§ MR. PEMBERTONsaid, he wished to ask Mr. Attorney General or in his absence Mr. Solicitor General, Whether he will inform the House against what persons prosecutions have been commenced or are contemplated by the Government in reference to the Bridgwater, Beverley, or Norwich Elections?
THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, that in regard to prosecutions actually commenced, he had to reply that in the case of Beverley sufficient informations had been exhibited against two persons—Sir Henry Edwards and Mr. Burrell; and in that of Bridgwater against four—Dr. Hamilton Kinglake, Mr. Vanderbyl, Mr. Fennelly, and Mr. Lovibond. He had, however, to state with respect to Mr. Lovibond, that though those who advise the Crown in those matters were not satisfied with the decision of the Court of Queen's Bench as to the power of revision where a certificate had been refused by Election Commissioners, yet, after the strong opinion pronounced by 768 the Queen's Bench, the Attorney General considered that, whatever might be the law of the case, the prosecution against Mr. Lovibond ought not to be proceeded with. In that view he entirely concurred, and though informations had been exhibited against Mr. Lovibond, he would not be prosecuted. In the case of Norwich the prosecutions would be against Sir Henry Stracey, Mr. Hardiment, Mr. Towne, and Mr. Pennefather.