HC Deb 23 March 1838 vol 41 cc1177-9
Sir R. Peel

wished to offer a suggestion to the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) on a matter in which he believed the House would be animated by the same sentiments—he alluded to the projected measures for the improvement of the tribunal for the trial of controverted elections. Whatever might be the opinion as to the nature of the tribunal to be constituted for that purpose, the opinion, he believed, would be almost universal—that it would be exceedingly desirable to have a declaratory act, clearing up, as far as possible, the intricacies of the law, and to prevent the inconsistent determinations of election Committees. He would rather not make the proposition himself, because he felt it would have more effect if made by the Government. He wished, however, to offer this suggestion to the noble Lord, that there might be great advantage in having an examination of the evidence taken before election Committees, for the purpose of ascertaining what were the points in respect of which the greatest doubts prevailed, and the most inconsistent decisions had been come to. There would be great expense, and possibly there might be other objections to the printing of the whole of the evidence; and yet it would be extremely difficult to ascertain the precise amount of decisions unless the evidence were read on which they were given. He had heard many decisions quoted as authorities, which, on looking into the evidence, were found altogether inapplicable. It seemed, therefore, worthy of consideration, whether a Select Committee might not be appointed for the purpose of examining the proceedings before the election Committees during the present Session, and extracting such parts of the evidence on important points as would enable the House to see the precise grounds of their decisions. Although, possibly, there might be objection to calling for the evidence before a particular Committee, he did not think any could be raised to the production of all the evidence before all the Committees which had sat this Session. He suggested the appointment of a Select Committee, singly and solely for the purpose of ascertaining what decisions within a recent period it would be most important for the House to consider, with a view hereafter, by some declaratory act, of settling the law and guiding the determination of future Committees. He was indebted for the suggestion to his noble Friend, the Member for North Lancashire (Lord Stanley), and he could not help thinking a declaratory law might be passed with the general consent of all parties, which would cut off a fruitful source of uncertainty, promote uniformity of decision, and greatly diminish the expense, by simplifying and shortening the proceedings before election Committees.

Lord John Russell

said, he should certainly take the matter into his serious consideration. He had no objection in principle to the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman, but he confessed if it were adopted he was not very sanguine as to its results, because those who were best able to judge of such matters, being Members of that House, and having great practice at the bar, could hardly be expected to pay that attention to the Committee which would enable them to come to a decision of great authority on the subject. At the same time, he should be very glad to see the experiment tried.

Sir E Sugden

could not help thinking the difficulty apprehended by the noble Lord might easily be got over, as the case lay in a very small compass, and the opinion of the legal Gentlemen might, therefore, easily be had.

Mr. O'Connell

never knew anything connected with law to be in a small compass. He thought the appointment of such a Committee would only be the means of continuing the present abuses by turning them into a different shape.

Sir R. Peel

said, that objection did not apply to his proposition. The Committee should have no discretion to report on anything, except the decisions of Committees on litigated points, the evidence bearing on different decisions, and the decisions themselves.

Mr. O'Connell

, in that case, should only say, the plan would be altogether inoperative.

Mr. Hume

thought, the best mode of diminishing the expense before election Committees would be properly to define the qualification of voters. Until the register was made final in every part of the country it would be vain to hope for any diminution of the expenses of an election Committee.

Sir R. Peel

said, it was to prevent adverse decisions on that point that he had suggested inquiry.

Subject dropped.