The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-02 00:00:00

TIIE

asylum to refugees fleeing from the effects of political cone
vulsions, and would not be ready to defend their right,to
afford that hospitality. But that was_ not the whole case.
They were not satietied with merely seeking an asylum
here, but they used the protection of England as a means of
adopting acts of hostility against and to disturb the tran-
quillity of foreign countries. That was the strong point
taken by those foreign powers. Those were the points which
our law 'did not meet as regarded foreigners. But if any
foreigner or Englishman were to be guilty of similar acts
against England, he would be guilty of treason or sedition,
so that they were, in fact, carrying out sedition and treason
against their own Governments. This was an anomaly of
which foreign Governments had a right to complain. He
(SirJ. Walsh) was not prepared to enact laws to meet this
case, but he was of opinion that there was a stronger prima
facie case on theesart of foreign powers than Gentlemen op-
posite,were ready to admit. There was a gross abuse of the
hospitality of this country on the part of refugees, and their
sense of propriety ought to induce them to abstain from acts
which involved the chance ,of periling fiiendly relations
between their own countries and that which had given them
shelter. He had no sympathy with most of those refugees
who had done much by their acts to put an end to Constitu-
tional monarchy all over Europe, and if this country afforded
them an asylum, it was not necessary also to airerd them its
sympathy.
Mr. V. SMITH concurred with the Right Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. Walpole), and with the Noble Lord (Palmerston),
that if an angry discussion on this subject had been brought=
to a satisfactory close, it was unwise to revive it.—(Hear,
hear.) The motion of the Hon. Member for Pontefract,
however, was intended to elicit a Late information from the
Government, and he. (Mr. V. Smith) desired to extract a
little more. What he wanted to know was, whether
British subjects had been subjected to any additional incon-
venience in consequence of non-compliance on the part of
our Government with the demands made upon them?
With regard to the Austrian correspondence, he must say 'he
thought it rather an unusual practice to compliment a new
Government upon its accession to office. Prince Schwarzen-
berg, hoivever, seemed to think otherwise; and he (Mr.
V. SMith) supposed that " Dear Derby," and not "Ce
cher Aberdeen," would henceforward be the formal ex-
pression of that statesman when addressing dispatches to this
country.—(A laugh.)
Mr. B. COCHRANE said that it appeared that the Aus-
trian Government had only placed British travellers under
the same regulations as those of other countries. He com-
plained of the tone and language adopted by several Hon.
Members in the present debate, and contended that such a
manner of discussing foreign affairs was calculated to do
serious injury to our relations with foreign powers. He con-
tended that the dispatch of the Austrian Minister, which
was said to contain a "menace," was written just after a
speech dslivered by M. Mazzini, in which lie spoke " of
establishing an organisation, to spread through England the
facts relating to the struggles and sufferings of Italy, and so
that she might receive a moral assistance iu those struggles."
Aus ria had cause to be alarmed, if she supposed suca an
organisation was on foot. He thought that the conduct of
Englishmen to General Hayeau, conduct which was at once
cowardly and inhospitable, was quite parallel with the con
duct of the Austrian troops in Tuscane .—( Hear, hear.) He
was astonished at this motion proceeding from his Hon.
Friend, who had always been received most hospitably at the
Courts which he now took upon himself to attack.
Sir H. VERNLY was understood to say that the whole
English nation ought to be grateful to the Noble Lord, the
Member for Tiverton, mainly in consequence of whose con-
duct it was that the cases mentioned that evening, of in-
juries and insults to British subjects abroad, were exceptions
and not the rule. The Noble Lord was competent above all
men to give advice on such a subject as this; and he (Sir
H. Verney) hoped that the Ron. Member for Pontefract
would act upon the suggestion which had been offered him.
—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HENLEY, after some Preliminary observations, said
he believed that any Government existing in this country
must always act upon the principle that British subjects, in
any part of the world, must be carefully protected. The
Noble Lord (Lord Palmereton) had referred, in humourous
terms, to the Austrian dispatch, in which complimentary
language was used in respect to Lord Derby's Goverruneet ;
but that dispatch must be read in reference to the declara-
tion of the present Government as to their foreign policy,
and not in reference to the preference of the Austrian Go-
vernment of any one set of gentlemen over any other set
of Gentlemen sitting as Ministers.—(Hear.) As regarded
the dispatch upon which the Hon. Member for Pontefract
had laid so much stress, as conveying a menace, he (Mr.
Henley) considered that it applied not to British subjects
proper, but to persons travelling abroad with English pass-
ports; and, so mar as he knew, he believed that no incon-
venience had arisen to any one British subject in conse-
quence of the intimation of the Austrian Government. He
had only, in conclusion, to say that the best way of dealing
with the motion, would be as suggested by the Noble Lord,
the Member for Tiverton ; and he therefore begged to move
the previous question.
Mr. M. 1411LNES replied, consenting to obey the direc-
tion of,the Noble Lord, and to comply with what appeared
to be the general wish of the House. In reply to the re-.
marks of the Hon. Member for Bridport (Mr. B. Cochrane),
he had to observe that the Hoe. Member was somewhat
in error as to the hospitedity which he (Mr. Al. Milnes)
had received from foreign courts, for on his last visit to the
continent he had , been stopped and prevented entering
the Austrian dominions. That circumstance had, of course,
however, nothing to do with his political conduct on this

oceasiou.
Tne previous question was then put and agreed to.
HARWICH.

Sir D. L. EVANS, pursuant w notice, moved for leave to
introduce a Bill, with a view to the appointment of, a Com-
mission to inquire into the existence of bribery in the bo-
rough of Harwich. The Bill would be word tor word, with
a change of names, with the Bill passed last session in refer-
ence to St. Albans. The case of Harwich, he was prepared
to show, was even a more flagitious case than that of St.
Albans, and there was this difference that proofs existed in
this case which had nut existed in the St. Albans case when
the Bill was passed, demonstrating the practice of bribery.
Harwich, indeed, was even in a "uric position than
was occutied by any of the other suspected buroughs.
When he had last brought this subject before the House,
which was immediately upon the -accession of the present
Government to office, the Hon. Member for the Uni-
Versity of Oxford (Sir R. Inglis) had charged him
and his Mends with a mere factious desire to annoy
and impede the new Ministry. It was sufficient to say,
in reply to the charge, that he had moved in the mat-
ter last year, and had then sought what he was seeking
now. The Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Judge
Advocate had fist called attention to Harwich; and upon
the motion of that Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman tor a
Committee he (Sir De L. Evans) had suggested an amend-
meat extending the inquiry to toe circumstances of all the
electioua fur iktembers for Harwich to the present Parlia-
ment. If, therefore, there was ..ny imputation in tots busi-
ness, it applied not to him, but to the Eight Hun. and
Learned Gentleman who, probably in consequence of his
onerous official duties, nu longer took an interest in it.—( a.
laugh.) In regard to Harwich corruption, the evidence was.
so copious, that; like NW*. e's hero. he suffered from an
" embarres des richesses." He would, however, not go
farther back than ten years. In 1842 occurred tae "compro-
mise," w..ich led to the celebrated' Compromise Committee"
of the Hon. and Learned Member ter Sheffield (Mr. Roe-
buck). In 1848 there was an election and a petition. Early
in 1851 there was an election and a petition ; and again, in
May, 185 there was another election and another petition.
The population had decreased from 183 t to -1841 by 411
persons; but, strange to say, the number of the voters had
increased. This borough had been convicted of bribery twice
within ten years, which had happened to no other borough.
In the Committee of 1842, Mr. Attwood, then a Mem-
ber of the House, was examined, and he stated that
Mr. Curran came to him, and said he should want 2,000/.
to carry out the arrangement entered into on the compro-
mise. "I thought it an extraordinary proposal," said Mr.
Attwood, " but I gave him the 2,0001., and there the matter
rested." He went on to say, that the petition was to be
withdrawn, and that Major Beresford was to vacate ; and
on being asked if he had any knowledge that electors were
bribed to vote for him and Major Berestord, he said he had
no knowledge of it, except through • the money paid. He
had no doubt whatever, it was notorious that this sort of

thing was carried on. The next election was in 1847, and
he would observe, that at the time these things were going
on at Harwich, Mr. Attwood was carrying on similar opera-
tions at Lyme Regis. A great deal had been said about Alr.
Edwards and Mr. Blagg, and their doings at St. Albans,
but they were mere pigmies compared with Mr. Moss,
the agent of Mr. Attwood. Mr. Moss was not merely a
giver of bribes to a great extent, but an exponent of the
political opinions of his candidates. Mr. Moss arrived
at Harwich on the 15th of Juue, 1847, and he imme-
diately published an address, in which he stated that Mr.
Attwood and another gentleman would seek their suf-
frages, "who would support their trade, reduce their
church-rates, and establish au intercourse between the
port and. north of Europe." When questioned in the Com-
mittee, Mr. Moss said before he published the address he
had held out a hope to a few individuals the hope that their
church-rates would be paid for them. At page 25 of the
" Bluebook," Mr. Curran stated that he had a list of 33
electors, to whom he paid more than 3,0001. for their votes.
This, therefore, was a much more monstrous case than St.
Albans, where the electors got some 2/., 31., or Si. each.
Here they averaged more than 1001. each. That was the
election of 1842. Then, with regard to the election of
1847, the Committee reported, "That the last election, so
far as regarded
.the election of John Attwood, .Esq., was
void. Resolved, that the said John Attwood, Esq., was by
his agents guilty of bribery at the said election." The evi-
dence went to show that about 9,090/. was spent on that oc-
casion. Since then there had been two or three elections
for Harwich ; but the cases of bribery were not gone into,
the Members being unseated without. He had shown that
the grossest corruption prevailed at St. Albans; that it had
been twice convicted of bribery within tWo years. He ap-
further
pealed to the House to allow him to introduce this Bill, and
he thought that every one who had the morality and good
g"ernment of the people at heart would join in granting
him,„rt.h._e permission that he asked.
eleetioen,
second prwould excuse him if he endeavoured to stop the
Mr. Hp KIER SEYMER hoped the Hon. and Gallant
meat of its two Members? After the
now in zress of his measure. Why was not Harwich
Year, the judce_tolle two Members, which took place last
—was entrusted s Right Hon, Friend the Judge Advocate
practices, but ot rate a petition, complaining
not of corrupt
her Majesty's
lat,:tjrrference and intimidating practices by
Lion for a Conernittee°,verunleut, and he gave notice of m -
Government did not o_which be was bound
-to say thea %-
but it did nothing hiPP7,e. The Committee was appointed,at
erseion. The Committecenoneuence of the lateness of the
the honour of presiding, „teredetisession, over which he had
if briberibry bad been practised, it I.toea careful scrutiny, and
h ot have known led, it
tat they
elections took place without bribery eyed that avert few
such an extent as to jusiify disfranehirmueruring, but not to
suppose that he was a friend to bribery and co, t• But do not
was nothing conservative in bribery and c„rruroPtion. here
Was influence derived from local connexion,Patuln.f 'rhere
just and impartial exertise of magisterial duties,. the
legitimate influence, but it was at the mercy oehm„,:tnnis was
was sent down by the Reform Club with a beg of 't:,uveere.Whe
He believed, however, that Mr. Coppock ever-estimated his
power of corruption. Itt the Committee it appeared there
was considerable influence exercised, but there did not ap-
pear such a case of bribery as to call for the notice of the
House. One voter was proved to have been corrupted, and
his vote was struck off. He would now state, as far as he
could, as the Hon. Member fore Kent was not present, what
took place in the other Committee. It seemed there was a
foolish custom at Harwich to destroy the pollirg booths as
soon as the polling was over, and on that occasion they
were so anxious to commence their work of destruction that
they were five minutes too soon, and they invalidated the
election. That was all the case they had before the Com-
mittee. It was said that it was a small borough. Caine
was a small borough, and Caine'was under influence.
Arundel was a small borough, and Arundel was under in-
fluence; and there were many more. lie could name
some that belonged to those who sat on his side of the
Noble Lord, the I Firo minio..er, .Jl` ' •
rAtt.i what 1.1; tont eye
Lord saw no reason why Hshould be treated arwich
differ-
ently from other boroughs, nor did he.
Were they prepared
to do towards otter boriPgll4what they wohed to do to..