Star. — London, England, 1827-02-27 00:00:00

. himhiminsoperalile. 41 was to be toispOsed of a certa in " number o f m e mbers, whose names were known, and whose acts would also be made public. And what was the duty they would be called upon to perform ? They would have in fact to pronounce not only upon the charges of bribery and corrupt acts alleged against par ticular Members, hut their decision, according to the a dmission of the Noble Lord himself, would in certain cases ge to expulsion.—(Hear, hear !) Now, if there was any one situation more than another in which party f ee lings would be likely to influence the conduct of Members, even against their wishes, it was this very eibunals But whether they acted impartially or rot, it would be equally impossible that they should l o upe a degree of suspicion and odium which he thooght few would choose to encounter.—(Cheers.) He should like to knot, whether any one Gentleman t hen present would like to be a Memher of this Stand ing Committee. Nay, he would go farther, and ask osetberliny Honourable Member would say that he jboeld lite to see the Gentleman who 'sat next him Upon i t ? Ile declared that he never knew a proposition which give rise to sa many unpleasant considerations. Who would say that there would not be a most perplexing difficulty in appointing the persons to compose this Sanding Committee ? Who was there who would not have objections to delegate such a superiority and power t o any Member in his heart, although he might not be dise posed to give them full utterance?-..(Cheers.) The Noble Lard had said that the measure he proposed was not novel in its principle; that it was analogous tb the ap pointment of Committees by ballot, and to Grand Jutiei. He was willing to grant to the Noble Lord that in one respect, and in one only, there was an analogy— is both cases the prcceedings must be ex paste. Such a Committee would have all their acts made public ; and was it possible to avoid prejudicing the persons accused, when the allegations against them should have been echoed by half the newspapers in the country, before the House was called -upon to confirm or reject the opinion which the Committee had reported ? He en treated the House to pause—(Hear, hear) —before it consumed to such a proposition ; but always admitting himself ready to support any measure which appeared really calculated to lessen the evil against which this was directed. He denied that there was any analogy between this case and the proceedings of the House in respect to the Committee of Privileges. Here there were twenty-one judicial characters to be chosen by the House, to be placed above their fellows, and to be clothed, not merely with a judicial but permanent au thority. This body would not only have to decide upon all charges preferred against otherMernbers of theHouse,but also upon the merits of their own elections. It was impos sible but that they must be the objects of odium,suspicion e imputation,and jealousy. which ought not to attach to the character of a Member of Parliament, and to which their present laws happily did not expose them. The Noble Lord wouldappoint these twenty-one Gentlemen as the guardians of that House. But, he would ask, who was to be their guardians ? Costae:, quis C'ustodiat ipso:. The measure was unfair to the House, it was unfair to the individual Members who would be placed in so in vidious a light, and he did not see that it promised any advantage which was not to be derived from their laws. Lord J. RUSSELL rose to offer his thanks to his Noble Friend, for having put the opinions which be had oftsevwxpressed, into the form of the resolutions before the House ; a form which he• had hoped would have been agreed ettestset much opposition. What had fallen front Kirk Member opposite amounted tol this—that the /louse wanted no farther remedy against bribery and coreeption than that already in existence. how he would appeal to the House whether such a position could be maintained, after the experience a every general election, and particularly after the notorious proceedings of a certain borough from which Members had lately been returned to Par liament? At that election . the voters returned from the poll with the bank-notes in their hands, or stuck in their hats, as signals that they had received the wages of their iniquitous conduct. While these practices were openly going on, let him ask whether the character of that House did hot require other means for their re pression than those already in their hands?—(Hear.) — There was one error which appeared to him to have run through the whole of the Hon. Member's reasoning, and that was, that he ascribed to the Committee proposed by hi, Noble Friend a judicial character. The Grew. ',ilk Committee was, indeed, a judicial body ; but that now proposed would only be a Committee of Enquiry. He entertained an objection upon principle to giving the judicial character to such a body. He thought the House afforded very good materials for Courts of En- Orb but very bad ones for judicial tribunals. But the Peoposition of his Noble Friend was for a Committee who would have to pronounce no sentence, but only to enquire arid report the result of its enquiries to the House. The Hon. Member had, indeed, argued that the Committee would be called upon to decide for the expulsion of Members. He could assure the House there would be no such thing. The Committee would only have to enquire into the conduct Of parti cular candidates and their agents, and although the al legations of bribery should be proved, it by no means followed of necessity, that the sitting Member should bet expelled. In the case of Grampound, the sitting Mem. bets remained in their seats until the end of the Parlitia anent, although the corrupt practices were proved, to the complete disfranchisement of the Borough. It was true that his Noble Friend had, in his candour, allowed that cases of such a flagrant nature might arise, as to ' , ender the expulsion of sitting Members incumbent upon the House. But that would be the act of the House, and not of the Committee. The Hon. Member opposite had dilated upon the dif f iculty of appointing ,individuals to form such a Committee, and of finding any who would like to undertake the task. He thought ti.ere were Members to be found in that House, pos sessing characters for learning and honesty which were above suspicion, who would stand forward to undertake such a duty, and who would receive the support and confidence of Parliament. The Hon. Member had objected that such a body would be without controul or s r s e o rnsibility ; applying to them the phrase—gait Cu , ism Cuse•diat. But then what became of the Grenville Act, which was equally liable to the same objection? It must, indeed, lead to the entire extinction of the judicial character in that House, and the transfer of judicial decisions to some other tribunal. Before he sat doirn, he desired to ex press his regret that his Noble Friend should have added the instrection to the resolutions. He thought their effi ciency was by so much lessened, and therefore regretted .that it should have been considered necessary. He knew that his Noble Friend bad consented to it, in order t° conciliate hostility to the measure, and he was aware that this was among the difficulties which any Mem ber co that side of the Houle must expect CO en- 'counter, when he undertook to remedy notorious abuses, or to- make any improvement in the law, however necessary. It was very well for a Minister, in the benevolence of his heart, and in the sagacity of his mind, to bestow his attention In the closet upon such reforms; and then to briag the result of his la bours before theHouse,conident of a majority,the larger' portion of which would be composed of men who ten• years age denounced as Jacobins all who proposed similar changes and reformations in the law—(Cheers from the Opposition). It was well for a Minister to'do this when his majority would be further swelled, per- Jsaps, by some generous adversary who came down to his support after ransacking his vocabulary for terms of gratitude, praise, and admiration—(Hear, hear). — Far different was the fate of those who came forsiard with similar propositions from the other side. When be had submitted to the clippings and cuttings down required by one and another of his opponents, until his• proposition was reduced to such a state, that its. or iginal object was scarcely to be discovered ; and when, after it had been put by from time to time to make way for the ordinary business of the House, then csme down some Member of the other side, strong in the majority, always reedy to back him, strong in the knowledge that a large ntunber of families represented in that House had .an interest in supporting abuses—and an opposition to the whole principle of the measure was declared. Thus tired by protracted delays, baillfd at every point, he abandoned the pursuit of his object in disgust, and abuses were tecognised and confirmed, to the destruc tion of all the best parts of our Constitution—(Hear.) - Mr. PALMER said he should not have tres passed upon the attention of the House, but that a con-. siderable nurnhet of hiS constituents had requested him, to press the necessity of applying some remedy to this • evil. If the House would allow him, he would- state one ease arising out of the Election proceedings at'a Borough in the county which he had the honour to to present (Wallingford, in Berkshire). He had received a letter from the Mayor and Corporation of this Borough, ats4 he believed that a similar one had been addressed to the Noble Lord; It stated, that the time having expired, during which the laws ef the House admitted the presen tation of a Petition, an individual called the Miller, went round and delivered to each voter a packet containing 201.—This money was avowedly paid as the condition on which the vote had been given, and the transaction took place openly in the day without any attempt at keeping it secret. Yet these persons took the bribery oath without scruple, and under the knowledge and_ promise that "the Miller" was to call upon them in the usual way. This was represented to him to be the state of the Borough in question. Whether the allega tions could be proved or not, he could not undertake to say. But perhaps the House might be informed by the Hon. Members themselves--(Hear and laughter). At all events he would ask, whether this was not a case which ought to be brought forward?—(Cheers from both sides of the House). He would not undertake to s iy, whether or not the Noble Lord's was the best mea sure which could be devise& but at least it appeared to bim calculated to act as a check upon these disgraceful practices. Mr. C. WYNN said, that the necessity of the Noble Lord's proposition - ther the practice whether there evil? As it not be hid been to the application tension of ti petitioning, that was a remedy which could as well be supplied in conjunction with the existing laws, as by establishing a new one. He for one should not object to a propJsition lot enabling parties to petition the Hou within a certain time after the giving of money could proved; and if proved,the Member might by the decisi of the House be then unseated. If the case whith the' Hoa. Member for Berkshire had stated could be proved, he bad no difficulty in saying that it was.a case for the cone sideration of Parliament. He would not pledge himself upon the course which be thought the House should take in dealing with it; but it was a case for the House: to dispose of according to the circumstances which should turn out in proof, as they had in the cases of Shoreham, Cricklade, Aylesbury, and Cii ampound. H. had beard no reason assigned why a Standing Cool mittee was necessary for this purpose, nor any answer* to the argumentitive speech of his Hon. and Learned Friend (Mr.L. Fostrr). Why was the Grenville Co mittee established, but to form a judicial tribunal ? And he had never yet heard of a case in which that tribunal had proved inefficient. Upon these grounds, he thought it better to stand by the mode of trial whiCh they already possessed. The main question before the House was, whether they should appoint a Standing Committee for purposes already provided for by the laws of the House. If any such case as that *presented by the Hon. Member for Berkshire were broughp for ward and proved, he was confident there would be no difficulty in dealing with it under the existing regu lations. • Sir J. NEWPORT said, it appeartd to be the almost unanimous wish of the House that the disgraceful prat- tire of bribery at elections should be put an end to. Yet notwithstanding the Grenville Act, or any other existing laws, it was notorious that the grossest bribery and corruption continued to be practised. He begged to recall to the recollection of the House that about 14 years ago he proposed a measure for taking away the oath of bribery from the electors, and administering it to the elected. He proposed to administer an oath to every candidate, by which he bound himself; neither by himself nor his agents, to give any reward of money, or promises of office or employment, or any promise of a valuable consideration whatever. The House in its wisdom thought proper then to reject that measure. But if they were in earnest in their desire to get rid of the stigma which now attached to the House, they would not again refuse to adopt it; and if his Noble Friend's motion was rejected, he pledged himself again to bring it forward. • Mr. Secretary PEEL thooght the speech of the 'Hon. Baronet not a very powerful vindication of his Noble Friend's proposition, for he had intimated that he had a better proposition in view, and which he would propose to the House in the event of the Noble Lord's measure being rejected. He would accept the terms of the Ho,. airoaet, and oppose the Noble Lord's proposition for the sake of obtaining the more effectual measure which the Honourable Baronet had iu reserve. He would admit that nothing could be more honourable than the oblivion of party considerations, which Gentlemen of the Opposition had always shewn, when they thought the intere.ts of the country at stake—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) He could not concur in the censure that bad• been passed upon those with whom he acted. They had no diEpo : ition to resist .the , useful propositi •ns of those who were opposed to 4em in patties. He had Dever opposed the proposal tot rectify the con s ti tut i on o f J ur i es i n cases b etween t h e Crown and individuals. So far from this, he had in troduced the Bill abolishing the power of the Crown t. nominate Special Juries, in case of libel, or in other cases where the Crown was at issue with the subject. When the Noble Lord brought in -a eill for the Re covery of Small Debts, he (Mr. Peel) had, from the moment, given it his most cordial support, and he given no proof that he was disinclined to afford the N le Lord every acc ess to the o fficial information b e t a required. ~' Whilst be thought it would be m ost un f a i r r ato resist prOpotal for any reform or c orrect i on o f . s. chews, because-it was brought forward by a Member ,of the Opposition, he must at the same time say, that it would be equal folly if, he admitted any proposi. tion of Which he did not approve, merely because it originated in the opposite side of the House. No man would stand op with a brave face, and advo cate the species of corruption now complained of; but it was nevertheless necessary to inquire if the mode of cure were proper. It was more safe to reject than to accept the present preposition. The proposed Committee was net to report t. the House Mrs fads of a cash, but they were required by the words a the proposition to report their opinions. If, then, the House were to coroe. to the discussion of any case upon each a report, would they not enter upon that discus sion with their minds Prejudiced by the opinions of those who were to be the Meinbers of this Committee? According to the words of the Resolution, they were be a selection of the Members most respectable for heir probity, sagaciiy, and iotegiity. Was not this a post invidious distinction? Every aria was sent to that House In; his Constituents, under the idea that equal privileges belonged to all its Members Each Representrire intered the Legislature with the ins. pression that he was 'on ae equal footing with men of the highest situation and highest talents to be found within its walls. He therefore gave Kis unfettered opi nion upon every subject as well as the most dignified Member of the House. The more decided were the distinctions to be cast upon the Committee for the pro bity and sagacity of its Members, the more influential would be the opinions entertained in its Reports upon ' the subsequent decision of the House. But the Com mittee was to have the power of proceeding upon ex. Lparte statements, without the persons concerned in its decisions having de power to challenge,.or object even to their most bitter enemies, who might 'constitute i portion of its Members. No similarity existed between such a Committee and a Grand Jury.. One of the Resolutions of the Noble Lord was, that all Pe titions which should be presented to the House after the expiration of the ordinary time for prea senting such Petitions, should be referred to a Select, Committee, without any question whatever. This would be to appoint a permanent Inquisition. It was at that moment undetermined whether the inquiries before the Committee were to be conducted at the expense of the parties complaining, or of the public. No time for any of its proceedings were specified in the Resolutions; the - who entered their chime— . .)--- If the Hon. Member for Berkshire M e a n t t o say dis tinctly that there was a borough in which six months or a year after the election a man went round with 201. notes, to be given to the voters he (Mr. Peel) could as sure him, that he would lend his hearty co-operation to soy regular tiquiry if the facts were stated in a Petition, ppd a prima facie case established. He would consent tO the examination of the miller himself, is order that, die investigation might be as full and as effectual as isoisible—(Hear.) • Mr. B. MARTIN said he felt himself bound to sup port the Resolutions of the Noble Lord. He would, however, recommend to the Noble Lord to withdraw his Resolutions for the present, for the purpose pf conferring with those Members on his side the House who were wil ling to prevent . the existence of the practice. But why aonfixte the operation of the Resolutions to Boroughs, *ben it was notorious that corruption was infinitely more atrocious. He could state, and was ready to prove, that an Under Secretary of State went into a county and opened a bank for the payment of all the ex penses of a candidate whom he called his man ; promised offices to his supporters, and even pro mised a Peerage. He would prove these facts before a Committee, so help him GoD. The person who did this was the Marquis of Clanricarde, Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and he would o ithin a month prove the facts before a Committee, and apply fen- a special Report against the Marquis Clanricarde.—(Hear and laughter.) The CHANCELLOR of the. EXCHEQUER said, that if the Hon. Member for Galway meant to charge his Majesty's Government with having taken any part in the proceedings which he had stated to have taken, place, the accusation was most unjust.—(Hear, hear.) He • said that, without any reference to the forty veers' support 'which the Hon. Gentleman said he ~/sad given to the Administration ; and he must also say, that if the Hon. Gentleman gave his support to the re solution, because lie thought that he had been treited with ingratitude, such support would hardly be worthy lof the acceptance of the Noble Lord—(Laughter.) He I(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) knew nothing what over of the merits of the case which had been alluded to by the Hon. Member for Galway; but as. that Hon. Gentleman had stated One side of . the question only. it. wouldriortri tio'rmich to call upon the House to sus pend its judgment with respect to the conduct attributed to a Noble Lord—(Hear, hear.) And he thought the House would feel it the more necessary to do so when it learned, that the Non. Member for Galway was him .self the party petitioned against, and was charged with aving committed as many offences as a candidate would commit—(Laughter, and hear). - Lord MILTON thought that his Noble Friend would do well to adopt the suggestion which bad been thrown out with respect to counties, and if he had any doubt upon the subject, the few sentences which had fallen (torn the 'Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Would have satisfied him of the propriety of the ahem lion. It appeared toshim that the Right Hon. Secre tary for the Home Department had entirely mistaken the scope and purport of the Resolution proposed by his Noble Friend. He maintained that the argument used by the NOble Lotd near him (Lord J. Russell) was per• Tettli Correct; the Committee proposed would act but the same way as a Grand Jury.; mad he was of opi aion that the statement made by the Hon. Member lor 'Berkshire, was a strong proof of the necessity of the 'measure proposed. Should such a measure as that hissed at by the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Wynn).— 'that of receiving Petitions after the f urteen days had !spired be tesorted to, he should most certainly ap- Erove of it ; but in the mean time the Resolution of his Noble Friend should have his hearty support. Mr. C. PELHAM did nor concur in opinion si 11 the Right Hon. Gentleman oppdtite, when he proposed Committeesthat should be appointed only as cases arose -'but he thought that there shocld be some permanent tribunal, and should therefore support the Resolution'. Mr. WYNN said, it was neither his wish, nor tt e wish of those around him, to stifle measures calcithred to remove the evil complained of; but he thought the motion of the Noble Lord open to objections. If The House wished, he would move the following, which might meet the views of all pantie.:—That all persons who shall question future returns of Members, on any allegation of bribery or corruption, and shall, in peti. don, specifically allege any payment of money or other toward, since the time of such return, may question the same at any time within 28 days alter the date of sub payment, it the House be sitting, or if the House be not sitting, then in 14 days after it shall meet—(Cheers.) Lord MILTON alloired that it would be a treat improvement oo the present state of the laws, but tt did not go so far as the proposition of his Noble Friend. He did not perfectly understand whether the resolution extended to uses respecting Boroughs, orMembers only ? Mr. WYNN.—Memhers only. . Lord MILTON thought the restriction unwise, and it gave him fresh reason to support most strenuously the Resolution of his Noble Friend. Mr. ABERCROMBY declared that he had never wi:aessed a more idle debate than had taken place that evening—(Hear, hear). He called it an idle debate, be cause in reality there was little or no difference between the parties who appeared to be opposed to each other- The House was in fact unanimous in its opinion oa the oubieet—(C r ies of "No,no"). He preferred the plan pro • • by his Noble Friend, and he did so, because he , • • • ght a Committee appointed on the first day of the • tit would be less likely to be biassed by party ing, than would a Committee chosen after a coin . int had been made. Mr. BARING should support the Resolution of the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Wynn), in preference to that of his Noble Friend, becatim it was Less vague, and • nd the parties in necessary and just recognizance.. Pe was decidedly of opinion that the wide range taken by the Resolution of his Noble Friend might,. where rty spirit ran high, prove extremely annoying and mjurious to any Member who happened to vote with the Mindrity, and expressed his opinion with force sod boldness. The House would readily conceive how easy it would be for a party to raise frivolous cases against those Members, especially as the Resolution of his Noble Friend would attach no responsibility to the Petitioners. Mr. It. PALMER explained. Hp would also take that opportunity of stating, that as the resolution of the Right Hon. the President of the Board 6f Controul ap likely efficit • and would em- agreed who had attributed considerable merit to the resolution of the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Wynn), but he could not conceal from himself that it differed mate rially from that which he had hoped would have met with the sanction of the House. His own resolution west to facilitate the disfranchisement of Boroughs where gross corruption existed, but that suggested by the Right Hon. Gentleman dia not go to that extent; it touched Members Only. And he would take that op portunity of explaining why he had not inserted the word Counties. It was became his proposition was not so much to unseat Members as it was to prevent cow ruption in general. He was not desirous of inconve niencing the House by calling for a division, but he still thought that the resolution he had proposed would prove more beneficial than that suggested by the Right Honourable Gentleman. . . The resolution proposed by Lord ALTHORP was then put from the chair ; and the .SPZAIICIR declared in.fas your of the Noes ; a division, however, was called for, and strangers were ordered to withdraw, but before the Gallery was cleared, the Noble Lord withdrew his resolution. Mr. WYNN then formally proposed his resolution, and it was seconded. Lord ALTHORP said, that however much he might regret the rejection of his own resolution. as it had been rejected, he should give his cordial support' to that moved by his Right Hon. Friend. Lord MILTON said, that the resolution proposed might be very excellent, and it might be quite the con trary. He did not think that the House ought to be called on trr adopt such a resolution until it had tad time to fully consider shat would be its effect, or whether it would have any effect at all. He was therefore decidedly %pored. to -the hasty adoption of the resolution, and thought the House should adjourn in order that the Hon. Members Might hair an opportunity of inquiring into it, and ascertaining its real worth. Mr. Secretary PEEL was prepsred to support the resolution of his Right Hon. Friend, on the ground that it clid . not go so lar as the resolution proposed by • the Noble Lord. Nor could he see that the House would tequire any further time to come to a decision on its me. its. The Hon. and Learned Member for Caine had argued that there was no difference between the pro positions which had that evening been brought before the Houit; but if he (Mr. Peel) had not formed a very material difference between the measure proposed by his Right Hon.Ftiend and that proposed by the Noble Lord, he most certainly could never have iupporteil it. A proof of its beaeicial operao,on would be that it would embrace such cases as Wallingford, and that to in a. way which neither the Borough nor the Sitting Members could justly object to, for it would give the complainants an opportunity of having the merits of their case fairly tried; while it would protect the Sitting Member from frivolous and merely vexatious proceed ings, because it would compel the Petitioning party to enter into proper recognizance'; in fact the same secu rities would be required as were necessary under the Grenville Act—(Hear). Mr. HOBHOIJSE would advise bit Noble and Hon Friends (Lord Milton and Mr. Abetcremby) to acc4pt the boon offered by the Right Hon. the Ptesideot of the C. W /CNN said, that the necessity of the Noble the persons who enticed their charges were to be bound peered to him likely to prove efficl nt, and would em. proposition rested upon these questions t—whe- ,in no recognizances. lithe Noble Lord.had proceeded brace the case he had noticed, it should receive his stip- ie practice of bribery existed ? and if it did,— by Bill, he would have been obliged to specify all these port, unless the Noble Lord persevered in continuing his er there were laws provided sufficient cornett the regulations. He could not persuade hilltself that this resolution before the House; of coarse, however, should As it appeared to him, the latter question could proposition ought tole seriously entertxided. The Hod. he do so, he (Mr. Pelmet) was ready to gate him the decided, at least in the negative, until some vases Member for Berkshire indeed mot the motion with am inepport be had prosise—(llear.)-14 regarded the en substantiated, and the law had proved'unequal individual ease; he (Mr. Peel) did not know on which' resolution of the Right Hon. Gentleman as a Acheloos applicatiOn of a remedy. With regard to the ex► side the Hon. Gentlemen sat, bet he hoped they ,had extension of the Grenville Act. of time beyond the fourteen days allowed for heard the invitation, and would accept it —(Hear.)— Lord ALTHOkP agreed with the Hon. Gentleman ' , - A