The Sun.
London, England, 1839-02-15 00:00:00

variety of measures that might be submitted to their consie
deration, a better plan might be selected than from adopt-
ing any one. [The latter part of the Hon. Member's ad-
dress was very imperfectly heard in the gallery.]
Sir ROBERT INGLIS entirely concurred in the
principle laid down by his Noble Friend, but could
not concur in his plan, the principle of which he thought
was bad. His Right Hon. Friend, who could wield the
weapons both of ridicule and argument, had decided the
House against the Bill, but might not that Bill have had
the effect of making the House of Commons believe that
the system had worked ill ? It was not necessary for the
Noble Lord to state that they were naturally corrupt, but
i: Wes necessary he should proveohey bad acted corruptly,
at fL'a:.4..4, in a majority of cases. They must either have
the Bill of liis Hight Hon. Friend, or that of the Noble
Lord. He was not afraid of the decisions of the Judges;
we trusted to them our liver and our honour, and if we
could trust them so far, why not trust them with
the decision of those cases which effected our poli-
tical power ? He had had heard it stated that ahe
parties in these tribunals had no knowledge of the law,
but he would ask any man, with gravity in his face, whe-
ther the present tribunals were tribunals at all? Tho
Judges had that knowledge which qualified them to decide j,
on all questions arising from contested elections ; he would
therefore suggest, or rather point it out to their considera-
tion, whether the Judges might not make circuits for ex- !
amining into such cases, and thus greatly diminish the ex-
pense of contested elections. One of the great evil:,
of the present system, was the increasing the number
of Courts of Justice, instead of strengthening the higher
ones.—( Hear, hear, hear.) In the case of contested
elections he, the Hon. Member, would propose to carry
into the country the highest legal authority, and have all
cases decided on the spot. Now, last Session, in one ease
no less than 200 witnesses were brought up to London,
and kept here for two months, at an enormous expense.
All that inconvenience and cost would be prevented by the
power being given to the Judges to decide, upon the
spot, in all cases of contested elections.—( Hear, hear.)
His Noble Friend had said that what was necessary
W a 5-justice, uniformity, and despatch ; and by this
plan justice, uniformity, and despatch would be attained._
( Hear.) Aiter an election bad taken place, all the time
that is now wasted during the recess might be employed
in these examinations. Without pledging himself to
anything, what he had stated appeared worthy their con-
sideration. He felt that the resolution was sustained by
concurrent opinion ; the House had the power of deciding
upon it, and it could then decide on the proposition of his
Right Hen. Friend.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought that the course pro.
posed by the Right lion. Baronet the Member for Oxford,
with respect to the Judges was rather a singular one, for it
went to say that the House of Commons was to shrink
from all confidence in the present tribunal, and that justice
was not to be obtained from a tribunal constituted by the
House of Commons. lie must say that until something
better could be put in the place of the present sys-
tem of deciding elections in the House of Commons,
that was not the course which the House ought to adopt.
The Honourable Baronet proposed that the power of
judging upon elections should be given to the Judges
of the land, and that if the present number was not
sufficient that 6or 8 should be added. He (Lord John
Russell) had the highest respect for the Judges, but ho i
thought if their slumber was considerably increased, and
if they were to be called upon continually to express their
opinions upon political cases—if, for instance, they were to
try the ease of the Hon. Member for Dublin or the Hon,
Member for Westminster, in which there would be a great
deal of excitement, he (Lord John Russell) doubted
much that general reverence and respect which was at the
present moment paid to the Judges would survive the ex-
periment of the Right Hon. Baronet.—( Cheers.) He
came now to consider the opposition that had beers
raised to the motion of the Noble Lord, and he
must say that he could not go along with him either in the
history he had given of the tribunal or in the remedies ,
which he proposed. It was not necessary he should go far i
with respect to the tribunal, because he thought it had been l
established by the Right Honourable Baronet, the Member
for Tamworth, and the Hon. Member for Montgomery it:
contradistinction to the Noble Lord, that from the time of
Elizabeth and James, when first that power was claimcdby I
tie! House of Commons, that it had been the indisputable
and inherent right of the House of Commons to decide
upon its own election. He found in the great case of
Ashby and White, where the most considerable persons of
that day took a lead in the discussion, Lord Chancellor Cooper,
Sir J. Jeyken, and other persons of distinction, he ( Lord
John Russell) found that although there was considerable
discussion with respect to the modification of electors there
was nothing said with respect to the right of that house to
decide its own elections, and upon that occasion those
great personages came to the resolution that according to
the then laws and usages of Parliament it was
the known right of Parliament to examine and
determine all matters relating to the election of
their own Members, in his opinion that privilege
which was claimed and held by the House without opposi-
tion for so long a period, it was not fit to take away,
especially when parties were so equally divided in the
House. When parties were less equally divided than they
were at present, it might not be considered as a fair tri-
bunal, and Mr. Grenville, so considering it, proposed a
scheme by which the tribunal was kept in the House of
Commons, but by which an amended judgment was to be
given by a select body of that House. For a con-
siderable time that plan worked well. The reasons
given by the Noble Lord for altering the pre-
sent system were in his (Lord John Russell's) opinion,
of a very fanciful nature ; he had said that the Committees
generally consisted of party men, but that that was not
the case previous to the Reform Bill. Now he (Lord John
Russell) considered that if any men were party men, it was
generally the Members for close boroughs, which might he
considered to have been done away with by the Reform
Bill. Parties were nearly divided in that House, and
it was of g:etit importance that the privileges al-
ready exercised by that House should still be retained.
Ile was of opinion with the Honourable Member for
Montgomery, that the situation of the House was very
different now to what it was in the time of Mr. Grenville.
At that time there were perhaps 420 on one side, and only
120 or 130 on the other—but then it remained to be
proved at the present moment whether the present state of
the parties in that House was such an incurable disorder
as that it was necessary that they should remove the deci-
sion from that House, and give it to another tribunal.
They found that in former times Mr. Grenville at-
tempted to carry it without having it out of that House
and he ( Lord J. Russell) was not prepared to say that the
lion. Member for Tam worth might not propose a plan which
at the end of some thirty or forty years might gain the re-
spect of that House. If such was the case—if such hope
could be entertained—he trusted the Noble Lord would
see nu necessity whatever for clinging to his resolution.
( Hear, bear.) If the Noble Lord thought the tribunal
he proposed was the better tribunal, he ought at least to
give the House the opportunity of examining the plan of
the Right lion. Baronet the Member for 'Famworth, in
order to see whether they could not again, without lower-
ing the house of Commons, endeavour to adopt a plan for
an improved system of the judicature, with respect to the
election of Members for the House of Commons. \Yids
respect to the plan proposed by the Noble Lord, he (Lord
J. Russell) must confess that he was not satisfied ; and in
that respect he agreed with the Hun. Member for Oxfurd.
The plan began with the Speaker, who was to take an oath,
in order that he might be the more competent to name the
six members of the Committee. When he had taken the
oath, he was to name three members from class A. and
class B. He ( Lord John Russell) thought whets the
Speaker had taken the oath, he would have a difficulty that
it would be almost out of his power to surmount. The three
members of class A. were to name three, of whom the class
B. was to take one, and then class B. was to name three,
from whom class A. was to take one, and when that had been
done, lie (Lord John Russell) doubted very much whether
they would be the most competent and the most learned
persons in the country to decide ; but the Noble Lord had not
said how the third was to be chosen, and upon that depended
the complexion of the whole tribunal. Perhaps if the Noble
Lord obtained his Bill the matter would be more ex-
plained than it was at present, but he (Lord John Russell)
must say when the tribunal was constituted, it would not
be one of those tribunals which the country would look
upon as free from political bias.—( Hear, hear.) What
were the additional evils that would result front such a
tribunal ? There might have been an Election Com-
mittee for a particular borough, complaints might be made
that that Committee had decidedly unfairly, and although
the decision might be blamed, the integrity of the individual
Members forming that Committee would not be questioned.
But with regard to this tribunal, they would have it the
constant mark for all objectors to aim at. If once it had
the name of being partial and unfair, all its decisions would
be vitiated, and every case would be said beforehand to be
a case that would be unfairly and partially decided. These
were his ( Lord John Russell's) reasons for not being sa-
tisfied with the plans of the Noble Lord or of the Hon.
Baronet the Member for Oxford ; and above all, for re-
fusing to agree with the resolution which he proposed of
condemnation, before any plan to which five Members could
consent, as a substitute for the present measure,
made to
was brought forward. He wouldh,.obhehfourdehelieensualtluddeodwn,
mention one or two propositions w
Committeese. would
not Com-
mitteebbyy
histhe
Hon.Rigi tFirlioonu.d
yefarthe Hose, in csrder to consider
-t- thereosit c'
should On e
besv s:
of legal Members o
Gluestntlemanthoappi
the disputed points with.. a coil toof e, of
fr anc hi
Iperrouplosi‘leioemnspheitrsapopeared to him (Lord 01l
consideringßoss ell) thatthaste
would not, therefore,
have—that the time e,
not be able to attend—that it would be the decision of a .
that even if they a road
veryth,o weightsmall
it number—thatoughtandto i t
therefore be
this
slosHtouse
as
to the solution of these pgointS
_
here
was another proposition to which
iracruinenouttti:likeilyhetor attain the assent of the other House'
generally
thei yi ss. were
of having a Court of Appeal from the Revising
the Rightar Hon. Gentleman alluded as far more objection_.
able, that
np i
opinion
nn eitherth at
at on '
Banisters. He did not see why there should not be a Court
of Appeal, constituted by the Act, from the Revising 1
Barristers, deciding upon three or four doubtful eases masons, ;
constituencies of three or four thousand, that they would I
be able without any great dispute or suspicion
Hear
settle the law or lay down rules of such authority
that they would have very great weight with Election
Committees of the house. He was still of
improvement might be made in two. respects—first, with
respect to the decision of the Revising Barristers, which
)—ai d
1 oe-
I casioned so much vexation ; and secondly, as laying
at present was so exceedingly various_(
down
decisions which might be afterwards referred to when
questions of a similar nature were discussed before the
tribunal which he wished to see in a Committee of this
House. Therefore, if the House wished to entertain that
proposition with favour, glad to
he should be assist in
bringing it regularly under the consideration of the
House. Ho did not say that he was entirely ad-
verse to the proposition of his Honourable Friend. • \Veen
the law more
asked to assent to it, he certainly could not ~, he
had any sanguine hopes of success. There were several
propositions
Righs Hon.
propositions which might be made to make
clear and simple. He thought the decision of the revising--
Barrister might be improved—he thought a great improve
ment might be made by a Bill such as the Bart.
proposed to introduce to improve the cons cation of Elec-
tion
Committees. To all these subjects the Hibuse might