Commons Sitting of 4 July 1832

MINUTES,
Petitions presented. By the Sheriffs of London, from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Commons, of the City of London, assembled in Common Council, for giving as extensive a measure of Reform to Ireland as to England.—By Mr. ANDERSON PELHAM, from certain Graziers, near Long Sutton, Lincolnshire, complaining of the great increase in the Crime of Sheep-stealing, and praying the House would examine into the propriety of the Commutation of the Punishment of Death.

CHOLERA MORBUS.
Mr. James E. Gordonpresented a petition from a Parish in the county of Tyrone, against the Ministerial Plan of Irish Education. He took that opportunity of inquiring, whether his Majesty's Government intended to take any preventive measures relative to the dangerous spreading of the Cholera: according to recent accounts in the metropolis, already, amongst others, the father of that House, Lord Amesbury, had fallen a victim to it ["No, no" from some Members]; and he heard, that so prevalent was it, that one eminent medical gentleman had attended, in one day, not less than forty patients, attacked by cholera.
Mr. Lambsaid, he saw no necessity to revive the reports which had formerly emanated from the Council Office, as to the number of cholera cases returned to that office. This disease, though it had decreased, had never, except for two or three days, totally disappeared in the metropolis. There was a strong suspicion entertained by himself, and others better acquainted with the malady, that it was of a kind which would be likely, under peculiar circumstances, to return at ail periods. He could assure the hon. Gentleman, that the reports circulated as to the number of cases which had occurred in the metropolis were much exaggerated, and that few or none had terminated in death, owing, he believed, to the attention paid to the disease by the faculty, immediately on its first symptoms becoming manifest. There was not, he was happy to say, a single case of cholera reported to-day.
Mr. Huntsaid, that it was making its ravages in Horsemonger-Iane gaol at this moment, where there had not been less than nineteen cases of real cholera. This might be, in part, attributed to the strict manner in which the prisoners there, debtors as well as criminal prisoners, were confined, and interdicted indulgence by the Surrey Magistrates, both in respect to air, ventilation, and the visits of their friends and acquaintance; but it might, with greater

75
propriety, be traced—and he had the corroborative testimony of the prison Doctor on this head, to the shamefully adulterated bread which was served to the prisoners.—[The hon. Member handed over a piece of it to Lord Althorp]—It was, he said, even when fresher than now, sour, and seemed to be, in fact, composed of ground bones—a very improper practice, all would agree, since that must be a very inadequate substitute for wholesome flour, which was to be cheaply had from warehouses where American corn was hoarded up to rot, in consequence of the iniquitous duty on this essential article of food, to prevent its coming into competition in the market with British-grown grain.
Mr. Lambexpressed his regret that the hon. Member had not refrained from making these statements until some of the visiting Magistrates, Members of that House, had been present. He believed it was difficult generally to get really good bread any where—perhaps more so within the walls of a prison. Those Gentlemen, if present, could have given more satisfactory information than he; but this he knew, that the cases of indisposition which had occurred there had been treated with attention by the medical person attached to the gaol; that, in consequence of complaints made to his department, the food had been provided of a better quality, and the whole state of the gaol much improved. There was no ground, he would state in reply to a question from the hon. Gentleman Mr. H. L. Bulwer), for the report that the cholera had appeared in Coldbath-fields' prison, the condition of which was perfectly satisfactory in that and other respects.
Petition laid on the Table.

POST OFFICE—CASE or MR. MILLS.
Lord Oxmantownpresented a Petition from George Dallas Mills, lately a Clerk in the check department of the Post-office in Ireland, stating, that he had been actively engaged in the duties of his office lor upwards of twenty-two years, and that, in consequence of malversation in the office, in which he had been admitted not to have participated, he had been dismissed without any retiring allowance.
Lord Althorpsaid, that this case had originated from the great irregularity which had prevailed in the Irish Post-office, and from the parties into which it was known that those functionaries had been divided. There was no moral imputation upon Mr.
76
Mills; but erasures had taken place in the books, which must have been known to him; and, on one occasion, when a fraud was discovered, instead of applying to the Secretary, who was on the spot, the petitioner had written to the Postmaster-general, who was in the country; and the result had been, that the defaulter made his escape. Such were the circumstances when the Duke of Richmond came into office; and, upon consolidating the English and Irish Departments, he chose, as he had a right to choose, efficient officers, and he had done so, leaving out this gentleman. The noble Lord said, he had no objection to produce the papers sought for by the petition; and, as to compensation, that was a subject which might be considered hereafter. Petition tolie on the Table.

REGISTRATION (IRELAND).
Sir Henry Parnellsaid, he had been accused by the hon. and learned member for Kerry, in a published letter, of having privately recommended to Government, the alteration from the English plan of registration to the old Irish method, while he appeared to assent to the introduction of the former system into the Irish Reform Bill, at a meeting of Irish Members. The fact was, about ten or eleven months ago, he communicated to the Irish Secretary his opinion, that the English plan was not suitable to the circumstances of Ireland, and, far from making a secret of his opinion, he mentioned it freely, even communicating his opinion to the Chief Secretary for Ireland through the Solicitor General. As to the meeting of Irish Members, at which the English plan was stated to have been agreed to, he had attended it in common with other Gentlemen, in the understanding that he was not to be considered as bound by everything that might pass on the occasion. However, he did not think it necessary to state his opinion on the subject of the registration at that meeting.
Lord Allhorpcould bear the right hon. Gentleman out in his statement, that there bad been nothing secret or underhand in the recommendation to the Irish Secretary as to registry.
Mr. O'Connellreiterated his published statement, and added, that the reason why he had charged the right hon. member for Queen's County with having acted secretly was, because the right hon. Member's recommendation to Mr. Stanley took

77
place in November last; and, in the following February, a resolution was unanimously agreed to at a meeting of Irish Members, of which the right hon. Gentleman was one, calling for the English in place of the Irish system of registration.
Sir Henry Parnellhad no recollection of any such resolution, and did not consider himself pledged to it.
Lord Killeencorroborated Mr. O'Connell's statement as to the resolution.
Subject dropped.

LIVERPOOL DISFRANCHISEMENT.
Mr. Benettmoved the Order of the Day for going into Committee on the Liverpool Disfranchisement Bill.
Lord Sandonobjected to any body of freemen being deprived of their rights without sufficient cause. In ail other cases of disfranchisement, the punishment was confined to the actual offenders. He maintained that it should not be carried further in the present instance. He should therefore move, as an Amendment, that the Bill be re-committed this day six months.
Mr. Ewart seconded the Motion.
Mr. Rigby Wasonopposed the Amendment. He considered the noble Lord's Amendment as only calculated to assist the cause of bribery and corruption.
Mr. John Campbellsupported the Amendment. He admitted that the practice of bribery was most mischievous and disgraceful, but he considered that the Reform Bill would render any measure of this kind unnecessary. The Bill would be inflicting a stigma on the electors of Liverpool, which they did not deserve a whit more than the electors of three-fourths of the empire, under the ancient system of mock Representation. The Bill, moreover, was opposed to the law as it at present stood; for it went to punish the innocent offspring for the offences of the guilty parent—a principle no longer recognized in the Courts of Justice.
Mr. Cutlar Fergussondiffered from the hon. and learned member for Stafford, and would vote for going into Committee, in order to afford the hon. mover of the Bill an opportunity of proving the allegations of bribery on which it was founded.
Mr. Stricklandthought it would be extremely invidious to direct a measure of this kind against any particular place, while there were others equally corrupt. He supported the Amendment.
Sir Henry Willoughbysupported the Amendment, upon the same ground. He conceived that, at the late period of the Session at which they had arrived, inquiry must be endless and useless.
Mr. C. W. Wynnhad, during his parliamentary career, voted for measures like the present, and would also vote for this, as he conceived that there was no more unexceptionable mode of punishing electors guilty of bribery, than depriving them of the trust which they had abused. It was no argument to say, that the minority were innocent; for every corporation was bound by the acts of its majority.
Mr. Benettonly sought for an opportunity to prove one fact, on which he would stake the success of his Motion—namely, that upwards of 3,000 out of the 4,100 electors of Liverpool took bribes at the election to which the Bill particularly referred. This fact being proved, he should feel that he had discharged his duty, and would leave it to the House to discharge theirs. The hon. Member was proceeding to enter into a statement of the details of his Motion, when
Mr. Hunt moved that the House be counted.
The House counted out.