The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1805-03-12 00:00:00

i .~ ~ IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HO!'SE OF L')RUS •-•:Mot:DAY, MARCH 11. The Loan CHANCELLOR did not come down to the House till nearly five o'clock ; and after prayers were read, their Lordships proceeded to forward the Bills upon the table—amongst these, the Pleasure Horses Duty Bill was read a second time, and oriLr edto be committed. . The Earl of DARNLEY expressed his desire, that the Order for summoning the House tomorrow, which took place in consequence of his motion on a former evening, should be discharged, and renewed tot Thursday. What he intended to move was for the production ofcei tails rapers relative to the Navy; with a view to a compai i son, in certain points, of the con dud of the late and the present Board of Admiral ty; and he was induced to postpone the motion for two reasons: first, because he understood the Noble Earl, lately at the head of the Naval department, could not attend to-morrow ; and, secondly, in order to afford the Noble Lord, who at present presided in that branch of the public service, further time to entisHer, relative to the produaion of the papers alluded to. He would therefore move to discharge the present Order, and that the Lords be summoned for Thursday next. After a few words from Lord ‘VALSINGHAN, re lative to the formal necessity of adverting to some specific purpose in an order of the kind, the original order was discharged, and the Lords, on the mo tion of the Larl of D•IIILEY, ordered to be sum moned for the service of the House on Thursday next. Mr. w:lliams, Secretary to the Commissioners of Naval Enquiry, presented the Eleventh Report of the Commissioners, and which, on the motion of the Duke of CLARLIICE, was ordered to be print ed. The oaths of abjuration and fidelity being duly administered at the liar, to Messrs. GIitLLEII, WOLFF', and NA Isivc, the Bills for the naturalisation of those gentlemen were formally read a first time, and re ferred to the consideration of Committees.—Ad journed till to-morrow HOUSE OF COMMONS. The Edinburgh Police 'Bill was read a second time, and referred td's private Committee, as wa, also Bowyer's Lottery Bill Mr. Williams, from the Board of Commission ers of Naval Enquiry, 'presented their eleventh re port ; which was ordered to lie on the table, and to be printed. An Account was presented, pursuant to order, of the money advanced by the Collettors of several counties, for the service of the volunteers and mi litia. Ordered to lie on the table. SIIFF.IFFS OF MIDDLESEX. The CH ANCLLLOR of the EXCIIEQUER stewed the Order of the Day for calling in Counsel its be ntlf of the Sheriffs of Middlesex, upon so much of the report of the Middlesex Committee in 1802. as regarded their misconduit. Mt. ADA M was then called in as Counsel on be half of the Sheriffs, and, after some prefatory oisservations, he proceeded to state, that, the first resolution was dirated to the proceedings of the Sheriffs, Mr. Cox and SirW.Rawlins, on the 13th, 14th, and 15th days of the pull, in which the Com mittee stated, that the said Sheriffs had " wilfully, knowingly, and corruptly" admitted the votes of upwards of 400 joint-tenants of a mill in the parish of Isfeworth, with the view of giving Sir Francis Burdett a colourable majority upon the poll. Upon this resolution the House had certainly very good reason to pause, before they could consent to its adoption. The petition presented on the part of Mr. Mainwaring against the elation and return of Sir Francis Burdett, alleged no more than " partiality" in the Sheriffs; hot the Committee, in stating that the Sheriffs aft d " wilfully, knowingly, and corrupt ly," had exceeded the premises to which they ought to have confined themselves, and therefore he had to contend that the report, any further than respat ed their partiality, was not within the province of the Committee, and should not be allowed to stand. The 2d Resolution of the Committee stated, that on the I sth day the Sheriffs had rejected, in the even ing, several votes under similar circumstances, ten dered for Mr. Mainwaring ; but, through the whole of the proceedings, he could not find a tittle of evi dence to substantiate that tad. The 3d Resolution was, that it appeared to the Committee that the Committee abed sometimes in a judicial, and at other times in a Ministerial capacity, contrary to the rules of their proceedings in other cases ; but if lie should, as he made no doubt of doing, prove the propositions to be false, and that the rules were laid down at the beginning of the Elation, which were never swerved from during its progress, to the ter mi. nation, he should consider his task concluded, and his clients completely exonerated. In judging of the manner in which they exercised their funetions, it must be recollected that the Sheriffs of Middlesex, and those in question particularly, were men train ed up in the habits and oecupations of trade, whose manners, courses, or educations, did not fit them for judging of all the niceties and sub. tleties attendant upon the administration of the Elation Laws. Their conduCt, therefore, was not to be judged of in the same manner as that of professional men, who may be placed in similar circumstances, and should be entitled to more in dulgence than if they were executing an office which could be of any advantage to them, or to which their pursuits could have been adapted. The Learn ed Counsel then proceeded to state what were the laws applicable to the duties of Sheriffs, when act ing as returning officers. The first Statute which he found for regulating their authority, was that of the seventh of Henry VI. which distinetly confined their power of enquiry, or of administering an oath of the value of the freehold, namely, 4.05. a year. The same rule was precribed in the ads passed in the reigns of Q. Anne, IVilliam, and Geo. II.; and, i ir the year 1695, two cases occurred in regard to the elec tions for the counties of Norfolk and Dorset, as fully reported by that able Lawyer, Mr. Serjeant Glanville—in which it was decided, that the only power the Sheriffs had of administering an oath, was distinctly confined to the value of the freehold. 'That similar decisions were made in the years 1642, 1692, and tti93, would be found detailed ia the re. ports of Douglas, the Journals, &e. from which it would be manifest that the Sheriffs had never the power to investigate any voter upon oath, as to the right he might have to his freehold. And he also referred to cases in the years 1715 and 1745, to shew, that it had been laid down, that the House of Commons should not investigate the rights of any sworn voter which had been.idmitted on the poll. Supposing then, the Shoals to have been apprised of all these precedents and authorities, was it not natu ral for them to conclude, and strongly to feel, that an oath administered hl' them, on the authority of that House, was sufficient to have a serious and sacred in fluence on the mind of him who took it, and who, if forsworn, would afterwards be li4ble to all the penal ties of perjury? The Learned Counsel said, he was sensible that he was speaking in the presence of a number of gentlemen who were very conversant with the eleftion laws ; but, he would venture to call on the most experienced of them to say, whether the Sheriff in election wished any better criterion upon which to form his opinion than the oath of the person who was liable to in dictment for perjury in case of being forsworn ? He came next to consider the responsibility un der which a sheriff, in the execution of a duty which was in a great measure coercively imposed upon him, ailed. In the year 1763, an action was commenced against a sheriff for not admitting the vote of a person claiming to be a freeholder ; and after the penalty had been awarded in the Court of King's Bench, it was removed by writ of error to the House of Lords, where the decision of the court below was coefirmed. On that occasion the House of Commons shewed a spirited disposition to assert its own dignity, and entered its protec• tion to the Sheriffs. Those who had read, or witnessed the proceedings which then took place, must know that the circumstance occasione a con siderable ferment, and produced a warm dispute between the two Houses of Parliament ; the result of which was, that Mr. Albany Wallis, the Soli citor in the Writ of Error, was called to the Bar of the House of Commons, and severely reprimanded for the proceedings taken against the Sheriffs. Subsequently to that, however, several cases of similar anions had occurred ; and as the House of Commons had negltded to interfere, the Sheriffs were exposed to penalties in all such cases, where it happened that they committed any mistake, in what they might suppose to be the exercise .1 their dis cretion. As the Sheriffs, therefore, at the close of the poll, had no opportunity of corrcaing any mistakes they might have. fallen into, he would leave it to the justice of the House to determine, whether the law boo ever meant that, fettered as they were, they should subjea themselves to anions for the rejeaion of votes, of which they had no cri terion to judge b., but the oaths of the parties who tendered themselves If such was the intention, or in contemplation of Parliament, he Mimed that they never could have passed the Scrutiny Aa of the 25th of the King, which directed them to close the poll finally at three o'clock. out the fifteenth day of the eledion, and allowed them thirty days afterwards to investigate the right of voting, in case a scrutiny snould be demanded. Sven this Ad could not be. construed to enjoin them to an investigation of eli the votes, for if so, he would ask how it was to bt expelled that the Sheriffs in the populous counties of Yorkshire er Lancashire, in each of which there might be 40,000 freeholders, could either investigate the right of each voter, as be offered himself, er go through the whole in the thirty days allotted for the scrutiny ? In the present instance, the Shetiffs were absolutely confined. In the poll, they had merely a Ministerial capacity allowed them by Ad of Parlia ment, but on a scrutiny, they would be invest ed with a judicial capacity. The opponents of Sir Francis Burdett, however, did not give them this double authority. They confined them to the ministerial Illation of colleOing the votes, but never demanded that they should ad judicially by insti tuting a scrutiny. Having said so much with re sped to the law in this instance, he had next to ad vert to the falls as stated in the second resolution, and, in that respell, be was prepared to contend, that no blame could possibly attach to the modal of the Sheriffs. The report and the evidence would shew the House, that in the parish of Isle worth there were a considerable number of per sons who claimed to be freeholders en the ground of their joint tenantry in a freehold mill, called the Good Intent. In treating of this subjelt it was necessary to divide his arguments into such obser vations as would occur, upon two distinct heals. First—What was the rule of proceeding in the course of the Elearm from its commencement to the 13th day; and from that to the time when it was finally closed ? The mill votes, he contended, came in the regular and eniform rule that had been laid down by the Slur without any variation, since the commencement of the poll. Their conduit WAS exactly the same as when there was no question or expedation of the votes of the millers being ten dered, which was entirely unknown, and absolutely a secret till the morning of the 13th, as may be seen from the evidence of Messrs. Sylvester, Park, and Borchelt. On the fish day a regulation was agreed upon, that the freeholders' oath should be put to every voter who came up to poll. He then went at great length through the whole of the evi dence, and deduced from the uniformity of the pro ceedings, that there was no proof whatever of a 11/01w aqllllll4 on the part of the Sheriffs. At the conclusion of the poll, he admitted that there were a great number of voters crowding to the hustings for Mr. Mainwaring, and a still greater number to poll for Sir Francis Burdett, which were necessarily rejeCted on account of their coming too late. On the morning of the 15th day the majority was 25 in favour of Mainwaring. though the scale was turned by time numbers that pressed afterwards, on the side of the opposing candidate. In all this he contended, that there was nothing to impeach his clients, as being knaves or fools; knaves they must be, if they suffered names to be publicly admitted on the poll ; and they must be fools if they could suppose that such partiality would not be detelled. He commented rather sharply on the advice given by Mr. Sylvester. as Counsel for Mr. Mainwaring. That Gentleman, he said, was entitled to his re. spell and to that of the public, for the laudable man ner in which he administered, in his place, the cri minal justice of the country. As a member of the Lime profession, he was desirous of avoiding any animadversions on him. which might have the ap pearance of severity ; but, however respeetable that Gentleman might be in his own sphere, when de ciding on the Eleetion Laws, he was quite nut of his element, and should have been mindful of the old admonition, Ye Sutor ultra trepidam. The Learned Gentleman then concluded, with recapitu lating the various heads of his speech, and added his confident expeEtatipn, that having proved the conduCt of the Sheriffs ttbt to have been infinenced by any partial or improper motives, the enlightened assembly which he had the honour of addresbing, would not desire that any penalty should attach to them. Counsel having withdrawn from the bar ; The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved, that the said debate be now resumed. The SPEAKER - then said, that, as the debate Was to be resumed, it was necessary for him to state the question, viz. " That the House do agree to the resolutions of the said Committee ;" which hav ing done; Isir. ROSE said, he had looked with the greatest attention into the whole of the evidence on the table, and thought there was as strong a case made out as he had ever heard, which shelved, that no form of eloquence, however used, could get the better of evidence. The Sheriffs, he said, afted both as ministerial and judicial officers, and the first point in which he thought their conduft reprehensible, was their general partiality, in having permitted a person under the name of an orator, in the front of the hustings, to make ludicrous and insulting speeches against Mr. Mainwaring, all treating him with scan! dalous grossness and indecency. The Sheriffs were called on to interfere, when their answer was, that he was a droll fellow ; and, instead of checking him, they laughed at his jokes. The next thing was, their permitting persons toexhibit black, coarse,bad bread, dead animals, and bullocks liver, in the front of the hustings, in order to excite indignation in the po pulace against the prison in Cold Bath Fields, and thereby to throw au odium on Mr. Mainwaring, who WAS one of the Magistrates, and, of course, to preju dice his eleftion. They also brought forward a man stripped half naked, and another under him, in the aft of whipping him, and when they had so done as long as they chose, it appeared, by the evi dence of Kr. Burchall, that the man disappeared in a moment. He thought it scandalous the Sheriffs had not secured him. He stated also, that Mr. Sheriff Cox had applauded Sir F. Burdett inhis spteches,and par ticularly those passages, in which he mentioned . tbe Bastile. He did not mean to answer for what might have been the Hon. Baronet's intentions, but there could be no doubt the mob was greatly inflamed by those speeches, and the Sheriffs who applauded them must have perceived their tendency that way. l i His next complaint against the Sheriffs was, that they had taken votes notoriously had. A mass had described himself as living in Westminster -street; and when Mr. Sylvester objected to him, on the ground that there was no such street, Sir W. Rawlins said, if he would take the oath, that would be suffi cient. There was, he said, a great variation in the conduit of the Sheriffs, on the 14th and 15th days. On the 14th day, Sheriff Rawlins took the oaths of the Mill Voters of fay sir of Sir F. Burdett, and when Mr. Mainwaring went t' the front of the huitfigs, to °Nee to them, and told them, if they would allow him to question them as to the time they had been in possession, he would convioce them from the voters own mouths they were not en titled to vote, Mr. Sheriff Rawlins pushed him away in a very rude manner ; and yet, on the 15th day, the said Sheriffs asked others of the Mill Voters who were in favour of Mr. Mainwaring, that very question, and, being informed they had not been in possession twelve months, he immediately rejeCted them. He then adverted to the sArcumstance of the value of the freehold en which those mill voters claimed a right to vote. He observed there were seven hundred shares at market, at two guineas and half a crown, yet, because Albion Cooper had said he would not take 1401. for his, those mill-voters had been prevailed on by persons who should have known better to fancy and to say, that they actually had freeholds of 40s. a year. Mr. Rose then adverted to the Land Tax Assessments, and condemned the multi& of the Sheriffs, for not attending to the paper tendered by Sir W. Gibbon on this subject, and said they turned Mr. Adolphus out of the box, that he might not he witness against them. A voter had also been examined, who own ed he had neither paid the land tax nor been assess ed, yet the Sheriffs took his vote, though by the 20th Geo. c. 17, it is expressly enafted and declared, that no person shall vote for a knight of the shire, with out having been assessed to the land tax six months before the Eleftion. The Learned Counsel had said, that the land tax assessment books were not in the custody of the Sheriffs ; he allowed it, but the De puty Clerk of the Crown was attending with them at Brentford, and they might have had them at any moment they chose to send for them. There was an Mt of Parliament, he said, against Under-Sheriffs serving more than one year, which Aft was made to prevent the abuse of the office of Under-Sheriff by any one person continuing m is too long, yet, in the very teeth of this Aft, Mr. Burchall had exer cised the office of Under-Sheriff for twenty-four years. He insisted that there never had been a case equal to this gross miscondwi of the Sheriffs in the c;rcumstance of the Land Tax Assessments. The question now was, nut what was to be done with the Sheriffs, but whether the freeholders of Middle sex or the Sheriffs should chuse the member ? He believed no man could take delight in punishing any other fellow creature merely for the sake of punishment; but it was sometimes necessary some men should be punished, in order to deter others from committing similar offences. Under these circumstances he felt it his duty to submit a motion to the House, which, if agreed to, he should follow up with another.--He then moved ' That the House do agree to the first Resolution of the Committee'. " Mr. P. MOORE said, that after the able and lu minous arguments the House had just heard from the Learned Counsel, he was astonished to hear the weakness and frivolity that had been resorted to by the Right Hon. Gentleman, who had just sat down. It that Right Hon. Gentleman should ever be She rif of Middlesex, be wished he might be able to con. duet himself in such a manner as to deserve equal approbation. The Right Hon. Gentleman had sewn there were fourteen or fifteen bad votes for Sir F. Burdett, he could thew as many on the other s' le, and the Committee had aBually struck of I,boo votes as bad, aad there was a list of I'2B r votes fur Mr. Mainwaring, which were d eeme d b a, l . because they were not Freeholders; whereas, tLP mill-voters were not deemed good, only they had not paid the land tax assessments. H. should therefore vote against the motion. Lord MA RSHA M, at considerable length, Ja s . t ified the conduct of the Committee in making the resolutions they had done, and he did not think that, from any observations he had heard, they would be induced to alter their opinion. With regard to partiality not applying, because there were other votes as bad on the other side ; he allowed that seve ral votes given for Sir F. Burdett, by most respe ct . able freeholders, had fallen to the gu ound, because they were not assessed ; and he believed it had been the constant praCtice of the county to receive such votes, as there had never been a scrutiny before. With respell to the annoyances, he believed ther, had been several exertions made to prevent them, and he thought there was no answering stria ly for events of popular eledions. Ile said the Cons. mittee had not condemned the Sheriffs fur having aded either ministerially or judicitl!y merely such, but for having afted wrong, by sometim s tf.- termiiiing one way and then another on the sti.ir point, in support of which, lie cited many pair- r the evidence. it was very easy, he said, to ad c • sistently with their own construdion, an I their ow o adion, which they had, however, not done. and tre• first and second resolutions constituted the ch., n ;e ot that inconsistency of condud. It was under these circumstances for the House to determine what course they would pursue. The SOLICITOR GENERAL (Mr. Gibbs) said, the substantial question for the House to de termine was, whether the Sheriffs, seeing Mr. Main waring at the head of the poll, did not, on the 15th day, at the close of the poll, for the purpose of giv. ing a majority to Sir Francis Burdett, alter their condo& when the majority became in his favour, and refuse to take votes of the same description as they had done the day before ? He catered into a very elaborate and learned investigation of the right of the mill-voters, and ridiculed the idea of their be. ing of the annual value of 40s. He particularly ad verted to the case of Albion Cooper, and shewed from the evidence of Mr. Sylvester, that the She riff had declared he had no right to vote, but. for fear of an adion, they had sent him to his oath, which was sending him to certain perjury. This, he insisted, was contrary to one of the rides laid down by themselves, for it was proved by Mr. Bryhnan and another, that the rule laid down by them was, " that if they were convinced in their own minds, that a voter had no right to vote, they would reject him, though he offered to take the oath." The Hon. and Learned Gentleman com mented very forcibly on several parts of the argu ment held by the Learned Counsel, and also on the evidence, particularly as to the mill -voters, on the 13th day, who wet e not, he shewed, tendered till the middle of the day, and then the question how long they had been in possession was asked, in consequence of a suggestion of Mr. Clifford, that these particular mill voters were sent by Mr. Mainwaring, in order to turn the majority, and to throw a slur on those mill-voters who had been allowed the day before. There were, he said, according to the evidence of Mr. Clifford, 520 polled for Sir F. Burdett, on the last day, besidcs the mill -voters; Among whim were several Gentlemen highly respedable, such as Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Erskine, and many others, as Mr. Clifford described them, all the old Whigs; yet, he believed, if it had not been fee the mill voters, all the old Whigs would not have carried a majority. Under these circumstances, could the House have a doubt that the Sheriffs ab ed under an improper bias, for it was clear the She riff, in admitting Albion Cooper to vote, when he knew he had no right, had aded against his own rule. He should therefore. under this convittion. vote for the motion, but if he should hear any argu ments, to convince him he was wrong, he would gladly change his opinion. and vote the other way. Mr. W. SMITH spoke at some length against the motion, and thought the case had been much aggravated by the Right Hon. Gentleman who made it, though he might not intend it, by adverting to the orator, and other circumstances, in a manner much too severe and rigid. As to the orator, he al lowed it to be scandalous and shameful • and he was astonished that so great a number of magis trates of the county should have daily attended without noticing it. and that it should be afterwards brought forward as a grievous charge against the Sheriffs. He commented on many parts of the eel dente, and concluded by expressing his disapproba tion of the motion. Sir W. W. WYNNE said, he would not take up the time of the House, but he must observe, on the extravagance of the supposition that any min should purchase, for little more than two guinea, .1 freehold, intitling him to vote at an eleetion, a nd concluded by saying it was his opinion the Sheriff , had aeled corruptly. Lord HENNIKER also thought they had aelcd corruptly, and differed from the Hon. Gentlentils opposite him (Mr. W. Smith), as he thought it was the duty of the Sheriffs, as well as the magistrates, to keep order and regularity. Mr W. SMITH explained. The Question was then loudly called for, aid strangers were ordered to withdraw, but no diri r took place. When the doors were again ope..cd, and upon the return of strangers to the Gallery, Mr. FOX was speaking in defence of the Metals. He maintained, that they had added in the manna preceding Sheriffs had always done. Mr. prrr moved, as an amendment to tlx li!‘t resolution, which states, that the Sheriffs had as`trd wilfully, knowingly, and corruptly, in admitnel the mill-voters to vote, the following words : " a; well AS by refusing to refer to the land tax assess ment." The ATTONALT GIMER•L supported the amend ment. The Question, so amended, was then put aed carried. Mr. ROSE moved, that the Sheriffs should, for their condua, be committed to Newgate, and that the Speaker do issue his warrant accordingly. -- Agreed to. Mr PITT gave notice of a Motion on Friday next, for leave to bring in a Bill to allow the Militia to enlist for General Service. Lord A. HAMILTON postponed his Motion re lative to the Irish Exchange, until this day sc'anT,l ll . Adjourned. 11 r Ti W Du do to an al! a 3CI c an