The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-16 00:00:00

BRITISH GUIANA.

Mr. BAILLIE said information had recently been re-
ceived to the effect that the Court Policy of the colony,
taking into consideration that the expenditure of the
colony had increased during the last two years from
56,000/. a year to 225,000/., had wisely determined to re-
duce the expenditure by reforming it. They proposed
that the salaries of the public officers of the colony, com-
mencing with the Governor himself, should be reduced
35 per cent., and that with a view to see what the
mother country would do, only to vote the sup-
plies for six instead of twelve months; both of
which propositions were rejected by the Governor.
The questions he wished to ask were, whether there
would be any objection to lay the correspondence on
the matter on the table, and whether it was true that the
Noble Earl at the head of the Colonial-office had refused
to license eight vessels for the conveyance of emigrants
in connexion with the colony ?
Mr. HAWES said it was perfectly true that the Noble
Earl had refused to license the vessels, because, in the
first place, he did not wish to see captured negroes sent
to a colony which appeared in such an unsettled state;
and secondly, because the captains of vessels conveying
free African emigrants received a bounty on their arri-
val, which, as the supplies had not been voted, could not
have been paid. When the correspondence, which he
had no objection to produce, was laid on the table, he
should be prepared to justify the determination to which
his Noble Friend had come.

Lord J. RUSSELLWES T I
saidND that
a th e proposed DISTRESS.
to make the
statement of which he had given notice for to-morrow
evening with respect to West India distress, before the
other orders of the day.—(Hear, hear.)
NEW WRIT FOR LEICESTER.
Lord J. RUSSELL wished to put it to his Hon.
Friend opposite, the Member for Northampton, who had
a motion on the paper for to-night for the issuing of a
writ for Leicester, whether, under exisiting circum-
stances, he would press on his motion that evening. The
evidence taken before the Committee had been printed,
but was not in the hands of Members, added to which
the whole subject would be brought before the House
on Tuesday next, for which day the lion. Member for
Droitwich had given notice of a general motion OR the
subject.

Mr. STAFFORD expected that such an appeal
would be made to him from some Member on the
opposite side of the House. He mut confess
that he could not accede to the request of the
Noble Lord. He considered that a most unfair and un-
constitutional course had been taken by some Members
on the other side of the House, the result of which was,
that the difficulties attending this question had become
greater and greater, and ultimately would become insur-
mountable unless same stop was put to the course that
was being adcpted. He could not allow a single day
to intervene before moving the writ, and having done so
he would have discharged his duty, and made it
imperative upon the House to discharge theirs.
He moved this writ with more hope than he
had moved others, for he had invariably found
that a short recess gave Members a more vivid notion of
whet was right and wrong than upon other occasions.
Let Hon. Members take the trouble to look over their
papers and sae what they had done in the present
session. Since they had met in last November,
the number of Acts they had passed amounted to
eighteen. Of those eighteen, four were money Acts,
three amendments and explanations of existing
laws, two the famous coercion Bills, one the
Borough Superannuation Fund, another to facilitate the
progress of public works in Ireland, another to extend
the time for the construction of railways, another for
making arrangements in the Court of Chancery, and
lastly, the famous New Zealand Constitution Suspension
Bill. Such were the Bills they had passed this session,
and in the face of this experience what chance was there
of the Honourable Baronet's Bill passing this session?
But the course the House was pursuing, so far from
punishing bribery, was, in fact, encouraging it—
(Hear, hear)—inasmuch as the electors who had
hitherto been the exposers of bribery had been annoyed
at the delay which had taken place, and now they al-
together abstained from making complaints of bribery.
They, had a proof of this in the proceedings of the
last Bewdley election, where it was openly avowed that
treating was freely resorted to, and yet they had now re-
ceived petitions complaining of the return, simply because
the parties who were the opponents of corrup-
tion in that borough naturally felt that their
petitioning might ultimately lead to the suspen-
sion of their motion altogether. Again, in the
case of Kinsale, parties who had determined to
emigrate upon the proceeds of the previous election, upon
learning that another contest was to take place, quitted the
emigrant ship in the Cove of Cork, leaving their wives
and families on board, and returned to Kinsale to do a
last act of duty to their country in assisting to return
another Member to the Treasury benches.—(Hear, and
laughter.) Bearing these circumstances in mind, and
looking at the fact that the Hon. Baronet's Bill, repu-
diated as it was by the Government, and by the Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth, had to fight its way
amongst 48 others, he really felt that it was impolitic
to delay the issuing of these writs any longer,
and he should therefore persevere in his motion.
Great distress was now existing in the borough of Lei-
cester, and the poor-rates were as high as 13s. in the
pound. Consequently great dissatisfaction was expressed
with respect to the institutions of the country, and there
was growing up a tendency towards violence among the
people, and he would ask was it right and was it expe-
dient in such a state of things to keep the bo-
rough without a representative in that House ?
The Hon. Member concluded by moving that Mr.
Speaker do issue his warrant to the Clerk of the Crown
to make out a new writ for the electing of two burgesses
to serve in this present Parliament for the borough of
Leicester, in the room of Sir Joshua Walmsley and
Richard Gardner, Esq., whose election had been deter-
mined to be void.
The SPEAKER having put the question,
Mr. FREWEN rose to oppose the motion. He said
the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Stafford) had told
them that he had no connexion with Leicester.—(Hear.)
A letter which he had received from a solicitor of much
practice in the locality, stated that he had put his motion
on the paper without consulting any one in the town with
respect to it. Now the House bad to consider two things
—the report of the Committee which was presented only
a few days ago—(Loud cheers)—which set forth many
cases of bribery, and whether they would main-
tain that report or not. His (Mr. Frewen's)
family had been connected with Leicester for
many years, and he believed it was as notoriously
corrupt a place as any in the kingdom.—(Laughter.)
As au instance of this, he might state that in 1826,
66,0001. were spent by three candidates, which
showed that much of that money must have been
spent in bribery. In 1839, when he (Mr. Frowen)
most reluctantly offered himself as a candidate,
he told his committee that he would rather

lose his election than that there should be a single
case of bribery. The election went against him, because
his committee would not consent to spend 1501. in the
same way as a similar sum had been expended at the
previous :election—in bribery. A certain number of
freemen tendered their votes to the committee
for 11. a head, 17s. 6d. having been the price at the
former election.—(Hear, and laughter.) They should
either disfranchise the city or limit its boundary. Un-
less they took some decisive step the same system of
bribery of which he had spoken would continue. lie
should therefore oppose the motion.
Mr. SEYMER, a member of the Committee,
recommended the House to read the report of
the Committee before they came to a decision.
If the Government proceeded with their Bill he would
vote for the suspension of the writ, but if they did
not he should feel compelled to support the motion of
the lion. Member for North Northampton.
After a few observations from Captain MANGLES,
which were inaudible in the gallery,
Sir J. PAKINGTON trusted that his Hon. Friend
the Member for North Northamplon would not press
his motion for the issuing of the writ. Leicester was
one of the Committees that had made a special report,
and that report was entitled to the consideration of the
House. Such being his opinion, he thought the writs
ought not to be issued.

Lord J. RUSSELL considered that if the Honourable
Member for North Northamptonshire had accepted
his proposition ho would have done far better for the
interests of those he represented than by adopting the
course he had of persevering with his motion for the
issuing of the writ.—(Hear.) He denied that the suspen-
sion of writs was an unconstitutional proceeding. Such a
course was warranted by the proceedings that had taken
place in earlier times, when writs had been suspended
for a year, in consequence of bribery and corruption.
In the case of Bishop's Castle, in the reign of Queen
Anne, such a course of proceeding had taken place, and
numerous cases of a later date migt be brought forward.
He thought, if the House approved of the principle of the
Bill of the Hon. Member for Flintshire it should be
gone on with, but if the House did not approve
of the principle of that Bill ; he would then go on with
the Bill with respect to the Horsham borough, and en-
large its provisions as the House thought fit.
Mr. BANKES said he was sure the Noble Lord
would readily admit that the times to which the Noble
Lord had referred were greatly disturbed by
party feeling, which ran very high in the House
of Commons, so much so indeed, that it was
related in Lord Hardwicke's life that the
House, on one occasion, voted that forty was a majority
in ninety. It was in that way the elections were con-
ducted then, and he was sure the Noble Lord was not
desirous that they should return to such a system as
that. With regard to the immediate question before the
House he thought these boroughs had been placed in a
very unjust position. They had no representative to
defend them in that House, and the only way
in which they could support their case was by
sending counsel to the bar of the House,
which was a very inconvenient course. On the
whole, however, as this question would be resumed next
week, he would recommend his Hon. Friend the Mem-
ber for North Northampton not to press his motion now,
but leave the matter to be decided with the other cases
next week.

HUME said the motion given for Tuesday by
the Hon. Baronet (Sir John Pakington) for the issue of
the suspended writs, would have the effect of delaying
his motion for Parliamentary reform, upon which, what-
ever might be the merits of the motion, great anxiety
existed in the country. He, therefore, trusted that the
Hon. Baronet would not persevere in his motion.
Sir JOHN PAKINGTON said he had given notice for
Tuesday next without the slightest reference to the
motion standing in the Hon. Member's name on the
paper, and considering that the issuing of the writs was
a question of very great importance, he could not con-
sent to withdraw his motion.
Colonel SIBTHORX trusted that the Hon. Baronet
would take the sense of the House on the subject.
After a few observations from Mr. ELLIOP,
Lord LINCOLN said he quite agreed with the Noble
Lord, that it was most desirable that the House should
agree to take at once a division upon the general prin-
ciple of the Bill brought in by his Hon. Friend (Sir John
Hamner), and if there was a majority in its favour, that
no further impediment should be thrown in the way of its
further progress. A private Member could not pass a Bill
so successfully through the House as it could be done by
the Noble Lord, who possessed so much influence
in that House. He hoped, therefore, the Noble Lord
would take the matter into his own hands.

Lord J. RUSSELL said he had given notice of his in-
tention to do so. _

Lord LINCOLN said people out of doors enter!ained,
much objection to indefinitely postponing the issuing of
the writ. No doubt the majority of the House would
, vote against the issuing of the writ, but he hoped
the Noble Lord would give precedence to the Bill on
Tuesday.
Lord J. RUSSELL had given as much assistance to
the Bill of the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Flint
broughs, as if it had been brought forward by a mem-
ber of the Government. He should assist the
progress of the Bill to the best of his ability, but he
could not give up other Bills of public importance,
seeing that the Bill was threatened with much undue
opposition.
Sir J. TROLLOPE, as a member of the Leicester
Committee, wished to remark that they had specially
reported that the parties at that election appeared to re-
quire the consideration of the House. He should like to
know how the consideration was to be given to it when
the evidence was not before them.
Mr. HUDSON thought that, whatever might be the
report of the Committee, it was hard upon the great
majority of the voters in,Leicester to be deprived of the
exercise of their privileges, because of the misconduct of
some very few of the electorate. As regarded his Hon.
Friend Sir Joshua Walmsloy, for whom he had great
esteem, he knew he had been most anxious to avoid
doing anything corrupt, and he thought he had been
hardly treated.
Mr. AGLIONBY said these discussions were ex-
tremely inconvenient. He had heard it said that small
constituencies were always corrupt. lle denied the fact,
,s far as Cockermouth was concerned.—(Laughter.) lie
would not sit there and hear his constituency slandered
ern by imputation. Ho had sat for Cockermouth ever
since 1632) and be declared be had never paid a single

farthing except for legal expenses. He had never once
been asked for money, and only twice for drink, in All
his canvasses.
Sir G. GREY hoped all the gentlemen who repro.
rented small boroughs would not think it necessary to
detail the circumstances of their canvasses.—(Laughter)
In the present case he had no hesitation in refusing hie
assent to the motion before tia.em. The evidence of the
Committee was not before them, and until it was, Old.
until it had been considered, he should not vote in WI
case for the issue of the writ. .••
Mr. MANGLES rose to• explain.. He had. not Sr
tacked small boroughs indiscriminately, but had state"
that a small number of voters could always tura the

scale.
Mr. COBDEN said he hoped the House general
was more pure than had been represented. Of this hei
felt convinced—that some of the cases which bad been
brought before the House were by no means sach
grant cases as had occurred in other places at the last
election. He believed the cases of Sir Joshua Wale°.
loy and Mr. Gardner at Leicester, of Mr. Seeley st
Lincoln, and of the late Honourable Member for
a
Lancaster, were peculiarly hard cases.—(Hear,
Ho believed the last elections in these boroughs we
as fairly conducted as ever elections bad been at di°
piaces.—(Cheers.) But what he rose_to advert to ei
the fact that the Hon. Member for Droitwich ha.
thought it fit to give notice of his intention to interfer°
between his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume) and the decisiofi
of the House on Tuesday night. The Hon. Member.
Droitwich had declared that he did not know that ;11:
should so interfere when he gave his notice. Blitz,
knew it now. The fact had been stated to biol. e"."0,
reply was, that his motion was of so much importst„.
that he could not postpone it. But there was no oop
sion to postpone it. He might bring it forward to-rn°,,,
row, or on Monday.—(Hear, hear.) If be did, be id
ever, persist in bringing it forward on Tuesday', be I°l4
drive himself and his friends to take the only remeiet„
course which was open to them, and raise discussionsvo
the general state of the representation of the Pel)'
whenever the question of a writ was raised.—(ebee"-.0
Mr. W. MILES thought Mr. Hume fairly entitled
..o
bring forward a question relating to the representst%
of the people. With regard to the question before been
he thought that as the subject was recommended to tßness
for consideration by a Committee, he ought not to
for the present issue of the writ. flier
Mr. GORING also said he should vote for the s--.
sion of the writ.
the
Mr. STAFFORD said he should move to-owrref.the
issue of the writ for Derby, and thereby get Member
difficulty arising from the notice given by the
for Droitwich, who certainly might as well haveie-iir,
his motion for any other day than Tuesday."—k,..iop,
hear.) He had been asked to postpone bis raibea
because the evidence was not before the House. to
would it be laid before them? If any printer wereit,
be able by his delays to prevent the issuing of "Aug
he did not know where the suspension of writs t bat
terminate. Although he knew that he should be Pio •
a small minority, he should, on principle, insist °
division.

The House divided, when there appeared-- 6
For the motion
12
Against it 9
Majority
PUBLIC HEALTH
proceeding on farther
deration of the report on this Bill, hileste
Lord LINCOLN said ho was anxious to Wrt":nesti'
motion of which he had given notice to alter the
tution of the board by which this Bill was to be ere°"tbst
He had thought a central authority necessaroll:nor
in the Bill, as originally framed, the principle or c",,--bse.
ligation was carried too far. The Bill, bowele,.l
since been altered, and its machinery has been "-c oj ieb
strutted. He highly approved of the alterations
iv 00
had been made, and he should therefore Withdrs.
amendment he had intended to propose. at thl
Viscount MORPETH expressed his gratificarols,
withdrawal of the amendment, and thanked t'BBll.
Lord for the general support he had given to the -ite the
Colonel THOMPSON then moved to subetil be it
following for clause 88: —" Provided always, efnt be'
enacted, that no contract, covenant, or agroeuiescb:
tween landlord and tenant, or any other persone,bogen
ing the payment of taxes and assessments to be cos'
on their respective premises, shall be deemed °roof
strued to extend to the payments or apportioneiese be
payment charged thereon under this Act. u°1••• IV"
binding contrary to the intent and meaning of t„1,„ sted
but that all such payments shall be charged oPviejar,
paid by the respective occupiers, subject to eue.had still
tions and repayments as are by this Act autbortst; oball
allowed; and all such deductions and reper,et Ott
be made and allowed accordingly, notwithstialor'nlocts,
contracts, covenants, or agreements; and a or to
covenants, and agreements made or entered in
made or entered into, for payment of aay reek h-dde,";
annual payment in full, without allowing SliCl/10°
tions and repayments as aforesaid, shall be Otte,. 4
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opposed the
ment.
The clause was withdrawn without a dirisieiri'nf clad°
Mr. TURNER then moved to add at the et, it;
A the following clause:—" And be it enacted 1 beer"
mediately upon the issuing by the said genes tee,sir
of health of any such certificate as first eu"..," 'arrs"..4A
tioned, in reference to any burial-ground deflithe s'r
or extra-parochial place, it shall be the duty °,d for tP°
general board to give notice to the local bee' oal to r,
district within which the burial-ground referr:b WO'
such certificate shall be situate, requiring sttiee.
_ate
board, within a time to be fixed by such,. -pi- tent
provide or purchase additional land to such d marst
to the said general board shall seem rneer'hanarishm°-
either within or out of the bounds of stle-,4 or
..itu'r
place, for the enlargement of such burial-greth'd paeort
making an additional burial-ground for the sat,
1 h PlifiL
or extra-parochial place, and thereupon it sirs" -° t""
for the said local board, with the approbatie!rebose
said general board, to make such provision or Pnreaaes
accordinkly; and in default of such provision or Pn, ouch
being made and completed within the time fixed 7_rd to
notice, it shall be lawful for the said general b7...030
make such provision or purchase, and for the Pufd or
of such purchase, either by the said general bljeads
by the said local board, all the provisions of the_.,,,bitee
Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, relative to the ues.-d
and sale of lands, shall be consolidated With
an
deemed and taken to be part of this Act."
Mr W. J. FOX opposed the clause, as invol
injustice to the Dissenters, who would be te-111
churchyard accommodation, from the use of Wille
eiellf lot
might be excluded.
Mr. NEWDEGATE supported the clause. tjesse
Lord J. RUSSELL would put to the Hon. Gen 00
the case of a Baptist: the Baptist would of eourstely
to contribute towards the rate for erecting a new Clsthe
yard, as proposed by the. Hon. Member. Wetn:fete
Baptistbe entitled to bury his child in the Church'
to which he had contributed? the
Mr- TURNER - id that hi alter

sai, ia, ..;is clause did not 013
general principle of the Bill in this respect There nijr
be, of course, a portion of churchyards open for '1
serTitheres'ATTOßNEY-GENERAL pointed out th
.t
bß)i,
nr7lyst vested
TURNERstthi
negfrtleeh saidoclodia
consecrated
er a
difficultted churchyardsport)ionmi tit
ogtfhb
tc) lee
or fivi
rtedas
in ther.D sO clergyman.N
conceived that it was calla-I:a:oll:5r°
, a biP
"
for Dissenters to be called upon to contribute htbe
the purposes of a churchyard from which they inbig nee
excluded. He agreed with the lion. Mover of 1,-;diff;
clause that it would be perfectly easy to obviate t",,,,tca
culty by vesting the freehold only of the conse'''
portion of churchyards in the clergyman. that -
The: ATTORNEY-GENERAL suggested oobis
removal of the words, "of any parish or extra-Porto lb°
place," would remedy the objection, as taking to
the special character it now possessed.
lad
Viscount MORPETH said he should be very !de for
adopt any practical suggestion that might be re pissee.
obviating what was clearly an evil as regarded
to tce
tern. It was manifest that their position in rel%ot sad
burying places should be placed on a more dist/.
satisfactory footing.—(Hear.)
The clause was then withdrawn. were
Colonel SIBTHORP wanted to know when tlifeloodoo
to have a Bill for the scouring of the City of '5"
that receptacle of a very dirty set ?
Viscount MORPETH said that his cectlPatihld'6ei`l'jili
the present Bill had been so incessant, that bertoonee,,,
been able to bring forward the long since aind iolos
measure for the City of London; but he c 0 ~ore aZo,
the lion. and Gallant Gentleman that a 1,00('
reference to the sewers, not only of the city. o._ nopaiLie
but of the metropolis generally, was in soti", ~osslY
tion, and would be introduced with the least,
delay. 20, reer;s6
Captain PECHELL moved that in clause ds gif
ing the qualifications of voters, all the or Ortyr,de
plurality of votes, accordi to extent of the
00'
omitted, so as to place then ch and poor on
level in this respect. . ca, lsf
Mr. HUME strongly supported the mhtl°
ground that plural voting in parishes was verY 5o
amongst the people at large. beep (01
Lord MORPETH said that the question had rot
fully argued in the House that it would be disre r
to tne decision then arrived at to alter the clause:o, sP
Mr. S. CRAWFORD, who seconded the 0
et
strongly supported it. 'ed t,f
Mr. NE‘VDEGATE, as a magistrate, deltetife'
plural voting iu parochial matters had keen prod" f
discontent. 'ye
tatl pr'
Sir B. HALL said that he was the represeflos
three parishes, in two of which single vori,l4o; s
wfy
mitten, and in the third (Paddington)
given, to the great dissatisfaction of the parrai„oiee'
n vet, ph
plural v.
If the 13i11 for the metropolis, which the t.itii°o presaa,
were preparing, contained any such clause as
.tly
he was sure the different parishes would begee' t
.„
h
poMrse to it.
d . HENLEY thought the Government was roigo-ase'
adhering to the decision already come to by the
After a few words from Mr. DRUMMOND,
The House divided, when there appeared---
For the motion
........ .
Against it
The amen 23
Adimajeonritstyhaavgianignsatllt.bh.ee
en
was received. No. 2)* jot°
BOROUGH ELECTIONS BILL ( to g 0
Inoue
e. ...
0.
t--;;er 014
On the order of the day for the Souse
tiorl is
Committee on this Bill being read,
his epool Colonel
tSoI
thisßT HBOi rll. foisee
hadt o o fib*:
been
alln ntiho‘er Tib,s.ll. ra‘s!,,beffi.,Y
lion. Members that they disapproved of !let wO5 etiortui;l,
they were not there he could not say, but
for him to be at his post. The Bill elas.greVgaaPi'6l,s)o°
If justice was done other much larger sealPl bad of
named in it would be included. A great
a, tail‘c?
said about Horsham, and the Noble .Lord had cp
But his at' bringing the case before the House. s f die
dat. Why bad the Noble Lord delayed s° hint;
deal
He '(Colonel Sibthorp) regretted that the ostpopeb-
House would not allow him to 1320Y0 tll° P

et the _ U
suhsvnnosittee ior six months; but he should in
viwerq.uent stages give the Bill every opposition in his
Lady
alr & RUSSELL hoped that as the House had
t ( declared its ipiei ei of the merits of the Bill in
asu d•.( , ,
pre divisions the Committee would be permitted to be
the
without further delay.—(Hear.)
Ins House then Committee on the Bill.
Prool went into
onel SIB-MONT moved that the chairman report
,!.ress, and ask leave to sit again.
sulls,r• BANKES would be willing to support his Hon.
but 'anent Friend in a division against the first clause,
,iiietrusted that he would not take the seemingly in-
the 13illcourse of dividing on a merely formal stage of
Cos e
the s IBTHORP persisted in dividing the House, and
ford was cleared. On our return we were
in-
the "fl that no division had taken place, the mover of
Tileaßtaoendosent having been unable to obtain a teller.
basks n• and Gallant Member hastily bundled up ii •
os and papers and walked out of the House.
- clause 1, appointing commissioners,
iadeedl!ANKES had an olej•ction to this clause, which,
jested d, involved the whole principle of the He ob
-
teen 7enerally to commissioners appointed
.?r Gcrvs•ern--
nenatise—let them act ever so imparts illy--their
of b; because—lot
newer gave satisfaction, being always suspected
eien'a'. It had been so in the case of the commis-
tsile.rs under the Reform Bill, and also in that of the
get Pal commissioners. Besides, they never could
otsuin of much eminence at the bar to serve on these
bsrl",s_lcine, and the holders of the franchise would
of tsa Y be satisfied to be deprived of it at the discretion
itestV4 Or fourth rate legal practitionera.—(Hear.) In
pieio`ws to this, they could never steer clear of the sus-
Thrl of political bias.
aiistie SOLICITOR-GENERAL—The Lord Chief
SLlcesswould nominate.—(Hear, hear.)
Aouhlhi)ANKES feared that under any circumstances it
mind be impossible to remove suspicion from the public
Gould Admitting that the Chief Justice (lid appo.int,
the,' not draw on the front ranks of the profession for
Icinlasission, and the consequence would be that the
srh!,Sters chosen must be of inferior status even to those
per ° Presided over the county courts, the latter being
PoihrtitaTient, while the forme were only transitory ass-.
Wore r„ --ent'• Then the duties of these co rnmissionersi
repes,not clearly defined. They were to inquire a,n(
coder their Opinions; that was to say, his opinion, sor
taun tho Bill one commissioner might constitute a
Was h It was said that the opinion of the commissioner
Itoehlsit to influence the House. If not, why all this
k di 7: and the expense to the country of five guineas
tsos` And here he had another objection. The
toe I,arrister . remuneration would make it the interest of
n employed to delay the inquiry for as
/log: time as possible.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The
lion t~ would then be in this dilemma—either the deci-
ehissa-atild be final, and a borough might be disfran-
log: en the dictum of a barrister of little or no stand-
and"Lit was a nullity and all the expense, trouble,
°he 543. Would go for' nothing. By the third clause
gite-r-I°anaissioner might hold a court, and he had powers
ton ."im greater than had ever been tolerated in this
elsittlst2' since the days of the Star Chamber. The tenth
Points plYe the commissioner indemnity on all legal
tour there were also such things as. points of ho-
qspo'.rom Which he could not be indemnified. He
might
eotehs"iered to summon parties before him, and he
4orntherci to expose and denounce other parties. with..
ous he had been connected. This was a most invidi-
-I,lhtsionr`)wer• He (Mr. Bankes) had once had occasion to
hashl-°4 a banker before a Committee of that House, but
titles& received a private intimation that the party in
mate 10 Would commit suicide if the summons were. per-
hie h he gave up the notion. It might be said. that
hett„4l, shrunk from his duty, but there were points of
Lesdlor w h. ich could not be got over. H.e entreated the Noble
hoes withdraw his support from this Bill,and to adopt the.
oaths° he had himself originally suggested. Let him in
sss Fue appoint a Committee of five, with powers to
tisenpe witnesses on oath, and a decision would be ar-
NrS calculated to satisfy both the other House of
s•itarnent and the country.
thisi), • HANMER said that the course suggested in
hers' bad already been adopted in the case of Sad-
Lae; and had received general approbation. The Hon.
reiB7eareed Member for Dorsetshire objected to corn -
hut Inners as likely to be influenced by political bias;
113DilY7re Committees of that House entirely free from
etts'e-.,°,4?—(0h, oh.) He remembered one notorioas
orie the borough of Nottingham.—(llear, hear, and
theet;°` " Hull," and laughter.) Very well; he merely
aseh-°ned the cases to allow that Committees had been
itigsed of political bias. He had watched the proceed-
eoitti et the various public meetings. throuehout the
h trY in support of Mr. Hume's motion, and though
qad b
sou,. served many opinions put forward as to the
of
laClltiioO on which the franchise should. rest, the mode
h vs ng votes and the duration of Parliaments, he ha
which ten that the constituencies of any borough in
gLs had been held had declared that
sttlif :wouldmeceolmmence the work of reform by
Oa Yule,' themselves of corrupt practices.. There was
the reason to suppose that the just pride of
u, electors could be offended by a strict in-
°try in every case in which a constituency was now.
ia,isrepresented, not because of the death or resignation
Is"' the late Member, but because bribery and treating
su,kl prevailed at the last election. It had been com-
plained that the commissioners would decide in accord-
ance with any bias that might obtain in their own minds,
cilt that was impossible; all the commissioners had to
tar was to collect evidence and embody that evidence its
ePort and on that report it would be for Parliament
,
si,tleet• He denied that the inquiry would be as expen-
eas some Hon. Gentlemen seemed to suppose.
r• ANSTEY. believed that the reason why many
Gentlemen ' opposite supported this Bill was that
fey believed it would have the effect of advancing one
11:p th4l objects of Mr. Hurne's motion to disfranchise the
ts boroughs. Not only did this Bill take away the
eitt of trial by jury, vesting the whole power in the
pre-sa)istiener without any appeal, but it offered a direct
leelLum to perjury. The whole Bill was open to ob
*ere" of a similar character. Treating and bribery
rue dealt with as if equally criminal, although
aria 7,48 Opposed to the law both of God and man,
ben "e other comparatively innocent. The conse-
ist ee putting them in the same category would
oots'° induce the poor man, who could see nothinglih
In huPt in treating, to view bribery in the same. g t.
to n,‘"eeordance with his pledge he shonld feel it hisduty
Sit?(l'e the further progress of this Bill.
co r.• HUDSON contended that no sufficient case of
JettilPtion had been made out by the Hon. Baronet to
14411 Ibis measure, which proceeded entirely a
upon a
corrtil„,'P' of surmise. If treating were to be deemed
With Practice, he saw no reason why they should not,
Pertsl4al reason, legislate against the influence of pro-
fact' °r even of eloquence, which, by falsifying the
ties' retbight lead men to a vote which, on calmer reflec-
(like 11'eeY would regret. Its effect would be to intro-
Would sartburnings in several towns, the effect of which
„.for ue most prejudicial. The Honourable Member
'Diolise(jristrose was anxious for household suffrage; if the
ekistis- wanted that, they had it in the freemen of some
to e;‘,R boroughs ; but the object of this Bill was
hetit;;:i`ngnish that class of electors. He was well
thou,,-bnt,ect with the virtues and merits of freemen,
the He was not returned by that class. It was said
chi e• Commissioner was to be named by the Lord
rear,- Justice ; but he had actually heard the gentle-
(lie already named by the promoter of this Bill.—
hh 'tr, hear.) He understood the appointment was to
listen to the late Hon. Member for Bath.—(Hear.)
jot.° sae Committee
what it was to be examined for three days be-
te h.- ‘sonamittee of that House on election matters, and
N" his banking accounts rummaged over and ex-
ec to individuals of the opposite party. Some such
qii-lisitorial proceeding might take place under this Bill,
aseh, though only applicable to 12 or 13 boroughs,
Th,
it on a future occasion be applicable to 80 or 100.
1,_3 would be a precedent in the next Parliament
,
then lion. Gentlemen opposite might perhaps be in a
iii':!ority.Hear, hear.) The measure would perpetuate
BgQlood in half the towns in the kingdom; it would be-
set,.
me a perfect nuisance; parties bankrupt in fortune
1,7 n character would busy themselves in getting up these
ds',Kluiries and fomenting discord, while the respectable
'hisses would hold themselves aloof. Expenses the most
w
ruinous would be incurred; and this the way to
Purify a constituency.—(Hear, hear.a)s The
Solicitor-
General as the legal protector of her Majesty's subjects,
tllßht to have taken care that no party was exposed to
inch
a heavy penalty.—(Laughter.) He hoped that
authorities- would mark their disapproval of the
aeasure by refusing the use of their public buildings for
'le Props,uiries. He contended that the lower
were no gmore open to corruption than others.
°rsd J. RUSSELL had hoped, after the House had
134;les_tited to go into Committee, that the clauses of the
rait would have been debated in the usual mode of car-
disat on the business.—(llear, hear.)
assented to the
He must own his
tecoP,PPintment, after the douse
eer had a
long debate on the
tittti reading of the Bill, and
eidesged °II of going into Committee, the. Ho. use having de-
the san each occasion by a large majority in favour of
over -41, that the whole question should now b. e argued
he ir again—not as to whether a formal inquiry should
of t?l'!tituted in certain cases, but as to whether any Bill
trc' kind should be entertained at all.--(Hear, b
43 11:1". Gentleman who began the debate, had argued,
seconderY fairly might have done in a speech on the
Cornreading, that the inquiry ought to be before a
Prever°,itteo of that House; but the House having sp-
ort w 24, the principle of this Bill, and decided to go
houraltot it, it was surely wrong to recommence this
had les °f opposition The Honourable Gentleman who
ktottL-it sat down *bad certainly added little to the
(1.,a0b8 means of judging of the clauses of the Bill.—
) He be`"er.) He argued that bribery and treating ought
moteetiene'nsidered venial offences, and that a Bill for
Z;(110,, g and punishing them ought to be discouraged.
ssarsh„,l:, hear.) His personal attacks on tho Honourable
th" who had brouelt in this Bill ought not to weigh
afire (c'r_Pouse in considering the details of this tnea-
‘°nge--‘'lear, hear.) Ho hoped the House would not
the eor discuss the eneral merits of the Bill. Whether
fresiditiate of prosecuting inquiries, but not those of de-
or thh°l2l=l, should be allowed, was a very fair question
""" con) C°nomittee, and he hoped that to such questions
, Ilya, ,Itlee would address itself.
course IiES said a few words in justification of the
A AIC7 cl-e„".,,a'l Pursued.
"qt eis-'")SON wished to know, in reference to the
aeoteese, whether the Lord Chief Justice had con-
, to nee
4sione ept the irksome duty of appointing the coin.
rs ?
hadeons
GOD s Efskissis lER said that the Lord Chief Justice
kr• o do t
Lo„ o so.
hx, far th ,„."N—That being so, the question arose
ay • c 'louse of Commons would consent to give
-setts Jtirisd. •
ter o the r 'thou. He thought it was bad policy to
thee, and il'e°rd Chief Justice interfere in political mat-
was was teraid it would shake the confidence of
th
sr --ptracti eir legal tribunals. Besides, the clause
..ti;:ell4:ser7oetannarciat:::sitise4 itself I for whilst the appointment
&Ronan 'was given to the Lord Chief Jus-
ave, it was iafterwards given to the

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said the House would
not part with its jurisdiction at all, because the commis
sioners to be appointed would have no power to dis
franchise the boroughs. The object of the Bill was to
give a convenient mode for ascertaining evidence on
which the House was to act. There was an appearance
of inconsistency in the Chief Justice appointing the
commissioners in the first instance, and afterwards thu
Speaker ; but that arose from a disinclination to name
the commissioners in the Bill itself, lest it might be said
that they were selected for their political opinions, and
the Speaker did not wish to make the appointment in the
first instance.—(Hear.)
Mr. HENLEY thought the Bill vicious and ill-con-
trived. He should like to know from the Solicitor-
General on what authority it was stated that the Lord
Chief Justice would take upon himself the appointment
of the commissioners. It was reported also that cer-
tain persons had been already selected for the office.
But the clause provided that if the commissioners did
not do the work as they ought, they, the majority,
might appoint other commissioners to override them.
He should likewise wish to know whether the 'commis-
sioners to be appointed would cease when the boroughs
named in the schedule were disposed of, because it was
provided by the last clause that in case of any fresh
report the Speaker was to appoint commissioners,
Sir G. GREY said that no nomination of commis-
sioners had taken place, and if the clause were adopted
the Lord Chief Justice would be at liberty to choose
from the entire bar any persons whom he thought pro-
per. With regard to the last question, the Hon. Gen-
tleman would see by the 17th clause that in future cases
only the appointment of commissioners was to be made
by the Speaker.
Mr. HENLEY said that the 17th clause merely gave
power to the Speaker to appoint an additional commis-
sioner, but it was by no means clear from that that the
commission died.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said what was in-
tended was that the commissioners to be appointed by
the Chief Justice should inquire into the boroughs men-
tioned in the schedule, and that when they made their
final report they should be functi officio. But with re-
gard to any future boroughs which it might bo neces-
sary to invite into, the inquiry was to take place under
the 17th section.
Colonel SIBTIIOUP said the Bill was the most
clumsy he ever read, and he would oppose it in every
stage.
Mr. ANSTEY (amid cries of "Divide ") observed
that the 7th clause was so worded that the commis-
sioners would have to go into questions of usage and
custom, and might protract their inquiries indefinitely.
Mr. GODSON' asked if the commissioners' decision
was to be final, and
Mr. HENLEY said he should like to know precisely
what their powers were to be.
Mr. NE WDEGATE expressed his belief that the
Government had not decided at all with respect to these
commissioners until five minutes before they came down
to the House.
Mr. BANKES said these commissioners were required
to report the names of parties whom they might " find
guilty" of bribery. Was it not an abuse to give such an
authority power to brand people in such a way? He
moved that the Chairman report progress.
Lord J. RUSSELL supposed there would be no ob-
jection to divide on the clause itself, provided progress
were then reported.
Mr. BANKES assented.
The House divided on the clause, when there ap-
peered—
For the clause lOB
Against it 39
Majority--
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and ob-
tained leave to sit again.
WRIT FOR DERBY, &c.
Sir J. PAKINGTON said that in consequence of the
appeal which had been made to him in the early part
of the evening not to bring on a question of privilege
on Tuesday, he should bring forward his motion for
the issuing of these writs at the sitting of the House on
Monday, or, if that should bo very inconvenient, on
Thursday next.
The House adjourned at a Quarter to Ono o'clock.