 2iivate Bills, which were read a first time:

COURT OF CIRANCRRY.

E it GROSVENOR held a Pctition from an ;n-

• -vg
dividual of the name of Gurael ,ss ho •iriptan."
of the delays which occurred i t the C•Hart of Chan*
eery. As there was a Coatmissi n no • engaged
:n an extensive inquiry into he cause of those delays,
(L'nd Grosvenor) should say not-i,g u on the
subject, except that whenever it should .coo e before
the consideration of Parliament, it would be a most ippon=
question. The Petitioner also complained of a Rule of Court, by
which a person entitled to an annuity was to rcc lye no intere4
ror it, however long its payment might be delayed by the proceed-
ins of the Court. The accumulation of money which must ensue
from the observance of that Rule, might be conside e I as rendering
delay a matter of Interest. He moved that the Pe.ition he read.
. The LORD CHANCELLOR had objr•ction
whrrever to the Petitkn being received: on the con-
t rary, he was happy that it I,ad been submitted to their
Lord hips consideration, as it woull give them some
insight into the nature of most of the complaints
made against th ; delays of the C :urt of Chancery. The
case to which the Petition referred was the succession
of the late Duke-of Queensberry. After his death the
validity of a number of leases had become doubtful,
and befOre the will could be executed it was necessary
to ascertain what was the real amount of the property,
lf which those leases formed a considerable part. Va.
ions suits ' had been instituted in the Court of Session
;n Scotland, which, after long proceedings, had been
dere'rmined in a manner which had caused appeals to
that House,and till it had been finally dec;ded what-were
the rights of parties and the amount of the property, it
was impossible for the Court ofChancery to dispose of the
money. Of all the cases in which delay hat been imputed
to that Gourt the present was the most unreasonable. With a view
I to the relief of the suitors, he had been called front time to time by
the tenants to state what was the probable amount of the assets;
but . the information had not been produced. Let his life and
charar!er Le lost sight of as respectable, if a single Counsel
in the Court of Chancery did not say that, with respect to
this cause, more had been done in that Court than had ever been
done lit fore. With respect to the Rule of Court, if it were wrong,
let their Lordships remember that it was not in the power of the
Judge to alter the law, but that it must be done by another autho-
rity. That Rule, however, had been farmed by the ablest men
who had ever sat in that Court, and no man who had since filled
their place, had conceived that it ought to be changed. As to this
particular cause, he should repeat, more had been done for it than
for any other during half a century, and the conduct of the Court
had been most praiseworthy.
E rl GROSVENOR said, that ete Petitioner chiefly
complained of the hardships crea ed by the Rule, cf
which no doubt could be entertain al Their Lordships must knew
that this was a case which had co: t.naed for t:n years.—
During the whole of that time had the Petitioner been kept out of
his annuity; and if he, or any other individual should be similarly
kept out during ten, twenty, or thirty. years, the great hardship
was, t' it at the end of that period, they would not only receive no
compound interest, but no interest at all. The case was by no
Means settled now, so that the Petitioner might wait much longer.
Lord REDESDALLE stated, that the Coen-mission
had nothing to do with the Rule of Court. It could
not alter the law any more than the Chancellor. As
to the delays-which occurred, how could the Court pay
either interest or principal, when a testator created nurnterless
difficulties by his own will ? He was one of the Members of the
Commission appointed to inquire into the cause of those delays,
and he must say, in vindication of the Noble and Learned Earl,
that they were created by the practices of that Court, he meant
by the Solicitors themselves, who produced them, and they were
the persons who clamoured most against his Noble Friend.. •
Earl GROSVENOR had not said .tnything ab- .
surd as that the Commission could alter the law. Whit he
had said, he should repeat : it was appointed to inquire
.into the
whole system of the Court of Chancery, and If, in its Report, ic
should point out the Rule as one which created unnecessary hard-
ships, it would then be for Parliament to alter the law. He cansi-
dered the Commission bound to lay every part of the system of
Chancery open to the public.
Lord REDESDALE said, that the Noble Earl de-
ceived himself, if he thought that the Commission had anything to
sio with the payment of interest. That wai a question of law which
had been decided by an appeal to that House, and the only way to
alter it lutist he to introduce a Bill for the purpose.
Earl GROSVENOR said, that if the Commission were not so
comprehensive as it had been imagined, it was a great misfortune -
that it should have been issued. He had heard it. said that the
individ.aals chosan as Commissioners were not exactly those who
ouch( to have been appointed, but he would not. enter into the
auestion at present.
The Earl of L A UDE RDA LE was understood to defL:nd the Rule
of Court, and to state that the Duke of Queensberry had so involved
h:s affairs as to render it extremely difficult to ascertain the right
amount of assets and of claims.

The LORD CHANCELLOR repea•ed his sitisfac-
lion that the Petition should have bren pre•ented. It
was natnial that the Petitioner should wilt to receive
his annuity ; and he (the Lord Chancellot ) could meet
the question and say, at the end of a long life, that he
had never meant to do wrong. The Nab'? and Learned
Ea:l tht n went into the history of thecae. He desci ibed -
the involved state in which tbe Duke of Queensberry
had let his large property, the suits to it had
given birth in the Courts of Session in Szo land;
C`e long time employed by th' m ; the, differences
of opinion which had prevailed, and the Appeals which
had isen in con equence of those dill-rt duces, after the
Court of Session-had given judgment. He showed the
length of time occupied in hearing and deciding those
Appeals, sonic of them against -the opinion of the
grates I.wyers in Scotland, thong!' they vie:e a•ter.
%tads found to be correct according to the law. He
'eflated that t':e Court of Chancery had never le;
deci ion of the Court of Session in Scotland slip without
doing instantly what could be done for the relit fof the
sui.ors. More in fact had been done for this cause than
pot any other before. Yet it was natural for bid vidaals
to present p ti ions, and they afforded opportunities
for rescuing the Court from the load of calumny thrown
upon it by those who did nil undeistand the n iture
of the ateged complaints. With respect to the Rule of
Court, the Chancellor could not settle the questiol. It
might be fair to ask him, if you thought it wiong, why
not bring in a Bill to alter it? To this the answer
would be, that be thought it perfectly right. There
wis,nothing in • the law which empowered the Lord
Cha`nettor to give interest where the testatoi hintse.f
baditorgiven it. The law, on the contrary, attt,t take
it that was not his intention to give it. liNides,
how.cou:d the Court be expected to pay interest when
it woo-not IsaSksrn whether there would be money
enough to pay :he capital? In the p-reient case the
Cou.t nad proceeded furvcr than it ever before had
.lone. It it were imagined that the business of the
country could go on without the Court of Chancery, let him to
sent to the thd Bailey and put to death. But he was convinced of
the necessity of that. Court. :1-le bad had the Noble Earl (Earl
Grosvenor) twice before bins; he did not having deny his been
brought improperly there_ • •
allow him to use that
he had sent him out of
After a few words

...a • I gag DriXl
kere ; but his Noble &kite, if he wotl I
name, would do him the justice, to say titur
f Court very quickly
from Elrl Geon.:•xox, braring testimony to
•

P~

1

■

r... :-..

MUSH OF COMMONS.

t

-4

I,'

iferirst=r4.4.o-4,".

th- handsome treatot•st which he hail cape: fenced in the Court O
Charcery, tbte Petition tokit ul on the table.
iNTERE3t,,.! MONLY IN INDIA.
- The Marq•lis of II AS/40(GS postponed the second reading of
his Bill fur amending the Art respecting the interest of money it.
'ntlim, till to-morrow. in consequence of its not having been yet laid
I :ta primal state before thc llouse.—Adjourned.

A person from the Court of I{lnfa Bench presented a copy of
the affidavit of Mr Drahard, with a copy of Mr. Kenrick's letter
to tine Solicitor.of the Morning Chronicle.
111.%.K ISSOY presented a Petition from the inhabitants of
glary-la-bonn,,erayin7, for leave to present a Petition for erecting a
new Church in that Pai.isb.
Mr. I.A BTON complained of a misrepresentation in the
Mo!pir,. re.necting his conduct in the Committee on the
' Hull Cocks 13.11. lie had at first intended to have moved that the
Printer shoal,' be called to the Bar of the House, hut on &littera.
lion he should content himself with denouncing the article in the
Paper alluded to as false and calumnious.
Mr. C. DUN DAS brought up the Report of the Committee on
the Berk% awl Hants ('anal.
Mr. JONES reprobated the conduct pursued by some,
of ti.e Me.i.bers o; the Committee, in dissolving the
Committee before the end of the Session. Their object was merely
to delay the t.ro Friss of the Bill unnecessarily.
Mr. BAKKE'S v ind,ca led himself, as one of the Mem-
bers alltt led to, a: d said that his object had been col
• defer the further consideration until the nett Session,in consequence
of there not being sufficient time to go.shrough with all the evidence
during the present Session.
Mr. NiONCK salcf the delay complained of was
wholly a trihutable to the promote: s of the Bill, who had,
not aop inted their Comeittee at an earlier petind of
the Session. The present Report slid not express any opinion as to
• the merits of the Bill, but only stated the impos4bility of carrying
the Bill through Parliament in this Session. The sante thing hod
. been done with respect to many other Bills of more impoPtanee.
Mr. NI A HER I,Y defended the conduct of the Committee.
Mr. ESTCOURT censured the conduct of some of the Mem-
bers of the Committee, and wished that something might be done
to regulate their proctedings hereafter.
Mr. C. DUN DAS entered into an explanation of the reasons
which had governed the Committee in making their Report. A
great prztion of the land owners were in favour of the Canal.
Mr. CA I,CR AFT said that he undo stood the contrary to be
the fact. Eleven miles of the course of the Canal were againat
the Bill, and only one in its favour.
Mr. BANK ES confirmed this statement.
Mr. C. DUN DAS said, that he spoke as to the number of the
persons aisenting, and not as to the quantity of tbeir property.
Mr. I%IONCK
Sir C. II U I,Sh' doubted whether the statement of the Hon.
Member (Mr. Colz-Taft) was correct.
The Report was then order,:ii to lie on the table.
The SPEAKER said, that two points had been
raised in refvrence to this Commit,ee, which were of
general importance, and on which he wished to ex-
press an opinion. The fist point was, whetl.er the
vote of any Member could be challenged on the•score
of his being in•ereaed in any Bill before the House?
Certainly it was the usage, though not the law of Par-
liament. It was a subject worthy the consideration
of the House to ascertain for what circum-tance
Member should be deprived of the exercise of the duty
he owed to his constituents. The other point was, whe-
ther certain persons subscribing petitions could be ex-
amined as witnesses before a Committee? The prac-
tice of the House was certainly in favour of their ex-
amination. In cases ef petitioners against election re-
turns, the person subscribing had an interest, because
they were liable to costs, in ease the Petitions were
decided to be frivolous. In the case of ordinary Pe-
ti ions they were not so incapacitated. If it were so. a
door would be throw's open to trick and fraud, by en-
trapping persons to sign Petitions, and thereby dis-
qualify them from appearing as witnesses, although they might
babetter acquainted with the subject than any others. These, how-
ever, were points of great importance, and worth the deliberate
consideration of the I louse—(Hear).
Mr. ESTCOU HT said, that as tbe.present measure was likely
to be again introduced in the next Session, be should now give
notice of a motion for a return of all the accounts of the different
Canal Companies having connection with the Thames.
The Report was then ordered to be received.
REACTIVE IRA NCH ISE.
Lord NUGENT said, that he had had two Petitions
placed in his hands, from the Inhabitant Householders
of West Lo -e and Banbury. They treated of a subject
which was of twofold importance; it was of import-
ance, as it affected the rights of individuals; and it was
of importance, as it *elated to the privileges of that
House. He mentioned the petitions together, because
their objects were identified, although their cases were
different, and bth prayed for an enquiry as to the
right of voting, and as to the mode in which Members
were remised to that House. Although he mentioned
bath petitions together, yet he would call the attention
of the House to one of! them only, viz. that from West
Lone. He believed, and he spoke in the presence of
Learned Lawyers who could contradict him if he were
in error, that to support a right, the immemorial usage
of it need not be shewa to have been unbroken and in-
variable, but that where it had been inftinged, docu-
ments and charters might come in to the support of it :
such documents the petitioners possessed, although they
did not rest their cave upon them, ter by the Common
Law, all inhabitants paying scot and lot were entitled to
a vote for Representatives in Parliament, unless that
tight was restrained by charter. In West Lnoe there
had been no charter limiting that right. What he
stated to be law was to be found in the language of
that famous Committee which sat on the Cirencester
petition, in the reign of James!. and among whom were
to be found the names of Coke, Selden,Lloyd, arri the
most eminent lawyers of that day. The Report of that
Committee distinctly laid down the position that the
right of voting resided in the inhabitant householders,
where it was not remained by charter. He would re-
mind the House, that the present was not a petitices for
-Parliamentary Reform ; the Petitioners were desirous
Only, that the law as it stood should be duly enforced.
He would then go, at once, to the petition, and in ad-
verting to it, he would for a short time beg the in-
dulgence of the House. By the Charter of the
lith of Elizabeth, all the inbaSitants of West
Looe were entitled to be considered as burgesses who
had resided in the borough -it year and a day. The,
Noble Lord proceeded to relid extracts from the Peti-
tion, to spew that' the fight of voting resided in the
burgesses, it never having been limited by charter.
el he Petition contained a chronological series of
in
ter s, establishing the right of election by name, the
burgesses, or the residents generally, or the probe ho-
r!ina. The first usurpation on the right of the inhabi-
tants was in the time of Charles 11. and the entries sub-
sequently to that period were made in various names.
There were many successive usurpations till 1709. In
1822 there was an inquiry before the Gienville Corn'mittee , and on the election, with respect to wh:ch that
place, only twenty-thsee voted, of whom
non-residents. Forty-seven of the inhabi-
t' their votes. but were refused by the
effect of the decision to which the Corn-
er^ to rev- guise the right of election in
, of the Corporation, being inhabitants of
They did not, however, determine how the
the Corporation were to be elected. At

inquiry took ;
. ,
eleven were oi
tants tendered
Mayor. The
rnittee tame I
the vnanibers 4
the town. 11
almoners of t