LIVERPOOL ELECTION. (Hansard, 14 March 1833)

§ Lord Sandon
regretted very much that he could not follow the example which had just been set him by other hon. Members, and postpone his Motion; but its nature was such that it would not admit of postponement, and it would be unnecessary for him to enter at any length into the grounds upon which he called upon the House to accede to it. His Motion was, "that the Corporation of Liverpool should have leave, by their Counsel and Agents, to examine witnesses before the Committee on election transactions at Liverpool." The purpose of this Motion was to enable the parties whose rights and privileges were involved in this investigation, to have the benefit of the skill and practical experience of Counsel in cross-examining witnesses. He could not conceive upon what grounds the Motion could be objected to; but, he might state, if there should be any objection, that the Corporation were willing that their interests in the Committee should be confided to a single Counsel.

§ Mr. Wason
opposed the Motion, on the ground that it would lead to great delay and increased expense, as the funds of the Corporation of Liverpool would be misapplied in the defence of the persons charged with bribery. If Counsel were admitted, 644 however, he did not see upon what principle they could limit the number. The noble Lord said, the Corporation of Liverpool would be satisfied with one Counsel; but every freeman of Liverpool might claim to be heard by his Counsel.

§ Mr. Nicholl
thought there was great reason for acceding to the Motion on this ground, that in truth and in fact there was already Counsel on the other side; so that if the House rejected the noble Lord's Motion, there would be Counsel for the prosecution and not for the defence. When he said that there was Counsel for the prosecution, what he meant was, that the hon. member for Ipswich (Mr. Wason), who was not a Member of the Committee, but who was a Barrister, sat behind the hon. member for Wilts (Mr. Benett), and suggested such questions as his legal skill and education enabled him to frame, in order to sustain the charge of bribery. This was giving an advantage to one side, which should be made up to the other by allowing Counsel. Some observations had been thrown out as to delay, but he thought the House could scarcely expect the investigation to close very soon, when he informed it that summonses were already sent out for above a hundred witnesses.

Mr. O'Connell
thought the appointment of nominees was for the express purpose of excluding Counsel; and when the accused had a Gentleman of such ability as the hon. and learned Gentleman who spoke last (Mr. Nicholl) for their nominee, it was quite certain that their interests would not suffer from the absence of Counsel. For his own part he would never throw the shield of his humble abilities over corruption. The delay which would be produced by permitting Counsel to exercise their ingenuity in cross-examination would be ruinous to those who had only justice in view. In giving nominees every thing necessary for justice was done, and he therefore trusted that the House would not accede to the Motion.

Mr. Wynn
thought it was a great mistake to conclude, that, because there were nominees there should be no Counsel. The nominees could not, and ought not, to act as Counsel; for, when placed on the Committee, they were judges, and were bound to act in that character. The hon. and learned Member who spoke last, said they ought not to throw their shield over corruption. Now he (Mr. Wynn) 645 had always understood that the grosser the charge was against any individual, or any body of men, the greater reason there was to afford every facility for defence. Though he was assured of the delinquency of the accused, he should say that they were entitled to be heard in their defence, He had never known an instance in which parties accused of corruption had been refused the assistance of Counsel by that House, and he should regret to find the House adopting such a course.

Colonel Williams
thought there could be no necessity for the ingenuity of lawyers in this case, the delinquency of the accused was so flagrant.

§ Mr. Benett
thought Counsel unnecessary, as nominees had been appointed. Admitting Counsel to cross-examine witnesses would produce expense and delay, and probably throw the ulterior measures which might be necessary over to another Session of Parliament. He had already devoted himself for three years to the investigation of this question, and he must oppose every proceeding which he thought would lead to unnecessary delay.

Sir Matthew White Ridley
said it was quite obvious, that some how or other a considerable degree of party spirit had found its way into this Committee more than was usually to be found in Committees in that House. With great respect for the Members of the Committee, he was bound to say, too, that the choice had fallen, by mere accident, no doubt, on very young and inexperienced Members of that House. This being the case, he thought" it desirable that they should be assisted by the knowledge and experience of Counsel; and if the noble Lord (Lord Sandon) called for a division on this Motion, it should have his support.

§ Mr. Harvey
said, that it would greatly expedite the inquiry, if Counsel were allowed, as their habits of examining evidence would enable them, to despatch ten witnesses, whilst the ordinary mode of examination by a Committee would enable it to hear only one. He therefore felt it right to sanction the Motion of the noble Lord.

§ Lord Althorp
doubted very much, if Counsel were allowed, whether it would not be for their interest to delay the proceedings before the Committee, and thus protract the inquiry to an unnecessary length. If, however, any regulation could be adopted, by which unnecessary delay 646 in the proceedings could be avoided, he felt no objection to the Motion of the noble Lord, as he was of opinion the legal habits of Counsel would be of great advantage towards the attainment of the objects proposed by the Committee.

§ The Solicitor General
said, that he was glad to hear what had fallen from the noble Lord in favour of Counsel being allowed; because he could with great sincerity avow it to be his opinion, that, instead of delaying the inquiry, the aid of Counsel would operate by way of despatch. It ought, however, to be a regulation of the Committee, that no speeches should be allowed, but that the Counsel should simply direct their attention to the examination of witnesses.

An Hon. Member
said, that he objected to the appointment of Counsel, because he never saw a lawyer enter into any business which he abridged; and as he was one of the Committee, he could not but observe that, in justice to them all, it was but fair for the House to order the Ballot to be gone over again, upon this new understanding.