The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-23 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF 1:, a DS. April 22.
Lord REDESDALE preluded, in the absence of the Lord
Chancellor. _ ___

MAYNOOTH.
the esm
to e r
the same
The Duke of ARGYLL presented a number of peti-
ions against any further grant to Maynooth.
The Bishop of W INCHES TER also presented a
nuaaser of petitions from different places in his diocese
to
effect BENNETT.
r.,
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY also presented sixteen
petitions
THE REV. eR
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said he would postpone
ifaohrathhirit,,fittt presentof p
theroptaree,seini which he had given notice,ation of the petition from the
until the result of the inquiry which the Government
had undertaken to make was made known.
S P. ALBANS DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
The Earl of DERBY rose to move the second reading
of this 13111. The Noble Earl said he was aware that
their Lordship would be very unwilling to agree to any
measure of disfranchisement which bad not been pre-
ceded by an investigation, or which could only lead to
the punishment of many for the sins of a few. But if
he could show that in the present case the bribery bad
not been ce.ntined to a few, but had extended over the
whole electoral body; that it had not been limited to a
single election, but had prevailed at several successive
elections—it he could show that the bribery had been
exorbitant in its amount, and if the whole of these facts
sad bean substantia.ed betore a comeetent tribunal,
which had entered into an inquiry on the subject under
the sanction of an Act of Parliament—he felt persuaded
that they would not then be disposed to save the offend-
ing borough from the esoialty justly due to its offences.
Ia the course of the year 1850 a vacancy had taken
()lace in the representation of St. Alben's, in conse-
quence of the death of one of the members. A contest
had ensued, as had almost always been the case;and
the result of that contest had been the return of a Mem-
ber who had been petitioned against, in the session of
1851, on the ground of gross and notorious bribery. The
petition had been tried before a Committee of the House
of Commons, and the evidence which had been brought
before that Committee had been sufficient to satisfy
them that extensive bribery had been
practised at the
election; but in consequence of the evasion and escape
of some of the principal witnesses, it had been found
impossible to bring home that bribery to the sitting
Member or his agents. The Committee had, therefore,
made the somewhat inconsistent report that gross bribery
hal been committed at the election, but that it could not
affect the seat of the sitting Member. He (the Earl of
Derby) would say a few words in passing, on the effect
the alterations made in the tribunals to
which rtrial of elections had been referred. Un-
peordt
produced
e by
ifotOtedly great abuses had been pat an end to by the
introduction of the Grenville Ac'; but, in spite of that
Act and the various incififications and improvements
which hed twist-vend); been mole in it, those election
'ribunals had been pervaded by this detect, that the inves-
option of that which was a public grievance could only
ne prosecuted by individuals, and mat the investigation
could not take place if private individuals were unwilling
to incur the great expense by which it was amempas
nied. He was Wrairi that under that arrangement gross
oribery had prevailed at the elections in various bo
rouges, session after session; although he would not go
so far as a person of the n L,me of Coppock, whose expe-
rience in the annals of corruption was unparalleled on
*he part of any other individual in this country, who
for the last fifteen or sixteen years had been a leading
agent in contested elections, and who, after having
stated that be knew something of most of the borouetbs
in England, added that, if he were to go through them
from the first to the last, he should be able to mike
quite as extraordinary revelations with respect to them
generally as Mr. Edwards had made with respect to the
He (the Earl of Derby) re-
peated prepared to go quite that length,
borough of
hSat. was Alb
not ati 'e .
although he admitted the great experience and knowledge
of Mr. Coppock in that matter; and he hoped it would
be remembered at the next election that the appearance
st Mr. Coppock in a borough afforded a prima facie
evidence that bribery
was to be practised there.
The House of Commons had thought it necessary to take
up the question affecting the borough of St. Alban's,
not tor the purpose of unseating the sitting Member, but
in order to aeaertaia how far bribery had prevailed in
the borough. They had passed an Act, wnich had sub-
sequently received the assent of their Lardshipe, by
which a Commission had been appointed with very ex-
tensive powers to inquire into the proceedings in the
borough, not only at the list election, but at any pre-
ceding e lection to whmh they might think it desirable
to extend their investigation,. The disclosures made to
that Commission were as open and as frank as any one
could desire. It appeared that previously to the passing
of the Reform Act the constituen
of St. Albaa's had
consisted of between 600 and 700 voters; but when the
non-resident freemeu had been struck off by that Act,
and the 101. householders had been introduced, the
number of the electors had been considerably diminished.
The total number of them in 1850 bad amounted to
483. It appeared that the political influence in the
borough had originally been divided between the two
great families of Spencer and Albemarle. Previously to
the Reform Act it had been the practice to give a speci-
fied amount of head money to each elector. But it
had subsequently turned out that the 101.
householders had been much more venal than the old
voters, and that higher sums bad been paid to
:hem. The Commissioners had come to the conclusion
that previously to the Reform Act one third part of the
total sum expended at an election in the borough was
spent in bribery, while two-thirds of the total expense
of an election there since the passing
of the Reform Act
had been devoted to the corruption of the electors. The
cost of the various candidates at seven elections during
a period of 19 years had amounted to 37,0001,, of which
two-thirds, or 24,6001., had been spent in bribery; and
that gave an average of more than 3,000!, spent in bri-
bery at each election. In 1841 the bribery oath had been
administered to every voter who had gone to the poll,
and the oath had been taken by each of them; and yet
there had been spent at that election upwards of 6,0001.,
of which 4,0001. had been employed in bribery. The
tote' Dumber of 101 voters was 354, and of these 212 ha-
bitually sold their votes; and of 66 snit and lot voters 64
habitually sold :heir vitas. There were two parties in the
borough—the Conservative party,
which was represented
by a gentleman of the name of Biagg, and the Liberal
party, which was represented by a gentleman of the name
of Edwards. There was also a third or a neutral
party, which had been established under the auspices of
Mr. Webster. That, latter party embraced 200 voters--
a number amply sufficient to turn the scale at an election.
The member; of that Fatty had been la the 1121'4 of

hanging up a ksy in the town as an indication that they
were about to take part in a contest. The C.inamis,ioners
reported that there was no doubt of the gross general
senelt y of the borough. and th at, as Mr. Ceppoek said,
the great rnsjority 4 the electors had always been
bought and tultl, I'i the year 1847, tt ter a variety of
intrieues between Mr. Ceppock, Mr. Blagg, and Mr.
Edwards, Mr. Raphael had been returned as the Liberal
candidate, and with him Mr. Repton, a Conservative;
and it was a remarkable fact that the voters for Mr.
Repton had been bribed with the money advanced by
Mr. Raphael, in order to carry out a previous arrange-
ment; for i, app-ar..d that there was honour even among
lavtion agents.—(A laugh.) Mr Raphael hid not
lived long enough to enjoy nis success. tie had died in
the sear 1850. Mr. Coppock had instantly been in the
field. At an interview with Mr. Edwards he had
promised a situation to the son of the la ter,
and there was ample evidence to show that Mr. C ip-
pock bad possessed the power of obtaining public situa-
tions. At that time there hal appeared un the stage
a gentleman of the name of Simpson. who had been a
clerk to Mr. Blsgg and then to Mr. Edwards, and whe
en finding that the bribing of electors bad not been an
unprofitable trade, had set op for himself. He and Mr.
Edwards had hit on a candi late in the person of a
practising chemist and druggist, who had been desirous
of obtaining a seat in Parliament, not for the purpose of
exercising any p deice' influence. but for this purpose of
carrying some measures connected with the medical
prwession. Bolt these gentlemen came to Mr. Bell,
whom they found ready to treat. It was true that Mr.
Ball throughout the contest declared that he would have
nothing to do with the election, and that all matters of
expense should be dealt with by his friend. It ap-
peared, however, that this friend, who had negotiated
payments to the extent of 3 0001., was the confiden-
tial partner of Mr. Bell, carrying on business with '
him, and with whom he was in daily correspondence.
It appeared that Simpson found it necessary to get an-
other candidate, and Alderman Carden was applied to.
It was but justice to Alderman Carden to state that he
seemed desirous of representing St. Alban's on the
purity system. He was told that if he went to St. Al-
ban's he would be the means of restoring the borough
to a state of purity, as there were many voters there
sick of the bribery system, and anxious to support him.
It appeared, from the evidence of the witness Blanks,
hat he went to London to seek for a candidate to pre-
vent the course being walked over, and that Alderman
Carden went down. It appeared that he was received by
the town conucVlors, some of whom walked arm in
arm with him, and that out of the sixteen councillors,
twelve voted for him, two against him, and two
remained neutral. The solicitor of Alderman
Carden found out what was going on in the
borough, and informed him that he had no
chance unless he bribed. Alderman Carden refused to
do this. Though he had spent 6001., there was no
reason to suppose that he was cognisant of any bribery,
and the result was, that Mr. Bell polled 276 votes, and
Aldermen Carden, the candidate on the purity system,
polled only 147 votes. Mr. Bell, after having spent a
large sum, was returned, and ho must do that gentleman
the justice to say that he appeared to be a forgiving and
much enduring man, for when the Bill for the disfran-
chisement of St. Alban's met with the unanimous support
of the other [louse in all its stages, Mr. B-ll'a was the
only voice raised to protest against the hardship done to
St. Alban's, and to utter a melancholy plaint on the too
probable fate of the corrupt borough which he repre-
sented. In conclusion, he begged to read the summary
which the Commissioners had given at the end of their
report, as to the bribery which had been practised:—
" We find that a sum of 3,5001. was advanced by Mr.
Raphael to Mr. Henry Edwards for the purposes of the
election in 1847; that the greater part of that sum was
expended by him with the knowledge of Mr. Raphael
in bribing voters; and that Mr. Raphael owed his elec-
tion in 1847 to such bribery.
" We find that the sum of 1,2001. was expended by
Mr. Blagg on behalf of Mr. Repton, for the purposes of
the el,ctai in 1847; that 500/ , part of this sum, was ad-
vanced by Mr. Edwards to Mr. Wage, for the express
purpose of bribery, and was expended by Mr. Blagg in
buying votes fur Mr. Repton; that Mr. Repton, during
the polling, and before the election, knew that bribery
was being practised on his behalf, and we find that he
owed his election in 1847 to such bribery.
"We find that nearly 1 0001 was advanced by the
Hon. Mr. Craven to Mr. El ward Gibson for the pur-
poses of the election in 1847, when he was one of the
unsuccessful candidates; that 3001, part of this sum,
was given by Mr. Gibson to Mr. James Vass for the
purpose of bribing voters on behalf of Mr. Craven; and
that the said sum of 3001 was expended by Mr. Vass in
bribery.
" We find that Mr. Craven was not directly cognisant
of any portion of the money having been expended is
bribery ; but that he had strung suspicion of the way in
which the money had been employed.
We find tbac a sum of 800/ was advanced by Mr.
Wilks for the purposes of the election in 1847, when he
also was one of the unsuccessful candidates; and that a
large portion of this sum was expended by his agent,
Mr. Thomas Harris, in bribery on his behalf; that
Harris gave 751. to George Perry, and 501. to Mr.
Frederick Theophilus Webster, for the purpose of
bribing voters for Mr. Wilks; and that the said sums ,
were expended by Perry and Webster iu bribery.
" We find that at the election in 1850, 2,5001. was ad-
vanced by Mr. Thomas Hydes Hills on Mall of Mr.
Bell to Mr. Henry Edwards; that the greater part of
this sum was expended by Mr. Edwards in bribery;
and that Mr. Hills well knew at the time that he ad-
vanced the money that it was to be so applied.
" We find that 2,0001. of this sum was advanced by
way of loan to Mr. Hills, by Messrs. Brace and Colt,
who knew the purposes to which it was to be applied.
"We find that of tne 2,5001 2,0001. was first trans-
mitted by Mr. Hills to he effice of Mr. Coppock by his
direction, and was thence forward. d to Mr. Edwards at
St. Albana by Mr. Coppock, with full knowledge on
the part of the latter that it was to be expended in
bribery.
" We fled that Mr. Bell knew that money was being
advanced on his behalf for the purpoes of bribery, and
we find that he owed his election to such bribers "

The report then stated the number of voters who received
bribes at the election of 1847. Out of 450 electors the
names were given of 307 who bad received bribes, The
total number who received bribes at the election of 1850
was proved to be 219, though, doubtless, there were
others whose cases had not been proved. He thought
he had stated suifictent to show that the bribery had nor
been incidental—that it was not confined to a few, and
that disfranchisement would not, therefore, be an unme-
rited punishment of the whole for a fault of the few. On
the contrary, the bribery had been systematic, election
after election, and at least two-thirds of the voters had
been proved to be corrupt. Such a state of things
would, he feared, continue if the borough were allowed
to return Members to Parliament, and so long as the
constituency, without any consideration except that of
money, allowed themselves to be driven like sheep to
the poll by those from whom they received their bribes.
The House of Commons in this case bad taken the only
course it could take, and after the clear and conclutive
evidence which had been laid before Parliament on the
subject, he trusted their Lordships would agree unani-
mously in reading a seennd time this Bill tor disfran-
chisiug the borough of Ss. Alban's.
Lord ItEDESD ALE ( Rho occupied the Woolsack)
said that b-fore h.- put thi vestion he wished to inform
their Lordships that a petition had been presented from
St. Alban's by eeriain persons praying to be heard by
counsel againat the Bill.
'rho Earl of VERULAM said he had presented such
a petition, thquv,h he disagreed in its prayer. After the
evidence which had been taken, he thought it impossible
for the borough to make out a case for itself.
The Marquis of ULANRICARDE thought their
Lordships were in a position to legislate on the qiesfion
without hearing counsel.

Lord CAMPBELL thought the parties affected by a
Bill of pains and penalties like this had a right to be
heard at the bar.
Llrd MON ['EAGLE agreed that parties aff-cted by
a Bill had a right to be heard against it; but the parties
in the present case had been heard, and had been tuund
guilty.
The Earl of HARROWBY was in favour of hearing
the petitioneri at the bar, if th-y desired it,

'rho Dud of WICKLOW said he should be guided by
precedent, and emu d vote fur the parties being heard
by counsel, if it could be shown that that course had been
adooted in similar tsar

The Earl of DERBY said, no doubt the petitioners
were anxious not to be inclu ltd among those who had
been gad!), of bribery, but there could be no doubt as
to the extent of it. It was stated in the report that the
bribery was not confined to ;persons of one station, but
extended to professional men, tradesmen, and even to
persons holding subordinate offices connected with the
administration of justice in the borough, and that the
exceptions were the clergy of all persuasions, and some
of the principal inhabitants.
The second reading was then agreed to.
Lord REDEiDALE then presented a petition, and
moved that leave 13, given to parties affected by this Bill
to appear by counsel, as such a course was conformable
to preci dent, though he did not think the parties would
be disposed to incur the expense.
Lord C A NIPBELL would not refuse to support the
petition, as the prayer of the petitioners was reasonable
and customary, and the Bill itself one of a very stringent
character

Earl GREY said that House ought not to be bound by
narrow or technical rules which obtained in courts of
law. It was the duty of that House to do justice on a
broad basis irrespective of the practice of other courts.
He did not think counsel could advise the House of the
course they ought to pursue, nor did he think it was
consistent with the dignity of that House to call counsel
to the bar in order to induce them by arguments to alter
their opinion on fac.s, and to influence their decision.
The Earl of DERBY did not think, if leave were
given, that counsel would appear, on account of the ex-
pense, and even if they did appear, he doubted whether
they would have any effect on the proceedings or de-
cisions of their Lordships. He should. however, sup-
port the motion, because the case of Sudbury was a pre-
cedent, and it would be advisable not to deprive fedi-
v;duals of what they might consider an advantage.
L MONTE AGLE said it this had been a sing le
case he for one would have been ready to hear counsel,
but the case was but too common. The precedent of
Sudbury had been adduced, but it was for their Lord-
ships to decide whether that was a usetul and a whole-
some precedent to follow. lle thought, therefore, the
coun.el ought not to be heard.
L vd BE 1U I,ION r denied there had been any
cial inquiry into the case. There had
only been a com-
mission to report to that Rouse, winch was, in fact, the
judicial tribunal. The parties had not
been heard in
their defeec 4, and now was the time tohear them. I. f
the House refused to hear c,)unsel, he asserted their
Lordships would do a monstrous injustice, and would act
dinrently to every other tribunal in the country. He
believed their Lordships eunbidered the facts too strong
to be up by any prwi cr reanuiDg; bat even ""