Star. — London, England, 1819-03-02 00:00:00

and as the petitioner had not supposed that this ob jection would be staved, he applied to the Committee for time to send for the poll-clerk. This tine, how ever, had not been granted by the Committee, and he thought their conduct to the petitioner was rather harsh. It was evident that, in future, whenever a petition was presented against an election in Ireland, it would be necessary for the petitioner to bring over the poll-clerk, in order to prove the poll. This he conceived to be a very great hardship, as it would be attended with considerable additional expense to the petitioner, and as in many cases the poll-clerks were not in so high a rank in_life as to afford'the loss of so much time. Yet such must be the inevitable con sequence, if the decision of this Committee were to become a precedent in future petitions from Ireland. Be should therefore Move, that the inintites of the . Committee be laid before the House, in order to con sider the propriety of amending the law on this subject. Sir THOMAS BARING said, that the documents en which the petitioner founded his defence were con tained in a sealed parcel which had been given to him after the election, without his knowing what the parcel contained. He cer,.ainly thought it a case of extreme hardship that the petitioner should be ob liged to authenticate the poll' in this way. The hard ship of which the Honourable Gentleman complained would certaii.r►' exist, for in future it would be ne cessary to bring over the clerk of the poll. He wil lingly.seconded the motion for the production of the minutes of the Committee. Mr. STURGES BOURNE asked if the poll-book Lad been produced by the proper officer ? Mr. WYNNE cited two cases in which a copy of tl.e poll, returned by the proper officer, had been con sidered proper evidence. Mr. ABERCROMBY was aware that there was great inconvenience in discussing such a question before the House. All must think, that a case of greater hardship than the present had never occurred. Ile had inquired into the particulars of this case, be cause a similar one, in which he had been a Member of the Committee, had been, he understood, relied on as a precedent for the present decision. If th.tt was the case, it was impossible that there could be a greater perversion, for the former case was totally inapplicable to the present, as every man, in the slightest manlier acquainted with law, would pro nounce. He thought that there never was a decision more unjust, more contrary both to reason and pre cedent, than the present. It was then ordered that the Minutes of the Com mittee be laid on the table. _ _ _ Mr. E.ILITTLETON presented a Petition from Wolverhampton, against the lusolvent Debtors' Act. Laid on the taSle. Lord WORCESTER presented a Petition from Monmouth, against any alteration in the Coal Tax. Laid on the table. Mr. HUNTER BLAlltyresented a Petition from the Incorporated Trades of Edinburgh, praying for a more liberal and constitutional system of Burgh Government to Edinburgh, and all the other Scotch Burghs. Mr. MAXWELL said, it was not his intention to trouble the House with arguments on a subject which . embraced so many topics relating to the Royal Burghs of Scotland. He would only state one circumstance, and that he stated on the authority of.the most emi nent Lawyers or Scotland,. that theiMagistrates of the Scotch Burghs had the power of contracting debts to any amount on the Funds of the Burgesses, while the Corporation had no control over the funds, nor any share in the administration of the Burgh.—, 'This was an important point, because the highest legal Authority in Scotland, the Lord Advocate, had announced his intention of bringing in a Bill, such as he had proposed last year ; but it was evident that such a measure was inadequate, and, in fact, did not extend to that part of the subject which was of the greatest importance. The Petition was ordered to be printed. Colonel WOOD presented three Petitions from the County of Brecon, against the equalizatiou of the Duties on Coals. Ile said, that the Press had - been active in stating that the promoters of the measure for the equalization of the duties were anxious to re move the operation of the Local Act from themselves, and throw them -equally on the whole Public. For his own part, he would oppose any alteration in the 'existing laws en that subject. Mr. METHUEN stated the hardships which any additional Tax on Ccials, would prove to Manufac turers, who already had great difficulties to surmount in bringing their goods to a foreign market. Mr. Alderman WOOD said, that those who prayed for the equalization of the duties did not desire,to throw the weight of local taxes on the public. The tax chargeable on London and its vicinity was not a local tax, but a Government tax. It the Honourable Member looked into the Act, he would find that it applied to coals that were -..--iter-Lorne, not sea borne ; and he believed, if the Act were properly construed, it would extend to coals carried by canals, as well as those carried by sea. The Petitions were ordered to he on the table. My. CHARLES CALVERT said, he held in his hand a Petition, signed by a great number of most respectable persons in the parish of Saint George, Southwark, against - the present lielvy Duties which they paid on Coals. The Petitioners did not pretend to say what should b 6 done ; they. only prayed fhe House to take such nieasures for their relief as it might think proper.—Laid on the table. Mr. CHARLES CALVERT presented another Petition from the same persons against the Insolvent Debtors' Act. The petition stated, that for one rigid creditor, there were ten fraudulent debtors.—Laid on the table. A MEMBNR moved for an Account of Ladd pur chased for the erection of the new Post Office ; and also an account of the progress of the work.—Ordered. The Sheriff; of London presented at the Bar a Pe tition from the Lord Utyl,r, Aldermen; and Corn mon Council of the City of London, representing the Right of Appeal in cases of murdei.' to have imme morrilly belonged to the City, while the Vager of Battle was quite unknown there, and praying that they should not be deprived of their= ancient right.— Af ter som e conversation, the petition was read, laid ou the table, and ordered to be printed. L or a (ASTLEREAGII moved, that the names pj •the dtifaulters at the ballot on Thursday should bq *cad over.. 7 0 4 t b c ni uucof Lord Var.ozuzut DeNriNtz being read, considerable difference of opinion appeared to prevail in the House. The SPITAKER repeatedly or dered strangers to withdraw, and at length the gal lery was cleared for a division ; but no division took place. All the defaulters were ordered to attend the ballot, either on Thursday next, or on Tuesday or Thursday se'nnight. • Mr. W. SMII,II said,. that he held inhis hand a Petition from the Corporation of Norwich, praying for an amelioration of the law, and a mitigation of , the punishment of forgery.—Laid on the table. The Report of the Committee on Irish Recogni zances was brought up and read. It stated, that re- 1 cognizances had been entered into, and die orders of the House complied with, in all the cases except th:q of the town and county of Galway, in which case the Committee recommended an extension of the time. Mr. C. W. WYNN moved, that the petitioners in the case of the town of Galway be allowed till Thurs day se'nnight to complete their recognizances.— Ordered. COVERNItIENT CONTRACTS FOR STORM, Mr. Alderman WOOD said, that he bad moved some weeks ago for an account of a gorge contract for stones, entered into by the Nav y Board. Ile had had no intention to reflect upon the Board. He had only stated, that stones were brought to Dactrnoor at 4s. Ild. per foot, which, if convicts had been em ployed, might have been obtained at 2s. per foot ; and thus a saving of £lOO,OOO would have been effected for the public. The whole had been conducted under the direction of Mr. Rennie, the Surveyor, who, he understood, always recommended Aberdeen stones— , • The SPEAKER called Mr. Wood to order. He had understood that his intention was merely to cor rect a former statement : if he meant to move, and to enter into discussion on his motion, it must be ob vious that he could not take precedence of other mo tions fixed for that day—Vicar, hear). Lord CASTLEREAGH remarkeJ, that it might perhaps answer the purpose if the Worthy Alderman would give notice for to-morrow. Mr. Alderman WOOD said he moved only for ac counts, to the production of which there could be no objection. He moved for an account of the contracts for stones entered into by the Navy Board, from the Ist of January, 1810, to the Ist of January, 1819, distinguishing the quality, quantity, and price per foot, of each kind, and giving the amount of the whole price.—Ordered. Sir BYAM MARTIN most willingly agreed to the motion. If the Worthy Alderman had not brought the subject before the House, he should have felt it his duty to institute an inquiry into the conduct of the Board in the case alluded to : for the Navy Board should stand well in public estimation, or not stand at all. Sir M. W. RIDLEY gave notice, that on Wednes day the 10th of March, he would submit a motion to the House for reducing the number of Lords of the Admit alty.—The Honourable Baronet afterwards fixed his motion for Thursday the 11th of March. Sir M. W. RIDLEY gave notice, that he would to morrow move for a Return of the Sur i charges, similar to those moved for by him last year. Mr. CANNING postponed lus motion of thanks to the Marquis of Hastings, &c. from to-morrow to Thursday. This, he observed, was in consequence of his not having been able to effect an arrangement with an Honourable and Learned Friend of his (Sir J. Macintosh), whose motion stood for to-morrow. PENRYN ELECTION. Sir C. BURRELL moved the order of the day for resuming the adjourned debate upon the question of the Penryii Election. The SPEAKER said, that before the House pro ceeded to the adjourned debate, it might be conve nient for them to know in what state of forwardness the minutesiof evidence were which had been ordered to be printed on Tuesday. From their length he did not think they would be ready before Wednesday, and would not be in the hands of Members before Thursday. The House would, therefore, see what time might elapse before the Members were put in possession of the information which might be neces sary on the subject: With respect to the question of suspending the issuing of writs upon special reports, he bad before expressed what had occurred to him at the moment. Since then he had looked into all the cases since the year 1770, and from these it appeared, that is all cases where reports were made, charging bribery and corruption upon a nurtsber of Electors, the issuing of the writ was suspended until the House had before them the minutes of evidence taken before the Committee. In one case, a report was made charging bribery and corruption; but as no special complaint was made, the issue of the writ was not delayed, but the Attorney-General was ordered to prosecute the offenders. Sir C. BURRELL was of opinion that it would be more convenient if the House did not proceed with the consideration of the question until the minutes of evidence were before them.—(Hear, hear). He was the more anxious for this, as he had heard a report that the evidence of one witness was objected to be fore the Committee ; and so nicely balanced were the, votes, that the evidence was only rejected by the cast ing vote of the Chairman. In order to shew the spirit which prevailed in this Borough, he would beg to have the report of a Committee which had sat in 1807, to examine the allegations of a petition against the return which had then.been made for it. The Clerk then read the Report of the Committee. It was dated February 4th,1807, and stated that Sir C. Hawkins, the Sitting Member, was unduly elected, and that Henry Swarm, Esq. (the petitioner) was one of the Sitting Members, and that John Trevanion, Esq. ought to have been returned as the other Mem ber. The Committee also passed a resolution that Sir C. Hawkins had been guilty of bribery, and that seve ral Electors of the Borough had been pPoved to have accepted bribes. , Sri- C. BURRELL said, that after what the House had heard of the base and mercenary spirit which prevailed in that Borough, they should see the ne cessity of not proceeding with the discussion until they should have the minutes of evidence fully before them. He would therefore move, diet the debate be further adjourned till next Monday. Mr. XIASTERTON URE.—There were few sub jects coming under the consideration of Parliament; of greater importance than those connected with the rights of Electors, and the paivileges of the douse; and he felt desk ous that on the present o,i9sion they should ao conduct the proceedin g s as •to hew to the people of England,- that if there were min? 1 persons who thought the elective franchi'e should 1* moor extended, and others of a contrary opinion, that they would take care that those who had the elective franchise should exercise it fairly, freely, and 'constitutionally. And bete it was important to ob serve, that by acceding to the Honourable Baronet's motion, the House would enable those who had proved themselves so unworthy of being Electors to repeat those acts of corruption so disgraceful to themselves and injut ions to the Public ; while by postponing the writ it would be liable to the charge. of depriving the bona fide Electors of Penryn of their due share in the Iter.nentation of the Empire:' for it should be ohscrvcd, that those Electors who by the Resolution of the Committee were found to have been bribed, would, non% ithstanding that Resolu tion, be entitled to vote, till they were convicted in a 'Court of I.aw, or di s qualified by Act of Parlia ment. He might here allude to precedents, from which it would appear that there was no case 'where the House had delayed to issue a wi it to supply a vacancy, unles the Report of the Committee was of a more general nature, and implied more fl.igrant acts of corruption. Inmost of these cases the Chair man of the Committee moved the House to postpone issuing the writ; whereas in the present case he moved that it. should he issued. Finding, however, on the journals of the House, that corruption had 'existed in this Borough on a former occasion, and si milar disgraceful practices appearing on the present, occasion, he would accede to the Ilonourable Baro net's motion. Mr. ATKYNS WRIGHT said, that several who had appeared before the Committee were proved to have taken bribes. The House might do as thes pleased with the question, hut he was not aware that it was the practice to suspend the issuing of a writ except where bribery could he proved against a very large portion of the Electors. The precedent he con sidered to be one of a dangerous nature. Sir JOHN NEWPOItT conceived, that where it was evident that such bribery existed, and was so notorious, that neither of the candidates adminis tered the bribery oath during the election, the House ought *not to have the writ issued until they had the whole of the evidence taken by the Committee before theni. If this caused a delay, it could be considered only as a very small punishment to those who had made so bad a use of their votes. Mr. ATKYNS WRIGHT said, that it did not ap pear from the evidence ',Are the Committee, whe ther the'bribery oath had been administered or , not. Sir JOHN NEWPORT replied, that if it did not appear from the minutes on the poll-book to have been administered, it was perfectly evident that it had not. Mr. C. HARVEY said, that he did not mean to oppose the motion, as he wished that the minutes of evidence should be before the House, which he con ceived would shew that some of the charges had been made without foundation. Mr. BANKES was desirous that the debate should be further adjourned, as, to say the least, there was very strong suspicion that very many of the Electors were implicated in the charge of bribery. Mr. DENISON thought there was sufficient evi dence to skew the system of gross bribery which had been practised in this virtuous Borough. One fact alone would prove it: the Electors were assembled at a public breakfast, and each of theth received £24 for his vote—(hear, hear).—With these circum stances before them, he trusted the House would ad journ the question till Monday. The Motion for adjourning the debate on the issu ing the writ, was then put and carried. The Report of Committee was also adjourned to the same day (Monday next.) PETITION OF MR. TROMAS GRADY. , Mr. CHRISTOPHER HUTCHINSON, in rising to present a Petition from this Gentleman, observed, that it would not be necessary for him to go over the same ground which he had gone ori a former occa sion when this question was before the House. He .was the less inclined to this, because he understood it to be the general feeling of the House that there would be no opposition to his release. Ills (Mr. Hutchinson's) wish was to conciliate all parties, and not to offer any thing which might prejudice the cause of the Gentleman whose Petition he was about to present. The Petitioner expressed his sincere sorrow at having in any manner offended the House. At the same time he solemnly declared, that he never had any such intention. He therefore -prayed that he might be released from custody. The Petition was then brought up, and read by the Clerk. It was in substance such as Mr. Hut chinson had described it. Sir ROBERT WILSON hoped the House would consider the age of the Petitioner and his ill state of health, and also that some days had elapsed since he had been committed to prison. —The Petition was or dered to lie on the table. After which, Mr. HUTCHINSON moved, that Mr. Thomas Grady be forthwith brought to the Bar, for the pur pose of being discharged. Mr. BOOTLE WILBRAHAM did not intend to oppose the Motion, but he would suggest, that .the old usage of the House should not be departed from in the present instance. It was the practice on occa sions similar to this to move, that the person in cus tody be brought up, not forthwith, but on the fol lowing day. Besides, if Mr. Grady were to be brought to the Bar in the course of the present even ing, it would probably interrupt the debate which was about to commence. He therefore suggested, that instead of the word " forthwith," in the Motion, the word to-morrow" should be inserted. Mr. HUTCHINSON had no objection to alter his motion as the Honourable Member had suggested. The motion wus therefore withdrawn, and another put—" that Mr. Grady should be called to the Bar to-morrow: Mr. BANKES suggested, that the latter part of the motion should run thus—" he called to the ,Bar of the House, to be reprimanded by 'Air. Speaker, and then discharFed." The sit AKLIt. observed, that when Pa person is custody by .order J the Hou se was ca ll e d to the liar in order tole'discharged, it implied tlnit he was to s r . teprirnaiicied;--(//rar, hear). sfr.C. W. WYNNsaid, that to prevent auy dcubt upou the object for which the prisoner was to be brought up, it might be better to let the Word " re , irittisanded" be inserted.. This was dote accordit.gly, aia .the . moti9u passed unatilutously. • 'fiTATr OP 'VIE PittSC6lS. Lord CASTLEREA(;H, in rising to c;i11 tention of the House to this importut sul);ect,' served, that he should endeavour as shortly ? sible to open to theth the nature and C;jest motion. It would be the less necessary to t, ct much of their time, as they must !eel that his , in one of its objects, was so much ‘like th at an Honourable and Learned Gentleman (Sir 411. intosh) intended to subthit trsmorrow. t ietti he believed, been some mis a pp re h ens i on a, to s nature of his motion ; but he hoped that the would understand, from the, course which h e about to take, that the motion of which the able and Learned Gentleman had given not: ce ~; pot be rendered necevary. It would be reccli2 e . that at an early period of the Session, a no cc been given for him, that in the course of a the-: he intended to propose an inquiry. into the std the Prisons of the Country, with which v. ls t , connected an inquiry int* the great increase el c r i and also-into the state of the Criminal Lr; Honourable .and Learaed Gentleman (Sir J. YE:: Cosh) could not have understood at the tine, tl l4 inquiry was to•refer to the state of the Gaol s - for his Right Honourable Friend had stated, was to embrace the state of the Criminal La., But the objection of the Honourable and L. Gentleman was, that the inquiry into the c Law , hould not be made in an incidental w should of itself form one subject of ino,u;:.: trusted, however, the House would see that tion which he intended to submit would ay.: b, fined to the state of Gaols alone; hut, oa tx trary, that it was, the intention of his M a i Ny nisters to take as large a view as possible of tht _ . subject ; and he hope d it would• be evidem there WAS no great difference between his motif that of the Honourable and Learned Gentlema, that it would lead to the same satisfactory coati which he (Sir J. Mackintosh) was anxious to at. If the que , ..tion was only that of inquiry ii State of the Prisons, their internal arrangement, the necessary classification of prisoners, he not have thought it a tit subject for a Corntr. the House of Commons, because it was a in. too Ministerial a character, and coming Eddie official regulation. The view his the subject was at all events more compreC. and it was impossible to look at the preient the Gaols without going at ktrge into the question. In fact, the very amount of criini present would of itself defeat the 'acninistrat. the Gaols ; and in order to arrive at the better of administering those Gaols, it would be'iirst portant to consider, whether it was or was nr Bible to repress and diminish cri:r.e. T!le qi of Crimes and Punishments was tinav:lidA!.. volved. The real difference between him r Honourable and Learned Gentleman was merely as to the scope of the inquiry. He took Criminal Law as his basis, and his Lordship - tiered it only as a concomitant. His Lordship's p. cipal object on, however, was, that the mode sat gested on the other side would have the effect creating in the country a prejudice against the Ire before the matter had been deliberately brought re der the eye of Parlianient. No investigation of kind could be instituted without examining the, priety of diminishing the more sanguitimy L: n necessity of some ch.uigc in the system of tle Uuh the advantages of Penitentiaries, the plan (,t -sportation, and the course of nianaeemeat in Prisons; all these branches must be included, and not toente upon them would be prematurely to pronounce general sentence of degradation on the Laws of the Country: people out of doors would hastily conclaile, that the whole system was unnecessarily harsh. ands false expectation would- be raised of inipractic7'" lenity. Even the argument of saving time by sion of labour, the only one urged against hi s Lorl , hip motion, would equally apply in his favour; in quiry would be commenced and conducted ou :.: broadest principle ; nothing would be withheld flee could throw light upon it, and the Honourable Learned Gentleman would have an opportenity . giving to •the Committ ee t h e most com prehneve view ho had taken of all the bearings of the quest:tie. The order of reference would be so worded as In give the widest range. His Lordship was willing L.) give all due weight to the opinions and suggesno of .the lion. Gentleman behind (Mr. Bennet): his zeal and information were unquestionable; and his Lordship did not yield to his proposal, he nelsted it with reluctance, and only because he 152 W that greater facilities by :molter course would be afforded' it was nut correct to s:rv, that he (Lord Castitreagei wished to recommend proceeding as with an inverted cone, commencing at the smaller extremity: on tae contrary, he began upon an extended plain, Ile pointed out clearly the line that ot: b h t to be purstmc• All the information on previous Reports coma be laid before this new Committee: its inquiries wee.; extend to the whole state of the adminiseratez 1 the criminal laws, and more especially to the trir-:' ment of offeuders before and after convicticn — Vicar, hear.)—His Lordship deprecated ctreze.! any travelling out of the road for the purpose 4 ' ; ' belling the laws, until it had been distinctly motto' ed that they merited censure. Separate Conullitte would in no way promote dispatch, and if division/ 3 labour were necessary, it could be accompiio:ed assigning particular duties to particular iadividute who'se information might subsequently b e reduce: into one common focus. Upon this subject he r; 1, well aware that a strong feeling, mixed perhaps' ; some prejudice, prevailed in the country vhe , be sorry, indeed, if that strong feeling did not ere , and if the subject were taken up rationally and calete a great deal of salutary' Reform might no cioula accomplished. The muitiplieltion of COnlm.,itt' could only have the effect of distracting wisov7 elucidating conflicting reports and discordant many would be produced, and. the mass td inform' tion weald be inapplicable, because teilatelligible: — He should have no Objection to add to the nult'.` of the Committee, which he proposed should ce!I!" of twenty-otte.members, whenever such an addirc: might be considered necessary, that the have the benefit of acting on a lit cut drawn tr o . the follebt sources of information, and by the ;Ye; men that could be collected. On these grounds !" trusted the House would net think. the* he wished impede inquiry by confining it to tine Commis.. only. His only object was to prevent an injuryi be . done to the L?wi el the cotentq, by passing • ss,l:- tt. , : t.I . Wel t ti 14 .1 L cte ell he :e , ce ;!, T • Ye:: • Cut al , • a al 4 C:1:1,17 Le :b: tx c.. the (rd. cat, aid% :17 to r into aent, :e shun mantis he-unc:.+7 trok. 7eCc:-.67 It St:.t' •, 13122.1, tratica :ter rho& tint in:- s not grzcost sIAY.v lz:•).rt tip consi• tip's mode s:tg• e effect i t the laT, )ught on of :':r the pr• Li c•s. !).., Hulls (,/ Tr.ia• t Prisons; to•eina TIOUP.Ce 1 ws N the conclaLit, rsh. antis racticable ; the divi• .ordshipi r; the Ur d on the held fiat rable asi rtunity ce rchesire questan. ded as to willing 4+ ggesnoz 1.4 if. if ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~, ~ ~1 ~~! .%