Sitting of 21 April 1807

MINUTES.
—On the motion of lord Porchester, it was ordered, that Drake, who was confined in Newgate under an order of the house, should be brought up to-morrow, to give evidence before the committee on the Westminster Election Petition.—Mr. White presented at the bar the following list of the committee chosen to try the merits of the Petition complaining of an undue return for Aberdeenshire: Tho. Bernard, R. Dawson, D. Jephson, sir J. B. Warren, John Patteson, Scrope Bernard, W. Taylor, D. S. Dugdale, lord Headley, E. Baillie, sir C. Hawkins, lord John Thynne.—Nominees, H. Erskine, sir J. Montgomery.

PENRYN ELECTION—SIR C. HAWKINS.
Mr. A. Wrightmoved the further consideration of the report of the committee upon the Penryn Election, which being read accordingly, and also the order for the attendance of sir Christopher Hawkins,
The Speakerstated, according to the custom in similar cases, that then was the time for the hon. bart. to deliver his sentiments upon the subject of the charge advanced against him.
Sir C. Hawkinsbeing present in his place, said, he should leave his case entirely to the justice and liberality of the house, and then withdrew.
Mr. A. Wrightsaid, that nothing was more remote from his wishes than to hurt the feelings of the hon. baronet in question. The proceeding he was about to take, was not matter of option but of duty. The parties in the Penryn election were strangers to him. The situation he had the honour to hold on the committee was the sole cause why he called the attention of the house to the transactions contained in the report. The report contained ample grounds for the motions he

505
was about to submit. The laws which secured to the people a free and unbiassed exercise of the elective franchise, would be but a mere dead letter if the proceedings enumerated in the report were not animadverted upon. He was aware that no gentleman engaged in a controverted election, without depending much on the assistance of friends and agents, and the house would allow the benefit of that consideration, so far as it would weigh in estimating this case. But, he lamented to say, that in the present instance, the hon. baronet had committed the offences charged upon him, not by others but by himself. The former patron of the borough of Penryn having withdrawn, it was resolved by a large party of the electors to look out for a new patron, meaning by a patron a person who either was to be a candidate for the borough himself, or to recommend a candidate. The terms agreed upon by these electors on which to sell their votes and interest, were 24 guineas a vote, and 10 guineas to each of the overseers. A deputation, at the head of which were a Mr. Stona and the Rev. R. Dillon, waited on sir C. Hawkins, to whom he admitted the first offer was made, and the terms being acceded to, articles were drawn up and signed. These papers the committee had not been able, with every exertion, to get brought forward. But there was the parole evidence of a person of the name of Moon, who was himself one of the parties, of a Mr. Hitchcombe, and of a Mr. Chiltern, steward to sir C. Hawkins, to prove the facts, and the payment of a sum of money, by the direction of sir C. Hawkins, to Stona, how much Mr. Chiltern, though otherwise trusted in money matters, could not say, and an order to a person of the name of Rowe, to distribute this money among the voters. Mr. Chiltern could not say whether the notes were large or small, or how many were in the parcel. But there was proof that notes had been sent and distributed to the voters. The minutes of the evidence were before the house, and he felt it unnecessary to make any comment on them. The house would deal with them according to its own feelings. He should move, first, that the house should agree in the resolution of the committee, declaring that sir C. Hawkins had been personally, and by his agents, guilty of bribery and other corrupt practices in the late Penryn election; and he should then move, that the Attorney-General be directed to prosecute sir C. Hawkins, and the others implicated in the said offences.
Captain Herberthad hoped that he should have had abler assistance in the defence of the hon. baronet and that he should not have been left to manage the whole case by himself, inadequate as he was to such a task He had particularly to lament the absence of an eminent gentleman of the law (sir A. Pigot), on whose support the hon. baronet particularly relied. Some important affidavits also were expected.
Sir W. W. Wynnethought the house ought to be cautious of procrastination. A threat of dissolution had been thrown out, and reports to that effect were very current. If therefore, the house wished to mark its sense of the offences contained in the report now under its consideration, it ought to do so before it should be bereft of the power by the execution of the unparliamentary menace he referred to.
Mr. Lee Keck saidthat as a member of the committee alluded to, he was convinced that there never was a stronger case made out for the consideration of the house, and it became them, consistently with their, dignity, to come to an immediate determination thereon. He looked upon the proceedings by the Attorney-General as the most moderate course that could possibly be adopted, under the circumstances of the case. The Committee had shown every disposition of leaning towards the accused; and, therefore, instead of proceeding further of their own accord, had made it the subject of a special report. If the house should be of opinion that any suspension of procedure should take place, he should bow with deference to their determination; but as a member of that committee, he protested against any suspension whatever.
Mr. Hurstdid not see the case in so strong a light as the honourable member; and in a case in which the feelings and the character of one of its Members were so touch called in question, the house was called upon to give every possible facility to the defence.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersuggested, that the house could take no affidavits into account, and that his hon. and learned friend, who had been alluded to, could probably attend without inconvenience to-morrow.
Mr. Bankeswished to know from the hon. mover, whether there was any precedent for an instruction to the attorney general, to prosecute in a case of this kind; he had himself inquired, and he believed there was no precedent for such an instruction, without some further proceeding.
Mr. Wrightwas not aware that there was

507
any precedent: but he thought the proceeding he suggested the most consonant to the case—The debate was then adjourned till to-morrow.

CAPTURE OF MONTE VIDEO.
The Earl of Moirarose, to call the attention of the house to certain observations and erroneous reports that had been sent abroad respecting a deficiency in the quantum of ammunition with which the troops were furnished in the attack on Monte Video. Nothing could be more cruel and mischievous than the dissemination of such rumours, without any concomitant explanation to account for the circumstance they alluded to. What must the soldiers feel, if they were taught to believe that they were sent into the field to encounter all its dangers, and expose their lives, without being provided with the usual and adequate means that might render their valour efficacious, and give them an equality of chance with the enemy? So far from that being the case, he believed he might venture to assert, that so far from the troops being left without a due proportion of ammunition, he was pretty certain, that a some-what greater proportion of ammunition than what had been allotted to a similar service (the capture of the Cape of Good Hope),

503
had been furnished to the troops who stormed Monte Video, but who were not destined for that service. Indeed, the difference of the nature of the two expeditions would shew, that the proportion of ammunition was larger on the part of those who were not destined for an expected attack. But these matters would be placed in their proper light by the return to the motion which he should now have the honour of submitting to their lordships. The noble earl then concluded with moving an humble address to his majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to order, "That there be laid before the house an account of the quantity of ammunition shipped on board the expedition, under the command of sir S. Auchmuty, and of the quantity usually furnished for similar expeditions".
The Earl of Gallowayconceived himself to be somewhat the cause of the observations thrown out by the noble lord who spoke last. It was true, that he had animadverted on the deficiency of ammunition under which the brave troops laboured who had so gallantly stormed Monte Video. In making that observation he had rather in view to reflect additional lustre on that achievement, than to aim any attack by a side wind, or otherwise, on the late administration. No doubt, the inevitable inference from his remarks was a censure so far on the late ministry, but he did not single out any department of that government, much less any individual, as the peculiar object of his animadversion. If, however, the cap seemed to fit the noble earl, it was for that noble earl further to explain himself: he certainly was surprised that any noble lord, who belonged to the late administration, could have so far let himself down as to justify his conduct by squeezing it upon that of his predecessors in office, whom it was the constant study and practice of the late administration to disparage and decry in the public estimation.
Earl Spencerdefended the character of the late ministry, and observed, that the noble earl (Galloway) should have waited the return to the motion, before he proceeded to animadvert upon the conduct of the late government. For his own part, he never disparaged the merits of the capture of the Cape of Good Hope; on the contrary, he was among those, who valued that possession much higher than any, perhaps, of the present ministry.
The Earl of Moirain explanation, observed, that the deficiency of ammunition, alluded to in the dispatches, was not owing
504
to the actual want of that article, but to the difficulty of introducing it within the trenches.
The Earl of Galloway would leave to the house to judge of the defence set up by the noble lords opposite. He should stand upon the ground he had originally taken, and content himself with observing, that the general, employed by the late administration, had complained of the situation in which they had placed him; the officer,who achieved the capture of the Cape, had performed his duty, and made no complaint against any one.—After a few words in explanation, the motion was agreed to.