The Sun.
London, England, 1833-05-25 00:00:00

Lord was to extend the constituency, b/ taking in a
district extending two and a half miles beyond the
present limits of the borough, and he expected to obtai❑
the desired purity in the elections by this extension of
the constituency. The Noble Lord seemed to rest his
whole case upon this, arguing that no act of bribery bad
been alleged to have taken place in the county.
He (Colonel Evans), for his part could not conceive how
extending the constituency would produce purity of elec-
tion. He saw no real and effective remedy for corrupt
practices but the ballot; and he, therefore, thought they
had now a very fine opportunity to try the question of
the ballot. He should, therefore, merely move, as an
amendment, that "gross bribery and treating having pre-
vailed during the last election for the borough of Ilertford,
it is expedient, with a view to the better management of
the election for the same, that the Members to represent
that borough should in future be elected by ballot "
The SPEAKER having put the question,
Mr. TYNTE observed, that he was placed in very pe-
culiar circumstances. He was always a friend to the bal-
lot ; amt he confessed that the circums•ances of his sitting
as a Member of the Committee on the Hertford election
had decided his opinion upon the subject; and he
should support any measure for introducing it. if his
Gallant Friend (Col. Evans) divided the House, he should

feel bound to support him.
Mr. E. J. STANLEY said it was very probable that
the ballot might turn out to be one of the modes for ef-
fecting the objects which they bad in view ; but he
thought it would be better to leave it to the Committee
to determine whether it was the best method wh ch they
had it in their power to adopt. He thought, certainly,
that the present was not a bad opportunity for making a
trial of the ballot—an experimentum in corpore viii ; but
at the same time he thought it ought to be lett to the Com-
mittee.
Mr. O'CONNELL wished his Eon. and Gallant
Friend (Colonel Evans) to consider whether his motion
would not tend to defeat his own tfoject. He was quite
aware of the paramount importadee of the ballot ; but he
thought its effectei small constituency, would afford a
less firrndible opportunity of treeing its operation than
that which would be afforded if the constituency were ex
tended. The only fruits which they could anticipate from
the introduction of the ballot into a borough in which such

miserable, low, abd depraved corruption had prevailed,
would be, the return of some Hon. Member of the corps
of twaddle, who might be less hurtful than those who
were introduced by corruption, but would not be more
❑seful. He hoped, therefore, that his Hon. and Gallant
Friend would allow the Committee to be appointed, and
the constituency to be enlarged. He might then move the
introductio❑ of the vote by ballot, when he should cer-
tainly command one vote at least in favour of it. For
these reasons, he would respectfully implore his Hon. and

Gallant Friend to withdraw his motion.
Colonel EVANS said, the Hon. and Learned Member
for Dubli❑ contended that his proceeding on the present
.erasion tended to defeat his own object. He (Colonel
Evans) was of opinion that the vote by ballot would se-
cure purity of election, even if the borough of Hertford
were to continue to be a small borough. His object,
however, was not confined to the borough of Hertford.
His object was, in this case, to endeavour to gain a great
principle. He therefore differed from his Honourable and
Learn d Friend in this respect. At the same time, if it
should appear to be the opinion of the House that he
ought to pursue a different course, he had no objtc-
tion to shape his amendment as a recommendation to the
Committee.
Mr. O'CONNELL said, if the Hon. Member's amend-
ment succeeded, it was plain there would be no Committee
—don't you perceive it ?—(A laugh.)
Colonel EVANS then withdrew his motion.
The Committee was then appointed.
On Mr. POLLOCK'S name being read as one of the
Members of the Committee,

The HON. MEMBER observed that he was quite willing

to undertake the duties, if the House Those to impose

them upon him, provided the Committee was to be allowed
to inquire: but he objected to proceeding upon former
inquiries.
Mr. BERNAL objected to his appointment from pri-
vate circumstances.—(A laugh.)
Mr. BERNAL than moved the suspension of the issu-
ing of the writ for the new election for the borough of
Hertford till the Ist of July.—Agreed to.
Lord G. SOMERSET asked whether the House was
to he prorogued in the meantime?
Colonel EVANS repeated his opinion, that the case of
the borough of Hertford was one of the most innoxious and
most satisfactory modes of putting the question of the vote
oy ballot upon trial. He would, therefore, now put his
former motio❑ in the shape of a recommendation to the
Committee.
Tie SPEAKER observed, that the motion was either
ttf such a nature as to give the Committee the power of
doing what they could already do—viz., to inquire into
the best means of preventing bribery and corruptio❑ in
the borough of Hertford—sr, it went to impose upon
them a spt cies of restraint which was inconsistent with
inquiry. He therefore put it to the Hon. and Gallant
Member whether he ought to persevere in such a motion ?
Colonel EVANS apologised for ❑ot being aware of the
precise forms of conducting business i❑ the House ; but if
,he Committee should recommend any Bill upon the sub-
ject in question, he should consider it his duty to propose
a clause for the introduction of the vote by by ballot.
CARRICKFERGUS ELECTION. _

Mr. O'CONNELL bad a similar case to bring forward
—that of the borough of Carrickfergus.
The SPEAKER observed that the case was not exactly
similar, as the writ in the former case expired that day.
Mr. O'CONNELL said his writ also expired to-day.
It was his intention to comprise what he had to say in
the shortest possible compass. His purpose was, to move
for leave to bring in a Bill for the total disfranchisement
of the borough of Carrickfergus. If it were possible to
bring the whole evidence before the House, he entertained
no doubt of his being able to induce them to permit burn
to bring in the Bill which he proposed. The county of
Antrim, in which the borough of Carrickfergus was
situated, returned five Members exclusive of that borough,
and therefore he thought that the district in which that
borough was situated was already sufficiently represented.
There was another ground on which he considered it
advisable to disfranchise the borough—he meant the
smallness of the constituency. It consisted of a single
parish containing 8,698 inhabitants. Be!ore the passing
of the Reform Bill, the voters consisted of 39 freeholders
Ind 812 freemen, in all 851. Out of all these there were
only thirteen 40s. lieeholders. The present number of
voters was 1,021, of whom 948 voted at the last election,
498 for the sitting Member, and 450 for Sir A. Chiches-
ter. The • influence in the borough had been disputed
between the Eari of Donoughmore and the Marquis of
Downshire, and the former had in the end prevailed; but
the bribery had been universal, and be (11r. O'Connell)
had analysed the poll.books.dividing the p rticulars into '
isolated cases, as explained in the evidence which had been
hid before the House. The first case to which he would
refer was that of Alexander Hallerton—a case which
showed the effrontery with which bribe ry had been carried
on. The next case to which he would refer was that of
James Hunter, who bad received bribes from both parties,
71. 10s. for the sitting Member, and Si. for the candidate
he voted for. Another case to which he would call the
attention of the House, was one of the most open, undis-
guised, and profligate character, where the wife of a
voter was paid 201., in the street, for the vote which her
husbar d had given. He regretted the hour was so late,
as he bad prepared a digest of evidence, which would not
fail to satisfy the most sceptical of the gross proceedings
which had taken place.—(Hear, hear.) He would, how-
ever, mention a fact connected with the bribing of a family
named Harper. There were three of them, having a
vote each : the father and two of his sons. One came,
he was off:red 101., under the supposition that he was
the only one possessed of the right to poll. A second
came, and he was offered 101. also. A third came, and
the agents struggled hard to run his price down to
71. It was resisted; and at length a pocket-book was
procured, notes to the amount of 301. were deposited in it,
and it was confided to the care of a trustee. The trio went
tip and polled, and immediately afterwards, in the open
street, without the slightest concealment, the pocket-book
and its treasure was handed over to the profligate voters.
—(Hear, hear, hear.) Another witness who had been
examined before the Committee, was George M'Cann, who
admitted he got, at one time, upwards of 1201. for general
election purposes. He was not, he said, exactly an agent,
but he was very active indeed.--(A laugh.) This money
he got from ens Legge ; and in reply to a question why,
and on what ground he had got it, his reply was, " Most
likely to give it to voters." The voters he negotiated with
were in the interest of Dobbs ; and he did not deny, nay,
he admitted, that he who gave him the money expected,
" most likely," that it would be distributed amongst the
wives of the vot. rs. Jas. Penny, another general agent
for bribery, actually produced to the Cnornittee a list of
those individuals whom he had corrupted, acknowledging
t,lvlol,el„.£3duiesr wasw v)h,triigch;ehne had given, none of which exceeded
Thhiem
,t, ntoonemy,akaeccotrhe bestdingto
uhseisoof own
could." He managed to get one vote so low as V. 17s.
Well, then, lie came to this Legge, Daniel Legge, at-
torney, Lisburne, Antrim, who admitted hiving given
money fur these vile purposes, and whose hesitation
was only as to the amount thereof. He admitted
they bribed every one they could, and as an excuse