The Statesman.
London, England, 1819-05-13 00:00:00

es
be cesM egainstkir. Swann, to Warne the lower
orders of the voters against biol. He also made a
strong speech egkinst Mr. Swann. lie was then
asked the substance of the band-hill.
Mr. C. HARVEY nosed that the witness do with-
drew ; and said, that as the hand bill was printed, it
weaht to produced.

SifC. BUR REl.ll.mid,that this hand-till emanated
from ,A• witnples own wind.

'Sir J. IN ACINTOqI obj►cted in thedoetrine, Itsst
they coold tins examine es to the contents of a docu-
ment. which 'tight be in existence. _

Ceti BARRY thnoght it was proper for the Boost
to proceed, accenting In the ordinary roles of evi-
dence in Coe►ts of Justice.
Mr. V. DOUGLAS wooed that the Clerk on the
Penryn Election be called in, to know if he had a
ropy of the band-hill; which was carted to, but the
Clerk said he bad no such band-bill.

Thomas Toy was then celled in again, and said he
bed only a consfused rerollerion of the contents of
the benri-all. H. moiler-IPd that it sermont Swann
of ring into publir.boeaes, and throwing money
soon, the peeple; odd that when they had again re-
turned him to Parliament, he 'instill throw aside dis-
simulation, en:l eaeld, to use Mr. Swann's own es•
prewion, them go to If— and be d---. It
also arcesed Swoon of never having Moen the
Eleriers e la/Pokiest, and that they were disposed to
leek back to the old timers, when every man had his
breather, which-we. all they 'spotted (rob the es-
teems of their elective franchise.—[4l latitgb.l-11
also put the Electors in mind that Swann.could not
give them pecuniary ,ratification. Witness was
then elomined as to his knowledge of different hand-
bills, which had been ringleted in l'enryn. Wit.
mess wrote a band-bitl, which referred to a teal..
there. for leforuntion, and said the old poetics of
¶2ll. for a plumper would be restered--ib. was pet
for pounds sterling, that no advantage might be
taken of the expression; but witness conceived the
}:44ors well •understood what was meant by it,
Virnees wet in the Chair et the Meeting at which
the Riesoletiont formerly ellelied to were adopted.—
Some dissatisfaction bad been repressed by the Elec-
tors at Mr. Swann not giring certain breakfasts.—
Witness did not know whether Mr. Sisson ought to
have be.n praised by the respectable inhabitants of
Pens) n for refraining from these acts of corruption.
There were as many respectable inhabitants its Penryn
es in any Borough in the kingdom of the same de-
gase of population. Witness did not believe the nb-
Jection and hostility to Mr. Swann arose out of his
parliamentary conduct, though the Resolutions thee
adopted stated so much
'ramified by Mr. DOUG LASS.—Witness accent.
palsied Mr. Anderson on two occasions doting his
cosmos. The hand-bills published were well known
is i'euryo.
*he witness was also remained by Mr. MAR-
RTAT and Mr. HUM E. but no new facts came oat.

feamined by Mr. WILLIAhIS.—For the last
toe liteetieer Mr. Swoon bad refrained from giving
the breakfasts. He was engaged in a public work in
London which required w great deal of stone. Mr.
Swann gave order and employment to many of the
Is.l.ctors is l'enryn. Witness believed it was gene.
rally understood in Penryn that this wee the reuse
the breakfast was not given. Witness, at the Meet.
log of the tsth of May, stated, that the political
rooduct of Mr.'Swerm was objectionable; bet at
that time they tad no idea who sheirld be theCandi-
dve. The oljection to Mr. Swann's political con.
duct west feint. Witness believed there was a wish
in thellormegh that Sir M. Lopez should come.—
Witness had stated to Mr. Anderson that be keew
corrupt practices existed in the Boroogh, aid that
when examined before the Committee he would not
sereen it to his own injury. Witness now, ►owever,
positively denied that since be had been In London
t•r. bad consolted any person as to what evidence be
might giro to injure Mr. Swann, without eodanger-
log the Borough being thrown open. Ho believed
corruption had prevailed is romps ; but he was of
(lonian only a small proportion of the Electors were
lir ibid.
Eternised by Col. BARRY.—Some of the Elec.
tors certainly expected to receive the breakfast. lle
could not say what proportion. The lower orders of
she neon,. espected it.
Est ermined by Mr. DO WDS W ELL—The break-
fast was gives io 1807, bet not in ISI2.
Etemined by Alderman WAITIIMA N.—Witness
thought two-thirds might be inflamed by expecta-
tion of a breakfast, or otherwise.
Witness thee withdrew, ■od Mr. 3. Sewell was
called its, and
Esamined by Sir C. BUIIItELL —Witness had
been in Woe a week, and had, denim the time,
general conversation respecting the 800 of evidence
to be given, consistent with troth ; et nob as shoold
wet endanger the Borough being thrown open. Wit-
ness had formerly supported Mr. Slung, but had en
altercation three years ago with hien respecting some
bills. Last Election be supported Mr. /Winton.
lie had heard talk of a breakfast being given for.
merly, and understood a breakfast meant 111. Can't
say whether a -majority of the Electors reputed a
breakfast, bet did not believe two-thirds rushd ac-
cept it. Witness did not, at any meeting, propose
1.31. as the price for upporting two Candidates.
Examined by Mr. 31AllitYAT.—Mr. Anderson,
f.efose he quitted London, declared iso would not
give
Examined by Col. BARRT.—Witness's connection
with Mr. Atsdertou arose from his basing been for.
way employed to purchase the Borough of Camel-
ford. Witness bad heard that Sir Al. Lopez srasde-
tired
u a Candidate. He had heard that Sir hl.
Lopes was a Gentleman of large fortune ; bat money,
the witness ►elieved, would have no effect upon the
Ramesh of Periryis.—( law:h.)
Examined by Mr. WILLIAMS.—Did not know
k was customary to give a breakfast ; or haul be ever
said be know the reason why Mr. Swann did not give
the breakfast. Mr. Swann and Sir C. Hawkins were
Candidates in 1807. Witness acted for them; but
did not know of suy men brig bribed on that occa-
sion, or that a breakfsst was given. Witness knew
of the band bill which was peblisbed with 211 b.; bet
did not know what the Electors understood by it;
be ►ad ors idea on the subject. Whom bad asked
whether be would be bound to answer any question
which might tend to criminate himself; and whether
ag•ocy would not protect his.