The Sun.
London, England, 1838-02-28 00:00:00

it. He apprehended that the House would allow the petition to the Member for Northamptonshire, they were taking ' a
be brought forward, because it related to the subject-matter part in a very shabby motion.—(Cries of hear, hear.) In his
about to be discussed. Another ground on which he was (Mr. Cresswcll's) humble judgment, it did not very well be- e
anxious not to lose the opportunity of presenting the petition, come the Noble Lord to impute to Hon. Members on (the -,,1
was, that he intended to found a motion on it at a subse- Opposition) side of the House any shabbiness in that transac- 1
quent day, and therefore he wished to obtain leave for its tion. And he must take the freedom to call the at-
being
printed. The petition was from Mr. Rigby Wason, tention of the House to the conduct of the Noble Lord with
and referred to the decision of the Committee on the respect to this matter, since the Noble Lord, the Member 1
Ipswich election. He (Mr. Aglionby) bad read the for Northamptonshire first gave notice of his motion in this
petition with the greatest possible attention, and belieeed House. The Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home De- I
there was nothing in it which could be construed into an in- partrnent, thought it becoming him on that occasion
fringement of the Orders of the House. There was nothing to give a conditional notice—( Loud cheers)—that if
improper in it as affecting the character of individual Mem- the House entertained this motion he would bring I
hers, nor any allegation which could render it unfit to be re- forward a motion respecting a Right Reverend Prelate.— 0
ceived. It did not impugn the motives of the Commiitee, or ( Continued cheering.) Now, if the Noble Lord gave that i
allude to the decision of particular individuals. The prayer of it conditional notice, not intending to bring it forward, e_
was that considering the decisions contrary to former decisions, provided the condition was fulfilled, but to offer it as a diver-
and* some of them contrary both to law and common sense, sion in favour of a political ally, at least it was not
the House would take into consideration some means of pre- very dignified proceeding. Or if that Noble Lord, upon that -- -
venting such decisions from being drawn into a precedent, and condition being fulfilled, did intend to prosecute his notice, 1
effect some improvement in the law as regarded election pe- and to call the attention of the House to some supposed offence ei
titions. On these grounds he requested leave to present the committed against its privileges by a Right Rev. Prelate, at .1
petition. As it did not impugn the conduct of any indi- a time long gone by—(Hear)—which was well known to the 3
vidual, he did not intend to move further than that Noble Lord, and which he had not thought it his duty to bring 3
the petition be printed.—(Cries of "ohloh !" from the Op- forward—if it was his intention to bring that before the 4
position.) If there were no opposition to the petition being House, not in the discharge of his public duty, but by way of :
printed, there could be no objection to bringing it up and hay- retaliation—( Cheers)—it was something worse than undigni- I
1
it read by the Clerk.--(Cries of "oh I oh 1") He scarcely fled.—(Repeated cheers.)
knew what Honourable Members meant.—(Cries of " Print Mr. W. WYNN rose and said that the proceeding which e
it.) It was to usual allow Members to state shortly the House was adopting on the present occasion was fully
the substance of petitions.—(Loud cries of " oh, oh.) warranted by the opinions of Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox. The .1
And he claimed the privilege of stating to the House, as only difference in the cases to which he had referred, as sane; ,I
shortly as he could, the nature of the petition which he held tioned by Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox, was the party being called
.f
in his hand. The petition stated there were at the last to the bar or reprimanded in his place. Here was foul per- 1
election for Ipswich four candidates, Messrs. R. Weser), jury imputed to the Members of a Committee of that House,
T. Gibson, 11. Tuffnell, and F. Kelly; that on the and was such an offence to be passed over without notice? ;
Committee struck, there were six Tories and five Li- Ho contended that the majority of the night before was not a
berals ; and that there were certain decisions come to by party majority, because it was composed not only of Members
that Committee, which, without impugning the motives of the of the Opposition side of the House, but also of several Hon.
Committee, were not, in the petitioner's judgment, legal. Members who usually supported Ministers, but some too i
He instanced a case in which a charge of bribery high-minded to support them on that occasion.—( Cheers.) !
and corruption, by treating, &c., was made against He did not think that the dignity of the House had been suf-
the Tory candidates, but in which the Committee re- ficiently vindicated, and therefore he could not vote for the ,'-
tained the vote. He also stated that one voter amendment.
as struck off from the poll for the Liberal candidates, as Mr. GORING complained that the Right Hon. Gentle.
cing that of a parish-constable, appointed at the request of the man who had just spoken had imputed perjury to the Corn-
Tory
candidates, and against the desire of the party himself. mittee of which he (Mr. Goring) was one, namely, the Car-
He
further stated that the vote of a person who had acted as a low Committee ; but he could conscientiously declare that
Deputy Returning Officer, without being paid for his service, his conduct on that Committee was influenced solely by a
ad been struck off. The Hon. Member moved that the peti- sense of justice and of his duty.
ion be laid on the table, which being agreed to, he moved that Mr. WYNN disclaimed having made any allusion to the
it be printed, giving notice that he would, on Friday, bring Hon. Member or to the Carlow Committee.
the subject of the Ipswich Committee before the House.— After a few words in explanation from Mr. GORING,
-( Hear, hear.) Viscount CA STLERE AG H believed his Roman Catholic
Mr. T. GIB SON (the Tory Member for Ipswich) thought countrymen who were Members of that House to be men of as
it would be impossible to decide on this subject till much integrity and of as high honour as any other Members in t
the evidenCe taken before the Committee had been laid ite___( Cheers.) He spoke as an Irishman ; and if he had not
n the table of the House ; and he hoped the Chairman said this he wonld have felt that he had not vindicated the I,
of the Committee would make a motion to that effect. vote he had given the night before.—( Cheers.) It did not I
With respect to the decision as to the special constables, it follow from this, however, that the language used by the Hon.
as •one of a class, and the decision of the first class and Learned Member for Dublin was warranted. Although I
usually influenced the decision of the rest. The decision he had not served on any Committee he felt himself aggrieved g
;Upon this case was unanimous ; and could not, therefore, be by the language used. If the present proceeding were
facto-
construed into a party decision.—(Tory Cheers.) It was a vered in he would vote for it, because he thought the House
decision, in fact, on the plain construction of an Act of Par- would stultify itself if it did not follow up the vote of the
liament.—( Cheers from the same quarter.) night before.
Mr. JENKINS wished, as Chairman of the Committee, Sir F. POLLOCK could not see why it was that the
;to state to the House that he had intended last night to move Noble Lord opposite had the night before imputed a shabby
for the production of the minutes, but was prevented from so course of proceeding to his ( Sir F. Pollock's) side of the
edoing by the understanding that the Hon. Member for South House. He should like to know if the Noble Lord was a
Essex would have moved for them. He was most anxious that judge of what was shabby. If he was, he might find such
the evidence should be produced, in order to repel the impute- conduct in supporting an amendment to stop further proceed-
tions that had been thrown out against the Committee, and ings, while he admitted that the conduct of the Hon. and
I
i'should therefore move as an amendment to the motion of the Learned Member for Dublin was a breach of privilege. The s
Hen. Member opposite, that the Minutes of the Evidence be House had declared that the language of the Hon. and ,
laid on the table of the House. Learned Member for Dublin was false and scandalous. The
Colonel WE STE NR A said that ho had served on the House ought to have taken such a step as this long ago. 1
Committee, and did not think that the decision referred to Were they to forget not only the dignity of the House hat
was unanimous —( Laughter, and cries of " Hear.") the decencies of society ? He did not want to have any high I
' Mr. JENKINS wonld ask the Hon. Member if the deci- punishment inflicted, but he wished the character of the 4
sion with respect to the Parish Constable was not carried House to be sustained.
unanimously? After some observations from Mr. HAnvaY and Colonel e
Colonel WE STENR A—Yee, bat that was not the decie CONOLLT, amidst loud cries of " Divide," I
•
sion alluded to. Viscount MAIDSTONE, in reply, said that the character
Mr. C. BITLLER wished to ask the Hon. Member oppo- of the House was at stake, and it was impossible they could
site (Mr. Jenkins), if there were not a division of six to five, pass the matter over without some further notice.
even on the other decision.—( Loud cries of " Order, order."
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
Sir ROBERT HERON, having been a Member of the divided, si
ided, when the numbers were— .i
Committee, felt called on to say a few words. It was not a For Lord Maidstone's motion 249 1
fact that the decision with respect to the Parish Constable For the amendment
was unanimous. That decision was entirely opposite to a deci- Majority inifavour of the motion ......
sion of another Committee which sat in 1835. He did not, The announcement of the numbers was received with cheers.
however, mean to impeach it. He voted in the minority ; the We presume that previously to our re-admission into the
question was a difficult one; and he by no means meant gallery the motion that Mr. O'Connell should attend in his 1
to say that those who voted against him were not right. place and be reprimanded by the Speaker must have been put,
The opposite decisions which were given on this subject proved for when were re-admitted we found
how necessary it was that some better mode of deciding these Mr. H. GRATTAN on his legs, moving, as an eme,"l: .;
questions should bo resorted to than they had at present. ment, the addition to the motion of words of which the Te.. i
On the question being put, that the petition should lie on lowing was understood to be the purport ;—" Notwithstana
.„
the table, and be printed with the votes, ing the Members for Cork, Sligo, Liskeard, and Falkirk have ::i
Mr. W. W. WYNN rose. He did not do so for the pur- avowed in their places sentiments similar to those uttered.
~ ~
pose of objecting to the present motion, although at any former by Mr. O'Connell ; and notwithstanding that House had 1
period he should have felt himself bound to object to any attempt passed by without notice a published charge of the Bishop !,
to make that House a Court of Appeal, es he considered it a of Exeter, in which an imputation of perjury is east upon the a
most dangerous practice ; but, after the accusation which Roman Catholic Members of Parliament."--4Hear.) If Hon.
.:
had been made against members of Committees, he felt bound Members meant to deal out impartial justice, they must adopt 1
in justice not to deny them an opportanity of making public this amendment. With respect to the case of the Hon. and ;
their proceedings. Learned Member, he did not that night, nor had he on the el.
Mr. JENKINS thought that the proceedings before the preceding, justified the language he had used—( Hear)—but ,i 1
Ipswich Committee should be laid on the table, and would if he was asked if gross party feeling did not prevail on Elec- '
make a motion to that effect. lion Committees, he should most assuredly say that it did. et
Mr. AG LIONBY trusted the House would allow him, in But let the House bear in mind the case of the Hon. Baronet, e
justice to himself, to say a few words. —( Cries of " No, no.") the Member for North Wilts ( Sir F. Burdett), as well as those 1:
He contended he had a right to do so.—( Laughter.) Hon. of Mr. Wilkes and of Dr. Lucas, Would not the people take I
Members might laugh, but they must recollect that that the pert of Mr. O'Connell, as they had that of Sir F. I3urdett u
was not argument. He begged to say that he never thought in 1819 ?_( Hear.) He stated this, to show the difficulty in '
of pressing his motion for the printing of the petition with- which the House was placing itself. Suppose—the
Noble
out having the proceedings before the Ipswich Committee Lord having brought forward his motion against the Hon. and --
before the House.—( Cheers.) And it had been his intention, Learned Member, and following it up with another, . that he, :,11,
if he obtained leave to have the petition printed, to have attend in his place, and be reprimanded —suppose the Hon. glee • ;
moved for the printing of the proceedings before the Commit- Learned Member denied the right of the House to compel hie'
tee. In that motion, however, he had been forestalled by the to attend—( Hear)—what was to be done in such a case ? The -;
Honourable Member. Speaker must issue his warrant, and it was very possible that -1
The proceedings before the Ipswich Committee were then the people might take part with the Hon. and Learned Gen-
ordered to be laid on the table and printed. tleman.—( Hear.) Sir F. Burdett had set this warrant at defi-
I
The petition was then ordered to lie on the table, and be ance, and had treated it as so much waste paper, as Cromwell ..
printed. had done before him—(Laughter from the Opposition)--- . 1
and what had been done in 1 812 might also be done in 1838. ' I
His opinion was that the Hon. and Learned Member for t,
Dublin was right in his estimate of Election Committees-- 1
( Hear, hear)—and that they were most shameful tribunals.
This conduct on the part of Hon. Gentlemen opposite arose
from their connection with the Spottiswoode gang. They
called the priests of Ireland serfs ; but what would they say : d
if he were to call the Bishop of Exeter a serf ?—( Laughter
from the Opposition.) The supporters of the Honourable
and Learned Member for Dublin had been accosted with all
sorts of degrading epithets—( The Hon. Member here read '
several from a piece of paper)—and his feelings had naturally .
been roused by them. What had the Hon. and Learned I
Gentleman said in the beginning of the speech which had ,A.
been so much blamed? Had he not said that the Irish /4
wanted some measure passed to protect them from the ma- 4;
chinations of the Spottiswoode gang?—(" Hear," and a 4
laugh.) What harm was there in such an observation as that, :i,
after the prodeedings adopted against the Irish elections ?--
.1
( Hear, hear.) Though he considered that there were other
words in that speech which were injudicious and improper, ee,
yet lie did not think the House ought to go further in this e
business than they had already gone. The Hon. Gentleman I
then moved the amendment we have given above. ''i
General JOHNS ON seconded the amendment. 1
Mr. E. B. ROCHE did not consider the ' proceedings 0f '
last night calculated to increase feelings in favour of that :I
House throughout the country. No person could deny .'
that the division which had taken place last night was el
as much a division of party as any division which had 4
taken place during the Session. The public would say 4
that Honourable Members opposite had not supported the
motion of the Noble Lord as men actuated by squeamish ~
sentiments for the honour and dignity of the House, but ac- '
tuated by enmity and animosity towards the Hon. Member for
Dublin. He adopted the expressions of the Hon. Member e
for Dublin, because ho believed them to be substantially cor-
rect. That Hon. Member had declared that the Committees
of that House had sworn to do justice, and nevertheless haddecided with partiality. The Hon. Member had ground"' •:
that assertion on the best test of personal and political Mat" '
ters, the opinion of the public, and on the notorious habit of '..
canvassing the Members who attended at those ballots. It had
last night been admitted by the Hon. and Learned Member -
for Ripon that Members did decide not according to the strict
rules of impartiality. For these reasons, he (Mr. Roche) was
ready to adopt the sentiments of the Hon. and Learned
Member for Dublin, although if he had to express those son- .
timents he certainly might couch them in different language'
However, for form sake, hewould adopt the precise expressions-
He had himself no personal interest in the question. He was -
not in any way connected with an election Committee. There
was no petition against his return, and he did not fence him-
self under any conscientious dislike to afford satisfaction to any ,
Hon. Gentleman who might feel aggrieved by him.—(Cries
e
of " Oh, oh," and a laugh.) It was not from any feeling of '.
this kind The Hon. Member was proceeding, when he was
called to order by
The SPEAKER, who could not help reminding the
Honourable Member that he was about to place the House in a ,
new situation. The House had agreed to a resolution ex- ;
pressive of its censure upon certain expressions that had been e
made use of elsewhere. In consequence of this another Mem-
ber rose in his place, to say that he adopted and reiterated e
those offensive expressions of the lion. Member which the h
House had thought deserving of censure. This course of pro-
seeding was attended with great irregularity—it was besides
a course of proceeding quite novel. Moreover, no such ex-
pressions could be made a subject for the consideration of the
;,
House unless the words of the Hon. Member were taken ,'
down. This was what happened] according to the ordinary ;.
-
usage of Parliament. When a Member used expressions that
were considered objectionable, ;the usage was for a Member.,
who viewed them in an op osite sense to the Member who.
used them to reeve that they be taken down. If a practice of
this kind was to be generally resorted to it was impossible to
say to what extent it might be carried. If Hon. Members
were to riso in succession and say that they
voluntarily to commit that which the House had decided to be ~
a grave and serious offence, it would be impossible to foresee e
to what inconvenience and irregularity it might lead. lie,
therefore, felt bound to call the attention of the Hon. Member :-
to this point, and to warn him against the irregularity of the 1
course he was about to adopt.—( Hear.) were prepared
Mr. E. B. ROCHE said that however anxious to yield
itlo.
any advice from the Chair, or to bow to its decision, a d
though he felt the punishment might follow the course ho
was about to take-e(" Oh, oh," and a laugh)—he repeated

MR. O'CONNELL.

Mr. HUME held the Votes or Minutes of the proceedings on
Mr. O'Connell in his hand, and he was surprised to find that
the words complained of by the opposite side were not inserted.
The resolutions of the House were there, but the foundation
upon which they were raised were wanting. If he were in
order, he would move that the words complained of be inverted
on the Journals of the House.
Mr. WYNN said that such a course of proceeding had
never before been taken. In this case the speech had been
read at the table, and had taken nearly an hour. In the case
of Sir Francis Burdett only the substance, a sort of description
of the libel, was given in the Journals, and he trusted the
same course would be followed now.
Mr. HUME would wish to hear what was the usual course
from the Chair. Former precedents might be bad—in this
case they were—for the matter complained of, and which had
been read at the table of the House, should certainly appear
upon the minutes.
The SPEAKER said that the precedents were all as stated
by the Hon. Member for Monmouthshire.
Mr. HUME gave notice, that to-morrow ho should cer-
tainly take the sense of the House upon the subject.
After a few words from Mr. GREEN,
Mr. WYNN said it would be impossible to give an in-
struction to a Com
SHERIFFSmittee, which bad not yet been appointed.
' S.
Captain PE C HELL had a question to put to the
Right Honourable the Attorney-General, whom ho had
been for some time endeavouring to catch in his
place.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Now that he had
Caught him, he hoped he would be allowed to ask him a ques-
tion, upon which much anxiety existed among those connected
with Sheriffs' Courts. It was whether the Law Officers of the
Crown intended to bring forward any measure for the amend-
ment of the law upon that point ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL begged to inform him
that it was the intention of her Majesty's Law Officers to
bring forward a measure on the subject, and he believed tho
Noble Lord, the Secretary of State, had actually a notice for
that purpose an the books.—( Hear, hear. )
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE—ADJOURNED DE.