Star.
London, England, 1827-05-19 00:00:00

WOOL TRADE.

Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL. in presenting Pe•
'titions trod the WoolGioirvis of Aslitoid, in Kent,

atad other places, took occasion to tub the flight H 'n.
President of the Board of Trade, if Goverbruent in-
tended to propose any tax on the importation of fa
reign wool?
Mr. HUSIUBSON said, that be had no information
as to the Subject matter of the Budget. which his Right
Hon. Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had td
Make up, previous to Friday nest. He should be mach
surprised if tt was the intention of his Right Hon;
Friend to impose any such duty. He admitted the ex.
istence of a temporary stagnation, but deprecated a dis.,
cussion of the causes of it until the feelings which suet
a depression had excited ,had paned away.
Sir C. BURRELL contended, that no class of sock"
was benefitted by the low price Of wool, not „en

manufacturers. There was at present no &mew- For
borne grown wool. He was sure hi, Right Hon. Friend.,
own wool (Mr. Huskisson's)—for he was a capital wee(
roarer...was laid up for the benefit of the moths. The
profits of the British farmer on this article had been
taken away for the benefit of foreign growers. Hews/
surprised and sorry '' at Government had not already
adopted some measure of protection, as even a sew(
tax would at once operate in that way, and also increase
The public revenue.
Mr. HUME expressed his satisfaction at the infornsa:
tion that there was to be no tax on foreign wool.
Sir THOMAS LETHBRIDGE insisted that the
farmers had a right to be protected by Parliament.._
Manufacturers were at present employed in working
foreign wool, while our own was neglected, He hoped
that the subject would be taken into consideration by the
House, and that on the bringing forward the Budget,
the propriety of imposing a duty on foreign wool would
be discussed.

_
Mr. WARBURTON said, that, at present, when
manufacturers had foreign wool cheap, they could
.difficnity compete with the foreign manufacturer
by way of rendering this competition more earl
Hoo. Baronet proposed to load foreign wool
duty. He was extremely gratified at learning,
was the intention of Government to follow up
mercial policy of the last two years.
Lord STANLEY presented a Yet tionfrom the
men of the town and neighbourhood of Lancaster,
plaining of the practice of paying wages in goods'
of money.
Sir J. WROTTESLEY ascribed this mischievous
practice to the abolition of small notes.
The same Hon. Mamma moved for a return of the .
bushels of corn charged duty within the United Kingdom,
September 1826, to the present month.—Ordered.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON moved for a return of
ber of thaldrons of coals inspected into the port of Loodoo,
year 1826,and the number of coal vessels that had
port during the same period.
TEN IMIIVITZT.
Mr. BEAUMONT staid, that in consequence of
ot which the Hesse reald be aware, he should witbdraw
tion which stood for Tuesday. [The Hon. Member's
for a ode declaring the Ministers unworthy of the
the House.]

?MIMI ILICTION.
Mr. LEGH BECK moved the second reading
Penryn Election Bill.
Mr. BARCLAY owed it to his constituent.
he did not oppose the second reading of the
clare that it had been urged on very ansioush
hoped that the House would consider that
now dealing with the interests of 500 persons.
Lord ALTHORP said, that he had been
state, on behalf of Mr. Greaten, that he bad
had been mated in the House, withdrawn 4
election because his having lost his interest
electors ; but because he felt certain that he cos
be returned without resorting to corrupt practices.
the leave of the House, he would read the letter,
" Idr Dean brao—On perusing the report of what k.
House of Coramoni on Tuesday last, when the miaow
Penryn Consignee was under the consideration of the P
Barclay is represented (hew coarectly I know not) to
I had withdrawn as a Candidate from Penryn
(pence of any opinions entertained by me injurious to
of the iloroogh, but because I had lost the coufidenee
tors; and as it might be inferred from this suppcard
Mr. Barclay. If not contradicted by me, that I lad el.
thing to justify the Electors in withdrawing their confidence
me, I should be much obliged if you could avail yourself
opportunity of stating. on my behalf, that although I so
that this assertion by Mr. Barclay can only have beets
of erroneous information, conveyed to bins by others,
ipitie. so myself, declare, that nothing can be mare
than the assertion itself ;for the truth is, that I withdrew
Palma, ass because that I had any reason to believe
lost the confidence of the Electors, but because I felt,'
tots had fotieited the confidence I had placed he them.
fided In the einestrity of the assurances which they made
before and after my Election in lest), that they would
support me upon the principles which I most distinctly i
werelhe only principles upon which I would accept their ,
1 had adhered strictly, on my part, to those principles.
never deceived them, but I had reason for believing '
tors were prepariag to break their compact with 111
therefore, all had 'satisfied myself, by repro:waterloos
frith varietal-Marten, that I had no chance of Wag -
cdfid time, without a recurrence to those illegal practical
Md fornitarly prevailed in the borough, I determined -
withdraw from it.
It has, indeed. been stated, that the two Dough*"
now represent Penryn were Betted without any par
either dirt/Lilt or indirectly, in those acts IK bribery
ins whir.h. In the Report now before the Home,
to have been practised at the cicadas in June last
ever Mans they may have possessed for thus re
themselves to the pure and unbiassed choke of
I ant sathfied that no such means were •withio
and that I had no chance of success at Penryn without
myself to those acts of corruption which are now proved
occurred at the lan erection, although without the
participation of the two Hen. Members who at
this borough.
" I cannot coaclude wittiest concurring in the opieiva
been repressed by others as to the respectability of many e
who are electors of Penryn, and who are not oolyineelrabie
patties to, but who reprobate. to the scrooges' mauler, do
prostate referred to.—l hematite honour to beton dear L '
faithfully yours, " PASCOE GRENFELL.
" Charles-stteet, St. James's, Friday,;hlay 11."
Mr. FERGUSSON said, tbitt Parliament
interfere to prevent the gross practices which had
place. A Committee sat in 1807; and another in
and both disclosed the most gross and flagran
bribery and corruption. The report of the first
mittee stated, that there was an agreement bet*
Christopher Hawkins and the burgesses. that those
voted for Sir C. should receive each 24 guineas
vote. The proof was given in 'the result, vin.'
Christ. Hawkins was declared duly elected. list
mittee of the House resolved that Sir Chris,
Hawkins should be declared gu icy of bribe`!
corruption ; and a prosecution followed. In 1619
Swann and another Gentleman were candi.
They paid five guineas openly for each of the
and on the payment of these were declared
elected. He did not mean to say that a hr,
ought to be disfranchised on slight ground,.
was the duty of the House to vindicate its van I
alleges, and in a case where bribery h,d been
repeatedly practised. he should be disposed to v. ter'
tilC borough be deprived of the privileges is

~~"

b

wool would •
•
its when oar
r could with
cturer; and, V
re easy, the
wool with a sU
sing, that it 0
up the corn. ; d
Iri
im the work. tl
scaster, cow ti
;odds instead
ft
mischievous a
to
' the somber of if
Kingdom, trots a
ts of the nos.
Look°, in the 0
al meant tint a
of some meet, ti
dadraw lib De
er's main we .S
as coutideace of ti
tl
reading tithe a
nuts, though ti
lie Bull, to de. fa
lioutly. He a
sat they wen
1001. so
it requested ta ti
tad not, ss e •
awn hot lie
eie. it wit**
t he could
tractices. Vitt .1
:letter:
whet peal&
madam Me it
e the amokfa
pt) up haw rest
rya/ oat • iser
t$ it) tee dorsal!
Woe of the Ilk. •
wart amnia
Fait does oar
r confide= far
I yourself at see
WI I am ratishsl
b
::111:m:tei7micitwounrenvrtidiataxi,
ttbso
Liirettteiket.munacerndwcail:cfr:iiides:
ist
ti
wield comiest • 1111
tioctly told its. •
didosHbeiatpingrhtiocipptrmehrgatisatnemadtiks..riettotTAtuss:Naiimada;
omitted at we
ht
e GentleoW AO • ai
any rraaPl C
bribery _,
owe, riu
r lest;
ors recosiorm's
of the skew].
ritbin myNam, b
s without
owprovcd to have A
esocoledge al II
■
present term°
opinion 'thick tut is
it man, isatiallii
incapable of bin ' •
It
tamer. the 's'l'it
my dear bath ref ti
GRENFELL.
rJ
1
:iirient:rnstntohgitcuilethrahniebestnettnfihettohas.istavuildienglaicsfeltihcalrotO:ksitimelo:
of:stbledidtr,ceo.avcfClniriltdiuh'hritditedshaltri:ll:i
pi:it:l;79
hat a be:00
ground, butts
0. .
ste iti von 1
ry h id beta '
used to v. trt oaio
fit :14‘:
•
•
•

ejoyea. There were instances of sovereigns having
beta given under the pretence df dinner tickets. it had
been proposed to transfer 'the right of election to the
hundreds. The neighbourhood of Penult was the eery
sit place to which he would tiansfkr the right:—
Iwo, hear.)—We should much tither prefer to trans-
jet the right of voting to some great manufacturing or
towroercial place, and no plate more required to such
a representation, from its immense commerce and po-
masiion, th•in the town of Manchester.—(Hear. bear.)
lift. H. GURNEY said, that Mr. Grenville might
hoe lost the confidence of the larger body of the elec.
ton, but it was only a small minority which it was ne-
trssary to corrupt. •
Lord ALTHORP said, that Mr. Grenville stated that
has not the case, for, as far as he knew, he had not lost
the confidence of the greater part of the electors.
Sir C. HAWKINS made some observations, which
here wholly inaudible in the Gallery.
Sir C. 'BURRELL said that, from the Hon. Member
trho spoke last having directed his eye towards him
(Str Charles), he supposed his observations alluded to
him, though, for his part, he could not catch one word
of them. He wished to call to the recollection of the
House that in 1819 a Bill had passed this House for the
disfranchisement of Penryn, and if, after this, the House
found fresh mal-practices, be thought they could come
to but one conclusion, that this borough was not a pro-
per place to send Members to Parliament.
Sir EDMOND CARRINGTON said the Bill before
the House embraced three propositions—the first was,
bribery had been practised on former occasions as well
slat the late election in Penryn-•-secondly, that it was
necessity to provide a remedy against the future °icor.
rence of such practices—and thirdly, that it was expe-
dient to partially disfranchise the botough, by admitting
to the right of suffrage the two adjacent hundreds.—
With respect to the first proposition he should say, that
whatever might have taken place at former periods, it
sppeared that at the recent election, though acts
of bribery might be brought home to particular in-
dividuals, who would thereby deserve the animadver.
sion of the House and the punishment of the laws, yet
that the present Members were returned by a most re-
spectable and unimpeachable body of the electors. Would
the House then determine, from the misconduct of the
few, to take away the ancient rights of the innocent.
and to brand them and their posterity with a perpetual
mark of reprobation at every recurring election? But
if he disapproved of the second proposition as unjust
and uncalled for, he was still more dissatisfied with the
projected remedy—namely, to admit to a participation
of the franchise of this Borough the inhabitants of the
adjacent Hundreds. This was a proceeding which,
however it might be warranted by two or three modern
precedents, was highly to be objected to on constitu-
tioral grounds, as tending to disturb the due balance
which existed between the different , classes in the
State, by creating a mode of petty County Elec-
tions, and depriving Cities and Boroughs of that estab-
lished proportion in the system of representation which
they ought to bear as compared with counties. To such
a transfer, therefore, he should be most decidedly op-
posed ; and he should think it far less objectionable, in
tase it was ultimately determined to remove this place
from its station among the 'elective Boroughs of the
empire, that the franchise should be transferred to some
great and spasm city, which, at present, did not pos-
sess the privilege of voting. At the same time be felt
Om it would be more discieet, that neither Manchester
nor soy other town shoold have been designated as en-
titled to that succession, before the previous question
whether the disfranchisement shouldiake place had been
temperately and impirtially decided.
Mr. L. limos havilig replied; the Bill was read i se•
road time.—Upon the question that it be committed.
Mr. BARCLAY said, that notwithstanding the pre-
judices which prevailed against the Borough of Penryn,
he was convinced that its character was. very mush
changed since the year 1819, and that it had been in-
deed undergoing a gradual change for the better since
the year 1807.
After a few words from Sir C. Burtaitt, the House
went into a Committee on the Bill, and witnesses were
ordered to be called.

- - - - - —.---
John Stanbary wan then called to the Bar, and eramined by
Mr. Lame Kece. The witness stated in substance, that he had
bete an inhabitant of the Borough of Penryn since the year late,
and had taken an active part in the electioneering proceedings when
Mr. Weedon wee a candidate, from-whom Ise' hid received various
suns of mown width were espendid in paying to different parties
their legal charges for services rendered to the cause of that Gen.
*tam He denied that be bad promised to support Lord Per-
creel if certain bets or other monies were= be had never re-
ceived nil. or any other rem, from John , in consideration
et the transfer of hie interest te Mr. Manning. He had never asked
a single elector to vote for Mr. Manning ; he remembered no con-
Striation with John Mallett, in which be bad said that he left Lord
Pereexats party, and joined Mr. Manning's, because the former
were ea pour that nothing could be got out of them, nor had be
la fact done so. He bad never paid money to any of the persons,
who voted for Mr. Manning, except in payment of debts due to'
ekes. evereince tans ay Mr. Weedon, and with that Mr. Weed=
loPeied hint. He tee* a person of the name of Putts, to whom
he bad lent IN, beaidol which he paid him, as a matter of private
accommodation. Jiikrared never told Pitts that he had made an ar-
rangement with Nt. Fieddisid, by which be was to receive 1,3001.
for the trashier lifi limiting to Mr. Manning, nor bad he in fact
made stay sink' ' ' * He bad paid a debt of ill. tos. to a
tenon of the wend and 19i. to Thomas Titus, for debts
tile to thesis He IddholeetibOarnond, might keep a list of the
aerisr
voters with the several sums paid against each name—paid be meant
in a legal way..-(iblangb). • Tide doh was only employed by him
in niectiwitethat allehlanse ,Het Mai mem sent Hallett to Mr.
Anderson for the nesnaissdeee of; die . be thought hi:welt en.
titled to. He bad relied sped Me. 4iaH, but it wan far PAP
ment for his own services, Spylie_akilllid no eerlain emu Then
had been discussions of an angey nature, but be bad never threateued
ao expose then all if he was net paid. He had applied to Joseph
Harrell for an. advance of SOL but it was as a private Mende and
bad nothing to do with any disappointment. Had not been in
communication with Mr. Freshfield or Mr. Sorrell since the eke-
tion. He knew Mr. Hayley, and bad seen him since the election ;
but had-not attempted to Impress upon hint the danger that if the
Petition prdceeded the Borough would be disfranchised—(During
this examination Mr. li,egh Keck once or twice reminded the wit.
ten that there were other persons to be examined, many of whom
bad already sworn to the facts of the ease.)

Mr. BROUGHAM then took up the examination,
and extracted the *following statements a—The witness
was born at Barnstaple, and had lived at Penryn for
two years. He carried on no trade, and had been en-
gaged in electioneering business at Barnstaple, Tregony,
budgewater, Penryn, and Exeter. The Hon. Member
caked whether not also •at Lincoln?—(d laugh).—To
this the witness answered in the negative. He had
Ilaan engaged at one time in Tregony and Barnstaple,
ald had introduced a candidate at Exeter, where there
*at no opposition. For this service at Exeter he had
n° Payment, promise, or 4oed turn whatever. He
bad alto been at St. Albans. He bad never been
,"gaged at any former election in the same man-
nn, only at Barnstaple, all his life. He was not
turn at Exeter; bad newer lived at, or had any con-
',lion with, that City. The Electors. sent to him
rofhe to them. He introduced Mr. Tyson as a Candi
ilia. Being *Aced reiterated and varied tuitions as to
4

the means he had ever had of getting ati honest lieeli-
hdod, he stated that he had at first been apprenticed to
a shoemaker at Barnstaple, that he was afterwards a
labourer in the East India Company's Warehouses, and
subsequently a clerk in the War 0:, ce ; that, after his
engagement in the War Office, and up to the present
time, be had been a yeoman occupied in the cultivation'
of his awn Lind, to the extent of 44 acres. lie had re-
cently been building houses in the borough of Tregony,
which had not yet yielded him any returns, and upon
which he had expended 4,0004 He had cottages or
houses in different boroughs. He enquired if he was
bound to answer the question how he obtained the two
thousand pounds laid out in building houses? and being
told yes, he thcinght he could answer it if he had his
books. He did not make it as a labourer at the Ent-
India House nor as a clerk in the War•ofice, nor as a
farmer cultivating forty-two acres of land. He had not
purchased the land. In fact it was not his. He farmed
it of Squire Innis. Except by farming this rental of
SBl. a year, he had made no money but what was made
by being engaged in elections. He had received money
upon those occasions. He had known Mr. Fteshfield
.since June last.

By Mr. BROUGHAM.—Did you not in fact plant
yourself in Penryn to turn the elections to your own
profit, to become the electioneering jobber or agent, in
fine for the purpose of selling seats in this House ?
Witness.-1 did nothing illegal. He bad applied to Mr. FreskSeld
since the election for the expenses actually incurred at this House,
but that Gentleman would give him no answer. It was within
fourteen days of the election, but be knew nothing about fourteen
days being the period limited for the presentation of Petitions. He
did not know that Mr. Freshfield was Mr. blanning's agent, or
what his business was at Penryn. Had heard that he was Mr.
Meaning's Attorney. He bad applied only fer 401.--would have
been satisfied with 401. but better satisfied with 501. Mr. Freshfield
bad never given Ides a farthing yet.• At other places he bad not been
paid se scantily. At Barnstaple be had received 5001. for his services.
Bat other money of Sir Byre Cooties bad passed through his hands.
This was at the election in 1812. At the previous election in 1806,
Mr. Taylor had paid him 5001. for his services, and 5001. after-
wards out of respect. The election cost Mr. Taylor 5,0001.; be
knew it did not cost him 6,0001. At Tregony, the expense bad been
I,looB—The witness was here ordered to withdraw.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL submitted to the
House, that it was inexpedient to pursue so extensive a
course of examination. The transactions at other elec-
tions were not connected with the subject before the
House, which was merely to inquire as to the necessity
of disfranchising the Borough of Penryn.
Mr. BROUGHAM was prepared to vindicate the
course be had pursued in his examination. It was the
tight and duty of the House, when they got within
their walls a man, whose whole life had been one
flagrant violation of their privileges, to expose him and
hold him up to the indignation of the world. The At-
torney-Generals of other days had themselves sustained
and exercised this duty, instead of attempting to check
and obstruct it, as his Hon. and Learned Friend had
done. But whilst he felt that he was.pursuing a consti-
tutional coarse, he would not be deterred, notwithstand-
ing the disappi obation of his Majesty's Attorney-General.
His examination had besides been intended to try the
credit of the witness, for he knew from the course pur-
sued by the Hon. Member for Devonshire, that other
witnesses were to be examined, and that he expected
their statements materially to vary from those of the
witness now under examination. In this witness they bad
before them a specimen of the beings who were only to
be found in Cornwall, or perhaps an Devonshire. He
had been born in Devonshire, and afterwards trans-
planted to the more genial soil of Cornwall, where the
pabulum that nourished these noxious creatures was
found in the greatest abundance. He hoped it was not
the intention of his Majesty's present Government to stop
short in the investigation of such transactions as these.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL trusted the House
would give him credit for feeling a full share of in-
dignation towards the practices in which the witness
had been engaged, as was expressed—he repeated, was
expressed—by his,Leareed Friend. But the object the
House had in view would be best attained by temperate
and well-regulated ,proceedings. He had not inter-
posed until after he had heard on all sides of him ex-
pressions of impatience at the great length and boundless
latitude of thebeaamthation by his Learned Friend, and
although that examination had been entertaining to him-
self, he thought it right to submit it to the discretion of
his Hon. and Learned Friend, whether he was not pro-
ceeding further than was either necessary or expedient,
in introducing other places, and ether names, uncon-
nected with the subject of the immediate inquiry? He
had no objection to other places being enquired about,
whether for the purpose of exposing the character of the
witness, or for that of :hewing the extent of the evil.—
What he objected to was the details, in reference to those
other places, into which his Hon. and Learned Friend
seeined disposed to enter.
Sir C. BURRELL expressed the pleasure with which
he bad listened to the examination.

Mr. W. WYNN said, that the character of the wit-1
nest had been so entirely blasted by his own admissionsl
I and prevaricitions, that it was hardly worth while to
occupy the time of the House by any further attempts
to expose him.
Mr. BROUGHAM said, that putting the mater
upon that footing, he quite concurred in the opinions
of his Right Hon. and his Hon. and Learned Friends.—
He bad not been, aware that the House was so fully
se isfie d.

The ATTORNEY•GENERAL thought that every
body roust have been satisfied long ago.

Mr. L. KECK thanked the Hun. and Learned Gen.
ileum for his valuable assistance. He understood that
the witness had screwed himself up to a total denial of
the facts, and nothing but the knowledge that other wit-
nesses were to speak after him could have extorted any
portion of truth horn him.

Mr. HUME thought the Right Hon. Gentleman op-
posite had indulged in unwarrantable severity of lan-
gasp respecting the witness. For any thing he had
heard there was no reason for such an assertion as that
the character of the witness was blasted. He had not
been committed to Newgate for speaking falsehoods)
but for nonattendance upon the Committee.
Mr. W. WYNN said it was on account of the mani-
fest prevarication of the witness that he had spoken of
him as he had done. His committal to Newgate had
nothing to do.with it any farther than in he bad nothing
further to dread from the displeasure of the House. •
Mr. Secretary BOURNE said, that from the com-
mencement of the examination it was clear that the
witness was not worthy of credit. His only sutprise was,
that the Hon, Member for Devonshire should have

thought it worth while to bang sech a witness before
the House,
Mr. L. KECK said the witness would not have been
called by him, but that they could, not get him before
the Committee to whist) be had been summoned, and

he tbottght his evidence might be necessary to make the
case complete.
Mr. R. GRANT observed, that the Hon. Member
, r Montrose had not, upon this subject, emplfrved his
usual industry. If he had read the evidence &Vets be.
lore the Committee he Would have found wirae,l after
witness deposing upon oats to the facts which this mall
,fo
positively denied. But to dispose of him it was not ne-
cessary to resort to the testimony of other%witnesses—
his own prevarications were enough. •
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said, that the witness was
plainly entitled to no credit, but yet his evidence might
explain matters deposed to by others. He ought to be
examined as to the reasons why he had requested his'
name to be kept oat of the way-bill of the coach by-
which he had travelled, and forbid the coachman to
mention his name upon the road—(Cries of question).
Oa the motion of Mr. Secretary Boom; the other witnesses
Elon within the House were ordered to withdraw, and John Stan-
bury was again called to the Bar.
In reply to questions from Mf. Secretary Boeass, the witness
stated, that the money paid by him to the voters was received from
Mr. Weedon, on account of debts due from him two years ago.
The number of voters who received a share of this money was 800.
The whole number of electors in the Borough was 800.
By Dr. LUSHINGTON—He never gave money to any Of
the electors for their votes, and never promised any. Witness kept
a banker's account ; kept one at the bank of Truro, and doe at
the house of Barclay in London. All the sums be expended did
not pan through these banks. Was at Tregoity, at Mr. Med.
awes, while the Committee of that Home was deciding en the
=election. Was too ill to attend the Committee ; had the
to of doctors to that effect. Went from Tenney to-Dam-
=4ao& no pales to keep that journey a secret; does net re-
-0 have told Mr. Medlicot to keep it a secret. Did 'unlink
Wand( op, or shut himself up, to avoid a summons—and had no
object In doing so. Was served with the summons by a man who
preseaded that he came to furnish him with bills. Took no means
to avoid being served. Did net go away secretly, and does nut re-
enact having said a word to the guard of the coach about conceal-
kigthit-pbee he was going to. Does uot recollect having told the
wad ea leave his name out of the waybill.
By Ur. W. HARVEY—Does not recollect having told King,
*guard of the Falmouth coach, to conceal his name; knows John
Bel fey and his son, at Penryn ; occupied two rooms in their house
dosing the last election, In which the voters came to him; could sot
retellect how many were paid there who had claims on him.... 20 or
palmy, IS ; the largest sum he paid to any one of them was 19/.;
paid in ail 10111.; a person named Curran was one of those whom be
paid; was not present at the meeting held before the election at the
Grange,in Penryn.
By Mr. L. KECK—Do you distinctly say that nine of those
persons whom you paid money received it In consideration of giving
theft votes T—l do.
The witness was ordered to withdraw.
Thomas Weedon calledin and examined by Mr. LEGH HECK.
—Witness was Candidate foe the Representation of Peron at the
last Election. John Sunbury was not authorised by Idea to pay
any sums of money for debts contracted at the Election. Did not
proceed to the poll. Recollects the names of Mallet and Harley.
Dora not recollect their having told him that be hail no &ann.
From his experience (as we understood) of the disposition of
the voters, he did net think It probable that he could be re-
turned without paying motley or promising it. He perceived this
to be the case, and therefore be desisted. He advanced Stan-
bury two sums of 6001. each, and me of 4001. He thought be
ought not to have been put to expense and trouble without some
remuneration, sad therefore he lent him this money. lisimbsify
.ever said that It should be applied to facilitate his ekcileeme—
Was not told that it would be necessary for him to bribe a certain
Maher of voters to secure his election. Very few hitinutad to
hint that they expected anything ; not so litany as fifty. lied a
Warrant of Attorney from Stanbury for 11100 of the mosey Met,
and copybold security foe the rest. As soon as he found what was
likely to be required by the voters he retired from the contest.
itst:yr. G. LAMB-rWitness is a merchant; knew nothing of
before; understood that he possessed copybold and other
. Mr. Stanbury Devil. told him that he expensed money
L' "-b.117 g tin 'lreton; he advanced him the sum of 1,5051. think.
legbina a person of good substance, and a (deed, and that it might
be uf sere* t. him. He represented to witoessthat be had copy-
bold property near Plymouth.
Q. Are you in the habits et lending money on rub represersia.
tlons?—lt is net a large sum.
By Lord PALMERSTON—Ten perhaps, more or less, it was
intimated to him expected something for their votes. No sum was
mentioned. Cannot now recollect how it came to his knowledge
that such expectations were entertained. It was not Mr. Stanbery
wise toiddiins so. Did not hear it was a prevalent Custom. Does
net tam whether he was the only Candidate of whom suck ex-
retains were formed. Was engaged fatly a fortnight in can.
emeing, and wog to every Elector's house at his first visit. Not
ate of them, upon that occasion, told him directly or indirectly,
dot be expected money.
. 11, in Hots. Mmamia—What reason bad you to suppose that you
could be returned for a Borough in Cornwall, where you were quits.
unknown? Witness—l canvassed the Electors, and made speech
after speech—(A laugh). They had some notion also that I was In.
dined to be a Ministerial man. His agents paid about 4110 fat
Sags, and other polling expenses.—The witness withdrew.
John Came, called In and examined by Mr. L. Kier.-Js a Mike
of Penryn. Knowythree persons, named Stanbury, Andertow,ond
Fresidleid. Is a carpenter by trade. Was not employed by Stan.
Wry to go to Anderton for money. Was sent for something, be did
not bow what, but Anderton said he would see Sunbury himself
'best it.
Q, Are you aware of any payments or promises made by Sun-
bury t. the Electors?—A. What about—on bribery ?—(A laugh.)
Stanbery paid him. He was not aware of his payments to others.
Was employed by Stanbary during the election to carry colours.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY—Witness voted for Mr. Manning.
Was not employed by Staobery in hunting for votes for another
Candidate. Witness persisted as before, in denying that he was
sent by Stanbury to Anderton for money.
By Dr. PHILLIMORE—He got ISI. during the election.
Was never bribed before. Gm it partly for his lost time.
Q. How did you lose your time?—A. Why, going about drink-
ing, or one thing or another—(A laugh). He was engaged for no
person but Mr. Weedon.
By Lord PALMERSTON—Witness lost his time walking
about and drinking; was not told by any one to lose his time:
Mr. James Mallet called le and examined by Mr. L. KECK,
and other Members—Recollects when Weedon withdrew; Stan-
bury told him that Weedon would not stand the poll; beard of the
thing called the breakfast at Penrya, but did not know what it was.
Witness himself was never made comfortable; never received a
farthing in his life; beard that, 22 years ago, it was the practice to
give a sum of money, but did not know what the breakfast meant;
did not know that it meant putting 241. into meth voter's band.—
The witness, 111 answer to various questiooes persisted is asserting
his total &poultice of the breakfast. • .: .
Mr. Alderman WAITHM AN said every person knew
what the breakfast meant. They had it in evidence in
1819, that it meant the giving to each voter present a
cam of money. Now here was a man also resident in
Penryn, who said he wag entirely ignorant of it. He
hoped when a witness prevaricated in this manner, the
Committee would see the propriety not merely of threat-
ening him with Newgate, but of sending him there.
Lord MILTON thought the witness was being rather
hardly dealt with. The witness had said, that the prav,
rice of giving breakfasts had ceased twcrand-twenty
years ago, and it was, therefore, not reasonable to expect-
that he should be acquainted with their nature. He did
not see that the witness bad as yet prevaricated, and he
saw no reason for the Committee proceeding tq the
course recommended by the Hon. Alderman.
Mr. PEEL thought the Committee ought not so fax
to forget its own dignity as to make use of a menace to'
the witness without sufficient grounds to induce their
carrying it into effect—(Hear, hear, heat).. If the wit-
ness had prevaricated, so as to call for the interference
of the House, then let the proper steps be taken at once;
but surely the House would pause, and see that thole
steps were irdispensable, before they proceeded to take
away a man's character, and inflict upon him one of the
.heaviest punishments he could suffer—(Hear, heat).
Arta some further observations the witness was retailed, and
the Coalmine informed him, that his answers had not been cond.
dered quite satisfactory or respectful to the House, and that they
must be plain, direct, and distinct. •
Mr. W. HARVEY and-other Hen. Members then proceeded

with the eltarninailuit of the witness, who said, teat be 614 si Iniii
which was open during the election to the *rakes of Lord PIK01111•1
and Mr. Barclay t be did not know the Meaning of being 4 trtaii
comfortable"
The witness was ordered to withdraw and
Mr. Charles Ady was called and examined by hfr. L
a solicitor, and canvassed the llorimgb of Petters in 1144 ad
eiebalf of Lord Perceval; the feelineof the Voiced were only el-

by their saying they wished him well, that he meat mealiest,
and call opens their wives. The canvass was a general one, and he
found that Lord Perceval bad then no chance from the ground being
pre.oecupted. la August, 1123. be caniassed the Borongh agate with
Lord Percent, and found the same disinilinatioo On the pirt of the
voters to promise their votes without receiving a primates of Motley.
Was asked for money by several timers in snottier Cantu' previous
to the election. Was preseneat a meeting held in die Eitircitigh qd
the Saturday previous to the election, at *hi& mope:fug it *as avoid
that the Candidates 'honld keep open Muses, at which houses there
war afterwards treating throughout the whole of the
Hadeevetal offers of support made to him for divers sums. Wad
once tubed up in the middle of the night by a person named
Moore, who offered him 76 votes at £lO a piece. Does net believe
that any person could have nude a successful (invert of the Bo:
rough without giving money, or the promise Of money. Many
persons told hint they would rather tote for Lord Perceval for as
than for £lO from the other party. A Verson named Stepireni
offered him ten or twelve votes at ten pounds each. On die
fourth day of the election witness became a candidate for the
purpose of administering the Bribery Oath, which was objected
to by Mi. Manning's Couniel. When iomi person+ who hid
offered their votes to him for money took the oath, he *as ad.:
'bed not t in adminkteridg 1G Witness is quite Is. heed
that no Candidate has a chance in the Borough without bribery.
if the other Candidates bribe. After he left Penryn, was informed
that arrangements had been made by the Candidates for paying the
rates of the voters, and that 114 had their rates paid at the last
deeded.
The ATTORNItt 0 lINERA L here suggested, that the Houle
should get the evidente of facts from persons togllbuint df them
frost their own personal knowledge. 'l'he *icons bating heard
these things could be no ground on which the Muse should come to
a deci.ion.
After a few words from Sir E. Eatercsthetr. and Sir C. Bunamt,
the witness was recalled, and the examination proceeded. There
was general treating throughout the borough; should think that
almost all the voters partook of the treating, and certainly more
than half of the bribery. Believes the corruption of the borough
to be such, that a person cannot carry an election through with sea.
cues unless be resorts to bribery.
lusnination continued by Lord MILTON and other Meetberei
In the canvass of August lath Lord Percent's prtimbts
amounted to seventy or eighty y those who then promised did
not all vote for him. The expectation of money in to/1116140u
of their votes was more prevalent among the pocirer Malmo than
the higher; the higher classes did not require money, het they
asked foe places in the India House, or any where, for their fa.
mily canneloni. The contest was between Lard Pereeval and
Mr. Manning, and the second vote of both those Candidates
.was given to Mr. Barclay. Does not believe that Mr. Barclay
made use of any bribery:. there was no necessity ter his doing
so. Mr. Moore, who tendered the seventy votes to the witness,
was not to elector; does not believe he *oakd have fulfilled his
engagement if it had been accepted; he did not live in Penryn I
ke came from Orampound--.(A laugh.) Three persons told the
witness they had received money from Mr. Anderson, who is Mn
Manning's son-in-law. Lord Perceval received- promise of sup-
port (turn 173 voters ; .believes those voters expected to receive
money after the election ; did not discourage that expectation
said nothing either one way or the other. Witness became a mina
didate himself on the fourth day of the election for the purpose
at putting the bribery oath; was dissuaded from it by his ovin
party, as he believes, as he believes, to avoid the general odiunt
of its being taken. The treating was general: gave orders that
there should be no treating by his agents; the order was nut
attended to, and did not much expect that it would be carried
hate effect when he gave it. If one Candidate bribes, and ano+
they did not, in any borough in England, think* the bribing
Candidate would have the best chance. Has beard of large
sums given for canary birds ; has heard of 401. being given for emu
Captalu Fellow calla!, and examined by Mr, L. KECK—Has
always resided at Penryn; is well acquainted with the transactions
of the election of 1824 ; there was bribery then: At the last eleca
tion heard that a great deal of bribery was carried on, but did not
knew it of his personal knowledge, having Mere ill at the time.- a
The witness was of opinion that bribery awl corruption existed to
a great mtheastka latge proportion of the electors, as be bad heard,
task Wiley. Had not beard any man declare he had received
money fee toting; no intimation was given to him from any voters
that be expected money for his vote; he voted for ?dr. Barclay y
be canvassed eight or ten voters, but did nut take a very active parr.
In theelection of 18E4, he believed there were intimations that
voters expected money for their Kites. Several that he canvassed
for Mr. Barclay said It is time enough yet, we will wait. One said
he should be happy to vote for Mr. Hereby, but It was his interest
to vote another way. He had no doubt many of the voters were
disposed to vote for Mtn who gave the largest bribe. He never
heard any conversation tending to bribery, in the presence of Mrs
Barclay or any other Member. Out of three hundred electors; he
thought a moiety would take bribes. The witness being asked
whether be knew of any act of bribery ? said he never was pity to
any am. He had heard mach about bribery, but had not seen it.—e
He could not recollect any act of bribery.
My. C. WETHERELL, after the witness had been
ordered to withdrew, observed that the evidence which
had been given, could not be considered such as the
House could *et upon.
_

The AT CORNEY•GENERAL was of the sante
opin on. No evidence had been obtained that night
upon which the House could act. The last wives; bad
expressed an opinicn that bribery exiAed in the borough
of Penryn, but was unable to suite any fact.

Thomas Ones was then called in.—The whom said be was a tee
sident in Pearyn. He was acquainted with the elettion of 11124.-..
Whilst he was engaged in canvassing, he believed the voters were
open to bribery. That an election for Penryn could not be carried
on without bribery, he was as conscious as be was of his own exist.
'nee ; large sums of money were given to persons Who were punt
before the Election. At the election of Lord Perceval the cry was
You may have me if you will ; call at my house; I shall not be
at home, but my wire will be there, and she will do the business."—•
The witness was ordered to withdraw.

Lord MILTON then said, before the next witness was
called in, he wished to call the attention of the Cem•
mittee to the false statement made by John Carne. That
witness having been asked whether he had seen Stan-
bury ? answered that he had seen him in the lobby of
that House. He was then asked whether he had not
seen him in Newgate?— The answer was Nn. He (Lord
Milton) understood that the turnkey of Newgate, who
was in the lobby. was.able to prove the falsehood of
the assertion. The Noble Lord accordingly moved that
Edward Harris, the turnkey of Newgate, be called in.
Harris was tailed to the Bar.
What is your name 7—Edward Harris.
Have you had Stanbury is your custody I—l have:
Has any person been to see him in Newgate?—Yes, one.
Who is It7—Carne.
Should you know him again?—yes.
• Did you see him with Stanbury 7—Yea.
Joha Came was then called in. and Mr. GURNEY, baying re.
(erred to his evidence, read it over to him. The question was—Have
you seen bids (Stanbury) since he has been in Newgate 7.—A. No.
Lord MILTON—I wish to ask the witness whether the answer
he gave is true 7--Carne--Yes, it is. . .

Mr. WYNN—I ask the witness Whether he has seen gtanbury
at any place but in the lobby of the House; whether he has not
seen him in Newiate, and stopped with him a quarter of an hour ?
Carne—When you asked me the questron just now, ft did not occur
to fey mind to say I bad seen bias. but I did See Islin in Newsate.
The witness was ordered to withdraw.
Mr. WYNN could not avoid believing 'the inten:ion
of the witness had been to deceive, and it was of im-
portance to the-House that respect should be. paid iCy
such persons to their proceedings. He shoult move
that the chairman report that John Carne,had been
guilty of prevarication and falsehood.
An Hon. MBUSER thought it just possible that the
witness might have concealed the truth from miser
prehension. , .
Dr. PHILLIMORE consideredijt a clear attempt to
deceive the House.
Mr. PEELsaid, jf it wasthegenehil opinion that the
man had shewn an intention to deceive the House, the
better way would be so deal with the offence forsho