The Sun.
London, England, 1842-06-15 00:00:00

NEW WRIT FOR BELFAST.

Mr. B. HUGHES presented a petition from Belfast,
impugning the veracity of Cropper, who, in a peti-
tion some time ago presoak.' to the House of Commons,
had reflected on the character of Mr. Emerson Tennent.
Mr. SHAW then rose to move the issue of a new
writ for the borough of Belfast. He did so with
reluctance, as he was aware that he was
interrupting important public business. He entirely
concurred with the opinion expressed by his Right Hon.
Friend, at the head of the Government, that in cases of
this kind the House ought to act judicially, and without
party feelings ; it was entirely in that spirit he wrought
the present case under consideration. The facts of the
case were very short ; on Friday, the 3d of June, the
Election Committee reported to the House that
the sitting Members for Belfast were not duly
' elected, and that the last election for that borough was a
void election. On that night the Right Hon. and
Learned Gentleman, the Member for the county of
Cork, gave notice that he would move for a Committee
of Inquiry into the subject, and consequently there was
a suspension of the writ. But it was remarkable that,
in the notice of the Right Hon. Member, no men-
tion whatever was made of bribery. He founded
his motion entirely on personation and perjury.
He would not refer to the petition that had been pre-
sented to the House ; it appeared that the only fact Mr.
Cropper was in a condition to prove was, that after leav-
ing Canarvon, he set up a public-house in Belfast, and
that there he had received a bribe of 50/. The Honour-
able and Learned Member might prove the perjury and
personation—two grave crimes—but it would ap-
pear that the bona fide constituency were the in-
jured,
and not the offending party,—(Hear, hear.)
It' such a course were pursued it would be utterly de-
structive ‘,
of the character of that House. He did not
aject to the most searching investigation into all cases
of bribery, and to the most exemplary punish-
ment being inflicted on all those found guilty. Pre-
vious to the present session it had been the established
rule of the House not to suspend the issue of any writ,
unless general bribery had been reported to the Hi use,
and the House proposed to legislate upon the subject=
or unless alarming riots existed in the borough at the
time. The present case certainly was not in the latter
category. During the present session, however, the
Hoe. and Learned Member for Bath had introduced a
new kind of law on the subject, which he (Mr. Shaw)
might perhaps be permitted to call the law of compromise.
He thought that the House had gone rather too fur in
suspending writs upon the unsupported allegation of the
Hon. and Learned Member. He was not aware that the
Hon. and Learned Member had even averred his own
knowledge of the existence of the facts. He was, how-
ever, free to confess that the notoriety of the cases to
which the Hon. and Learned Member had directed the
attention of the House certainly seemed to jus-
tify the interference of the House. But his argument
was, that even admitting the law of compromise. as
laid down by the Right Hon, and Learned Member for
Bath, there was nothing in common between the cases
of Belfast and Nottingham. In the case of Not-
tingham, the Electiou Committee had decided,
contrary to the prayer of the petition, that the
siting Members had been duly elected. In the
present case, in pursuance of the prayer of the
election petition, the Committee had declared the late
election void. They had now the same parties in the
field as candidates at the ensuing election. Supposing
the writ to issue, he apprehended that no person of Par-
liamentary experience would deny that, supposing the
same parties to be returned, or to become petitioners in
the case, all the matters that had occurred at the last
election would be brought under the consideration of the
Committee. He had now stated all the facts of this case,
and he would leave it in the hands of the House. lie
begged only to submit to the good sense of Honour-
able Members, whether they should not consider
they bad already become sufficiently entangled in
the suspension of writs, and the difficulties of
appointing tribunals fur inquiries of this nature.
He was extremely anxious that the House should deal
with the case judicially, and without any party bias, not
condemning parties unheard, nor punishing the inno-
cent for the guilty. He desired to be guided by the
general sense cf the House as to the propriety or im-
propriety of granting the writ in this case.
Lord SANDON said he should not rise for the pur-
pose of entering into the discussion, but simply for the
purpose of reading a lett4r which (as we understood
the Noble Lord) lie had received from the agents of the
.lute Members for Belfast. It was to this effect :—" I
am requested to state, on behalf of Mr. Emerson
Tennent and Mr. Johnstone, in reference to the
late compromise of the Belfast petition, that if
any such arrangement was ever made it was utterly
without their concurrence, and without any con-
cert or understanding on the part of either of them."
Mr. O'CONNELL rose to move, as an amendment,
the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire
whether a corrupt compromise had been entered into for
the purpose of avoiding investigation into gross and ex-
tensive bribery, and gross and corrupt personation of
voters, and consequent perjury, alleged to have been
practised at the late election for Belfast. The
House would perceive that there was not the least at-
tempt to deny that a compromise had taken place. All
that the letter contained was a denial that the parties to
whom it referred were concerned in it. It had already
been decided that 'a corrupt compromise was a breach of
the privileges of that House, and the House must,
therefore, either grant his motion, or declare that their
fbrmer decision was wrong. The Hun. Member said all
the questions in this case might be raised before the Select
Committee. It was plain that they could not. They
might go into the circumstances which would render that
compromise advisable, but they could not by possibility
inquire into the compromise itself. The bribery which
had taken place was not confined to either party ;
but bribery bad been committed by both parties.
His statement was this—that he was informed by so
much of authority that it was impossible fur him not to
believe it, that it could be proved io the House that ex-
ceeding gross and extensive bribery took place at the last
election for Belfast—that there it had been an organised
and systematic bribery, emanating from the Committee-
room of the Conservative candidates ; that one person ac-
tually got 401., anotlftr 501., and others different sums
varying from 10/.upwards. He was also informed, and could
prove, that personation of a most corrupt nature took
place at the last election, that a list of those, who at
former elections voted for the Conservative candidates,
was actually stereotyped by an elector, and that although
many of the persons on the list were dead, or were nut
entitled to vote, persons were brought tsfuoirtswarodf tcoloptheers-
sonate them. He understood that those parties had
been brought from Monaghan, that
had been purchased fur them, that disguises of every
description had been resorted to, and that a great deal
of Quakers' apparel had been used for that purpose ;
that presenting themselves, although having no right to
vote, they actually took the bribery and other oaths
administered to electors ; that one person voted three
times. He (Mr. O'Connell) had been furnished with
the names. of thirteen persons who had personated
others. Witnesses had been brought to London
to prove the facts he had stated. The case, therefore,
stood for trial. Attempts, however, were made at Bel-
fast, unsuccessfully, to compromise the matter.
A case of compassion was attempted to be raised
towards one of the sitting Members at Belfast. It
was refused, and now he was in a condition to
prove that a compromise bad been entered into.
The arrangements were this—first, that the sitting
Members should be unseated, with the co-operation of
Counsel upon both sides, upon mere matters of form ;
and next, that the entire expenses on the part of the
petitioners of appearing before the Committee should be
forthwith paid. He was ready to prove that they had
been either actually paid or that they had been per-
fectly secured. Now let them look to the Report
of the Committee. They had not re ?orted that the
petition on the defence of the return was frivolous or
vexatious ; and of course, therefore, the costs
could not be alloWed to either party. But by
the corrupt compromise which had been entered
into, the costs of the petitioners were secured. He
was able to prove these facts ; and he had
before him the petition of one of the persons bribed. It
was said, however, that the party owed money at Car-
narvon, and it seemed to be supposed that whoever owed

money at Carnarvon must be a bad character. That
was the accusation against him, 'out he (Mr. O'Connell)
wanted to know whether that was not the gentle-
man to whom one of the sitting Members wrote in
affectionate terms, signing himself, " Most truly, your's."
—(A laugh.) These expressions he would not have used
to any man whose character he did cot think respectable.
But, at all events, that was a matter for the Committee
to decide. The allegations were not his (Mr. O'C's.)
They had all that they could desire in the case._
In the instance brought forward by his Hon. and Learned
Friend the Member for Bath, his evidence was purely
this, that "he was told, and had been informed, ,and
believed, and was convinced, and was ready to prbee."
But they had more in the present instance. He- (Mr.
O'Connell) had a list of witnesses returned to him who
would prove the facts. He had distinct allegations
of a man of the name of Cropper of the existence of a
compromise. lie stated that the sitting Members had
agreed to pay all the expenses of the petition, and 'that
the inquiry into personation and bribery was conse-
quently abandoned ; the understanding between the
parties being, that the return should be voided
on the sole ground of illegal conduct at the poll,
that one Member should be returned on each side, and
that the new Tory Member should be Mr. E. Tennent.
Now, Mr. Tennent had come forward with a declaration
setting himself free from the compromise ; but did. he
tell the House that his return was not insured ?
Did he tell them that it had not been agreed
on that one Member not coinciding with him-
self in opinion should be also returned ? Did
he venture to deny that the arrangement in ques-
tion had not been made ? It was stated, no doubt, that
there were several candidates in the field, but Mr. Ten-.
nent did not say that he was not bound in honour to re-
frain from opposing the return of one Liberal Member.
Against the party who had made these allegations there
was no charge by which he could be disparaged, unless
it was a disparagement that he had once been in debt.
He heard statements that enormous bribery had been
committed at Belfast—that a compromise had been
entered into, and that the electors were indignant
that this compromise should have taken place.
He heard it stated that the general feeling
in Belfast was that the crime should be hunted out,
and that the guilty party should be punished, and
that the facts of hideous personation and mufti-
tudinous perjury should be fully investigated.
All he wanted was the Committee, and he would
leave in the hands of the House what the composition of
the Committee should be whether. it should he
referred to the Committee to which the other cases
were referred, or whether a separate one should be
appointed. All he desired was, that what was
done with regard to the English cases, might be
done with respect to the Irish one. What would be said
if this inquiry was refused ? He heard it said the
writs were issued alternately—now black—now white.—
(Laughter.) But something more would be said if the writ
was issued in the present case. The writ wa4 not issued
in the case of Nottingham, in which a Member of the
late Administration was concerned, and would a con-.
trary course be pursued with respect to a Member of
the present Government ?—(Cheers and laughter.)
Both individuals were also in the same of.
fice—the Board of Control.—.(" Hear, hear," and
laughter.) And how could they rilloW a Committee to
inquire in the one case, and refuse it in the other ?.
That gentleman, (Mr. E. Tennant) to be sure had pa-
tronised the Government—(Laughter)—for• he said in
his address to the electors of Belfast, " the best proof of
my confidence in the present Government may be guessed
from the fact that I have accepted office under them."---
(Much laughter and cheering.)
Mr. SHAW, who held what we believe was a copy of
the address in his hands, said that was not contained in
the address.
Mr. O'CONNELL—Oh ! you have been sent a copy
it.—(Laughter. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman
was here handed a copy of the Address by Mr. M. J.
O'Connell from which he read the extract as
before, amidst continued laughter and cheering.)
It seemed then that lie (Mr. O'Connell) was perfectly
right.—(Loud laughter.) It appeared then that he
patronised the Ministry. Would the Ministry in
return patronise him ?—(Continued laughter.) He (Mr.
O'Connell) had produced infinitely stronger documentary
evidence than had been produced in the Notting-
ham case. The notoriety was as great as it
had been in the Nottingham case. He had
proved that by the newspapers; he had the information of
a greater number of witnesses to appeal to ; he
had the distinct assertion of the petitioner, and there-
fore he thought he was perfectly justified in stating
that there was the strongest reason for believingthat a cm -
rupt compromise had taken place. Then there was, in ad-
dition to all that, the evidence of pecuniary corruption by
the payment of all expenses, or what amounted to the same
thing, by giving security that such payment should
take place. He felt convinced that he should be able
to prove the existence of bribery and corruption.
He submitted that he had made out a case stronger
than any of the English cases. If he had said any
thing implying an idea that this case would be more
leniently dealt with, because the party implicated be-
longed to the, Administration, that was a conviction
that he would altogether postpone for the present.—
(Cheers and laughter.) He would therefore move, as an
amendment, " For a Select Committee, to inquire whe-
ther a corrupt compromise has been entered into, for the
purpose of avoiding investigation into gross and exten-
sive bribery, and gross and corrupt personation of voters,
and consequent perjury, alleged to have been practised
at the late election for Belfast."
Sir H. W. BARRON seconded the amendment.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
Messengers from the Lords brought down divers Bills.
BELFAST ELECTION RESUMED. -
The PEAKER having put the question,
Captain POLHILL said that having been a Member of
the Belfast Election Committee, he hoped the House
would bear with a few observations from him
on the matter. He most cordially supported the
motion of his Honourable and Learned Friend (Mr.
Shaw). He would state very shortly the reasons why
the evidence that came before them on that occasion
was in his opinion clear, lucid, and free frcm anything
like proving bribery.—(lronical cheers from the Op-
position benches.) The grounds put forward
by the Learned Counsel, and on which the Committee
decided, were, first, the minority of certain of the
deputy returning officers, that they had adminis-
tered the bribery oath, they being under age. That
circumstance was of itself, both in his opinion
and that of the Committee, fatal to the claim of the
sitting Members. The second ground counted upon by
the Learned Counsel was, that in a certain booth marked
letter M, great delays were occasioned in bringing the tal-
lies up; the bribery oath was administered to almost every
person that presented himself to vote, except to
a few respectable persons ; and in this latter
case, where the oath was not administered, a
certain compromise was . entered into, of grant-
ing a delay of three minutes, so as to equalise
the position of the contending parties. Upon those
counts his mind had been made up, and they termed the
grounds for the decision come to by the Committee. He
hoped, then, that the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of
her Majesty's Government would support the motion of
his Right lion. Friend.
Sir H. W. BARRON said he was empowered to
state to the House the names of the two parties
who had made the compromise, and the amount
of money .they were to have been paid. The
person who acted on behalf of the Tory Members was
Mr. J. M‘Neile, and the manager on the part of the peti-
tioners was Wm. Candor ; the money that was to have
been paid for preventing the case from going before the
Committee, and keeping back the evidence was GOO/.
down, and a further sum of 4001., left solely to
the arbitration of a gentleman resident in Belfast ;
he need not give the name of that gentleman,
who had not properly been mixed up with
the business, but if the facts were denied, he was pre-
pared to give it. The other two gentlemen had com-
promised the House, and had stultified the Committee
of which the Hon. and Gallant Officer was .a member.
Why it would be ridiculous—it was a solemn and ridi-
culous, but a very thin-veiled farce. The whole facts
had come before the public, and were notorious
to every club in London. He had heard the
names and facts stated by several parties. One
of them was now living at the Burlington
Hotel. • Let him be called to the bar
of the House and examined upon oath. Let them
call to the bar of the house John M'Neile, who had acted
for the Tory candidates, and see whether he would deny
that he was a party. to that compromise, that
the money was paid, or promised to be paid, and that he
acted for those candidates. If, after suspending the
writ in the case of Nottingham, they refused
to suspend it here, there would be an end of justice.
an end of common sense, and they would be attempting
the grosseSt delusion, but a delusion which would not
pass current with the most think-headed dolt who read
their proceedings.—(Hear.)
Sir R. PEEL said he quite agreed with his Right
Hon. Friend that they had got into great embarrass-
ments, in consequence of the allegations on this subject.
But why had they got into them ? Why were they
compelled to adept a course, which lie admitted was
novel and not warranted by the precedents of former
Parliaments ? Because they had passed an Act of Par-
liament dispensing with the necessity of proving
agency as a preliminary to the proof of bribery, and be-
cause they had appointed Committees which, notwith-
standing the imputations which had been thrown upon
them, had shown by their proceedings that they were
anxious to perform their duties, without reference to
party considerations. One consequence of these two
Acts had been the paralysing the tribunal, because the
evidence had been withdrawn from it. As he had stated
before, he did not think the House of Commons, by al,
pointing a tribunal for the adjudication of individual awl
personal rights, had deprived itself of its general juris-
diction with respect to bribery at elections. He did not
believe that that was the original intention in passing
the Act, nor did be believe it would be consistent with
the proper exercise of their functions. In the present
case, as in the other, he should decide upon judicial
grounds. lie did not see any difference between this
case and that of the Hon. and Gallant Member for Pen-
ryn. In that case the House had determined to institute
au inquiry. With respect to the present case, he
thought that the documents which had been referred to
by his Hon. Friend, showed clearly that a compromise
had taken place. his opinion, therefore, was, that in
such a state of things the House of Commons was bound
to convince the country that it was in earnest—(Hear,
hear)—in preventing, as far as it possibly could, those
growing systems of bribery and compromises which pre-
vented the exposure of them. The case of Belfast was
not exactly the same as the case of Nottingham. There
was no vacating of a seat, or a giving a sum of money,
but there were distinct allegations of a compromise.
He thought the course the House ought to pursue was
to apply themselves as quickly as possible to the Bill of
the Noble Lord ; thereby founding their legislation on
some principle. On the whole he thought that for the
sake of the character of the parties themselves, an in-