Star.
London, England, 1828-04-19 00:00:00

74, _

A'
•• Ai`s
an DeidDerthe Bill. and Kr. AMA's. Amsted by Mr. C. P. Waal
alluletat edam** the whumeia kits support.
. Mr. Assam, a&ii a shnn totroductery speech, called Mr. W.
Iss Carat, Banker. dl rarhnutb, vibe ersommenined as to Nude which
Drat distributed antral/ the voters elf Pereira.
• Mr. nauseam took an objective sindiasime. He submitted that
his clients 'grouts' be placed in a bard siteatioe if they were to be
Made subject by evidence to the consequences of acts committed
before the commencement of the Parliament which brought it,
The
LORD CHANCELLOR wished to know to wino
period the evidence was to apply ?
Mr. ADAM said 1826, but be was entitled to go back to 1824.
The LORD CHANCELLOR. looking at the pre-
amble of the Bill, was of opinion that the Learned
Counsel might refer to 1824.
Mr. Team, a merchant at Plymouth, and the agent of Lord Per-
ceval, one of the candidates for Penryn, was next examined. The
witness was active at Penryn in late. He was on Lord Perceval's
Committee. Many of the voters said, when canvassed, that Lord
Percent might have them if he paid their price. The witness did
not know the names of the voters who required money, but he
was sure they voted.
Mr. HARRISON objected to the evidence. Without the names of
the persons who were charged with taking bribes, the petitioners
could not defend themselves against the charge
The LORD CHANCELLOR having several times
• interposed, to ascertain if the last witness could itlentify
particular persons of whom he spoke collectively as
having, during his canvass of the BOrough, in the in-
terest of Loid Perceval, intimated their expectation of
. receiving money.
Lord DURHAM suggested the etpedieticy of per-
mitting Counsel- to conoilete the domination in chief.
of each witness, previous• to subjecting bins to any
Cross esamination, with a view. to the truth, and
to spare thea Lordships time.
The LORD CHANCELLOR replied, that he be-
lieved Noble Lords would generally be of opinion, that
the course he was pursuing was the most eligible;.as itj
was of importaoce that the witnesses should be under-,
stood as they proceeded; and Oat all answers which
were not evidence proper for their Lordships to receive,.
should be excluded from the minutes.
. Mr. James Reid was called by Mr, ASIAN and examined.—lle
was a resident at Penryn when Lord Perceval was a candidate in
1106. He was examined before the House of Commons in May
last. Witness generally denied that bribes were offered to the per-
sons canvassed for his Lordship. There were many persons in
Penryn who would not take bribes for their votes.
DUI you bear any one say he received a bribe ?
The LORD CHANCELLOR objected to the ques-
tion, and said it was clear, from the evidence generally,
that there were persons at Penryn who had not taken
. bribes. It appeared to him, that in justice to that
part of the borough which was allowed.on all hands to
be pure, they could not admit testimony tending to con-
vict another person from that person's own confession.
The Earl of CARNARVON said that such evidence
was admissible in a Court of Justice, and ought also to
admissible before their Lordships, and that it was so,
be could show by a reference to the J ,utnals of the
House. by which it appeared that when in a similar.
case the same exception hid been taken by Sis William
Grant, it had been overruled by a decision of their Lord-
ships. He contended that it their Lordships were to
refuse such evidence it wou'al be unfortunate in the
entente. as the Ludo's: they were then engaged on
would be reodeted a farce rather than an inquiry; It was
for the interest of the Constitution in general, and of the
purity of representation in the other House in particoldr.
• that the question should be well sifted; and he mai.
- ccived it was their Lordships' boenden duty, in their
legislative capacity, to affarct every facility to this end.
The LORD CHA %CELLO& said. nobody could
feel more anxious than himself that the question should
be well sifted. and it the evidence went to prose as
much as was set torch in the pseamble of the Bill, I.e
• would be found as ready to t• u p pot t it as the Noble
bird. He thought, however, that at prevent, when a
• case of general corruption was by no means establi bed,
hut, on the contrary, it appeared from evidence that
there was a party of the borough against the polity of
which there was no charge; it would be ext- einCly un-
just to admit evidence of that descript on advocated by
the Nolan Earl, and especially when it was consi lend
that those individuals whom it was alleged had been
bribed, were accessible, and might be cross examined
at the Bar of their Lordships' House. But still, what
ever might be his own individual opinion upon the sub-
. lett, be was ready to admit that if the case were found
• to be established. as stated by the Noble L-ad, he would
• be bound to defer to the decision of their Lordships,
and would not feel himself justified in attempting to
press Isis objection farther ; but if the case were not
• roved lobe directly in point, if it were found only to
apply to a state of general corruption, be argued that on
principle, and when it was considered bow great was
the magnitude of the stake for which the purer portion
of the borough had to contend, evidence of this kind
Ought not to be received. If, however, the case alluded
to by the Noble Earl, of whose accuracy he entertained
the highest opinion, should prove to be precisely the
aline. he would then, of course, consider himself bound
to withdraw his objection, and declare that the evidence
should be received.
The Karl of CARNARVON stated, that the same
' objection had been taken at the Bar cf that House by
' Si, William. Grant, and that it had been overruled. He
,did not wish. however. that the fact should be received
upon his authority, and desired accordingly that refe-
rence should beat once had to theJoarnals of the Haase.
The Journals were then produced, and examined by the Loan
aIIANCAZIMI; after which his Lordship rose, and said that he was
perfectly satisfied the decision of their Lordsbips was as the Noble
F. art it ; and that he, of course, at once withdrew his objec-
tion. not presuming fee an instant to set up his individual feeling or
• embark,' In opposition to a decision of that House.
After a few-words from the Marquis of fiatiesvay and the Barb
• of Casmairstr and Lamemat.s, It was igreed that the answer be
emeleed la evidence.
The examination of witnesses was then resumed.
Thomas James. on his cross-examination by Mr. Thaerson---
Witness admitted thn be had charged Mr. Staubury 151.95. for a
ask of oboes. They were good shoes, and he charged a good price.
pet 101. in witness's pocket, which he took away,
but did not vote for Mr. Stanbury's friend. •
Lord SHAFTFABURY—Then you put the money in your
paint. bet did not vote for Mr. Stanbury's friend?
Wit se—Mr. Sunbury put it In my pocket.
Lord SRA FTESUURY—That was not bribery, I suppose?
Witness—Why, I intended to ask your Lordships whether it was
bribery or not--( Laughter).
The witness then withdrew.
Jobs Paisley was next called and examined by Mr. ADAM—Wit-
ness had may times semi Mr. Sunbury talk to the wives of voters.
The maisimation of the witness having terminated, he was or-
dered to withdraw.
The Earl of FALMOUTH then rose, and moved,
that the Nether consideration of the matter be post-
poned to Tuesday nest. His Lordship feeling it to be
perfectly consistent a ith the forms of their Lordships'
House. begged leave also to move that a particular
hour, namely, ten o'clock (at night), should be fixed
• for the tern'inatiaP I* each day's proceeding spots that
specific subject.
Tbe Earl of CARNARVON concurred, and the mo,
bony was then agreed to.
Vs* Lordships then, se lisleosst 'rms oQock, sillortrue' d to
tea o'clock to morrow (thiellayY to hear Appals.
HOUS/MOF COMMONS. .
•
The SPRAlltlett brivrbeg takes the Chair at dour *sew.* the
Dew Ultiet el the Mack Red entered and summoned t
it''
ea onaceedto the Lords, and there hear the Royal Amami /
Camaissisa to smell DIU The ihrzawca, attended by