The Sun.
London, England, 1841-06-09 00:00:00

with his Bill for the regulation of the medical profession.
Mr. HAWES saR that he had not the shghtest in-
tention-of proceeding further -with the Bill. • •

.• • FACTORIES' BILL.•
Lord' J. RUSSELL .moved the Order of the Day re-
specting the Factories' Bill, for the purpose of discharg-
ing it.—Agvevil to. • •
On the motion of Lord. J. RUSSELL several of the
Orders of -the Day were called <on :-for< the purpose of
postponing. Them. The Noble Lord stated that it was
his intention-to proceed with the Bribery at Elections Bill.
to-morrow The Ecclesiastical Commissioners Bill, and
the New 4ith Wales Bill.

HERTFORD REGISTRY.
Mr. Storey, _the Town Clerk of Hertford, was then
called to the Bar, and in answer to a ques-
tion from the SPEAKER, he stated that he pro-
duced a copy of the . registry of Hertford ; but he
did not think he was bound to produce it, inas-
much, as it belonged to the Magistrates of the county,
who had paid for it ; and there was no other copy.
The witness, amidst the loud laughter of the House,
here quietly walked off, taking with him the copy ; but,
having been brought back armin by officers of the House,
The SPEAKER ordered he should leave them
the copy of the register, and the House would see what
they should do with it. f

The copy of the register having been left in the House,
and the witness having withdrawn,
Mr. T. DUNCUMBE said that it was a matter of in-
difference whether the copy belonged to the Magistrates
or not. The Clerk of the Peace was the person who was
answerable to the House, and it was his duty to obey
their orders. There could be no doubt that the Magis-
trates had exceeded their power ; they had nothing at all
to do with the printing. It was extremely unjust to the
electors that they should nut be furnished with a printed
copy as provided by the Reform Act. Between the
Clerk of the Peace and the,linderSheriff the House had
been trifled with ; and if the House did not take deci-
sive steps the effect 'would be that the House would be
dissolved, and that the electors would be deprived of the
register. He believed that such had been the object of
the parties in Tefusing it. If an elector had applied for
a copy on the 30th of May, he would no doubt have been
supplied with a copy at a charge of 251.; that was not
contemplated by the Act. The Hon. Member then
moved that the copy of the register be now laid upon the
table.

Mr. ESTCOLTT! could. see no sufficient ground for
taking the register. 'ficim the custody of the officer.
, There was no. doubt that the order of the House had
been disregarded, but he saw no reason for imputing im-
proper motives to the Clerk of the Peace, who was the
servant of the Magistrates, and had only acted under
their orders, and if the- House should removethe register
from-, his .custody, it would be impossible for him
then- to comply with the Act. Ile would not object to a
motion ordering a copy of the register to be furnished
within a week, or any time which would he sufficient for
the purpose. The motion as it stood was quite inconsist-
ent with the practice of the House.
Mr. W. COWPER said that the electors of the
county of Hertford were in this difficulty, that any per-
c)n who wished to obtain a copy of the register must pay
for it the sum of 251. There could be no doubt that
throughout the whole transaction there had been a de-
cided evasion of the orders of the House.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought this question
was very properly brought forward.—(Hear, hear.) He
did not think it expedient to take the copy rom the cus-
tody of the person at the bar, but he would certainly
submit to the House, that that person should be ordered
forthwith to furnish the House with a copy. By the Re-
form Bill it was clearly the duty of the Clerk of the
Peace, as soon as the register was revised, to be in a
situation to furnish a copy to the public upon application.
The order of the House required a statement of the ex-
penses attending the publication of the lists. That return
stated that the sum paid by the Magistrates was 89/., but
that it was not a sufficient remuneration for the labour of
preparing these lists. It being the duty of the Clerk of
the Peace to furnish copies to all parties at a reasonable
price, some difficulty arose as to how he was to be remu-
nerated. But the Act said that the Sheriff and the Clerk
of the Peace were to be remunerated for any expenses
incurred in carrying into effect the provisions of the Act
by the treasurer of the county, and therefore the Clerk
of the Peace was not interested except in so far as con-
cerned the discharge of his public duty. • His remunera-
tion did not arise from the sums received by furnishing
copies to the public. He was paid by the treasurer. In
every county the electors were required to pay ls. to-
wards the expenses of the registry ; and in the present
case there were several thousand electors, so that the sum
must be very considerable; but that sum was not applied
to the expenses of the printing copies—it was paid to
the overseers, and was •added to the Poor-rate of the
county.
.The representation of- the county .being
a matter of interest to the county, it was
considered advisable that the expenses should be
defrayed out of the county funds. It appeared to him
that the party at the bar had no excuse for refusing to
furnish a copy, inasmuch as it was a statutable duty im-
posed upon him without any condition. He was most
unwilling to attribute motives to that gentleman, as he
believed him to be a very respectable person, but he ap-
peared to him to be acting' under some gross delusion.
When the application was made'to the Under-Sheriff in
the first instance his'ansWer (not a very respectful one)
was in substance " I want to know who is to pay .me."—
(Hear, hear.) An Hon. Member had said " hear, hear,"
but he did not think that a safe principle to lay down.
—(Cheers.) Because if the House thought it necessary
to call for the production of any document it was the
duty of the party, on whom. the order was served, to fur-
nish it, if in his power, otherwise no one. could tell how
far the doctrine would go. (Hear, hear.) He
.did not
think the House. would so far disregard every sense
of justice .as to refuse' proper remuneration to
the party who had been put to expense in
complying with its orders, but it should not be met, in
the first instance, with the question of " How am I to be
paid ?" The House had shown great forbearance in
waiting from the 23d of March till now, the Bth of June,
and if there was any longer delay the House would rise
without having its order complied with. He submitted
to the House, therefore, that Mr. Storey be required to
deliver a copy to the HouSe forthwith, or, to prevent
any inconvenience, lie would move that he be required
to furnish a copy on Thursday next.
Mr. WYNN said there were two questions belonging
to the present case—the one was, as to the Clerk of the
Peace not having complied with the provisions of the
Reform Act, and then there was his not having complied
with the order of that House. There was another point
which should not be lost sight of, and that was what was
the object of the Hon. Member in making the motion ?
Now he presumed the object of the Hon. Member was
that the public should be supplied; but he did not think
the publication of these lists by the House would tend to
any very great utility, because it would hold out an in-
ducement to the Clerks of the Peace to furnish copies to
the public and have them printed at the expense of the
House. It would be better, in his opinion, after the
copy was laid on the table, to return it to the Clerk of
the Peace, and to admonish him that he was bound by.
law to furnish copies to the public at a reasonable price.
Sir R. INGLIS said it was impossible for him to con-
cur in the suggestion of the Right Hon. Member' for
Montgomeryshire (Mr. Wynn). The object which.
was required would be obtained by following the advice
of the Solicitor-General, and if his Right Hon. Friend
(Mr. Wynn) urged his suggestion, he. (Sir R. Inglis)
trusted the House would not concur in it.
Mr. WYNN explained.
After a few words from Mr. C. WOOD and Sir E.
SUDDEN, • •

• Sir R. PEEL did not think that the privilege of the
Hdttse was in any way called in question, so as to- render
it necessary for Hon. Members to vindicate them. In
his opinion the best practical course in the present in-
stance was that suggested by the Solicitor-General, and
at an early period of next Session a Committee should be
appqinted to inquire into the best mode of obtaining co-
pies of registers of voters at the least possible expense.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE• acceded to the course suggested
by the Solicitor-General, and agreed to withdraw his
motion.

The motion was then withdrawn, and the amendment
of the SOlieitor-General agreed to.
Mr. Storey was then called to the bar, and
The SPEAKER read to him the order of the House,
directing him to cause a copy of the register of the elec-
tors of the county of Herttbrd to be presented to the
House on Thursday next.

The witness stated thatit would be impossible for him
to have it prepared on that day ; and, in reply to a ques-
tion from Sir Edward Sugden, he said that it would take
him three weeks to have a copy prepared.—(Hear, hear,
and laughter.)
The witness was then ordered to withdraw.
The ATFORNEY-GENEAAL said he had a feeling
at first in favour of the person at the bar, but after his
late exhibition, he certainly thought him contumacious.
—(Hear, hear.) There could be no doubt the copy could
be made within twenty-four hours s or half the time if ne-
cessary.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. ESTCOURT said he did not think the gentleman
at the bar was contumacious, but that he was acting
under an erroneous impression.
Several lion.-Members rose to,43eak, when the Speaker
reminded the House there was no question before it.
ST. ALBAN'S ELECTION. •
Mr. W.• WYNN moved that Mr. .Attorney-General
be directed to prosecute Dr. Richard Webster for bribery-
!at the last St. Alban's election. lie would put it to the
House whether there was not sufficient evidence laid on
the table to enable the House to institute judicial pro-
ceedings. It was proved that 1)r. Webster gave two per-
sons, named Stebbings and Adams 121. for their votes in
favour of the sitting Member. Adams was a person who
went by the name of " lying Adams," and his evidence
therefore might not be to be depended on, but they had
I in addition the. evidence of a clergyman that Adam
ss:
came on the' hustings during the election, bearing
the.
presence a small paper packet, which was opene in
presence of the.candidates and all the electors.
the Mayor said "'What is this ?" and Adams d
repilil :da,t

" It is money, two five-pound notes and two sovereigns,
given me to vote for Lord Listowel by 1)r. Webster."
Dr. Webster appeared to be the chief mover in the busi-
ness of the election, and he (Mr. W. Wynn) could well
conceive Why the Committee had come to the conclusion
Which they had come to, that he did not act under the
directions of Lord Listowel, for in fact, he was the prin-
cipal and not the agent. He (Mr. W. Wynn) looked
upon this as a case of peculiar imiortance. If Dr. Web-
ster had any evidence by which this charge could he
met, he would have an opportunity of producing it,
but he (Mr. W. Wynn) would ask any Hon.
Member whether if he sat on a Grand
Jury, and this evidence bad been given before him,
he would have hesitated to indorse " a true bill?" The
only answer he had, heard to his motion was an inquiry
whether he did not-also look at the election at Walsall.
If there . had been, fifty persons guilty of bribery at
Walsall, that :Iva* no reason:why he should not bring
forward this,charge of bribery at St. Alban's. It had
also beetf ynkl that Dr. Webster might be prosecuted by
a qui ftiiii:a%!tiott, hut he thought the House would do
very wr(Mg it:wttssatiOlei with such • course; and he