The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-03-15 00:00:00

id pf three weeks since the noble lord He (Sir R. Peel) begged to say that L to cause unnecessary delay in the' 1 be wished for was, that time shc whose interests were concerned, an' was, that the house should be call T days only to decide upon a bill inges. He considered that either too early a notice for members to V uss the principle of this bill. He r reasonable time were allowed, the ild find no disposition evinced by thof .el) acted, to delay this bill as th' by the gentlemen connected with id not mean to blame for pursuin( it he thought of the noble lord to ill as if they had a desire to delay it te noble lord's sense of justice to say ask him to delay the second readini R.Peel) begged to say for one, that iy unnecessary delay . in the passi Lt think it would be fair dealing . the e acted, should suffer for their fc icription, the object of which was the KI Church, and the appropriation of ocular purposes, ought to be calmly nd lie did not think that the dela; ime limited by the noble lord was .meat wished to conciliate the chuff iterest in its concerns, they could tter than by allowing a fair and n aration of this bill. one said that the delay in bringin, ioned by the time which was necessl its details, and the bill would be' rich the plan laid down by him wi aeasure to the notice of the house. nice between Thursday and Month se, if hon. gentlemen could not • days they could not hope to be iven days. With regard to the that he never recollected a simila , nights taking place on the first re:. RCIVAL could not see on what "route could persist in refusing further :nportant bill. )N considered that his Majesty's reasonable request, because it had lar quarter of the house. From w the opposition to the other bill pi more pure and disinterested in its the party who conscientiously oppe 'd? (Hear, hear.) Surely the - dell stent with common sense and come( NG said that he first entered that he 'hen the noble lord opposite (Lord r of it, and he appealed to that noble )er who had the same experience, to s' llected any measure of so much • to be discussed on two days' notice advantage of seeing the hill in la , s the table, said that the printed b : lw.) If ever there was a bill requiril ion than another, it was this very b about to hurry forward with such br( Len that not even sufficient time shol Light wish to consult persons in helm post ? This method of yielding to th , was opposed was a dangerous precede :h the customary courtesies and estel might be consistent with a reforme , t, in his opinion, "it was more hone e observance." The noble lord paper respecting tithes in Englan be founded on that motion to be ar to this? (Hear, hear.) The ded by observing, that, if he str R house on this question. SELL said, that, after the explanati( (Lord Althorp) with regard to this hat honourable members would come hursday perfectly prepared to vote reover, would not be called upon to ill on the second reading, as those ration of the committee. He did iaterial connection between this and ijesty's ministers might, if they thougi conciliation without one of coercion were rievances to be redressed, it I be re dressed; and, on the other ht :es to be put down, it was right that When grievances existed, such as I :t of this bill to relieve, it was most uld take the earliest opportunity it removal. s said, he had stated to the noble loi his determination to oppose this bi Tressed the same determination to tieman the Secretary for Ireland. oue single bishop only, instead of tent rst consideration. N said, that although he was in bill, he was of opinion that the o have-sufficient time for the consie ouch importance. He was of opilt) •,0 a full and calm discussion. ZNT hoped his Majesty's ministers ?medial measures with as much celer% )f an opposite character. He wisheeL , me would be given to discuss the detA l oped that the noble lord would not gji Id bring on the second reading on the use then divided. ✓ the motion. lB7 ainst it. Majority for Ministers. .dmission to the gallery we found Mr•ol wing a further adjournment of the e 3 e ,l t of the Liverpool Election Comullt! e c i buses of the elective franchise in that er some discussion, was agreed to. MALLOW ELECTION. 41 I of Mr. O'Connell the order of the da l ment of the period to allow the recor to, was discharged. • BPeeches of the two gallant colonels from the north au evidence of the calmness and prudence of the of Ireland, and a strong p roo f o f th e sat i s f act i on Would give to that faction. (H ear .) Th e r i g h t 4 an, the Secretary of State for Ireland, ought to be th e language he used. He thought the right hon. unsafe ad exhibited such a total want ot discretion that it ' 0 Place such extraordinary powers in his , hands. measure was only ca l cu l ate d to g i ve the Conserva -1 esaie s of the government, an opportunity to make on the government of the country, and to enable Pare place and power. (Cheers.) The support the 0 1 . 0 11 rA t de rived from the right hon. baronet, the member t o ": 41, and his Conservative colleagues, was not cal , 2ve weight t o t h e measure, when the public would 'ie influence that was thrown into the scale to was directed that evening against reform in • He did not consider that the state of a for such unheard of powers, that would subvert ,-ople of British law and justice. The disturbances Tatty during the discussion opon the Reform Bill were , glitrageou s as the agitation of the repeal question in Lie was free to admit that there existed great dis 4ZMid of the u ecess i ty o f putt i ng them down, and pro , and property ; but he differed with his Majesty's desirable the tueaus.that ought to be adopted to accom , an object. He thought remedial measures, coercive means, would be more efficacious. Those 3e that they could keep up - the present church ie ny• in Ireland w h en the Catholic disabilities were rete shallow politicians indeed. (Hear.) These of tie outworks of the bastion, and so long as one re • 1 adious estatilishment (hear, hear, and a laugh) re °l2,R would the people of Ireland be opposed to it. The hon. gentleman concluded by moving an ' 4 ' e the effect, that the house was not satisfied that vv . , Lor passing this bill existed at the present period. ' I( L iNB seconded the amendment. He opposed this saw that it went farther than merely protecting "of that unfortunate country from the midnight sustaining the law. He feared that the bill was tt it could be brought to bear in any way, or under not co ln ees, grasping within its iron hand matters which of tl i . - L il templatcl it should lay hold of. Why was the 40 n. and learned member for Dublin so mixed up ire, the ostensible object of which was to repress outrage ? How many of the people of England ,felt that this was a bill to put down Mr. O'Connell ? it Were to put down predial agitation, he should ected to this bill. If ever there was a case wherein legislate bit by bit, it was in this very case; they rare that, in forging the chain, they should not u nless the proceeding one was weak and inefficient. .) orrszu felt grea t regre t t o b e o bli ge d t o vo t e i n 18 hill, from the kind way in which he had been reload by those very individuals against wh om thi s 1 1 1 ,tnne degree o p era t e . (Hear.) H e agree d t h at t hi s toe appellations bestowed upon it, namely, that it and unconstitutional, but it had two attributes tt, namely, stern necessity and sovereign mercy. trso Saw the necessity of the measure in the fact of ( „ 0 _ , 1 1 or property being safe in Ireland. Every per ,4old, left that country. (Cries of No, no). I } . ( ,?"E'r stated the grounds of the objection which he With respect to the county of Carlow, if the re had done their duty, the few outrages that , that part of the country would have been quickly Ulear tu N cA,NwoN supported the bill, and bore testimony to sl ay exertions of Dr. Doyle to preserve the peace '4 '; Said that this was a measure quite uncalled for. t ted by th e government that only a few of the coun : a disturb e d s t a t e , and wh v , th ere f ore, s h ou ld i t b e 10 , Place the whole of Ireliind under such coercive bill was intended to establish. The hon. and I liber described the tithe sy s t em as th e essent i a l di sturbances which had arisen in Ireland, and con ; that system (and he would beg to remark he was ; 11 this assertion by the evidence given by Sir H. Other gentlemen of known intelligence) had been , =of the crimes which were committed in that un -Nlitry, This was a legsilation not for the people, 'a; it was not a legislation for the people of Ire the purposes of a faction. (Hear.) He would, Call upon the house to remember that the revolu he had alluded had been caused by the acts of • governments, and not by any act of the people. ke„ 4 iT said, in the considerati on o f that bill they ought u every tittle of evidence and argument which was ' they came to a conclusion. He had done so, - to say that, looking at all the evidence, and at lasts which had been produced, he felt himself its his sorrow must be and was at the fact, to ac- It ministers had made out their case, (hear, hear,) Measure, severe and violent as it was, was neces had no hesitation in giving his support to the bill, put down political agitation. (Hear, hear.) 4 bir, after some preliminary remarks, said that the for Newport seemed to imagine that, by this bill, , were proclaimed, martial law would at the same mo rte., d. Now that was not the case; for if the pro ell' of itself the effect of quelling the disturbance, L ue no necessity for proceeding to the other extre '' end sought to be attained would have been arrived law, not being required, would not therefore be _or erected. If circumstances a rose t o ren d er it re -47'6 an inroad in the constitution, it was necessar y (1:' what effect would be mduced, were the steps ta latir "'eat of the measure arising therefrombeing held ! 1 1, 14a,s precedent. The hon. and learned member for h got k him seat' said that the members of the Irish bench liti o4. and proper persons to act as judges in cases of this fo r is Ile for one agreed with the hon. and learned gen- hkild er ", did not consider it right for a judge of the land 4, t h e provisions of this measure. He should not tae judge act upon his own opinion, without that of a 1 e 8 similar to those which , under this bill, he would t° be '' ' i n. , I lts i l a called upon to adjudicate Th e learned r4 P4t at 7 o necessarily return to his own court with a degree s i l d (I lt ,unjustly attached to his character, for having rif t h? niFoself) an individual or individuals. The pro hil),, ;s bill, taerefore, avoided this unpleasant alterna- Ottfitnonourable and learned member for Dublin had il,lt ed l i nsed of the magistracy in the same way ; that was, .. to,ry re that body sitting in judgment. Now, it was for 1 ist r a son, and to rescue the people from the power of litt il4eY and from the Orange magistracy, as the hon. si, gentlean had denominated a ortion of them .pe r ela t ive e to the courts ial p had been intro , th e ar, hear.) He could not but observe that already is,„ s n of r i o t ous con d uct i n I re l an d h a d taken place. It 14,72 therefore, that the measure—that the pro cee di ngs t y Lnt—h a d thus early done good. (Hear, hear.)— i,Pe t ,7 determination of Parliamentto adopt a measure to Clo r 4 elat of crime in Ireland had, he was rejoiced to say, Oee ) 4 .B °lleed in souse parts of that distracted country bene q.,lity ; it had struck terror and alarm into the hearts of i,' 4 „Wear, hear.) The severity of this measure would 'i tv ne discretion of the Lord .Lieutenant of Ireland, , 01,7 e enactments would not be brought into action un eic an absolute necessity for their application.— : i t t e declared that his Majesty's ministers had brought ~bt e,forward because they considered it to be matter of ' L'i; f' he y thought that the state and condition of Ire ;Nraught with danger. They imagined and believed ' 4 k i) ,Peace of that country was all but, if not quite de "liZtherefore that a measure similar to that then be se, was the only one by which tranquillity could be t,, Preserved. (Loud cheers.) His Majesty's minis , lqi introduced this measure to arrest a den )Wa.,,n,s crowding over Ireland and her people. (Loud qrs Were it with approbation or censure, his Majesty's th e e re determined to bear all the responsibility. They rt vy.were responsible for it, and they should therefore tt,geir course. (Applause.) They felt that the empire ‘$ t rt to th e m compact , and as compact were they de la). Y would deliver it op. (Contin ue d c h eers .) Ir k , hoped to convince .the house that thi s measure js,"ght with every evil to Ireland, far out we i g hi ng an y Is Zed advantages. He complained o f th e exagge - It tv 7rits which had been made, and of th e d e f ec ti ve va ,tal. ulence by which the necessity of the measure was ; Ike h Ile right honoura fr ble Secret erary for lreland had ) 14 1 4 41 n 9 e extracts om private letts but had brought .14 to unseats iu support of his ease, the former alone he 'p r e?) , on. This said little for the provided of the go . ! . .ne house, however, ought to be with the 4 a v the case a d m i ts o f, one way or another. They el ) ,! had a complete list of every cr i me , o f every in let), 'Red with it. N o thing of th e ki n d b a d been offered. Is: l ent either wished to impose upon th e h ouse , or kw re strangely imposed themselves. The honourable tl:Peech was continued amid considerable interrup ,llsif repeated calls of " Question," " Question," and be ,'Pk i e . ll . IY sat down. met i ;Lit then read the amertdment. A xiEs asked, if the house would permit itself to be in the speeches o e lord intttmgetue:4evideno iy that ben weii4ora of Irelan t h e pa ssiotti. g em i e would g ihould be (titiou s ofth a n ? the at I and all ttler a „ h litugua c alled unsaf e ,a' lace illlove/110e wh o l e 6 ° Place s Wediftes, th e ettaeasure w. ler to PreP a r e rapt mies of He veil te t o n ;', 1 , 1 the goi the 0 ° 7 1ril aIn ni w e o ri l tr : t f e e r P iv l e a d ce i e lf r i ci, l'iated to 9', and hx t Y t teh li s e tr' l au ,° that r e weighi at 0%014 d e sam e - ng o r e eh esp ot i s at to treat cella urcl i of Ir tu f Was it upo the r t „M call e d f o e and ' say wh„ e ti4 Principl e r f s ue ] 4aii eQuiatr dui Brit e y a s eu i ra ing Issing o f s i t b a°4 . H. geous that h ro a att l d W a e s fre• • forbe J a oche g an , ;)1 the 1 is the r' ar il g h rh rneat Prop 3n of 3 Mead de s . -° to the to t O h of ' t able a mly o elay 'xotateilltl N 'retve m vras Or e Ick eo l 'slitae o pose tha church at.. e oft Trel- c re th, Were h l reason' tai rks this odire ous e i nb g ce d .wdes i n sti n bfa : o t joe f L un u fl o ir t : o ; II je I r t i t rd'C oe ' 4 re l )p:iseltilties:it::ret forsi a t t w l lu i C . e s t v h p so so c ea s u a c a t el ch ff l :d so l l a t i c i ( ti 3t m ay ht,?cler, f that pe rna° l o• y ‘,'? 4 cl "taini Coot', filar p e ) alle es, gra th e 4t emPate readiug t y 'rounds efi e measure h4 h- and 1 Ler dela , r a ti d , the o: tela m outrage ? 's m inisiAtit: r. ) j t • f elt that th happeu,./they ,Ire o b i 't were t , what 9 3 7, 4 4 8 4 Ntl f r e l et e,d to th procee legislate 1 a its 0 0° • Leik r are that al . t at 441 es oppose s the e delaY., lo k4 t , ommooi - of this fell at house ttit44 - in I r hill, fr ,ord h i te . a ud by t noble I' — crited ' 44l e de 44. the gt tte, to se/ • ttr a „ aPpell ,h imp° 4 unc notice 0 , • ') nun( in print ' ' w t ; ner s ,:,,, s aw the ted bill , , could, or prop uirinl4l4,,cio left tha ery „, th is bi t rEv state breatP,,,, t irkte s they With 3 shoo ,LBgrae —.ere had ireialla te "„1%11. hat pan to those, b uN '''ear.) TeCedeP establi' l l lcitt ht i`"Y exerts 'formed ',l" 4N,, . honour , tile acl fo f t ' t i said that d (Alth° • re is ed by the •gland. t o a disturbed be disP"l this Place the The bo was stood th e deser deser th, tt tit!turhanc4 anatiotq dj4 at systei ,o this by 41 , 4 this asset ° e ‘ f c ao ' s )t her gent ` vote oil to c o Of the ci 31:1 to vote iti 14.utry. Th l ose w•o° ,but( 0 ,. 1 , 44 ; it wa did not : •14 8io t , ' " l e i. PUrpo s and the,: k ‘o whr , upot thought he had ierciatif A t. ' governor ssed, it r' ir ) hand' s 46 kei ?T said, in t that the' b efia .. . every tilt h as thr ro i/1 •• e l'e gt r e they ca most p etted to say pity of cle f 44 ° 4l s whi sci ße t as his sore ble lord ° t it this ra i n i ste this h 3 measure ion to 4 , V iew e , had no he land. Pi (-,;,„`° Put dowi dof tell , , Cinb: 447 ', after ttic t -r for Newp in favo u t i e et were procla at the Its Z et ed• Nol% :onsider° Ro tt ed of itself if " opini o th e " neee inattiel, law, d sought isters vr° f for te a no . h celeritt L ti, 1 ,2 3 ,r erected. AGE FROM THE HOUSE OF LORDS. ne's Museum Bill was brought tip , and read a first time. N ARESBOROUGH ELECTION. S INGILBY moved the order of the cla!' t f upon the petition against the ratio ) .d. e( ,id that he rose under strong feelings tip? Ipon this petition, which was wholiy,he, nals of the history of parliament. vas not only to unseat him, but it auk IE, id penalties against him, as it sta t The question involved his propertYl% v. re prospects in life. (Hear, hear.) he grounds of postponing the inquir9l4o an alien born, and owed no alleFi 3 '! l l at his father was the subject of a forego e N rose to order, and said that sol' i t iti ,r4l d in to verify the statements of the pe ..4. ) itered into such a statement. (Chee..4 iC :he agent to the petitioner, was eall e r efl said the election petition had beep 'ebruary, founded upon letters re ce y ;• that Mr. ltotch and his father v er fo ° Le main object of the present petitio n d e petitioners to procure evidence to e petition. (ti amination by Mr. O'Connell, he a d 'ls ling the intOrmation was dated the lid not send over to Dunkirk to Ina' d ie 24th. , se and said that it would never be 9 o pc id was made a ground for the postP N said that the statement would notwl) .1115 ment. The witnesses were in t o ' if injustice to postpone the inquirY'o amended the honourable baronet to is then withdrawn. „I , BSERVANCB OF THE SABBATH. iv i.GNEW postponed his motion for leo tb , ce the due observance of the sabba ISTURBANCES (IRELAND) BILL. o fl Vl )f the day, for resuming the debate this bill, being read, I • 4 R said that he regretted the rnan n e . t r 0,1 ....en carried on upon this question; I A li t) unity of the house; it had assunle . , F .; on; and appeals were made to aqi r ietip njure his honourable and learneu roe city of Dublin. (Hear, hear.) THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD. bullied, because an hon. gentleman might imagine that proper deference was not paid to his abilities and station. If the noble lord (Althorp) would stay in the house till to-morrow night, he (Col. Davies) would stop with him. Mr. FERGUS O'CONNOR complained that while members on the opposite side were listened to with the greatest attention, those coinciding with him in opinion met with nothing but in terruption. Lord ALTHORP hoped that the hon. gentleman did not sup pose that the interruption proceeded from his (Lord Althorp's) side. He should be very glad if the house would allow the hon. member to continue, but he must declare that he should feel it to be his duty to resist any proposition for an adjournment of the debate. (Hear, hear.) It was necessary that the question should be settled if they expected to get on with business at all. Mr. MAURICE O'CONNELL would beg of his honourable friend not to press the question of adjournment, but trusted that the house would allow Irish members to make their statements fairly also. (Loud cries of go on.) Mr. LALOR then resumed, and argued that the report ought to be attended to. He should propose voluntary associations for the purpose of insuring peace, but by the present measure of coercion something like quiet might be produced, crime might appear to be repressed, but it would soon be seen that there was nothing' certain in these appearances. (Hear, hear.) He trusted that the house would pause before it consented to pass that b --y bill against his unfortunate country, and not lead them to suppose that they had nothing to expect from Eng land but coercion and bad laws. (Question, question.) Mr. MAURICE O'CONYELL observed that the present distur bances were caused entirely by the bill of the right hon. Secre tary for Ireland. He had been forewarned that the results of it would be as they have since turned. The hon. member remarked upon the want of consistency in giving a preference to courts martial instead of deputing English lawyers, who must be better acquainted with the nature of criminal cases than a subaltern just out of the Military College. The hope of reward is applicable to both. He insisted that ministers had shown that personal feelings had guided them ; that it was party feeling against the hon. member for Dublin. After some observations of this description the hon. member observed that in 1830 England had been disturbed, but such measures were not thought of. In Hants 600 persons had been tried, and 246 transported. The hon. member concluded amidst loud cries of question and withdraw. The gallery was then cleared for a division. The house then divided, when there appeared— For the second reading For the amendment B4 Majority On our return to the gallery we found that Lord Althorp had moved the committee on the bill, and Mr. O'CONNELL was addressing the house. The hon. and learned gentleman said that the real battle on the bill would take place in the committee. He concluded by moving as an amendment that the bill be committed on Friday next. Lord ALTHORP said he had heard no reason given by the hon, and learned member for his amendment. (Hear, hear.) It was the duty of the supporters of the bill to guard against unnecessary delay, and he should, therefore, feel it his duty to vote against the amendment of the hon. and learned gentleman. Mr. H. GRATTAN contended that the house ought not to go into committee on this bill at so late an hour of the night. The assizes were now going on in Ireland, and the result would show that this bill would not be required. The opinion of the Irish judges, and the result of the assizes, would both be at va riance with the opinion of the noble lord. Mr. HOME said, that his Majesty's ministers were of course justified in pressing this measure forward with as little delay as possible. It was, however, too late now to go into committee on the bill, and he therefore suggested that the bill be com mitted on Wednesday next. Mr. SHEIL said that the noble lord (Allhorp) had given a distinct pledge to the Irish members that the bill should not be committed when the second reading took place. It was . quite clear that the noble lord would have sufficient opportunity of carrying the bill through its future stages, and it was therefore most unreasonable to press for the committal of the bill to night. Lord ALTHORP said he should have no objection to adopt the suggestion of the hon. member for Middlesex, and fix the com mittee for Wednesday next. The motion of Mr. Hume was then agreed to, and the com mittee stands for Wednesday. Mr. HALL gave notice that, in the committee, he should move an amendment on the ninth clause of the bill, to this effect : "That the Lord-Lieutenant should not have the power of in terposing his veto against meetings taking :place for the pur pose of petitioning parliament and other legitimate objects." The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the house adjourned at half-past one'clock. TUESDAY. The house was occupied till 5 o'clock in ballotting for a conimittee to try the merits of the petition against the return for the borough of Ennis. Mr. HALL presented a petition from Monmouth for an amend ment of its corporation laws;_ from the same place for a repeal of the Septennial Act; and from Newport for a repeal of the assessed taxes. Captain BERKELEY gave notice, that he should on the 25th inst., submit to the house a motion for providing the reporters with accommodation in the gallery, or other part of the house ; and that they should be amenable to such regulations as the house may think fit. LIVERPOOL.-BRIBERY. Lord J. RUSSELL rose to state the mode of proceeding with respect to the appointment of a committee to inquire into the corrupt practices of certain electors of the borough of Liver pool. As the house had already agreed to the appointment of a committee, and as the grounds of its appointment had been more than once submitted to its consideration, it would not be necessary for him again to repeat them. The motion with which he would conclude was one of great importance as a constitu tional precedent; it being in degree a revival of a mode of inquiry which had been found by our ancestors to be productive of great benefit. The house was aware that the complaints against the returns fur elections were, till the passing of the Grenville Act, referred to a committee of privileges, to inquire and report upon. There were many instances of this mode of proceeding posterior to the revolution, of which a memorable one was the active part taken by Sir Edward Seymour against the Shepherds, for which (having proved bribery and corrup tion against those individuals on four elections) he received the l i formal thanks of the house—the Speaker, as its organ on the occasion, telling him that the eminent military and naval ser vices of his ancestors were far exceeded in value by his efforts to rescue the character of the house from unworthy suspicions. This mode of proceeding, however, fell into disuse on the pass ing of the Grenville Act, and the result has been that very many flagrant instanees of bribery and corruption have been compromised and carefully concealed from the public. (Hear, hear.) It was not a rare occurrence in the case of two persons having contested a borough, that the successful candidate—that is, the person returned, no matter by what foul means,—should pay a certain sum to the unsuccessful one. In the case of Gram pound, for example, which came under his own knowledge, £7OOO was thus paid after a committee had declared the return -valid. Instead of an inquiry at the bar of the house, of which they had had some recent instances, and which were invariably desultory and vague, and in which it was difficult to separate truth from falsehood, he would propose that the inquiry should be made by a committee, the mode of .forming which was the special object of his motion. The hon. member for Wilts (Mr. Benett), who had taken so active a part in the present inquiry, proposed that the committee should be named by the pro poser. He, however, could not approve of that mode, and would propose instead that the committee should consist of 13 persons, to be chosen by lot, instead of 11, the number of an election committee ; and that instead of 33 to be chosen by lot, as on ordinary election committees, that but 21 persons should be so chosen, from which two persons, to be named by the house (Mr. Benett and Lord Sandon, as the persons most in terested,) and who would also be members of the committee, should have the power of striking off four names each, thus re ducing the actual number to 13. This power he would give to the two hon. members to be thus named by the house, as they would not have the assistance of counsel. The mode of pro ceeding, principle, &c.,,he would afterwards embody in a dis tinct act of the legislature, as a precedent and guide for future similar inquiries. It would be needless for him to dwell upon the salutary effects of such an inquiry in preserving the charac ter of the house, and holding out a punishment to abuses of the constituent purity of election. Neither did he say that only an efficient remedy should be adopted as a precedent. The noble •lord concluded with moving, that two individuals to be named by the house, and 21 to be chosen by lot from those answering to their names, with such exemptions as the house might think fit (to be afterwards reduced to 13, in the manner just speci fied) should be a committee to inquire into and report upon the corrupt practices at the election of members for the borough of Lfverpool. Mr. WasoN conceived, the mode proposed by the noble lord of electing the committee wus improper, in giving either party the power of striking off members. Mr. O'CONNELL agreed with the hon'. member, and would second an amendment to the effect of having the committee al together chosen by ballot. The proposed mode would be justly liable to the charge of partiality, besides inefficiency. As to the principle of the noble lord's motion, it was perfectly unex- ceptionable; and he hailed it as an admirable precedent, for punishing not only successful, but unsuccessful bribery, without regard to time or distance. Mr. WARBURTON considered the provision that the commit ' tee should be chosen only from among those present—that is, answering to their names—to be very objectionable. It was well known that on election ballot days there was almost inva riably what was called a " whip,"—that was to say, a very pressing call for the attendance of the friends of the parties im plicated and interested. Mr. BARING was inclined to regard the very important pre cedent which the noble lord called upon them to establish as fraught with very serious objections. Was it to be a general precedent, or only a partial one ? Did the noble lord propose that every petition complaining of corrupt practices at elections should, as a matter of course, be the subject of a similar in quiry? If he did, who was to bear the expense, and who suffer least from the inconvenience ? If he did not, was he not open ing the door to a system of mischievous partiality ? Pray, who was to defend the poor accusers in this inquiry ? Was not the house bound to furnish them with the means of defending the poor elector ? Then, see how the precedent would nullify that excellent provision of the Grenville Act which punished, and that effectually too, the rich corrupter, by rendering his elec tion null and void. Mr. BENETT said he could assure the hon. member for Essex that the poor freemen of Liverpool would not be without de fendersin the event of this committee being appointed. These poor freemen were the tools of the corporation, and he had no doubt that the whole of the corporation funds would, if neces sary, be applied for the purpose of defending them. He ob jected to striking the names of any persons off the committee who should be chosen by ballot; but he thought that no person should be fixed on the committee unless he was iu the house at the time the ballot was being taken. Sir R. PEEL doubted whether the corporation had by law the power of applying ls. of their funds to the purpose of rebutting the charges which might be brought against the freemen before the proposed committee. An act was passed last session for the express purpose of preventing corporations applying their funds to defray election expenses, or any expenses incidental to elec tions. By that act, any officer who expended the corporation funds for election purposes could be compelled to refund the money out of his own pocket. Now, there could be no doubt that any sum expended to defend the fteemcn of Liverpool be fore the proposed committee would be an expense incidental to an election; and he therefore strongly advised the treasurer of the corporation of Liverpool to be very cautious before he is sued any money for that purpose. (Hear, hear.) Mr. WasoN said that the expenses f the deputation that came from Liverpool last year to prevent the freemen from be ing disfranchised, amounted to £1,200, and the whole of that sum was paid by the corporation. Mr. HUME said' there could be no doubt that the application of any corporation fund for election purposes was illegal, and if the statement made by the honourable member for Ipswich were correct, he would advise some of the burgesses of Liverpool to compel the corporation to refund the money. (Hear.) But he thought that the public money . could not be better expended than in the prosecution of an inquiry the object of which was to put down bribery, and he trusted that the house would take up every case of this sort, and allow of no compromise being made between interested parties for the purpose of stifling in vestigation. Lord SANDON intimated, that no compromise of such a na ture had taken place in the present instance. Mr. H UME said, that, in the present state of the house, when only about one-third of the members were present, he did not think it right that the ballot should be proceeded with. Ile re commended the hoii. member for Ipswich to withdraw his amendment, in order to give the hon. membei for Bridport an opportunity of moving his. He thought that every member should be obliged to attend, according to the practice, during ballots for election committees, and that no member whose name should be drawn ought to be struck off the list. Mr. WARBURTON said, that, understanding the hon. member for Ipswich was willing to withdraw his motion, he would now move an amendment making the ballot to apply to the members who were absent as well as present, excepting such as had leave of absence, or were serving on an election committee, or had any other exemption that the house might think satisfactory. Sir J. WROTTESLEY said, that if the hon. member for Mid dlesex's suggestion was acted on, and the public money ex pended in inquiries like that which was about to be instituted, any reduction which government could make in the estimates would fall very far short of the sums which would be so con sumed. He believed that if the house once consented to cuter into inquiries of this nature, there would no end of them.— (Cheers.) He was convinced that if they were to be conducted at the public expense, every defeated candidate would come be fore the house praying for an inquiry into the circumstances of his opponent's election. (Year, hear.) Mr. W. HARVEY said, that the house having on a previous night formally decided that a committee should be appointed, the only question now was the mode in which that committee ought to be formed. Had he been present the other night, he had no hesitation in saying that he would have voted against the appointment of the committee, because he thought that after the passing of the Reform Bill a curtain ought to have been allowed to drop over the transactions of former times. But that matter had been decided, and now the only question was how ought the committee to be constituted ? He saw no reason why any names should be struck off after the ballot. He considered that the committee had better consist of 15 than 21 persons; and that the attendance of each should be required as strictly upon this committee as upon any committee ap pointed under the Grenville Act. (Hear.) Mr. W. WYNN objected to the precedent which would be established by the appointment of the proposed committee. He believed that its eflect would be to lead the house into in terminable inquiries. (Hear, hear.) If, however, it was de cided that the committee should sit, he thought it absolutely necessary to strike off a certain number of the names drawn by ballot. If this were not the case the most reckless individuals might be constituted judges on a matter deeply affecting the rights and privileges of the people • and, in the event of three or four gentlemen being chosen who were known to be eager either for or against the borough of Liverpool, the consequence would be the public would believe the entire committee were influenced by their partialities. Lord J. RUSSELL agreed with the right hon. gentleman in thinking, that if the names of three or four gentlemen known to be eager either for or against the borough of Liverpool were allowed to remain on the committee, it would create a belief that the committee generally were influenced by partiality either to one side or the other. He therefore thought it better that there should be a power of striking off a certain amount of names; and the power of striking off four names would, in his opinion, be sufficient. If the house should be in favour of a different arrangement from that which he had proposed, he should not be discontented;, but he saw no reason why it should not come that evening to a decision upon the present question either one way or the other. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY.—I trust the noble lord will persevere in his original plan, and allow four names to be struck out on each side on the ballot. The number four is sufficient to keep out those who may have a strong bias, and yet not enough to strike the brains out of the committee, as is said. Our object, at.the least, is a fair and impartial tribunal. I object altogether to the committee, and I think, if such inquiries are to be pur sued, it would be much better to constitute by law a proper tri bunal, acting under the sanction of an oath, and when the attendance of those who are both judges and jury may . be secured. The noble lord has referred to a precedent at a period subsequeut to the revolution. It is notorious that at that period the proceedings before committees were most scandalous and unfair; the majority in this house rode over the minority, and election proceedings, which should have been the subject matter of law and of justice, were determined by the spirit of party. Sir R. PEEL thought that if the plan now proposed were adopted, the house would lose the benefit of its best tribunal, — namely, that appointed by the Grenville Act for the trial of election petitions. Individuals would prefer trying cases of bribery at the expense of the public to trying them, as they must do, at their own expense, before election committees no minated in the ordinary way. In those committees they had done away with nominees, and that was thought a great im provement in their constitution; and yet by this plan the house was appointing nominees, the very tiling which was deemed so objectionable in other cases. Lord ALTHORP said, that as a large majority of the house had been of opinion that a committee should be appointed, the only,question which the house had then to discuss was hew it .should be appointed. There would he this difference between the nominees to this committee and the nominees to election committees: the latter were sworn, the former would - net be sworn. Their duty would be limited to seeing that no injustice was done towards either party. This committee would differ in another respect from election committees. The election com mittees decided each case, and their decision was final: but this committee would only have power to report to the house, and the house would be called upon to decide whether it would stand by their report or not. He did not think that this plan would .induce individuals to pursue election petitions, not at their private expense but at the expense of the public. Elec tion petitions were in general presented by individuals for the purpose of unseating rival candidates and of seating themselves; and in all former cases, as, for instance, in that of Grampound, where the inquiry was instituted at the public expense, the sit ( ting 14etubers had never. leen uubeatel, although the borough itself had been ultimately disfranchised. He did not think that it was necessary to have counsel heard before the committee, but he thought that if, on the report of this committee, a bill were brought in with penal enactment s , th en th e p ar ti es to b e punished by them might be heurd against such a bill by COUTI seI at the bar. Lord SANDON said, that having agreed to the appointment of a committee on a former night, he felt. himself precluded from opposing the appointment of it now. He thought that, before it was appointed, the house ought to know something of the course of its proceedings. No rule had been laid down as to the time of its meeting, as to whether the attendance of its mem bers should be compulsory, and day by day, as to the number requisite to form a quorum and various other s i m il ar ques ti ons . He thought that a tribunal constituted on this plan would be a tribunal of iniquity. lie had been pointed out as one of the nominees • but supposing that he were to assume th a t c h arac t er , how peculiar would be his situation. He would have to inves tigate a case in which his own conduct might be involved ; and farther, he must defend one part of his constituents against the attacks of another. Under these circumstances, he did not think that he was a proper person to act as nominee on the oc casion. Who was to pay the expense of the inquiry ? Were the funds of the corporation to be taxed for that purpose ? In conclusion he entreated the house, before the committee should be appointed, to chalk out the mode of proceeding which it was to adopt. The question on the amendment was then put and negatived without a division. On the original resolution being put, Mr. C. W. WYNN observed that there was no penalty im posed for non-attendance. Sir R. PEEL said it would be desirable to make a provision for the case of any member of this committee who might* hap pen to be subsequently nominated on an election committee. Lord J. RUSSELL said that members who stated that •they had already served were excused from election committees; that rule would apply to the case of a member of this Commit tee who should be nominated in the way mentioned by the right hon. baronet. ri lhe resolution was agreed to. Lord J. RUSSELL proposed Lord Sandon and Mr. Benett as nominees. Lord SANDON said, that at first. it was his intention to accept the office of - nominee, but on consideration he thought it would be better for him to decline the situation, unless the house in sisted on his acceptance of it. If counsel Were not to be heard in this case, he thought it necessary that soma legal gentlemsdk should be on the committee, and therefore wished to name a learned - riieinber to serve.' He should propise The lion: - arid' learned member for Cardiff (Mr. Nicholi) to serve on the Com mittee, which he would again designate as a scandalous and iniquitous tribunal. (" Oh, oh !") On the question that Mr. BENETT and Mr. Nienou. be no minees, Mr. BENETT said that as the noble lord had declined to serve on the committee, perhaps he ought to follow the noble lord's example. However, if the house desired that he should serve he was willing to do so, notwithstanding a legal gentleman had been nominated on the other side. He was satisfied that the fairness of the hon. and learned member would do away with the imputation of partiality. An hon. Member (name unknown) objected to having a law, ver nominated on one side and not on the other. lie caw, from a county that was lawyer ridden, and would, if possiW, exclude all legal people from the committee. (Laughter.) Mr. NictioLL, although he felt totally inadequate to the fluty imposed on him, would not shrink from its performance t9' the best of his ability, at whatever personal inconvenience to him self. At the same time, if the noble lord would consent to the nomination being postponed till to-morrow, ("No, no,") it would be the greatest possible relief to him. lie suggested tht: postponement through a feeling of his own inadequacy ant want of preparation, but was willing to yield to the wishes et the house if it desired to proceed at once. The resolution appointing Mr. Benett and Mr. Nicholl -hav ing been agreed to, The ballot for 21 names (to be subsequently reduced to 13) proceeded, and the following members were nominated : Mr. A. Bannerman Lord Dudley C. Stuart Hon. C. Langdale Mr. J. O'Connell Mr. L. Oliphant Mr. J. Wedgwood Mr. E. a,Hornby Mt. T. Gladstone Mr. W. B. Brodie Mr. George Williams Mr. R. A. Oswald Mr. E. B. Curteis Mr. W. H. Hyett Mr. L. Fenton Right Hon. C. P. Thomson Mr. W. Turner Sir Harry Verney Mr. B. Handley Mr. T. Bish Mr. J. Marshall Mr. E. G. Barnard - ' Several members were excused on the ground of being-en gaged on election committees, or for other reasons. Lord Althorp's name was called, but he excused himself on the ground of public business. It also fell to the lot of the Speaker to read his own name, which created a laugh. On the name of Mr. Thomas Gladstone being announced, Mr. R. WASOIV objected to that gentleman serving on the committee, on the ground of his having been himself petitioned against for bribery and corruption. The SPEAKER said that it ill became the hon. member to object to the nomination of the member for Portarlington, unless he was prepared to follow up his remarks by a motion. Did the hon. member mean to snake any motion? Mr. WA SON having replied that ~ hc did not, the matter dropped. Lord SANDON presented a petition from the mayor, aldermen, bailiffs, and common council of Liverpool, praying that they might be heard by counsel before the committee now sitting ui defence of their corporate rights. STAFFORD ELECTION. Mr. ELLlcE . said he would endeavour, as shortly as possible, to lay before the house the grounds on which he asked for leave to bring in a bill " to indemnify certain persons who may give evidence relative to corrupt practices at the late election for the borough of Stafford." On the subject of the alleged corrup tion a petition had been i presented to that house. The gentle man who was especially nterested would not have been induced to defend that petition unless he was enabled to state to the house certain circumstances which had come to his knowledge, which he hoped would lead the house to extend the inquiry with re spect to the practices at elections which had long prevailed at Stafford, and would procure redress for the corruption which had, it appeared, at all times prevailed in that borough. And if the parties who it was intended should be examined - had not protection given to them, it would be irnposible to arrive at any investigation of the facts. At the last election for Stafford a scene of such gross corruption occurred as few gentlemen, even in that house, could conceive. He had a statement which came from two parties who actually paid for the votes at that election. The tickets which insured payment were double sealed for plumpers, and single scaled for split votes. (Hear, hear.) Tickets, such as he had described, were issued by some persons at the poll, and were received by 524 voters out of 526, who formed the majority at that election, and returned a mem ber to that house. (Hear, hear.) On one side of the ticket there was the name of the party, and on the other the amount agreed to be given for his vote. (Hear, hear.) Some of those tickets he held in his hand, from which it would appear that the price paid was from £4 to £l5 for each vote. (Hear, hear.) When he stated this, he thought he had made out a case to induce the house to institute some inq . uiry . into this matter. (Hear, hear.) If they proceeded to an inquiry up stairs with out extending protection to those whom it would be necessary to bring forward, he feared that they would not be able to pro cure the evidence of essential witnesses to substantiate the alleged facts. In asking for a bill to indemnify witnesses he war pursuing an unusual course. He believed there was but one example of the kind. That was in the case of Lord Melville, when this house sent up to the house of Lords a bill to indem nify certain witnesses, who where themselves connected with the criminal acts that were the subject of impeachment. the case of Grampound, East Iletford, and of some other places, where circumstances transpired in the course of the 'inquiry which demanded further information, that information was fiat elicited, and acts of indemnity were afterwards passed. In making this proposition, he could assure the house that his object was not to cast reflections on any individual, or to ex pose any person to disagreeable consequences on account of matters that occurred formerly. Upen these grounds he moved for leave to bring in the bill. Mr. W. WYNN said undoubtedly this was an election poti tion, and if they entered into a discussion relative to what, as described in it, had occurred at an election, he was quite sure that a prejudice was likely to arise from adopting such a course, He was decidedly friendly to the principle of the proposed bill as a general measure, and he could not see any reason why that principle should not extend to the borough of Liverpool, or any other place, when a petition, on account of bribery at -omen place, was presented. (Hear.) • Mr. O'CONNELL said if there wore no general law to meet a case of this kind, they ought undoubtedly to introduce a pairti cular law. Mr. A. BARING said that others felt as much indignation - at offences,of the nature described as the hon. and learned gentle man, who, if. report were true, was himself the greatest borough monger in that house. It seemed that some persons had been guilty of serious mat-practices, and now they came forward, their friends here, to screen themselves by the introduction 41 - a bill for that purpose. They ought, in his opinion, instead i.kc (Continued to pass 261.) •