The Sun.
London, England, 1853-04-06 00:00:00

town. He asked, then, should they withhold the writ ?
Surely, they were not to suppose that the guilt of whole
communities in the absence of some presumption against
them ; and if no party had come forward from the borough,
and no member of the committee had thought it devolved
upon him to be present, it was certainly neither equitable
nor just, on suspicions so inadequate and so impalpable in
their nature, to deprive all the inhabitants of the town of
their franchise. From these considerations, as well as for
the dignity and consistency of the house, he ventured to
urge the honourable member for Wolverhampton not to
press his motion. Though the writ was issued, any
necessary inquiry into corrupt practices might take
place.
Mr. H. DRUMMOND never had taken part in these
discussions, but was always surprised that the hon. gentle-
men who did so had adopted measures so inadequate for
their purpose as they had. He hoped, however, that the
noble lord's (Lord J. Russell) measure would consider all
these points together. One thing struck him as very re-
markable, that in almost all these petitions they had
punished the innocent members and had let off the guilty
agents. (Hear.) That seemed very extraordinary. They
did nothing to the attorneys who were at the root of the
evil, who played with the members as if they were playing
at the game of chess. These things should be considered.
on some general system, and he hoped the noble lord would
not lose sight of them. He did not see how, after giving
the notice in this case, they could help acting upon it.
Lord STANLEY thought the manner in which they
dealt with these cases was, on the whole, most unsatisfac-
tory. He once had some connection with Lancaster, and
believed that corruption did prevail among the freemen ;
but it was absolutely necessary that in these, as in other
matters, they should act on some fixed and definite prin-
ciples. The rule laid down by the house was, that they
were not to act unless the committee or the inhabitants of
the borough required their intervention. Here they had.
neither a petition from the inhabitants nor a recommenda-
tion from the committee ; therefore, he thought they were
not justified in suspending the writ, though at the same
time he was glad to hear that they were not precluded by
the issue of the writ from further inquiry. From what he
knew of the borough, he thought such inquiry desirable.
Mr. THORNELY withdrew his amendment, and. the
original motion was agreed to.
It was resolved, on the motion of Mr. W. BROWN,
that the following reports of committees should be reprintf3d,
viz. —Report on the Police of the Metropolis, 1817 ;
Report on the Police of the Metropolis, 1822 ' • Report ,on
the Sale of Beer, 1830 ; Report on the Sale of Beer, jru ie
21, 1833 ; Report on Victualling House Licences, 183; ; ;
Report on the Sale of Beer, with the Queries and Anna, rs
from the Chairman of Quarter Sessions, and the Chaplal us
of County Gaols, 1850.
COMBINATION OF WORKMEN BILL.

Mr. DRUMMOND moved the second reading of ti ie
Combination of Workmen Bill. An act had formerly bed 3n
passed on this subject, the object of which was to pi; .ce
masters and men on precisely the same footing. To timit
enactment—a dispute having arisen—the judges had re-
cently given different interpretations, and this was a de-
claratory measure to define the real meaning origin ally
intended.

_______
Mr. HUME said it was simply declaratory, and (;on-
tained but one clause. He hoped the house would a gree
to it.

Lord PALMERSTON did not object to the second read-
ing, but wished to reserve to himself the right of consider-
ing whether the bill agreed with the act it professed to ex-
plain. He knew some doubt had arisen as regarded the
construction of the word " molestation," but though it
would be exceedingly wrong to alter the existing act so as
to permit that kind of molestation which, without • a.-ny
actual violence, hinders men from their work. He ha. Ino
objection to the general object of the bill.
The bill was then read a second time—to be commi tied
on that day week.
The Sheriffs' Court (Scotland) Bill was read a se( xmd
time—to be committed on the 14th inst.
The house then adjourned at ten o'clock.