3 MARCH 1832, Page 14

TUESDAY'S DIVISION-LIST.

SOME of the names in the division of Tues

" True to no party, and contemned by all."

He came into Cambridge upon the interest of Lord HARDWICKE ; and when the interest of Lord HARDWICKE began to decline, he assumed the tone of a high Reformer, in order to secure the seat that would otherwise have slipped from beneath him. He has deceived his patron and the people, and verily he shall have his reward.

Sir ANDREW AGNEW is the gentleman who, a few nights ago, declared that if Ministers made Peers to pass the Reform Bill, he would from that moment oppose them. His Reforming principle is of the same character as that of Sir JAMES SCARLETT. He is a Whig of the old school. He will support the popular side as long as its failure is certain.

Mr..BUCH is not a Reformer; he is the nominee of the Corpo- ration-of Exeter, and came in-against a Reformer. He has voted for the :Bill in no case but when it was obvious that opposition to it was.absurd as well as hopeless. Mr. BURTON, we presume, bought Beverley at the usual price, and may therefore sell it when 'he pleases.

Mr. R. COLBORNE is amenable to Lord EGREMONT, and Sir G., STAUNTON to Lord HEYTESBUKY. If their patrons suffer them, we must. Our hope and trustis, 'that we shall not have to suffer either paitron.s or proteges tnucia longer.

Earl GaosvsNOTt acts With a due sense of his obligations—to the Ministry for a prospeetivaMarquisate, to London for a pro- spective fortune such as no individual in England ever before pos- sessed. What would he or his family have been, compared with what they are now, if London had not grown great enough to de- mond what he would fain deny to it?

The "film," it appears, has fallen from the eyes of Mr. WATSON of Canterbury. He too, we believe, has the saine excuse as Mr. BURTON.

Sir HENRY WILLOUGHBY, who clamours for two members to Dartmouth and votes against two members to Marylebone, Mr MARRYAT, Mr. MILLS the Rochester patriot, Mr. NORTH, Lord A and B SANDON, Mr. CRIPPS, Mr. EVELYN DENISON, require no remark. The intentions of Lord HARROWBY are indicated suffi- ciently by the movements of his heir, the worthy representative of the incorrupt electors of Liverpool. Lord WHARNCLIPPE also will assist his Bit-by-bit brother in "extracting the venom" from the Bill; and the Duke of PORTLAND tells us as plainly, by the vote and canvass of Lord G. BENTINCK, that he will assist in the process, as if he had, like an honest man, voted against the second reading.

But what are we to say to the Cornish LEMON—the man who was so nobly and so disinterestedly supported by the yeomanry there ; to whom Mr. RASHLEIGH so handsomely gave way, because he believed him not less honourable and more active than himself? If his countrymen do not squeeze him and cast him 'away at the first opportunity, then is their tin turned into base lead.

And what shall we say to Captain POLHILL ?—he who lives by the people of London? Does he think his vote of Tuesday will fill the pit of the great Drury Lane show-house? Who is Mr. HALSE? This gentleman ought to be a nominee of Mr. LONG WELLESLEY. Did he obtain his seat as security for the interest of his bond, or did he purchase it out and out? If he be Mr. WELLESLEY'S nominee,with what face dares Mr. WEL- LESLEY call himself a Reformer? If he be not, with what face can he call himself an honest Reformer?

Two Scotchmen, besides the Whig Sir ANDREW AGNEW, de- serted the cause of the public on Tuesday. Did they expect more representatives to .Scotland if Lord CHANDOS'S motion had been carried? How could they, while Ireland was so unprovided ? But who, except the most egregious of simpletons, could imagine that the Scotch Bill was to be bettered by ruining that on whose inte- grity its existence depends ? If the English Bill perish, Scotland will not only get no more members, but it will get no Reform at all. The people of Glasgow are looking after their borough— when the time comes, we hope they will look after their member.