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

LONDON, SATURDAY M,irRNING SU Ng

r
, -21-0,, ,„,fiz,
rupt age or the most corrupt pe ( o id. ,) , F-,•4 -,t4 Llf •
The Right Hon. Baronet had said thlie the press of ,--
public business would prevent him from \jsringing for -4,
ward any measure for that purpose, but that he trus
that the Noble Nord, the Member for London, would- Coik-2-411116-'
again introduce the measure which he had introdined in
the former Session, and would again take up tine sub-
ject. At the same time the Right Hon. Baronet ad-
mitted that it was his. (Sir R. Peel's) belief that at
the last general election gross bribery, gross corruption,
and gross intimidation had been practised.—(Cheering
and counter-cheering.) He (Mr. T. Duncembe) could
only say that if any one expressed the slightest doultis
on the subject, he could undertake to prove at the bar of
the House that a majority of the Members of that House
had been returned by gross bribery, corruption, and
intimidation.—(Cheering and counter-cheering.) He
was now prepared to prove that assertion, but he was not
prepared to carry that great question' to a private room
up-stairs, to gratify party feelings avd private animo-
sities.—(Cheers.) tie wished that an inquiry into the
constitution of that House should take I.'lace at the bar,
,in the face of open day, and of the whole country.—
(;Loud cheers.) The whole country regarded their
transactions during the last week with the mest unmiti-
gated disgust at their injustice and hypecrisy.--(Lotel
cheers and laughter.) The public knew perfectly we-,'l
that when they were about to persecute six or eight,
individuals there were at least 600 of them in the House
who were just as bad. There was a sense of justice
in the British public, that did not like to see eight or
ten men hunted down by 600 others, who were equally
implicated.—(Cheers.) Three millions and a half of
the people had already told them so, in the petition
'which he had presented, and which they had refused to
hear, although the petitioners had offered to prove their
allegations at the bar. What did they say in that peti-
tion, which had been so unjustly maligned?—(Hear,
hear.) The petitioners stated that seats in that HOMe
were improperly obtained, that they were sought for at
a most extravagint cost, which proved an enormous de-
gree of fraud and corruption. They stated, and oases?.
most truly, that bribery, intimidation, corruption, and
treating prevailed in Parliamentary elections. Now, if'
they were to inquire into these practices, let it be seen
that the gentlemen, who were to act to a certain extent
as volunteer inquisitors, at all events, mounted the judg-
i:nent seat with clean hands. That was-the object of his
fliction. He-also agreed in thinking, that the Committee
,
shou„i. be presided over by some gentleman of great legal
ability, .of calmness of temper, and moderation of habits.
He hoped lilsey wot:ld be enabled to find nine men, at least,
who would be eerae from the corrupt practices complained
of. He could only say .that, if he been named upon
that Committee, he coula not make. the required decla-
ration.—(Hear, hear, and I,,ughter.) He could take it
as the representative of Fins:bury ; ,but, unfortunately
for him, lie was once a candidate for the very pure and
O. aughter.) He
immaculate borough of Pontefraeie—
had spent 4,0001. to get into Parliament I,Dr Pontefract,.
and he had no hesitation in saying that thee' money was
spent in gross bribery, treating, and corruptica.i. On that
occasion, he was unsuccessful ; he was defeatecs by Lord
Pollington, and the father of the Hon. Gentleman.' oppo-
site (Mr. M. Milnes). At that election, corrupt prac-
tices had been resorted to ; and he would say more • he
did not believe that any one was returned for Ponteiract
without bribery.—(Hear, and laughter.)
Mr. MILNES—I deny it.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE continued.—He had unfortu-
nately stood a candidate also five times for Hertford.—
(Hear and laughter.) Three times he succeeded, and
twice he was defeated ; but at all events he contrived to
leave 30,0001. behind him at Hertford.—(Great laughter'.)
He had to contend with a very great aristocracy. Hie
had to contend with "seven days leases"—(Hear, hear)--r
which the voters held under the Marquis of Salisbury,
so that they would be immediately turned out if they
voted against the pleasure of their landlord.--(Hear„
hear.) Well, he (Mr. Duncombe) had to build houses
for them.—(Laughter.) He had to build or buy sixty-
three houses.—(Roars of laughter.) A great portion of
his money was spent in treating, but the greater part in
direct bribery.—(Laughter.) Having only shown that
he himself could not take the declaration, he should like
to see the nine men who could.—(Hear and a laugh.) They
would be the admiration of the country. The whole city
would come down to see them, especially after they had
passed sentence upon the gentlemen accused of offences
of which almost the whole House had been guilty.—
(Hear, hear.) If the resolutions were not agreed to, he,
should, immediately after the holidays, move that an.
humble address be presented to her Majesty, praying
that she would be graciously pleased to dissolve this t
Parliament, after the extensive and disgraceful practices
of corruption which prevailed at the last general election ;
without the total discontinuance of which the House
could not be restored to that degree of respect and confi-
dence which was necessary to the due exercise of its
legislative functions.
The SPEAKER having put the question,
Lord POLLINGTON said the Hon. Gentleman who
had just sat down, had applied such language to the
borough which lie (Lord Pollington) had the honour to
represent, that he felt it his duty—(Laughter)—that he
felt it his duty to inform the House of the circumstances
of the election to which the Hon. Gentleman had alluded,
when lie confessed that he spent this large sum of money,
which was unsucessful ; and he would tell the House why
it was unsuccessful. It was because it could not succeed
in corrupting the people.—(Hear, hear.) In the borough •
of Pontefract there had only been one election before the
time, when the Hon. Member came down in reference to
which charges of bribery and corruption had been made.
On that occasion there was a very severe contest in-
desse, and the- metnory of that contest- rare.aio44 to this •
day in the town. In (lie year 1834 Mr. Raphael, the
then Sheriff of London, - came down in the Sheriff's
coach to stand as a candidate for the borough. There
was a report in the borough that lie was a Jew, but
when he was asked the queston, he replied, " I am not a
Jew, but I am as rich as one." Mr. Raphael paid
as much as 4,0001. into a bank in the town, but lie was
unsuccessful in his attempt to gain the election. If
bribery ever prevailed in that borough it had originated
with Hon. Members on the other side of the House.
He believed that if there had been any corrupt voters,
a better class were now taking their place, and lie made
no doubt that if the imputations were true, which he
denied them to be, the borough would very shortly be
relieved from them.
Mr. M. MILES would simply say, as it seemed these
assertions were to be made, that since he had repre-
sented the borough of Pontefract, he had never heard
the subject of bribery so much as alluded to, and ho
had never heard any accusation of that sort made. All
he had to say was, that if the Hon. Member for Fins-
bury divided the House. he should support him (as we
understood).
Mr. HARDY, who rose amidst much laughter, said,
that as he had been alluded to in this ace usation, he
ought to be allowed a few words in explanation in re-
spect to his connexion with Pontefract. He had con-
tested the borough ofPontefract in 1826, and he had the
good fortune to prevail on the returning officer to take
the election in one day instead of two, as had always
been the case, and by this means he avoided the prac-
tice which prevailed in the intervening night of an elec-
tion. He certainly did prevail on the returning-officer
to take the election in one day, and lie was told, when
that day had considerably advanced, that if he would
spend 5001., and leave a sum of money in the hands of
some person, he should win the election ; but he re-
fused to do so. He was not cognizant—as he was an-
swering to that House—of bribery in respect to
that election, and to show to the House in
what way, he considered his own conduct on
that occasion, when the Committee sat on the
petition, on which his Right lion. Friend below him
was his nominee on that Committee, and he put himself
in the witness-box, and was examined by the counsel on
the opposite side with respect to his conduct on that oc-
casion, they refused to put any question imputing
anything unfair to him. He was perfectly aware, and
Hon. Gentlemen who had spoken were aware, that when
the late excellent Member, Mr. Daniel Sykes, the Mem-
ber for Hull, was first chosen for Hull, his legitimate
expenses were less than 3001. ' 'There was a little me-
moir in the library of the House in which this fact was
stated. Owing to the spirit which prevailed in Pontefract,
he was obliged to leave behind him what Hon. Gentle-
men .knew by the name of head-money ; but he took
care that it should not introduce him again to this con-
stituency. He had stated plainly to the House the
facts, and he should ever strive to follow in the steps
of Mr. Daniel Sykes in all his elections,
Mr. WARD said he would vote against the motion of
his Hon. Friend. He thought that motion was of a na-
ture to cast ridicule on what he conceived to be a grave
and important proceeding. The motion of his Ham
and Learned Friend (Mr. Roebuck) was brought for-
ward with temper, tact, and firmness, and he considered
that a test so impracticable—(Oh, oh)—and so ill. act
vised—(Oh, oh)—.he said ill-advised, because no perso
was agreed as to what legal expenses were, and no peril
son could take the test with a safe conscience.—(0h -
oh.) The Hon. Member overshot the mark in pro-,
posing it.—(Hear, hear.) He looked on it as en alt.
tempt to interfere with the motion of his Hon. and
Learned Friend. His Hon. Friend did not intend it, he
was sure ; but that would be the effect of it, and Ise
shueild therefore vote against it. ,
Sir R. PEEL said that the House saw the Com-
mittee, and it would judge whether they were fit to dis-
charge the duty imposed on them. And in his opinion_
the Committee, constituted as it was, were fit, as honour-
able men, to discharge the duty confided to them. No
such test was required of the Committees selected to try
election petitions ; and if the members of such Com-
mittees were not considered disqualified from deciding
cases Involving the rights of Members and constituents,
why should such a test as that proposed by the Hon.
Member be imposed in the present instance ?—(Hear,
hear.) It was a dangerous precedent to establish, that
a test of thiS nature should be imposed on certain of its
Members by the House. He thought the Hon. Gentle-
man said that supposing nine Members could be found
who took such a test, the whole town would flock down
to see them. That was a very facetious sentiment, but
if, as he expected, a considerable number of wondering
spectators came to see the entry and departure of the
Committee—if 600 out of the 658 Members could not
take !the test, he (Sir R. Peel) did not see how they
could expect a satisfactory result from the inquiry he
proposed to institute.—(Cheers.) His objection was of
a general nature. He believed that to appoint a Com-
. mittee in the manner proposed by the Hon. Member for
`Finsbury, would be forming a most dangerous precedent.
He-should therefore dissent from the proposal of the
Hon. Member.
Mr. HUME could not vote for the motion, because he
believed, if he did so, he should frustrate altogether the
motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Bath.
Mr. ROEBUCK thought that it would be desirable,
when Hon. Members wished to oppose a. measure, that
they should do so in a straightforward 'manner, and not
to pretend to patronise when they were doing all in their
power to render it inefficient. •When he proposed to the
House the inquiry now under consideration:: he. was
anxious to state, and did state explicitly, and it received the
assent of a majority of the House, thitit was the system
at which he weed, and not th• individuals. Throughout

MAY 14, 1842.

PRICE 5d