The Sun.
London, England, 1836-06-22 00:00:00

-
to form a county board, for the assessment, levying, and admi-
nistration of the county rates and financial affairs of the coun-
ties in England and Wales.
Mr. W YSE congratulated the Hon. Gentleman on bring-
ing forward a measure which appeared to be in some degree
founded on the Grand Jury Bill for Ireland. He hoped that
if such a Bill were passed for the government of the counties
of England and Wales it would not be long before similar
rdvantages were bestowed upon the Irish counties.
Sir E. WIL NIOT did not object in the slightest degree to
the proposition of the Hon. Member to exonerate the magis-
trates from a portion of the onerous and painful duties which
they now had to perform ; but he feared much that if they
took away from the magistrates the financial controul
they would find considerable difficulty in getting them
to attend to the more judicial duties. In his own
county he could speak from experience, for on the
first day of the sessions, when financial matters were
to be settled, there were usually from 30 to 40 magistrates
present ; but on the next and following days, though perhaps
there were 150 prisoners to try, he could with difficulty
obtain the presence of a second magistrate; and if he re-
ferred in any case of difficulty to any magistrate present for
his opinion, the answer he usually got was, " Decide it your-
self; you know much more about it than I do." He thought
therefore, the Bill of the Hon. Gentleman should be carried
further, and that as he had in what he now proposed copied
the measure of municipal reform, be should copy it to the ex-
tent of appointing a county recorder, to be nominated and
paid by the Crown, who should be a Barrister of not less than
ten years' atanding, and who should preside at Quarter Ses-
sions, and at other intermediate sessions, for the trial of of-
fences.—( Hear, hear.) The fact was, that if the financial
and judicial functions were separated, they would find great
difficulty in getting the magistrates to attend to the onerous
and invidious duty of punishment only.—( Hear, hear.) There
was one other provision which it was necessary to attend to,
and which he hoped the Hon. Member would not neglect—
viz., to take care that the parties to be chosen as magistrates
should have at least such a qualification as would ensure that,
from their education and station in life, they would be proper
and fit persons in whom to repose such a trust. He thought
it right to mention this, as the Bill did not, he believed, pro-
vide for any qualification.—(Hear, hear.) He should not,
therefore, oppose the motion, but hoped that due time would
be given, and that it might hereafter be brought before the
House, in a more matured shape.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
PLEADINGS.
Mr. PRYME begged to call the attention of the House to
the Act of 1833, for the amendment of the law which referred
it to the Judges to make certain rules relative to pleading,
subject to the approbation of that House. The most impor-
tant perhaps of these rules was that which called on all
parties to plead specifically and distinctly, and to put their
defence plainly upon record. Notwithstanding this salutary
provision there had been a clause inserted in many Acts
that had passed, such as Acts relating to fisheries, omnibuses,
and many others, for the purpose of allowing parties to plead
the general issue, and yet give special matter in evidence.
The plain English of such a clause was, that the defendant
was to be enabled to take advantage of the plaintiff by surprise,
that he was not to let him know his case till the hour of trial,
and then he was to be permitted to bring forward evidence
of which he was not aware, and which, had he been aware of
it, he would have been prepared with evidence to rebut; and
by these means the defendant was, perhaps, enabled to snap
a verdict contrary to the real merits of the case. He had just
heard that the Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter ( Sir
W. Follett) had it in contemplation to propose a Bill to re-
medy this evil. Had he been aware of the fact sooner he
would have taken an opportunity of conferring with that Hon.
and Learned Gentleman : but at present he would content
himself with moving a resolution to the effect that the intro-
duction of such a clause was contrary to the spirit and inten-
tion of the 3d and 4th William IV., c. 42, sec. 1, and the
rules of the Judges founded thereon.—( Hear.)
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL expressed his entire con-
currence in all that had fallen from the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman, and 'ne believed that he would receive the thanks
of the profession end the public at large for haring brought it
forward. There was indeed some feeling amongst the public
against 'Oat was called special pleading, but it was only
amongst those who did not understand that the whole object of
it wai, that the plaintiff should distinctly state his ground of
complaint, that the defendant should as distinctly state what
be had to allege to the contrary, how much of the complaint
he admitted, and how much he denied, so that both parties
should know what was the real question to go before a jury,
and Le prepared with evidence accordingly.—( Hear, hear.)
lie hoped, however, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, see-
ing the feeling of the Howie, and that such a clause would not
again creep into a Bill of that description, would not hamper
them by pressing his resolution at the present moment.
Mr. PR YAI E. after is hat the Solictor- General had said,
consented to withdraw his motion.
CANADA.
Lord EBRINGTON presented a petition from Lord
Aylmer, relative to the atialcs of Canada, which was ordered
to he printed, but in consequence of the absence of the Under-
Secretary for the Colonies and of the Hon. Member for B ith,
ho would defer his motion for the production of Lord Aylmer's
despatches till that day week.
IN SOLVENT DEBTORS.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL, in the absence of the
Attorney-General, obtained leave to bring in a Bill to con
tinue the Insolvent Debtors' Court for one year.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Lord J. RUSSELL gave notice that on Monday next he
should move that after the Ist day of July Orders of the Day
should take precedence of motions.
REGISTRATION OF VOTERS' BILL.
On the Motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, the House went
into Committee on the Registration of Voters' Bill.
On clause 63 being proposed,
Mr. M CL EA N proposed an amendment, to the effect of
preventing fraudulent voters remaining on the poll. He did
not think that it could be expected that Members of Parliament
should be placed under the heavy expense of watching over
the votes. They could not be expected to keep up an expen-
sive machinery for watching over fraudulent votes. In bo-
roughs, from their peculiar circumstances, if the overseers did
their duty, he did not apprehend any danger from fraudulent
votes to any great extent ; but in the country, where property
was constantly changing every year, there was every danger of
f auds in this way. As well as the amendment of the Hon.
Gentleman was understood, its effect was that parties who had
as much property as entitled them to vote fora Member of Par-
liamest, though they might have parted with a portion of the
property out of which they originally registered, still, if suffi-
cient remained to constitute a qualification, they should be en-
titled to vote.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG was willing to support the proposition
with some modification. There was a doubly injustice in the
present state of the law. First, that of a person divesting
himself of a part of his property, but still retaining sufficient
to constitute a qualification, and being disqualified from vot-
ing unless the property was identical. The other injustice
was, that on a change of residence a party was deprived of
his right of voting until he had registered his new resi-
dence. He was disposed to support the amendment in a mo-
dified form.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL opposed the amendment.
After a few words from Mr. PRARD and Mr. R. Wasors,
the amendment was withdrawn, and the clause agreed to.
Clauses down to 71 inclusive were then without opposition
agreed to.
On clause 72 being proposed.
Mr. C. ROSS proposed that a provision should be intro-
duced, giving parties who might have occasion to petition, or
those petitioned against, freer access to the poll-books than
they were permitted to have at present.
After a few words from Mr. R. WA SON,
Mr. C. ROSS, at the suggestion of the Attorney-General,
who said that the amendment could better be proposed on the
third reading, consented to withdraw it for the present.
Clauses 73 and 74 were then agreed to.
On clause 75 being proposed,
Mr. PR AE D moved as an amendment that all words after
" Shall have tendered his vote in such election " should be
omitted. It was too much the practice of the committees of
the House of Commons when the registry was made up in
a correct manner to insist upon greater correctness, but when
they were less perfect it was the practice to decline interfering
with them.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
Ayes 7O
Noes 4l

Majority for the clause —29
On clause 76 being put,
Lord G. SOMERSET said the object of the clause was
to disqualify non-resident voters. Persons might have pro-
perty on the confines of two counties, and would be entitled
to vote in thoie counties ; but the clause, by restricting the
voting to one day, would prevent the out-voters from coming
up. It was giving an advantage to the town voters which
the country voters did not possess. He thought it was calcu-
lated to disqualify a great number of voters, and he should
object to it.
Lord E BRING TON was understood to say that he origi-
nally proposed the clause, but if it were objectionable to the
House he would not press it. It was well known that on the
second day certain parties came to the poll who were willing
to sell their votes. All the doubtful and unprincipled voters
were reserved for the second day, when the polling was
slack. The Noble Lord, in a tone quite inaudible to us, by
reason of his position and feebleness of voice, entered into
some calculations from the returns of the number of voters
polled in the counties of England on both days, to show that
the great majority of votes was polled on the first day ; and
that most of the impeached votes were polled on the second
day. This evil could, he thought, be in some measure
amended by increasing the number of polling places.
Mr. BAINES supported the clause. Most of the bribery
at elections was committed on the evening of the first day.
The best remedy was to have only one day's polling, and to in-
crease the number of booths.
Mr. C. ROSS thought, if they interfered with the present
arrangement, it was better to introduce a separate Bill on the
subject.
After one or two remarks from Hon. Members, the gallery
was cleared for a division.
During our absence, a long and protracted discussion took
place, the nature of which we could not ascertain, but the re-
sult was understood to be that the clause was negatived with-
out a division.
As an instance of the method in which business is carried
on in Committees of the House, Mr. C. BULLE R rose,
after much desultory and unintelligible conversation, to learn
of the Chairman the clause which was then before thi3 Com-
mittee, if without a " breach of confidence" the Chairman
could convey such useful information.
Mr. BERNAL informed the Committee that clause 10 was
under consideration.