The Sun.
London, England, 1853-04-12 00:00:00

THE CANTERBURY COMMISSION.

The Earl of ABERDEEN moved that the house
should agree to the address which, had been adopted .3,
the House of Commons, praying that a commission
should be appointed to inquire into the corrupt practices
that had prevailed at the last election, grid at previous
elections, for the city of Canterbury. He hoped their
lordships would have no difficulty, in giving their assent
to this address, as well as to others that are before the
house of a similar description, and to those which here-
after. might come before them. (Hear, hear.) Their
lordships had always declared their willingness to Co-
operate with the other house in endeavouring to diminish
and check by every means in their power those corrupt
practices at elections of which they and the whole
country complained. (Hear, hear.) The time was filly
come when something should be done on this subject—
(hear, hear)—because if matters continued to go on as at
present, a serious blow would be struck at the very
principle of the representative system in this country.
(Hear, hear.) He knew that some pergons were accius-
[
tomed to view with' comparative carelesiness those p c-
tices, and to undervalue their importance • if so, he
thought they were greatly mistaken. (Hear, In
his opinion the people of this country generally 100 ed
with increased disgust on the frequency and gro h
of those corrupt practices at elections. (II ar,
hear.) Even the lowest of the people were in *g-
r,l nant at those practices. (Hear, hear.) The pens
who were deprived of the franchise themse es
were indignant at the manner in which it was used by
those parties in possession of it. (Hear, hear.) T ey
were told that the evil had not increased, and tha it
had existed to an equal amount in former times. at
might be so, though he greatly doubted the fact ; but,
sat all events, even if that were the case, what did it
prove ? It might prove that the- practice of fortner
times was worse than they imagined it to have ben •
but, at all events, it could not diminish the enormit of
that which they now saw before their eyes. (H ar,
hear.) He did not think it necessary to enter into de-
tails of the evidence that was on their lordship's to le ; ,
indeed, he thought it would have been much bette if
their lordships had left all that preliminary part of the
proceedings to the House of Commons. (Hear, he'r.)
If it consisted of materials on which they were to found
legislative measures, then,indeed, it would be necessary
to go minutely into the whole case, and to see how far
it wou',' bear out any enactment which they might be
called upon to make on the subject ; but he merely
looked upon it as laying the grounds for inquiry, iind
for inquiry alone. (Hear, hear.) To such inquiry he
hoped i'r.;3r would at once agree, reserving to thpm-
selves the power of dealing with any measure to which
that inquiry might possibly give rise. (Hear, hear.) Ille
'had been told, but he scarcely supposed it probable, that
t
an objection might be taken to the course which: he
proposed, arising', out of the terms of the repor of
the committee of the House of Commons, i as-
much as the report of the' committee did not m-
body the, precise terms of the act of last year, ro-
viding for the better inquiry into the existence of or-
rupt practices at elections. The committee repo d,
" that a system of bribery and corruption, by means
of coloured tickets, prevailed at the last election, i,n4l
at prefous elections generally ;" whereas the words of
it
the ad required; he committee to report " that bri ery
extensively prevailed." The House of Commons, tu-
rally taking-what appeared to be a common-sense *ew
of the case, considered that where bribery was ys-
tematic and, general it was extensive ; therefore the
adopted the words of the act in the address which they
had sent up to their lordships, very properly it appeared
to him to comply with the terms of the act, and in their
address they alleged that bribery did extensively pre-
vail in the city of Canterbury. (Hear, hear). In doing
so they adopted substantially the words of the repo .t of
the committee, which stated the bribery to have een
systematic and general. (Hear, hear). He shout re-
gret very much if an objection so purely technic as
that, and which was not sustained when the subject ;was
mooted in the House of Commons, should bo ma Z in
their lordships' house. (Hear, hear). He thought uch
a proceeding would seriously endanger the belief in eir
lordships' sincerity in co-operating effectually fort the
suppression of corrupt practices at elections. (fear,
hear). It could not be urged as an objection whieh at
all had any application to the spirit of the proceedings
that had been adopted, but would only serve to place
that house in the eyes of the public in a position in
which he should be very sorry to see it. (Hear, hear).
He hoped, therefore, that their lordships would agree in
the address to her Majesty which was sent up from the
House of Commons, for, the purpose of appointing a
commision to inquire into the proceedings at the election
for the city of Canterbury.
Lord LYNDHURST said that no man felt more
strongly than he did the necessity of putting an end to
corrupt practices at elections, but he wished to call the
attention of their lordships to an irregularity in the
address which in his opinion was fatal to it. The address
stated that a committee of the House of Commons had
reported that extensive bribery bad prevailed at the last
election at Canterbury ; but he found that no such
report had ever been presented, and they were therefore
asked to tell her Majesty what was in terms a direct
falsehood. The act of Parliament required that before
an address of this kind should be presented, a committee
of the House of Commons should have reported that
" extensive" bribery had prevailed at an election ' • but
the committee, in this instance, had only reported that
bribery was systematic and general ; but bribery might
be systematic and yet not extensive, and the word gene-
rally must be taken to mean that it had prevailed
generally and usually at former elections. (Hear.)
The committee was the only tribunal which could
judge of the fact whether bribery had been exten-
sive. It had not been so reported, and he protested
against a precedent, which might afterwards be turned to
a mischievous purpose, being laid down of either house
being allowed to conclude for itself that bribery had been
extern ' ,-e, when it had not so been reported by the com-
mittee.

The LORD CHANCELLOR hoped that their lore-
ships would not be deterred from 'agreeing to this ad-
dress by the authority of the noble and learned lord.
Although the committee had Not reported in the exact
words of the act that extensive bribery had prevailed,
yet their report did, in point of fact, amount to that.
Nay, he would go further, and say that the words gene-
ral and systematic were far more stringent and forcible
than the word " extensive," which, after all, did not
mean "to a great'extent." _

Lord STAEONARDS said that this was a mere
question (4 law whether or not they were justified in
agreeing, to this address. Under the act of Parliament
they were empowered to join in an address in cases
where a committee of the House of •Commons had re-
ported that bribery was extensive, and without such re-
port they could not stir or move a step. No such re-
port had been made in this case, and he contended,

therefore, that they had no power to join in any such
address as this.

Lord CAMPBELL said that the house were now in
a very grave position. The other house had passed an
address to the Crown, in which it was represented to
her Majesty that a select committee of the House of
Commons had reported that bribery and corrupt przp.
tices had extensively prevailed at the last and previo,
election for the city of Canterbury. To that address
their lordships' assent was asked, and. they were now
hesitating as to whether the House of Commons had not
represented an untruth to the Crown. He trusted
that their lordships would not suffer in the public esti-
mation by differing from the House of Commons on such
a subject. He believed that both houses were equally
desirous that all such corrupt practices shall be put an
end to, and that the most effectual mode of doing so was
by putting this act of parliament into full operation.
(Hear, hear.)
Lord ST. LEONARDS said that as the repoit,

on which the address was founded was that of an elec-
tion committee, it must, in order to comply with the
terms of the act, refer to the last election, and state the
corrupt practices to have extensively prevailed then, be
i -
cause the committee had no power to inquire into
past elections.
Lord REDEStALE said that the noble and learned
lord who had just 'addressed the house had said that it
was unfortunate that the committee of the house did not
use the words described in the act, 'and that he hoped
that this oversight would dot occur on a future occasion.
He (Lord Redesdale) agreed with him in these remarks,
and thought thatno committee which intended to make
a report that would subject a borough to an inquiry of
this sort would be likely again to commit the same
error ; but the true and only mode by which to secure
a borough. against an unjust, and oppressive, and tyran-
nical decision of a. majority in parliament was to say that
they would insist upon the report of the committee con-
taming the precise words used in the act of parliament.
By postponing their assent to this address they did not
prevent an inquiry being made into the prevalence of
bribery at Canterbury. The same members as had eon-
stituted the former committee might be directed by the
House of Commons to report, without taking fur.