The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-12 00:00:00

ELECTION COMMITTEES.

WITHDRAWAL OF THE PONTEFRACT ELEC•

TION PETITION.
COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY.
Yesterday the committee appointed to inquire
into the petition of Mr. Hugh Childers, complain-
ing of the conduct of the sitting member, Mr. Over-
end, relative to the withdrawal of the petition
against his return, resumed their labours in Com-
mittee-room No. 17. Mr. Walpole was in the
chair, and the other members of the committee,—
Mr. Glyn, Lord R. Clinton, Captain Jervis, Mr.
Craufurd, Mr. Phillips, and Mr. Selwyn,—were all
present.
Mr. Leeman, who was examined on the previous
day (Wednesday), said he wished to add to the evi-
dence which he__then gave. The witness entered

into a long detail of various circumstances more or
less connected with the election.
Mr. Childers then proceeded to confirm generally
the evidence given by Mr. Leeman. He added that
he should never have consented to withdraw the

petition, except upon the understanding that the
question of the seat was to be referred to arbitra-
tion. If he had ever believed that the seat was

not to be referred he should immediately have in
Mr. Leeman to decline to sign any agree-
ment. The first infermatiett-he -received of any
difficulty came from Pontefract. He was in-
formed that Mr. Cariss had stated at the Leeds
Club-house that the seat was not in question,
but that the petition was withdrawn uncondi-
tionally. He subsequently saw Mr. Cariss,
who said, on the subject being mentioned to him,
" Oh, I was only chaffiing; I wasn't going to let them
know what we were doing." Subsequently he saw
Mr. Rose, who, after some coversation, said the
seat had never been in question at all. He imme-
diately took Mr. Rose to Mr. Leeman to talk the
matter over, as up to that time he had never heard
a word from Mr. Rose or anybody connected with
Mr. Overend that the seat was not included in the
reference. When Mr. Rose went to Mr. Leeman
witness offered to go for Mr. Baxter. Ultimately
he did So, and met him in the street. He took him
to Mr. Leeman at Fendall's Hotel, having previ-
ously told him that, as it was a case in which the
honour of several gentlemen was concerned, he
simply wished him to hear a statement without
requiring him to express any opinion. On the
mornings of Tuesday and Wednesday, the 2d and
3d of August, the whole case was gone into between
Mr. Rose and Mr. Leeman. Upon one of these
occasions Mr. Rose admitted that Mr. Spcfforth
had stated to him the conversation which he had
with Mr. Leeman as to the re,ference of the seat.
Mr. Rose also stated that he had written to Mr.
Overend characterising the agreement as "illusory."
The Chairman asked Mr. Childers if Mr. Rose
said that he had simply written to say the agree-
ment was illusory, or that he considered that the
agreement was illusory ?
Mr. Childers said Mr. Rose expressed no decided
opinion of his own, but merely implied that he had
made such a representation to Mr. Overend. Wit-
ness then confirmed Mr. Leeman's evidence as to
the interview with Lord March. He added that up
to the time he went to fetch Mr. Brand, Mr. Over-
end had most distinctly refused to refer the seat to
Lord March, when Mr. Brand could not be found
Lord March said, " What am Itodo ?" Some con-
versation ensued, and Lord March again said,
" What can Ido ?" Mr. Leeman 'said, " Well my
lord, we withdraw the reference." Mr. Rose at
once interposed, and said, " As my honour is at
stake' I should wish the inquiry to go on ;" where-
upon Mr. Overend said, " I think so too. I consent
that Lord March shall decide upon the prelimi-
nary inquiry." Mr. Leeman rejoined, "It is now
too late."

Mr. Wilkinson, London agent of Mr. Childers,
was then called. After corroborating the evidence
of Mr. Leeman in reference to various interviews
between the different parties, he proceeded to say
—I was at Fendairs Hotel when the agreements
were exchanged, and I recollect Mr. Childers mak-
ing an observation in reference to the issue of a
new writ. He said he thought the writ ought to
be issued as early as possible, so that he 'might be
returned and take his 'seat this session. I said,

"The session is now nearly at an end, and it does
not matter whether you take you seat or, not, so
long as you are returned." Both Mr. Rose and.
Mr. Spofforth were present, but they mide no com-
ment. Mr. Leeman said to Mr. Rose, " What I
propose to do is to open my brief to you, and go
into each case as it arises. We shall have no diffi-

_ulty, and in a very little time we shall be able to
clear the ground so as to leave a very narrow ques-
tion for the decision of Lord March." A conversa-
tion then took place as to Mr. Rose's engagements.
Mr. Spofforth said that if Mr. Rose could not at-
tend it would be necessary to employ counsel. I
said, if we have counsel, we shall incur the expense,
we are so anxious to avoid. The subject then drop-
ped. As the London agent of Mr. Childers I advised
him as to what ought to be done in the matter. I
was down at the election for four or five days, but
took no great part in it. I should certainly not
have allowed Mr. Childers to withdraw the peti-
tion on any other terms than the reference of the
seat to arbitration. A heavy expense was already
incurred, and we had such a case against Mr.
Overend that it was impossible for us to withdraw
the petition upon any other terms. Our case was
perfectly conclusive, and having ascertained the
persons upon whom the Speaker's warrants had
been served on the other side we were satisfied that
there was nothing whatever against Mr. Childers,
and we looked upon the seat as certain. The only
question was how we could best avoid a heavy ex-
pense.
Cross-examined by Mr. Baxter—The reason why
there was an argument before the arbitrator was
because it was stated that the seat never was in
question. Mr. Leeman attempted to open the re-
ference, when Mr. Overend at once interposed.
There was a good deal of discussion, Mr. Overend
endeavouring to prevent our going into the ques-
tion, and Lord March began to feel more distinctly
the position in which he might be placed in a
matter involving the jurisdiction of a committee of
the house. Mr. Leeman was very indignant at
not being allowed to state the main case. If the
seat were': not in question we had nothing to do
there. In the course of his observations Mr.
Leeman made some remarks which evidently hurt
Mr. Rose, and almost electrified him, for he jumped
up from his seat and moved away to another one,
saying that he hoped Lord March would not attend
to anything of that kind.
This being the whole of the evidence on the part
of the petitioner,
Mr. Rose was then examined by Mr. Baxter,
and in detail gave a succinct statement of what
had taken place between himself and Mr. Leeman
relative to the agreement for the arbitration of
Lord March, and said he most distinctly under-
stood throughout that the question as to the seat
was not included in the reference, and he had told
Mr. Overend so, and was always under that im-
pression; he assured the committee be had acted
in full belief that such was the case.
Mr. Cariss was called, and spoke to what took
place between him and Mr. Wilkinson at Ponte-

?met.
Mr. Overend was then examined. He repeated
in substance his statement before the house on
Wednesday, and stated that he had given the most
positive and distinct instructions to Mr. Carissthat
he would consent to no agreement of reference as
a condition for the withdrawal of the petition that
would leave the question as to the seat open. He
had from the first the fullest determination not to
do so, and always understood it formed no part of
the agreement. When before Lord March, Mr.
Leeman argued the question of his going into the
reference as to the seat, and he was followed by
Mr. Rose, insisting that the question of the seat
was to form no part of the reference. His first op-
position was to the reading of Mr. Rose's letter;
but as he found it affected the male fides of Mr.
Rose, he withdrew his opposition, and had done so
two hours before; but he declined to assent to going
into the question of the seat. Lord March said he be-
lieved there was bona fides on both s'des, and it was
difficult to determine. Mr. Cariss had written down
what Lord March had said, when Lord March said
he had decided nothing, and the paper should be
torn up, which he (Mr. Overend) did at once. Mr.
Leeman then withdrew from the inquiry. He told
him that he had consented to the preliminary in-
quiry being gone into two hours before, but Mr.
Leeman said it was too late. Mr. Leerncn after-
wards spoke to him in the lobby, and said the
matter should not stop there, and that he (Mr.
Overend) had better be in his place in the house
that night. He requested him not to tease him, as
Cross-examined by
he ',lad enough of it.
Mr. Leeman—Was positive