'be girobincts.

Mr. Grantley Berkeley has addressed another immensely long letter "to the independent electors of West Gloucestershire," as a reply to the pro.- ceedings at the recent meeting of electors, and to the letter from Earl Fitzhardinge read at that meeting. - It is characterized by all Mr. Berke- ley's usual recklessness of syntax and of discretion— He denies the charge made by the electors, that he bad shown a disposition " to throw over the constituency : it is "a base and unworthy falsehood," and whoever asserts it "lies under the public allegation of a liar." When he told Lord Fitzhardinge that his circumstances would prevent him from continuing to hold his seat, and do his duty, " under such cruel privations as those which he was made to put upon me," Lord Fitzhardinge replied, that he might hold hia seat until a dissolution, and not do the duty.

Mr. Berkeley explains the " pecuniary advances" to which Lord Fitzhardinge alluded. " Some years ago, upon the pressure of Colonial failures, I asked

Lord Fitzhardinge to lend me 3,0001, offering any security he liked to take on my West India estates. He proposed to borrow the 3,0001 (he told me this himself) at four per cent, and to lend it me at five per cent, by which he in- creased his income 301. a _year. He also secured to himself the power of stop- ping the interest from monies of mine passing through his bands from the rental of the Castle estate; and he has had ever since that 1501 a year. For the life of me, I do not see the great liberality of this, or the vast obligation." The next transaction occurred thus. "The sum he advanced, as be calls it, was a legacy left me by the late Lady Berkeley of 1,0001.; a like sum having been left to others of my family, and which Lord Fitzhardinge had hitherto re-

fused to pay because there was not exactly enough property left immediately to cover all the bequests. Lord Fitzhardinge told me, in his great desire to relieve the pressure of my pecuniary affairs,' that he was too poor to advance the sum unless some one could be found to lend it to him at four per cent, but that if Mr. Bloxsome could get it at that interest, he would pay me my legacy. Mr. Blox-

some did get it; and I received that which no other brother in Lord Fitzhard- inge's position would have so long withheld. Now where, I ask, is the vast gene. rosity in this? I have thus stated to you all that Lord Fitzhardinge has done."

After the passing of the Reform Bill, Lord Fitzhardinge asked Mr. Gran Berkeley to stand for West Gloucestershire. He replied, that he could not a London residence. Lord Fitzhardinge pressed the request, and offered to reim- burse his brother. Mr. Berkeley named 2001. a year as the needful sum. The compact was pretty well observed for the first year; but in the next the honour, able Member had to apply for his allowance, and he then learned that Lord Fitz- hardinge had "wrung the 2001. from his mother. On further remonstrance, the Earl said that he should stop an annuity to Lady Berkeley's brother, and pay it to Mr. Grantley Berkeley. The Member, however, declined to receive it from such a source; though this obliged him to give up the hounds with which he had hunted for fourteen years.

On the death of Lady Berkeley, he applied for the arrears. He was met by a flat refusal, accompanied by the remark that if he stated that the Earl had been a party to any promise of payment, he had stated what was not true. Mr. Berkeley rejoined, that he had found the Earl's original letters. On this the Earl insinuated a doubt as to the fact that the letters had been found. As to the we of the town-house, Mr. Berkeley says that he had only one roots in Spring Gardens, of which be had had the use all his life.

_ :

Last year, the brothers were reconciled, the Earl recognizing his compact; but be again passed it by; and at the close of the session Mr. Berkeley received this letter from his brother-

" West Cowes, Isle of Wight, Aug. 31, 1846•

To your allegations in your last letter, I can only do as I have done before, flatly give them the lie ; and I should not have done this but that I have to add, that from henceforward I will not mix myself up with you In any business whatever, political, pecuniary, or otherwise. The money that you have had from me has not been spent in attending Parliament, and you are guilty of an ungentlemanliko fraud In pretending that it has.

tt Yon have abused the patronage you have obtained. You have now unfairly got a promise of a cadetship ; which is not for any county person, and you have no right to bestow it elsewhere. The money you have had from me has been spent in journies to Bath. You may now come forward or not, as you please, for the county ; for I will have nothing to do with you or your affairs; and so ends this correspondence." Mr. Berkeley imputes all this hostility to Mrs. Barker. He concludes with the -following admonition to the "independent" electors—"Remember this, Lord Fltzhardinge, at the instigation of a notorious woman, forbids you to return me as your representative, and names another in my stead: it is for you to show that you are not his serfs and bondsmen."

Mr. Grantley Berkeley liar also treated the public to a very short and pithy correspondence. He writes to Mr. Harman Visger, of Bristol, one of the gentlemen present at the recent " unfair meeting held at Gloucester "- " You are there reported to have said, in speaking of me, ' In many respects he was a good Member, in many others he was not; and, above all, was the fact of his being ready, on account of some private matter of his own, to throw the constituency over.' Now, Sir, if you did apply that passage of your speech in those terms to me, you have stated that which is utterly, unconditionally, and disgracefully false; and you will of course see the necessity of making good your words, or of correcting a report which, if uncontradicted, is calculated to do me considerable injury. I await your immediate reply" [by " return of post."] Mr. Visger's reply is immediate, and more laconic: this is the whole body of his letter-

" The only reply I think proper to make to your letter of yesterday, is simply to acknowledge its receipt." On the same day, Mr. Grantley Berkeley rejoins- " Sir-1 have received your letter of the 7th instant; and I then held you guilty of having deliberately and intentionally told a disgraceful and unwarrant- able falsehood, in regard to my being ready to throw over my constituency.' .And I shall make public this our correspondence.

" Your most obedient, GRANTLEY F. BERKELEY." Thus far the correspondence as it is published by Mr. Grantley Berke- ley: Mr. Visger republishes it with his snrrejoinder- " Bristol. 10th November 1846.

" Sir—You have anticipated my intention of publishing our correspondence. Nothing more can be necessary to enable the public, who are acquainted with the facts, to see whether the unjustifiable terms you use are applicable to you or my-

self. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, HARMAN Visosn." " Honourable Grantley F. Berkeley."

On the 6th instant, the Marquis of Londonderry, according to annual custom, entertained a large number of his tenantry, at Wynyard Park. After dinner, the Marquis made a speech, containing some notable re- marks- At-their meeting last year, he was fully aware that the affairs of the country were in as prosperous a state as they could possibly be in. Commerce, agricul- ture, and finance, were all prospering ; and there then seemed no call on the part of any one for any national change. Shortly afterwards, however, there was issued from Edinburgh, by an individual now a Minister of the Crown, a letter which set the country in a state of convulsion. That letter had such an effect that the Minister of the day thought it necessary to take measures in conse- quence of the views then stated. But it must be remembered, that all great politicians—public men of both parties had previously declared their belief of the absolute necessity of a repeal or modification of the Corn-laws. And, as coming events cast their shadows before, it was almost certain that Lord John Russell's launching of that epistle would be the signal of some corresponding an- swer from the Minister of the day. It was unnecessary to go into the detail of the measure which was carried in consequence. He did not mean to say that the arrangement was the most satisfactory, and agreeable to that party which had always strongly supported and assisted ItteeaCbonservative cause, and placed Sir Robert Peel at the head of it. He deeply lamented—as he was sure they would all do—that there had been a great deal of violent language, and a great deal of what he would not call personal abuse, but something very like it. A great deal of exaggeration had also been indulged in: but they were there as tenant-farmers to judge for themselves of what had passed. They had seen the mach-dreaded measure carried into law. It was still in a state of trial; and they had, up to this time, no right to say anything detrimental of that indi- vidual who had carried that measure into effect- He much regretted the course which bad been taken by the agricultural Protectionists, as they called themselves, in attacking Sir Robert Peek Now, he had considered the question as closely as he could—indeed, as he considered every question which came before him as a legis- lator—and he had come to the conclusion, that Sir Robert Peel was the Minister of the country, and not of a party. Though having been bound in a great mea- sure to that party for his holding office, still he had become Minister for England, Scotland, and Ireland, and was bound to act for the general and not for party be- nefit. Those who stood out so much for agricultural protection were, after all, but a portion of the great landed proprietors. The Duke of Richmond, Lord George Bentinck, and some great Southern proprietors, had been opposed to the repeal of the Corn-law, and had called the farmers together to oppose it. But look on the other hand—look to the North. The Duke of Northumberland, the Duke of Bucclench, and the noble Lord present, [the Marquis of Westminster,] were divided in opinion from the others on the question of a repeal of the Corn- laws. But there was another consideration. Notwithstanding a repeal of the Corn-laws, times had never been more prosperous with the farmers. Up to the last market-day, prices had continued to advance; and the farmers were generally in a much better condition than they were last year. He had himself had a proof of it—which was interesting to himself—that day; for, out of his whole tenantry, both on the Northern and Southern estates, there were but two had left any arrears, and of those two one was about to leave. That must be most gratifying to them, as it was most satisfactory to him. He was happy to state this, because it showed, so far from rents being diminished or lowered by the repeal of the Corn-laws, there was no prospect of it, whilst he knew in many instances they had been increased. These matters had unfor- tunately caused a split in the Conservative party in this country; but he trusted that ultimately it would be healed up. These were the opinions which he him- self entertained of the present position of the agricultural interest; and he trusted they would agree with him—that they would be unanimous and all work together. (Much cheering.) The first of a series of meetings on the Short-time question was held on Tuesday at Huddersfield. About two thousand persons assembled in the Philosophical Hall; and the Vicar of Huddersfield was called to the chair. Mr. Richard Oastler, Mr. Busfeild Ferrand, and Mr. John Fielden addressed the meeting at considerable length; but their speeches threw no new light upon the question, merely serving to exhibit their own undimi-

nished zeal in the cause. Similar meetings are to be held in succession iit Halifax, Bradford, Leeds, Keighley, Dewsbury, Wakefield, Barnsley, ant HolmfIrth.

It is stated that the Law Officers of the Crown, to whom the matter was sub milted, have given an opinion that Butfoy, Foams; and Stevens, three Policemen who so grossly prevaricated in their evidence at the inquest on the body of Police- man Clarke, at Dagenham, cannot be prosecuted for perjury, as their first state- ments, which they afterwards admitted to be false, were not taken upon oath. The men have since been dismissed from the force. Parsons, Kempton, and another constable, still remain under surveillance; and nothing is known of what course will be taken with regard to their conduct.

Some twenty persons are in custody at Abingdon, charged with frauds aid robberies committed on maltsters and brewers of the vicinity. They were leagued together in their criminal practices. Several of the prisoners had previously borne very respectable characters.

Mr. M'Gill, the Martian of Manchester who was shot by Wright, has so far re- covered as to leave his bed, and he is now pronounced out of danger from the wound.

In November 1844, George Taylor, a farmer of Carlton-upon-Trent, died, after a rather strange illness; no inquiry or examination took place, and the body we interred. A Miss Elizabeth Smith had lived with Taylor as housekeeper. After his decease, she was low-spirited, and, it now appears, told more than one person that she had poisoned her employer. It was only recently that these disclosures came to the ear of the authorities; they immediately ordered the man's body to be disinterred, and an inquest was held. The inquiry began last week ; Miss Smith having been taken into custody. Witnesses deposed to the disclosures made by the prisoner: to one of them she stated that she had destroyed Taylor by putting mercury(corrosive sublimate probably) into his coffee. She had quarrelled with him. The inquest was adjourned in order that the stomach of the corpse might be analyzed.

Mr. James Morse, a chemist, who has for some time acted as deputy Postmaster of Barnet, has absconded, after committing a number of forgeries on the Post- office, A reward of fifty guineas is offered for his apprehension: be is supposed to have fled to the United States.

Three men employed on the Eastern Counties Railway were charged before an Ilford Magistrate, on Friday week, with neglect of duty. It appeared from the evidence, that in the morning a goods-train from Colchester ran into a truck which was standing on the up-line of rails near Cbadwell; the truck was smashed to pieces, and the engine was damaged. The truck had been used by plate-layers who were engaged on the line; two of the prisoners were thus employed; the third, their foreman, was in bed when the disaster occurred, instead of looking after his men. By a rule of the company, no truck used by labourers is allowed to remain on the traffic-rails. The Magistrate committed the foreman to the Ilford House of Correction for six weeks, the others for one month each.

A serious accident happened on the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway on. Sunday night. A number of sub-contractors and other persons employed on the line at Kendal resolved to have an excursion to Shim, along a part of the road not yet opened: without permission, they took two engines, and proceeded on their trip: on returning at night, one engine arrived at Kendal some time before the other, and was left standing on the rails; the second engine dashed into it with tremen- dous force, smashing it to pieces. The people on the moving engine were pitched off with great violence; one, a smith, was thrown into the furnace, and so dread- fully burnt that his life is in danger; the thigh of another man was lacerated; and the rest were much hurt. The engineer has absconded.

A young man has been killed by an explosion of fireworks at Bedford. The deceased and another man were engaged at night in a chemist's shop making fire- works; a spark from the fire or from a candle set light to the combustibles; the shop-window was blown out, and the place was set on fire. The man who perished was one charred and blackened mass; his companion was much burned. A nunt- ber of people jumped out of the windows in the upper part of the house, and one was hurt. The fire, 'however, was soon extinguished.

A frightful accident, though fortunately unattended with fatal results, we curred on the Derby railway, near Burton-upon-Trent, on the 81st of last month. About a quarter of a mile from the Burton station, the railway passes over the Grand Junction Canal by a drawbridge; whenever barges pass, this bridge has to be withdrawn, and of course a gap is caused in the line. On the morning sit the 31st, when the train for London arrived at this spot, the bridge was welt- drawn; but the morning was foggy, and the engine-driver did not see bow matters stood; moreover, only one man had charge of the bridge, and no signal was given; consequently, the engine dashed into the canal, carrying with it the tender and a passenger-carriage: the rest of the train was greatly shaken by the sudden stoppage. The driver and stoker saved themselves by leaping off, the instant they saw their danger: there were no passengers in the first carriage, which was smashed to pieces, but a guard who was on it was much bruised. The man who had charge of the bridge was also greatly hart.