CORPORATION OF BOSTON. (Hansard, 18 June 1833)

Major Hundley

I have a Petition to present from Charles Frederick Barber, of Boston, in the county of Lincoln. The fact of the existence of the public grievance here complained of—namely, corporate abuses—does not rest solely upon this document. A petition, containing similar allegations, and signed by many inhabitants of Boston, was, I believe, presented to this House by my hon. colleague about two months ago. That which is new to the House is the individual case of Mr. Barber, which demonstrates clearly the injury inflicted upon him individually, and upon the community at large, by the practices complained of. The petitioner accuses the Corporation of Boston of having applied to political and party purposes their authority as Magistrates, and the resources of the town of which they are trustees—of having expended large sums of money to uphold illegal claims. He asserts, also, that at all the late elections for Members of Parliament, they have been in the habit of forcing their dependents to vote according to their dictation under pain of losing their situations. Upon these public grounds Mr. Barber appears before the 957 House as a petitioner, and it becomes my duty, however painful, to call its attention to the state of the Corporation of Boston. I now proceed to the case of the petitioner, and I am bound to say, that the statement I am about to make is, from all I can learn, substantially true. At the election of 1831 party spirit ran high, and gave rise to much contention; on one occasion a disturbance took place, windows were broken, and damage was done to other property. But as these unlawful proceedings arose out of the customary licence of elections, an earnest wish was felt by a majority of the inhabitants, when excitement had subsided, that the offenders should not be prosecuted. In order to smooth the way for this act of clemency, and restore peace and harmony among neighbours, at a public vestry it was agreed, upon the express understanding that no prosecution should take place, that the amount of damage done should be paid for out of the parochial rate; and it was paid accordingly. Nevertheless, an indictment was preferred by the Magistrates and others of their party against nine men implicated in the tumult, and they were convicted and sent to gaol. It was thought in the town, that these men were hardly used, that the promise of an amnesty had been violated, and considerable interest being felt for their case, several addresses were printed and published, exposing the hardship to which they were subjected. A considerable number of copies of one of these addresses was publicly circulated from house to house, was put in the windows of a great many tradesmen, and exposed to view in other public parts of the town. The petitioner, among the many who had placed these Bills in their windows, were apprehended under warrants, taken before the borough Magistrates, and by them convicted on the oath of the Beadle, and fined in the full unmitigated penalty of 20l. for publishing a printed bill without a printer's name. The petitioner solemnly declares, that he was neither the author nor the printer of this bill. The penalty inflicted may be supposed to have no reference to the contents of the Bill—they were vituperations—the Corporation was the object of their abuse, and the corporate officers composed the evidence as well as the Bench, which convicted in 20l., having a power of mitigation to 5l., the crime being the exposure in a window of a 958 hand-bill printed without the name of a printer, and previously circulated through the town. Rigidly to exact the full penalty to such an amount, and for such an offence, under such circumstances, appears to me, I confess, an Act of extreme severity, to say the least of it. This is only the beginning—much more and worse is to come. At the last Midsummer Assizes at Lincoln, these parties, after having paid these penalties, were indicted for a libel on the Corporation of Boston, said to be contained in the aforesaid handbill. A true bill was found. It must now be supposed that a measure of punishment was likely to fall upon these offenders, at least adequate to the crime laid to their charge. The prosecutors did not think so. Two more degrees of aggravation are still to be enumerated. At the following Assizes, the case was not brought to trial, but was removed by certiorari to the civil side; by this process time was gained, the torture of suspense, and the fear of aggravated expenditure were superadded. Lastly, application was made (and refused, I am happy to say) to the Court of King's Bench, a few days ago, for a rule to change the venue, on the plea that an impartial Jury, Special or Common, could not be had in the large county of Lincoln, to try the matter at issue between the Corporation of Boston and the petitioner, Charles Frederick Barber. Now, Sir it is, natural to inquire who is Mr. Barber? Hon. Gentlemen will suppose that he must be some person of great wealth and influence whose consequence has rendered him an object of jealousy to a public body controlling great public resources, and wielding Magisterial authority. Mr. Barber must be the patron of the anti-corporate party. The man against whom, not the whole force of the law alone, but that more tremendous engine—the law's delay—has been employed, must at least be wealthy! No such thing, Mr. Charles Frederick Barber, the object of this long-spun prosecution, is a poor lame tailor with a large family (I believe three children), and possessing nothing in this world but his industry wherewith to feed and clothe them. His goods were distrained for the payment of the penalty of 20l., but released by the kindness of his friends. This petitioner, therefore, humbly prays your hon. House to take his case under your serious consideration, and in your proposed enactments on the Law of Libel, as in the 959 reforms which you are about to enact in municipal institutions, to take especial care to enact such laws as shall prevent the officers and members of the Body Corporate of this borough, and other public bodies, from expending the funds with which they are intrusted in bribery and corruption at elections, or in the prosecution of individuals opposed to them in politics. And that a Committee of your hon. House be appointed, or a Commission sent down into this borough, to investigate and examine evidence on the spot as to the abuses of the Corporation officers. Sir, I stand not here to call upon this House to interfere between individuals struggling before the legal tribunals; my object is not to screen from just and adequate punishment any man, be he rich or poor, who may have offended against the existing laws; but I feel it to be my duty to expose, in its true colours, a case, in which the authority of a powerful institution appears to have been prostituted, and the discharge of Magisterial functions to have been tinctured with feelings of a vindictive and malignant nature. This is no squabble of individuals. It is here stated, and I believe correctly stated, that these prosecutions are supported out of the corporate funds. It could never have been the intention of the donors that their benefactions should be so employed. This is not a case of individuals, for it is well known, that a body, in which there is a divided responsibility, will in many cases adopt measures which no individual of that same body would venture to pursue singly. It will not now be said, that Corporations are authorised to hold property as an individual, and to apply it to purposes having no sort of reference to their Charter. But suppose a divided interest in a Corporation, is a majority to make such extraneous application as to deprive the minority of all advantage whatever to be derived from property which all hold in common? Towards the Corporation of Boston, individually, I have no feeling of hostility; for one Member of it I entertain the highest respect, from him I acknowledge with pleasure to have received essential obligations; he, I am sure, never concurred in these harsh measures. But, Sir, in my mind, the case of this petitioner affords a strong illustration of the injuries done to individuals and to communities by combinations authorised by law; consequently, an undeniable proof of the defective state 960 of the law. But is the mischief confined to individuals or to small communities? Or does it affect the condition of the public weal by corrupting the source of legislation? Does it not strike at the root of purity of elections?—and have not these combinations, by corrupting the Legislature, brought this country into a slate of debt and difficulty of which no man can say what will be the termination? In vain has the Reform Bill been passed, in order to secure purity of elections, if the sources from which corruption flows remain unchecked; if the instruments by means of which the legislative powers were formerly usurped are still to retain full force and vigour; if patronage shall continue to lure the Alderman, and the Alderman have still corporate powers wherewith to corrupt the burgess to yield obedience, or means to corrupt him at the public charge; if party feeling and private interest are still to control the appointment to petty offices, the distribution of public charities, and the administration of public justice, then is that great measure, for which the people have done and suffered so much, a mere dead letter. As long as these practices shall continue, so long will the measure of Reform granted be unsatisfactory; it will be justly so, for it is incomplete, and will every day be less effective. It is to be deplored, that there is but too much disposition in these days to hold the constituted authorities in contempt. When such things are, as those which I have related, it may be matter of regret; but it can cause no surprise. When authority, when the powers confided by the law for the benefit of the people, is converted into an engine for oppressing them; when all sense of due proportion between crime and punishment gives way to feelings of political and private rancour; when the poor man is pursued, persecuted by a body of men, separated and segregated from the people, armed with privileges to sit on the vantage ground of the judgment seat for their protection; when the constituted authorities by their conduct merit contempt; then is this House imperatively called upon to examine, investigate, and interpose, that it may in the time of need rescue the laws from abuse, the people from oppression. It gives me great satisfaction to hear, that the Committee on abuses of Corporations have recommended, and that it is the intention of his Majesty's Ministers to appoint a Commission for the 961 purpose of inquiring into the practices of those bodies.