Sitting of 29 January 1805

MINUTES.
Mr. Bulley,from the exchequer, presented an account of the nett produce of the permanent taxes for the year ending 5th Jan. 1805. Ordered to be printed.—Mr. Pole presented the ordnance estimates for the year 1805; and gave notice, that he should move them in the committee of supply on Monday.— Lord W. Russell brought in a bill for raising a further sum of money for the prosecution of the Surrey iron railway. Read a 1st time, and ordered to be read a 2nd time.—On the motion of Mr. Long, it was ordered that the house should, at its rising, adjourn till Thursday, Wednesday

159
being the anniversary of king Charles's martyrdom. — The bill for granting the usual taxes on land, malt, pensions, &c. were read a 2nd time, and ordered to be committed on Thursday.—On the motion of Lord H. Petty, the order made yesterday for a more particular account of the imports and exports to and from Spain, was discharged, and the account already laid before the house on that subject ordered to be printed.—Mr. Huskisson presented an account of the duties of excise outstanding, on bond, or otherwise, up to the 5th Jan. 1805.—Mr. Huskisson obtained leave to bring in the annual bill to indemnify persons in office omitting to take the qualification oaths.

MIDDLESEX ELECTION.
Lord Marshammoved, that the order of the day should be read for considering the report of the committee on the conduct of sir W Rawlins, knt. and R. Albion Cox, late sheriffs of the county of Middlesex, relative to their conduct at the election, in which W. Mainwaring, esq. and sir F. Burdett, bart. were the candidates for that county. After the order of the day was read, the clerk, on the motion of his 1dp. read the resolutions of the committee contained in the said report, and which were in effect as follows: "1. That it appears to this committee, that, on the 13th, 14th, and 15th days of the poll, on the first of which days there was a considerable majority of votes in favour of W. Mainwaring, esq. the sheriff, R. A. Cox, esq. and sir W. Rawlins, knt. wilfully, knowingly, and corruptly, did admit to poll for sir F. Burdett, bart. upwards of 300 persons, claiming to vote under a fictitious right as proprietors of a mill purported to be situate in the parish of Isleworth, and called the Good Intent Mill, by which means a colourable majority was obtained in favour of sir F. Burdett, who was thereby returned as having the greatest number of legal votes. 2. That it appeals to this committee, that, on the 15th day, towards the close of the poll, after such majority was established, they rejected persons tendering their votes under the same circumstances. 3d, That it appears to this committee, that the sheriff at the poll acted in a judicial capacity, by admitting counsel to argue the validity of votes, and by deciding in some instances on the validity of such votes; that in other instances they refused to decide on the validity of votes which were objected to, and stated, that
160
they would admit any persons to poll who would take the oaths, declaring themselves to be only ministerial officers, thereby acting in a manner contradictory to their practice in other cases, and in flagrant 'violation of their duty. 4. That it appears to this committee, that the obvious tendency of their conduct was, to admit persons having no right to poll, and to afford the greatest encouragement to perjury." —The clerk then, on the motion of lord Marsham, read from the journals the proceedings in the New Shoreham case, in 1771; and that of Great Grimsby in 1803.
Lord Marshamsaid, he proposed, in conformity with these precedents, to move four resolutions. 1st, That the charge should be heard at the bar. 2nd, That it should be heard on Friday, Feb. 1. 3d, That the sheriffs, sir W. Rawlins, and R. A. Cox, esq. be ordered to attend. 4th, That the said sir W. Rawlins, and R. A. Cox, esq. be furnished with a copy of the charge, and heard by counsel.— The noble lord observed, that he proposed an early day for the discussion of this business, as it was desirable that a question of so much importance, which had stood over so long, should be determined as soon as possible; and also, as he understood, that it would be attended with no inconvenience to the parties concerned, but rather agreeable to their wishes to expedite the discussion. Agreeably to the precedents already referred to, the house would perceive that it was usual to move that evidence should be heard at the bar upon such an accusation; but to that part of the course of proceeding the noble lord did not think it at all necessary to adhere upon the present occasion, because the report on the table contained a very full account of all the evidence which related to the conduct of the sheriffs; that account was taken in short hand by a person sworn to report it with fidelity, the several witnesses were interrogated by the members of the committee, who were also on their oaths, and they underwent an ample cross-examination by counsel of the highest ability employed by the accused. The circumstances of the case were therefore already before the house, and there was no necessity for the further examination of any evidence on the subject. An objection, indeed, offered against the further production of evidence, from this consideration, that witnesses not being examined on oath at the bar of the house as

161
they were before the committee, might be induced to prevaricate. On the score of precedent it did not appear to him to follow that a motion for the further hearing of evidence should be made; for in one of the precedents that had been read to the house, the reason alleged to shew the propriety of such a motion was, that the party accused had no counsel present at the committee to cross-examine the witnesses upon whose testimony the accusation was grounded. This consideration could not be urged in the instance then before the house, nor did he conceive any ground upon which such a motion as he alluded to could be fairly sustained. The full investigation of every thing connected with the charge against, and the defence for the accused, which had taken place before the committee, of which he had the honour to be chairman, seemed to him entirely to preclude the necessity of any fresh examination of evidence. The case of a court martial, the minutes of the evidence taken before which formed the ground for the sentence, to be subsequently ratified by higher authority, he thought analogous to that of an election committee. To the committee it did not belong to pronounce any sentence, or to inflict any punishment. They had only to inquire into the subject referred to them, and to report their opinion thereon. Such was the course pursued by the committee whose report was under the consideration of the house, and that inquiry was so minute that he really could not think any farther inquiry by the examination of evidence necessary. Upon these grounds the noble lord said he would decline to make any motion of that nature.
The Speakercalled the attention of the house to the course of proceeding which the noble lord had announced his intention of adopting. In every part of that course the noble lord proposed to act consistently with the accustomed order of the house, with the exception of omitting to move for the production of evidence at the bar. This was a departure from the usage observed in the precedents which, according to the motion of the noble lord, had been read by the clerk; and also from that which had been attended to in another instance, since these precedents had occurred. From a just solicitude for the important privileges and order of the house, lie felt it his duty to notice the proposed deviation; at the same time he ob-
162
served that no question would arise upon it to-day. The practical question on this point, as to the sufficiency or deficiency of evidence, would occur when it should be proposed to proceed to a decision, without any farther examination of evidence.
Mr. Francisrose to ask, for information sake, for what purpose the business was at all brought before the house for consideration, if evidence was not to be examined; or upon what question the house was called on to decide? If the subject was not to be investigated at the bar the house would have nothing left to do but to adopt the opinion and recommendation of the committee; and there could be no use for the hearing of counsel. But he trusted this measure would be differently considered; for if the course proposed by the noble lord were followed, it did not appear to him that any question would remain for the discretion of the house.
Lord Marshamstated, in reply to the hon. gent, that the question brought before the house for consideration was this., whether, from the whole body of evidence contained in the printed report on the table, and which comprehended the fullest information on both sides of the case, the committee was justified in the inference they made, and in the opinion they had pronounced upon the parties accused, and also whether any proceeding should be instituted grounded on such opinion. The noble lord repeated his objections to the farther examination of evidence.—The resolutions were then put and carried.—Adrjourned;

WAR WITH SPAIN.
Lord Mulgraveobserved, that, having learned from the recent votes of the other house of parlt.
156
that certain documents, in addition to those already produced, were deemed essential to the due illustration of the question of hostilities with Spain; and as his anxious wish was to bring that important subject as fully to the consideration of parliament; and to the view of the public, as the case would admit of, he deemed it his duty to make farther inquiries upon the point, in order to learn what farther papers may be necessary. He doubted not he should have it in command from his maj. to produce the documents to which he alluded; they could not, however, be got ready or selected before Thursday, or perhaps before Friday, when it was probable he should have the honour of presenting them to their 1dps. In that view of the case, it was evidently impossible the discussion of the general question could be gone into on Thursday next, as proposed. He should, therefore, propose to discharge the order which at present stood for summoning their 1dps. upon that day, for the purpose of naming a subsequent day. In selecting this, another consideration was to be kept in view. Though he greatly wished to afford full time for the consideration of the documents in question, yet the consideration of having the case decided upon by parliament, with as little delay as its nature would admit, in order that the public mind may be set at rest upon the subject, operated with him very strongly. In that view, he should propose Thursday se'nnight as a proper day for taking the whole into consideration. He observed, that the papers which it was probable he should have occasion to produce, were not comparatively of the importance as those presented in the first instance. His 1dp. concluded, by moving that the order for summoning the lords on Thursday next be discharged,—This communication, and its result, gave rise to a conversation of rather an irregular and desultory nature. On the question being put,
Lord Grenvilleshortly expressed his coincidence in the idea of its being proper that every information should be given relative to a subject of such importance as that in question, but that due time should be given for its full consideration. He was however sorry the day suggested by the noble lord had been selected; as he understood a noble friend of his had come down that day with the intent of giving notice of a motion on a subject of considerable importance on. Thursday se'nnight
Earl Darnleysaid, it was his intention, to move to discharge the order for his motion on Monday next, with a view of proposing it for Thurdsday se'nnight. He wished at the same time to observe, that he did not intend to make any motion with respect to the general state of the army; to that task he did not think himself competent. He should merely confine himself to moving the repeal of the additional force act, which he still contended had operated as a tax, and had operated partially and unjustly. He concluded by moving to discharge the order for Monday.
Lord Hawkesburythought it would be better not to fix any day for the discussion of the question respecting the war with Spain until the additional papers were laid upon their 1dps table.
Lord Mulgraveassured the house of his anxiety to have the subject fully before their 1dps., and to allow full time for its discussion; at the same time he must deprecate, with a reference to the great importance of the question, any proceedings which might interfere with its discussion on a day which might probably be proposed as convenient for that purpose.
Lord Grenville,in explanation, adverted to the competence of any noble lord to move for a summons of the house on any given day. He deemed the opposition which noble lords, over against him, seemed inclined to give to the intended motion of his noble friend, for summoning the house for Thursday se'nnight, as rather extraordinary, even under the circumstances of the case; the option, however, certainly rested with his noble friend.
The Earl of Carlisledeemed the opposition which the noble lords in office seemed inclined to give to the discussion of his noble friend's intended motion on Thursday, as most extraordinary, even on their own grounds. They professed their anxious wishes to have the subject fully understood and considered: why not then appoint a later day? Friday, for instance. He saw no necessity whatever for positively fixing Thursday.
Earl Camden,shortly adverted to the great importance of the Spanish question, on the grounds alleged by his noble friends on this bench with him; at the same time, he admitted it to be more regular and consonant to the orders and practice of the house, not to propose any particular day, until the papers were upon the table.
Lord Hawkesbury,in explanation, ad-
158
verted to the anxious wish of his noble friend to have a subject of so great importance fully considered and discussed. He did not mean to say the proposition of the noble earl was not of considerable positive importance, but he thought, its discussion should not interfere with the decision of parliament, upon a topic of such peculiar importance as that previously submitted to its consideration.
Lord Mulgravethanked his noble friend for adverting to his anxiety to have the subject alluded to fully considered and discussed; but he had forgotten his second consideration, which was one that equally operated upon his mind, namely, the propriety of having the question decided upon, with as little delay as the nature of the case would admit, in order, principally, that the public mind should be set at rest upon the subject.
Lord Kingobserved, that he saw not the least necessity for selecting the day chosen by his noble friend, as that for the discussion of the Spanish question. By what fell from a noble secretary, it appeared, that the papers which remained to be produced were, comparatively, of no great importance; in that case, wiry should not an earlier day be fixed for the discussion? If the remaining papers were of importance, and necessary to the due understanding of the subject, ministers were deserving of censure for not bringing them forward in the first instance.
Earl Darnleythen moved, that their 1dps. be summoned for Thursday se'nnight for the consideration of the repeal of the defeuce act. Ordered. — Adjourned till Thursday.