HC Deb 25 June 1855 vol 139 cc72-4
MR. T. DUNCOMBE

said, he wished to ask the hon. and learned Attorney General whether, under the provisions of the Act 22nd Geo. Ill,, c. 45, a new writ ought not to be issued for the City of London, in the room of Baron Rothschild, who had since his election entered into a contract for the public service, a copy of which had been laid before the House? In asking the question, he referred to the contract which Baron Rothschild had entered into with the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury, for a loan of 16,000,000l. He presumed that the House must be aware, that in 1782 there was a Bill passed to disable all contractors with the Crown or the Government of the day, from sitting or voting in that House. That Bill was passed to secure the freedom and independence of Parliament. Now, from the requests and representations which had been made to him, and from the legal opinions which he had received, he thought he should be justified at once in moving for a new writ for the City of London, in the room of Baron Rothschild, who had entered into this contract. But not wishing to do anything which might seem harsh or discourteous to an hon. Member of that House, he thought it right to put this question first to the Attorney General; and he should be satisfied if, in the hon. and learned Gentleman's opinion, he could state that Baron Rothschild's seat was not affected by his having entered into this loan contract with the Government.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

It appears to me, Sir, that the question is one which it is for the House to answer, and not for the Attorney General. If the question should come before the House in a practical shape, it will be my duty, no doubt, considering the office I fill, to state my opinion; but I do not think I ought to answer upon a speculative question, involving the right of an hon. Member to a seat in this House. If, for his own guidance, my hon. Friend wishes for my opinion, he knows that there is a certain mode by which it can be obtained.

MR. MALINS

said, that after the discussion upon administrative reform, when the hon. Member for Tynemouth (Mr. Lindsay) had made his statement, the House would remember that several times in the speech of the First Lord of the Admiralty, the right hon. Gentleman did, not indirectly, but one might say almost directly, charge the hon. Member for Tynemouth with being interested in Government contracts. Now, he (Mr. Malins) thought when any Member of that House, and particularly a Minister of the Crown, rose in his place and charged another Member of that House with an infringement of such an Act of Parliament as that which had just been referred to, and which was passed to preserve the purity and independence of Parliament, that was a circumstance which ought not to be passed over by the House entirely in silence, and therefore he would now put the question to the right hon. Gentleman, whether he had any reason for making a statement amounting certainly to the belief on his part that the hon. Gentleman the Member for Tynemouth was interested in Government contracts?

SIR CHARLES WOOD

The statement I made, Sir, was this, that with reference to a particular vessel, she had been transferred to Mr. Gladstone by the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lindsay) before she was taken up by the Government. What I did state was this, that, so far as I knew, the interest of the hon. Gentleman had been transferred; but I said that he interfered so much in the management of these vessels, that I had every reason to believe he must be perfectly cognisant of all that took place about them.

MR. T. DUNCOMBE

said, he should next day, at the evening meeting of the House, endeavour to obtain the opinion of the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General, without a fee—by moving that Mr. Speaker should cause to be issued a new writ for the City of London.

MR. MALINS

said, he would beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman in the chair, whether the subject was a question of privilege? If it were so, he should give notice to the hon. Member for Tynemouth of his intention to bring it before the House.

MR. SPEAKER

Anything affecting the seat of a Member of this House is a question of privilege.

MR. MALINS

said, that, under these circumstances, he should bring forward the Motion to-morrow, at the evening sitting.