The Sun.
London, England, 1841-10-01 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Sept. 30.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY took his seat on the Wool-
sack shortly before Five o'Clock.
The Frogmore Estates Bill and the Royal Gardens
Bill passed through Committee, and were ordered to be
read a third time to-morrow.
Messengers from the Commons brought up the Ex-
piring Laws Bill, Clayton's Name Bill, the Duke of
Marlborough's Estate Bill, Liddle's Estate Bill, and other
Bills.
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE BILL.
The Administration of Justice Bill was read a second
time, and, the Standing Orders being suspended, it
passed through Committee, and was ordered to be read a
third time to-morrow.
CORN-LAWS.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Mid-
dlewich, Cheshire, and from the congregation of the
Tabernable Chapel, Trowbridge, praying for the re-
peal of the Corn-laws. The Noble Lord said he
would take that opportunity of reminding those
who thought the sliding scale was a great protection,to
the agricultural interest ; that at the present time, when
shat interest especially required protection, the result
of that scale was a duty of one shilling per quarter, and
the consequent introduction of somewhere about five
weeks' average consumption of the people of England
and Scotland. There had been introduced from
1,500,0Q0 to 2,000,000 quarters at a duty of one
shilling. If there had been a fixed duty of Bs. it was
very possible that part of this importation might have
been made, but it certainly would not have been made
in a manner so beneficial to the consumer, and so little
tending to protect the grower, as the one shilling duty
lly the sliding scale. Their Lordships were aware that
.his opinion was against the fixed duty as well as the
sliding scale ; but still the fact should not escape their
attention.
Lord KINNAIIU) prevented a petition from Perth,
praying for the repeal of the Corn-laws. The Noble
Lord said that he feared great distress would result from
persisting in the present srtem.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said, that if the Noble
Zord had beca in his place a little earlier he would
I.
have heard it s d that a very large supply
of corn had beets itrodneed at Is. duty. There could
therefore (we un .. stood the Noble Duke to say) be no
ground for the Noble Lord's apprehensions.
TIMBER. DUTIES.

Earl STRA,NGFORD presented 'a petition from 9,000
inhabitants or Quebec, representing the frequent changes
in the timber duties, and praying for no further alter-
Lions.

BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS.
On the question for the adjournment of the !louse
being put,
Lord BROUGHAM said he would take that oppor-
,taiity of stating the course he meant to rursue on the
important subject to which he had called' the attention
of their Lordships on the first night of the Session. .He
meant the subject of bribery and intimidation and other
malpractices which prevailed to (he was afraid)an unpre-
cedented extent at the late genera! election. He then stated
to the House that they could not more efficiently and faith-
ftilly discharge their duty, than by taking this subject
into consideration, and appointing a committee to en-
quire into the evil, and to provide measures that might
have a tendency to put a stop to them. The degree to
which these- eractices existed, the extent to which
they prevailed, and the miserable effects which they
-produced, not only on the result of the elections, but on
the characters of those concerned, was matter of such
notoriety, that any further description of it would be
superfluous. He (Lord Brougham) had made it his duty
to inoheire into the particulars of a vast number of in-
stances ; and at one time he had intended to select,
for the consideration of their Lordships, three cases
which appeared to him to possess features in some degree
common to them all, and when he stated to their Lord-
ships that the parties who were affected by the evidence
adduced to him were the three great parties which at
present divided men both in and out of Parliament—that
in one case the person charged was a person
connected with the Government, sitting opposite them
in opposition ; that, in another case, the charges were
directed mainly against the present Opposition, then
the Government —(leveghter from Lord Melbourne, and
the Peers on the Opposition benches.) He did not
know whether his Noble Friend laughed at the word
" present," or at the word " Opposition." He
supposed there was no such thing as opposition.
Lord MELBOURNE—AIIow me to explain. I have
heard Gentlemen in the House of Commons called to
order for using the word " opposition." Nothing can
be more unparliamentary than for any Gentleman to
state that he is pledged to opposition.
Lord BROUGHAM made an observation, which was
inaudible in the Gallery, which excited some laughter,
and proceeded. In this case he examined the facts stated
ley the party with which he usually agreed adversely to
those against whom he had the honour of sitting.—
(Laughter.) In another of these cases the charges were
mainly directed against those with whom he had usually
the honour of acting—(Laughter)—those who agreed with
his Noble Friend and himself sitting on that
side of the House ; and in the third
case, the charges mainly affected a third
party belonging neither to the regular Tory
party nor to the regular Whig party, but to-
a party which generally passed under another
name, belonging to neither one nor the other.
He mentioned these circumstaneee for the purpose of re-
minding their Lordships that it was in vain to say that
these practices were adopted by one party or another.
The fact was, that they were adopted by the partizans
of all the three great parties, and if he (Lord
Brougham) were to state the result of the inquiries
he had been able to prosecute, he should say, whichever
party in any given place had the greatest possession of
the means that party had been most lavish in adopting
every course that was calculated to corrupt their
fe'low-subjects. Those were greatly mistaken who
held that these lamentable circumstances, to which
he had adverted, had been the result of the Reform Bill of
1832. He knew that his Noble and Learned Friend on
the Woolsack would take credit to himself for having in
the debates on the Bill, predicted that the increase of
bribery would be the result of that mea-
sure. He (Lord Brougham) maintained the contrary opi-
nion. His Noble Friend, however, had e right
to state that his predictions had been to a certain -extent
fulfilled. He (Lord Brougham) held that the tendency
of the Reform Bill of 1832 was directly the reverse,
and the ground upon which Ile held that opinion was
this—provided the Legislature would do its duty in
checking such practices by punishing those crimes
the ground on which he thought the Reform Bill did
not encourage bribery was simply this—what was the
main cause of this bribery ? It was, that the candidate
expended his money ignorantly, as- he might
do justly under the old system of voting, bribery
being the result of that expenditure, because
the expenses at elections under the old system
were such, that thousands might be expended legally;
but in the present state of the law, the expenses of
a contest were lessened almost to nothing. Such '
being the case, every candidate who was called upon,
to spend thousands, and (lid it with his eyes open,
must of necessity know that the money was spent •
in bribery. Parliament would not do its duty unless,
when the facts came te be known, and when* the corrup-
tion and intimidation that had been practised had been
explained, it took means to put an end to such practices. ,
It was not the Bill of 1832 which had caused
the injury, but because Parliament had not taken- other
step?. He had consulted those who had been ac-
quainted with the subject, and they had stated that
there could be no objection to that House inquir-
ing into the subject. Why, then, it might be asked,
did he not press for the appointment of Com-
mittee ? The reason for his not doing so was this.
first that the duration of the Session would be so short
that it would be utterly impossible to colaplete the in-
quiry. In the other House of Parliament- there were
about eighty election petitions pe nditig, the greater part
of which would come
ttoe castriate it
inth e course of the next
h
Session. That being
might
.be said that
great inconvenience might arise from making inquiries
in that House upon subjects that would come
before the other House of Parliament.—(Hear.)
These two reasons, after much consideration
hive to justqy hira, most reluctantly, in ales,ine
ta appearedto
from
pressing on their Lordships that notice of whichn had
~even notice on the first night of the S •
fie hoped, however, that he would halo their Lordshipsesn.
concurrence in entering upon that inquiry in
rY the
ensuing Session. He felt sure that it
might be
conducted with an absolute certainty of obtaining
information. facts
confident that the
must lead to some
which
Would be elucidated,
legislative enactment, and the inquiry would teach
them what the provisions of that enaetment ought'
to be. He should deem it his duty to call
their Lordships' attention to the investigation of the
facts as soon as the inquiries in another place had been
brougnt to an end.
The House then Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Sept. 30.
The SPEAKER took his seat at a few minutes to Four.
The Right lion. T. L. Corry took the oaths and his
seat for Tyrone.
The Duke of Marlborough's Estate Bill wa.3 read a
third time and passed.
The Riddle's Estate Bill was read a third time and
passed.
The Claytin's Name Bill was read a third tim3 and'
passed.

PETITIONS.
Col. VERNON presented a petition from the grocers
arxl spirit-dealers of Armagh, praying for an alteratun
of spirit licenses.
Mr. THORNELY presented a petition from Beiper,
in Derbyshire, praying the House to take the depressed
condition of the country into its consideration, and to
make an inquiry into the decayed state of various branches
of commerce.

Sir G, De LARPENT presented a petition from
11('LlbaY, complaining of the conduct of Sir Henry
Roper, Chief Justice of that place, and of the partiality
in the adininiszration of justice.
Mr. EWART presented a petition from a numhvr of
Ministerarepresenting large bodies o the Disseaters of
.Lane.,hiee and Cheshire against the Corn-laws. Also
a petition from a Baptist congregation in the same place,
complaining of being obliged to talc.; oaths. And an-
other from the same parties, complair.g or the gross im-
morality of certain females in servral towns in those
counties, and praying that penalties may be enacted to
~.,Fevent such immorality in future.
C. NAPlERpresented *petition front St. Pancras,
praying that the bridges of Vauxhall and Waterloo may
be opened to the public.
Mr.,CORIPEN presented a petitions from th© Protes-
tant Dissenters of a town in Cheshire against the Corn-
laws, also petitions from Sisley-bridge and Stockport to'
the same effect.

-----
SAVINGS' BANKS.
Mr• WILLIAMS gave notice that he folioed, early