only question was, why the dismissal of their services without any pay whatever, the yeomanry had so long been delayed? whenever they might be called upon ; and In 1817, he had propounded the same idea; he was confident that if the public service and as he was connected with a regiment required their assistance, they would be in Staffordshire, he trusted the House found ready to come forward to devote would give him credit for the purity of his their best efforts to its maintenance and motives. If there was any thing wanting support. to convince him of the good intentions of On the question being put, “That the late government, he should find it in ninety-one thousand and seventy-five men the fact, that they had not regarded their be maintained for the service of the United own private feeling in favour of the yeo- Kingdom for the year 1828,” Mr. Alderman manry, when they deemed themselves Waithman moved, that the number of men called upon by public duty to dismiss the be reduced to eighty-one thousand and body.

seventy-five. Sir R. Heron thought that the only ques

Mr. N. Calvert thought that, as long as tion to be asked was, why the whole body Ireland was in the state in which she was had not been dismissed ? He could not at present, the army could not be safely see that any portion of them was necessary. reduced. It was beginning at the wrong In time of peace they were utterly useless, end to think of reducing the army: they nay, they were worse than useless ; for, should rather seek for some way to tranfrom proofs of their acts, the painful par- quillize Ireland. ticulars of which he would not bring to the Lord Althorp rose to explain why, upon recollection of the House, they had shewn this occasion, for the first time he believed, how unsafe it was to employ them, and he should vote against reduction. They how much more preferably the regular were at present only called upon to vote soldiery might have been engaged to un- the estimates for six months, which were dertake the business. For his part, he absolutely necessary, and nothing which thought they ought to have been abolished passed now pledged any member to a parten years ago.

ticular line of conduct hereafter. He Lord Palmerston said, he did not see trusted that, in the Finance Committee, how the present topic was connected they should be able to reduce the military with the question before the House, but establishment of the country. In the he was quite prepared to take the fullest existing state of their foreign relations, he responsibility upon himself for the measure. did not think that the force specified in It had been a saving to the country of these estimates was too much to be granted 86,0001. a year, and that, too, without the to ministers for a period of six months sacrifice of any thing that was necessary to [hear]. the well-being of the state. As to those Mr. Alderman Waithman said, the corps which were retained, he thought that House was called upon to make every in that particular the noble marquis had effort to reduce the expenditure of the exercised a sound discretion.

country. He should not, however, press Lord Morpeth observed, that the hon. his amendment to a division. baronet had compared the late govern- Mr. Sykes did not see any reason why ment to sir John Vanbrugh ; nor did he reduction should be postponed, on account object to that comparison, for he was of the appointment of the Finance Comquite willing that they, as sir John had mittee. When that committee should make been, should be the envy of the superficial, its report, the session would probably be and the abuse of the ignorant; confident near its close, the members would be out that they would inherit the well-founded of town, and, under such circumstances, admiration of posterity.

parliament would be called on to discuss Mr. Secretary Peel said, that upon every this most important question. He was occasion, the yeomanry had distinguished unwilling to vote so large a number of men itself for the public good. It had always as ninety-one thousand. Such a force was merited and received the approbation of not required in time of peace. They had the country; and the same disposition not such a force in 1792, nor in 1817, nor still pervaded the body at large to con- even in 1823. He could not see what tribute its exertions whenever necessary in were the peculiar circumstances of the future. He was justified in saying so by country which rendered such an enormous the fact, that many corps had tendered | force at present necessary. Looking at

a

the difference between the expenditure of was void for treating. That special report the country and its resources, he felt him- stated, that it had been a “notorious, longself imperatively called on to vote for the continued, and general, practice, for the reduction of the army; and for that re- electors, who voted for the successful canduction he certainly should vote, again didates, to receive twenty guineas from and again, whenever it was proposed. each of them, so that the burgesses who

Sir M. W. Ridley was of opinion, that, voted for both the members returned, had in the peculiar circumstances of the coun- customarily received forty guineas for such try, it would be only a delusion to hold exercise of their franchise.” In directing out a hope that much relief could be ob- the attention of members to this report in tained by reducing the army. This was a the last session, he had touched upon

the mere fallacy; and there was another which unparalleled extent of treating and the outhad gone abroad, namely, that by reducing rageous rioting at the last election-riotthe expenditure in other respects, great ing which could only be subdued by a mibenefit might accrue to the nation. The litary force. However repugnant to the total annual expenditure was about fifty constitution and to the law such interfermillions, and of this there were not more ence might be, the paramount necessity than nineteen or twenty millions for the for it in this case had been such, that the army, navy, ordnance, &c.; any reduction, committee had determined a petition comtherefore, that could possibly be made of plaining of it to be frivolous and vexatious. these twenty millions of expenses, could He had thus exemplified the depraved, not make a material difference, or meet disordered, and demoralized, condition of the expectations of the public. The largest the borough, the electors of which consistpart of their expenditure was that which ed of about two hundred persons-one was connected with the interest of the half-resident and the other non-residentnational debt; and until they could reduce all of them in the most abject condition of that, with perfect justice to the public life. As to the main charge in the special creditor, it was clear that they could not report, he had so far satisfied the House make such a reduction as would satisfy by a statement of the evidence, of the exthe nation. Taking this point into con- istence of the practice complained of, and sideration, it was, he conceived, very hard of its tendency to vitiate and corrupt the to expect from the labours of the Finance choice of the members, that the Honse had Committee that which they could not effect. not only allowed him to bring in the bill He believed that the committee would now again before it, but it seemed to be prove to be an honest and efficient body; its general impression, that any evidence and nothing, he was sure, would prevent beyond that taken on oath before the comthem from entering into a full investigation mittee was unnecessary, and he believed of every subject that might be brought that if the session had not closed upon before them; but it was unfair to expect him, he should have been allowed to pass impossibilities from them.

the bill through that House upon the The amendment was negatived, and the grounds which the minutes of that evioriginal resolution agreed to.

dence afforded. Those details were how

ever probably forgotten—the impression East RETFORD DISFRANCHISEMENT produced was worn away—and he now Bill.] The order of the day for the found several gentlemen so desirous of second reading of this bill being read, evidence at the bar, that if the House

Mr. Tennyson said, that at that late would read the bill a second time, he hour, and having in the last session occu- should propose to examine evidence in a pied so much time on the subject of this committee of the whole House upon the bill, he should not, in moving the second bill, in order to justify that part of it by reading, say more than was necessary to which it was proposed to disfranchise East remind the House of the grounds on which Retford. He abstained from saying a it rested, and to explain the course he in- single word as to any other of the provitended to pursue. Members would re- sions of the bill; because as they were all collect that the committee appointed last necessarily dependant upon the course year to try the merits of the East Retford which the House should take as to the Election petition, had presented a special first, it would be premature to enter into report, in addition to that, by which they any discussion with regard to the expeannounced to the House that the election 1 diency of giving the franchise to Birming. ham or elsewhere until that first proposi- equally have taken place at the last election was disposed of. The place to which tion if the opportunity had occurred ? two representatives should be given if Was it not absurd to say, that because Retford were disfranchised—the nature of these payments were not made at the last the elective franchise to be established in election (which was simply because they such new borough—and all other subsidiary could not) the proceedings should be provisions, would be proper subjects for stopped? This objection was started in a discussion in the committee, when he petition presented, on the 8th of February, should be prepared to state the grounds from the bailiffs, aldermen, and burgesses. upon which he thought Birmingham ought | But why did not these gentlemen seize to be preferred, and, if he could not pre- upon that convenient opportunity for devail on the House to agree with him, to nying the charge against them? Not one submit to any alternative it might please to word of denial did the petition contain; on adopt.- In confining himself, then, to that the contrary, the omission of such denial part of the bill which related to Retford, must, under the circumstances, be taken he understood an objection was to be start- as an admission of their guilt. They said, ed in limine, namely, that the corruptions they should consider the suspension of he complained of were not such as occurred the writ “a warning.” Against what? at the last election, but at former elections, Why, against the future commission of the and that there was no precedent for any offence charged upon them. But the bill, either of disfranchisement or regula- House could not limit itself to a warning tion, so grounded. He thought every case in so gross a case as he would prove this must be judged of on its own merits. He to be. As to the practice not obtaining was not bound to produce a case similar at the last election-was it not the same to a precedent case. But if he had thing if the expectation of it generally prewanted proof of the ground stated in the vailed, and had an effect upon that elecspecial report, he thought the extensive tion. If it had no connection with the treating, outrageous rioting, the demora- last election, he should not want precelized, abject, and depraved, condition of dents: he believed the case of Shoreham the voters, and the various corrupt indica-, was one, but he considered that unimportions at the last election, would have been tant. He could shew very conclusively, amply sufficient to justify the interference that the most extensive use was made of of the House. But he should stand upon the practice in influencing the burgesses the charge stated in the special report - at the last election. The hon. gentleman on that notorious, long-continued, and then made several references to the minutes, general, practice there complained of. It and cited the evidence of George Palfreywas notorious, for every one of the wit- man, Samuel Hindley, William Jackson, nesses before the committee, of whom in- William Brown, and a letter written by quiry was made concerning it, stated its direction of an agent of one of the candinotoriety, and if he wanted further evi- dates to one Joseph Marshall, which went dence, he had in his hand a petition signed to prove that the electors were seduced to by the most respectable inhabitants of vote for the candidates ultimately success.) Retford (presented last Friday) in which ful, on the ground of their being the this practice was set forth as one which strongest, and sure to pay the electionhad existed for a long period, and as one money. Thus, the practice had at the by which, in the opinion of more than two last election, as it always would, if not hundred of the most considerable inha- checked, the most injurious effect upon bitants of Retford, the electors had for the public interest, by unduly and corruptly feited their franchise. Evidence at the biasing the voices of the freemen. It bar could not be better than this, for that must always operate upon the whole body would not be an oath, and this was signed of the electors prospectively, by inducing by the parties giving the testimony. In them to vote for the strongest party, withaddition, every witness before the com- out regard to qualifications. That the mittee, who was an elector, and had voted money was not actually paid at the last at former elections, admitted that he had election arose from the claim being lost received the election-money. It was clear in consequence of the successful candithen that the practice had long existed— dates being unseated. It was the inquiry he believed for about seventy years. Was now on foot, and the origin of that init then, to be imagined, that it would not quiry, which alone intercepted the paya. ment, and was it now to be said, that be- others : yet this was the kind of evidence cause the payment was not made, the in- on which the committee had founded their quiry which stopped it ought not to pro- charge. The evidence came before the ceed? If such an objection prevailed, the committee casually and incidentally, whilst practice would be immediately recurred to, in pursuit of another object. If the preand would go on to all eternity, which was sent bill was suffered to pass, it would precisely what the petitioners desired. He offer an easy and convenient precedent would not detain the House longer; but for the disfranchisement of a borough. he wished it to be understood, that the Let it be brought before a committee on real question before it at present was, any charge, and if any instance of corrupwhether it would go into a committee to tion could be shown, at any former period, examine witnesses; and although that then let it be disfranchised. There was vote was given in the form of a vote for another point of view in which the present the second reading of the bill, he should measure was unjust: one fourth of the not consider any gentleman pledged by it electors had been admitted to their freeto support the bill hereafter in its details, dom since 1820. So that if this bill which, if the evidence were deemed suffi- passed, persons would be disfranchised to cient to justify parliamentary interference whom no guilt was imputed: it confoundwith the borough of Retford, would remain ed the innocent with the guilty, if guilty open for subsequent consideration. The they were. A total disfranchisement was hon. gentleman then moved, that the bill justifiable solely on the ground that the be read a second time.

whole body of electors were so corrupt Mr. F. Clinton said, that having been that there was no pure stock to ingraft intrusted by the corporation of East Ret- upon; whereas here a large body of voters ford with the care of their interests, he were perfectly innocent. must object to the present bill, both on Mr. Stewart opposed the bill. He principle and because, in common justice said, he saw no reason why Birmingham to East Retford, the House could not en- should enjoy the privilege proposed to be tertain the present measure. In every taken from East Retford.

There were former case-in the cases of Shoreham, four counties without representatives at all Grampound, and Cricklade—the places in that House. He would move, had not been disfranchised on loose sur- the bill be read a second time this day six mises of general corruption, but instances months.” had been adduced, in almost all the cases, The amendment was put, but not seof individuals having been convicted of conded. bribery. In the present case, the com- Mr. N. Calvert observed, that the trust mittee had thought proper to bring a ge- with which electors were invested was sineral charge of corruption against East milar to that of jurymen; yet it was the Retford at a former period, not properly practice now a days, to consider the elecunder their consideration. In the Penryn tive franchise as a great privilege. In an case, what had passed at former elections early period of our history there had been had been stated to the House; but, in instances of electors petitioning the House that case, repeated charges of similar acts to be exempted from the office of voting, at several successive elections had been on account of their poverty. It was now, recorded on the Journals of the House; however, found out that the office was exwhereas this was the first time that any tremely profitable, and that it was quite charge had been made against East Ret- cruel to take it away. ford. There was great hardship towards Mr. G. Bankes said, that even if he the accused in this course. The alleged agreed with the hon. member that the acts of bribery had taken place in the trust of an elector was like that of a juryelection before the Jast. The accused, man, he must still assert, that to deprive therefore, had not the same facilities of a man of such a privilege inficted a disdefence as they would have had if the grace which would be felt painfully. He charge had been made at that time. The could not agree, therefore, that in these evidence before the committee showed, cases the complaints of the parties ought that out of forty witnesses, eight or ten not to be listened to. The members of admitted that, at the former election, they that House did not sit in it for their own had taken bribes. This was good evidence purposes alone. A seat in that House was against those individuals, but not against a burthen from which no member could VOL. XVIII.

z

" that

a

discharge himself. The objection of the I was to be disposed of; which was assumhon. member was therefore no answer to ing the guilt of East Retford. The part the hon. member on the other side. If of the bill to which he most objected, was it were proved that the parties were guilty, that which transferred the elective franthen he admitted that their feelings ought chise to Birmingham. They ought to reno longer to be considered; but he could ceive evidence without any previous prenot allow that to be the case. He was possession in favour of the bill; and if not contending against the motion of his after the evidence had been gone through, hon. friend, because the object of his hon. they should be satisfied that the borough friend was merely to call other witnesses. of East Retford had been guilty of the He was a party to the report, and thought imputed corruption, and therefore deserved the case called for further inquiry; but he to be disfranchised, their next measure did not think that it was one which justi- would be to decide on the place to which fied disfranchisement. It was a grave the forfeited franchise should be transsubject of inquiry, and he felt disposed to ferred. Such, he conceived to be the aid that inquiry; thinking it a most fit course which justice and propriety dictated. occasion for the House to exercise its in- To all those who might have an inclination quisitorial functions.

in favour of the proposed change of franMr. Secretary Peel thought it was ma- chise, he would suggest the inexpediency terial that it should be distinctly under of making a transfer from a limited jurisstood what was the principal object of the diction to a place so populous and extenpresent measure. If he thought the real sive as that in contemplation. question involved in the proposition of the Mr. Littleton observed, that in the case hon. gentleman was that which had been of the bill for disfranchising Grampound, contemplated by two hon. gentlemen on the name of Leeds was introduced, as the his side of the House-that it was to de- place to which the elective franchise was cide whether East Retford was to be dis- to be transferred; and that in the bill now franchised or not—he might be disposed in progress for disfranchising Penryn, the to vote against the proposition of the hon. name of Manchester was introduced in a gentleman. But he understood from his similar way. He had no hesitation in speech, that he only called on the House saying, that he was prepared, on the rethat evening to agree to his motion, in port of the Select Committee, to proceed order that further evidence might be ob- to disfranchise East Retford; and he tained, to enable members to make up trusted that the legitimate object in view their minds. If this were the case-if the would not be met by jesuitical evasions ; House was to agree to the second reading but that the House would determine to do of the bill, in order that evidence might its duty. be adduced at its bar, and that it might Mr. Secretary Peel, in explanation, obby personal examination of the witnesses served, that all he wished was, to wait determine the extent of corruption in East until the evidence before the committee Retford-he should not refuse to the hon. had proved the expediency of disfranchismember the opportunity of establishing his ing East Retford: after which he should facts. He did not feel himself called support the proposition for introducing upon to enter into the question of whether into the bill the name of the place to there was or was not a prima facie case of which, in the opinion of the House, the corruption; but he could not refuse the elective franchise ought to be transferred. hon. member the opportunity he asked. The bill was then read a second time. Some regard should also be paid to the past proceedings of the House. The

HOUSE OF COMMONS. House had come last session to the second reading of a bill on this subject; he there

Tuesday, February 26. fore thought it would be too much to set REPEAL OF The Test AND CORPORAaside a former decision. On these grounds TION Acts.] Lord John Russell rose and

- the special report of the committee, and said :the past proceeding of the House-he I rise, Sir, in consequence of the notice gave his consent to the second reading of which I some time ago gave upon the the bill. One part of the bill he thought subject, for the purpose of submitting to objectionable, namely, that which stated the consideration of the House, a motion the way in which the elective franchise / which, although it has not, for many

a

a