The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-03-15 00:00:00

IVlAacu 15, 1836.

. .
dow duty, of which HuNrE and his dogs'-meat reformers
are, by an absurd courtesyoSsumed to be the sincere ad-
vocates.

Need we itnprove'npqn -gtese startling facts by saying
that the people of England`thiare grossly and shamefully
imposed upon by these "incomprehensible vagabonds"
—by men who, with economy upon their lips, and peace
in their mduths, and non-interference inscribed upon their
banners, are the real enemies of the people, inasmuch as
they 'are the most wasteful and profligate empirics that
this or any other nation was ever pestered or afflict-
ed with. We subjoin the return of the House of
Commons, in order to show that we write by the card;
and we•earnestly request the attention of our readers to
the details. They %, ill, we question not, see at a
glance, that this supply., of arms is a supply money
upon the pawnbroking system—that -the muskets are
given to be sold—practically to be captured by the Car-
lists—and that the British arm's, thus granted, are in all
Probability to be made the means of advancing the pros-
Pects of the prince against wbose fortunes they were
originally directed. It will be a:singular mishap if Don
.CARLOS should enter Madrid by means of the London
and Birmingham bayonets supplied to his enemies. In-
cidents more remarkable than thig have occurred in the
Wars.

" A Return of all Stores, Arths, and Ammunition furnished by
the' British Government to the GoVernment of the Quen of
Spain ; together with the Sums which have been paid for
the same, and the Guarantees fur the Payment of such is

remain unliquidated.
" SPANISii GOVERNMENT.---Muskets, 220,2 W; carbines,
10,000; pistols, 3,600; swords, 10,000; rifles,3,ooo; cartridges,
small .arm, 3,000,000; powder, 900,000Ihs.; chests and barrels,
27,783; one 18-pounder iron gun, six 18-pounder carronades,
30 muskets, 40 pistols, 40 swords, ammunition, shot, &c., for
the schooner Isabella;' two 18-pounder iron guns, tour thirty-
two-pounder carronades, 24 muskets, 24 pistols, 24 swords, am-
Munition, shot, &c., for the steam-ship 'City of Edinburgh;'
six. 32-pounder iron guns, 80 muskets, 40 pistols, 100 swords,-
40 pikes, with ammunition, &c., for the steam ship
bells ll.'
" AuxtuAßY LEGlON—Muskets,ls,ooo; carbines, 1,200; pis-
tols, 650; swords, 1,000; rifles, 600 ; cartridges, small arm,
5,280,000; cann0n,16,720 ; powder, 900,0001bs ; chests and brls.,
10,847; 18 brass guns, 936 rockets, 10,892 fusees, 12,108 shot
and shells, 54 carriages for guns and rockets, 2S waggons and
carts, 392 sets' of harnes, 15 tents, with bedsteads, bedding. &c,
&c. .Value or the above—Spanish Government, £333,767;
Auxiliary Legion, £53,0101- total value, £386,777, no part of
which has been received by the Ordnance department.—By
order of the Board of Ordnance.

"It. BYUAII, Secretary.
"Office of Ordnance, Feb. 12, 1836."

It is very hard upon the candid seercher after truth,
Who weighs evidence with all the care of a juror, to rise
uP froin:the consideration of admitted guilt, and find that
the committee on the Carlow election have returned
otnething like a verdict in favour of the accused. This
is a heavy tax upon our credulity. The reasons which in-
duced the committee to come to this conclusion are not
explained, and we confess we are unable to comprehend
there.
We lave paid the utmost attention to the evidence ;
ve-ha‘Tdeligently waded through the.whole of it; and
if what we have read be the genuine evidence, all we
'nau say is, that trafficking in seats was proved by as clear
testimony, and as clear a confession, as ever came under
the notice of the House of Commons.
Mr. RAPHAEL'S.evidence is plain and straight forward.
Ile proves the bargain made with O'CONNELL;. he paid
the stipulated price in hard cash; this money is conveyed
to:the private banking account of the accused, who uses
the money for his own private purposes, sends part of it
indeed to VIGORS, but gives his bills at long dates for
another portion, the money which these bills were sup-
Posed to represent, remaining meanwhile at the disposal
of O'CONNELL. RAPHAEL proves that the Conditions
'sf :the' bargain were not fulfilled by O'CONNELL. The
latter Promised to defend the petition at his own cost,
which, when a demand for the means was made upon
tm he positively refused to do, thus throwing upon his
and ignorant dupe the whole burthen of the defence.
-Ln. short RAPHAEL was defrauded of upwards of ONE
THOUSAND POUNDS !
Perhaps the committee did not consider they were
'empowered to enter upon the charge of fraud. They
may have deemed it a Bow-street or Old Bailey case with
Which they had nothing to do, and they may have left
RAPHAEL to seek his remedy in a court of law, which we
hope and believe he is resolved to do. Be it so ; but
surely they were bound to pronounce an opinion upon
the legality of the transaction and say whether a mem-
ber of the house had a right 'to sell his influence to
• RAPHAEL, a stranger, for so much money. The applica-
tion of the money is one thing, but the traffic alone,
independent of the appropriation, was conduct upon
'which the committee were bound to adjudicate, in so far
as it interfered with the right of election, the dignity of
'the. house, and the powers,:privileges, and duties of its
tnernhers.
Let us look at the case in another light, and in refer-
ence to a very different man from DANIEL O'CONNELL.
89PPose Sir ROBERT PEEL were to insert an advertise-
ment in the papers, offering to return a representative
for; Tatuworth on any qualified person paying into his
'ands the sum of £2,000, what would the House of
(31urnons, or the public, say to such a transaction as
this? Would it nut be said that this is putting up a seat
for
sale ? Would it tot be considered as gross an act
nf corruption as would be that of raffling for a member,
Zr 'selling a seat, or the office of Speaker itself,.by pub-
:Lc auction ? And what greater criminality in such. a
Jc'h than in that of selling _the county of Carlow to a jew
to a man who was a perfect stranger to the electors—
a person who never had so much as set his foot in
? It is of no consequence whether O'CONNELL
act any " pecuniary interest" in the bargain. He was
-"allY guilty as an agent. He did not know, and could
"0( know, how much money would be required. There
might have been no contest; a small sum might have
et'vered all the legitimate expenses; but still O'Corr-
:Rtr, covenants to receive £2,000. It is no defence to
sYthat, providing there had been no contest, the mo
Il -
the
have been lent to, or distributed amongst,
e earlow electors, for in every sense of the word, this
wl "Id Katie been bribery. This would have been remu-
oeting certain persons for their votes, and such
r.4tin remu-
according to the GRENVILLE act, would have
:validated the return,- and deprived the member, not
41Y of his seat, but have rendered him incapable of
is:ting in the existing parliament. But beCanse O'CON-
-1.,E4' Pleaded agency, and Vroorts stated that he had
'ceived the whole of the £2,000, the committee pass no
thatinn upon the illegality of- the bargain. They forget
cle, an agent can be as culpable as a principal, and they
„ elde that the accused had no " pecuniary interest" in
"le
tr,With great submission we contend that this is the con-
tY atYof the evidence. It is proved that O'CONNELL all-
teed RAPHAEL'S cash to his own purposes. Bills, we
1,14 leave to tell Mr. COLBORNE, are not cash. O'CoN-
bill kept the money for his own convenience, and gave
an at long dates. He had therefore most distinctly
unquestionably an interest in the transaction. The
ik,s t.'tned agency gave him the command of ready money,
4:ch he did not otherwise possess—and that money was
"AEL's. What would the world say of VIGORS, or
other.man appointed to collect the pence for the beg-
„ 8 "rent" in Ireland, if having collected the said
i)erenrat the chapel doors, and scraped together all the
to n
Le. e he possibly could, he should apply the said money
4: 8 Own use, and send O'CONNELL a long bill for the
ixoc'unt.drawn upon THOMAS DUNCOMBE, SILK BUCK-
" Am* or Surgeon WALLEY? Would this not look
suerY like a fraud ? We presume O'CONNELL would think,
eas and yet O'CONNELL did the self-same thing in the
at
se. of RAPHAEL. He used the money, and gave his bills
savirc, nine, or twelve months. And yet the committee
- line lead no "pecuniary. interest" in the bargain !
wis,eP, no the whole we cannot fathom the reasons on
" this extraordinary decision is founded, and we
jec,. for further information, for most assuredly the sub.
cannot end here.

11:Nt d sT,
171Qe -;""41, lgt*st,NPEas---4ohn Pughe, who was con-
Oews 'n the mitigated penalty of £5 for selling unstamped
tuoiattaPer, has been committed to the borough goal for a
for default uf payinent.