The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1860-02-07 00:00:00

FRIDAY.

The House of Lords est for only a short time this
evening, and adjourned at 20 minutes to 6 o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-MONDAY.

On the Report of the Committee of Supply,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY entered into certain details with
the view of showing that money was expended without
a previous vote in supply. Last year, he said, it appeared
that £1,500,000 had been unexpended.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER admitted that
there had been an excess of expenditure in the army
department for 1858-59 amounting to 470,000, and Sir
Henry would have an early opportunity of discussing the

,
subject. _
The report was agreed to.
The St. M.ry-inMydal Marriages Validity Bill was
read a second time.

The House having resolved itself into • committee
upon the Annuity-tax in Edinburgh,
The LORD-ADVOCATE obtained leave to bring in a Bill
to abolish the tax and to make provision in regard to the
stipends of the clergy in Edinburgh.
Sir G. Lewis allured for leave to bring in • Bill for
the better regulation of the Corporation of the City of
London. The Bill. he said, was substantially the same !
as that which, founded upon the report of the commis-
lion had been introduced in a previous sessioniid!
referred to • committee, which had reported it to the
House. It was limited to the constitution of the cor-
poration, not including financial matters. During the
'meant session lie might have to call the attention of the
House to the subject of the coal duties.
After souse discussion, leave was given to bring in the
Bill.
The CHANCILWR Of the EXCHEQUER moved the
reappointment of the Committee on Packet and Tele-
graph Contracts, which was agreed to.
The LORD-ADVOCATE obtained leave to bring in a Bill
to continue certain Acts for the improvement of prisons
and prison discipline in Scotland.
Sir G. Lewis moved for leave to bring in • Bill to
provide for the consideration of an ordinance which has
been laid before Parliament in a report of the Oxford
University Coumaissioneri.
Lord 8.. Cecil, protested against the Bill as • breach
of contract.

Leave was given.
The House, after soma further business, adjourned at
a quarter to 10 o'clock.

TUESDAY.
Mr. MILLon moved for leave to brind in a Bill to
amend the Corrupt Practices' Prevention Act (1851),
and to make further provision for the detection and
punishment of bribery, treating, and undue influence at
Parliamentary and municipal elections. He had long
been of opinion, he said, that there was a general feeling
in the country that the House was not in earnest in
desiring to put down bribery. He appealed to the re-
port of the Glocester Commission as containing evidence
of the nature of the feeling, and to the statement made
to the Commissioners by Sir Willialll Ileyter, that he
hail always considered the Act of 1854 • dead letter,
which practically was uniformly disobeyed. In his
opinion, there would be no evidence of the sincerity of
the House in this matter unless a larger discretion was
given to the Judge, in cases of indictment for bribery,
to add to fine and imprisonment a sentence of hard
labour, and he proposed to empower the Judge to pass
such sentence, limiting the term to six months. The
, Bill contained other provisions intended to facilitate the
obtaining of evidence, to prevent the evasion of the law
in the payment of expenses, and to prohibit the em-
ployment of voters as messengers and runners. It being
hopeless to put down bribery at Parliamentary elec-
tions unless it was arrested at municipal elections, his
Bill would apply to both.
Sir F. KIELLT observed that the intention of the
original framers of the Act was that all moneys appli-
cable to election purposes should be in the first instance
paid to some public officer, and that any person paying
such moneys except through such public officer should
be guilty of • emeanour, and liable to severe punish-
ment. This provision was cut down in the Committee ;
but unless some enactment of this kind were passed he
despaired of any effectual prevention of bribery.
Lord PALMERSTON said he had no otijection to the
introduction of the Bill, reserving his opinion as to
the details. The object was one which every person
must consider highly deserving the attention of the
House. He was afraid that there existed among many
epustituencies • laxity of feeling upon this Point; that
they did not consider the offence of being bribed in the
same moral light as they did in that House, where he
believed there was • strong feeling against the offence.
The Government would be ready to consider any mea-
sure for suppressing bribery, and he hoped that one
would be devilled better calculated to serve the purpose
than the Act of 1854.
Leave was given to bring in the Bill.