The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-10 00:00:00

stated in power they would not impose a property tax on
Ireland. (Opposition cheers.) This seems to me a trans-
action so iniquitous in its character—(laughter and cheers)
—so directed against the principles of the British constitu-
tion, and so contrary to the practice of the house, that
some further notice ought to be taken of it. A member
who had given only 12s. a-week, for which ample work had
to be done, was held guilty of corruption ; and the hon.
member for Bridgenorth, who had 22 charges of bribery
through his agents brought against him, was exonerated
from them all, except one, which was a charge of having
through his agents paid a bill due on account of a former
election. Purity is expected in the system of election--
uprightness and integrity on the part of the electors ; and
the electors are justified, if there is so keen a scrutiny as
regarded the constituencies, in asking that the members
shall not be found guilty of taking anything in the shape
of a bribe, whether place, pension, or money. This case is
especially one of those gross cases with which hon. gentle-
men opposite would, I think, have been revolted. ("Hear,
hear," from the Opposition.) The earliest opportunity
should have been given to Ministers of repudiating, ex-
plaining, or denying the charge. I would, therefore, re-
spectfully ask the hon. member for Westmeath, whether
he will state that such an overture was made as he alleged
on Friday, and that such a promise was given as that no
income tax should be imposed on Ireland if the Whigs
received the loaves and fishes by the votes of certain mem-
bersa dva
no
tf
atghee ;
butlrish
thereparty.
w a
sI
ahno poeb
jln
nhave notto
thetaken
ire
wunfair
I tendered.

Captain 3IAGAN.— -I believe, Mr. Speaker, the hon.
member has no strict right to put this question to me
at all. The rules of the house are, I believe, that
the question should be put, by order of the house,
through you. In the second place, I think I am un-
fairly treated by the honourable gentleman ; for if he
had considered one moment he would at once have seen
that a question of this sort, involving such grave conside-
rations, ought to have been placed openly and fairly on the
paper. If it had been so I should have answered it. I can
assure the hon. gentleman that he is completely mistaken
in all the facts he has stated with respect to this matter.
Lord J. RUSSELL—After what the hon. gentleman has
stated, I think it right to say a few words in consequence
of an impression which appears to rest on the mind of the
hon. gentleman. He seems to think that some person was
authorised by the Whig party, when the late Government
was in power, to make some contract to the effect that they
would not try to impose au income tax on Ireland if those
Irish members would vote against the late Government. I
have only to say that, according to my knowledge and be-
lief, there was no person authorised to make such a con-
tract, and no such contract was made with the Irish party.
Lord A.VANE—As the subject has been commented on
in the public prints, I must submit whether, in justice to
the Government, the hon. member for Westmeath should
not assign the grounds on which he made that statement,
and also name the accredited agents to whom reference was
made.

Captain MAGAN—I did hear there was an intention to
bring forward the question, but a notice should have been
put on the paper. None has been so, and therefore I should
have been placed in the awkward position of being called
on to give the names of gentlemen who might be absent, if
hon. members could have found me stupid enough to strike
a man behind his back.

Colonel DUNNE—I don't think the scene very creditable
to the house. As an Irish member, I have felt deeply the
observations made in various newspapers with respect to
the conduct of Irish members. If Irish members made
such a bargain, it would be nothing disorderly. If I were
going to support a Government, I should like to have some
knowledge of their intentions. The way in which the Irish
members have been spoken of is most shameful; there is no
libel so base that a man will not write it for pay. All the
Irish members are lumped together ; no exceptions are
made. . - -

Mr. MALINS—I think the credit of the house is con-
cerned. I heard the hon. member for Westmeath state
that a party of Irish members sitting abovestairs had been
waited on by accredited agents of the Whig and Peelite
party, and had this proposal made to them :—" If you
vote to turn out the Government of Lord Derby we shall
engage to keep the income tax off Ireland." If that be a
correct statement it conveys a grave imputation on the
great party which is now the Government of this country.
(Hear.) Is it decent or proper that such imputations
should pass unnoticed ? There is not an hon. gentleman
who does not know who those accredited agents are. It is
due to all parties that the imputation should be verified or
repelled.
Lord J. RUSSELL—I stated, that to the best of my
knowledge and belief, no accredited agents of the Whig
party made such a proposal. I ask the hon. member who
has just sat down whether he believes me or does not be-
lieve me ? (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Does the hon.
gentleman mean that accredited agents of the Whig party
made such agreement or bargain ; or, if he does not mean
that, let him state who it is that he does mean ? (Hear.)
Mr. MALINS—The noble lord's statement is, that he
did not authorise such an offer. The question, however,
was, whether such accredited agents made it.
Mr. G. MOORE—We are unnecessarily beating about
the bush. I myself know nothing about the transaction,
and was in no way influenced by any declaration of the
kind. I shall go directly to the point by asking the hon.
member for Wells what he has to state on the subject.

Mr. HAYTER—I am extremely obliged to the hon gen-
tleman for bringing this question to an issue. I certainly
have some reason to complain of the hon. member for Cam-
bridgeshire. I saw him as I entered the house. I asked
him if he was going to put any question on this matter.
He told me that he had submitted a notice, that there was
an informality, and therefore he was unable to ask the
question in the form and the terms in which he originally
designed to ask it. I begged him then to put the question
in a formal manner, so that I might be enabled to give
a plain answer to a plain question—(hear)—and, if the
hon. gentleman had had the courtesy to comply with that
request, much of that which has painfully passed in this
house would have been altogether spared. The hon. gen-
tleman, when I was not present, took occasion to refer to
that matter, and I trust the house will not for a moment
believe that I in the slightest degree shrink from giving
a positive answer. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for
the county of Wicklow also came this evening and said he
was about to ask me the same question; I told him I should
be obliged to him if he would defer it till to-morrow, be-
cause then I should know what the distinct charge was,
which up to this moment I don't know. (A cry of "Oh !")
I told him also that I was desirous of communicating with
another hon. member before giving an answer to a charge
apparently involving some question relating to him. (A
cry of "Oh !") No arrangement seems to have been made
between those two hon. gentlemen. I never yet had a
positive, distinct question, put to me. But I now under-
stand the hon. member for Cambridgeshire to say that
some person, alleging himself to be an agent of the party
now called the Whig party, some time during the financial
statement of the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, took
on himself to attend a body of Irish gentlemen, and state
that he was authorised to make this proposal—namely, that
if they gave their votes for the purpose of overthrowing
the late Government, the Government likely to be founded
on its ruins should undertake not to impose an income-tax
on Ireland. I never was authorised by any person or any
body of perfons to make any such communication to any
person or any party. (Hear, hear.) I never did attend any
meeting of any kind in my life of the Irish gentlemen.
(Hear, hear.) I never stated to any person, at any time,
that I was authorised in any manner to state, that in the
event of the Government of Lord Derby being overthrown,
the Goverment to be substituted in its place would under-
take not to impose an income tax on Ireland. If the hon.
gentleman had put the question plainly before me, as he
ought to have done, I should have given him an answer
before. (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
Mr. BALL—I did put the question fairly and fully last
Friday.
Captain MAGAN—The mistake made is in taking for
granted that I mean the hon. member opposite. (Great
laughter.) The words were these :—I spoke in the plural
number. I don't think the hon. member is in the plural
number. (Laughter.) I spoke of gentlemen usually
called accredited agents. To use " accredited" was a
stretch of conscience. They were three private Irish
members of Parliament. (Name.) I will not name ; I
will put a notice on the paper, in order to give them an
opportunity of offering explanations. As reaards the hon.
meMber for Cambridgeshire, lam not surprised at the sen-
sitiveness which that hon. gentleman has evinced, for
nothing can be more odious or detestable than that persons
having gained an object by making promises should after-
wards refuse to carry those promises out. (Hear, hear.)
When we look back and observe the way in which the late
Whig Administration was displaced by Lord Derby's Go-
vernment, on the strength of their promising to a particu-
lar party that they should have protection ; and that as
soon as that noble lord and his friends obtained power
those promises were abandoned, it was enough to make
men sensitive as to the conduct of men who have once
placed themselves under pledges. (Hear.)
Mr. G. MOORE—After what has just taken place, I
think it right to say that, having heard that the right hon.
member for Wells (Mr. Hayter) was the hen. member re-
ferred to in the course of this discussion, I thought it but
fair to appeal to that right hon. gentleman in order at once
to terminate the debate. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. KNOX had understood that three Irish members
had waited upon the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Hayter)
by way of deputation, and that they were authorised by
him to make the statement which had been made by the
hon. member for Cambridgeshire.
Mr. HAYTER—I wish the hon. gentleman who intro-
duced this subject had mentioned what has now just been
stated by the hon. member for Marlow, that I might have
answered it. I will answer it now, and say that no such
circumstance ever occurred. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. WORTLEY.—I think the House ought to feel
much obliged to the right hon. gentleman for the explana-
tion he has given, and I do trust we have now done with
this unworthy matter. (Hear, hear.) I think every gen-
tleman who has a regard for the character of this House
can entertain but one opinion as to this story, which, as it
turns out, is utterly unfounded. (Hear, hear.) I hope the
question will now be put an end to. (Hear.)
Here'the subject dropped.
DISFRANCHISEMENT OF PERSONS EMPLOYED
IN HER MAJESTY'S DOCKYARDS.
Sir F. BARING, seeing that his noble friend (Lord J.
Russell) had a notice to move for leave to bring in a bill to
disable persons employed in her Majesty's dockyards and
gun wharfs and other civil establishments of the Admiralty
and Ordnance from voting at elections of members to servo
in Parliament for certain boroughs, wished to ask whether
it was his Intention to make that motion before the evidence
taken by the dockyards committee was printed? The house
know nothing of that evidence yet. He had reason to sup-
pose that the measure to be proposed by the noble lord was
actually founded upon the evidence given before that com-
mittee. If so, then it would be impossible for the house
fairly to discuss the subject without referring. to that evi-
dence. If he were to refer to newspaper evidence before
the committee made their report, ho should be very properly
called to order. He considered it unfair that any, steps
should be taken to disfranchise these persons until the evi-
inee e had been produced ; and therefore he thought that
the motion of the noble lord ought to be adjourned till the
committee had made their report.
Lord J. RUSSELL begged, in the first place, to say, in
answer to his right hon. friend, that the bill he (Lord J.
Russell) intended to introduce was not all founded upon
the inquiry now going on before the dockyards committee.
With respect to postponing the motion, the only objection
he should have to it was, that it must necessarily protract
the business of the session. The boroughs which he in-
tended to include in the bill were Chatham and Rochester,
Greenwich, Sandwich, Portsmouth, Devonport, Plymouth,
Harwich, and Pembroke. He would postpone moving the
introduction of the bill till Friday se'nnight.