The Sun.
London, England, 1858-05-07 00:00:00

MKY 7, 185 8,

made this motion for the purpose of showing the great
necessity that existed for another reform bill,
Mr. Serjeant DEASY thought the decision referred to
bad given an interpretation of the Corrupt Practices Act
which was never intended by its promoters or by Parlia-
ment in passing it, and referred to the proceedings and
discussions on the bid to show that in respect to the
travelling expenses of electors the only object was to
leave the law as it stood. But in the case of Mr. Slade,
because he acted upon that understanding, and paid the
railway fare for certain electors who voted for him, he
was proceeded against for the penalties under the Bribery
Act, to which the judges held he was liable. The hon.
gentleman having described the progress of the procee
ings in the snit of " Cooper v. Slade," observed that as
the law was now declared to be every member who paid
the travelling expenses of any voter at his election wag
open to an indictment hr a misdemeanour, though the
practice of Parliament, as acted upon by every election
eemmittee, went to legalise such payments. Such a state
of things was most unsatisfactory, arid some alteration of
the law was therefore necessary. It was said, he knew
not with what truth, that the house must soon be dis-
solved ; but, whether or not, between the present time
and the next session, and before any act could pass in
another session, many isolated cases might arise like that
which bad been alluded to. As the law stood, poor voters
living at a distance must either be disfranchised or the
candidate incur the responsibility of violating the Cor-
rupt Practises Act. There were but two remedies—either
they must alter the polling places, or pass a declaratory
act legalising the payment of bona fide travelling ex-
penses.

Mr. WALPOLE did not intend to oppose the mo-
tion ; on the contrary he thought it quite right that the
opinions of the judges should be i❑ the hands of mem-
bers. So far as he under,tood the law, there was no
danger of any member being proceeded against for penal-
ties under the Corrupt Practices Act in connection with
any past election, and as to indictment for misdemea-
nour no Attorney-General would recommend that.
With regard to the future the subject was under consi-
deration, and he hoped, in proposing to renew the Cor-
rupt Practices Act, to submit such amendments as
would remedy the existing defects. With regard to tra-
velling expenses, unless they were paid with a corrupt
motive, he thought it reasonable that they should be
allowed. At all events, the question was one that ought
to be settled.

Mr. J. D. FITZGERALD was glad the subject was
to be taken into consideration of the Government. He
believed the decision of the courts had been given upon
the principle that the liability only existed where the
travelling expenses were given with the corrupt motive
of inducing the elector to vote, and not upon the prin-
ciple upon which the House of Lords had proceeded.
Mr. Y. SMITH suggested that it would be well, if
the law to be altered as proposed, that the bill for that
purpose should be introduced as early as possible, inas-
much as elections might take place and election petitions
be presented in the interim• He thought it advisible if
any alteration in the Bribery Act was to be made that
some provision should be introduced applicable to muni-
cipal elections, and to prevent their being made the
means of bribery and corruption.
After a few words from Mr. CROSS, the motion was
agreed to.

THE CAGLIARI.
Mr. KINGLAKE intimated that in order that he
might have time to make himself acqua;uted with the
papers hid on the table upon this subject, he should
postpone the motion of which he had given notice till
Tuesday week. (Hear.)
Mr. HUTT—Is it intended to lay on the table the
papers referred to by the Under Secretary for Foreign
Affairs in the debate on Tuesday night in reference to
the negotiations relative to the Danubian provinces
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—It
would be most inconvenient, and more than incon-
venient, to lay papers on the table relative to negotia-
tions that are still going on. My hon. friend spoke of
the documents in question in illustration of an argument
during a debate, and thinking that the information
won d be interesting to the house ; but to present them
at present would be incnsistent with our duty. (Hear.)
Mr. LYGON withdrew his motion for a bill to alter
and amend the law of church rates, explaining that his
only object was that some plan of compromise should be
devised in which all sides would concur. In the hope
that thissession or the next an amicable settlement would
be arranged, he begged to take the notice from the
paper.

GOVERNMENT 01? INDIA BILL.

Lord PALMERSTON postponed this measure (the late
Government's) to this day fortnight.
DURHAM. COUNT PALATINE JURISDICTION

BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. A. SMITH called attention to the clause of this
bill which affected the rights of the Crown to the fore-
shore. He thought that the clause was objectionable, in-
asmuch as it represented this shore as the actual pro-
perty of the Crown. Now, although the right to the
shore was in the Crown, still it was a right subject to
the duty of exercising it for the public good. He also
noticed that two-thirds of the produce of the sale of any
rights of the Crown were to go to the Treasury, and the
remaining third to the Eccle-iastical Commissioners. He
considered that this was reserving ten great a benefit to
the Crown.

Mr HAMILTON said that the object of the bill was
merely to carry out an agreement for settling doubts
which arose under the acc passed in the last reign for
transferring jury regalia within the county of Durham
to the Crown.

Mr. ATHERTON thought the bill was one which it
was very desirable should be passed. The doubt resting
on the statute of William IV. was very inconvenient in
many ways.
After a few words from Mr. INGHAM, the bill was
read a second time.