干掉5名高价值人员!揭秘美军在非洲无人机反恐}

Character of the new KingPosition of the MinistryDiscussion in the Lords on a RegencyBrougham's Speech in the CommonsThe King in LondonBrougham's Slavery SpeechThe DissolutionSketch of the July RevolutionIts Effects in EnglandThe ElectionsTheir Results in England and IrelandDeath of HuskissonDisturbances in EnglandThe King's SpeechDeclarations of Grey and Wellington on ReformBroughams NoticeEffect of the Duke's Speech-Agitation in IrelandAnd against the PolicePostponement of the King's Visit to the Mansion HouseResignation of Wellington's MinistryGrey forms a MinistryBrougham's PositionThe MinistryGrey's StatementAgricultural EnglandCobbett and CarlileAffairs in IrelandLord AngleseyHis Struggle with O'ConnellO'Connell's Prosecution droppedThe Birmingham Political unionPreparation of the Reform BillIt is entrusted to Lord John RussellThe BudgetThe Bill introducedThe First Reading carriedFeeling in the CountryThe Second Reading carriedGascoigne's AmendmentA Dissolution agreed uponScene in the LordsThe PressThe Illuminations and RiotsThe New ParliamentDiscussions on the Dissolution and O'ConnellThe Second Reform BillThe Second ReadingThe Bill in CommitteeIt is carried to the LordsDebate on the Second ReadingThe Bill rejectedPopular ExcitementLord Ebrington's ResolutionProrogation of ParliamentLord John Russell's DeclarationThe Bristol RiotsColonel Brereton.

The next who took his trial was Horne Tooke. The evidence was much the same, but the man was different. Tooke was one of the keenest intellects of the time, full of wit and causticity, by which he had worsted even Junius. He summoned as witnesses the Prime Minister himself, the Duke of Richmond, Master-General of the Ordnance, and others of the Cabinet, who had all in their time been ardent Reformers, and cross-questioned them in a style which, if he were guilty, showed that they had once been as much so. Tooke's trial was very damaging to the Government, and he was also acquitted after a trial of six days, during the whole of which the jury had not been allowed to separate, that they might not receive any popular impressions from withouta course which was not calculated to put them in a particularly good humour with the prosecutors.

Almost immediately on the meeting of the House of Commons, Welbore Ellis demanded whether a return had been made for Westminster, and being answered in the negative, moved that Mr. Corbett, the high bailiff, with his assessor, should attend the House; and the next day, February 2nd, Colonel Fitzpatrick presented a petition from the electors of Westminster, complaining that they were not legally and duly represented. In fact, the scrutiny had now been going on for eight months, and as not even two of the seven parishes of Westminster were yet scrutinised, it was calculated that, at this rate, the whole process would require three years, and the city would, therefore, remain as long unrepresented. The high bailiff stated that the examinations, cross-examinations, and arguments of counsel were so long, that he saw no prospect of a speedy conclusion; and Mr. Murphy, his assessor, gave evidence that each vote was tried with as much[310] form and prolixity as any cause in Westminster Hall; that counseland this applied to both sidesclaimed a right to make five speeches on one vote; and that propositions had been put in on the part of Sir Cecil Wray to shorten the proceedings, but objected to on the part of Mr. Fox. THE TREATY OF TILSIT. (See p. 544.)