The Sun.
London, England, 1838-06-07 00:00:00

William Goodwin, my clerk, with instructions to lodge it
with the Clerk of the Committees before twelve o'clock
that night, according to the direction of the order, dated
December, 1837 ; my clerk returned about half past twelve
o'clock, and stat,d that he had been at the Clerk of the
Committee's office ; that he had found no one there ;
that there was a lamp burning there, but no person to whom
to give the list ; desired him to return immediately, and if he
found any cne there to leave with him the list ; was afterwards
informed by his clerk that he found a messenger in the lobby
of the House, who informed him that during the first six
weeks the clerk of the Committees remained in his office until
twelve o'clock, but that afterwards he went away at eight ; saw
the clerk next morning, who said that he had put the list un-
der the door ; went next day myself to the Committee-room
at ten o'clock ; asked the messenger if the list had not
been placed under the door; he brought it and laid it on the
table, and it was afterwards taken up by the clerk of the Com-
mittees ; I immediately caused a copy of the list to be made
cut, and had it sent to Mr. Coppock, the agent for the sitting
Member, that day (Saturday); sent also a letter, of which
this is a cony.
Mr. oto N NEL L objected to the reception of the letter.
Anything that had occurred after the day in question could
not be received. The matter lay narrowly in whether by the
tic fault of the officer of the House this party had received any
clisalvantage or not.
Sir J. GRAHAM saw the force of the objection of the
Hon. and Learned Member. His object was to show that
Lord Blandford and Isis agent had done everything in their
power.
Mr. Gray, in answer to Mr. O'CONNEL L—lt was not
more than twenty minutes after eleven o'clock when Goodwin
left my office in Bedford-row to go down to the Clerk of the
Committees' office.
The witness was then ordered to withdraw. _ _ _

Mr. Goodwin was then called in, and examined by Sir J.
GRAHAM. He deposed that he went before the hour of
twelve o'clock on Friday, the Ist of June, to the room which
he had been told was the Committee Clerks' office ; but he
Lund no person there, neither was there any person in the
room called the Election-office to whom he could deliver the
list of objections.
The witness was examined by Messrs. O'Connell, E. Stan-
ley, Aglionby, the Attorney. General, and the Chancellor of
the Exchequer; but his answers were to the same effoet.
Mr. William flardhig gave similar testimony, having ac-
companied the former witness.
Mr. Chalmers, senior clerk of the Committee Clerk's office,
sail that it was the duty of the clerks in the office to receive
lists of objection; the junior clerk was expected to attend until
twelve o'clock ; Charles Frere was the clerk in attendance on
Friday, June I ; the upper room was o:at in which the lists
should be deposited; he did not know if any lists had been
found under the door.

Charles 17z...1.e stated that he had at:eaded the Committee
clerk on the Ist of June, from five until twelve o'clock ; he
attended to receive the exchange lists; he stopped in the inner
office ; there was always a lamp in the other office ; the lamp
was burt,ing there at past twelve o'clock; the order of Mr.
Ley, the. clerk of the house, was, that the lists should be deli-
vered in a room adjoining the Committee clerk's office; he did
not know the room referred to in Mr. Ley's order.
Wiiliam Mitchell stated that on the night in question a per-
son inquired of hint where the Committee Clerk's office was ;
he pointed it out to him ; the person told him there was no
one in the room ; witness said that was strange ; there was a
light there ; it was half-past eleven o'clock.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM considered that the allegation in
the petition was borne out in the evidence. He rested his
case on the fact that the directions of Mr. Ley had not beets
obeyed. The petitioners had done their utmost to comply
with the order, and had failed. He would, therefore, move
that the order to take into consideration the. Woodstock
petition be discharged, and be taken into consideration on
Tuesday.

Mr. AG L lONBY opposed the motion, on the ground that
the usual practice of delivering the lists ,vas contrary to the
order of the clerk.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL did not think that the parties
had displayed much intelligence or used sufficient diligence,
and as the Order of the House had been departed from, he
thought no other course was left them than that pointed out
by the Right Hon. Baronet.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL suggested that the ballot
should take place to-morrow, and no objection made to
the list.
After a brief conversation,

Sir J. GRAHAM said that his Noble Friend (the Mar-
quis of Blandford) had no objection that the ballot should
take place to-morrow, on the honourable understanding that
no objection should be made to the list before the Committee,
—( Hear, hear.)
IRISH CORPORATIONS—TITHES.

On the motion for the House going into Committee on the
Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill,
Sir J. GRAHAM asked, whether it was proposed to go
through all the clauses?

Lo-'d
JOHN RUSSELL replied, that he intended to go
through the Bill clause by clause. He intended to propose
on Monday a resolution respecting tithes, and should endeavour
to have the resolution printed by that time, with a view of
bringing in a Bill upon the subject.
In reply to Sir J. GRAHAM,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he intended going on
with the Corporation Bill before he had any lengthened dis-
cussion on the subject of tithes.
The House then went into Committee. Some amendments
were made. The report was brought up, and oriered to Le
taken into consideration on Monday.
COUNTY-RATES BILL.

Mr. HUME moved the second reading of this Bill. He
complained that, according to the present system, those who
regulated the rates were appointed by those unconnected
with the property which was rated, while those who paid
had no check on the administration of the funds. It was, he
thought, time to put an end to this system. It was his
opinion that the county boards ought to be appointed by the
rate-payers. Great abuses had taken place in the adminis-
tration of county funds, and those abuses the House ought
to correct. An irresponsible body taxed 11,000,000 of people
to the amount of 700,0001. or 800,0001. a year. The prin-
ciple he wished to introduce was, that representation should
be connected with taxation. He complained of the absence
of Members on this occasion. Ho moved the second reading
of the Bill.

Colonel SIBTHORP moved the second reading of the Bill
that day six months.
Lord DUNGANNON supported the amendment.
Mr. R. PALMER said that he felt bound to oppose the
second reading of this Bill, as he for one would be most un-
willing to take away from the County Magistracy all controul
over the county-rates. The Magistrates, through themselves
or their tenants, paid a very large portion of the county-rates,
and Inhere, he should like to know, could they find a body of
men who, on the score of interest, would pay greater atten-
tion to the expenditure of the county-rates than the Magis-
trates, by whom the principal portion was paid ? He must
also add that he had heard no general complaint on the part
of the rate-payers against the present system ; and from the
county with which he was more particularly connected (Berk-
shire) there had been no complaint whatever.
Mr. INGHAM opposed the Bill, because he did not con-
sider that there was any evil whatsoever in the present system
to justify the alteration proposed. Only one petition had been
presented this year in favour of this Bill, and as it had been
now two years before Parliament, if the evils described by the
Honourable Member for Kilkenny really existed, there would
have been a great, if not a general feeling throughout the
country on the subject.
Mr. BROTHERTON supported the Bill, because he was
anxious to see representation go band in hand with taxation.
The Magistrates were eligible under the present Bill, and if
they discharged their duty to the satisfaction of the rate-
payers, there was no doubt but they would be again elected,
and that they would exercise the influence which they now ex-
ercised. There was a general feeling throughout the coun-
try that whenever there was an appointment to be made, or an
office to be disposed of, the County Magistrates attended in
great numbers, but they left the management of the county-
rates in the hands of a select few.

Mr. C. P. VILLIE RS concurred in the concluding ob-
servations of the Hon. Member fur Salford (Mr. Brotherton),
and could state, on the authority of the Chairman of the
Quarter Sessions of Warwick, who, after an experience of 17
years, said that this was the invariable practice pursued by his
Brother Magistrates. In his opinion, the present measure
would be extremely useful, inasmuch as it imposed a responsi-
bility on those who were to have the controul of the county_
rates. At preseut the Magistrates were wholly irresponsible,
There was even no :neans of testing the fitness of the Magis-
tracy to discharge their duties. The only qualification re-
quired for the appointment to the Magistracy was one hun-
dred pounds a-year in land, and the friendship of the Lord-
LicuLnant.—( A laugh.) It was not necessary that a Magis-
trate should have ever looked into a law-book, or have heard
a case tried—no proof of his fitness to the office was required,
and yet this was a class of men to whom was entrusted the
whole controul and direction of the county-rates.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL concurred with the Hon.
Member for Kilkenny that it would be extremely desirable
that there should be some sort of check imposed more effec-
tual than the present one upon the expenditure of the county-
rates, not that lie thought such a check necessary on account
of the misapplication of the funds, but because he thought
it would afford greater satisfaction to the people—( Hear,
hear.) But though he felt this, he felt at the same time
bound to oppose this Bill, because, looking at the Bill as a
practical man, he saw that the machinery of it created
eleven thousand parochial officers and eleven hundred other
officers.—( A laugh.) Now, he must say that the evils that at
present existed would ho more than counterbalanced by any
advantage that would arise under this Bill. He must also
say that the additional responsibility which this Bill imposed
would not be compensated by the increased expense. An-
other reason for not supporting this Bill was this, that the
Magistrates at present had not the power ad libitum of asses-
sing the rate-payers.—( Hear, hear.) The Legislature had
provided that for certain purposes a rate should be made,
and to those purposes the Magistrates must apply the rate,
so that there was a very strict limit upon abuses. On these
grounds he felt hound to oppose the Bill.
Mr. D A RBY denied that Magistrates were irresponsible.
They were responsible to public opinion, and under public
control. Their object was to keep down the county-rates,
and complaints against them were more generally of par-
simony than of lavish expenditure. He should support the
amendment.
Mr. CA YL E Y said that the magistrates were virtually re-
sponsible, because their property was directly involved.—
( Hear, hear.) Whilst be admitted the principle that taxation
and renresentation should go together, he was not prepared to
,aer.), ;., the cumbrous manner proposed by the pre-
sent Bill.
Mr. HUME replied.