The Sun.
London, England, 1821-03-16 00:00:00

entrage up-on the_freedom of election.—(Chcers.)
Lord CasTeLazaeiti was eta loss to know what
the direct object otethe motion was, but he sup.
posed it wvas to have the parties brought to be
examined at the. bar,. and then to deal them
as eircurestancgs might require. From all he
could collect
_on the sobject, General Byng had
giveti strict orders to the troops
:not to appear
iraCerlisleed.oring the electioreexcept in aid of
the. civil Rower ;"and the. Officer in command. had
as strictly obeyed those orders. The House,
livvevera. would bear it in mind that the British
law pothorized the calling in of a military force-
:when the civil power was found ipsufficieut.
keep the. peace. Upon the occasion in qnestion
theamilitary, had been called in only on the requi.
tsitiop of three Magiatrates: and when they af-
teewards--,vished to have -the cavalry brought
back into tlu town, the Ofacer refused to corn-
plaaanleesewith the, consent of the Mayorovho,
noalaubt, from proper considerations, declined
gising.it.. It, appeared- that after the whole of
the polli-ha was over, two companies of foat hat!
14)ep hroagh.tin to quell a riot, which he under-
stoed teas-.attended with great violence.
ATraTakeeaseeei can assure the Noble Lord there
wesretarioting.whsteaer.--(Clieers.):
Lord CAST/.cnr.lGti continued.-Theee might,
peahaps, :be -in. this ecase a question ;of privilege
but ;he did net see how _a
.question of law could
be. rained nen it. The, Magistrates might have
tat-gal:under at.n, erroneous judgmentelaut. certainly
notcoaltli an evil intention. If their object was
to: interfere tiwiih the freedom of election, .why
ha;d they called in the military after the polling
PAT!' ?-7--(crtes of
.No, no it was not over.)---
gadidenot set there existed any sufficient grounds
f(le-bringinjr ,persons all the way from Carlisle .to
tha'har of-that House: and he certainly thought
titeliouae was not the best Jury-in the world to
try- all the facts of the case. •
,
..aaoro Low-THEP. maintained that there- never
)ezdbeen a more violent riot at any election than
that which took plraceat theelectionfOr
had read the depositions taken before the
Mtigistratee, -and they all' represented it as a
reett 'atrocious riot. The Noble Lord read au
extract of a letter written by the Mayor, in. which
• heitated7,.that if the scenes continued which had
already. occurred, he 'should have felt it his duty,
hoWever painful, to call in the military. The
Lord then vindicated the conduct of the;
Magietratesaand'said they had done every thing
in. their. power to preserve the peace, but all was
ineffectual till they had recourse to a military
force.
..}l«..was- willing to admit that no military
interference ought to take place at elections, but
neither ought they to be controlled by a mob.
The- Noble Lord concluded by, moving the pre-
vilus question as an amendment.
. Mr. Cuaavat supported the original motion,
and commended the motives which had actuated
his.HoneFriend ip bringing it forward. He then
argued that there was not even the semblance
of.a.riot to warrant the, interference of the nl-ilia
tar4e. The, only circumstance that could coantea
?:Mice. aid :idea, of a riot was that an individual
iiad the boldness to ask one of the Magistrates if
vie. Riot Act bad been read ?- For this offence
he Was committed; 'and when it was. found that
no proceedings could be taken against him, he was
told.to Walk out of prison. This, however, the
;adividual very properly refused to dcetill he had
get legal satisfaction, el/edging that the freedom
-of.eleetion had been violated in his person, and
that the Magistrates must be amenable for their
cenduet. He (Mr. Curwen) concurred entirely
• -with his Hon. Friend that a strong case had been
rmd.e out to warrant an inquiry.
le r. W. W.vsat observed, that the House could
not be too' ealous of the -constitutional
.freedom
of election. The mere appearance of a body of
soldie'rs, during an election,
.was a violation of
law, which could not be toleratedamiless where
uaeOnt necessity required it. The .Hotiourable
Member then cited- the case-of the Westminater
eiecticn,in 1741,When. a body of soldiers, called
in" by the 'Magistrates, took possession of the
huatings owl a certain day; before the polling com-
menced. The House-upon that occasion pasSed
rOsHati-on, stating-that this was a gross violation
of the law. The Hon.MeMber then referred-. to
the 'reprietiand of MraSpeaker Onslow to the:Ma-
gistrate; width animadverted on their Conduct
in the most severe terms. He. Cotraluded bY de
clsring himself in favour of inquire.
Illreliecotreter insisted that the military had not
iappettre.d.till'the poll was closed.
- J4mrs--I !can: assure the R;glit Hon.
Gentleman that tha poll was not closed.
Likcaafaiproceeded.—The petition stated
that "the military. appeared at four o'clock. --if
the 'Magistrates-acted 'wrong, they acted on their
64rn)-espoesibility, arid could be made'account:-
able for their conduct, He was surprized to
bewtit asserted, that there were no appearances
cf R Ile- con'teraled that there were the
strongest appearances: The Magiatrates. read*
the Riot' Art • three several times; and if the
rimers cikl not afterwards' disperse, how could` it
LP 'thought culpable, that the military had 'been
railed Ii ? The-. proper was would, be,ein • the
present ceeeeif it *as .taken up by the House, 'to
have the particulars detailed
.in a petitlon, 'the
merits of whickeshould be examined in a Select
Clornroittee up stairs. ;With respect to the Me'a
gistrates, tic ,thought that the Court of Icing's
Bench was the, only. place where their. conduct
ought to be invesitigated. The subject of this
Inlition- was somewhat stale,
,and;lie Saw no ad=vantage itabringing it forward.
Air. CA rcrtA with' Much waxth Ca -deprecated
tire :sentimenta he had-heard from the Right Hon.
Gentlerrian Who had just sat" down. Be wase,xa
trerriely sorry to'find that there SaS in that House.
any one so-lost to 'a.due. 'sense ofthe- freedtiria of
-election, so lost to a proper. regard for the:•beat
priAcipleslof -the-Constitutikb,'es.toeileliver:SUch
sentiments. Tbe'Right libii:Gentlernan
the subject stale, -yes, stale; be cruse forsOotb. its
was not:v4rY-pleasitig to
What ditif.the
eßigh-t'Hon. aentleman.iprii
talkinaaof common Jaw and the CoOrrof.
Bee ' that the .prOper-Wav for
,;to red reta an injury done to its dearest'
-rightzebylbOtinterference of the military at.elec.a
thlegs..-?.'e2a(batirl Cliciera.)—lie regretted exceed
inelv''fflaeany maa holding the'sentirii*nts Of •the

~•

.. • .
night-Hon. Gentleman . should have place in
that House, and he still more' regretted that
he-Amild have an official situation in the- coun-
try.—(Cheers.)—He verily believed that if
the Righ.t" Hon. Geniterhan' had declared those
sentiments before hand he never would have-got
a seat in the" grit's!) House- of Commons; nor
would he 'have got fife* office he ho%i held. ThE
Right. Hon. Gentleman needed not to have told
the ifouse'that the Magistrates acted on awlr
othi resposibility; the House was. aware of it,
and knew also that they must bp answerable at
the tlar for the events that had taken place.---
He (Mr, Calcraft) did not stand there to shy
Whether the Mip'bristrates were or were not justi-
riled by the .;necessity of the case in having re-
course to the military pOwer, but this he would
say; that the douse was hbunld. to 'inquire into
all the c:rcurristancea. Did the Right Hon.
Gentleman when hd spoke as he had .done; hear
;.the words of that -revered Man Mr. Speaker
'Onslow, as referred
was,
h%' an Hon: Member ?
The' fair- prPsn mption in the first instance,
that the Magistrates had acted contrary to law,
hoWev'er the 9 afterWardS stand acquitted
froth partichlarcircum—stances. He thought that a
Committee of privileges was- the correct mode
btit if a select Committee was thought preferable
then'let it be adopted. Let-the House not act in
manner to shame itself, let Hon. Members not
sanction the prificipleof common law or special
pleading in such a case as the present:
Bracit'and Mr. 13tcrimr send each a few
words, explanatOry an allusion made by-the
latter to the Nottingham Magistrates. ,
Mr. BENNET instanced a case where a more
violent riot occurred than .that represented to
have taken place at Carlisle. It was at the last
election of a Noble _ Lord (Lowther.) who had
taken part in the debate. Upon that. occasion
he (Mr. B.) saw a person who had been a.'slave-
dealer, iri Liverpool, proceed at the head of
a ferocious band of bludgeon-men, 'who 'were
guilty of the 'most daring - excesses against the
opponents of the Noble Lord'. It appeared that
this. ringleader from Liverpool was -regularly
retained by sortie of the Noble Lord's Friends.
--(Hear, hear !)—lie had been present when
aone'of the spoils of these ferocious rioters were
taken from them. '
Lord Lowmca vindicated the conduct of .his
friends, who, he;said, acted entirely on the de-
fensive. The-Whigs had found it-convenient to
have recourse to the military, when they were
attacked by the Radicals, at (co, Westminster Elec-
tion. The Noble Lord Was proceeding to Offer
some other observations,. when he was interrupted
by loud cries of-r--(Spoke, spoke)—upon which
The SPEAKER interposedobserving, that though
it was irregular that such a discussion should be
prolonged, still it was but fair that the House
should allow the Noble Lord a full opportunity
of explanation, as they had permitted the Hon.
Member for ShreWsbury (Mr..Bennet) to advert
to a subject which had no reference to the case
before the House:
Lord Low-I-licit then said, that the military
had come within a few miles of Appleby at the
last Westmoreland Election ; and as to the cir-
cumstances which had occurred, they were not of
a nature which his opponent (Mr. Brougham)
thought worthy of being brought before the
House.
Lord CASTLEREAGH said, that as there now
.ap-
peared to be the military had
been called on before or after the poll was over,
he should acquiesce in the proposition for inquiry.
For-himself, he understood that the soldiers made
their appearance in the evening, but as a doubt
existed, it, ought to go in favour of investigation.
Sir JAMES. G R ASI rose, amidst loud cities of
" Question," and stated, that there were no less
than seven affidavits,' to shoW that the most dat-
ingericts. had taken place for some days, and that
inconsequence :it' was found imperatively neces-
sary to call in the rtilitary. The three magis-
trates were• most anxious to•have the subject in-
vestigated, in- order :to. vindicate their conduct.
The circumstances Complained of took place on
the 24th of May, yet nothiny; had been said be-
fare 'respecting it,•though the House was sitting
at, the time. As to the petition, ire'had peen
credibly in-forrried; that many who had put their
names to it did not know what they weresigning.
Mr. JAMES, after the able discussion which the
'subject }Cad undergone, didhot.think it necessary
to trespass on the time of the House with any reply.
The motion was 'then agreed to, and a Corn
ruittee appointed. •
_LAWS RESPECTING i7pREAD.
Mr.' IIA.RnoRD -called the. attention of the
house. to,a grievance which Pressed Severely oh
two-thirds of the'population of the country, who
lived almost on bread, the primary. and best food
they could get. Care should be taken that the
bread with which the poor were supplied, should:
be. of the beqde.scription„ and that good weight
or me4sure, should. be secured. The laws on this
subject seemed to hold forth a protection to the
poor_rnan Ivhich it' did not supply. He had re-
ferred to the Acts.passed relative to bread. during
the last 553 years, but he would not go throUgh
which indeed would Only go to slew
the_ difficulty, of legislating on the subject. He
-proposed-to move for the aPpOintment of a Corn--
Inittee';- and to ma-he out a case for this it was
Ofily_necessary for him to
,'point out the defects
'of lhepresent laws.. At present, under the 59th
(eOrp,e Fll. that Act after providing for the.
punishment of the adhlteratiOhof bread, enacts,
" That the seller of light' bread cannot be pu-
nis!'ed,' unless the bread be weighed lierore:a
Magistrate within. 21 hours after being haked."
How.--cmild 'a pauper, who bought his bread of a
seller, -proye that- it had not been baked 24
liOars? baker ought to haie been required
to she w was` akeri • frem the oven. As
the laWnow-stood., the 072uspr ,sv as thrown
on. theareifig, person: proceeded.-at F!orne
lengt.h:tAp'-oiril: out the 'defects of the existing
law, and conclo4,.by. moving- for (Lel a-I.)point-
ruentß.l a_Selec(corriMiffee.
the,npri. :AVern-
her's statAlents to the defectS of the law. as it
noes slow!, and supported the motion.,. He.was.
anClined_ to think that competigon Vias the best
reMeale,.. for H. thought the (73.oannittee
croposed -!Omp...,ppp s!O. would.,..,4e,l'a.kely to re-;

~