Star.
London, England, 1819-03-23 00:00:00

PENRYN ELECTION.

Mr. ATKINS WRIGHT moved that the order of
the day upon the Penryn Electicn be now read. He
begged to call the attertion of the House to the in•
structions and report of the Committee appointed to
inure into that subject t. and moved that the Reso-
Ltioits before the House be read a second time. '

The Clerk proceeded to read the Resolutions; the
first of which was, that it did appear to the Connnit-
tee• that Henry Swann, Esq. had bein guilty of
bribery during the last election for the Borough t,f
l'erzyn, a:-.d had therefore become disqualified to
serve ir. the pte3ei.t Parliament.
A ME7.f2I-It was proceeding to make some. objec-
tions against titc. pa:g,irig of au Act, .pursuant to the
Resolutions, n•hen

Lord EA GI! rose to order. He begged
to remind the licit-tot:rabic Gentleman, that the pre-
sent was not the proper stage for his objections: the
House was not now upon the Bill; it would be then
the proper time to submit them.
The Honourable Member explained. His reason
for trespassing upon the-attention of the House was
etis—that the preamble of the Resolutions stated,
that notorious acts of bribery had been committed in
Penryn, not only during the late election, but also in
the year 1 `io7. Now it was true, that on the latter
occaion, the House directed the Attorney-General
to prosecute the individual concerned ; but the case
came :iefore a Jury, who fully acquitted him. Yet
the commission of acts of bribery in 1807 had been
as a ground for the proposed Bill ; in the face
of such a verdict, he thought this circumstance im-
proper to be inserted (Question! .Quartion !)—The
Resolution was then read a. second time, and passed.
The SPEAKER thought it might be more conve- .
r.:ent to the Muse, aad to the Honourable l'iLmber,
to ascertain precisely, the nature of the present pro-
ceeding.—(hear, hear.)— The Resolutions before the
House had nothing whatever to do ss ith:the Bill. The
speclal Report of the Committee had been brought
in, and postponed till this day. These Resolutions
must now, therefore, be either negatived or adopted.
Two other Resolutions were then read a second
time and passed, viz.—
" That Join. Coalyor, henry romford, and Abraham
Minn, had beer. guilty of takir.g bribe:, and of other corrupt
practices."
" That Henry Carter, Thomas P.oxo•, John Cay, Charles
Skinner, and others, bad recci-g:d money for tlr..ir votes during
the late election at Penryn."
Mr. ATKINS WRIGHT said, that in rising to
move the second reading of the Resolution be was
about to submit, he felt that the House was bound
to act in such a mariner as to vindicate its own ho-
nour, although it should be disposed to grant that
indulgence to individuals which the peculiar circum-
'stances of their conduct might seem to merit. There
could be no question; but that some persons, in the
matter before the House, were not so much nor so
criminally implicated as others; he should therefore
move—That the Attorney-General be ditected to
prosecute Henry Swann, Esq.:frir having been guilty
of various acts of bribery during dos last election for
the Borough of Penryn.
Mr. VALENTINE BLAKE said, that the persons,
before the Committee had been accused of disposing'
of their votes for money.- Eien at common law tins
was held to be an- offence ;.in the present case it was
a Most s'eandalons Offence,-(hcar, hear.)--Iltiihoped
therefore that the House would not interfere with the
administrant* of uince usurd'in such cases. There
was one view in which he thought it proper that the
House shall& cousider the effeet of a contrary course..
In the present east-, persons legally qualified to vote,
bad sold and prostitoted the 'elective franchise for
money. It became, therefore, a question of punish-
ment; and the House could take no other step to
that end, hut to take away the elective franchise
from the Borough altogether.—(Near, hear.)—This,
however, would be to punish the innocent, and inflict
on them, in common with the offenders, the punish-
ment due alone to the crimes of the guilty. Ile bad
merely availed himself of this opportunity in order
to express his idea, that in this instance the House
vas not called upon to interfere with the administra-
tion of justice, but that the law ought to be suffered
to take its course.
The original Motion was then put and carried.
Mr. ATKINS WRIGHT then moved, that the
Attorney-General be directed to prosecute .Tohn
GoUdyer, Henry Donsford, and Abraham Winn, for
corrupt practices doling the last Election for the
Borough of renryn ; which was also carried.
ROYAL HOUSEHOLD.

The Royal Household Bill was read a third timc.
Or, the question 'that it should pass, there were se.
venal dissenting voices, the tiallcry•was half cleared,
but the motion was agreed to without a division.
• Thoquelification of Members Bill was read a se-
tijudi•tisnl, and ordered to be committed on Friday.
•%,` • stmtOurs OP ItAsTmos.
Mrs HOWORTH observed, that an advertisement

had appeared is the public papers, from the Court of

Directors of the East...lndia Company, recommend-
hg to the Geneml.Court of Proprietors the grant of
an annuity to the Marquis of Hastings of 6,0001. to
issue out of the territorial revenues in India, for the
term of twenty years. Seeing the President of the
Board of Contronl in his place, he wished to ask the
Right Honourable Gentleman whether the proposed
measure had received, or was to receive, his sanc-
tions' for without his concurrence it
_could not le.

Bally be carried into effect. He asked that question,
cause it appeared to him to be a measure of ex-
traordinary precipitancy. The vote of that House
in approbation of the Marquis of Hastings's con-
duct referred entirely to his military Operations ;
every consideration of the justice and policy of the
war itself having been expressly excluded from the
discussion. No documents had been submitted either
to Parliament or to the Proprietors of East-India
Stock, illustrative of the system of our policy in
India; and under such circumstances, to hurry to a
grant of £lOO,OOO, as if every thing had been ex-
plained and was quite satisfactory, and as if nothing
more need be said on the subject, appeared to him
to be extremely premature. The Right Honourable
Gentleman knew that the public were materially in-
terested in the disposal of the territorial revenues of
India; and perhaps the time was not very far distant
when the attention of the House would be called in
no very agreeable manner to the consideration of
that subject.
Mr. CANNING was always happy to answer any
inquiry to which he was enabled to give a satisfac-
tory reply ; but if the Honourable Gentleman
thought that the vote to which the advertisement
that he had quoted was premature, he mast see that
any opinion now given by him (Mr. Canning) on the
subject would be as premature. The only way in
which such a subject could come under his cogni-
zance was, if the recommendation of the Court of
Directors to the Court of Proprietors should be
adopted by the latter. Ir. that case, the vote of the
Court of Proprietors, granting the annuity in ques-
tion, could not be legal or binding without the sanc-
tion of the Board of Controul. Should the Court
of Proprietors, however, not agree to such a vote,
he (Mr. Canning) should not be called upon, as Pre-,
sident of the Board of Controul, to notice the sub-
ject. The day for determining that question had not
arrived • and it would be full of inconvenience were
he called upon to state his opinion on an hypothesis.
Mr. I lonourable Gentleman had stated his object to
1)., to prevent the grant ; but he must be aware that"
other persons had other objects ; and that if a Presi-
dent were established of extracting an opinion from'
the President of the Board of Controul on such sub-
jects, and if, for instance, a favourable opinion should
be procured, in a popular assembly such as the Court
of Proprietors, that side would have the better of the'
argument which could say they were sure of the sanc-
tion of the superior and ultimate authority. Under
such cit etunstances, he was sure that the Honourable
Gentleman would not think it disre-spectful to him,
if he begged to be excused from giving an hypothe-
tical opinion as to the way in which he should think
proper to deal with this vote, if it should pass. 1

IRISH CORN.

Sir JOHN NEWPOR'L adverting to some Go-
vernment Contracts for Corn of British Growth, ex-
cluding Corn the Growth of Ireland, in direct con-
travent:on of the Act of 1806, asked on what ground
the restriction was made?

Sir GEORGE WARRENDER observed, that the
Scotch Corn was equally excluded with the Irish,
and attributed the exclusion to the difficulty of ob-
taining the supply in the winter season. It was to
be recollected, that Ireland had the monopoly in the
supply of salt provisions.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT contended, that no diffi-
culty had ever been experienced in conveying corn
from Ireland to Plymouth, Portsmouth, &c.