The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-05-10 00:00:00

gallant officer Said that he had never eiven one farthing in
the shape of a bribe, either directly or indirectly, and that he
never would. His election, as far as he was concerned, was
as pure as that of the hon. member for Bath.

Mr. ROEBUCK thanked him for his candid answer, and
then asked Sir John Hobhouse whether it was not arranged,
respecting the Nottingham election, that a sum of money
should be paid down to stop the inquiry, and whether a tuF-
ther sum of money was not to be paid in order to let a certai❑
gentleman walk over the course.

Sir J. HOBHOUSE declined to answer the question.
Mr. ROEBUCK then put a similar question to Mr. Elphin-
stone, who said, in reply, that there had been a compromise,
but he was no party to it.
Mr. ROEBUCK next applied to Major Beresford, who said
he declined to answer the question of the learned inquisitor.

Mr. ROEBUCK then askid the Speaker if it was competent
for him to move for a committee of privilege before the house
proceeded to the business of the evening, and was replied to
in the affirmative.

Sir R. PEEL was anxious to proceed with the income tax
committee, and hoped the hon. member would postpone his
motion until Monday. It appearing, however, to be the wish
of the house that

Mr. ROEBUCK should proceed, he entered upon the sub-
ject accordingly. He said he was induced to bring forward
the present motion, which he knew was somewhat extraordi-
nary, because he had grave reasons for suspecting that the
hon. members for Harwich, Nottingham, Penrbyn and Fal-
mouth, Reading, and Lewes, were open to accusations of
bribery and corruption. The hon. member referred to the
details of some of those cases ; but when he came to Not-
tingham, he said he understood that the entire constituency
had been bought and sold ; bought by Sir J. Hobhouse and
Sir G. de H. Larpent, and sold to Mr. Walter, who was to
be allowed, for a specified sum agreed upon, to obtain the
seat to be vacated by one of the sitting members. The hon.
and learned gentleman concluded by moving for a committee
of privilege, and called upon Sir J. C. Hobhouse to second
the motion. _ _

Mr. FTTZROY seconded the motion, and repudiated the
charge of bribery and corruption, as applied to him, as a foul
calumny. He was fearless of the result of the investigation
of the committee. .

Mr. C.NV:"ViTY. N's said the question was one deeply in-
volving the honour of the house. , It was of the greatest im-
portance that it should be well considered' and he therefore
moved the adjournment of the debate until Monday next.
After some further observations the adjournment was
agreed to.
The house then resolved itself into committee on the In-
come Tax Bill.
On clause 96 being proposed,
Mr. HUME moved that the profits of persons in trade, on
which the income tax should be levied, should be estimated
by those of the preceding year, and not by the average of the
three years preceding. On a division the amendment of Mr.
Hume was negatived by a majority of 76 to 27.
On the 188th clause being proposed, to the effect that the
tax remain in force until the sth of April, 1845,
Mr. HUME moved that it should continue in operation for
one year only, instead of three years.
On a division, Mr. Hume's motion was negatived by a
majority of 174 to 52.
Mr. R. YORKE moved a clause to the effect that attorneys
should be exempted from the payment of their certificate du-
ties during the period they were subjected to the income tax.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed the mo-
tion on the ground that if all persons were allowed to deduct
the amount of their other taxes from the income tax they
were called upon to pay, the latter tax would be very unpro-
ductive.

After some conversation the committee divided, and Mr.
Yorke's motion was negatived by a majority of 183 to 18.
Mr. DUNCOMBE moved a clause to the effect that the non-
payment of the income tax should not disqualify the voters
in boroughs from being placed on the registry, or voting at
elections for members of parliament.
Sir R. PEEL said he was not desirous of imposing any
new restrictions upon the exercise of the elective franchise,
and would, therefore, inquire if the non-payment would dis-
qnalify the elector, and it' so, he would take care that a clause
should be introduced to guard against such an occurrence.
The whole of the clauses having been disposed of, the
house resumed, and the report was ordered to be received on
Monday.

The Other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
house adjourned.

SOUTHAMPTON ELECTION COMMITTEE

CLOSE OF THE PROCEEDINGS

The committee re-assembled on Friday at the usual hour.
Mr. Austin said, that after the committee yesterday came
to their resolutions, he and his learned friends held a consul-
tation, and the result was, they had advised their clients not
to proceed with the other petition.
Mr. Cockburn then applied to the committee to declare the
last election void.

The room was cleared, and on strangers being re-admitted,
the chairman announced that the committee had resolved,—
" That the last election of burgesses to serve in parlia-
ment for the borough of Southampton was a void election.
" That the committee had determined to report specially to
the house.

That Charles Coombes Callen was bribed with the sum of
£lO paid to his wife for him.

" That Joseph Whitmarsh was promised a bribe of ;£lO,
the whole or some part of which was afterwards paid.
" That Joseph Redwards was bribed with the sum of £3.
" That William Andrews was bribed with the sum of £3.
" That Giles Pasquin was bribed with the sum of £3.
" Each of them to vote for Lord Bruce and Mr. Charles
Cecil Martyn.
" That the evidence given before this committee relative to
an extensive system of treating carried on through the means
of local associations ; the payment of large sums to chairmen
and colourmen, many of whom were voters ; and the expen-
diture of a sum of money for the purposes of the election,
amounting to nearly £5OOO, and therefore far exceeding the
ordinary and regular legal expenses, is deserving of the serious
attention of the house.

" That the committee feel that they have been prevented
ascertaining the exact mode in which this money was ex-
pended, by the loss and destruction of vouchers and other
documents connected with those payments, particularly in
the case of William Rouse Mabson, who, after having been
served with the speaker's warrant, disposed of those in his
possession."
The committee then separated.