LONDON ELECTION COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 28 February 1838)

§ Mr. Curry
, the chairman of the London Election Committee, appeared at the bar, and said, that he had been directed by the Committee to report to the House, that, 271 before the meeting of the Committee, and, therefore, before their proceeding to transact any business that morning, an hon. Member, Mr. Richard Sanderson, who was appointed to sit on the Committee, had communicated to him the fact of his having voted at the last city of London election, which, he said, he had discovered only on that morning. He took the earliest opportunity of apprising the Committee of the fact on that morning, and they had adjourned their proceedings until to-morrow, directing him, in the mean time, to report the circumstances to the House.

§ Mr. Sanderson
rose, and said, that he felt that some explanation and some apology were due from him on this subject. It was now nearly twelve years since he had first sat as a Member of that House, and, during that time, he had always been an elector of the city of London. It so happened that, at the time at which the election for the city took place, he was almost invariably in attendance at his own election at Colchester, and had, therefore, been prevented from voting, and he thought this had been the case at the last election, and he said so in this House. On reference to the poll-books, however, that morning, and which was entirely of his own accord, he found, that the fact was not as he had imagined, but that he had voted at the last election. He immediately communicated the fact to the chairman of the Committee, and he could now only sincerely express his regret for the inconvenience which his neglect had caused to the House. He could assure the House that the error had been quite unintentional, and he did hope, that every hon. Member would acquit him of any desire whatever to act improperly. What course would be taken by the House he was unable to say, but, for his own part, he wished his name to be struck off the list of the Committee.

§ Mr. Williams Wynn
said, that he thought this House would look with very great regret at the unfortunate error of the hon. Gentleman who sat near him, but, whatever any others might feel, he was quite sure that the hon. Gentleman himself must be sincerely sorry for the occurrence. The mistake, however, having been committed, it was a subject deserving of consideration as to what was the proper course to be pursued. There was an act in existence, to which the late Lord Colchester, about twenty years ago, had introduced a clause 272 in order to meet any instances of this kind. It was provided by the statute, which was for regulating the appointment of election Committees, that eleven Members should be sworn at the Table of the House, well and truly to try the merits of the election, and that they should then be deemed and taken to be a Select Committee, legally appointed to try and determine such merits from and after the time of any such Select Committee having been sworn. This was intended to meet the very great inconveniences which must arise from any informality in the proceedings, or from the occurrence of any case like the present, when any Member was, by mistake, sworn to serve on the Committee. Now, a case somewhat akin to the present happened a few years ago with respect to the Dublin election. The only difference was, that there the mistake was discovered at an earlier period of the proceedings; for, on the instant, the hon. Member whose attendance was objected to, had declared that he had not voted at the election, but, afterwards, when he came to the Table to be sworn, he pointed out, that he was disqualified to serve by his having voted. Now, the only question was, what should be done in this case? The Committee, there was no doubt, was legally constituted, because the Act of Parliament provided that it should be taken to be so after the Members were sworn; and it appeared to him, therefore, that, to take the case as one of strict law, the Committee was entitled to proceed with the inquiry which they were sworn to make. The House could not meddle with the case, and could give no direction to the Committee; but if the hon. Member himself felt, as it was most natural he should feel, the circumstance to be one of a very unpleasant nature, he might, on his own application, be relieved from further attendance. He was disposed to think, that the power given to the House, at their discretion, did not exist, unless the facts should specially appear upon the statement of the hon. Member himself. Now, the House had to guard most especially against the possibility of their employing the discretionary authority thus given them as a favour to any hon. Member; but, nevertheless, under certain circumstances, the exemption which he suggested had been allowed; and as one case he might mention, that hon. Members had been excused from further attendance on the 273 death of any near relation. Then it appeared to him that the present case was one which might fairly be considered to fall within the principle which had been then acted upon. Let the House consider the situation in which the hon. Member might be placed, and he thought that it would at once see the propriety of it interference. The vote of the hon. Member himself, given at the election, might be brought under the notice of the Committee, and he had not the power to absent himself, because it was a rule that every Member should be present, and he must give his vote. He did not think, therefore that, upon reference to the case which he had cited, and on the application of it principle to that which was now before the House, any difficulty would be felt, or that the construction which he proposed to put on the statute would be considered to be strained to an improper extent.

§ Lord John Russell
entirely agreed with the right hon. Gentleman opposite as to what he had said on the subject before the House. Certainly the law require that the Committee must continue its sitting, without any alteration being made in the Members sworn; and it did not appear, that any hon. Gentleman could, of his own accord, neglect to give his attendance on the Committee; and if any question affecting his own vote, or that of an other person in the same situation with himself came on, he must still vote upon it. He thought this last consideration was sufficient to induce the House to accept the apology of the hon. Gentleman, and to allow him to be exempted from further attendance in his place in the Committee.

§ Mr. Sanderson
then handed in an affidavit to the clerk at the table, and was sworn to the truth of its contents which were as follow:—"I was not aware whet my name was drawn on the London Election Committee that I had voted at that election."