The Earl of Huddingtonsaid, he wished to put a question to the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack. It would be in the recollection of the House, that in the last Session he brought under the consideration of their Lordships the extraordinary fact, that certain individuals had been appointed justices of the peace in Cromarty who were guilty of an act which, in his opinion, disqualified them from sitting on the bench. One of them was an ironmonger, and the other a country practitioner in surgery. These persons were, it seemed, guilty of abducting a voter during the election, and thus preventing him from giving his vote. Certainly it was very unusual and very extraordinary to make justices of the peace of persons who had thus conducted themselves. 308 When he before mentioned the subject, the noble and learned Lord said, that he would inquire into it. What he now begged leave to ask was, whether the noble and learned Lord made that inquiry, and if so, what was the result of that inquiry?
§ The Lord Chancellorsaid, that in consequence of the question of the noble Earl, he had made inquiries on the subject. He had found considerable difficulty in ascertaining the facts, but he believed, that he had at last ascertained them. The result did not correspond exactly with the impression which seemed to have been on the noble Earl's mind. The fact was, that these three persons met together, and they got drunk together. By degrees, however, they got sober. When the person who was a voter became sober, finding himself in a place where he did not wish to be, he, as might be expected, informed his companions that he was anxious to go back. To this they consented, and all three resolved to return. They, however, went a little out of their way, wishing to see Cawdor Castle. They then met some other friend or friends, and having got a little social again, before they could return they were too late for the election. It was, on inquiry, found, that the two parties could not be subjected to any criminal proceeding; that was the opinion of the officers of the Crown, and of the legal adviser of the voter. An action was, however, brought against the parties, and a verdict with 25l. damages was returned. It appeared, that both parties at the election acted with great violence; and he could not look to the conduct pursued on one side, without taking into account also that which was adopted on the other. The result of his inquiry was, that the intention to remove the voter did not seem to have been at all pre-concerted. The resolution was formed while they were all three drinking, and was abandoned immediately after they got sober.
The Earl of Haddingtonsaid, be did not wish to press the noble and learned Lord into a long discussion. After what had fallen from the noble and learned Lord, their Lordships would be enabled to decide whether it were fit and proper, that persons who had been guilty of such conduct should be placed in the commission of the peace; whether it were right, that these persons, who had made this man drunk for the purpose of preventing him 309 from voting, should be raised to the situation of justices of the peace. The information which he had received on the subject led him to believe, that he was perfectly justified in saying, that it was an unfortunate and unfit thing to make such an appointment. If the Lord-lieutenant of the county was aware of the circumstances, he ought not to have recommended these persons.
§ The Lord Chancellorsaid, he had never till now heard any objection to those persons; and really, the many and onerous duties of his office precluded him from looking into the particular details of such cases.
§ Subject dropped.