The Sun.
London, England, 1842-05-10 00:00:00

THE TARIFF-TIMBER DUTIES.

In answer to a question from an Hon. Gentleman,
whose name we could not learn, relative to the duties to
be paid on timber,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said (as
we understood) that the timber imported since October
last, and now in bond, would pay the duty in existence at
the time when it was taken out of bond ; but the timber
not in bond would pay the duty of that period at which
it was imported. '
CASE OF MR. BIDDULPH.

Mr. SHIEL said, that seeing the Noble Lord, the Se-
cretary for Ireland, in his place, he ventured to ask him
a question respecting a matter of which he (Mr. Shiel)
had given notice. It appeared that Mr. Biddulph, a
Magistrate of King's County, of considerable respecta-
bility, was fired at some time ago, and two persons,
Colville and another, were tried for firing at him. .No
less than three trials took place with reference to this
matter—two under the late Government. At the last
trial a complaint was made by Lord Charleville, respect-
ing the constitution of the jury. The fast trial
took place at the late Spring Assizes, when the
prisoners were acquitted. It appeared that, on
that trial Mr. Keating a man of distinguished ability
was sent down as counsel. Upon the examination of
Mr. Biddulph, it appeared that he, in his capacity of
Magistrate, had conveyed advice to the two persons
charged with the felony to abscond and fly the country. On
the cross-examination by Mr. Murphy, he (Mr. Murphy)
said, " I shall now leave you in the hands of the Attorney-
General." Mr. Keating was then the representative of the
Attorney-General. After this Mr. Castles, Mr.Buddulph's
steward, stated he had been authorised by Mr. Biddulph
to advise the prisoner to fly the country. Mr. Biddulph
had since been dismissed by her Majesty's Government.
He (Mr. Shiel) wished to know the day on which the
trial had taken place upon which Mr. Biddulph was
dismissed.

Lord ELIOT said, he believed the Right Hon. and
Learned Gentleman had stated with perfect accuracy
the facts of the case. He (Lord Eliot) regretted that
the Right Honourable Gentleman had not given him
intimation of the specific question he had intended to
put upon which he desired an answer, but he would take
care to ascertain the dates, and let the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman know. The Lord Chancellor of Ireland, upon
the investigation of the circumstances, had dismissed Mr.
liddulph from the commission of the peace for King's
County. The first intimation that Government had
received upon the subject was, from a question
put by a Noble Person in another place.
Under these circumstances he hoped the Right Hon. and
Learned Gentleman would feel satisfied with the course
taken by the Government and the Attorney-General.
Mr. SHIEL expressed his satisfaction at the reply of
the Noble Lord.
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.

Mr. ROEBUCK moved the Order of the Day
re-
suming
for
the adjourned debate on the breach of privilege.
The Order of the Day having been read,
Mr. ROEBUCK presented a petition from the bo-
rough of Reading, stating that the petitioners had heard
of the circumstances that led to the debate of Fri-
day night; that they believed that the charges con-
tained 'in the petition against the return for that
borough were and are true ; and that the object of the
arrangement that had been made was to prevent the dis-
closure of the corrupt practices that had prevailed ;
they, therefore, prayed the House to grant a Select
Comittee of Inquiry without delay.
ELECTION PROCEEDINGS—ADJOURNED DE-
BATE ON THE APPOINTMENT OF A SE-
LECT COMMITTEE.

Major BERESFORD said that it was his intention to
address the House on Friday evening, when he was per-
sonally attacked, and he hoped that he would not now
be precluded from addressing the House.
The SPEAKER said that the question should be put
first.

The question having been then put,
Major BERESFORD said, he was anxious to address
the House, especially as he was not in the habit of occu-
pying. its time on a subject in which he was person-
ally concerned, and in which his honour was at stake.
—(Hear, hear.) He rose for the purpose of saying
that he considered this Committee should be appointed
—(Hear, hear)— which would not be so unparliamentary
as the precedent which the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man opposite (Mr. Roebuck) sought to establish. He
' believed the question of the Hon. and Learned Member
was unparliamentary, and he should refuse to answer it,
though if it were put by a competent authority,
he Would not.—(Hear, hear.) He did not object to the Hon.
Gentleman's request for a Select Committee, but he did
object; and with reason to the manner in which he asked
for it—the matter he brought forward—and the tone and
gesture with which he enforced it. The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman had charged him personally with
bribery and corruption, and he stated that a rumour
was abroad to the same effect; but he thought
the Honourable and Learned Member should have
known that rumour had been called a lying jade ; but he,
too, heard a rumour, perhaps as well founded as that of
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, that he (Mr. Roebuck)
was a Member of that House without a qualification, and
that he swore to that qualification the very day on which
it was executed for him in London. That was one of the
rumours which he (Major B.) had heard, and, perhaps, as
well founded us that upon which the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman charged him. He had heard a rumour,
too, that not patriotism alone, but that bad feeling also,
had excited him to his present measure. (Hear,
hear.) Perhaps that was unfounded also, and he, had
not come to point the finger of scorn and malevolence at
any person; but he thought the Honourable and
Learned Gentleman was trying to establish a
dangerous precedent, and one which ought not
to be tolerated. It was better they shoulil
go before a Committee regularly and fairly
appointed to vindicate their characters, than to be called
on to do so in that House, the arena of public discus-
sion.—(Hear, hear.) He had said that the Hen.
and Learned Gentleman was at liberty to draw what con-
clusions he pleased, and the Hon. Gentleman drew false
conclusions, which he always would do as long as he argued
on false premises. The Hon. Member for Cockermouth
had also made a remark, which he could not assent to.
He knew no reason why, because a man was accused, he
should be judged guilty, if he did not immediately appeal
to some tribunal for the purpose of clearing himself. He
protested against any such conclusions being drawn, and
he trusted that the House would grant the Committee.
Mr. C. WYNN had moved the adjournment of the
debate, for the purpose of affording himself an opportunity
of maturely considering what would be the effect of the
Honourable and Learned Gentleman's motion. That
motion appeared to him to be of too general a
nature. The Honourable Member bad brought forward
nothing specific for the House to inquire into.
The Honourable and Learned Member had brought
forward certain charges against certain individuals, but
there was nothing definite in them—the charges
ought to have been specified. There had been one case
mentioned, in which it had been stated that a bond
had been given with a conditional penalty to be enforced
on the withdrawal of the petition, if the Member did not
resign his seat within a certain timer In another
instance it had been stated that a sum of money
had been laid down. If a corrupt contract could be es -
tablished no doubt that would be a case of breach of
privilege. But there might be a case in which
a person not being able to support the expense
of defending his seat, and not wishing an investigation to
go forward affecting his character during his absence,
might say to his opponent, ~ If you wish merely to get a
new election, you shall have an opportunity of going to
one, for I will resign my seat. Of any such arrange-
ment as that the House had no right to complain.
He thought the regular course was for the Hon. Member
to bring forward a separate charge in each case, and
upon that charge the House would determine what
course it should adopt in each special case. In each
case the facts and charges might be taken down as
the ground upon which the House acted, and it would
then be entered on the Journals as the evidence of
that ground. He had studiously abstained from enter-
ing into the merits of the case that had been referred to,
but he thought that the adoption of the course he had
proposed would be consistent with justice ; as it must be
clear to every Hon. Member that it would be much
better that each case should be disposed of according to
its own merits, than that fishing or roving Committees
should be appointed.
Mr. WARD could assure the Right Hon. Gentleman
who had just sat down, that nothing was further from the

desire of any person on that side of-the 11I4useitj?antio fur-
ther the issuing of a fishing or rovitmPonhiittee ; but
there were certain allegations which had been made'
by his Learned Friend, which he believed could'
be proved. He believed that his Learned Friend
had understated his case, and that more might be proved
than he had asserted. The allegations that had been
made had in a great measure been confirmed by the
conduct of certain Members. In Nottingham so clear
was-Ahe evidence of malpractices that one of the Hon.
Members had found it so impossible to defend his
seat that he had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds.
The object of his honourable ambition was a seat in
that House. He stood two contests for Nottingham,
and that was no small proof of sincerity.—(Hear.) Why
had he withdrawn ? His withdrawal was itself, under the
circum stances, all the confirmation the House could require
as a ground for investigating the facts, and those facts he
believed would be proved in Committee. With regard to
the Gallant Major who had just addressed the House,
no one could suppose that he was cognisant of what had
taken place at Harwich, but still as the reports were rife,
it was necessary that the matter should undergo
investigation. They had heard from his Hon. Friend,
the Member for Bath, something about a Parliamen-
tary Napoleon going down to Nottingham, but it ap-
peared that there was also a Parliamentary Caesar, who had
been down to Harwich, and this Veni-vidi-vici-Gentle-
man had swept everything before the strength of his
arms—(Laughter)--and in that town 83 objections had
been served on one side, and 81 on the other, a number
which included a very large proportion of the
voters.—(Loud laughter.) He did not say they
had all been bribed, but the objections bad been
served. They had been told, and he believed proof
would be adduced before the Committee of the fact,
that in the course of two or three months the House were
to be deprived of the Gallant Major's services, with no ex-
planation of the fact, except the inconvenience of allow-
ing the allegations of the petition to be tried before the
House. He thought such charges ought not to be made
without being thoroughly investigated. They were told
that there was at that moment a bond in existence, pro-
viding that a penalty of 2,0001. should be paid,
unless the constituency were dealt with in a par-
ticular manner, and handed over to a particular
individual without opposition. He believed that fact
would be proved before the Committee. This could not,
then, be called a fishing Committee, grounded as it
was upon certain allegations made by his Hon. Friend.
He would entreat the House to pause before deciding
upon the course to be adopted. This was not a
fishing Committee ; it was not a roving Com-
mittee, but one confined and limited to cer-
tain cases adduced. Let them give such a Com-
mittee the adequate powers and authority, and
they might depend upon it that those who
wished to stop the rapid progress of corruption and
bribery at elections in this country would find
that they never had so good an opportunity of
effecting their desires. He had no party or
personal feeling upon this question ; all he wished to
see was the axe laid to the roof of a system which was un-
dermining the morality of the country. In the present in-
stance, they had to deal not with mal-practices sanctioned
byEleetionCommittees, but with malpractices,in which the
name and character of that House were constantly mixed
up, and which were most dangerous to the moral
health of the nation. He trusted that the Right
Hon. Baronet,the First Lord of the Treasury, would not
throw any obstacle in the way of the inquiry now sought
for, which inquiry it was his interest, as well as that of
the House at large, to promote. He hoped that all due
powers would be given to the Committee, for the purpose
of bringing the just censure of the House upon those
who might be proved to have infringed its liberties,
and to have compromised its character with the country.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said, it was very true that
the present could not, in the common sense of the
word, be called a party question, inasmuch as the
allegations made by the Honourable and Learned
Gentleman opposite affected both sides of the
House. Not having had the advantage of being present
on Friday night when the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman put his question, he would take the liberty
of expressing, with respect to it, that which he
should have personally desired to do, and which had
not been done by others. He certainly should have en-
deavoured that that question should have been put not
without opposition from an individual at least. He
should have endeavoured to have resisted the inquiry.
Supposing the Committee were granted, he would ask by
what course of proceeding would the result so confi-
dently anticipated by the Hon. and Learned Member for
Bath be arrived at? Did he mean to make individuals cri-
minate themselves. Did he mean to take the evidence
of informers as to practices in which they themselves were
implicated ? If so, he would certainly have followed the
example of the Old Bailey, but he would not so satis-
factorily arrive at the conviction to punishment of
the parties accused. For those reasons he would certainly
vote against the motion of the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman.

Mr. R. YORKE simply rose to quote an au-
thority which would be respected on the
subject, which had been brought before the House
in the autumn of last year. He referred to the dis-
cussion arising on the disputed election for Caernar-
von. On that occasion, it had been said that bribery
had prevailed to a great extent during the recent elec-
tions, and that the worst cases of bribery occurred in the
larger towns, and that nothing could give greater satis-
faction than to see the House take up the cases of those
large towns, and if the guilt were brought home to
those places nothing could be more desirable than to
have them disfranchised. Such had been the case of a
Right Hon. Member of the Government. . _ _

Lord PALMERSTON could not allow this question
to come to a division without stating strongly the
grounds upon which he voted ; at the same time he
could not help expressing his surprise at the si-
lence of the Members of her Majesty's Government—
(Opposition cheers)—upon the present question, which so
deeply interested that House and the country, He
should have expected that the Right Hon. Baronet at
the head of the Government would have stated the course
which he meant to pursue, and the reasons upon which
that course should be founded, and that he should have
intimated to the House what was the proper line to be
adopted upon the motion of the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman. The Right Hon. Baronet and his Colleagues,
however, had not thought fit to do so. No doubt they
had their reasons for it.—(Opposition cheers.) He
(Lord Palmerston) should not shrink, however, from
stating his intentions, and whether those intentions
were conformable or not to the opinions of the majority
of the House, entertaining the strongest convictions and
opinions on the subject, ho thought it his duty to explain
his vote. He (Lord P.) could not vote for the motion
of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. He understood
that motion to be for a Committee not to inquire into
the extent to which bribery had taken place at the last
general elections, but to inquire into the existence of
certain compromises which he alleged to have occurred
at certain Election Committees recently, by which some
parties had consented to withdraw their petitions, and
others to accept of the Chiltern Hundreds. He (Lord P.)
apprehended that the grounds upon which the House
ought to be called upon for that purpose, would be either
that the compromises alleged to have been made, were
against the established law, or were a breach of
the privileges of that House.—(Hear.) That it
was against the statute law he was not prepared to
say. There was a clause in the Act constituting Elec-
tion Committees, expressly enacting that any parties pre-
senting an election petition should be at liberty to with-
draw the same at any time they might think proper,
and it was manifest that nothing could be more proper
than that such power should be given, because
the trial of those petitions was conducted at
the expense of the parties petitioning ; and it
would be an injustice if they were not permitted
to withdraw from the trial of such petition whenever
they might think proper. The next point to be
considered was, if such compromises were a breach
of the privileges of the House. As at present
informed he was not aware that they were.—(lronical
Radical cheering.) If .it were thought that the
question was of sufficient importance to merit a
separate discussion, let the statement of the Hon.
Gentleman be assumed to be correct for the purposes of
argument, and let the question be solemnly argued.
Let the case be put that A and B had been returned
to Parliament, and C and D petition against them on
the charge of bribery. A and B are told by
their Counsel that, though they themselves are guiltless,
yet their agents have abused their confidence, and done
things affecting their suits. The parties petitioning,
naturally anxious to avoid the enormous expense
of a trial, and thinking there may be some uncertainty
in the case, are willing to enter into a compro-
mise, by which the parties petitioned against
resign their seats. Another election takes place, and the
electors have again another opportunity of making
a choice. He could see nothing inconsistent
with the privileges of Parliament in all that.
If it were so, let the question be argued, and if, after
full consideration he should be of opinion that such was the
case, he would rote accordingly. But these compromises
which were said to have taken place, were no new matters.
It was not the first time they had been suspected_ ~ it was
not the first time that they had happened. No man
could get up in his place and say that the existence of
such compromises had not been known before.
If neither a violation of the law nor a breach
of the privileges of Parliament had taken place,
the inquiry could not lead to the punishment
of any of the; parties eoncerned. There was a
perfectly legitimate ground on which this Com-
mittee ought to be sought for, namely, to lay
the ground-work for an Act of Parliament, ren-
dering such compromises for the future impossible.
He did not require investigation to lead him to that ; he
was prepared to take the statement of the Hon.
Member as the ground-work, and he was prepared at
once to vote for the measure proposed by his
Honourable Friend the Member for London in 1840.
He was prepared to vote for a law which, if they
would, should not only give power to Committees
but make it imperative upon there to enter into
cases of bribery. Those proceedings being for the
public good, they must be at the public expense,
for they would be well incurred if they • enabled
the House to get at those mal-practices, a nd visit them with
severity. For any legitimate purpose for which this Com-
mittee could be appointed, he was prepared to go with
the Hon. Member, and he would vote with any other
Member who would introduce a measure, or he would in-
troduce it himself, that would give to Committees the
extra power, or make it imperative on them to go into
the circumstances of bribery; and he would also agree to
add the clause whieh was struck out of the Bill of his
might be told that this was all very well,
Hon. Friend in the House of
Lords, indemnifying wit-
nesses
from any consequences arising from their own
evidence. He
but they had, no certainty Such a measure would pass.
He would say to the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, that
for such a measure he ..should claim the support of
the Government, not only= ,in that House, but
elsewhere ; and he was persuaded if such a mea-
sure were proposed by the Government, or if