The Sun.
London, England, 1834-03-12 00:00:00

HERTFORD.

Mr. BERNAL moved the order of the day for the se-
cond reading of the Borough of Hertford Disfranchise-
tnent Bill. In moving the second reading of this bill, it
was not his intention to travel over all the ground that
had been beaten during the last session of Parliament,
regarding the conduct of the electors of the borough of
Hertford. The house would remember a committee bad
been appointed to inquire into and decide upon the merits
of the election that had taken place for the borough, and
that a special report followed.—(Cries of " Hear hear.")
—That special report became matter of debate in
the house ; and the result was a reference to a
special committee to consider of the best means to prevent
acts of bribery and corruption at future elections. Since
that time the special committee had made its report,
which had got into the hands of every member in
the house.—(Hear, hear.) That special report recom-
mended the passing of a bill to carry into effect the
report of the former committee. There were various
classes of voters in this borough, some of whom had
been guilty of the grossest acts of bribery, and others
against whom no acts of misconduct could be im-
puted; and it was absolutely necessary that a measure
should now be carried forward to prevent a recur-
rence of such transactions as bad disgraced that borough.
The bill, for which he now proposed the second reading,
was to disfranchise the whole body of householders and
freemen, leaving the class of freemen he had mentioned
untouched, and the 101. householders under the old
franchise also untouched. The body of freemen at large
were not bound to have been to any very great
extent participators in the corrupt practices which had
been:going on in the borough of Hertford, and it was found
to a very small extent ,such practices hadj prevailed in the
body of 101. householders. lie did not wish to disguise front
the house the different plans that were mooted before the
committee. It appeared that at the late election 671
votes voted, the number of the constituency being about
700. Three hundred and fourteen were inhabitant how:-
holders under the old franchise ; 264 were occupiers
of houses of 101., and 124 voted solely in the right of free-
men. The Lon. gentlemen who took a part in the first
discussion would doubtless remember that a great deal of
corrupt practices was mixed up with the question on that
occasion. The committee who sat the second time
thought proper to call a person of the name of Back,
who it was said bad been one of the bribery agents. He
(Mr. B.) considered that it was the borough of Hertford
they had to deal with and not with individuals.
A great deal came out incidentally in the course of tie
examination respecting the distribution of fluur and tea,
and of other articles, which were distributed not in the
way of charity but as gifts, and were admini-

stered from purely corrupt motives.—(lfear, hear.)
It appeared that an agent was concerned in distri-
buting certain quantities of flour and other things
at the houses of various voters. It appeared from
a calculation which had been made by Mr. Dock
that Pour and coals had been delivered to about
two hundred and thirty-eight of the old inhabitant
householders, to 26 of the freemen, and to 28 of the 101.
householders; so that, from the evidence, it appeared that
the greater part by far of the old class of inhabitant house-
holdere participated in those corrupt practices, but compa-
ratively few of the freemen, and a more limited number of
the new voters.—(Hear.) That was the short history of
the case. It was proved -in the course of the evidence,
that the gifts were not mere charitable donations, but
were given fin- the purpose of operating as a corrupt
influence over the minds of the electors. The Con s-
mittee, anx'ous to discharge their duty faithfully, in
order to make a proper report to the house, had thought
fit to employ a gentleman of great experience and
knowledge, Captain Browne, an officer of engineers, to
go to Hertford and make out a map or plan of the parishes
lying contiguous to the town of Hertford, and which it
might he the most convenient for the purposes of an election
to add to the town. The result of that survey was
the map that was appended to the report ; he should here
observe, th it the first map was incorrectly printed, but
there was now a correct one. The parishes proposed to
be joined to Hertford lay in a certain radius of the town
of Hertford—no one parish, even in its extreme limits, was
more than five miles fioin the town, and a great part of the
localities did not lie beyond the distance of three miles from
the town. The only desire in recommending that plan,
was to obtain a pure and incorrupt representation of the
borough of Hertford, and the addition of those parishes
would add 618 voters to the constituency of that borough.
Ota of this 618 it was said that 113 had a right of vot-
ing for the county. But let not honourable geut emen
suppose that, by giving these men a vote for the bo-
rough of Hertford, they would be deprived of the
right of voting! for the county ; on the contrary, it
stood to reason that they would have a freehold in
some other port of the county, and would be thus
entitled to vote for the country. After the best consi-
deration and inquiry, he was fully satisfied that the
greater part would preserve their right of voting. It
might be said that some better mode might be adopted to
enforce the object of the committee. It was very pos.
sible ; but his answer to this was, that the committee
had had a very difficult task to discharge; they bad
discharged it to the best of their ability.—( Hear, hear.)
And if any errors were pointed out, there would be as
opportunity of correcting them. When they CRITIC to a
Committee upon the bill, it would be competent to any
gentleman to suggest any improvement or objection, and
he for one would be happy to consider them. He hoped
that it was too late to say that no notice should be taken
of these corrupt practices—(Hear, hear)—or that no
usually should be applied to those practices which in their
consequences were fraught with evils of the most injurious
nature.._( Hear, hear.) With respect to a person of the
name of Russell Davis, who had been convicted of per-
jury in the Court of King's Bench, in consequence of the
evidence he had given at the Hertford election, he (Mr. B)
would only say that his evidence had never been received
by the committee : they had completely discarded it, and,
at the very opening, he confessed that there was not one
gentleman on the committee who thought this indivi-
dual's evidence admissable. His evidence had no more
weight upon the decision of the committee than the most
light feather of the smallest bird that flies.—(Hear.)
Some gentlemen bad expressed a design of throwing an-
other member into the county ; but be was for keeping
up an equal balance of town and county representation.'
He thought the house was bound to make the Reform
Bill a wholesome and salutary measure, and therefore
he trusted that no gentleman would get up and object
to the second reading of this bill.—(Hear, hear.) The
house had sufficiently committed itself by sending the bill
up stairs, and all that retnained to be done now was to
adopt the remedy suggested.
Lord G. SOMERSET could not agree with the hon.
member that because the house agreed to an enquiry it was
bound to agree also to the second reading of the bill.
On all former occasions, bribery of the most gross kind
was the ground of a measure of disfranchisement. He also
had the sanction of the present house of Commons for
saying that, in a case of the most gross and glaring
bribery, it was enough to satisfy the justice of the mat-
ter that one individual only should be prosecuted.
He alluded to the case of Newry.—(Hear, hear.)
That was a case in which great corruption was proved ;
and yet that was all that was ordered by a reformed
House of Commons.—(Hear, hear.) He did not see
why one measure of justice should be meted out
to one borough and another kind to one that was proved
not to be so corrupt. The disfranchisement of 300 indi-
viduals, whatever their station in life, was a matter of
very considerable importance, and was worthy the attention
of that house. There was a considerable difference be-
tween bribery and treating, and, in his opinion,
there bad been nothing proved against Hertford
that at all amounted to legal bribery.—(Hear.)
In the borough of Hertford the hon. member opposite
had in a very handsome manner expressed his disbelief in
the evidence adduced by a person named Russell Davis.—
(Hear, hear.) As far as he remembered the evidence
that had been given before the committee upon the
subject, he did not believe that any case of bribery
had been brought forward, with the exception of
the case of Russell Davis, and the money that was
given to him was clearly proved to be given out
of charity. He thought that when the house were
about to disfranchise 200 or 300 peor men, and
thot too upon a point which the Legisla-
ture, by its statutes, and by the decision of
its committees, had concurred in it, should pause
before it inflicted such severe punishment—(Hear)_and use every endeavour to purity the borough, instead
of disfranchising it. He was not one of those who did
not think that offences of the description to which the
hon. member opposite had adverted td should not be
properly punished, but he thought some other punishment
than that of wholes Ile disqualification should be resorted to.
Mr. CALVERT opposed the second reading.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said he would vote fur the se-
cond reading.

(LETT SITTING.)

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

OXFORD CIRCUIT.—• WORCESTER, MARCH 10.
(Before Mr. Justice PAitx.)
Abel Griffin, an elderly man, who wore a white night
cap, J. Quinlan, a sweep, in the costume of his order,
T. Williams, an idiotic-looking lad of squalid appear-
ance, and four other persons, who seemed to have been
called from some corps as respectable in its garb as
Sir
John Falstaff's ragged regiment, were charged with
rioting at Dudley during the late election.
The defendants were all understood to have been sup-
porters of Sir John Campbell's interest.
Mr. Blakeway said, 1 am a grocer at Dudley. At
the last election Sir J. Campbell was yellow, and Mr.
Hawkes blue. On the 27th of last mouth there was a
great crowd at half-past three o'clock. I had closed my
fhop, but the mob from without took down my shutters
and smashed all my windows. I had starch, spices,
plums, and figs in my windows, which were all gone
when the mob left. The mob who bad sticks were 2,000
in number.

John Jones said, I saw the prisoner Flaxell in the
mob. He took stones out of his pocket and threw them
at the windows of the prosecutor. The Riot Act was
read. The military arrived from Birmingham, and the
crowd dispersed.

William Round—l saw the prisoner Davis in the crowd
with a stick. A great many of the mob had sticks.
___ . _ .

Cross-examined by Mr. CARRINGTON—The prisoner
was very " beerified."—(A laugh )

Sarah Westwood—The prisoner Quinlan (the sweep) is
in my father's employ. I saw him breaking Mr. Robin-
son's windows with a stick.

Cross-examinc 1 by Mr. Godson—Quinlan is a Scotch-
wan.

Mr. Justice PARK—It is very natural that he should Le
attached to his countryman.

It appeared by the evidence of other witnesses that the
prisoners Capewell and Williams were active in the mob,
but that both were subject to fits.
James Craig, the constable of Dudley, said—l heard
Mr. Forster tell the prisoner Davis to go home, as the
Riot Act had been read, and he would get into a scrape.
He said, the Riot Act the magis-
trates, we will have Campbell, or blood for supper !"—(A
laugh.)
Mr. ustice PARK—Campbell, for supper, would be
rather a tough morsel.—(Continued laughter.)
Mr. Sheldon Gray said—l am a liquor merchant. I
had closed my shop, bnt the mob broke my shutters, and
left me not a whole pane. There were coloured barrels in
the window. They were show barrels.

Alr. Justice PARK—They were sham. I dare say those
at the gin shops are just the same.
Examination resumed—One of the mob drank some vi-
triol and water out of one of the show bottles.—(A laugh.)
Joseph Jewkes said—l am a constable. I saw the pri-
soner Griffin (the man in the nightcap). I advised the

mob to do no murder, and I intended to have said the
same to him, when he knocked me down.
Mr. Just ce PARK said that this was not a slight case.
The friends of liberty, as they called themselves, ought to
allow other people to have their own opinions, without
destroying their property or injuring their persons. With
respect to all the defendants, except Griffin, it was proved
that they were joining in the riot; but with regard to
Quinlan, it was stated that he was a Scotcbman, and very
much excited in favour of Sir John Campbell, who was
said to be also a Scotchman; indeed it had been said by
some people that his dialect showed it.

The Jury found all the defendants Guilty.
Sentence—Tbe defendant Griffin to be imprisoned one
year; the two persons subject to fits to he discharged, and
the others to be imprisoned for terms varying from two to
four months.