Cemarry MEETINGS.—Ill England, twenty-three out of forty counties have met and adopted petitions approving of the Reform Bills. The

counties are—Kent, Essex, Middlesex, Surry, Sornersetshire, Suffolk, Berkshire, Wiltshire, Warwickshire, Staffordshire, Yorkshire, Devonshire, Cornwall, Hampshire, Gloucestershire, Monmouthshire, Leices tershire, Hertfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Huntingdonshire, Durham, Lincolnshire, and Sussex. Northampton will meet in a few days. Nearly all the Welsh counties, and a number of the Irish, have agreed to petition for the Bills. Not so the Scottish counties. Most of them that have hitherto met • have disapproved of Reform; and for reasons which, if they be satisfactory to the understandings of those who offer them, argue a vulgarity of intellectual appetite which does not speak highly for the wisdom of . Scotch gentlemen and Scotch lawyers, notwithstanding the perpetual boasting of their superior information. The freeholders of Perthshire disapprove (by fifty-eight to thirty-six) of the plan of Lord John Russell, because it takes two members from the county representation of Scotland. The wiseacres of Elgin complain, not that the Bill takes from the county members, but that it will virtually disfranchise the smaller boroughs. The Dumbarton gentry are more ambitious: Sir Archibald Campbell cannot approve the measure, because—it is approved of by Messrs. Hunt and O'Connell. " That," quoth Sir A., "is quite enough for me." Sir A. acknowledged, "that in defending the English rotten boroughs, be was treading on delicate [soft ?] ground; but though they were indefensible in theory, they u-ere excellent in practice—Lord Brougham and fifty more [Sir Robert Peel said fifteen] had been intro.duced to Parliament by their assistance." Lord Brougham is a favourite example with the admirers of rotten boroughsnow-adays; five or six years ago, Sir Archibald Campbell, we suspect, thought the introduction into Parliament of such a terrible Reformer as Mr. Brougham, no better proof of the value of a nominee borough, than he now thinks the approbatioh of Mr. Hunt of Stamford Street a recommendation of the Bills. Sir Archibald has stolen Mr. Shelley's argument, but he applies it more coarsely. Mr. Shelley defended the independence of a man who had no constituents. Sir Archibald bolds that—" there is not a more lade. pendent member than he who purchases his seat, as he is uninfluenced by any party, and can give his vote according to the dictates of Ids conscience:

This from a member of the Kirk—perhaps a ruling elder What a pretty idea of conscience the gentleman must have ! Sir Archibald urged another reason, which seems to have had great weight. The preamble of the Scotch Reform Bill proposes to extend the franchise to persons "of property and intelligence ;' and what does this insinuate, but that it had hitherto been held " by a parcel of idiots ?" Touching the Scotch county electors, the insinuation is certainly rather broad. A Mr. Buchanan, who followed Sir Archibald, asked why the country gentlemen of Scotland were to be degraded from the rank they had hitherto held ?—i. e. of making legislators to rule all the ranks of the community. '" It was their duty to stand by the class in which they were born, -and to which they belonged, and to defend those privileges left to them by *titer ancestors." The disapproving vote was carried by 36 to 25. We have given some space to the Dumbarton case, because it may be taken as a fair specimen of the men and the means by which Lord John Russell's Reform is opposed in Scotland. One of the Glasgow papers, the Free Press, gives an analysis of these doughty thirty-six, whose magnanimous mouthpiece, Mr. Buchanan of Ardoch, talks in so lofty a strain. Fourteen of these country gentlemen are persons who hold their -honours by a slip of parchment, and have neither land nor habitation in -the county which they impudently affect to represent. The most extraordinary feature in these Scotch meetings is the tone of insolent domination in which the speakers indulge. Our Northern brethren are the most enduring of men where the great are concerned. Had any petty squire addressed a county meeting of Englishmen as Mr. Buchanan did ,the people of Dumbarton, he would have run a serious risk of rea horse. 'pasta for his pains. 'Sussex DIEwrimo.—This great meeting was held on Thursday, at Lewes. Lord George Cavendish, Lord George Lennox, Lord William Lennox, and Mr. Partington took the lead amopg the Reformers ; Mr: Shelley spoke a word for poor Gatton, but the independent nominee was laughed down. Some ardent spirits endeavoured to amend the resolu. tions so as to make them approach more nearly the Radical standard ; but the amendment was given up at discretion, on the earnest recommendation of Mr. Mabbot, the High Sheriff.

THE APPROACHING GENERAL ELECTION.—Mr. J. B. Chichester

has announced himself as a candidate to represent Barnstaple ; Mr. John Ryle, the Banker, and a son of Sir John Stanley, for Macclesfield. Mr. Fleming will again contest Hampshire. A canvass has been already commenced by Mr. be Fevre and Si? James Macdonald. Sir W. Heath. cote has not announced his intention. The other candidates, it is expected, will be Mr. J. B. Carter Sir T. Baring, and • Mr. E. Knight. Mr. P. Mildtnay is considered safe at Winchester, but there is little hope for Sir E. H. East. Nine candidates are in preparation for Southampton. Mr. Otway Cave is invited to stand for Leicester. Mr. Dickinson, the member for Somersetshire, has no chance at all ; his vacillation and want of firmness have displeased both friends and foes. Mr. Northmore of Exeter has been invited to stand. Lard Euston retires from Bury St. Edmunds; and Mr: Boileau, of Lincoln's Inn, offers himself.

NEW ME MBE RS.—Dr. Lushington has been returned for Wincitelsea, and Mr. Mayhew for Colchester. The majority for Mr. Mayhew was.114. The Londonderry election has terminated in the return of Sir R. Ferguson.

Mat. JEFFREY,.-The Lord Advocate has been returned, as we stated

last week he would be, for the borough of Melton, on the recommends: tion of Lord Milton. We hope that in his next election he will not stand in need of any man's recommendation, either lord or commoner In the mean time, we cordially hail his return to the House. Our hint, that he ought, in the case of a dissolution, to be returned for Edinburgh,

bids fair to 'wove prophetic—prudentia quodommodo eat divinado The Caledonian Mercury states, that the Town Council seriously mean to act as we advised, and that if Meister Willy Dundas should venture to appear again among them, he will meet a very dry reception.' LIVERPOOL PUROE.—A bill has been drawn up by Mr. Watson and'

R

has received the approbation of Lord Althorp, disfraechising all the freeholders of Liverpool, and vesting the right of election in future in the inhabitant householders renting houses td 10/. per annum and upwards. The bill will be introduced on the 18th, and will probably pass both Houses without opposition, whatever come of the general measure. To render it complete, it ought to disfranchise nominally: every corrupt scoundrel who voted at the last election, whether they rent a house of 10/. or 50/.

TORY SrxEs.—The Herald says the Rump have a number of well. dressed vagabonds at present employed in travelling round the country to ascertain the sentiments of the people. We doubt this. During the Catholic debates, the same thing was said ; and we all 'know, from the subsequent ea-poses at Bow, Street, that their employers were a .parcel of low-minded swindlers, who had no connexion with either the head or

the tail of the party whichthey pretended to represent. •

RIOTS . AT DUNDEE.—The Reform illumination at Dundee led to a serious riot. The police betook themselves to put out the bonfires at midnight, and were resisted by the mob. On the following, day, the Magistrates having refused to bail some of the delinquents, the mob attacked the POlicenffice, burnt it to the ground, and with it all the records ; and liberated the prisoners. All accounts agree, that had the local authorities abstained from interference, the illuminations would have terminated harmlessly.

Slit EDWARD SUOOEN AND TIIE BOROUGH OF IVETMOVTII.—A statement has appeared in a Scotch newspaper, the Caledonian Mercury; which, at the present time, is calcnlated to excite considerable interest, and which may serve more effectually to convert those (if there be any such) Who honestly object to the destruction of the Rotten Boroughs, than the most elaborate general argument. The borough of Weymouth belongs chiefly to the heirs of the Pulteney family, the Johnstones of Weiterhall. The late Sir John Johnstone, who married a Miss Gordon, died in 1811, leaving an infant son and two daughters, to whom the late Lord Alloway, a Judge of the Scotch Supreme Court, and Mr. Masterton Ure, a " writer to the signet," or solicitor, were appointed guardians. Mr. Urn very soon afterwards abandoned his practice in the Scotch Court, and came to England, where he has since remained. He was chosen one of the members for Weymouth, in 1813 we believe, and has sat as such ever since. In 1825, a suitwas commenced-s-the heir of Sir John Johnstone being then fourteen' years -of age, and by Scotch law capable of selecting his own guardians—by Lady Johnstone: Lord Alloway retired from time trust, and Colonel Gordon, brother to Lady Johnstone, was appointed hi his stead. Colonel Gordon was returned for Weymouth in 1626; the other members being Lord Wallace, Mr. Ure, and Mr. Fowell Buxton. Lord Wallace was nominated by Mr. Ure, who also nominated himself; and Colonel Gordon contrived to thrust himself in, on the strength not so much of present power as of future expectancies. When Lord Wallace was, in 1628, made a Peer by his friend Canning, two Persons contested the vacancy,—Mr. Weyland, the second husband of Lady Gordon, and Mr. Sugden, the legal adviser of Colonel

Gordon. Mr. Stigdeir was the successful candidate. .

Thus far the proceedings of the borough of Weymouth were open to the world and the newspapers. An incidental cause has however, lifted the drop-scene, and shown what was going on among Le movers as well as the puppets in this domestic drama. In the 'Scotch part of his legal proceedings, Colonel Gordon had employed a Mr. J. J. Fraser, a solicitor ; and, in consequence of some dispute between the Colonel and his agent, a prosecution was commenced, hi September last, for certain balances alleged-to be due -to the latter. In the printed'summons issuedby Mr.-Fraser, are a number of letters ,and memoranda, which offer, not an unirecedented or extraordinary view of boroughmongering, bt4, coupled with the recent Parliamentary conduct, of one of the parties, a curious view of the causes Which have led,' on the part of the ex-Solicitor-General, to so extraordinary a display-of. zeal against Lord John Russell's Bill. We quote the summary of Mr: Fraser's publication from the Caledonian Mercury. "Mr. Fraser does not intorm us on what interest Mr. Sugdau stood, nor by whose influence he was returned, at this first election. But it comes out afterwards, as It were incidentally, that Colonel Gordon, through Mr. Fraser, paid the expenses ; •

and the reimbursement of them, or a portion of them, .seents to have been subse

quently the subjecteda good deal of chaffering on the part of M. Sugden. 'Thereafter,' to use the words of our authority, • as the said E. B. Sugden was in a state of great insecurity with regard to his future representation of the said boroughs,

and as the influence of the said John Gurdon therein had by this time increased very much, the following proposal was made to the said E. It. Sugden Lieute

naut-Colonel Gordon offers to return Mr. Sugden free of expenae for Weymouth, so long as he may require a seat, Mr. Stirlen allowing Colonel Gordon to sell two of the three remaining seatn. He also, with Lords Grantham and Goderich, will use lot best endeavours to obtain a peerage for Lieutenant-Colonel Gordon. Mr. Weyland to be

excluded from the borough. This offer appears to have been made hi connexion 'with the purchase of some political properties at Weymouth of considerable value, which Colonel Gordon was then desirous of makina. but which there were objections to his name appearing as the sole purchaser of. This we gather from Mr. Sugden's own memorandum of the agreement, which he drew up in consequence of this Offer : .' ' Colonel Gordon is to buy of Messrs. Henning and Hereford their freeholds, and the conveyance is to be taken in the joint names of Colonel Gordon and Mr.

Sugden as purchasers, but Mr. Sugden is to hold as a trustee only for Colonel Gordon. Mr. Sugden is to he returned free from expense, so long as he requires a seat, and the other seats are to be disposed of as Colonel Gordon thiuks proper.—E. B. S '

" The object and effect of the device of vesting the property in the joint names of Colouel Gordon and Mr. Sugden were (according to Mr. Fraser) to create double votes, to increase the political influence gristle; from the purchase, and to complete Colonel Gordon's ascendency views over the borough. We omitted to mention that the stipulation about the peerage was forborne to be men tioned, but the promise of obtaining it was confided to Mr. Sugden's honour. After some farther intermediate negotiation which was carried on by Mr. Sugden, this arrancement was finally carried into effect, as appears by the following minute of agreement drawn up by Mr. Stmelen Lincoln's Inn, 6th December 1826-1 here

by declare, that the purchase made in Weymouth of Messrs. Henning and Hereford, was, although concluded in the joint names of Colonel Gordon and myself, made for him solely, and the 21,0001. was his money, and I am a trustee for him, but I am to have the benefit of my seat, according to the arrangement between Mr. Fraser, on the part of Colonel Gordon and myself.—Enwaen B. Suensar. The 10,5001. paid into my account at Hoare's is the money of Colonel Gordon.—E. B. S. 2,0001. to pay off ohl bills, to be paid by Mr. Sugden on or before general election, if he is returned. If he retire, and another person is returned for his seat, he to pay the 2,0004 or only 1,e0e1. if Mr. Sugden is returned before general election.' " These purchases, however, could not be carried on so secretly but that they got wind in varione quarters before they were completed. A letter from Mr. Sugden to Mr. Fraser, dated the 4th of September 1828, mentions his having received a letter from Mr. Henning, one of the sellers, in which he says ' You will be somewhat surprised to hear that letters have been received from Scotland, stating that Colonel Gordon is the sole purchaser of the freehold. It has excited a considerable feeling here (at Weymouth)? As there appeared to be danger of an ultimate collision between the interests in the boroughs (that is, between the interests of Colonel Gordon and hie nephew Sir Frederick Johnstone), Mr. Sugden recommended the step of gaining over Mr. Masterton Ure, the other trustee, and • attaching him to us ;' a proposal was accordingly made to Mr. Ure, which he declined to accede to. It appears from a letter of Colonel Gordon to his agent, dated the 17th of December 18'28, that his sister, Lady Johnstone, had written to the steward of the trustees at Weymouth, stating that ' his (Colonel Gordon's) conduct had plainly proved that he had no wish but to gratify his own ambitious views, —a statement which he regards as a calumny, and desires to know if it in not actionable. Finally, Alderman Bower, of Weymouth, ' made vehement complaints in writing at this period, that the said John Gordon had unfairly and tile:rally supplanted his nephew (Sir F. G. Johnstone) In the said boroughs.' I'Sese complaints were communicated to Mr. Sugden by Mr. Fraser, to whom he wrote the following letter: 'Lincoln'e Inn, 23rd January 1829.—My dear Sir—It seems hardly possible to avoid answering Bower's letter ; but it cannot be too general. On the other side I have sketched what suggests itself to me. I do not think it advisable to apply to Mr. Gilbert Stewart, for reasons which it would be useless to detail in a letter. I advise you not to show any eagerness to purchase either Buxton's or Weleford-a. lam. Sec. EDWARD B. Se CIDEN? The sketch of the letter to Alderman Bower annexed is in these terms :•—• That his long letter scarcely admits of a reply ; bat Colonel Gordon has no doubt that the step taken by him will secure. Instead of weakening, the interest of his family. Mr. Sugden is of likely to want the seat for a long period; and he (Colonel Gordon) will always be ready to purchase his iaterest when he no longer requires it ; and he (Colonel Gordon) has no reason to sinecsse that the interest of his nephew and himself will lead to any disunion between them.' In 1829, Mr. now Sir Edward Sugden was appointed SolicItor-General; and, conformably to the agreement before mentioned, he was, on vacating his seat, again returned by Colonel Gordon, free of expense. After some time, Colonel Gordon, finding that there was no appearance of that coronet encircling his brows for which they had been so long aching. or, to adopt the precise language of our authority, ' the said Edward B. Sugden not having obtained a peerage for the said John Gordon within the stipulated period, a serious altercation arose between him and the said John Gordon, who complained that he bad

been deceived by the said Sir E. B. Sugden.' In this state of matters, Sir E. B. Sugclen wrote the following letter to Mr. Fraser House of Com mons, Thursday morning.—Colonel Gordon asserts that you never communicated to him the arrangements signed by you and myself regarding Weymouth. This, indeed, is directly contrary to his own letters in my possession ! But he goes still farther, and says, that you misrepresented the matter to him. This has placed me in an unpleasant situation • and I call upon you, as a gentleman, to state distinctly how the fact really is, and to furnish me with any evidence in your power, to show that all the facts were fully communicated to him. lam, itze.EDWARIS B. Sone/EN."

This is the last of these interesting documents. We may add, that Lord Goderich and Lord Grantham have, by letters in the newspapers of the week, denied that they ever heard or thought of the peerage of Colonel Gordon, or had any knowledge of the corrupt proceedings on which his expectations were grounded. Private knowledge of course is meant—for there is no one so ignorant or retired as not to have heard of the scenes at Weymouth in 1826 and 1828, which have furnished matter of description even to novel-writers.t It is but just also to observe, that the Caledonian Mercury has published a second statement, evidently from some agent of Colonel Gordon, in which the Colonel is made to say that he stood candidate in 1826 chiefly with a view to continue and strengthen the connexion between his sister's family and the borough. We know that this cause was assigned at the time, in some pamphlets that were published by Colonel Gordon, and which charged Mr. Ure with an attempt to employ the influence which his situation as guardian to Sir Frederick Johnstone gave him, not only to secure his immediate return, but to establish an interest for himself to the destruction of that of his ward. We happened to see a number of private documents— and among the rest, several letters from Lady Johnstone to Mr. Urewhile these charges were still fresh ; and our impression then was, that there was no truth in the imputation against Mr. Ure—that the action instituted by Lady Johnstone was a friendly me, in order to permit Lord Alloway to retire—and that the whole story of protecting the interests of the minor was a mere election ruse to serve the purposes of Colonel Gordon. There is also an exception taken, in this reply *This is clear, not only from what is mentioned in the text, but from a passage in Colonel Gordon'e letter to Mr. Fraser of the 11th of May 1830—" Why the elections of 1828 and 1829 are introduced into the Colonel's accounts, are more than he knows!" There was no other election at both these times but Mr. Sugden's Editor of the Mercury.

fit is obviously the NVeymouth election that is described In the Life of a Lawyer, of which Sir Edward Sugden is as obviously the hero. The picture of the future progress of the learned knight is, however, one that his present prospects hold out small hopes of his realising.

ot Colonel Gordon (for such we consider it), to the facts set forth bit Mc

Fraser. It is stated, that the copy of the agreement between the -Colonel and Sir Edward is not an accurate one : the stipulation of the peer

age—the exclusion of Major Weyland—the defraying of Sir Edward's expenses—are denied. When it is recollected that the agreement is.set. forth by Mr. Fraser, in a regular appeal to a court of law, as an existing document, and that the contradiction conies in the shape of an anonymous communication to a newspaper, there cat, be little hesitation which. side to believe. '1'lle graver part of the charge is not, however, dis

puted : it is not said that there was not an agreement between Colonel' Gordon and his Majesty's Solicitor-General, by: which the latter ac

knowledged the right of Colonel Gordon to do %vlitit the law of the lanff,

declares to be a crime, arid the law of Parliament a high breach of privilege—to do what, as a member of the Legislature, it was the duty or Sir Edward to bring under the cognizance of Parliament, and what, in. the peculiar circumstances in which be was pieced during the interval. between the resignation of Sir Charles Wetherell and tl'e appointment of Sir James Scarlett, it was his duty to bring under the notice of" the King's Bench. " If these things be done in the green tree, what shall be done in the dry ?" If the legal adviser of the Cabinet, amid oneof the appointed conservators of the prerogatives of ti te Crown and the fiberties of the subject, could so tantper with an impel;, nanirest, and registered. violation of both, what may not have been done by men in obscurer stations,. and who had neither the ties of office nor of character to restrain them Serious, however, as are these considerations, we confess that, in our view, the ludicrous greatly exceeds the lachrymose part of the inelo-drame. We pass over Mr. Sugden's alleged lowering for his own seat, and for its payment ; we pass over Sir Edward Sugden's alleged sanctioning of a most profligate violation of the constitution, of which he professes to be an ardent admirer ; we pass over his special-pleading in behalf of the rotten boroughs, and his pettish insolence to Lord Brougham; we pass over all this, for the sake of one hearty laugh at time immoderate vanity and confidence of the littleand learned gentleman. So far back,. it would appear, as 1828, the Seals hung suspended before the raps vision of Sir Edward ; and even then he was exclaiming with Macbeth, " Come, let me clutch thee !" nor did he recover from this fever of fancy until he saw the bag that contained all his soul lie'•1 most dear, its the hands of the 'present Chancellor. He bargains for Weymouth, as a marr would for a first floor furnished—he will be at liberty to quit at the end of the week : he is to hold the borough, not for a Parliament, not for a. session even, but so long as he requires a seat ! It may be collected froze the scattered rays of light which the Idiots in Mr. Fraser's summons' supply, that there had been betti een the aged chief at the head of the_ Chancery Court and the member for Weymouth, a distinct understanding, that as soon as old John Scott hobbled down from the bench, SirEdward Sugden was to trip up. It was the near prospect of this mighty elevation that turned the little man's head. He was not only to be a. Lord himself, but a creator of Lords " Master Shallow, My Lord Shallow, be what thou wilt ; I sin fortune's steward.' Stand by me, Blaster Robert Shallow ; I will make the King do thee grace."

The Times says Parliament should take up the subject of these die-closures. Take the skin off Marsymss I Is not the loss of the Chancellorship punishment enough for poor little Sir Edward ? For our own part, we freely give to him and to his patron as much pity as laughter has left us.

Since the above was-written, Sir Edward Sugden has addressed the Tones, to say that the letter quoted by Mr. Fraser was in answer to one which he retains, and which has no such stipulations as the agreement that bears his name, and which he declares he never saw. Sir iLdward has a short way to get rid of the entire charge—let him puldish the letter' of Colonel Gordon to which his note was «n answer. lit the mean time, Mr. Fraser maintains and repeats the whole of the statements in the.

summons. .