The Sun.
London, England, 1842-08-09 00:00:00

. _
the facts. At this moment the Btitish foroes'occaple!
Candahar, and, he believed, jefialabad ; and We did D",
apprehend any probability of -tNeir immediate retrO,
from these situations. That was all the. infornlatl
which he could, consistently with his- sense of fit!bti!i,
)
duty, consent to give. He had sail that the lanforces were in possession of Candahar and .Iclialabt_!
and that he did not apprehend their in:mediate NV'
from thes,t situations.—(Hear. hear.)
TILE NORTH AMERICAN BOU2.:1;.4111'
Lord PALMERSTON inquired whether t 143
lion. Baronet had any objection.to lay; pro
_Arm', un fe
table the last Report of the North American floutly,
Commission, which he had already had .the goodness
communicate to him (Lord Palmerston) in private.
Sir R. PEEL, who had come provided ‘vith tine d°6l.A'.
'
meat, did not answer the Noble Lord,
or_, but caused nt 5
by bolding. up the Report; and at Once .vvallting,96,`Ail,,
it to the bar, whence he brought,it it was Wu-
the table. - • .

IPSWICH WRIT. ,
mi.. LEFROV said, that understanding the Chiairej
id the Mem here of tholipsivich Election Committee 't't'r
net hitt nil to offer any opposition. to the issning of te
eTit, he thought he shoula best discharge his own (1%;
aid con;ailt the convenience of the Ileum?, by ecfrai?"o
from occupying- their time in making any observa!')le
upon the evidence laid on the table of the House. Ne'Llie
would he be tempted by, the Le:ie.:ea tha.Bill givenhY: ro
Hon. Member fur Finsbury to 'Make an; ehserv'itl° a
but he thought there Was no support in - the evideile
that Bill. lie felt confident that the Hon„ -NlPraal
w it.:
uuld not persevere in that Bill, because if he 4''''',., be
for a moment be 'would find that he -Would cot ada.' la
disfranchising the persons named in the Bill, ho'o,
e:euld prevent the issuing of the writ for Ipswich. ir,/
160 felt that he would experience considerable dillicg
.f
in persisting in that Bil', when the other members of it,
Comnnttee had declared that they would not oPP°;e
time issue of the writ. He would du no more than 1,1,°,,
the issue of the writ ; and lie hoped that those l'°l,,
:lembers who who were candidates for the bcfo%o
e ould be subject to as little imputations, and celiac' il
with as uutarnished honour, and with as iedepentlenllo'
unblemished integrity as the Hen. Gantlemen who hif
lost their scats.—(Cheers.) He Would reser\ e to liilogee
anything he had to observe upon the Bill of alie-Ileialp
tlenam. He concluded by moving the issuing of the,"
Mr. STUART seconded the motion.
.- Mr. P. M. STEWART said there was a little in-ls,t.
prehension on the part of the Hon. Member. He. (e' .
Stewart) certainly did say that he shouid not apraii
the iia,;ue of the writ, but he did not say that ae,ali°
not support the Bill of the Hon. Member fair FineW,a)'
Me. LEFItOY said, he understood that the. Gore-a
- • a - -
intuitintuitWOU.l!.i hell oppose the issue of the writ, there:Ad
he did not expect he could support a Bill which :%l-°'
have that effect.-
Mr. DUNCOMBE said, that the Geveremen i
t -1a
11,
expressed a hope that he would not persevere in his Bud'
13;r
as he had no- case to rest it upon. Now he t,,,
Duncombe) would refer the House to what 'Oa
taken place within the last seven years. He f's'ea
that nu less than seven-petitions had been presathe
In 1835, there was one against Mr. F. Kelly, and oil t,
occasion Mr. Butt Cook was reported guilty of bribeo'ed
end hind absconded. In 1837 a petition was ereseop
against the return of his Hon. Friend Mr. Tuffnell. i,
1839 his Mon. Friend Mr. Milner Gibson resigPe,u/
(wear)—raid Sir Thomas Cochrane was returalr,
(Hear.) Then came 1841, when Mr. R. Wnson and /of
Rennie were unseated on account of bribery : undid.
came the election at which Lord Desert and Mr. b iof
stone were returned. They were unseated on acccenle
bribery by their agents, but without their cognisl, 0 13c
If the Hon. Gentleman had taken the trouble to renal
evidence, he would find that the seine -individuals,. a
been engaged in, bribery in all those eases to "'hr)he (Mr. Duncombe) had referred.—Wear, l'cl'9.ep
It appeared by the evidence that bribes had been g,' to
to, the following. persons :—To Arthur Boit Gnat'.
Henry G. Bristo, and that the wife of another vOt°'edo
received 10s.—(" Hear, hear," from the Ministerial 1y
of the House.) Be supposed they wished it wits Ivro.
(Cheers.) It appeared that Amos Goodchild n'llsarese
mised money to pay his railroad expenses.—(`` -I' JP
hear," from the Ministerial side of the House.) lei
thought that Cook, having been found guilty of hr.' sic
in 1835, and again in 1842, was a person wh°,l be
House ought to visit with reprobation. What CO!"(:ae
more just ? Mr. Wason and Mr.-Rennie, and a,3'•'lfrora
Gladstone and Lord Desert, had been incapacitate,ifearf
sitting in Parliament in consequence of acts of bil ill'
committed by their agents ; and yet tlic•tc oere
dividuals who were guilty of the crime
,i bY
allowed to go unpunished and uncensure'y it
the House. He considered it was a great anolirhad
such was permitted tobe the case. One individ° the
received 30s: for the loss of time, though 2s. Vi; flit,'
usual pay, and John Downing had received an it'd,
tilted
for his security of 251. ; Themes Bowman had rciereel:
30s. for playing in the band, and a person panto e„eie
had received 7s. 6d. because he would not vote. '-`,3lc.
of those were old offenders, and upon their evideneNho
Wason and Mr. Rennie had been unseated. WI for
Brown was an old offender. He had received 41. 1,57001
travelling expenses, and he was the principal erluu „e
Nv'e.-
by whom Lord Desert and Mr. Gladstone „eve
unseated, and it was partly upon his ew, 0
that Mr. Wason and Mr. Rennie were unseated his
1841. The number against whom he made
a,
motion was 21, and he thought they ought be incq 3
(Nutted for voting for the borough of IpsWich_ lital
there were any-other- persons who ought to be ,ineapg"
eitated for voting, and if he were allowed. to bring in $
Bill for that purpose, he had no, objection that mho's'
should be added. The question then was, would the
House consent to the issuing of the writ, and would the,'
allow those parsons to make a repetition of the corrnY6:
practices of which they were guilt, in the course °:'
the next week -? • There was' the case of Shoreler_';
which was a precedent for what he now moved. rim-_,
case - occurred -in 1777, and in that borough the
isted a society for the purpose of selling iled
votes to • the highest bidder, which was '6.0
the Christian Club (Laughter) —so called Eger
, t
the benevolent and charitable views which they e" ea
twined.—(Laughter.) The Club consisted of sixty-etre
members, and previous to the election, five of thew " aa
formed into a Committee to transact the business, the
though they never voted themselves they applied t° ,
others to vote, which was done by means of a ceVt iia
signal. The consequence was that a Bill was brallgali,ere
to incapacitate those sixty-eight individuals who "ing-
named, and they were incapacitated for ever from v°,.trd
for Members of Parliament. The case cf East rie;'°o.o
was another precedent with regard to which a Bil'aieja
brought in in 1828, to incapacitate sixteen ill" of
duals from . voting who were reported gui/t1 05,
bribery. The Bill passed the House of Connv9 be
but it was thrown out in the House of Lords; but of
only mentioned it to prove the opinion the Houseaci
Commons held on the subject. The Right 1.31' Hon. '',o
iijinself, when the Hun. Member for Montgomery 13'4"
his motion forward to the effect that the Attoril,..
General should prosecute those persons who were g 0,,,
of bribery, when Mr. Wason and Mr. Rennie we",l,sv.
seated, said, that it was a dangerous doctrine that 11%,
who received bribes should be indemnified. It wits trim
lie said. that . the acts of some individuals ought -r
be suM'Cient to disfranchise the borough, huet ace
the present case, lie did not ask to the
the Lorough disfranchised. He only wiShed that be
guilty persons should be disfranchised, which wouiciae
a sufficient example. On another occasion, in conaaaluc'et
of a question put by him (Mr. Duncombe) to the -111'1.0
lion. Baronet, he stated that he believed the woe!st criat
of corruption had occurred in the Irrge towns, and oc
wish d that those cases should be taken up by the .101,a
and made an example of. Now, here was the bior°°,fg
of Ipswich, which bad been twice reported to the goof
in the course of one session, as having been aei:d.lt,oe,
corrupt practices, •and it afforded, in his ola'".e
,te-
a fair opportunity to the House to take' the subject -",aya
its consideration.—(Hear, hear.) He thought it utte've
impossible the Right Hon. Baronet could agree to lop
issuing of the writ, after what he- had stated, and vl iia;
had taken place in the borough of Ipswich. What %!,;(a
time language of Sir Thomas Cochrane to the electorsoval
the borough of Ipswich, in a letter he addressed to theoat
on the 21st of September, 1841? The Hon. GentlOiket
- then read the letter of Sir Thomas Cochrane at gO.
length, length, which stated several facts connected witlip,l;,
standing for the borough of Ipswich, and that he
,1W
lieved it was necessary - for a person to go do wn to;tlf24.r'•
borough with 1,500/. He had been asked to ,11-81,0:
money after the election : and perhaps the Sr il
demand would be made with regard to the last elen:P -,:fo
f
Any one who read the letters must come to the ogle. ' .8
skill that it was impossible for any person to thsilniolicro:l6;
i.
any party could behave more property than Sir Tfi'-'%ao
drawnCochr a itlit-o' had
( that 'ie
letter ' bu t?
w hlliCrthwy it'
thatt .he
niolt-1 theirf;)-c
1',500/e would answer the purpose of' the Com:'cr?eetajog
of Ipswich. The question was, had the borough '-''''':
er 1474,
more pure sinee 'then ? TES Hon Friend had s.''4li el
had. sow ;he (Mr; Diniconthe) asserted that le the
not ; and- for the proof of that he would refer to ~,, ...
'fact that four Members had lost their seats for
it.):
v
place in consequence ef bribery and corruption. 110 -as,a '
the Report that bad been made by the Committee t c
vie a;
a fair and true one, and the effect of that Reportu'r. ee .
that the electors had been bribed. -It was no W
whether that bribery was 30s. or 301.—(lIear,11"-‘10'r)
If the House woula allow him to bring in this Bill ' _
the purpoSe .of referring the subject to a Select C. 0, reli
~ .
mittee, be bad no hesitation in fixing any indislage
.. ,
named with that with which he charged them. Ile
knew it would be said that there would not be
_,.,
tithe to consider the Bill properly, and pass it, during the
~,,
present session ; but all that he asked
house should not issue the writ till the Bill had passede ,
..
What would be the inconvenieece of not issuing the tacit
,'',,.6,
till next session ? In Southampton he had heard ceril:-
,'e.
plaints of there being no Members, but that was not IN;
cause no writ had been issued, but because the race,
was no Memo: rte
was, that tn..
~:.,
had taken place, and there.
pnliatthe.,--pal,ialuglVhe lq'ulti.astt,i.ohiole
feuvrert,iemelidounsoet
tobe
consider
was
whether they would not stultify their proceedings if
they issued the writ in the face of the Report of the ~
Cemmittee; but it' they were determined not to pay atten-
tion to the Reports of a Committee, then they n (Mid be
justified in issuing the writ. It; however, such a -course
was to be pursued, he thought the sooner such u juris- . ~
IL!,ct,trin IN.) Lia,s, tedenreta'rdonialtrl,i,eugilletuisice
ettiebnecteterb.:o(rleictabre,
Committee,and lie thought the Report fully sustained by .
die evidence. He would not go through the evidence; all be .., .
propo,ed to do was what had been done before, and that .
was where parties had been guilty of bribery, not to -
_:.
allow the writ to go down in order to allow those
parties to be , guilty of bribery
months.—(hear, hear.) - The licnott:rvaiebele ill‘ilesnia":. : -,, -04' ;
her concluded by moving fur leave to bring i112,tr.1-3 P. - a faf.,
to incapacitate Arthur Butt Cook, Henry Gaitent B.etja.tt!: -a
Charlua Steward, John lam eine, Aalos ~(3.c°°..a.61.1e4it
,;
Willizun 1:;:.(iwn, _Richard Bisi,oi,, John Cncl I ~
~I.i, h 1 r .
i::.,-,, 7,'• '. i, 7
.1, •-.. 71.-•--:' ' --- '-.' . . - -- •
Robut Pack, 'Joseph -Barrett Warren, Robert ly ilhata

f `•
~;