The Express.
London, England, 1848-05-04 00:00:00

FOREIGN POLICY.

Mr. URQUHART, in the absence of Lord PALMERSTON,
postponed his question respecting Spain and Prill4l2, till to-
morrow (this day).

LEAVE OF ABSENCE.

On the motion of Mr. SCULLY, leave of absence to Mr. W.
Fagan for three weeks, on urgent private business. On the
motion of Mr. SPOONER, leave of absence to Mr. Plumptre,
for one month, on account of serious illness in his family.
Granted.
LINCOLN ELECTION PETITION.
On the motion of Sir J. Ilsnwitu, it was ordered that the
minutes of evidence taken before tLe select committee on the
Lincoln election petition be printed.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. HUME complained that the government bad not
taken care to make a house on the previous day. He believed
he might eay that independent members of the house showed I
on all occasions a readiness to facilitate government business
by waiving their notices, and it was but fair, on the other I
hand, that government should act with Limner consideration
towards them.
Sir 0. GREY assured the house that the government had
every disposition to forward the business of the house, mad
to give every possible facility to its members as to inde-
pendent notices. The hon. member should recollect that on
the very first day of the house meeting after the recess the
attendance was so thin that a political ally of his own, the
hon. member for Southwark, had moved that the house be
counted. There could be no question that the house ought
to sit on notice as well as on government days. (Hear.)
Mr. G. BERKELEY said that before he moved, as he
should do, the adjournment of the house, he had to make
one remark. Yesterday was not the first occasion, by very
many, on which be had known no house arranged, because
some independent member had a notice coming on dis-
agreeable to the dominant parties in the house. (Hear.)
He had many times been stopped in the lobby by govern-
ment officials, and requested not to go in, because such or
such a motion was on the paper, which it was de-
sired to get rid of by the no-house process. On Mon-
day it was perfect], well known that there would be no
house on Tuesday, beaus on Tuesday an hon. member had
a notice of motion involving grave imputations against a
noble lord, whom the dominant partite desired to screen.
Now it appeared to him essential that the house, instead of
blinking inquiries so intimately connected with its own cha-
racter, should prosecute them thoroughly instead of getting
rid of them by a side wand, as in this case, or by referring
them to a mug committee upstairs, as in the case of the
Lord Lieutenant of Gloucestershire. He moved that the
house do new adjourn.
Mr. P. WOOD, in seconding the motion, observed that on
bringing forward the motion respecting the Marquis of
Easter and the borough of Stamford, he undertook a task
aot of his own seeking, but devolving upon him as a matter
of public arty, hem As polities which bad been presented
b hiss sa the swab= othistirt complaint of two-thirds
the eleetem pt the la noraplaint.
which he deemed it of NM importance to have tho-
roughly investigated at the earliest possible moment.
(Hem, hoar.)

Mt. BERRIES repudiated the impillation that the cir-
cumstance of there haring been no house on Tuesisy wee at-
tributable to a desire to shield the Marquis of Exeter's con-
duct from inquiry. He himself and many other members
were tulle pet pared to vindicate the character of that most
honourable nobleman from the aspersions eo unjustly direct-
ed igsinst it.
Col. SIBTHORP denounced it as a prose abuse that a
government with such a train of overpaid officials, members
of the house, should, on an oecadon of such importance,
have absented themselves from their duty. He had seen but
one member of the government near the place, and that
member, a noble lord, was not in the house, but in the pas-
sages, evidently on the lookout.
Sir G. GREY said that be and his colleagues were en-
gaged in some important business at the time they were in-
tormed that there was no house. It had been hi. intention
to cane down as soon is he wag disengaged. He mutt, how-
ever, remark, that the hon. member fur Glasgow was not in
the house when it was counted out.
Mr. HORSMAN said that a systematic attempt to pre-
vent the house from meeting had been made. As the house
had consented to give up a day to the government, in consi-
deration of the great pressure of public business, the least
that could be expected of the right hon. baronet and his col-
league, was that they would take measures to make a house
on the only day that was now left for independent motions
to be brought on. He hoped a distinct understanding on this
subject would be come to.
Sir G. GRKY begged pardon far again offering a few ob-
servations. The bon. member (or Cockermouth, who never
missed an opportunity of casting • slur upon the govern-
ment, had stated that a systematic attempt had been made,
on the part of minislere, to prevent forty members from being
present yesterday. This he begged to deny. It was to be
observed that not one of those soh i had complained of the
default of yesterday had been present when the house was
counted out—not even the hon. member tor Cockermouth
himself. The government was willing to do all in its power
to facilitate the bringing forward of independent motions,
but it was too much to expect ministers to charge them-
selves with the duty of making • house for them. He
believed that the real reason why a house wan net made was
that members had not come to town atter the holidays.
Sir J. WALMSLEY, in justice to ?dr. ld'Gregor,
begged te sly that he was down at the house yesterday,
and was engaged in the library looking out for members to .
constitute a sufficient number to meet at the time the house
was counted out.
Mr ELLIOT protested against the new doctrine that the
ministers were to be expected to charge themselves with the
duty at making a house on open days. Hs had been down
yesterday, and. no one had asked him not to come into the
house.
Mr. FREWEN also denied that, as far as he was person.
ally e4neerned, any canvass had been made to prevent mem-
bers from making a house.
Mr. H. DRUSIMOND also said that it was the duty of
the 600 idle men who constituted the bulk of the house,
te come down in sufficient numbers to prewnt the occur-
rence of yesterday ; the government was already overtasked,
and could not be charged with such a duty as that suggested
by the hon. member fur Cockermouth.
Mr. G. BERKELEY said that he had always understood
the duties of the junior Lords of the Trearury to be com-
prised in the efforts of making and keeping together a house,
and of Cheering the minister. He begged leave to withdraw
his motion.
Mr. BERRIES asked the right hon. baronet opposite on
what day he proposed to go into committee of supply, as the
hon. and learned member for Oxford bad stated it to be his
intention to twine forwent Lis motion on the first occasion of
that kind that offered.
Sir O. GREY was not at present able to answer the ques-
tion, hut would endeavour to come to some arrangement on
the subject with his noble colleagues.
The motion was then, by leave, wi'hdrawn.
POOR REMOVAL BILL.
The house then went into committee on this bill. The
preamble was postponed. Clauses 1,2, and 3 were, after
some amendments, agreed to.
Clause 4, alter a short discussion, visuals) agreed to. Some
objections made by Mr. HENLEY were, by arrangement,
postponed until the bringing up of the report.
Clauses to 10 inclusive were agreed to without discussion."
On clause 11,
In answer to a question, Mr. C. BULLER stated that the
whole question of the poor. law would shortly be brought
under the consideration of parliament.
The remaining clauses were agreed to, and the house re-
sumed. Bill to be reported this day.

SMALL DEBTS BILL.
Mr. COCIIRANE moved the second reading of the above
bill. He stated the object of the bill to be merely the sim-
plification of the law with respect to the powers given to
judges of county courts to imprison debtors, and also to pre-
vent debtors so imprisoned from being put on the felon's side
of the prison. He disarproved of imprisonment for debt
altogether, and at all events considered the power given to
county courts, of imprisonment for 40 days on each failure of .•
instalment, a moat monstrous power. It looked as if there
was to be one law for the rich and another for the poor. He
trusted that the house would accede to the second reading of
the bill.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opposed the bill se likely
to interfere with the doe security of the creditor. if fraudu-
lent debtors were merely to be imprisoned on the debtor's
side of prisons, there were many idle and dishonest persons
who would prefer remaining there in idleness to making any
exertion to pay their debts or maintain their families. He
moved as an amendment that the bill be read a second time
that day six months.
Mr. H. BERKELEY supported the amendment.
Amongst his constituency, the working of the County Courts
Bill had given universal satisfaction.
Mr. CHRISTOPHER, although he did not contend for
complete immunity for debtors, was still of opinion that they
should not in any case be confounded with actual felons. In
his opinion some separate place of confinement should be
provided.
After a few words from Mr. BERNAL,
Mr. HENLEY supported the hill as necessary to protect
the honest debtor who would pay if he could.
Mr. CARDWELL supported the view of the Attorney-
General, and resisted the further progress of the measure.
Mr. NEWDEGATE thought it a nexuar► measure in
order to forth the small debts courts to make a distinction
between poverty and fraud in the case of persons committed
• to prison for debt.
• Sir G. GREY having said a few words in favour of the
• existing law as rettaisite to restrain fraudulent debtors,
• Mr. COCHRANE replied, and the amendment having
! been agreed to without a division, the bill was consequently
lost.
GREAT YARMOUTH FREEMEN DISFRANCHISE-
MENT BILL._

This bill being next on the order for " committee," Sir
G. GREY suggested the propriety of its postponement until
the Borough Elections Bill, which stood for '• second read-
ing " that day, and which in a degree embraced the other,
should be discussed.
A conversation arose on the question of postponement, in
which Mr. Stafford, Lord Mahon, Mr. Bright, Mr. Stuart,
and others, took part, the last-named hoe. gentleman appeal-
ing to the hon. member for Dorsetshire to proceed with the
bill, and not to accede to the suggestion.
Sir G. GREY said he did not at all object to the prin-
ciple of the bill, and only made the suggestion to facilitate
and not retard its progress.
The galleries were cleared for a division, but none took
place, and the house went into committee, when another
conversation arose and lasted nearly an hour on a similar
suggestion to that made by Sir G. Grey. At length the chair-
man (Mr. Bernal) put the question " that the preamble be
postponed."
Mr. STAFFORD (who was the first to object to proceed-
ing with the bill) moved that the chairman report progress,
and ask leave to sit again.
The committee divided—For the motion l6
Against it
Mr. STAFFORD said it was his duty to lay before the
house the substance of toe evidence on which this bill had
been founded, and the grounds on which he objected to it.
The only cases of corruption against Great Yarmouth were
these which had arisen during the last election. It appeared
from the evidence that out of a constituency of several
hundreds only 14 persons bad been charged with bribery;
and the whole amount of money which they bad received
was 461. 10s., in sums varying from 71. to 10s. If justice were
done, instead of disfranchising the whole borough, those
whowere bribed and those who had bribed them only would
boo treated. It appeared that Mr. Cogle, formerly a mayor
of the borough, and who had resided on his own property,
had been instrumental in bribing several persona. The bon.
gentleman then read copious extracts from the evidence, and
said that the whole volume was full of " Cogle," on account
of the part he had taken in the transactions. Mr. Cope, Mr.
Wright, Mr. Stack, and others, were implicated in the
same way. This selection of a particular borough for
dhiranchilement, and of a particular clans of electors in
that borough, who were poor, and had therefore yielded
to bribery, was certainly unjust : especially as the measure
took no cognisance of the parties, who had led opinion In
the borough,—the chief agents in these nefarious transactions.
As long as the house acted in this way their decisions would
command no respect in the country. The only just course
was to pass a general act, making it criminal to take or ten.
der a bribe, and giving half the penalty, which should be
large, to the informer. (Hear, hear.) He did not oppose
this bill because he thought it right that electors should sell
their votes, but because he was anxious for a just measure.
Without some such measure the house could never convince
those who had no votes that they were dealing uprightly.
A bill to disfranchise Mr. Coale and he only, would approaa .
much more to justice than the bill before the house. Having
already divided the committee he should new only protest
against the measure.
Mr. H. SEYMER said that a law already existed by
which persons who gave bribes might be punished. As long
as persons were found ready to take bribes, as long as they
crowded the stands about the Angel Inn, as at the Yarmouth
election, anxiously inquiring whether " election money"
would be paid, there would always be parsecs
found to bribe them. The evidence showed that three cm-
reigns had been regularly paid to the freemen of Yarmouth
for their votes. Those were the grounds on which the
committee had recommended the disfranchisement of the

borough.
Kr. PLOWDEN (u we understood) said he was ems.
vinced that systematic bribery had long prevailed in Great
Yarmouth.
Mr. HUMS asked if government would be willing to take
the opportunity of this bill, which reduced the number of
electors, to make a reduction in the amount of the franchise
to 61., with a view to prevent the reduction of numbers
Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to my that he did not
think it woad be expedient to introduce any such Sanas
into this NM.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said this assure would be
great hardship es inchoate freemen.
The bill tiro prod through committee,and the report
was ordered to be received the day.
lan-STOCK COMPANLIG3 BILL.
On the adios flat going into oummittes ea this bill,
Mr. HRADLLY Oiled ita postponeseat.
Mr. CARDWELL said the meson was ono of steam

Importenoe, and he hoped an early day would be axed, in
preference to ping Into committee now.
Lord J. RUSSELL hoped the house would not object to
go into committee on the bill now, as he was unable to fix
any other day.
The house then went into committee.
Clause I was agreed to.
On clause 2,
Mr. HEADLAM moved to add an explanation of the
word " commissioner," as follows :—" Any, country commie-
aioner of the,Court of Bankruptcy having jurisdiction in the
town where the principal office of the company is "
The SOLICITOR GENERAL objected, on thesituate. ground
that this would occasion much expense, and that the law
proceedinn would be much better conducted in London.
Mr. HUDSON desired to bring justice home to every
man's door. He thought the proceedings would be beat
conducted in the country, and he supported the amendment.
Mr. AGLIONBY also supported the amendment, on the
ground that the practice in mestere' offices in London wee
excee dinly objectionable. He suggested that the govern-
ment shoguld consider the matter, and that to afford them an
opportunity of so doing the chairman should report progress
and ask leave to sit again.
Mr. STUART supported this view, and, after some fur-
ther observations, the proposal waa agreed to, and the chair-
man reported progress and obtained leave to sit on a future
day.
STAMFORD ELECTION PROCEEDINGS.
Mr. W. P. WOOD intimated that it was his intention to
bring forward the consideration of this subject on Friday
week, when the noble lord at the head of the government
had consented to give him precedence before taking the
other orders of the day.
The house adjourned at 10 Wastes to 6 o'clock.

PARLIAMENTARY PAPER.
Horsa or COMMONS (290).—Bill to appoint com-
missioners to inquire into the existence of corrupt practices
at elections lot certain boroughs. The preamble states tkat
sorrupt practices appear to have prevailed at certain borough
elections from the reports of certain election committees, and
that it is expedient that certain parties (names left blank) be
appointed by the Queen, with consent of parliament, to be
commissioners for the purposes of the act.—See. 1. The
speaker may fill up vacancies and appoint additional com-
missioners on the rote of the house.—bee. 2. The commis
sioners to take an oath defiddi before the presiding judges of
the common law courts at Westminster.—Sec. 3. Two com-
missioners are to form a quorum, and simultaneous inquiries
may be made by different sets of commissioners.—See. 4.
The crimmissioners may appoint clerks, &c.—Sec. 5.
The inquiries are to be prosecuted in the order
of a schestule annexed to the act.—See. 6. The commissioners
are to hold courts of inquiry on the spot. Sec. 7. They are
to report from time to time to the crown. Sec. S. Their
reports are to be laid before parliament. Sec. 9. Power is
given them to summon witnesses. See. 10. Witnesses im-
plicated in corrupt practices to be indemnified ; but not
without a certificate from the commissioners. Sec. 11. The
commissioners are to examine on oath. Sec. 12. A penalty
is to be inflicted for nonattendance or refusal to give
evidence. Sec 13. A penalty is imposed on false swearing.
Sec. 14. Commicioneta to have five guineas a-day while
engaged, and to he allowed for clerks, &c., and travelling
expenses. Sec. 15. Any action against commi•sioners or
any persons for anything done in execution of the let must
be brought within six calendar months. Sec. 16. The
powers of this act may be extended to other elections.
Sec, 17. The act may be amended or repealed this session.—
Sehedide.—First part : Great Yarmouth, Derby, Horsham.
Second part : Kinsale, Carlisle, Lincoln, Harwich, Bewdley,
Aylesbury.