The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-21 00:00:00

BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS.

Sir JOHN I'AKINGTON, in rising to move the
second reading of the Bribery at Elections Bill, said it
was necessary for him to make some statement of the
views which he entertained upon the subject to which the
measure had reference. He could assure the House that
he was fully aware of the importance of ihe subject, but
he was no less sensible that after the notorious corruption
which prevailed during the general elections of 1841 and
1842, the subject assumed a new degree of most pressing
importance. If the House would be kind enough
to grant him its attention, he would be
enabled to show that the present law against
bribery was quite insufficient for the object which
it ought to accomplish. He was desirous to solicit the
attew,on of the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell), who had
given his praiseworthy attention to tLe subject and un-
derstood it so well, and he begged to assure him
that he did not desire to undervalue or depreciate
his exertions. The Noble Lord had introduced
two valuable Acts against bribery, one in 1841, and
another in 1842, but they had proved altogether insuf-
ficient. He did not mean to say that the present law
was not severe, but he wished to show to the House
that a great deal of it was quite inoperative,
and o the reason that under it punishment for
bribery was actually dependent upon the presentation
of election petitions—(Hear)—and wherever extensive
bribery prevailed there were such powerful combina-
tions thy. t pariit s were deterred irom presenting them.
lie wotli briefly call attention to the existing law
against bribery and corruption. Towards the end
of the reign of Charles IL and James 11.
attempts were made to legislate on the subject, and in the
7th year of the reign of William 111. an Act was passed
which was known us the Treating Act, under which the
present system of Election Committees originated. An-
other Act was passed in the 2d of George 11., which
was known by the name of the Bribery Act, and
was very stringent in its provisions, but
it was virtually a dead letter upon the
statute-be o'r. To those two Acts they had mainly
deinaded uotil 1841, when the Noble Lord brought in
one of the two Acts to which he had referred, and
which gave Committees power to take evidence of
bribery before agency was proved. The other
Act was introduced in 1842, and it was di.
rented particularly to compromises. Bat both
those Acts, however good in themselves, did not
cominto operation unless a petition was presented to
Parehament. At the present moment there was a Bill
pending in another place on the subject, and the same
deft cts that he had pointed out existed in that Bill
which were in the measure that had been introduced
last year, namely that of appointing a Commission which
bad proved itself totally inefficient to put down bribery
and corruption. The Hon. Baronet then proceeded to
detail at some length what had taken place
in different boroughs with respect to bribery and cor
ruption, and putted that in many instances in those
boroughs niche early part of the day 151. to 201. were
given for a vote, and at the later period of the day not
less than 100/.—(Hear.) He asked the House whether
such a state of things ought to continue, and whether he
had not made out a case for the measure he
e as now proposing :Hear, hear.) It had been
said that wholesale disfranchisement was the only remedy
for this disease, he could not agree with any such pro-
position • it had been tried, and it had been
,
shown that it had not acted as a warning
to those who had been guilty of bribery.
It was for these reasons that he had ventured to propose
that no man should take his sea; in that House without
making a public declaration at that table, before the
House of Commons and the country, that so far as he
Was concerned he was personally guiltless of all these
corrupt practices. He was aware that this decla-
ration might be considered only as a trap tor tender
consciences. He trusted no Hon. Member would vote
against his Bill on that ground. It any doubt was en-
tertained upon the subject, then let them look to the
declaration itself, and then they would see that no such
danger was likely to arise. He was aware that the
subject was surrounded by many difficulties, but he
thought that some such rule ought to be adopted,
even if it were only for the protection of the
candidates themselves.—(Haas, hear.) Conceiving this,
and believing that the malpractices to which he had al-
luded had brought a greet scandal upon the country, he
felt deeply impressed with the necessity of adopting some
such plan, and he should, therefore, only now propose
that, in addition to the declaration in the House, there
should also be a right, vested in the electors
themselves, to demand from the candidates on
the hustings a similar declaration,so that when
men of respectability and standing went down to any
place, they should find it prudentbe toabstain from bribery
altogether, lest they should placedf in the position
either of acknowledging their guilt, obryodlrzjuerirng tshtehma-t
elves.—(Heer.) lie had been tol
the only remedy against bribery was an extension
psonof the
franchise. For his own part he was in no degree op-
posed
t() an extension ot the franchise, but until he
saw that what his lion. Friend, the Member for Buck-
inghamshire, the other evening very happily termed a
proper sense of the dignity of exercising the franchise, he
could anticipate but little benefit from any extension
of the franchise.
This appeared to him the more
important, inasmuch as he could not forget that no
constituency had been formerly more distinguished. for
their corruption than the two large ones of Nottingham
and Norwich.—(Hear, bear.) Yet he would wish it to
be understood that he was by no means unfriendly to an
extension of the franchise, soon 35 it could be shown

to him that it might be safelrconfided to more numerous
bands. Lle;appealed to the House not to reject this Bill; but,
at all events, if they did so he should have the satisfaction
of knowing that he had made a single-minded attempt
to check what he believed to be a great
growing and increasing evil, which was sapping
the very foundation of our representative system,
which had been the boast of England and the admiration
of the world. They were justly proud of the purity of
public men.

Colonel SIBTHORP—Oh, oh.! Nonsense, ridiculous.
Sir J. PAKINGTON proceeded—But let him
warn the House that if they valued the purity
of public men in public offices they might
endanger that purity if they did not maintain an equal
degree of purity amongst the constituent body.—(Hear,
hear.) Now he asked the House to give this Bill a
second reading. He did not hold out to them that this
was a measure by which bribery would be prevented in
all cases, but if they adopted the principle of
the Bill it would put an end to all those
gross and wholesale cases to which he had to-day di-
rected attention, and he did hope that the House would
pass some legislative measure upon the subject. They
were bound to make an effort to remedy the existing evils,
and it was to give the House an opportunity of making
that effort that ho moved the second reading of the Bill.
Colonel SIBTHORP said, when he gave notice of
his intention to move that this Bill be read a second
time this day six months, of course, he was not led to
expect, but certainly, he did not know that the Hon.
Baronet proposed that the Bill should be referred to the
consideration of a Select Committe.—(Hear, hear.) Ile
now knew what the Hon. Baronet's intention was, and as
he had no objection to the course the Hon. Baronet
proposed he should abstain from moving his amendment,
but certainly not from saying a few words upon the sub-
ject.—(Hear, and laughter.) If he entertained objec-
tions
to the Bill when he gave notice of his amendment,
they had been increased ten-fold by the speech which
the Hon. Baronet bad made in support of it. Where
the Honourable Baronet obtained his information
from he could not for the life of him make out.
He presumed it was not from Droitwitch, nor could he
believe that the Hon. Baronet had given the informa-
tion upon the ipse dixit of individuals. It appeared
rather to be the result of some secret inquiry, and he
should always oppose a Bill which was based upon in-
formation derived from secret sources.—(Hear, hear.)
The lion. Baronet then talked about the purity of public
men. Good God ! the purity of public men, where
was it?—what. was it?—(Hear and laughter.) He had,
always thought and now boldly declared that the Trea-
sury bench was the seat where, above all others, the
grossest corruption prevailed.—(Laughter.) But he
had heard with infinite satisfaction that the Honourable
Member for Hull, who now occupied a seat on the bench,
had refused to take office if be were not permitted to
pursue w hat course he thought proper in reference to the
navigation-laws, and they had received an intimation
from the Noble Lord at the head of the Government—
the Member for the city of London, which was all
purity—(Laughter)—that he bad absolved the Right
Hon. Gentleman from voting against the repeal of the
navigation-laws, but the Noble Lord did not give him
liberty to vote as he liked upon every other question.
No, the Noble Lord was too cautious for that. He said
the navigation-laws was an open question, but ques-
tions might be open out of doors but not in the House.
An open question out of doors was a very different
thing to what was considered an open question in
Downing-street.—(Hear, hear.) The purity of public
men, indeed ! Faugh ! Stuff ! It was mere moon-
shine.—(Hear, and laughter.) It was impossible for
them to be pure. Bribery and corruption was
part of their system, and their impunity was as noto-
rious as the sun at noon day.—(Hear, and laughter.)
He could not help thinking that the Hon. Baronet who
introduced the Bill would have done much better had he
delayed the second reading of the Bill until the House
had seen the information which the Hon. Baronet said he
had read. Besides, there was a Bill coming from another
place, and he should like to know before they disposed
of this one what that Bill would be. A Bill was also
introduced last session into the House upon the subject,
to which great attention was paid, and which incurred a
great amount of expense—a waste of time, printing, and
paper—and yet it all ended in smoke.—(Hear, and
laughter.) And then the Noble Lord followed it
up with another Bill, which he managed to get
through the House ; but when it got up to
another place, the other place wanted to shut up them-
selves, and they kicked out the Bill.—(Cheers and
laughter.) But now it seemed another Bill was rising
in the other place out of the ashes of the Bill they
had knocked on the head last session. Now he would
not say anything against the other place,
but he always understood that the House looked
with eyes of jealousy upon intermeddling of the
other place ; but, be that as it might, he for one
did not like this interference of the other place. Why
did they not mind their own business? But it might be
possible that there was not too much purity in the other
place, although it contained a mitre.— (Hear.) What had
bishops and priests to do with this question? What had
Christian members of the Church to do with it? Why,
nothing at all; and he hoped they would (though he hardly
expected it) abstain from voting on the resuscitated Bill.
If this Bill were passed it would destroy that good feel-
, ing which had so long existed between the higher and
the lower classes, and it was well known what care
the wealthier classes bestowed upon their humble
dependents.—(Hear, hear.) If, however, there
was to be a searching inquiry into all their
acts—if secret machinations were to exist, no man would
be safe. Bribery and corruption had existed, and,
doubtless, would exist. He hoped at least, however,
that he had never been guilty of any such acts ; he was,
therefore, altogether free from the charge, but
if eight or inine Bills had been introduced
since 1841, for the purpose of altering the present state
of things, and yet had proved inoperative for that pur-
pose, he should like to know what chance the present
measure stood of success. He hoped the Bill would be
rejected, because ho believed that every man ought to
do what he liked with his own.—(Laughter.) At least
allowing a man that permission was but carrying out the
much vaunted principle of free trade ; but he supposed
a free trader (a hair of whose head he would not hurt)
could not bribe; it was quite impossible; he was too pure a
being to do so.—(Laughter.) He believed the 13111 to
be absurd, to be full of equivocations, and that it would
prevent the purest and most honourable men from
coming to the House and conscientiously taking the
usual oaths. Nevertheless, as the Honourable
Baronet had consented to have the matter re-
ferred to a Committee up stairs ho should not
oppose the Bill in its present stage not wishing to thwart
fair investigatiQn, lie trusted, however, when it came
down again, if it came down at all—(Laughter)—that it
would do so in a far different shape. He saw no reason
why they should pass a Bill of this character, because
Mr. Tompkins or Mr. Jenkins was dissatisfied with the
result. It was an attempt to catch them sleeping, and
he advised the House to take care that its silver spoons
were not stolen.—(Laughter.)
Sir J. HANMER said it was perfectly true that
former attempts had been made, as had been
stated by the Hon. and Gallant Member who had
just resumed his seat, to suppress the corrupt practices
which had been so long carried on at elections. He
hoped, however, that the present attempt of the Hon.
Baronet the Member for Droitwich (Sir J. Pakington),
though he (SirJ. Hanmer) was not able to give his support
to all its provisions.vvould be successful. lie was glad he had
expressed his readiness to refer this Bill to a Select
Committee up stairs, and trusted, through the searching
investigation and practicaLsuggestions of that body,
that the House would be enabled to pass a mea-
sure to put an end to those evils which
threatened, unless at once checked or restrained, to sap
the foundations of Parliament itself. It was true that,
heretofore, the attempt of unofficial Members to stop
the evil had proved abortive, but he assured the House
that unless a remedy wag devised without delay
that the day of vengeance was at hand. After the vast
quantity of evidence that had been collected on oath, he
confessed that he was at a loss to understand why a Bill
of this kind should have to encouunter so many difficulties.
As the Committee was to take into its consideration
the subject of treating, the motion of the Hon. Baronet
should have his support. The Gallant Member had
'said, that if the Bill were passed, no one would be
safe. Had be been in his place he should have
asked him if any one was safe at the
present moment. No one, in his opinion, would be safe
until the law with respect to bribery and treating, and
their punishment, was placed on an intelligible footing.
The difference between treating and bribery was by no
means clearly defined—(Hear, hear)—and a va-
riety of opinions existed on the subject. He need
not go any further back than last session to find instances
of this difference of opinion. No less than three dis-
crepancies of opinion occurred last session en the subject
Carlisle,oe by was air.hi
of treating.
Hodgson, who had been elected
for
unseated because treating had been
carried
was
easgtehnetso,
thought
tuht
ewhithdout hish knowledge
and consent. It
the seat again; he did so
andg was aelected,arig antdton
ocodoubt
t
sat in that House with great advantage to the city.
The other cases were North Cheshire and Horsham.
Mr. Cornwall Legh, who had been elected for South
Cheshire, and Mr. Fitzgerald, who had been elected for
Horsham, were unseated for treating by th
though they declared they had nothingi toirdoagentsi;
it, and that they, therefore, were not reponsivtbile.
The Committee said an action at law could not be main-
tained against Mr. Cornwall Legh, and therefore he was
most rightly permitted to retain his seat. The very same
question occurred at Horsham, where all the elements
went to show that Mr. Fitzgerald did the very same thing
when he stood in 1847. The Committee declared
there that he was not duly elected, and net capable of
sitting. Therefore, on the very same question having
been referred to a Committee in room A, concerning
the North Cheshire election, a gentleman was now sitting
a Member of the House, and on the very same question
being referred to a Committee in room B, a
gentleman was not sitting a Member of the House;
and ho was, he (Sir J. Hanmer) believed, incapable
of sitting again in the present Parliament. Surely it
was time fur the House to define what was the law, or
what ought to be the law. There was another, though
an incidental, question arose in the Horsham Committee.
They not only decided that Mr. Fitzgerald, who had the
majority of votes, should be deprived of his seat,
and was incapable of sitting, because at a previous
election [some treating had been carried on against his
instructions and without his knowledge, but the Com-
mittee decided that another Noble Lord, who had the
minority of votes, was duly elected. Now that
question arose incidentally, but it was a very
important question, and ho hoped that if the
Bill of the Nodle Lord was to be referred to a Com-
mittee up stairs, the terms of reference would not be
small
the
that decisionsin which existing
and narrow, and that the eases
decisions of Committees of the House conflicted with
the courtsand oft wouldthe beH
Committee,in osuusbemittmedightot
arrive at a state of things
such
as the Hon.
Member for Lincoln aa much
desiderated,

viz.—when the country would get a good, plain, and in-
telligible law on the subject of bribery. He had fault to
find with other parts of this Bill. On account of the very
great and pressing importance of the subject, and be-
cause he was well aware that the attention of the country
was directed to this great and crying evil, and that
the House ought not and should not be content with the
present state of the law, he did hope that the Bill would
be referred to a Committee, and that gentlemen would
not be too anxious to find fault, but would say
hero was a great evil, here was a Bill that proposed to
amend that evil, and let them take it into their whole
consideration. Bu,t at all events, only for God's sake
let us have a Bill in the present session, by means of
which the election of members to an important branch of
the Legislature might be pure and satisfactory.
Lord MAHON thought that the course which
the Honourable Baronet had taken in referring
this Bill to a Committee up stairs was most pro-
per, though he (Lord Mahon) thought there were
difficulties and doubts connected with the Bill which he
was anxious to suggest, not in a spirit of hostility, but
with a view to amendment. At the third clause he found
it proposed, that any Member who should, by a report
of a Committee of the House of Commons, be
declared to have been guilty of bribery shall be for
ever hereafter incapable to be elected a Member
of Parliament. Now he wished the House to consider
how dangerous was such an enactment. Let the House
just consider how it would have operated in former years,
when the great party leaders were in array against each
other, when the exclusion of one of those great party
leaders would have been considered an object to one of she
opposite parties. Let them take the case of Pitt and Fox.
Would it have been right for this House to put it into
the power of any five of its Members to declare that any
of those great party leaders were incapable of ever
again hereafter sitting in Parliament? Let the House
consider what a temptation they held out to party spirit;
and let it consider this case, not in reference to
the present moment, but in reference to those
periods of great political excitement. By the second
clause it was enacted, that any person whom a Com-
mittee of the House of Commons should declare to have
been guilty of receiving a bribe shall forfeit his right of
voting. He (Lord Mahon) was a member of the
Committee which sat on the Borough of La❑caster
Election Petition. It was proved on the clearest evi-
dence that several ♦oters had received bribes, and the
Committee :were in the painful position, that the writ
had to issue and the election be determined by the very
persons whom the Committee had to report to the House as
having been guilty of bribery.—(Hear, hear.) There,
again, as in the former case, there might be a danger
of party spirit intervening. With respect to the gene-
ral subject of declarations, it was one on which he
wished to reserve his opinion. The Noble Lord con-
cluded by saying he would have the greatest
satisfaction in vctiog for the second reading
of the Bill, and for referring it to a Committee.
Mr. AGLIONBY would vote for the second reading
of the Bill, but he was afraid that, like all that had
preceded it on the subject, it would be found to
be inefficacious. The only proper course to pursue
was to disfranchise the ancient freemen and enfranchise
them as householders.—(Hear, hear.) Give them vote
by ballot, and then matters would be put upon a proper
and sound footing. The matter should be met boldly,
and the country would be with them.
Sir G. GREY gave great credit to the Right Hon.
Bart. the Member for Droitwich for the motives that had
induced him to bring forward the measure, and he should
be exceedingly sorry to throw any objections in the way
of such a measure; but beforelhe consented to the second
reading of the Bill, ho felt bound to make some
observations upon it. If the House agreed to the
appointment of the Select Committee it would,
as he understood, be assenting to its principle.
The question was, with respect to this measure, whether
it was desirable on the one hand to repeal the existing
law, and whether the House was at the same time entitled
to impose on Members of Parliament before they took li
their seats the necessity of taking an oath or making a
declaration couched in the same terms as the bribery
oath, which he considered would tend more to the com-
mission of perjury than to the suppression of bribery.—
(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member said there were three
main points in the Bill; first, the declaration imposed
upon candidates before they took their seats
that they had not been guilty of bribery;
secondly, the disqualification for ever of a Member
to sit in the House who had been found guilty of bribery
by a court of law, or by a Committee of the House of
Commons; and third, the repeal of the Bribery
Act. With regard to the first point, be had
heard nothing to convince him thatit was necessary
to impose such a declaration. It would not prevent the
commission of bribery at elections, and would have
the effect of shutting out some of the most honest and
best Members from taking a seat in that House. The
Ron. Member said if the House assented to the prin-
ciple of the oath or declaration by Members, he was
willing to amend it in the Committee up stairs; there-
fore he (Sir George Grey) wished it to be
understood that the declaration was open to
serious objections, and that he was not prepared to
sanction it. With respect to the second point he enter-
tained the same serious objections, and thought it a
most dangerous thing to impose a penalty which would
disqualify Members for ever sitting in the House again,
however desirous constituents might be that they should
represent them.—(Hear, hear.) He had no objec-
tion to the clause which altered the present law
on the subject of bribery, and therefore that
would not meet with his opposition. He entertained a
great objection to the perpetual disqualification of elec-
tors. he would he sorry to oppose the general wish of
the House to refer to the Committee up stairs
the Bill in question, but he should be happy
to aid in introducing some more effectual check
to the commission of bribery, and ho thought it his
duty at present t warn the House against sanctioning
the mai❑ principles of the Bill.
Mr. G. J. TURNER said he could not agree to the
sending of this Bill to a Committee up stairs.
He would just point out to the House with what ease
this declaration might be avuided. Why, a scrupulous
man would to his agent and inquire whether any bribery
had been practised before he made any declaration,
whereas the unscrupulous man would make no inquiry
at all. If the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of
State for the Home Department divided the House, he
should most certainly divide with him.— (Hear. hear.)

Mr. COCKBURN conceived that this Bill contained
so much ;that was good that it ought to go through a
recond reading. Whether there was the extent of
corruption and bribery at elections alleged,: or
whether there was not, they had at least this assu-
rance, that it was an attempt, and a wise attempt, to
stop an evil of very serious magnitude. Was not this
worth the while of a Legislature to stay? Why, what
was the ease which the Hon. Baronet the Member
for Droitwich had adduced ? He had asserted that in a
constituency amounting to three thousand every one
voter in twenty-eie,,ht had been bribed to the amount of
ten pounds. Surely, then, this was a matter which re-
quired the instant exertion of the authority of Parlia•
ment to put down—(Hear.) By doing this they would
be bringing the conventional usage into harmony with
the strict rules of morality, and they would be doing away
with a mischief which was fast sapping the root of all
public virtue.—(Hear, hear.) By this declaration a
Member of Parliament would voluntarily incur the
risks of condemning himself, and thus expose himself to
all the risks of ignominy and disgrace.—(Hear, hear.)
Then, with regard to the penalties which the Bill pro-
posed to impose, he, for one, thought that they were
by no means too severe. The Bill proposed to
render the making of a false declaration an act of felony.
—(Hear, hear.) Let them believe him that all their
legislation had hitherto been in the wrong direction.
They had only now begun at the right end. If they had
hitherto attempted simply to bring the tempted to
justice, surely it was but wisdom to endeavour also to
place the tempter in the same predicament.—(Hear,
hear.) It was useless to make laws for the
object of abolishing an evil, the subjects of
which had placed before them a sum which it was almost
beyond the power of a poor man to resist, in accepting
which, the gain was present and certain, while the pu•
nishment for receiving it was at the least remote and very
contingent.—(Hear, hear.) Let this declaration be made
and the man who made it would have a right to separate
himself from the evil thing, and take his part in investi-
gating the conduct of those by whom it had been com-
mitted.—(Hear.) They all remembered the severity of
the inquiries of the Election Committees last year, and
certainly he was not one who complained of that severity.
All he wanted was a judge and jury, and when convic-
tion followed, he was prepared to permanently disqualify
the person so convicted from ever sitting in Parlia-
ment. The recent decisions of Election Com-
mittees had entitled them to the respect of
the House; but in times of strong party ex-
citement it was not unlikely they might be induced
thereby to act in favour of the party to which they be-
longed. The House should, therefore, be very cautious
how it extended the power at present possessed
by Election Committees. He doubted not that this
part of the Bill would be modified in the Select Com-
mittee. He trusted the Bill would receive the assent of
the House.—(Cheers.)
Mr. HENLEY said, if two Learned Members, like
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who had last spoken
and the Hon. and Learned Member behind him (Mr.
Aglionby) could not agree as to the terms of the de-
claration to be made by Members at the table on taking
their seats, how could they expect nnlearned Members
to make up theiri minds;-upon the matter?—(Hear,
hear.) If the Committee, as he believed, was
likely to disagree on the leading points of the Bill, he
could not see what advantage could result from sending
ltiheithiamedto.aecrttiloshem. The Bill was so objectionable that the
feoalfietiFirnotgyorinthmiego
might be
Billyb parties
toiunseatedesb eutuseless,t e utterly
y inu unconnected
consequencennhOUectel
ddvote
w i
to hf
s against it.

-Mr. HUME had had a good deal of experience of
the inutility of these Bills, but he wanted the law to be
simplified. Throw the responsibility and punishment
on the really guilty party, and where they found an
agent guilty of a dishonest act strike him off the rolls
if he were on any, or disfrancise him if he were an
elector.—(Hear, hear.)

Mr. HEADLAMicouId not support the Bill, al-
though he was most anxious to put an end to
the system of bribery and corruption which pre-
vailed at elections. It was a continuation of
a vicious course of legislation on the snbject
of bribery. It was unfair to compel a man to make a
declaration at the hustings, so that he might afterwards
be indicted for the crime of bribery, ;because that
system involved a principle that was unknown
to the common law of the land. The law
wisely said that no man could legally criminate
himself, and until the House established a different
mode of putting down bribery the crime would never be
abolished.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD cordially agreed
with the principles of the Bill. He could not under-
stand upon what principle of equity or justice they re,-