the end of May, and to which a very brief reference here will be sufficient. A few years back, an individual, a native of Cornwall of the name of John Nicholls Thom, abruptly left his home and made his appearance in Kent, where he was not long in becoming a very conspicuous personage. Having exchanged the name of John Thom for the more euphoni ous one of Sir William Courtenay, knight of Malta, he commenced a practice of parading his naturally fine and commanding person before the admiring people, clad in rich and extravagant costumes, and pouring forth streams of exciting and most persuasive eloquence. The populace attracted by his romantic appearance, and fascinated by his singular talents, flocked around him with the wildest enthusiasm, while even the superior classes of society furnished him with occasional partisans. In the year 1833, he became a candidate for the representation of the city of Canterbury, and actually polled 950 votes on the conservative interest. But not long afterwards, he was found to be implicated in a transaction, which resulted in his conviction for perjury, and was sentenced to six years transportation. It was then that more decided symptoms of insanity exhibited themselves; and in conformity with the act 9 George 4th he was removed from Maidstone gaol to the county lunatic asylum, where he remained in confine ment for four years. At the expiration of that period, in October 1837, Lord John Russell, in virtue of a power conferred on him as Secretary of State by the same act, thought proper to direct that he should be delivered up to his

friends, upon their engaging to take charge of him.

It should seem, however, that the parties to whose keeping the unfortunate man was confided, ill discharged their duty; and he reappeared in Kent, in the Spring of 1838. His conduct was now more extravagant than ever, and the infatuation of the peasantry, whom he literally enchanted by his eloquence and his personal accomplishments, was proportionate.

To his political pretensions he had now added others of a religious character; and his claims to a divine mission, and even to divine attributes, were implicitly recognized by the deluded multitude, who, apparently scarcely less insane than himself, acknowledged him without hesitation to be another Messiah.

For the particulars of the conflict. between the military and the peasants, with which this strange tragedy terminated, the reader is referred to the second part of the volume; but it is expedient to notice, in this place, the parliamentary discussions which naturally arose out of this disastrous business.

By an unlucky coincidence, it happened that Thom's liberation from the Lunatic Asylum was concurrent, in point of time, with the last general election; and was, moreover, obtained through the mediation of Sir Hussey Vivian, one of the successful candidates for the county of Cornwall, on that occasion. On this account, it was more than insinuated in the House of Commons, that the father of the lunatic, who was one of Sir Hussey's voters, had certain obvious reasons for making an application for his son's release at that particular period.

The subject was taken up in the House of Commons, by Sir E. Knatchbull, in a speech reflecting upon the misconduct of the Secretary of State for permitting so dangerous a person to be at large; and he referred, in a very pointed manner, to Sir Hussey Vivian's share in the transaction, and moved for a select committee to inquire into all its circumstances.

Lord John Russell, in reply, seems to have made a satisfactory defence. After shewing that he had not exceeded his authority, or stretched the prerogative of the Crown, in ordering the liberation of the lunatic, he proceeded to detail the particular circumstances of Thom's case. The parents of that individual had waited upon him while at Endsleigh, in Devonshire, to solicit their son's release. He remembered, he said, little of the interview, except that the father was an old person, in a respectable situation in life, and and having the appearance of a farmer. They were both greatly distressed at their son's confine ment, and assured him that no danger was likely to arise from his discharge.

This interview took place in August; and the order for Thom's release was not made till October. In the mean time, a correspondence on the subject ensued between Sir Hussey Vivian and himself; but he could assure the House that the matter had never been mentioned in connexion with the Cornwall election, nor had Sir Hussey Vivian ever adverted to the political opinions of either the father or the son. Having made some enquiries concerning the nature of Thom's case, of the visiting magistrates of the asylum, he was

referred by them to a medical certificate, dated the 8th of September in that year, which merely stated that the man was a lunatic, fancying himself a knight, and claiming an estate and a castle.

The unhappy person was therefore discharged, his father engaging to take due care of him; but, instead of doing so, he delivered him over to the keeping of a person named Francis, a friend of the lunatic's, and no wise fit for the charge. The noble Lord then concluded by strongly condemning the attempt which was made, on the other side of the House, to give a party character to the proceedings.

Sir Hussey Vivian declared, upon his honour, that it was only within that week, that he had heard how Thom, the father, voted at the last election. The application, which he had made for the son's release had, he most distinctly stated, no connexion whatever with the election for Cornwall; and he entered into some details in corroboration of that assertion.

Mr. Turner said that he had been personally acquainted with Thom, the son, for twenty years. Being at one time engaged in large mercantile transactions in Cornwall, he had, for many years, employed that individual in his service, and found him faithful, honest, and zealous.

A singular occurrence attended the nomination of the committee for which Sir E. Knatchbull had moved. Lord Howick objected to some of the gentlemen proposed by the right hon. Baronet, as entertaining rather "stronger and more eager opinions in politics," than befitted persons

deputed to investigate a transaction of so delicate a complexion. He thought, he said, that the committee should be composed of men of high station and experience-men in whose character and judgment even their adversaries placed confidence. Under these circumstances, and in the absence of any disposition, on the part of Sir E. Knatchbull, to make the least concession, he had been under the painful necessity of presenting a counter-list to the House. He did not propose to alter the relative strength of parties, in the committee, and was content that there should be seven from the ministerial, and eight from the opposition side of the House. But, as this was no light and ordinary charge which had been made against Lord John Russell and Sir Hussey Vivian, he asked, in common fairness, that the eight gentlemen selected from the other side should be persons who united, as far as it was possible, the confidence of all parties. He particularly hoped that Sir Robert Peel would consent to be placed on the committee. He added, that there was one hon. member in particular, on Sir E. Knatchbull's list, who did appear to have his feelings strongly excited on this subject; he meant the member for Aylesbury (Mr. Praed.) There were others, also, on the same list, who either appeared to be very strongly actuated by party feelings, or who were of less experience, and less station in the House, than those whom he proposed to substitute for

them.

The noble lord concluded by saying, that his list omitted the names of the Earl of Lincoln, the

Marquis of Chandos, Mr. Praed. and Mr. Darby, and substituted those of Sir R. Peel, Sir T. D. Acland, Sir R. Inglis, and Mr. R. Clive.

It could hardly be expected that the members thus broadly stigmatized, could submit in silence to Lord Howick's stricturess Mr. Praed was the first to protest against what he stigmatized as "the superfluous, gross, and unnecessary affront put upon the members to whom the noble lord had alluded."

He was followed by the Marquis of Chandos, who declared that he should fail in his duty to himself and to his constituents, if he were for a moment, after the insinuation which the noble lord had presumed to throw upon his character, to hesitate in requesting Sir E. Knatchbull to withdraw his name.

Mr. Darby having spoken to the like effect, and Lord Howick having disclaimed any intention of throwing "the slightest imputation" on the gentlemen whose names he proposed to omit, Sir Robert Peel rose for the purpose of expressing his determination not to serve upon the committee under such unusual circumstances. He was of opinion that the honour of any man might, with safety, be entrusted to the four members in question; and he exhorted them not to countenance Lord Howick's objections, by refusing to serve.

Sir H Hardinge (one of the members originally proposed) Mr. R. Clive, and Sir R. Inglis, ex pressed their desire to be excused from serving on the committee.

Lord Howick's conduct, upon this occasion, was certainly of a character likely to be extremely

offensive to the gentlemen upon whose competency, as judges in a court of honour, he thus pronounced sentence; and there seems to have been nothing in the manner or language of the noble lord which was calculated to soften down the harshness of such an unusual proceeding, even supposing it to have been, under the circumstances, in itself justifiable. - But Lord Howick's demeanour rises into forbearance and actual courtesy, when compared with Mr. E. Lytton Bulwer's, who permitted his excited feelings to be tray him into a strange and utterly unprovoked attack upon Mr. Praed, and which, moreover, was quite extraneous to the matter under discussion. Mr. Bulwer accused the member for Aylesbury of having formerly entertained opinions the reverse of those he at present maintained; insomuch that, when at college, he had celebrated the 30th of January by a calf's head dinner. This was distinctly denied by Mr. Praed, and an altercation ensued between the honourable members, which shortly proceeded to such a height as to compel the interference of the Speaker to prevent ulterior consequences.

The House divided on Lord Lord Howick's motion, which was carried by a majority of 124 to

94.

The next division was on the proposed substitution of Sir Thomas Acland for Lord Lincoln. And although Lord Howick admitted that he had not obtained the hon. Baronet's consent to be on the committee, a courtesy usually practised in such cases-Sir Thomas was appointed by a majority of 134 to 104.

After a similar fashion, and in spite of the right hon. Baronet's

reiterated refusal to serve, Sir Robert Peel was nominated in lieu of the Marquess of Chandos, by a majority of 131 to 112.

The discussions on the ministerial project for creating a fund for the payment of church rates, by increasing the value of ecclesias tical property, will be found to occupy a considerable space in our preceding volume. The reader will recollect that the deliberations of Parliament in that instance, resulted in the appointment of a committee to ascertain the probable amount of any increased value which might be obtained by an improved management of Church property.

Lord John Russell, on the 3rd of May, moved the re-appointment of a committee for a similar purpose. He estimated the net revenue of the Church of England at 3,439,767. It was, he said, calculated that this income would admit of a considerable increase. With respect of the disposal of such additional revenue, when obtained, he and his colleagues held it as a fixed principle that it ought to be devoted to a purpose clearly and intimately connected with the church. Many hon. Members were of opinion that such a fund ought to be applied to the education of the people. The Government, on the contrary, would prefer to dedicate it to a purpose which nobody could deny was connected with the church, viz. to the repairs of the fabric of the church itself. But it was, he observed, at that moment, unnecessary to discuss or decide what should be the eventual application of the anticipated fund,

• Page 83.