The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-03 00:00:00

lie details, and sifting to the very bottom the registra-
tion system, in order to make out a ground for
the rejection of his Bill a Society consisting
of Members professing to he warm and cordial sup•
porters of heir Majesty's Government, while they at
the same time deprecated the repeal agitation in Ire-
land. He entertained great respect for the Socieiy,
and he would speak of them with that respect, even
when he differed from them. Surely, then, he might
be allowed fairly to claim them as coadjutors, in what he
considered to be a geod work, when they agreed with
birn.—(Hear, hear.) They were in favour of an Ex•
tension of the Suffrage, Vote by Ballot, end of short-
ening the duration of Parliaments ; therefore, when he
agreed in their opinions, or rather when they agreed
with him, he could not be charged with illiberality
if he called their opinions to his aid.—(Hear, hear.)
He was anxious to show that upon all the leading prin-
ciples of the Bill, he had the sanction and concurrence of
this Liberal Association of Meter. They thought the
certificate system ought to be abolished—that was a
principle of his 8.11. He wanted a register to be made
by the assistant-barrister, upon a due notice given by
the claimant, and that he should appear personally or
by agent to substentieto his right—their avowed princi-
ple were the same. There was no part of his Bill upon
which he met with so much abuse as upon that point,
giving the double appeal to the Judge. He would
rend one or two extracts fi cm a Report of the Sub-
Committee, and approved of by a General Committee,
which was presided over by the Earl of Gosford,
wherein they recoenised the very identical principle.
' The Noble Lord here proceeded to read extracts from
the Report of the Committee of the Ulster Associa-
tion, or: the registration of voters, wherein they refused
to approve of the English system, because it gave no
rneaue of redress either to the cluienaut or to the ohjec-
tor against an erroneous decision of the registering bar-
rister, except with reference to a Committee of the
House of Commons, or of the Irish system, because it
confined the right of appeal to the elaitunnt.—( Hear,
hear, from the Opposition.) The Report went on to
state that the Committee recommended that the right
of appeal on ell points of law for final decision should
be extended both to the claimant and objector, and
{hat a Court of Appeal should be constituted, be
fore which the clairnatit should have such point de-
cided. There, continued the Noble Lord, were three
of the main provisions of his 13.11,—that it was desirable
to avoid a reference to a Committee of the House of L'orn-
mons. Such refeience to a Committee of the House of
Commons was utievoidable, unless an appeal tribunal were
constituted ; and if they did constitute on appeal t-ibunal,
the appal should lie both ways—to the clamant and to
the objector. Under the system, as it at present existed
in Ireland, the appeal was unswisfactory, and the Felglisla
system was unsatisfactory, because Ilia appeal existed
neither for one party nor the other. With respect to the
appeal being made the subject matter of costs, the plan
he proposed wts framed with a view to avoid a reference
to a tribunal constituted like a Committee of the
House of Commons. In that he concurred with
the Liberal Association of Ulster. Now, what
were the points on which he d-ffered with that Associa-
tion ? The ma tern upon which they differed were not of
great importance—they were about to be non owed to a
single point. He would show to the House that the
points upon which they differed were nut such as to throw,
with the semblance of justice, the charge upon him of
seeking to destroy the franchise, while be professed an in-
tention to amend the law of registration.—( Hear, hear.)
The first of these points was, wheiher the registration
should be linnua, as in England, or quarterly, as in Ire.
land. He confessed that he had no hesitation whatever
on that point. He confessed that he entertained a strong
opinion, that if they meant to make the register a decisive
document, they could not hesitate about making the regitt-
tretioo annual, as it W;is in E gland --(Cheers from the
Opposition.) Ile had next to point cut to the Ii nose that
questions were like.} to arise upon these matters which he
hoped would be discussed with calmness. He stood there
then as the representative, not of his own opinions merely,
but as the representative of the recorded opinions of the
House of Commons. It had been decided last session in
that House that the annual registry was preferable to the
quarterly.—( Cheers from the Opposition.) As regarded
the forms of notices a great deal had been said. He had
usefully considered that subject; he had looked over the
forms of notices, and he had endeavoured to simplify those
forms. He would require certain particulars to be proved,
and upon the proof of those points should rest the right to
be registered, and upon the failure of proof, the removal
from the register. What were the costs as pro-
posed by the Ulster Association ? It was proposed
that although costs should be given in favour of the
party who had proved his claim to the franchise in the event
of the objections raised against his claim being proved to
be frivolous and vexatious. Yet in the case of an indivi-
dual raising objections, of whatever kind, and however
well-founded, and being unable to substantiate those objec-
tions, it was proposed by the Ulster Association, that in
all cases of that kind the public magistrates should impose
a penalty ; on the other hand, however the frivolous claim
might be repeated twenty times over and over, and might
be objected to one session after another in succession, and
at the end of each period come forward again and again.
But however frivolous and absolutely ridiculous that system
was in the one case, yet no costs were to be imposed, and
she claimant would feel perfectly secure that such would be
the case ; but the objector was to be saddled with
costs, if he failed to substantiate his case of objection, hews
ever well founded it might be. Now, he could not sup.
pass that was fair and impartial justice. Ile would pro-
pose in the one case, that if it was the opinion of the
presiding Judge that the objection was frivolous, costs
should be given, but not exceeding 51,, and in the other
case, not exceeding the amount of expenses to which the
opposite party Was put. As that was an important point,
and as it was a point that had been raised in discussion
in the course of the last Session, and upon which a division
had taken place, he wished to call the attention of the
House to it, more particularly as he was extremely anxious
with regard to it, to see how far he would be enabled to
meet the views and wishes of the House. The Right
Honourable Gentleman, the Solicitor-General for
Ireland, had moved for the insertion of certain
words into the clause, which declared that after
the Ist November no person would have the right of
voting for places in Ireland, except Dublin, unless regis-
tered according to that Act; that was to say, that all per-
sons having a right to vote, and holding a certificate
which entitled them to be placed on the list of voters,
should not be called on to substantiate their claims, but
should be liable to objections made by any persons coming
forward to question their right to vote. Tne Attorney-
General wished the introduction of the words for the pro-
tection of parties holding certificates, but he (Lord Stan-
ley) was not sure whether it was his (the Atterney-Go-
neral's) intention to carry that protection further, and ex-
tend it to any persons who should afterwards get on the re-
gister. The words proposed to be introduced into the clause
to which he referred were, " That after the Ist of Decem-
ber, on the making of the registry for any county, city,
borough, &c., every person whose name shall be upon the
register when so made shall be retained on it, and have-his
right to vote continued according to the present law, un-
less he lose his qualification, or die, or unless the registry
be effected by fraudulent means." Sueh was the amend-
ment proposed to be introduced by the Solicitor-General.
As on the one band he (Lord Stanley) came forward to
support the views entert. iced by the majority of that House,
views in which he was supported by a division,
he was ready, as far as a sense anis duty would permit, to
bow to the sense of the House as expressed by a large
majority equally where it concurred with, as where it was
opposed to, his own sentiments ; so, on the other, he
could not agree to that amendment if he understood it
aright. He did not know whether it was the intention of
the Attorney-General to apply the provisions to persons
who had obtained certificates by which, according to the
present law, they were entitled to vote, or whether it was
his intention to say that no party should be placed on the
registry unless he were able to show that his claim wile
established without being subject to any imputation of
fraud. He admitted that in the present arrangement per-
sons were
_subject to re-examination, and in such
ease the right to continue on the registry was
given to them, unless they were rejected ; but the
Right 1-14;h—Gentleman meant to go a step further, and
say that no man once placed on the registry should be
afterwards liable to any objection for any point which might
have been urged against him at the period when he first
put forward his claim. To that extent he (Lord Stanley)
.could not agree with the Right Hon. Gentleman, for the
certain result would be a multiplicity of fraudulent voters
if those. parties who once got on the registry were
left there for ever without having their right at any
time questioned. 'rho evils of ,he present system would
be aggravated by that means, because the privilege of
voting would thus last for the natural term of a man's
life, and Cult not because he proved that he had pos-
sessed the rght to vote, nor because the objector had
not proved that he did not possess that right, but
becau..e in en wer to the objector, he might say, "Truly
I do not possess the right of voting, but you have been
unable to prove that. If you raised this question when I
was first put on the registry, I would not have sue-
ccede i in establishing my claim, but now you have missed
our opportunity, and I am enabled to vote."—(Cheers
from the Opposition.) That was not an extreme case—
it was a cese which be ( Lord Stanley) knew to have
occurred in Scotland, where that very system does
• prevail, and where instances could be produced
of parties at the present moment being on the registry in
several counties eehout having a toot of land in these
cuunties. Those parties did not possess any land, but be-
cause their names were once on the registry, no change of
circumstances could remove them —( Opposition cheers. )
It was well known to every gentleman in England, Scot-
land, and Ireland, that the registries were not very closely
watched in some counties, and that many persons at con-
tested elections were found to be on the registry, who had
no right whatever to be there, and yet the collective wis.
.dom of that House wise called upon to decide that, because
the voters had once got on the Hats, they should continue
on them. He ( Lord Stanley) proposed to give thiS pro.
tection to a voter wile was placed on the registry, that on
the registry he should remain for We, unless a party came
forward and substantiated against him a prima facie case
of note-qualification. The party attempting to being for-
ward such a cese, and not establishing it, was to be subject,
at the discretion of the Barrister, to costs. lie (Lord
Stanley) thought it was right that the voter should have
that protection, and he could not depart from that prin-
ciple so far as to carry the amount of protection to as ab-
solute prohibition against any inquiry respecting a party
placed on the registry. But he had said before lie was
willing to bow to the decision of the House as taken upon
the motion made be the Solicitor-General on a Report of
his, made of the cases of those persons who, up to the
present time, had acquired a right to vote. He(Lord
Stanley) proposed that those parties having certificates
should remain on the registry, and that after the
exeiration of those c,eitifieetes they should comae foriv,wl
as fer-,411 claimants in the same tanner as any other p;.r.,-..t0;
tteieel ine hi- :s" tle• tho!. tho
had been taken as an objection to his Bill were narrowed!