The Sun.
London, England, 1837-12-20 00:00:00

ELECTION PETITIONS.

The SPEAKER announced to the House that the recog-
nizances in the petitions for the following places had not been
completed :--.County of Wicklow, Borough of Downpatrick,
County of Kerry, Borough of Tralee, Borough of Youghal,
City of Dublin, Borough of Woodstock, Borough of Beverley,
Borough of Frome, Borough of Preston.
On putting the question that the order for their being taken
into consideration be discharged,
Mr. PARKER said that as the person in whose favour the
last named petition had been discharged, he begged to address
d few words in explanation to the House.—(Order, order.)
The Hon. Member said, that all he wished to state to the
House was, that he had affidavits to prove the persons who
presexted this petition against the return were paupers.
There were two law officers of the Crown in the House, and
if the Attorney-General did not prosecute the parties,
he hoped that the Honourable Member for Liskeard
(Mr. C. Buller) whom he regarded as the Solicitor-
General—( Laughter)—would take the matter up and make
some provision in his Bill for these cases.
The recognizances for the Petitions ageingt the return for
the Boroughs of Preston and Ipswich not having been entered
into, the Order of the Day for taking them into consideration
was discharged.
THE DUDLEY CASE.
The SPEAKER then said that the first case which would
come before the House was that of the Dudley petition, in
which one of the recognizances had not been entered.
Mr. PRYME said the petitioner, the House having
granted him a general enlargement of the time for
entering the recognizances, had naturally concluded
that this indulgence extended to all the recognizances :
he had therefore neglected to enter this recognizance
yesterday, which was the last day for that purpose. He
(Mr. Pryme) hoped the House would accede to the motion
which he now made, that the petitioner be allowed till to-
morrow to complete his recognizance.
Sir FL HARDINGE opposed the motion. He thought the
House ought not again to grant its indulgence in this case,
but at o..ce to crush, or put an end to, the laxity and inatten-
tion, which indulgence appeared to produce.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, that the Hon.
anythingf:;entle wasnaii had
likea
dused the right word first—" crush ;" for if
" crushing," it was the course which he re-

commended. He (the Solicitor-General) thoug

ulge.

11,

IC,

:e

ought to be granted in this case.
The SPEAKER said a few words, which were quite in-
audible in the gallery.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought it was extremely
natural that the parties concerned in the Dudley petition
should fall into the mistake, inasmuch as they had heard it in
the House that the same indulgence was to be granted to them
as was granted in the Pontefract case.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Would
it not be better that all those cases should he allowed to stand
over till after the adjournment which had been agreed on
should take place? Of course, as these were matters of That
vilege they would, after the adjournment, come on first.
course would be best as no one would be taken by surprise:
He believed that it would be better not to move the formal
adjournment of the House, as there might be some difficulty
attending it. He believed that the -Speaker leaving the
chair would adjourn the House as a matter of course,
upon the understanding that it met again at Eight o'Clock.
Sir H. HARDINGE, seeing the Noble Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs in his place, wished to ask hue
whether he had seen in the papers an order signed by the
Spanish Minister of War, in which he bad stated that the
officers and soldiers of the old Legion should be compelled to
embark for England ; and whether he had seen an order .by
General O'Connell, in which he stated that the officers of the
Legion having been compelled to lay down their arms,
had done so. That order also stated that they were in a state
or great deprivation and danger. He wished to know whether
any steps, and what, had been taken in order to enable those
unfortunate men to come hack to their native country. but
Lord PALMERSTON said he had been informed,
not officially, that in consequence of some differencle
of opinion between Gen. O'Connell and Gen. O'Don
nel
the Spanish General commanding San Sebastian, the
Infantry Legion had given up their arms, and were no lonerler
considered as soldiers in the Spanish service. If that were scl,
no time would be lost in bringing them over to this country.
Mr. MACLEAN gave notice that he should, after the
recess call the attention of the House to the conduct
pursued by the Russian Government in regard to the Treaty
of London ; and also as to the conduct pursued by the I,l.°ni
sian Government with regard to our trade ou the coast'
Circassia and the Black Sea.

The House then adjourned till Eight o'Clock.
The SPEAKER resumed the Chair at a few minutes Past
eight o'clock.
Mr. HUME brought up the report of the Select Coneoit;
tee on Controverted Elections, and added that there werl thed
or three resolutions at the end of the Report which be 1/15that
to have read by the Clerk, who read them in so low a tone as
they were almost inaudible. They recommended, as wetn es.
we could catch the substance, the reducti n or certain
Frt-
The Hon. Gentleman then gave notice that he would, 00 the
day, the 2d of February, move that the House do agree In le
resolutions, so as to have them come into operation pre/jells
to the appointment of the Election Committees.

POMFRET ELECTION.
On the motion of Mr. AGLIONBY, the adjourned debate
on the petition in this case was resumed.
11Ir. James Florence, of No. 9,iCharing-cross, solicitor, !ilea
called, and, in answer to Mr. Aglionby, stated that he acies
as agent in the Pomfret election, at the desire of Mr. 1V.105,
who did not like to undertake it, he having been a candidat:
at the election. Mr. Moss did not decline acting from
motive of his being disqualified, but through motives of d,?l,,ir.
cacy. Witness, and no other person, acted as agent. 1".
Moss accompanied him when entering security for the Fos(
cut ion, but did not act as agent.
To Sir T. FREMANTLE—Witness had no instratiohns
from any person but Mr. Moss to act as agent. Tb"ghif
had no interview with Mr. Gompertz, he considered liinfseg
appointed by that gentleman, through the agency of Mr. NO%
To Mr. IL STEUART—Mr. Moss gave the names of tn
sureties. for
To Mr. COLTRTENAY—Witness looks to Mr. Moss
payment.
Mr. AGLIONBY wished to know (as we caught the ques;
fen)) whether it was not because witness considered Moss
better security than Gompertz that he looked to the forrner?
Sir T. FREMANTLE objected to the question. if the
„
Hon. Member wanted to get at the fact that Mr. Gon3Per—
was in the Bench for several thousand pounds he was wel"ele
to it.
Mr. GODSON contended that the whole proceeding was,,
a departure from the real issue, which was, whether or not the
double ad6.ions to the name of Mr. Proctor were or were not
made for fraudulent purposes. To that point the House had a
right to confine its inquiries.
Mr. VILLIERS, on the contrary, argued that the whole
case was considered to lie open when the question was A
•
journed last night.
Mr. AGLIONBY admitted that the inquiry was limited to
the question of fraud wi!li respect to the additions, but cam
i
tended that he had a right to take every means of arriving
evidence.

Mr. Florence, being recalled, said, in answer to some clues:
tions, that it was a common practice in London for one soliel:
tcr to be employed by another in such cases. He furthel
..r
.
stated that he considered himself as the agent of the prineilis
After a few words from Mr. AGLIONBY and Sir T. Fs
MANTLE,
Mr. Benbow was called to the bar, and deposed that be had
been engaged nine months by Mr. Moss, who had called at
his house in Mecklenburgh-square, and who asked him if he
wished to go into Parliament. He said certainly not.—(Hear'
hear.) He asked him also, at a subsequent period, if he would
like to be engaged in the proceedings connected with the Pon-
tefract election, and he agreed to go down, and investigate the
business on the spot. On the 30th November he again came
to him, and said that he should go down and take the petitiel;
in his pocket, to get two inhabitants as'sureties. The names
Gompertz and Proctor were procured. He had been 36 year"„
a solicitor, and once resided in Stone-buildings, Lincoln's lell'
He did not know Proctor, and was not an agent for the Ca°.
terbury petition. He had given his opinion on the Canterbury
case, having been confidentially consulted.

The witr;ess was then ordered to withdraw and
John Phillips Bevan was called in, and deposed that be had
been applied to by Mr. Benbow to become surety in an elec-
tion petition, and that he should feel obliged by his obtain'
d
for him also a second surety, and he said he would, and gl%a
his own name and that of Mr. Proctor. Had described
~kr.r
Proctor as of South Bank, Regent's Park, gentleman. .s"lr.
Proctor lived in that neighbourhood as a gentleman, possess-
ing a villa, surrounded by grounds, which were his own Pr°;
perty. He did not fist ask the consent of Mr. Proctor,
from his long knowledge of him, was justified in putting Pri..
Pr-
name down. He had put his name down also in the Cant
bury case, but believed that he had then written to him 1430,
the subject. The witness withdrew.
ch
A long and desultory conversation ensued, during cri,hi„o
Mr. Bevan was called in twice or thrice, and ordered as e". 4
to retire; and the short-hand writer had to read his notes -
the evidence three times to the House.
a
Mr. Bevan was again recalled, and in his re-examiltatio
said it was his personal respect for Mr. Benbow that intle,ee,
him to become surety at his request, and that he expected °-
remuneration whatever for doing so.
On the motion of Mr. MACLEAN,
The witness Proctor was then called in. He stated that
was a bootmaker, residing at South Bank, Regent's Park, abner
carried on business in Exeter-street, Strand. He ftirlar-E,
stated that he had resided in the former place for nine Year
and was in business in the latter for a period of 18 or 19 ; ;ad
he bad two freeholds, one of which was in the country:. ed
that he bad become surety on the strength of a letter real'
from Mr. Bevan. 11
In reply to a series of questions put by Mr. MA CL E
The witness said that the Hon. Member for Cheshire,, to
E. J. Stanley, Secretary of the Treasury) had sent for hi b°
his house; that he had had a conversation with him ellicor
subject of the sureties to this petition, and that the Hones for-
her had taken a copy of Mr. Bevan's letter to him. De for
ther added that he was bootmaker to the Hon. Member
Cheshire, which caused considerable merriment on the -
terial side of the House. • as
Mr. LEADER deprecated such a course of proceeds gor
Oen
that pursued in the examinin of the winess. Its te- idietr
was to throw discredit on the House andt bring it into r
bus diute.
Mr. STANLEY said that the Hon. Member for Oifol4
seemed to think he had found a mare's nest.—( A laugh_;)o, to
Mr. MACLEAN thought more justice would be ling it
the case if Hon. Members attended to it, in place of male
a subject of merriment. Mr.
A conversation then ensued, in which Mr. Jervis, the
Stanley, Mr. Godson, Mr. Ormsby Gore, Mr. Harve;',lioa-
Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir T. Fremantle, Mr. A
by, Sir R. Inglis, and Mr. M. J. O'Connell took part'
The House then divided, when there appeared-
-86
For the motion
56
Against it
Majority
DUCHESS OF KENT'S ANNUITY.

On our re-admission to the gallery we found of the'
Colonel SIBTHORP inquiring why the Chancellor ehess
Exchequer had not brought forward the grant to the ti-
of Kent before so late an hour ? •J tbst
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER sair re''
he had no controul. He was as anxious as anybody to P
coed with the Bill, but there were other Orders before it-00,
Sir G. SINCLAIR said that he hoped the Right
Gentleman did not mean to bring on the Bill at two or Wl.'
o'clock in the morning.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said' iler-
tainly not.

Wm. Merryweat
hweather DUDLEY
TurnerE LwEasCeTallleOdNto. A ie
answer let
to questions from Mr. Pr and Sir T. Fremant
said that he had applied tothe S to enter
Speaker's Secretary ,_.e.
into recomnizances, and was informed that 'oe was too 18;
the lnr, se-,
Be was a'Barrister by profession, and had drawn up his bad
petition. He had no agent, but he understood the time g
b e
been enlarged to the 26th of December; but this mornin
heard, for the first time, that he was too late.
The witness having withdrawn, the 20th
Mr. PRYME m,ved that the time be enlarged to
of December. General,
After a short discussion, in which the Solicitor- a the
Mr. P. Thomson, and the Attorney-General, supporrete,
_cid,
motion, and Sir T. Fremantle, Mr. Maclean, Mr. F sell
Sir 11. llardinge, and Sir G. Sinclair, opposd it.
The House then divided when the numbers were---__
.............
For the motion ................... ••• 5.!
Against it .............................................. ..22f36
M.ijority ............................
SLIGO ELECTION.
On the re-admission of strangers,case of the
Mr. MAULE was on his legs, arguing the
_ e given
Sligo Petition. Though different interpretations tvoe_ridbe of
in the legal instruments to the word 4, day," ite:.f.vs were
no use now to enter upon that point, as the fourte (~.7
ecogni-
' d that the r
clearly passed, and the Speaker had decide

zances were not entered into. The Hon. and Learned Gen-
Vernan then went on to argue, from the provisions of the Gren-
ville Act, that it was competent to the House to enlarge the
time, upon proper cause being shown. The ground upon
which he would rest his application was, to give an opportu-
nity to the parties of entering into a better and less doubtful
form of surety than that adopted. The only thing necenary
Would be to substitute one name for another on a sheet of
Parchment. He moved that Mr. Potter be called in.
Colonel SIBTHORP rose, and moved, as an amendment,
the adjournment of the House till to-morrow (this day).
Mr. WARBURTON wished to know from the Chair whe-
ther, if they then delayed calling the witness, they could pro-
ceed with the question at another time?
Sir H. II ARDINGE considered that the Speaker, who
had acted with such impartiality in this matter, ought to be
requested to state to the House his opinion whether the time
could Le enlarged or not?
The SPE AKER said he would not express any opinion
upon the subject, but would merely state that the witness had
presented one set of recognizances which wore not formal, and
upon being informed of the fact took from his pocket a set that
was formal.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman then called
the attention of the House to the fact that the question before
the House was a motion for adjournment.
Mr. P. THOMSON recommended an adjournment of the
case, as the debate upon it would be a protracted one.
After a few words from Mr. Mauls, Sir H. Hardinge, Sir
T. Fremantle, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
Colonel SIBTHORP withdrew his motion, and

Mr. v Potter was called and examined. Tlie following was
the result of the examination :—The witness stated that he
lived in Dublin ; that he was the agent in the Sligo, Porter-
lington, and Carrickfergus petitions ; that he sent once to his
partner in Dublin printed forms to be filled up ; that in the
Carrickfergus case the recognizances had been sent him, both
joint and separate ; that he had been most anxious, to have
good recognizances and good forms in all the cases : that the
blanks in the printed forms were filled up ; that he took with
him to the Speaker's Secretary the recognizances in the
Carrickfergus c: ;e, believing them to- be quite right ; that
he handed in the separate recognizances to the Speaker's
Secretary ; that he handed in those which were not in
conformity with the forms of the House, without having read
them first ; that be had referred to them since, and con-
fessed he had been in error; that, from his general knowledge
of law, he believed the recognizance, were such as would
be binding on the sureties ; that he did not know whether
costs could be recovered upon them, although he believed they
could be estreated ; that he had sent in the printed forms
which had been given to him by the officer of the House ;
that he had examined them, but not with the schedule
of the Grenville Act before him ; that he ha 1 such a
general knowledge of the forms of the House as to
know that they corresponded with them ; that he
had no communication with his partner as to how the blanks
were to be filled up in the forms ; that he was aware there
were joint and separate forms ; that the written forms he sent
over to Dublin were filled up ; that he bad handed in the re-
cognizances in the Portarlington and Carrickfergus cases on
Friday, and the Sligo on Monday; that he had received the
recognizances of Patrick Welch on Wednesday morning ; did
not know one Galogher ; that there were fcur petitioners, of
whom he had seen not one ; that he knew a petition had been
sent by one Nelson; that he had had no communication with
any of the parties on the sul)ject of remuneration. Did not
know Mr. Jones, the petitioner ; had been in England only
three weeks ; that the petitioner Jones was in daily communi-
cation with witness's partner in Dublin; that he was not aware
whether the order on the petition of Jones had been discharged
by the Speaker; that he had not yet applied for an extension
of time to put in the recognizances ; that the petition was pre-
sented on the 4th of December; that it would fall to the
ground on the 19th unless the time were extended ; that he
did not know what arrangement his partner had made with re-
spect to costs, but that he expected to be remunerated like all
other professional:persons for his services ; that he knew nothing
of the petitioners in the Carrickfergus case, but that a party
who had come ova- from Belfast for the purpose had employed
him to put in the recognizances ; that the sureties had justified
in both eases, but not in the Port arlington case ; that he knew
from the Votes that the order on the petition of Lawler and
Gorman had been discharged by the Speaker, but that the
Votes did not show that the petition presented by Jones had
been disposed of; that there was a clerical error in the recog-
nizances in that case, but that, in his judgment, it was one
which, on motion, that House would hare allowed to be cor-
rected.

The witness having withdrawn,
.Mr. M AULE said that, a7ter the evidence which the wit-
/lessee had given, he did not think it necessary to say more
than that those who heard that evidence must be satisfied that
the error in the recognizances was a perfectly accidental one.
The Hon. and Learned Member then moved that the time for
putting in the recognizances of the petitioners and sureties
in the case of the Sligo petition be enlarged to ten days.
Mr. MACLEAN said that he must object to the propo-
sition of his Hon. and Learned Friend on the several grounds
of the inconvenient precedent which such a course would
establish, and the gross and culpable negligence of which the
witness, even according to his own showing, had been guilty.
He had admitted that he knew the form of recognizance which
Cie Act required, but, notwithstanding this, he had not been
at the slightest trouble to ascertain whether those which he
delivered were correct or not.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
after the evidence which they had heard it was impossible any
ese could say that there was the least ground fur imputing
an.fairness in this case. For his own part, he must say that he
wester knew of a case more free from imputation, and he
therefore hoped the House would grant the indulgence which
was asked for, and which could not be denied without injustice.
Colonel PE RCE VAL observed that it would he his duty
to leave the House, but before he withdrew he was anxious to
bear the Speaker state the opinion which he entertained on
the disputed question of law.—(Cries of " Oh, oh,” and
" No, no.")
Captain FORRESTER said they had now arrived at a
time of night when they should adjourn, and he must there-
fore move the adjournment of the debate until to-morrow.
The House divided on this motion, and the numbers were—
For the adjournment
Against it 69
Majority —42
On our re-admission to the gallery we found the SPEAKER
putting the original question.
Mr. FITZROY moved, as an amendment, that the House
do now adjourn.
Mr. YOUNG did not think that by such a motion the po-
sition of the minority was likely to be bettered. He wished
the matter to be decided at once, and as2far as he was con-
cerned he should vote only in accordance with that which was
his own conscientious conviction as to the justice of the case.
—( Hear, hear.) The testimony which the witness had given
had failed to satisfy him that there had not been gross and
culpable negligence on the part of the witness ; and, as that
was the conclusion at which he had arrived, he must say that
the case was one in which indulgence ought not to be given.
—( Hear, hear.)
The SPEAKER asked whether the Hon. Member for
Lewes meant to divide ?
Mr. FITZROY replied that he did.
Mr. FRE SHFIELD hoped the Hon. Gentleman would
slot do so, as the consequence of an adjournment of the House
would inflict serious injury on the parties in other cases.
Mr. FITZROY then moved that the debate be adjourned.
Mr. ELLICE did not think the course which the Hon.
Gentleman had taken would look well in the eyes of the
.country.—( Hear.) He hoped the matter would be brought
to a conclusion that night ; but if it came to a vote' he must
Say that he would act on the same principle which had go-
verned the vote which he gave last night. He thought then,
and it was still his opinion, that they had no power to afford
relief after twelve o'clock on the last night. The Grenville
Act was passed for the protection of the sitting Member, but,
at all events, there had been such gross neglect in the present
case as ought to induce the House to refuse the indulgence
sought for.—( Hear.)
Mr. AI ACLE AN agreed that no advantage would be ob-
tained by the adjournment of the debate, and therefore he
hoped his Hon. Friend would withdraw his motion.
Mr. FITZROY said that, as be was always anxious to com-
ly with the wish of the House, he should at once withdraw
his motion.
Mr. COURTENA Y said he entertained a very decided
opinion with respect to the construction of the Act of Par-
liament, and he was quite satisfied that it did not justify the
I:louse in the course they were now called upon to take. The
Act of Parliament provided that in all cases where the recog-
nizances had not been perfected within the fourteen days. the
order should stand discharged, unless upon matters specially
Stated upon oath. Now, surely the evidence at the Bar of
the House could not be held sufficient. The special matters
mentioned in the Act could not be held to mean an admission
of negligence or ignorance. There ought to be some swat-
ters of fact proved, to show a satisfactory reason for enlarg-
ing the time. That had not been done, and ho did not think
that any construction of the Act of Parliament would warrant
the House in acceding to this motion.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, and the num-
bers were—
For the motion 55
Against the motion
Majority for the motion —3s
During the exclusion of strangers it appeared to have been
moved that there should be a similar extension of time with
respect to the Portarlington petition, and on our return to the
Gallery we we found
Mr. KEMBLE on his legs. He protested against the in-
troduction of a new subject of debate at that advanced hour,
and we understood the Hon. Member to move that the peti-
tion should be taken into consideration this day.
Mr. WOUL FE contended that there was nothing in this
ca•se to lead to discussion. The same set of facts applied to
law:h cases. They had heard the evidence, and they were
beer sly to come to a decision.
The SPEAKER said he thought that, for the purf ose of
Th.eintsining the forms of the House, it would be necessary
that the witness should be re-called and examined.
Colonel PE RCE VAL said before the House came to any
decision on _this question there was one point to which, as a
becessary consequence of his situation, he begged to call their
attention. It was necessary that the day after the recog-
bizances were entered into he should hand in a statement of
116 qualification. As a certain enlargement of time had been
granted to the petitioners, whom he knew to be paupers, he
hoped the House would extend the time for handing in his
qualificatism, and be trusted that •some lion. Friend would
Move that this act of justice be' extended to him. He was
teady to hand in his qualification at that moment, but he did
hat wish to do so until these recognizances should be completed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
'aid not think that there could be any intention to subject
the Hen. Member for Sligo to any disadvantage that be
:Vould not have been exposed to before, and he was sure that