The Sun.
London, England, 1857-06-06 00:00:00

OUR RELATIONS WITH BRAZIL.
Mr. ROEBUCK referring to the late discussion wills
reference to our relations with Brazil, asked for the pro-
duction of certain papers relating thereto..
SHAM ELECTION PETITIONS.
Mr. ADDERLEY called the attention of the house
to the practice of presenting sham petitions to the
house against hon. members' returns, and instanced
his own case, where a person named Fox, a
journeyman hatter, of Newcastle-under-Lyne, a stranger
to him, charged him with c irrupt practices. Unfor-
tunately men making such attaaks escaped punishment
by the house not publishing the libel. In his case he would
readily expend 1,0001 to bring the man to justice, did
the law and the rules of the house permit it. It was
time measures should be taken to prevent the repetition
of such practises. The law shoulJ make it compulsory on
the petitioners to pay all expenses if they had not
good grounds for doing so. He firmly believed
that fifty per cent. of the petitions against mem-
bers were not genuine, but for the purpose of
extorting money. (Hear, bear.) He asked the Govern
meet what course they intended to take relative to this
question/
Mr. G. 11. MOORE complained of the manner he had
been treated by the House and the press relative to the
petition that had been presented against his return. His
remarks were principally directed to the honourable
member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Spooner),
who, it was understood, the hon, member said had used
it in debate. He considered the publication bad the
effect of prejudging the case. He protested against the
privilege of the press, and that house being used in these
instances to the prejudice of the sitting member.
Mr. H. DUNCOMBE referred to the abuse of these
petitions. He had known instances where petition's had
been withdrawn by the agents without the consent of
the petitioning parties. lie condemned the present
Corrupt Practices Act, which be thought rather tended to
the conception of corrupt practices than their preven-
tion. He hoped the Government would do something
to get rid of the evils complained of.
• Mr. SPOONER defended himself from the supposition
that he would do anything wilfully that might tend
to the prejudging of any case. The document he quoted
was in the bands of all the members.
Viscount PALMERSTON was quite sure the right
hon. bart. (SiroL Pakington) would believe that he en-
tirely concurred with what must be the opinion of the
whole house, that no member was entitled to more cour-
tesy and consideration at the bands of the Government
than the right hon. bart., especially in reference to the
subject with which he was anxious to call upon the
house to deal. He also admitted that the subject of
education was one eminently deserving to be taken into
consideration and discussed in a new House of Com-
mons at the earliest opportunity. On the other hand, he
wool .I submit to the right hon. bait.—who, whatever
his anxiety in regard to that question, would, he was
sure, enter into the feelings of her Majesty's Government
in this regard—that they had as yet made but very little
way with the estimates—(hear)—some estimates of con-
siderable consequence yet remaining to be voted. Be-
this there were measures of great importance which the
Government was desirous to proceed with in order that
they might be sent up to the other house in time to
pass during the present session. The right hoe. bart.
had been hitherto unfortunate in the ballot for priority ;
but though as yet unsuccessful, he might be more fortu-
nate before long. All he could say was that be was afraid
he was unable at the present moment to offer the right
hon. baronet a Government day for his motion. When,
however, they bad made more progress with the public
business—if the right bon. baronet should be still unsuc-
cessful in the ballot—be (Lord Palmerston) would have
much pleasure in affording the opportunity he desired.
With regard to the question of his hon. and learned friend
(Mr. Roebuck), what he (Lord Palmerston) stated on a
former evening was exactly what his hon. and learned
friend had quoted. He stated that the operation of the
act of 1845, in regard to the Brazilian slave trade, was
suspended by the mutual consent of the two Goveen-
meats. But if his hon. and learned friend or the house
understood that by that he meant to say that the Bra-
zilian Government consented to the continuance of tbe
act in its suspended state, he wished to correct that
impression, and to explein that he used those ex-
pressions somewhat hastily, and without due considera-
tion. What he meant to say was, that the act of 1845
was suspended in consequence of communications which
took place between the two Governments--that was
suspended by the British Government, in fast, in defer-
ence to the wishes of the Brazilian Government ; and in
consequence of that Government having used its active
exertions in putting an end to the slave trade. With re-
gard to the production of the correspondence, the papers
in reference to the Brazilian slave trade were annually
laid before Parliament, in which the correspondence on
the points referred to would as a matter of course appear.
But be would not trouble his hon. and learned friend to
wade through the somewhat bulky blue-books in which
the papers were comprised, but would have the corres-
pondence extracted and printed, and direct it to be
placed in the library. With regard to the nomplaint of
the hon. member for Stafford, it was unquestionably true
that the right of petitioning against the return of mem-
bers of Parliament wee frequently used for improper
purposes. The hon. gentleman said that charges
were often brought which the parties making them
knew to be unfounded, for the purpose of extorting a
or, in some cases, he believed, a consider.
able compromise,
es
eaYwent. No doubt it was so, and no doubt
it was most desirable to put an end to such practices ;
cs
but on the other hand they had to consider the character
of Parliament, and they ought not, in order to prevent
such abuses of the power given by law, to restrict too
much the right of petitioning, and the opportunities of
electors or defeated candidates of bringing before Parlia-
ment the improper and corrupt practices by which the
successful candidates might have secured their election,
They would do wrong it on the one hand they too much
restricted the right of petition, while no doubt on the
other hand there was an inconvenience arising from
the power given under the act regulating the trial of con-
troverted elections, of making unfounded charges against
sitting members. The hon. gentleman, however, should
remember that an election petition could only proceed
from an elector, or from the defeated candidate him-
self ; but the hon. gentleman complained that a peti-
tion had been presented containing libellous--because
unfounded charges against him, and that that petition
having been withdrawn, he has no remedy agccusations.
ainst his
accusers, and no means of refuting their a
But surely there could be no stronger admission that the
charges were unfounded than the dropping of the peti-
tion. And with regard to the character of the hon. mem-
ber, no one who was acquainted with his public career
or his private life would suppose for a moment that he
had been guilty of the offences which had been all, ged
against him. But the petitioner was in all these cases
under a certain liability—he was liable to the payment
of all and every expense incurred by the sitting member
in consequence of the petition. After all, the temedy was
very much in the hands of hon. members themselves. It
was said thagelection petitions were sometimes presented
with the view of extorting money. In such cases the ob-
vious duty o itbe member petitioned against was to bring
the fact forward as a breach of privilege, and as such the
house would take immediate cognisance of it he was sure.
And in the case of a petition presented to induce the
withdrawal of another petition, if that other petition was
well founded why should the parties withdraw it 1 They