The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-04-19 00:00:00

WAR IN SPAIN.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY renewed his motion for a
copy of the instructions given by the Admiralty to Lord John
Hay as to the conduct or his Majesty's naval forces in the war
in Spain.
Lord MELBOURNE objected to the motion on the ground that
such a call was novel, and that aconipliance with it would be
impolitic. After some discussion the motion was withdrawn.

RAI LROA RESIMUTIONS.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE rose, pursuant to notice given
yesterday, of submitting a motion to the house, on the subject
of the resolutions df the House of Commons-as regards rail-
roads. In examining the resolutions, the noble 'marquis said
that in some of the suggestions he did not entirety concur, but
in the main portion of them he did. One of the propoSitions
was, that a sum of money for those projects should be lodged
in the Bank of England as security. Another was, that some
engineer should be employed either on the oart of this govern-
ment, or on that of the proprietors. Such. a thing would be
highly desirable to have accomplished, provided it could be
done. Another suggestion was that all these worki should ul-
timately be made public. Now he thought such a thing could
not be accomplished unless the government engaged in them
acted in the same way as the local governments of America
did—viz., by taking shares in them. He thought that as to the
railroads becoming ultimately public property there was very
little likelihood. There was no doubt but, the parliament
would be called upon to consider those works, and that in fu-
ture sessions many more would be brought forward to an ex-
tent yet scarcely to be believed. The noble marquis, after a
few further remarks upon this paper, concluded with moving a
resole tionito the effect that the house agreed to the principle of
the resolutions of the House of Commons.

The motion was agreed to after some conversation, in which
the Eari of Ripon, Lord Hatherton, the Duke of Wellington,
and several otherpeers took a part.

STAFFORD DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.

The Marquis of CtANRICARDE moved the second reading o
the Stafford disfranchisement bill.

Lord LYNDHURST objected to the bill being read a second
time before evidence had been heard at the bar of their lord-
ships house to prove the allegations upon which it was founded.
If he were called upon to act in his judicial capacity upon the
present bill as a member of that house, he must have the evi-
denae delivered on oath in his presence before he could justify
it to his conscience to decide in a case of such importance. The
bill, as it stood was altogether founded on er parts statements,
and those too obtained in the most unfair manner. No cross-
examination of the witnesses was allowed, nor were the parties
permitted to meet the case or to put in any defence. Did his
noble friend's notions of justice as a hereditary judge square
exactly with these circumstances, and could he justify it to him-
self to act up,m such evidence? Besides, the whole of the evi-
dence, as printed and annexed to the report, was anonymous;
and iisuch statements could be relied upon as containing any
truth at all, his Majesty's Attorney. General was implicated in
the bribery that was alleged to have been carried on at Staf-
ford ; -for one of the witnesses, who states himself to be a soli-
citor employed in the interest of the hon. and learned gentle-
man, averred that out of 556 burgesses, voters of Stafford, who
had voted for Sir John Campbell, no less than 531 were bribed
by him, some being paid £3. 10s. each, that being the price of
split votes, and others being paid £6, that being the price of
plumpers ; and this witness being directly asked whether these
sums were promised to be paid to the electors before they voted,
answered unhesitatingly, " Yes." (A laugh.) Now this was
the evidence of a person employed, as he averred, by the
Attorney-General; but that learned gentleman was not present
at his examination and, consequently, could not rebut his
statements; but as—they were put forth in the printed evidence
anony sly. he could not rely upon them, though he 'must
point the sense time, that they stood in precisely the
same co ion, as far as their credibility was concerned, as the
evidence n which this bill was founded. The noble lord
next nrocee ed to lead a portion of the evidence of a banker at
Staff(ird, who asserted that a sum of nearly £3,000 was drawn
out of his bank on Sir J. Campbell's account during the Staf-
ford election, which, he had reason to believe, was all expended
there and then, and that there was no great entertainment, the
expense of which could swallow up so large a sum.
After several noble lords had spoken on the question, and
among them the Lord Chancellor, who contended that the
measure was not a bill of pains and penalties,
Lurd LYNDHURST begged to move, by way of an amendment,
that all the words in the motion after the word " that" be left
out, and the following words added :—" This house do proceed
with the examination of witnesses to prove the preamble of the
bill; and that before the second reading of the bill the peti-
tioners, being electors of the borough of Stafford, be heard by
themselves, counsel, or agents on the matters contained in the
said petition."
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE replied, and said that he lad
never proposed this bill as of pains and penalties. He
proposed it as a measure of partial retorro, because he thought
it essential in consequence of the misconduct of the people of
Stafford.
The motion was agreed to.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-FRIDAY.
DUBLIN STEAM-PACKET COMPANY.

Mr. MAURICE O'CONNELL presented the report on this bill,
the consideration of which was postponed to Tuesday (this
day.)