The Express.
London, England, 1853-03-16 00:00:00

CONSOLIDATED ANNUITIES.

Mr. MOORE said that in consequence of the chance of
Irish members at the assizes, he should defer his motion on
the subject of the Consolidated Annuities until after Easter,
and, in order to In a definite time fur bringing it on, Do
should postpone the motion till Friday next.
BOROUGH OF CANTERBURY._

Mr. HER SEYMER rose to move for an address for a
commission to inquire into the state of the borough of Can-
terbury. He said that be did not now propose to the home
to take any conclusive or final steps with regard to the
borough of Canterbury, or, as in the case of Great Yar-
mouth, to disfranchise any of the electors, but he wished to
ask the house to coincide with the unanimous opinion of
the members of the committee on the Canterbury election,
that some further inquiry was necessary. The course he
proposed to take was much cleared by tho consideration
that it was the general desire of the house to put an end to
bribery and corruption. (Loud cheers.) He thought he
heard an hon. gentleman opposite say "It was all hum-
bug," but at al! events he could not but say that the
election committees had done their duty. (Hear, hear.)
He contended that the report of the committee showed ex-
trnsive bribery. It said, "A system of corruption by means
of colourmen's tickets prevailed at the last election and the
previous elections in the city of Canterbury generally."
These words appeared to hint to amount to a system of ex-
tensive bribery. Ifs had done his du.y in bringing the
case before the house, and he now left it to the house to per-
form its duty.
Mr. MALINS said the justice of this case would not be
met if the inquiry was limited to the last election. They
had most decided evidence before them that during the last
50 years the practice of giving:colourmen's tickets was used
as much on one side as the other. He thought the house
would come to the conclusion that there was but one pos-
sible remedy to avoid the repetition of these practices,
which was in futuke to prevent tho franchise from brine
centinued in or descending to persons whose poverty was
BO great.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said, fir he it from him to rise to
oppose the motion of the hon. gentleman, or to say that
the house was not both anxious and sineere in the desire to
put down corruption. He contessed he was not competent
to form an opinion on that point. Ito should be able to
form an opinion if ho saw a good Reform Bill introduced,
but until he saw that, and the way in which the house ex-
pressed itself on the bill, ho would not express an opinion
with regard to the anxiety of the house to pu t down corruption.
A conversation arose, out of an objection mule by Lord
John Manners, as to tther the address was in accordance
with the decision of the committee. Ultimately the address
was eg,eed to.
THE WRIT FOR BLACKBURN.

Mr. W. FATTEN moved for a new writ for the borough
of Blackburn; maintaining that th 3 requisite notice having
been given, the writ c-uld not be any longer suspended, and
must be now issued, unless bribery and corruption could at
once be proved.
Sir J. V. SHELLEY opposed the motion, on the ground
that time had not been given for sufficient inquiry, and
moved as an amendment the reference of the matter to a
select committee.

Mr. DEEDES, u chairman of the Blackburn committee,
was for altering the law, if neersrary, but not for interfering
with the power given to a committee unier the existing
law.

Lord J. RUSSELL pointed out the cations cantles open
to the house in similar cases, with regard to which he would
yield to their decision ; bat if he was required to give a de-
cision in the case in question, he should be inclined to vote
for the amendment.

Mr. Bouverie, Mr. Barrow, and Mr. Wortley opposed the
amendment, as introducing an inconvenient and dangerous
system.
Mr. Iluvwoon said a few words on the part of Black-
burn, and Mr. Bass attempted to say a few words against
;hut was not listened to.

Clt.mately, after a brief reply from Mr. W. l'arraN, Sir
J. SUFLLEY yielded to the advice of that hon. gentleman,
and agreed to withdraw Ilia amendment; upon which tae
original motion wan agreed to.
BOROUGH OF BRIDONORTH. _ _

Colonel FORESTER movad for a new writ for the
borough of Bridgnorth.
Sir J. V. SHELLEY considered that the present case
stood in a different position to the lest. The evidence had
been printed, and was before the house. According to that
evidence a system of corruption appeared to exist in the
borough, sod he accordingly moved, as in the preceding
case, a reference to a select committee.
Mr. Bouveatz and Mr. FRENCIL opposed the amend-
ment on the ground of the purity of the borough, and the
inadequacy of the motion to meet even the opposite case.
Mr. COBDEN asked if there were a dozen members in
the house who were ignorant of the true state of the bo-
rough under discussion ? If there were any such, he would
refer them to a little book with which they were all fami-
liar, which gave all their biographies and the character of
the constituencies for which they sat, and in that book,
under the head of Bridgnorth, they would find some in-
formation as to the character of that borough. In " Dod's
Parliamentary Companion"—an authoritative work amongst
them—they would find under Bridgnorth " Constituency,
freemen and burgesses, and 884 houses of 101. ; population,
7,610; registered electors, 717. In some degree under the
influence of the Whitmore family." (Laughter from the
opposition, and "hear, hear.") This was the very mild way
n which Mr.Dod made up his genteel little book, but should
he (Mr. Cobden) tell them what had been said of this bo-
rough on oath? The Hon. F. W. Cadogan was sworn and
examined by the committee, and what was the nature of
his evidence ? Now, this Hon. F. W. Cadogan was the un-
seated member for the borough, be it remembered. ("No,
no," from the opposition, and an hon. member, " The
wunielossful candidate.") Well, the unsuccessful candidate
—that meant the same thing. (Hear, hear.) What he
wanted to show that house was what was the evidence of a
man who had run the gauntlet of an election for this bo-
rough. Mr. Cadogan said in his evidence—" I certainly
shall not stand again unless they (the Whitmore family)
went to a liberal being there. The Whitmore interest
may get any one into the seat they please—they might re-
turn their own footman." (Hear, hear.) This was the
description of the borough, given on oath by an hon. gen.
tleman who had canvassed it himself. (Hear, bear.) The
hon. and learned gentleman who was chairman of the com-
mittee hail forgotten to give any information on that point ;
he had talked of bribery and corruption, but the question
was whether that was a real representation, where people
living in the neighbourhood had the power of re-
turning anybody they pleased to that house, even
down to their own footman (" Hear, hear,"
and cries of " Question," and " Divide.") That was
the question, and until it was discussed he and those who
voted with him did not intend to divide. (Hear, hear.)
His hon. and learned friend (Mr. Bouverie) was under
great apprehension that if they had a committee there
would be no evidence. Why, how had evidence been ob-
tained in other committees. The house summoned wit-
nesses, paid their expenses, and they came to give evidence,
and hon. gentlemen who composed the committee, gentle-
men of all shades of opinion, examined them. And though
it occasioned an expenditure of time and money, he thought
a committee of the House of Commons was as good an or-
deal as they could resort to for brining out the truth in
any matter of this kind. But with regard to the difficulty
of getting evidence he had a letter which would show that
if the committee were once appointed evidence would be
forthcoming. This letter was from a respectable per-
son of Bridgnorth. (Cries of " Name, name," from
the opposition.) H. produced the letter on his
own authority, as a member of that house—(hear, hear),—
and as coming from a respectable and responsible party,
who, if the committee were appointed, would come for-
ward and substantiate what he wrote. (Cheers.) The
hon. gentleman then read the letter, which stated that the
reasons why more names were not attached to the petition
for inquiry were, Ist, that the time was too short ; 2nd,
that Mr. Whitmore's tenants were afraid to sign; 3rd, that
the publicans were a numerous body in the town, and it was
ISM likely that they would sign in favour of purity of elec-
lien • 4th that many electors hesitated to do anything that
"
would tend to bring disgrace upon the borough ; sth, that
Many were implicated in the corrupt practices, and of course
did not wish to expose themselves and the system by which
they profited ; and, Gth, that many were afraid of the Win-
ence of the Whitmore family—but, it added, if a committee
were appointed plenty of evidence would be forthcoming.
It would be seen then that there would be no great diet-
ashy in procuring evidence, and he (Mr. Cobden) would
engage that there should be evidence forthcoming if the
committee were appointed. Something had been said as to
the character of the petitioners. On this point the writer
of the letter stated that two of them were manufacturing
capitalists, who paid 1501. a week in wages, the only two
manufacturing capitalists in the town. The letter showed
that the character of the borough of Bridgnorth was equal
to that of Sudbury—but in ono respect it was peculiar and
different from many corrupt borough., for it combined
within itself all the different forms of corruption—
bribery, treating, intimidation, and family industries
so overpowering that the gentleman who possessed
it could, if he liked, return his own footman.
In the fare of these facts, he thought the argument, that
they would be subjecting the borough to temporary dis-
franchisement by delay, fell to the ground ; for, as the
member was returned by the Whitmore influence, and not
by the constituency, no harm could result to the borough ;
and seeing that the character of Bridgnorth was notoriety.,
he hoped the house would not, by refusing iaquiry, take a
course that must strike at the root of purity in the electoral
system.
Sir J. GRAHAM intimated that had the hon. member for
Westminster pressed his amendment to a division in the
Blackburn case, he should have taken the same course as
his noble friend (Lord J. Russell), and voted for it; but as'
the hon. gentleman had withdrawn it in obedience to what
appeared to be the wish of the house, and considering that
It was of the utmost importance that they should act with
justice and impartiality, he could not consent to the with-
holding of the writ is the Bridgnorth case after they had
determined not to withhold it in the Blackburn case. It
was true there was in the present case the speciality of a
petition praying for inquiry, which there was not in the
other, but that petition was by no means numerously
signed, nor did it contain any allegations which were not
hruught before the election committee and investigated
by them. Again, time had been given to lay
the evidence before the house in the Bridgnorth
came, and the ehn i small of the committee had
stated distinctly that the party most competent to speak
upon the subject, and who had given his evidence in the
moat candid and distinct manner, had, speaking of 20 years,
denied that corrupt practices existed. Under all the eir-
eumstalicis therefore, if the question were pressed to a
division, he should vote for issuing the writ.
Mr. II U DI II was sorry his lien. friend (Sir J. Shelley)
h.,1 iili.:cooen amendment in the pr,vioti case; but
th..t. v. 19 a 1 reaso:t why the guvcrnment senuld join in re-
(using inquiry, Nobtru they had proaf of the existence of
undue influence.
Mi. I.ll.lta.l...Ll;oldierved that the hist. gcnteman oppo-

site (Mr. Cobden) had based his whole argument on one
fact—that one of the witnesses had stated that the Whit-
more family possessed not only considerable but predomi-
nant influence in the borough of Bridgnorth, and that Mr.
Whitmore, who he described as the patron of the borough,
could return both members, or, if he liked, his own foot-
man. He (Mr. Disraeli) could only say—and the authority
on which he spoke was open to every one—that was one of
the public journals of the highest character, in which he
happened to read a few weeks ago an account of the adven-
tures of the candidate for the honour of representing Bridg-
north. The gentleman in question was a man of high social
position, who had been long a member of that house, and
one who had held a high official post, and was prima
facie entitled to the confidence of any constituency,
but not trusting to his known worth, his high social position,
or the reflected lustre of part of his official services, be
went to Bridgnorth and offered himself as the friend of the
gentleman who was described as having such dirge influ-
ence in the borough. Mr. Geo. Hope, the candidate he
referred to, went to Bridgnorth and stood upon that info.
once—and not only that, he was the guest of Mr.Whitmore,
at Arley Castle—was introduced by that gentleman to the
constituency at a public meeting—but after canvassing the
town he was obliged to confess he could make no way what-
ever, because his poatical opinions, though favourable to
the present government, he believed—(a laugh)—were not
those which met the sanction of the electors of Bridgnorth.
In the face of such a fact, it was rather too much for the
hon. member for the West Riding to get up and, in his
authoritative manner, to mako the house believe that
Bridgnorth was the mere rotten borough of a family, and
that the free exercise of the electoral right could cot take
place. There was not the slightest authority to be given
for; that assertion, which had been proved within the last
few days to he without foundation. The report of the
evidence showed that the Whitmore family exercised some
influence in the borough, and perhaps they did; but because
they did, the hon. member said they might return
their own footman. The other evidence was that
of a disappointed candidate—a gentleman who, like all
disappoiated candidates, wished only to account for a result
not over pleasing to himself. This was the only appearance
of evidence which had been adduced for the unqualified
statement of the hon. member, while it was shown clearly
that the asserted patron and master of the borough bait in
vain recommended a gentleman who has every claim on
the constituency, except that his political opinions were not
in accordance with theirs. (Hear, hear.)
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY, as a member of the elec-
tion committee, fully concurred in the statement
of the chairman (Mr. Bouverie).
After a few words from Mr. H. HERBERT and Mr. •—.
•
BALL,.

The house divided—
For the motion
Against it 6O--134
THE SHIP VIOLET.

Mr. WHALLEY stud that with reference to a motion,
of which be had given notice, to bring under the notice of
the house the petition of Samuel Massey Cross, and to
move an address for copy of correspondence between her
Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and Mr.
Drummond Hay, the Consul at Tangier, relative to the cap-
ture by pirates of the ship Violet, in October,lB6l,being the
subject referred to in the petition of Samuel Massey Cross.
Re should not be under the necessity of troubling the
house, as the government had taken the cue into their
consideration.