The Sun.
London, England, 1842-05-14 00:00:00

the whole- proceedings he had been anxious to put his
finger. upon the system, and abstain from all asperity of
langudge upon individuals. But the Hon. Member for
Finsbury had, in slanting language, for his language was
as oblique "as his motion, endeavoured to fix on him
the stigma of being actuated by other motives thin those
he had distinctly avowed. He said he was desirous to
promote the purity of the House, and yet he stated a case
the most corrupt, according to his own phra-
seology, and in the most shameless and barefaced
manner. Those who promoted purity ought to do so by
example as well as precept, which of the two modes of
proceeding, was the most straightforward opposition.
The motion of the Hon. 'Baronet was plain and
distinct, it questioned the propriety of inquiry at all; but
the Hon. Member for Finsbury was favourable to in-
quiry, and yet endeavoured to prevent investigation.
When it was before the world that there were nine or
ten cases that might be distinctly proved, were they to
_say that tke whole representation was so corrupt and so
evil, that they could make no inquiry ? Were they to
indulge in an esoteric morality in that House, and in-
dulge in sneers which they would not dare to mention
out of doors ? What he desired was, to make the matter
so plain as to render it necessary to legislate upon it.
He trusted to the good feeling of Hon. Gentlemen around
him to treat with scorn the present motion, considering
that itwas not an honest and straightforward, but a round-
about, oblique, and factious mode of opposing his (Mr.
Roebuck's) object.
PAKINGTON was surprised at the intention ex-
pressed by the Hon. Member (Mr. T. Duncombe) of
pressing his motion to a division. The sole object of
the Hon. Member was to throw ridicule upon the motion
of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath. He be
lieved the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had done
great public service by bringing forward this subject.
The extent of bribery which- had taken place at the last
elmtion was discreditable to that House, and discredit-
able to the law. He would not be a party to an attempt
to defeat the object for which the Committee had been
appointed.
lord J. RUSSELL said he perfectly concurred in the
objections which had been stated to the motion of the
lIon: Member for Finsbury. He thought, that having
ordered the inquiry. it would be extremely inconsistent
for the House, by an extraordinary and unusual pro-
eeeding, to defeat the object of that inquiry. His Hon.
Friend seemed to imply that the House must either agree
so his motion, or make the confession that its Members
had been guilty of • bribery ; but he (Lord J. Russell')
-
would not - admit that such was the case. • There wo-ne
cases in which moderate refreshment was given to the
voters; which were very different from the offering of a
bribe of Ave Taineas. -For himself, he would feel it very
unsafelp say that he had never paid any sums beyond
legal eXpe*vas. Re would suggelt to the Honourable
Member tIrS propriety of using words which would
:ncet the difficulty.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN said—ln rising to support the mo-
tion of the lion. Ysember for Finsbury, he would assure
tyre House that be did not do so with any intention u,
defeat the inquiry. But for his part, if he were included
in the inquiry, he-would not consent to be tried by a per-
son,who hail. himself been guilty of the same practiCes of
which he ryas accused.—(Loud cries of " Divide.") He
did not think with the Hon. Member for Finsbury,. that
corruption had so far infected the House, that this small
number of persons could not sign the test. If it were so,
the sooner the people knew how they were represented
is that Honse—(Divide, divide.)
Mr. WAKLEY ~vas utterly at a loss to know why so
much soreness of criticism was bestowed upon the motion
of his Hun. Colleague. It had been said that this was
propos/A to get rid of the Committee. He denied that,
and ho believed that its effects would be to carry out the
4,hjera of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath. In-
stead of so much reproach being cast upon his Hon. Col-
league's courageous and honest acknowledgment, his ex-
am* ought to be followed. His Hon. Friend was right
bringing forward his motion, and could not have an
object in defeating the motion bi ought forward by the
honourable and Learned Member for Bath, and
prosiecuted by him with so much zeal and ability. I
Did the : Right Honourable Baronet opposite think
there was anything in the test which every Member •
odgitz not to be able to take ? Would it not be very well
for ;ray candidate to be able to point to this test. and
v that if he were returned he would have to take it:
He thought that the inquiry ought not to
eud :with those six boroughs, fur if it did it would give
no satisfaction. He did not agree with his Hon. Friend
that.-..there were 600 members who could not take the test,
for 'he believed that many Members were not guilty of
brildery, or 'tiny dishonest practice. For his part, he
ivoadol nut have the slightest hesitation in taking this
test, for he never spent one farthing in bribery or treat-
ing, and he believed that many men could take the test
:is safely as him. The inquiry, he asserted, could not
stop -with these six boroughs, but it should go as far a.s
die petitions would reach, for in most of them the alle-
gations of corruption and bribery were as strong as in
-those which were compromised. He supported the
motion.

Mr. lIROTHERTo N thought that the Hon. Member
for Fins'ourf should have brought forward his motion
before the Committee was appointed. He was confident
that the gentlemen of that Committee would do their
(hay, and would neglect no means of bringing to light
the corrupt practices which had prevailed at so many of
our elections. For his part he should have had no hesi-
tation in taking the test ; but he could not support the
motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury.
Mr. V. SMITH said that he should feel it his duty to
vote with the Hon. 'ldember for Finsbury. It would be
advisable, in his
.opinion, to satisfy the public that the
Members appointed to try the charges that had been
made were themselves free from the practices complained
ot: They were not about to call on the Members of the
COMM-it:tee to subscribe the declaration. from any in-
vicllous Motives ; but he believed it would be more satis-

factory to the public that they should be placed beyond
the reach of suspicion.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that he wished to say a few
words, in answer to some of those very unfounded attacks
which had been made on him by the Hon. and Learned
Member for Bath. He had always thought that the
usual Parliamentary course was, not to attribute motives
to Any Member of that House when he had brought for-
ward any motion he had though fit. The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman, the Member for Bath, had thought
proper to attribute to him motives which were totally
unjust and unfounded.—(Cries of " Order.") The
lion, and Learned Gentleman had said that he had.
wished, by oblique and indiscreet, and as it were
underhand means, to defeat the inquiry. Now he could
till the Hon. , and Learned Gentleman, that there had
been nothing in his (Mr. Duncombes) conduct in that
HouSe which could authorise any individual to say that
hointd not always taken a direct course when any
motion was brought forward.—(Hear, hear.) He was
not one of those who had made attacks upon individuals
in their absence, and who when called upon to justify
those attacks would shrink from doing so.—(Order.)
Mr. ROEBUCK said that if the Hon. Gentleman
meant to make any charge against him, he begged he
would- state when he had been guilty of any conduct to
justify it.
The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member for Bath,
cenid not speak in reply ; if he spoke at all, it would
only be by the special indulgence of the House.
Mr. DUNCOMBE contended that he was in order;
he repeated that he was nut one of those men who made
nt:acks on individuals who were not there to defend
themselves.

Sir E. KNATCHBULL rose to order.; he deprecated
this mode of one Member making attacks on another.
.Mr.D UNC OM BE—I am making no attacks.-7 (Order.)
Sir E. KNATCHBULL was quite sure that discus
*ions of this personal nature were not advisable.
Mr. FRENCH thought if the Hon.. Member for Fins-
itry was personally attacked he had a right to defend
himself., lie moved that the debate be adjourned.
Mr. BERNAL said that as the Speaker had not
given his opinion it would be indecent to adjourn the
oehitte.—(llear, }tear.)
Mr. DUNCOINIBE said his object was that the Com-
mittee should have the confidence of the public, and he
believed it would not obtain that unless this test were
applied. They might think his confessions shameless
and barefaced, that might be human frailty ; but he
considered that frailty preferable to those professions
into which the . self-conceit of other people led them ;
namely,, the profession of superior virtue and purity,
which only themselves were able to discover.
Mr. FRENCH withdrew his motion of adjournment,
and the House. divided ; when there appeared :--
For Mr. Duncombe's motion l7
Against it l6O
Majority against the moton
LIVERPOOL PETITION- ON EDUCATION.
on our admission to the gallery, we found
Sir U. DOUGLAS on his legs, stating that seeing the
:Right Hon. Gentleman the :Member for Tipperary in
his place, he wished to infurin him that he had received
:a letter from Liverpool, with respect to the petition he
had presented the other night ea the subject of educa-
tion, and for presenting which he had been charged by
the Hon. Member with a breach of the privileges of the
House fir presenting a petition with fictitious signa-
tures The letter he had just received stated that the
shrnatures were genuine.
SHIEL would only observe, in reply to the Hon.
and Gallant • Officer, that it was most extraordinary that
in a petition casting the gravest imputations on many
in
Members of the Catholic Hierarchylreland, the first
pi, bwe should contain a whole series of names written
it ,mifestly by the same hand.
Sir li. AEI, despaired of getting through with the
34:trilf, if these irregular discussions -were indulged in.
:Ile really must take advantage of the rules of the House.
Ha did not mean for one moment to say, that the delay
ocrasioned by these discussions was intentional, but he
must ask the Speaker if such discussions were strictly
in order.

SHILL--This is a matter of privilege.
The SPEAKER said that, according to the strict rules
the House, no debate could take place that did not in
sieve manner relate to the Orders of the Day ; but, that
of 'ate, practice had sprung up, of asking questions and
TaiSing discussions on them, on the motion that the Orders
(A. the Day be read. According to the strict rtties of
the House, however, the debate ought to relate to some
of the Orders of the Day.
Mr. SHIEL would just remark, that the discussion
which hadjust taken place, related toa question of privilege,
and was, therefore, perfectly in order. lie had charged
the Hon. Member for Liverpool with having been guilty of
a breach of privilege in presenting a petition to the
House, many of the signatures to which had been fabri-
ca,,,,ed. lie had been requested by the Noble Lord, the
other Member for Liverpool, to postpone calling the at-
tention of the House to the subject until the Hon. and
Gallant Officer should have had an opportunity of com-
municating with Liverpool on the subject, and this was
the
earliest opportunity he had had of calling the Mtn-
Lion of the House to the subject.

IP6WICH ELECTION.
114-PAICINGTON rose, not for the- purpose (4,16_
hying' 01(Ftariff; but,: to make a •communication to the
Ifousc on.the subject of the Ipswich Election, which he

•