The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-23 00:00:00

The witness was then ordered to withdraw.
The House went into Committee on the 'Bill.
Lord CAMPBELL suggested an amendment for the
purpose of discontinuing, instead of only suspending, the
actions.
The Duke of RICIIMOND said if the actions were
discontinued, and nothing further done, then the " un-
known," might renew them immediately.
After a few words from Lord CAMPBELL, _ _

The Bill passed through Committee, was reported, and
ordered to be read a third time to-morrow (this day),
and their Lordships to be summoned.

MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS.

Mr. GREENE and others from the Commons, brought
up the Joint-Stock Recovery-at-Law Bill, Metropolitan
Buildings Bill, the Ayr Bridge Bill, and other Bills,
which were severally read a first time.
SL AVE- TRADE.

The Earl of ABERDEEN said that, on Thursday, he
would lay before the House the instructions which had
been given to officers engaged in the suppression of the
slave trade.

The Marquis of NORMANBY presented a petition
from medical gentlemen of the metropolis, praying the
Legislature to take measures for improving the sanatory
regulations of the metropolis, and especially calling at-
tention to the want of drainage, to churchyards, and
crowded buildings.
Lord COTTENIIAM presented petitions from per-
sons confined in the Queen's Prison, and in Whitecross-
street, praying for the abolition of imprisonment for
debt.

Lord WHARNCLIFFE laid on the table a return of
the number of persons in prison for debt in England
and Wales.

SUDBURY DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.

The LORD CHANCELLOR called the attention of
the House to this Bill, of which he moved the second
reading. The evidence had shown a state of constant
and habitual brikry, more flagrant and corrupt than
anything else that could be tbund in the history of Par-
liamentary elections. He therefore thought that, for
the sake both of punishment and example, it was abso-
lutely necessary that the Bill should pass.—(Hear,
hear.) His Lordship went through a detailed his-
tory of the Bills which had been previously brought up
from the House of Commons. Counsel had stated that
day at the bar, that the last Bill broke down in that
House. But how did that happen ? Before the election
Committee, the witnesses for the petition and against it
proved enormous corruption each against the other side.
But when theso.same witnesses came before that House
to be examined, on a Bill for disfranchisement of the

borough, and depriving those witnesses of the power of
selling their votes, the two opposing parties coalesced,
and their Lordships were unable to obtain sufficient evi-
dence to warrant them in passing "the Bill. The House
of Commons, therefore, adopted the course of procuring
a Commission to examine witnesses on the spot. The
Commissioners found, on commencing their proceedings
in Sudbury, a general determination not to answer any
question—the witnesses standing on the point that their
answers would tend to criminate themselves. At length,
by obtaining the evidence of electors who had ceased to
reside in the town, and of other persons, the Commis-
sioners succeeded in collecting a mass of proofs that the
corruption of the borough was so extensive, so deep-
rooted, and so inveterate, that it was a duty their Lord-
' ships owed to the country and to the Constitution to
' deprive the electors of the power of repeating these enor-
mities.—(Hear, hear.) His Lordship then gave (amidst
much laughter) an account of the procceedings at the
last election, which have already been frequently
before the public. The result was, that there
was a majority for the liberal candidates ;of ten for
one, and six for the other. Here ;th© liberal bribery
was successful; but he would be impartial; he would
tell them that bribery was quite as bad upon the Tory
side.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Tile same spirit
prevailed on both sides; but the party that spent the
most money obtained the most votes. The losing side
paid 1,400/.; the successful side paid 3,0001. No part of
the public-house expenses, and only part of the legal ex-
penses of the election, had yet been paid, so that the
whole of these two sums, amounting together to 4,400/.,
was applied to those gross purposes. It was true that
there were many of the better class of electors who did
not receive bribes. But there was the remarkable fact
to be kept in mind, that it was proved that the wealthier
classes—that all the respectable men in the town were
cognisant of those transactions, and gave their sanction
to them. They were, therefore as guilty as those who
received the bribes, feud should partake of the punish-
ment. Although the Commissioners were not directly '
authorised to inquire respecting former elections, yet a
great deal crept out in the evidence which proved that a
system of general corruption had long been established
in the borough, extending to the whole constituency.
He believed, therefore, that the disfranchisement was
inevitable; and as to the question what should be done
with the two votes, he would say that the House of
Commons had taken the best course in this Bill—
namely, to disfranchise the borough at once, and to con-
sider next year what should be done with the votes. He
therefore recommended their Lordships to pass the
second reading of the Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM highly eulogised the perspicuous
statement of his Noble and Learned Friend, who was
the head and ornament of his profession. He agreed
with his Noble and Learned Friend that this borough
should be disfranchised as an example to others. But
the disfranchisement of a borough was a grave matter,
and he strongly objected to their Lordships passing
such a measure without hearing evidence at the bar.
His objection did not so strongly apply to the present
case, as the evidence was taken not before a Crown
Commission, but a Commission appointed by both Houses,
and !sanctioned by the Crown in the face of an Act of
Parliament. It was grievous to witness the frightful
guilt exposed in this inquiry. There could be nothing
more degrading or more criminal than to swerve from
the discharge of a public duty for the sake of sordid
lucre. These corrupt, venal, and degraded wretches
were guilty of perjury as well as bribery—for, even
though the bribery oath was not administered, they
were as guilty of perjury as if they had taken the oath,
for they would have taken it if required. He thought
the most expedient course was to pass the Bill.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to
be committed.
COUNTY CORONERS' BILL

The House then went into Committee on this Bill.
The Duke of RICHMOND said he had received some
communications in answer to the objection which he had
made on a former evening to the increased allowance
for travelling expenses; but he still adhered to his
opinion that the coroners should be paid by salaries like
the other judges, and not, as it were, by the head, ac•
cording to the number of inquests they held.
The Marquis of SALISBURY moved the omission of
the 21st clause, which relates to the payment of ex-
penses out of the county rates.
The Duke of RICHMOND seconded the motion.
After a few words from Lord CAMPBELL and Lord
WHARNCLIFFE in support of the Bill,
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, but no division
took place.
The amendment was negatived, and the Bill passed
through Committee.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.

The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the second read-
ing of this Bill. There were a great number of chari-
table trusts in England which were entirely exempt from
control. There were 13,000 trusts, which did not
amount to more than 51., 14,000 which amounted to less
than 101., and 17,000 which amounted to less than 20L It
was quite impossible that the Court of Chancery could
exercise any control over these trusts ; and yet it was
monstrous that trusts, amounting to 300,0001., should be
without control or protection. To remedy this evil, he
proposed to give the Commissioners the power of ap-
pointing persons to inquire from time to time into the
state of these trusts, to examine their accounts, and the
manner of their administration. Another power which
he proposed to give was that of appointing more trustees.
All that he now asked, however, was that their Lord-
ships would read the Bill a second time, and he would
gladly receive any suggestions for its improvement in the
Committee.

The Bishop of LONDON thought the country was
greatly indebted to his Noble and Learned Friend for
taking up this subject. But he hoped he would not press
it through the Committee in the present session. The
Bishops would be shortly obliged to go into the country,
and he thought that no measure affecting the Chnrch
ought to be discussed in their absence. This Bill would
affect the Church considerably, inasmuch as the great
majority of the educational trusts in the kingdom pos-
sessed incomes not exceeding 20/. a year.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he did not intend
to press the Bill.
Lord WROTTESLEY regretted that the Bill had
been postponed to so late a period of the session.
Lord CAMPBELL thought the measure one of very
great importance, and that it would, with alteration and
amendment, prove to be a great improvement on the
present system. Still it was to be regretted that so great
a measure, affecting upwards of 30,000 trusts, and
13,000,000/. of property should be introduced on the 22d
of July. He had no objection to agree to the second,
reading, un the understanding that no further pro-
gress should be made in the Bill until next session.
The LORD CHANCELLOR only wished the Bill to
go into Committee, that he might hear what alterations
might be propo:z.en, but not to carry it through the Com-
mittee. As to the lateness of the session, he had pre-
pared the Bill at the beginning of the session, but he had
not had the opportunity of bringing it forward sooner.
The Bishop of LONDON objected to the Bill going
into Committee in the absence of the Bishops, who were
the best qualified to offer suggestions for its improve-
ment. lie respectfully requested his Noble Friend not
to go further than the second reading.
The LORD CHANCELLOR was understood to say
that he would not proceed further in the'present session,
unless with the assent of the Right Rev. Prelate, after
consulting with his Right Rev. Brethren.
The Bill was then read a second time.
THE CATHOLIC BEQUESTS (IRELAND) BILL.

Lord WHARNCLIFfE moved the order of the
day for the third reading of this Bill, and the order
being read, he proposed several amendments, which were
agreed to.
Lord AIONTEAGLE returned his thanks to the
Noble Lord for the pains which he had taken with this
Bill, and his care to give satisfaction to the persons for
whose benefit the measure was intended. He would
take that opportunity of expressing the great pleasure
he felt at the intimation given in the other House with
respect to the improvement of ➢iaynooth College. The
improved education of the clergy would do much to
elevate the character of the people.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
The Parish Constables Bill was read a second time.

Several other Bills on the table were advanced a stage.
The Unlawful Oaths (Ireland) Bill was read a second
me.

The Colonial Postage Bill passed through Committee
without discussion, and was reported.

The Assessed Taxes Ccm;position Act also passed
through Committee.