The Sun.
London, England, 1840-05-15 00:00:00

other. He was mainly influenced in voting for the writ
by the proceedings of the Committee itself. He never
witnessed a greater desire to ascertain the truth, or a
greater absence of party spirit. lie entertained a
strong impression that the prevailing sense of the
Committee was, that there was not sufficient evi-
dence to justify the suspension of the writ.—(Hear. )
One Hon. Gentleman alone observed, that there was suf-
ficient ground for suspecting that a system of bribery
and treating prevailed. The majority of the Committee
differed in political opinion from him ( Sir R. Peel)
but he must say that their conduct in the inquiry was
marked by the greatest impartiality, and he had thought
that if they considered any further step accessary, one of
them would have mooed fur it. The impression which
the circumstances left on him was, that in their opinion
bribery did not prevail generally. He certainly was aware
that treating was a medium of bribery, and the evidence
as to general treating was quite conclusive ; and it could
not be deniedahat treating served the purposes of corruption.
If they pleased, let them establish a new law making
treating as great a crime as bribery. Hitherto the law
had made a difference between the two cases, and it would
be a harsh measure to apply a new principle, and disfran-
chise a borough by a prospective law. Upon the whole
case the House was not warranted in suspending the writ
for Ludlow. He had no party views in voting for the is-
suing of the writ, notwithstanding the information of the
Hon. Member for Finsbury, who said that if the writ
went down, Ludlow would certainly return a Member op-
posed to him ( Sir R. Peel); he with that ringing in his
cars would still vote for the issuing of the writ. lii coming
to the decision he had done upon the case, he had not
been influenced by any party views. With respect to
the general measure, of which the Noble Lord had given
notice, he thought it would be more decorous in him to
say that he would most heartily concur with him in put-
ting an end to all species of bribery and treating of a cor-
rupt nature, than to bind himself to any specific measure.
He should have no objection to put an end to treating of a
corrupt nature altogether, if it were possible, for he saw
no reason why candidates should treat. In some cases it
might be entirely innocent, while in others it was moat
corrupt and demoralizing ; for instance, suppose a candi-
date, or his agent, were to invite eight or ten of his friends
to bis house, in order to talk over their prospects, or make
arrangements—that he had been previously on habits of
social intimacy with them—that would be treating, but of
an entirely different description to the indiscriminate open-
ing of houses, and accustoming the electors to almost
habitual drunkenness throughout a contest. He was
afraid that the suggestions of the Noble Lord would not
attain the object he had in view. The Noble Lord pro-
posed to prohibit treating within a month before and after
an election, but that could easily be evaded by the candi-
didate giving notice that after the expiration of the month
the voters would be treated as usual—that clearly would
not extinguish treating. But the Noble Lord pro-
posed to go further, and make treating equal to
bribery—then that might be effectual, for it would run for
six years—that period would include the month—then
where was the necessity for it. His advice to the Noble
Lord would be not to attempt too much, or by aiming at
much lose even the benefit of the little. Then, with re-
spect to the question of bribery, the strict letter of the law
was, at present, strong enough. Even in the present case
they bad inflicted upon both parties the penalty of exclusion
from the House, and the Noble Lord had forgot one other
punishment to which the parties were liable, viz , that of a
prosecution by the Attorney-General. The widening of
the scope to which Committees might go in their inquiries
might expose, and no doubt would expose many corrupt
practices. But he thought it would be found necessary
that the Committee should have power to adjudicate at
once upon the cases of those parties who appeared before
them. It would be hard upon those parties to expose them
to the enormous expense of a long inquiry when that in-
quiry was for the public good, by showing the delinquences
of the borough after the Committee had decided, or were
ready to decide upon his case. The consequence would be,
that if parties were subjected to such expense, no party
would appear before an Election Committee. He would
advise the Noble Lord not to throw more difficulties than
at present existed, in the way of parties appealing to an
Election Committee. The Hon. Member for Lambeth
bad said that no one on that (the Opposition) side of the
House had expressed any abhorrence of these practices.
—( Hear, hear.) He could only say that in his opinion it
would be for the benefit and advantage of both parties if
they could put an end to such practices altogether.—
( Hear, hear.) He was most anxious that an end should
be put to both bribery and treating. He was only afraid
that they might defeat their own ends by attempting too
much, but he would express a strong desire generally to
concur with the Noble Lord to put an end to them.
Mr. SANFORD, as Chairman of the Ludlow Elec-
tion Committee, begged to express his thanks on behalf
of himself and the Gentlemen who sat with him, to the
Right Hon. Baronet for the manner in which he had
thought fit to speak of the proceedings of that Committee.
He spoke the feelings of all the Hon. Gentlemen who
composed that Committee, when he said that he felt
deeply the responsibility which bad been thrown upon them
as the first Committee under the Right Hon. Baronet's Bill.
He (Mr. Sanford) had sat upon a great many Election
Committees, and he could assure the House that be had
never seen any gentlemen upon a Committee who had so
thoroughly discarded party feeling.—( Hear, hear.) In
the few remarks he was about to make, he would state his
own impressions, and would speak merely as an individual.
They had before the, Committee, a limited number of cases
of bribery, and they thought it their duty to investigate
them ; but the moment they had come to a decision upon
one of the cases, they thought it their duty to intimate to
the Counsel that they had come to a resolution in his
favour, for one case served his purpose as well as many.
The Committee felt that they had no right to ask any
person to put himself in the situation of public prosecutor,
and prosecute other cases without any prospective advan-
tage to himself. He was bound to state that even as far
as the opening statement of Counsel went, as an individual
he could not have made up his mind that bribery was
alleged even to have been so extensive as to
justify a suspension of the writ. With respect
to treating, the case was otherwise ; most un•
doubtedly an extensive system of treating pre-
vailed among all classes in Ludlow. Even the most
respectable inhabitants attended the open houses, and the
houses were opened in a very peculiar manner, without any
order either from candidate or agent, and upon a full and
complete understanding, he supposed, from what had oc-
curred at previous elections, that the candidate in whose
interest they opened would have paid their bills. In those
houses were to be found the candidate, the agent, and
the voter, each having refreshment and liquors of any
kind without payment ; and it had made a strong impres-
sion upon the minds of the Committee, as well as upon
the minds of the public, that, when the Committee felt it
their duty to call for those accounts, some of them were
falsified when they were produced. The question then
was, whether the writ ought to be suspended, in conse-
quence of this extended system of treating? He had made
diligent inquiries whether, in any previous case, a writ had
been suspended upon such a ground, and he believed that
no such case was to be found. He had therefore come to
the conclusion, that in the present case the writ ought not
t be suspended. The vote he had given upon a former
evening was not for the suspension of the writ, hut for
the postponement of the question according to what he
consid-red a clear understanding existing between the two
parties, and he had not voted a second time. Ile felt
bound to state, that, in his opinion, the Chairman of a
Committee under the Right Hon. Baronet's Bill ought
not to originate any initiative measures after an inquiry,
unless directed so to do by the Committee—( Hear, hear)
—and he thought it was not the duty of a Chair man to move
a writ or its suspension without direct orders from the
Committee. He concurred in all that had fallen from the
Noble Lord be:ow him—he only wished he had gone a
little further. Composed as such an assembly as that was
—composed of such a class of men, there ought to be no
difficulty in the way of a Member coming to that table,
and making oath, that, neither by himself nor his agent,
had he been indebted to bribery for his election.—
(Cheers.) That was his opinion, and he begged to give
notice that he would introduce it in a tangible shape
upon a future occasion. It might be necessary, to give
effect to these regulations, that there should he a public
prosecutor.
Mr. WA RB URT 0 N rose, amidst cries of" Question,"
and said he was astonished that any one should doubt the
necessity of an inquiry.—( Hear, hear.) Why the Coun-
sel had opened ten cases of flagrant bribery, and only
proved one. Ought not the other nine to be gone into ?
Hear, hear.) One of the best preventatives against
such corrupt practices was the dread of exposure. That
would be done away with if the exposure in such a case
as this did not take place.—(Hear, hear.) The plan
of the Noble Lord, it was greatly to be regretted, did not
give any checks against the disgraceful practices of intimi-
dation and coercion—( Hear, hear)—and though the Noble
Lord proposed that a Committee might continue their in-
quiry if they thought necessary, further than the parties
to a petition required, yet he had not provided for the
ease (which was not unusual), of the two parties uniting
to stifle the inquiry, of which they had equal cause
to be in dread, and refraining from presenting any
petition for inquiry. In such a case, which might be a
most flagrant one, ought these not to be the means of es-
tablishing an issquiry?—( Hear, hear.) That the corrupt
practices at the boroughs of Ludlow and Cambridge would
be repeated at the next election, he had riot the smallest
doubt, and he for one should do his best to prevent this,
by resisting the writ,—( Hear, hear.)
Lard SAN DON denied that the Committee had stopped
the inquiry. And he remarked that Gentlemen opposite
could not lay claim to purity of election, when the re-
nowned Secretary to the Reform Club had been found
guilty of bribery the most flagrant.—( Loud cheers.) Let
bribery and treating be pnriued with the utmost rigour of
the law, but not beyond it, and not retrospectively.—
( Ironical cries of " Hear, hear.)
Mr. G 0 RIN asserted that, on a suggestion from the
Chairman of the Committee, the inquiry had stopped with
the first case.—( Hear, hear.) And he expressed himself
strongly for the inquiry.
Mr. WAKL EY begged his Hon. Friend the Member
for Lambeth to withdraw his proposition for the present,
and bring it on as a separate motion, not entangling it
with the suspension of the writ.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
He therefore said, let the writ then issue, they having
opposed it as long as they could with any useful effect, but
let an inquiry before a Select Committee take place after.
wards, and lie advised his Hon. Friend not to press a di-
vision, but to bring the matter forward at a future day as
a substantive motion.
Sir R. PEEL explained that lie had not, as the Hon.
Member had said, pledged himself as to the course he
should take in the future prosecution of this inquiry.
Mr. AGLIONBY rose amid cries of ." Divide,
divide," and said he should strenuously recommend his
in. Friend, the Member for Lambeth, to press his
amendment to a division, and if he did so, were there
but half-e-dozen to join them, he ( Mr. Aglionby) would
divide with them. He asked what new circumstances had
transpired to render that course wrong now which was
right the oilier night. If he had not thought the Noble
Lor4 (Lord John Russell) entertained the same
view of this question with himself, he would never hive
persisted in those divisions. The Hon. Gentleman then
entered into a detail of the proceedings of the Committee,
and said he could not but think the Counsel were of opi-