а

.66 " that the Liberal party were doing the practices. In one paragraph the learned same," he thought that highly probable, Judge said and it only made the case for a Commis- "It appeared that Sir Henry Edwards first sion all the stronger. Far be it from came to Beverley as a candidate in the year 1857, him to say that all the reported bribery upon the invitation of a Mr. Wreghitt, a draper was on one side; and if 800 voters were Sir Henry Edwards was then elected. Shortly

in the town, on behalf of himself and others. bribed by one party and more were after that time Sir Henry became the chairman bribed by the other he should like to of a Company carrying on its business in the Boknow how many were not bribed. The rough, called the Beverley Waggon Company, learned Judge intimated as strongly as Limited. Of this Company a Mr. Norfolk hereit would be respectful in him to do that the secretary. From and after the year 1857,

inafter mentioned was manager, and a Mr. Usher this was a case for a Commission. Hav- and continually until the present time, Mr. ing read the evidence, he thought it en- Wreghitt has been and is the confidential agent tirely bore out the Report of the learned of Sir Henry Edwards for the purposes and maJudge.

nagement of his Parliamentary interest in the

Borough, and during this period, and from time to Motion made, and Question proposed, time, he remitted to Mr. Wreghitt

sums of money

to be expended by him in support of it." " That an humble Address be presented to Her If it had appeared to the Judge that the Majesty, as followeth : "Most Gracious Sovereign,

money was to have been used for the “We, Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal benefit of Sir Henry Edwards, one would Subjects, the

Commons of the United have expected he would have inquired Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parlia- how it was expended. What did he say ment assembled, beg leave humbly to represent to Your Majesty, that Sir Samuel Martin, knight,

in the next paragraph ?one of the Barons of the Court of Exchequer, “It appeared that no detailed account of the and one of the Judges selected for the trial of expenditure of this money was ever given to or Election Petitions, pursuant to the Parliamentary asked for by Sir Henry Edwards, and although Elections Act, 1868, has reported to the House of both he and Mr. Wreghitt were witnesses at the Commons, that corrupt practices did prevail, and trial, neither of them were examined as to what that there is reason, upon the evidence before amount of money was so remitted and received, him, to believe that they did extensively prevail or how it was expended, beyond some general at the last Election for the Borough of Beverley. questions, which were answered by a statement

** We therefore humbly pray Your Majesty, that that money was paid for charitable purposes, and Your Majesty will be graciously pleased to cause for a subscription to an agricultural association.” inquiry to be made pursuant to the Provisions of the Act of Parliament passed in the sixteenth What struck him on reading that parayear of the reign of Your Majesty, intituled, 'An graph was that the Judge did not conAct to provide for more effectual inquiry into the sider it necessary to ask for any specific existence of Corrupt Practices at Elections for statement of the sums expended, he beMembers to serve in Parliament,' by the appointment of Michael O'Brien, esquire, Serjeant at lieving that they had nothing to do with Law, Thomas Irwin Barstow, esquire, Barrister bribery, but that they were for the usual at Law, and Homersham Cox, esquire, Barrister purposes and for subscriptions to chaat Law, as Commissioners for the purpose of ritable objects. So far as this went, he making inquiry into the existence of such corrupt could not see that it brought home a practices."—(Mr. Attorney General.)

charge of corruption to Mr. Wreghitt, Sir LAWRENCE PALK said, he Sir Henry Edwards, or any of the canquite admitted that, under ordinary cir- didates. He admitted at once that there cumstances, a recommendation such as was considerable bribery by Mr. Wreghitt the learned Judge had made in this case for municipal purposes; and having adought to be accepted indisputably by the mitted that he came to this point. The House. So long as the trial of election Judge saidpetitions was delegated to the Judges,

“Sir Henry Edwards and Captain Kennard the representations of a Judge ought came to Beverley the following day, the 3rd undoubtedly to be submitted to and sup- November, and there was no evidence that from ported. But in this case

there were

that day any bribery took place, and Sir Henry

Edwards stated that until the trial he never was special and exceptional circumstances

told or heard of the bribery and corruption which which the House ought to consider. had taken place at the Municipal Election, as it The learned Judge reported that "no was proved that Mr. Lowther and others who corrupt practice was proved to have been were directly engaged in this bribing canvassed committed by or with the knowledge or with him during the ensuing fortnight, it is obconsent of any of the candidates," and, November, which must have been notorious in the

vious that the Municipal bribery of the 2nd of therefore, the candidates—Whig or Tory Borough, was of purpose and design concealed -were not implicated in the corrupt and kept back from him.”

Therefore, at that time neither of the Mr. Baron Martin observed to Mr. Sercandidates was cognizant of any bribery jeant Ballantino—" It seems to me that or of any intention to bribe, as far as this arises out of your cross-examination. they were concerned. He now came to It may be that this beer-drinking may the paragraph quoted by the learned be municipal beer-drinking and not Attorney General, in which the Judge borough beer-drinking.” He should be said 800 Parliamentary electors were glad to learn why municipal beer-drinkbribed, but there was no evidence to ing should in Bradford be regarded as show that that bribery was for Parlia- harmless, while in Beverley it was to be mentary election purposes. The voters visited with these penal consequences. were, no doubt, bribed for municipal He thought, too, that under the present purposes. The hon. Member for Brighton circumstances, with a Committee which (Mr. Fawcett) must be aware that most had been appointed on the Motion of municipal elections throughout this coun- the Secretary of State for the Home Detry were carried by the aid of the gross- partment, and which was now sitting est bribery and corruption, and he did upstairs, it would not be fair to accede not believe that even Brighton itself was to the Motion of the Attorney General, an exception. He was perfectly willing and to throw upon Beverley the heavy to acknowledge that great corruption expenses which would necessarily attend had prevailed at the municipal elections; such an inquiry as that now proposed. but not only had no bribery or corruption He would therefore movebeen traced to Sir Henry Edwards or his “ That the issue of a Commission be doferred agents, but no corruption had been until an opportunity be afforded for an inquiry by proved to have occurred in connection the Select Committee on Parliamentary and Mu. with the Parliamentary election. He nicipal Elections now sitting.” did not, therefore, see that they were

SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONE, in sejustified in visiting Beverley with so conding the Amendment, said, that in a severe a punishment, and although he, certain sense the system under which for one, regarded the new mode of con- the House had abandoned its jurisdicducting election inquiries as perfectly tion with regard to election petitions successful, and believed the decisions was as much on its trial as the particugenerally to be very satisfactory, he lar case now under consideration. He thought that the House might fairly thought the discrepancies in the decimake an exception in this particular sions of the Judges were a serious matinstance.

ter, and he was not sure they might not MR. BREWER said, he was at a loss lead to a resumption by the House of its to understand how any Member could privilege of trying election petitions. have read the evidence and the Report At all events, he thought that during in relation to the late election at Bever- the present Session the House ought to ley, and not have come to the conclusion deal generously and gently even with that there had been for the last eleven peccant constituencies. At the end of years in the borough an organized sys- the Session the decisions in all the cases tem of bribery, carried on, too, at the might be laid before the Judges, with instigation of the gentleman who desired the view of seeing whether a fixed code to represent the borough in Parliament. of laws relative to election cases might

COLONEL STUART KNOX said, he not be laid down. did not desire to cast any imputation on Amendment proposed, the learned Judge who had tried this

To leave out from the word “ That” to the petition, but would leave him to the end of the Question, in order to add the words verdict of the country. He believed the issue of a Commission be deferred until an that, in this instance, the Members for opportunity be afforded for an inquiry by the Beverley were made to suffer for faults Select Committee on Parliamentary and Municipal which were not their own. He could

Elections now sitting.”—Colonel Stuart Knox.) not see what difference there was be

Question proposed, “That the words tween the cases of Bradford and Bever- proposed to be left out stand part of the ley; and yet in these two cases the same

Question." Judge gave different decisions. At MR. W. E. FORSTER said, as a reBradford, when evidence was being ad- ference had been made to Bradford, they duced to show that there had been a might as well put an end to inquiries by good deal of drinking in the borough, the Judges if, on occasions like the pre

a

sent, evidence given in another case was

IRELAND-SLIGO ELECTION. quoted and relied on, although the Judge himself had decided that it was

MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS. not worthy of consideration.

THE ATTORNEY - GENERAL FOR MR. VANCE said, that if elections IRELAND (Mr. SULLIVAN) moved for a were to be voided, as in this case, al. Royal Commission in the case of the though there was no proof of corrupt borough of Sligo. Mr. Justice Keogh practices by the Member or his agents, had reported that corrupt practices exno candidate would be safe, because he tensively prevailed at the last election might be unseated for bribery committed for that borough. The learned Judge by his enemies.

had also reported that intimidation had MR. BRUCE said, this case was even likewise prevailed at the Sligo Election, a stronger one for a Royal Commission though not on the same side as the corthan if merely the candidate or his agent rupt practices; but it would not be was proved to have committed bribery; competent for him, under the Act of because, where an election was voided Parliament, to make the intimidation a for bribery by an individual, there might subject of reference to the Royal Comperhaps have been only one case of that missioners. corrupt practice, while the case alleged against the borough of Beverley was

Resolved, That an humble Address be pre

sented to Her Majesty, as followeth : that there had been wholesale bribery.

Most Gracious Sovereign, As many as 800 persons were proved to

We, Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal have been bribed, and there was reason Subjects, the

Commons of the to believe that that was not the whole United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, number of the bribed. Why, then, in Parliament assembled, beg leave humbly to should not the inquiry be made ? Sim represent to Your Majesty, that the Right ply on the flimsy pretext put forward, of the Court of Common Pleas in Ireland,

honourable William Keogh, one of the Justices that the bribery was not practised at the and one of the Judges selected for the trial Parliamentary, but at the municipal of Election Petitions in Ireland, pursuant to the election ? But they knew that the for- Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868, has reported mer followed almost immediately the to the House of Commons, that corrupt practices latter election, and that the sums of for the Borough of Sligo.

have extensively prevailed at the last Election money given to the voters at the munici

We therefore humbly pray Your Majesty, that pal contest were far in excess of what Your Majesty will be graciously pleased to cause was ordinarily given.

inquiry to be made pursuant to the Provisions of Sir FREDERICK W. HEYGATE the Act of Parliament passed in the sixteenth said, that, while he thought the decisions rear of the reign of Your Majesty, intituled, “ An

Act to provide for more effectual inquiry into the of the Judges should be respected, it existence of Corrupt Practices at Elections for appeared to him that the House were Members to serve in Parliament,” by the appointgoing beyond the lengths to which they ment of Denis Caulfield Heron, LL.D., one of went under the old system. A Royal esquire, Barrister at Law, and William R. Bruce,

Her Majesty's Counsel, John Alexander Byrne, Commission did not, as a matter of esquire, Barrister at Law, as Commissioners for course, follow a strong Report of a Com- the purpose of making inquiry into the existence mittee. The question whether such a of such corrupt practices. Commission should issue was debated.

Address to be communicated to The Lords, and He must also remark that he thought General for Ireland.)

their concurrence desired thereto.-(Mr. Attorney the observations made by the hon. Member for Colchester (Mr. Brewer), to the

WAYS AND MEANS. effect that corrupt practices had existed for years in Beverley, was an unfair one

Resolutions reported; to šir Henry Edwards, whose absence to Her Majesty, the Duty of Customs now charged

(1.) “ That, towards raising the Supply granted from that House many hon. Members on Tea shall continue to be levied and charged on regretted. At the same time, he would and after the 1st day of August 1869 until the recommend his hon. and gallant Friend 1st day. of August 1870, on the importation (Colonel Stuart Knox) not to press his thereof into Great Britain and Ireland : viz. Amendment.

Tea

the lb. 06." Amendment, by leave, withdravon. (2.) “ That it is expedient to amend the Laws Main Question put, and agreed to.

relating to the Inland Revenue.”
Resolutions agreed to:

- Bill ordered to be Address to be communicated to the brought in by Mr. Dodson, Mr. CHANCELLOR of Lords, and their concurrence desired the EXCHEQUER, and Mr. AYRTON. thereto.

8. d.

Lordships, if they desired to maintain | reject.

There were

some which he their reputation for the careful and should be compelled to resist ; but thorough manner in which they trans- a very large number of them, espeacted their business, to proceed with cially some proposed by his noble the consideration of the measure until Friend opposite (Lord Colonsay), he they had seen them all, and compre- should gladly accept as decided improvehended their bearings. He did not ask ments. Before their Lordships went to have the Committee postponed from into Committee he should propose to feelings of hostility to the principle of re-print the Bill, with the Amendments the measure—that having been approved proposed by the Government. Conby a great majority of the people of sidering that it had been introduced in Scotland—but in hopes that the question their Lordships' House with the view of might be properly and well considered. furnishing them with occupation during The noble Duke opposite (the Duke of the early part of the Session, their Marlborough) was right in stating that honour and reputation required that they were on the point of holding their it should be sent down to the House of county meetings in Scotland, at which Commons in sufficient time to give them the various Committees to whom Bills an ample opportunity of discussing it; relating to Scotland were referred would but that House was at present fully report, and thereby the feeling of the occupied, and he believed no injury counties would be ascertained upon this would arise from a postponement till measure. He hoped the noble Duke after the 30th instant, the date of the who had charge of the Bill would post- county meetings. He would beg their pone the Committee until after Whit- | Lordships not to request a postponesuntide, and in the meantime that he ment till after Whitsuntide, and hoped would inform their Lordships which they would go into Committee on the Amendments he would adopt and which 3rd or the 10th of May. he would resist.

LORD CAIRNS presumed it was the THE EARL OF AIRLIE also joined in intention of the noble Duke to move to the appeal for postponement, wishing it, go into Committee on the Bill pro forma, however, to be understood that he hoped for the purpose of re-committing the Bill the principle of the Bill—a national sys- and having it re-printed. tem of education based on rating-would THE DUKE OF ARGYLL said, he had be sanctioned by Parliament. He could no such intention. He simply proposed see no great force in the objection that to have the Amendments printed before rating tended to dry up voluntary sub- their Lordships went into Committee scriptions; and the necessity of educa- upon it. tion being admitted, there was no more LORD REDESDALE thought it would reason for leaving the burden to be borne be much more convenient to have the by individuals, than for throwing on Bill re-printed with the Amendments in them the cost of lighting or of repairing the form in which the noble Duke inthe roads.

tended it to be actually proposed. It THE DUKE OF ARGYLL said, he had was impossible otherwise for those ungreat regret in postponing the Bill, but acquainted with the forms of the House felt it impossible to resist the appeals of to understand what the Government the noble Duke opposite, and his two intended to propose. noble Friends, all of whom he believed to be friendly to the main objects of the

NAVY-ARMAMENT OF TURRET-SHIPS. Bill. H ad no wish to take any course other than that which was best

EXPLANATION. for the cause of national education in THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN said, Scotland. He had to apologize for not that since the subject of turret-ships had having presented to their Lordships the been under discussion on Thursday last, Amendments he proposed to make in he had communicated with his right the Bill in Committee, but the fact was hon. Friend the First Lord of the Adthat up to Friday last Amendments were miralty. He was now able to lay on showered

upon him by Members of their the table the letter addressed by the Lordships' House so fast, that he had Admiralty to Admiral Sir James Hope, not had time to consider how many he and also his reply, expressing approval would adopt and how many he would of the proposed new turret-ships. With