The Sun.
London, England, 1842-05-27 00:00:00

tS'e_edings in the form suggested by his Right Hon. Friend.
had
at every great objection to the House directing prosecu-
s all, believing that it was not strictly a Constitutional
mode of proceeding, and that it sent parties to their trial with a
,e•rytho vonsitlerable weieht of prejudice against them. At least,
he ught there should be the clearest possible evidence that
the parties, if sent to take their trial, would be convicted by
• the jury.
Liord J. RUSSELL said his complaint was, not that the
it° Gentleman did not tell the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
•otiny other individual that it was his intention to oppose the
Sleurnment of the House, but what he complained of was, that.
40 diit d not publicly announce it to the House. If he had done
he had stated that it was his intention to oppose the
adJournment to Monday, he, for one, should have stayed till
tb,:inotion had been made, in order to have supported the mo-
ti
.r.i.rof her Alajesty's Ministers.
sat C. NApIER said that be supported the adjournment to
t rdaYi and moved that the individual should be released,
teer.he had heard opinion of the Attorney-General, con-
Md ring it most unjust to imprison an Englishman improperly.
prThe ArRANEy-GENERAL differed from his Learned
ttend the Member for Wo dstock in his motion for the ad-
itnrnent toSaturday. He also differed with the Gallant 01E-
, r, because he did not think it Heist, without due notice, and
deliberation, that a vote of the House should be set at nought.
trusted
that the Noble Lord and the House would ft-el sa-
- Ca.ed with the explanation which his Hon. and Learned Friend
now for the third time given. He (the Attorney-General)
, believed that his Hon-. and Learned Friend had had no inten-
tion in the slightest degree to abstain from giving notice, and
t_lii.athe had, as far as he had the
power of so doing, given notice
ant the He-entirely concurred- in all that had fallen
s Learned Solicitor-General, and also much that had
,4_lallen from his Hon. and Learned Friend opposite, as to the
37tPshoiiii.riety of the present rnotion ; but he could not concur
im in the view which he had taken of the St. Alban's
le. From his Learned Friend's remarks it would appear that
.benPt osecution at Hertford had failed because the Jury had
-unmindful of their duty, and had been influenced by im-
r! per motives. He (the Attorney-General) thought it right
!to iniPute to state distinctly and explieitly that he did not think it right
t° any person serving on that Jury that he was in-
cfltneoe'l oY any
but a desire to discharge his duty honestly
zrcurnstitutionally. Believing, as he did, that there were
the witnesses
for that prosecution, he could not forget that one of
aor'tries"' was proved to have been confined in a lunatic
011 in within the previous twelvemonth, and that another was
t
.ti„e admit that he was commonly called by a name indica-
nt bis utter want of veracity.—( Hear.) Those circurn-
ati,z,!e had been dwelt on by the Learned Counsel for the de-
-11..7_(e v
. in his able and animated address to the Jury, in which,
mark
ser, that Learned Gentleman had indulged in certain re-
/ind
e°f which he (the Attorney-General) could not approve,
ght t (the Attorney-General) thought that no one had any
we surprise at their verdict.—(Cheers,) That
*Unr_use,°was no more the place for commenting on the verdict of
iu_u_r.Z,ethan for calling in question the direction of a Judge.—
dt., heera.) With respect to the immediate question before
eh, "use, although he would at all times willingly
7ty the orders of the House, yet he thought that by the pre-
loMotion too great a degree of responsibility would be
t7ved upon the Attorney-General. It would be devolving
.4111 the Attorney-General that discretion and judgment which
°use e'alone ouoht to
se exercise. It
nswould be placing him
situation of the Hou of Commo, to call upon him to
t7eide who should and who should not be prosecuted.—(Hear,
44.!iar,;) He would never shrink from the honest discharge of
..untY both to the House and to the public justice of the
s,it""trYs but he must protest against being placed in a situation
zatteh Pow d
er an responsibility, power to the exercise of ,Itc it would be so easy to attribute corrupt motives. Great !tmonVenience arose in the case of Swan, who was named by
citron
for prosecution. When the Report was made on
in ,font was doubtful whether there was sufficient material
prosecution, and it was upon information
.I"Mtairbt
70tied elsewhere, that Swan was tried.—( Hear.) He
ed
the propriety of this course, and if the House
been sitting at the time the prosecution was going on, he
Ton°,slid certainly have come down and made a communication
public
the case. It was extremely undesirable to cast upon a
nd,"e officer associated with the Government, the selection of
‘...._+vidnals for prosecution, with respect to matters with which
I:72tY feeling Ve4S so much mixed f his Right Hon.
.!'riled would bring a case before the House in which bribery
~t7'lm'ci clearly proved, he thought the House, notwithstand-
g the observations of the Hon. Member for Worcester, would
zantute a prosecution. But it being a case without evidence,
iothout the sanction of constitutional practice, and where
the
„,,,,Ote Must give to a public officer the discretion and judgment
.I.bsien ought to belong to the ouse alone, he trusted his Right
s Friend would not persistH in his motion, but withdraw it,
and present it another time, when het should have selected
mouse cases only in which there was not merely a tolerable,
rdr ea certain prospect of bringing the charge home to the parties.
the BUNCOMBE saki that it seemed to be admitted by
Eon, and Learned Gentleman that there was not a suffi-
tiel4ly clear case made out against any individual with regard
to IF" •
11, 16. Now he (Mr. Buncombe) should say that even
-"'mittli a clear case could be made out, he would not be pre-
to support the motion, for he entirely agreed with the
no- ~hmkingd Learned Gentleman the Member for Worcester in
that that House did not stand sufficiently high in pub-
he
not in sufficiently good odour with the
latldie, to enable them to institute a prosecution upon a charge
ISf bribery with any prospect of success. Let them look to what
„,nati takingplace on a former occasion. During the last session
HAttorney-General was directed, on the motion of the Right
ost, Gentleman, to prosecute Dr. Webster for having at-
tempted to bribe a certain elector at St. Alban's. The party
io'osecuted was acquitted on that occasion, to the satisfac-
lien of the public. That was the result of the Right Honourable
Gentleman's motion, showing that this sort of proceeding, when
instituted by that House, was perfectly useless. It was not by
snag proceedings that they could obtain for that House the
respect of the public. He believed there was no remedy for
the evil but a remodelling of the whole frame-work of that
House, anti a considerable extension of the class of electors by
Whom that House was returned. If the motion was pressed to
Otlivition, he should vote against the Right Hon. Gentleman,
lbatronly upon the ground that he had not made out a sufficient
hs.e, but because he thought the proceedings would be impar-
%i and unjust.
tar. DARBY said that his Right Hon. Friend had not ad-
•st,,ited , as the Hon. Gentleman seemed to suppose, that there
tot been a strong case made out before the Election
:nrottlitteee of bribery to a great extent, although in many
_rVittideal cases the charge could not perhaps be maintained.
lean respect to a case for prosecution, although if any person
*4ll through the evidence given before the Committee, they
Jilts
t77.,.-G end it most conclusive, yet it would be difficult for the
t•-t° to found a prosecution upon it.
'a
N%lr.a•i4"-Y.THE said that the Hon. Member for Finsbury
tlrvitZaticombe) had talked of a corrupt compromise being
--1,0M*(1,41,1 in the cases of Canterbury and St. Alban's. As for
out L'4raythe), he could state that he was cognizant in no
tav,—`134;1.,/ of_, a compromise taking place, and he never was
tli aTailikin27° than when, oe the morning on which the peti-
bf...'" the his return was to be proceeded with, he learned
ctt,a74er`f,-".",,.015ti0n oft that petition was abandoned. The Hon.
ae,l "Insbury ad no more right to accuse him of car-
ikran--eess than he (Mr. S.) had to charge that Hon.
414),5t. o,,,with corrupt practices in the borough of Finsbury.
the'ONNELL said, that in Canterbury and •s t.
Wis Was ,Y settled their accounts as well as they could ; the
nnwever, that a great deal of bribery took place
Rhe N.,81„,11,°t known at Hear, hear. )He was sorry
--mist not support the motion of the Right Hon. Gen-
*lts • e •
hit so kin Public were thoroughly aware that there never.t
t. o corruption and bribery at arty election as a the
i.trined.,v,, Attorney-General said he was anxious to find out
Drew!bribery. Now what was the great impediment
4tie' to tleteto the investigationof b ribery ? The refusal of par-
ho ttchll Iralnate themselves. Was it not possible for the
hisnetidGen.eral to bring in. a Bill to indemnify all witnesses
~clest„ give evidence of bribery ?—( Hear, hear.) The
:,seth the were quite strong enough to carry any measure
Ini.ght propose • and the public would not give them
hr' tva ate desiring to suppress bribery, unless they took some
Many persons of high rank were guilty of
Wes% '''sf‘oLit was impossible but that many of those who
5,,,t-,'iro were involved in it. Let' them get a Bill
~ntstrs "Um facilitate the proof of bribery, and then the
21144 Lotild believe them to be seriously disposed in finding a
70_4%1'11_4 ; but until that was done it would be hard to
•-"Elatiblic that that by which it was believed an over-
ktis, stirs Majority was returned to that House—( Oh, oh)—
that • all the object no, Ject of their care. He had heard it calculated
~,asaittv", million and a half.—(oh, oh !) Give him a
1.144 -the stmt
Inquire into it, and he would prove it. Such
414‘.• 'lt 01 bribery, that the House was now called
11°.ribers, instead of a House of Commons. But if
cet; th.llta were thrown in their way in the discovery of bri-
th
ve4 Public would not credit their prefe.sions, and it was
.Public
vert/4P u,* d that those who were not tinged with bribery
• it. ssel'a'ete ready enough to avail themselves of the results
",sse believed the Attorney-General would act impar-
• *lt "butt
si. a:reee are Was no use in prosecuting the poor wretches
eek Ived bribes, 'while the greater miscreants who gave
u. %I. 414 a. onpunished.—( Hear, hear. )
EEL said it was a dangerous doctrine to hold that
4104_40 received br;bts ought not to be punished. He
'1%4 public e,good anrne two or three pu prosecutions would have
tiussmet on the constituencies in general.—( Hear, hear.)
was
the not
illegality without its difficthe prosecutions weighed
Itty.pi. oesi-'" Ylyitb. him, and he should decidedly object to the Trea-
lynksiststPPing up defective evidence by other testimony. It
kink -"lo eat the be unfortunate if the result of the inquiry' should
„tuie li, Weakness of the law, and of the power of the
„sq sa„„m, Punish cases of this kind. On the whhle, he thought
Lae --we of the arguments was in favour of abstaining from
eentinn He believed the House could not be charged
"rale esire ta.shield bribery. But he should be exceedingly
11;0•4,--4114., itopr -sion went forth among the constituent body,
tlio-ann, se. webasunwilling to prosecute in clear cases of brihery.
o'st at would be very unfortunate if the House abstained
-:441 iiii,otinga clear case of bribery, because the party was in
tiell l 4ow" lg
Beth° ht it &dangerous doctrine to say that parties
rufe Were exem ted, because the bribes were given by par-
' tiecai'sithigb In the case of the Ipswich election, the
z.,-„ni9,11 unseated the Members was unanimous, and it
tie ''''''s-.lnerefore be said that the Committee were in-
tees4.• b,_3l Party. He thought in all instances the Commit-
After.l4°wri a strong desire to investigate charges of bribery.
Were it W :fel, words from Mr. W. 0. STANLEY, which hri-.../Mble in the gallery,
11,1-7 ME said there was not a single. individual in that
tle 6 °fun denied that bribery had existed at the last election.
be,,,,Ptliiy believed that a sufficient number of Members had
tho returned by bribery to turn the
.present majority. Ile
returned a .
•ate Motion ought to be made to dissolve the present Par-
ent oes,and to give the electors an opportunity of making a
""91ee of representatives Parliament first having passed a
mah'elt would make briber}, impossible.
ESCOTT nr sonse risnahrks on the speech of Mr.
Yliewe'whwhiFli were indistinctly eard, said he wished to
th Tram. Y toe Hon. Member for Montgomery (Mr. Wynn)
Prosee Infl the present motion, had not done so with a vievv to
ISOiltyuot;ng those individuals who might have been proved
la° 50r giving or receiving bribes at the last elections for those
gad heeenughs of Ipswich and Southampton. if the motion
4aPPort •._ framed it would have received his (Mr. Fscott's)
°li(framed as it was' in so general a manner, hi, must
, se it
, „
ht ~f7j•KNAL was afraid that a great many of the mem-
% moral- e constitutent body of this country were not alive to
t obligation which the franchise imposed Until they
n." isslidle in the minds and eonsciences of the constituent
411 t ."-leehng of the sacredness of th • trust reposed in them,
:41eitirtoetratkSeWpOrllipold,biteiounnavailingi toL check the evil. It was
pt the proper means of s regarding
.bribery, if they did not
14.4 the voter expected so suppressing it. Ever person knew
ve served you, and7yething.
mtubsetHesevilvae.ys to tyh,eM embe r
Was it by
hi,_'le:t inn they were to remeady
?Jo me."
danger was
nning' and they should meet it, and not suffer the evil to
tel such strength as would prevent them from applying any
reined y.
so,l%_lr'•• WAKLEY sat& he did not think it fair of the Hon.
4.'!ober opposite (Mr. Escott) to
• Friend the Member for Modnitrosa
Montrose
the
attributingmo motives st
oofhl4is
tresi;xe to bring the House into n "O.:Friend were entirely unnec The labours of his
asrsePatefor that purpose, for
411' °uld now disabuse the puillintnind of the belief that
lieuse was foully and corr coisitituted.— (Cheers.)
lust Th %recent proceedings before' tiYie ection Committees
Sri 'l'`ndtbet Public in entertaining these o
wasat,.deal had been said reg- riling buter He
nhoetahridnga
be! ''°". to suppress it. Was not the foundation of the bri-
laliY-ab4 corruption that Lad taken place to be traced to the
.I.oa. itself? It °ugh began with money. The representative of a
vras required to have so much money, and the money