HC Deb 05 July 1866 vol 184 cc715-7

House informed, that the Committee had determined,—

That Robert Campbell, esquire, is not duly elected a Burgess to serve in this present Parliament for the Borough of Helston.

That William Baliol Brett, esquire, is duly elected, and ought to have been returned, a Burgess to serve in this present Parliament for the Borough of Helston.

And the said Determinations were ordered to be entered in the Journals of this House.

House further informed, That they had altered the Poll taken at the last Election for the Borough of Helston, by striking off the name of the Reverend Isaac Rodgers, as not having had a right to vote at such Election.

That no evidence having been adduced in support of any of the charges of bribery, treating, and undue influence made in one of the Petitions, the Committee have no reason to believe that corrupt practices have extensively prevailed at the last Election.

That it appears from the Poll Books produced before the Committee that the number of votes given for Robert Campbell, esquire, was equal to the number given for William Baliol Brett, esquire, and that the Returning Officer nevertheless returned the said Robert Campbell, esquire, as duly elected.

That the Returning Officer was not in attendance before the Committee, and no explanation was offered to the Committee of such a Return having been made.

Report to lie upon the Table.

Clerk of the Crown to attend forthwith to amend the Return.

The Clerk of the Crown attending, according to Order, amended the said Return accordingly.

MR. LOWE

There is a matter arising out of the Report of the Helston Election Committee, of which I was Chairman, which I am instructed by the Committee to bring under the notice of the House. It appears that the returning officer was served with the Speaker's warrant and with a notice to appear, but that he received a letter from the parties who, I suppose, procured those documents informing him that his evidence would not be required. The Committee, however, were of opinion that the facts disclosed in their Report did require further explanation, and they therefore instructed me to make some Motion to the House in order to give the House an opportunity of hearing from the returning officer that explanation which the Committee did not hear. I therefore am anxious to take the most convenient course. We are hardly in a position to discuss such a question at present, and I therefore propose, with the concurrence of the House, that on this day fortnight the Report of the Committee should be taken into consideration. I do not know whether I am in order, but it appears to me desirable that the returning officer should attend at the Bar on that day to give some explanation. I will, therefore, make those two Motions.

MR. LOWE

thereupon moved that the returning officer be required to attend at the Bar of the House on that day.

COLONEL WILSON PATTEN

suggested that it would be more convenient if the consideration of the Report were to take place first, so that the House might determine for itself whether it would be necessary to require the attendance of the returning officer.

MR. LOWE

thereupon withdrew the Motion.

Report to be considered upon Thursday, July 19.