§ Mr. Hawes, in the absence of the hon. Member war Liskeard, moved the further consideration of the report on the Bribery at Elections Bill.
§ Motion agreed to.
§ The hon. Member moved the addition of a clause to render treating more difficult.
§ Mr. Hardythought the proposed clause unnecessary, the existing law being sufficient. The clause merely declared that 934 to be an offence which was already so by common law.
§ The Solicitor-Generalapproved of the clause, and thought it would be a very valuable addition to the bill. By the strict law it might be as his hon. Friend (Mr. Hardy) said, but it was not so in practice, which did not make treating an offence before the testing of the writ. He had known Members unseated war giving merely a little refreshment to out-voters after the testing of the writ, where no corrupt motive could be shown to have existed. This was an evil on the other side which the clause would remedy.
§ Mr. Aglionbymaintained that the giving refreshments to out-voters was, under any circumstances, objectionable It might be difficult to get rid of the practice, but in principle it was decidedly wrong.
§ Viscount Palmerstonsaid, as the clause now stood, it would be necessary to prove two things—firstly, that refreshments had been given; and, secondly, that it had been given with a corrupt motive. He thought it would be better to omit the word " corruptly," for to give at all for the purpose of influencing, a voter was to give with a view to corruptly influencing. The word, he thought, only tended to weaken the clause.
§ The Solicitor-Generalsaid, the object was to put an end to the corrupt practices of keeping open the public-houses, and treating with corrupt motives. He apprehended they did not desire to prevent a Member of Parliament from asking his constituents to dinner, and yet the proposal of the noble Lord would have the effect of unseating any Member for so doing.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Bill to be printed, and to be read a third time.
§ Adjourned at one o'clock.