Sitting of 15 March 1827

COUNTY ELECTIONS—MODE OF TAKING THE POLL.
Lord Althorprose, in pursuance of notice, to move for the appointment of a select committee to consider the mode of taking the Poll at County Elections. The subject was one of great importance. The enormous expense frequently attendant on county elections was a grievance which required the intervention of the legislature. It appeared to him, that the best time for bringing forward a question of this kind, tending to produce a material alteration in the law of elections, must beat as early a period as possible after the meeting of a new parliament; because, among other reasons, opportunities would be thereby given, before the occurrence of a general election, to try, by experiment, the merits of the alteration. Not only was the expense frequently attendant on a county election a great grievance, but no
1188
man who was returned after a contested election for a county could feel secure of his seat; for it was impossible that any man who had to conduct a contested election for a county, could do so without violating what was called the Treating act. It was quite impossible that freeholders-residing at a distance from the place of election could be expected to repair thither without some succour. He was aware that some committees of that House had decided, that such a practice was no infringement of the law; but every body knew that other committees had decided differently. In one of the Middlesex elections Mr. Mainwaring lost his seat, because he had provided meat and drink, for the voters in his interest. Although it was proved that the provision was not an extravagant one, yet the House decided that Mr. Mainwaring had been guilty of infringing the Treating act, and he lost his election accordingly. It ought to be recollected that it was not merely the losing candidate who might petition the House under such circumstances; as it generally happened that he participated in the violation of the law, he could scarcely himself object to the violation by another; but it was in the power of any freeholder, from vexatious motives, to take such a proceeding. Such was the case in the election for Norfolk in 1806, between Mr. Coke and Mr. Windham. This consideration, added to that of the expense, deterred many persons, otherwise well qualified, from coming forward, and offering themselves as candidates for counties. The freeholders were thus prevented from having a full choice. For instance, although at the last general election for the county of York, the candidates never went to the poll, the expenses were so enormous, that it cost the gentlemen elected an expense, among them, of not less than from a hundred and twenty to a hundred and fifty-thousand pounds. If the election had been carried on for fifteen days, half a million of money would not have covered the expense attendant upon it. It had been said, that the members for counties should be men of high rank and large property. No doubt. But from the experience which they had all had of county elections no one could suppose that the great body of the freeholders of a county would choose any man for their representative, unless he possessed rank and property which, entitled him to.

1189
that distinction. But why should that principle be carried to so enormous an extent, as to render it impracticable for any man to stand, for the county of York for instance, unless he was prepared to spend 100,000 l.? The effect was, that the freeholders of Yorkshire were deprived of a choice. Of course it could not be supposed that he meant any thing offensive to his noble friend (lord Milton), or his noble friend's colleagues; but it was well known that at the last election for Yorkshire, a gentleman, who, at the nomination, had a large show of hands in his favour, and yet who, although possessed of large property, and he believed a highly respectable man, felt it prudent to decline offering himself. In proportion, too, to the largeness of a county was the choice of the freeholders limited; because in proportion to the largeness of a county was the expense of an election. He thought therefore, that he had shown sufficient grounds for the appointment of a committee of inquiry, to see if some remedy could not be devised for the evil. He was aware, however, that it was incumbent on him to state his own ideas of what would be the proper mode of proceeding. He proposed, then, that the poll should be taken in different parts of the county: This was by no means a new suggestion. On a reference to the Journals, it would be found that in the year 1774, the House agreed to a resolution "that in some counties, by reason of their great extent, the freeholders could not come to the poll without a great expense; and therefore it was the opinion of the House, that the poll should be taken at such different places as might' be appointed." It appeared, therefore, that the opinion of the House had been declared to be in favour of the principle of his proposition. In consequence of the resolution to which he had just adverted, a bill had been brought in, read a first and second time, and committed. What became of it afterwards he did not know; 'but he supposed that it was lost, in consequence of some difficulty in the details. He was aware that that difficulty must exist to a great degree. If he had not been aware of that; if he had made up his mind as to the details of the proposed measure, it would have been his duty to have moved for leave to bring; in a bill, instead of for the appointment of a committee. But he should move for the appointment of a committee, in the hope that, if the House
1190
thought it desirable to take the poll in separate districts, in the committee the difficulty of the details might be got over. This was a hope which he very confidently entertained; for, when a committee of that House applied themselves seriously to obviate difficulty in the details of any measure, they almost always succeeded. But, at the same time, he did not wish the House to grant a committee, unless it agreed to the principle of taking the poll in different parts of the county; because otherwise the labours of the committee would be mere loss of time. One objection which had frequently been made to the principle of his proposition was, that it tended to destroy that kind of feeling of warmth and interest, which it was desirable to preserve among the freeholders at an election. He thought, however, that that objection might be obviated by the attendance of the freeholders at the place and time of nomination, and also at the chairing at the end of the election. He readily admitted that it was not undesirable to keep up the feeling of the electors throughout the whole poll; but the enormous expense of the present system prevented them from giving their votes, unless the candidate laid out a sum of money which no man should be called upon to expend. This was, therefore, a counterbalancing consideration. There were two modes in which, as it appeared to him, the object might be effected. The one was by having officers inferior to the sheriff, appointed to receive the votes in the various districts; the other was, by instructing the sheriff to make the circuit of the county to collect the votes. He was not prepared to say to which of these modes of effecting the object there would be fewer, objections in detail; but either of them would be a great improvement on the present system. He would not trouble the House further. He had stated the grievance, and the expediency of some remedy. If he were allowed the committee, he was satisfied that the difficulty of the details would be got over. The noble lord concluded by moving, "That a Select Committee be appointed, to take into consideration the mode of taking the poll at county elections, and to report to the House whether any means can be taken to diminish the expenses incurred by candidates at such elections."
Mr. Batley, from the hinder ministerial benches supported the noble lord's pro-

1191
position, and wished it to be extended to city and borough elections.
Mr. W. Smithsaid, he concurred in the observation made by the hon. member, and fully agreed with him that the evil which the noble lord's proposition was intended to meet, existed as forcibly in city and borough elections as in elections for counties. He thought, however, that the abuse, as far as it related to cities or to boroughs, was capable of being altered much more easily than by the method proposed. The poll, he thought, was kept open much longer than was necessary, and by closing it at a proper period, and by some few regulations with respect to out-voters, the evil complained of would be got rid of in city and borough elections. He had the honour to represent a populous city, the voters of which amounted to not less than four thousand; yet the poll was always over, to every intent and purpose of ascertaining the election, in one day. This was effected without difficulty, by means of arrangements which were made a considerable time ago, and upon which no man whatever attempted to infringe. The election always commenced at nine in the morning, and by seven or eight that same day it was decided. Knowing, by experience, that this could be done with the utmost simplicity, and that when once established, the advantage was acknowledged to be so great, that all parties concurred in it to the extent that no man wished to oppose it, he did not see why the same arrangement could not be made in other cities. If the principle could be applied to county elections, he trusted that the committee for, which the noble lord had moved, would be able to devise some means to check the evil complained of.
Colonel Maberlysaid, that the hon. member for Norwich had stated, that he represented a city containing four thousand voters, and that, nevertheless, the poll was always concluded in one day. Now he was in the unfortunate situation of representing a town in which there were not half that number of voters, and he never recollected an election in which the poll was concluded in less than eight or nine days; and, in one instance, it had been kept open for fourteen. Every gentleman who represented a popular borough would be obliged to the noble lord if he would make his motion include boroughs as well as counties.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, it was by no means his wish to oppose his noble friend's proposition; and he did not think that an insuperable objection existed to assimilating elections for boroughs to those for counties. He did not feel any great anxiety to effect the change for which the noble lord and many honourable members appeared so desirous; but he was not prepared to state any objection to the measure before the House. He was against taking the poll in different parts of a county at the same time. He thought it was of great advantage that the candidates at an election should be badgered a certain number of days by the electors. Now, if the poll were to be taken in different places at the same time, the candidate would be deprived of the opportunity of answering the questions of the freeholders in those parts where he could not be personally present, and such an arrangement would tend to separate the candidate from that intercourse which ought to subsist between him and his constituents. It was most desirable that his intercourse should be preserved; and, although it might, perhaps, in some instances, occasion perplexities to the candidate, yet that inconvenience was amply repaid by the honour of the seat, if he obtained it, or if he failed, by the glory of having honourably contested it. He should not like to see the candidate removed from the liability to answer the questions of his constituents. However, he had no objection to the appointment of a committee.
Lord Miltonsaid, that those gentlemen who wished to engraft upon the measure any further inquiries into borough elections, would not attain their object, but rather defeat the beneficial proposition before the House. He had always observed, that when questions were brought before, that House, unconnected with borough elections, gentlemen were particularly desirous to confine them to the single object proposed. With reference to what had fallen from the chancellor of the Exchequer, he entirely agreed with him about badgering candidates. It had a very desirable effect; but he was by no means certain that the benefit would be lost by the noble lord's proposition of taking votes at different places at the same time. In the county which he represented, it was the practice of the candidates to visit the great towns, and there show themselves before the electors. He should be sorry

1193
to see the practice done away with, as it brought each candidate fairly before his electors. But at the poll, it was not until the latter end of the day that a candidate made his appearance before any great body of the people. But were it otherwise, he rather apprehended that such assemblies consisted principally of persons who were not electors, or who had previously decided for whom they came to vote. These were not the description of persons, before whom it could possibly be advantageous to bring any candidate. What, moreover, was the scrutiny into a candidate's pretension which such an assembly could institute. It appeared to him, that any benefit of exposing representatives to the inquiry of their constituents must be derived from those interviews before the electors to which he had alluded. In smaller counties, perhaps, the case might be different. In large counties, no man came to the county town without having previously made up his mind as to his vote. He was of opinion, that great benefit would accrue from the adoption of a new system. He had himself, some years back, brought in a bill to a certain extent analogous to the measure now contemplated; namely; a bill for taking the poll in the three ridings of the county of York at once. He believed that at present, in the county of Hampshire, the principle was acted upon, and that when the poll, for what might be called the mainland, was concluded, that for the Isle of Wight commenced. He was not sure whether the proposed measure could be adopted beneficially in the smaller counties; but with the exception of four or five of the counties of England, he was satisfied that it would be generally advantageous.
Sir J. Wrottesleysaid, that there were two points of extreme importance. The first, the time during which the poll was to be taken; and the other, whether the poll should be adjourned from one district to another, or be proceeded with in various hundreds, at the same time. He thought if the measure should be found practicable at all (which, however, he doubted), it would be better that the poll should be taken first in one hundred, and that the sheriff should then proceed to others, leaving proper persons to take the votes which might come in after his departure. But it would also be material to determine where the poll was to be taken first, as the
1194
knowledge of a majority in favour of a particular candidate in one hundred, might affect the votes in another. He would vote for the committee without pledging himself to any particular line of conduct when the report should be received.
Mr. Dickinsonsupported the motion; which he thought would be productive of much good. He considered the Treating act a subject of great importance, to which it would be right to direct the attention of the committee.
Mr. Wynnsaid, he felt much indebted to the noble lord, for the attempt he was making to remedy an evil, the existence of which had been pretty generally experienced: and thought the principle of the measure, and the effort towards removing an existing difficulty, highly deserving the support of the House. It was with a view to further the proposed measure, and not for the purpose of interposing any obstacle in the way of its future adoption, that he should take the liberty to advert to some details, the particulars of which had been alluded to, in the course of the discussion. Allusion had been made to the present state of what was termed the Treating act; and it was said, that the provisions of that statute were deserving the attention of the House. Now, he did not mean to deny that the act might be well worthy of consideration; but he thought this was not the time for entering into a discussion on that subject; the rather, as it might be impossible to enter into it without interfering, more or less, with various of the Irish county elections, which were, or might hereafter become, subjects of inquiry before a committee. They should not say what was, or what was not, the sense of the Treating act, or enter into a consideration of the alterations in it, which might, perhaps, subsequently appear to be necessary, until the cases which came before the House, under the provisions of the existing law, had been first decided. He approved of the noble lord's intention, to confine the inquiries of the committee, in the first instance, to the best mode of taking county polls, because he had invariably remarked, that intrusting too many subjects to one committee, was the surest way to defeat all. Prior to the act of 1784, the law of election was very different from what it now was. That act had been passed in consequence of the Westminster election having been spun out to forty days; and, under its provi-

1195
sions, in future elections, the period of polling was limited to fifteen days. It had s been conceived, that any election might be put an end to within that period. But a practice had arisen of keeping open the poll for the fifteen days, if voters could be got to come forward at the rate of one in an hour; this was done at a great expense, and to the infinite vexation of the candidate who had a most decided majority, and which it was known could not be disturbed with any final effect upon the election. This was a very injurious and reprehensible practice. In the county of Essex, on one occasion, five thousand voters had polled on the same day. The assessment on land formed another and unnecessary delay in county elections. It was made a criterion of votes, which became every day more false and troublesome. In the redemption of the land-tax, and transfer of the property on which such tax had been redeemed, much of the [difficulty existed. The sheriff had to decide the question, though he could not subpoena witnesses, and had not the least shadow of power to make the proper inquiries, or to ascertain the facts upon which his reception or rejection of the votes was to depend. The getting rid of this would be a very great improvement in the mode of conducting county elections. He wished not only to get rid of the practice of requiring proof of the assessment of land-tax, but of any other species of tax. He had an impression, that it would be better that the poll, if carried on in different parts of a county, should be carried on contemporaneously, than at different times. But he felt that this was a question which required the experience of those who were more versed in county politics than it was his fortune to be, although he had had the honour to represent a county for many years.
Sir T. Lethbridgethought the House and the country under considerable obligations, to the noble lord, for the manner in which he had brought forward his proposition. He, as the House well knew, had been pretty well badgered, but did not shrink from it. He did not think the badgering would be got rid of by the proposition of the noble lord. There would still be the nomination, on which occasion, the freeholders would have an opportunity of examining the candidates. The proposition of the noble lord went to open a wider door for more numerous
1196
county candidates, in the same proportion is the expense of a contest would be diminished. In this view of the case, it vas one of great importance. He trusted that the committee would make a report, which would lead to a great practical improvement in the mode of conducting county elections.
Lord Nugentwas glad that his noble friend had confined his attention, and limited the object which he sought to accomplish, to an improvement in the conduct of county elections. Such a course was the more desirable, as it afforded a greater chance of success to his noble friend, who, no doubt, would have enough to do to carry his proposed measure into effect. If any attempt was made to extend the system to city elections, with a view to limiting the expense, the proposal would be met in limine by an obstacle of considerable moment. One great difficulty would be, to ascertain the number of non-resident freemen. Shortly before the recess, he had himself given notice of a motion, for returns of the members of non-resident freemen, who were qualified to vote at elections for cities; and he still thought it would not be so difficult to make out such returns as had been represented. It was his intention to revive his motion on the subject, with a view, perhaps, to a registration of their names and numbers. In Ireland, a registration took place, by which the creation of freemen during elections was prevented—an object, as the House must perceive, of primary utility.
Lord Lowthersaid, he had had his share of contested elections. He thought, if the noble lord's proposition was calculated to diminish expense in one way it would have the effect of increasing it in another. When the poll was taken at different places, barristers and agents must be employed by the candidates at each; so that what might be saved in one way, would be lost in another. His right hon. friend had made some remarks relative to the land-tax, in which he could not concur with him; seeing that all his experience on the subject led him to conclude, that proofs relative to the redemption of the land-tax were easily produced.
Sir W. W. Wynnwas of opinion, that the difficulties at present attendant on a legal proof of the redemption of the land-tax were such as to prevent numbers of qualified voters from coming to the poll.
Mr. C. N. Pallmercongratulated the House upon the auspicious spirit which had manifested itself in this first session of a new parliament. Many beneficial measures had been originated, and the one now under consideration he looked upon as tending to promote most usefully the unrestricted exercise of the elective franchise. He entirely concurred with the right hon. gentleman, that nothing could be more unsatisfactory than the present system of the land-tax; and he hoped that something would be done for its amendment. It was highly desirable that the expense of elections should be diminished, and that the elector should be able to give his vote unbiassed, and free from the influence of any pecuniary consideration. The expenses of contested elections, as they were at present conducted, were calculated for no other propose than that of giving to wealth alone a preponderance, which was by no means desirable.
Lord Althorpsaid, he felt bound to acknowledge the kind manner in which his proposition had been received by the House. It had been his object not to overload his plan with an attempt to comprehend within its provisions, any regulation relative to cities or boroughs. Indeed, the details of it were, for the most part, inapplicable to such places. His system would not apply to the out-voters in cities. His object was, to throw the counties open to a greater number of candidates, by diminishing the expense consequent upon congregating voters together in one place, during a protracted poll. The effect of the present mode of conducting elections was, to prevent many persons from standing, who would otherwise become candidates. Every day, the redemption of the land-tax was becoming a criterion less to be relied on at elections. A registration of voters would be desirable; not such as that adopted in Ireland, where the electors were allowed to register their own votes, but some mode similar to that by which the lists of persons qualified to serve as jurors were made out in this country. The increased expense likely to be occasioned by the employment of additional agents, would not be so great as some hon. members seemed to suppose; certainly not great enough to counterbalance the saving in other respects. It was well known that agents were at present employed in the various places where voters resided, for the purpose of canvassing them for the
1198
respective candidates; so that no additional expense worth speaking of would be occasioned by retaining these agents during the polls at each place. The expense connected with the Carriage of voters to the place of election, and then-maintenance there, was that part of the candidates' disbursements which was the most considerable. These items, he was informed, constituted three-fourths of the expense of the Yorkshire election.
The motion was agreed to, and a committee appointed.

LEICESTER ELECTION—CONDUCT OF THE CORPORATION.
Mr. Sykes, in rising to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice, begged to disclaim all feelings of hostility either towards the sitting members for Leicester, or towards the individual members of the Corporation of that Borough. His only object was to call the attention of the House to a subject of considerable importance, as it regarded the freedom of election. The charges which he intended that night to bring forward were already in the hands of the two members for the borough, who were not, therefore, taken by surprise on this occasion. These charges, too, were stated upon no idle rumour, but had been well ascertained, and were now ready to be substantiated by several respectable persons in the borough. The charges were, first, that the Corporation had made an undue exercise of the power they possessed—if, indeed, they possessed any such power—of creating honorary freemen, to such an extent as to overpower the voice of the other freemen of the borough. They were charged also with having misapplied the funds of the Corporation for election purposes, in having improperly taken those funds and devoted them to the payment of those fees which were due on the admission of honorary freemen, and which: they had discharged on the admission of those freemen who were considered to be in their interest. They were further charged—and if the House granted him a Committee he had no doubt he should be able to make out the charge—that the Corporation had borne a very large proportion of the expenses of the election. They were besides charged with having resorted to a compulsory mode of polling; making the electors poll in such a manner as to be most favourable to their own interests. There were several modes of poll-

1199
ing, but one was generally preferred in a particular place, on account of local peculiarities. Now there was one principle, regarding the mode of polling, which, he thought, ought to be universally acted upon. That principle was, that the convenience of the different candidates should be equally consulted, and that nothing should be done which would give any one candidate a manifest advantage over his opponents. If a particular mode of polling had long existed, and any change of that mode was proposed, if all the parties agreed to it, the change might be made; but if they did not give their consent, then, he maintained, that such a change was illegal.
He would now proceed to give the House some sketch of the history of the Borough of Leicester. The Corporation was composed of a mayor, a certain number of aldermen, a bailiff, forty-eight common-councilmen, and the freemen of the borough. The right of election was vested, not only in these persons, but also in the inhabitant householders of the town. By these means was formed a body which all would agree was fit for the exercise of the elective franchise. Besides these inhabitant householders, the Corporation possessed or claimed the power of making-honorary freemen. The charge now made against them was, that by the exercise of that power, they had reduced the large town of Leicester to the state of a rotten borough. It had formerly been the custom in Leicester for a sort of compromise to be made between the Corporation and the inhabitants, by which one member was returned by the former and one by the latter.
Such was the situation of the borough of Leicester. Some time before the last election, the resident householders amounted to five thousand; a number which no person would deny was not sufficient to constitute an elective body. There was certainly no positive necessity for increasing their number, except that which could be found in the object of the Corporation to get the election of the members into their own hands. That being the scheme of the Corporation, it appeared that, in the latter part of the year 1822, the Corporation determined to draw the whole influence of the elective franchise into their own grasp. He said "determined," because, from what they had done, it was evident that their object was, by increasing the number of freemen, to overpower the votes
1200
of the resident householders. When he stated that such was their view, he made that statement neither from any inference from, nor from any argument founded upon, their acts, but because he had that view and that object acknowledged in a document given under their own hands. When he read that document to the House, he thought they would be shocked at the open avowal of the real intentions of the Corporation. At the close of the year 1822, those persons actually made a voluntary offer of the freedom of the Corporation to no less than two thousand persons. That fact spoke for itself; and spoke too forcibly to need any comment. The object of the act was manifested by the occasion on which the offer was made. It was expected that a general election was not far distant, and the time was chosen in such a manner, that the measure might not appear to have been adopted merely for election purposes. The selection of the time, however, was not a sufficient cloak for their real intentions, which could be clearly shown by proof still more strong than that which was to be found in the act itself. This proof consisted of two letters. He held in his hand a copy of the letter which had been addressed by the Corporation to the gentlemen who were solicited to become members of it. That was an honour which was generally courted at the hands of Corporations; but in the present instance the gentlemen had been courted by the Corporation, who had their own reasons for what they did. The first letter was dated "Leicester, December 31, 1822." It began by informing the gentleman to whom it was addressed, that the Corporation of Leicester had unanimously elected him an honorary freeman of their borough. It then went on to say, that the Corporation were anxious to increase the number of freemen, by the admission of gentlemen of known principles. Now, he would ask, whether that expression did not clearly shew the object and intention of the Corporation? The letter then went on to request, that the gentleman thus elected would do them the favour to take up his freedom, at the earliest period that would suit his convenience; and it stated, that the Corporation would pay all the fees and charges incurred by his doing so, except a certain sum specially mentioned, which was small in its amount, and which, they trusted, the newly-elected, freeman would consider a

1201
sacrifice that he was willing to submit to in support of the cause.
The latter part of the letter, he contended, was nothing less than a fraudulent application of the public money, in order to obtain a number of sham-freemen, who should vote in favour of the Corporation candidate, and should overpower the real electors of the Borough. Among the honorary freemen thus elected, were one hundred and four clergymen, several noblemen's sons, and others connected with noblemen; but no noblemen were in the list, as their votes would not have been receivable, and their election could therefore serve no possible purpose. Upon the invitations thus given, eight hundred persons actually took up their freedom; and, on the last election, the two gentlemen who were favoured by the Corporation, were, as it might have been expected, returned. The old members retired from the contest, as the Corporation, in breach of the former custom of the Borough, insisted upon returning two members on their own interest. The two gentlemen who came forward to supply the places of the former members were Mr. Evans and Mr. Otway Cave. The Corporation did not entirely approve of either of them, and thinking that they possessed a sufficient force to obtain victory, they determined on a contest. With their eight hundred new freemen at their command, they relied upon a triumph, and they therefore looked out for a third candidate who would be more likely to suit their own views. He ought to observe here, that this creation of honorary freemen not only tended to influence the election according to the wishes of the Corporation, but also to increase the expense in such a manner as to deter independent candidates from coming forward. The result of the election proved that this had been the fact; for, in consequence of the increased number of out-voters, although he believed there had been no material transgression of the provisions of the Durham Treating act, the expenses of the three candidates had not amounted to less than 50,000 l. That enormous expense might fairly be said to be owing to the conduct of the Corporation. He had said that the Corporation went to look out for a third candidate, and at last they found one in the person of sir Charles Abney Hastings, one of the present members. He now came to another part of their conduct, which, he thought, loudly
1202
called for inquiry. The mayor and bailiff being the returning officers, another circular letter was sent by the Corporation, of which they were the chief members, to all the newly-created freemen who had been admitted, merely for election purposes, to their freedom, without the payment of the customary fees. The letter stated, that the writer of it was directed by the Corporation to take the liberty of addressing the honorary freemen, for the purpose of representing to them the state of affairs with respect to the Borough of Leicester. It then went on to recommend sir Charles Abney Hastings, who was described in the True Blue interest as a decided supporter of king and constitution in church and state, and as strongly opposed to what some called Catholic Emancipation, but what they (the Corporation) called the Popish Ascendancy; that that gentleman was directly opposed by Mr. Evans, who came forward on the low Radical interest; who pretended great liberality of opinion, and was a friend to reform, and some other of the liberal doctrines of the day. The third candidate was stated in the letter to be Mr. Otway Cave, a gentleman whose family had been staunch Blues, but who had not made up his mind upon the question of Catholic Emancipation; who, though not quite of the true colour himself, was an admirer more of the old lights than of the new, and was certainly more blue than Mr. Evans. That letter was signed, as the other had been, by a Mr. Burbidge, who was an officer under the Corporation. He had read that letter, with the view of shewing that what the Corporation had corruptly designed, they had as corruptly endeavoured to execute. That fact, however, would be proved by other parts of their conduct. In consequence of an agreement which they made to pay a sum of money, they were compelled to borrow certain sums of money on the bonds of individual members of the Corporation, who were to be reimbursed out of the funds of the Corporation any money they might be called on to pay.
He had now detailed some of the charges against the Corporation, and the facts on which those charges were grounded; and he thought he had succeeded in making out a case of crimination, into which he trusted the House would give him the power of making the fullest inquiries. In requiring this at their hands,

1203
he was not acting without a precedent, which was to be found in the committee granted to inquire into the circumstances of the Northampton election, where it was alleged, that the Corporation had attempted improperly to interfere in the choice of members for the borough. He had before referred to the mode of taking votes; and he contended, with the utmost: confidence, that the returning officers had no right to impose conditions upon the candidate as to the manner of polling, and that they were not justified in requiring the voters to be polled by tallies, or by pens, when such a mode of polling was evidently attended with great advantage to one candidate, and a corresponding injury to another. If any new plan was proposed, it ought not to be adopted unless it was concurred in by all the candidates, and the poll should be equally open to one voter as to another. Now, in the present instance, that which he contended ought to be the rule had been departed from, and he thought the conduct of the Corporation upon that point was part and parcel of the self-same conspiracy by which the Corporation had sought to monopolize the power of electing members for the borough. Previously to the election there had been some disputes as to the mode of taking the poll, and the friends of Air. Evans had had a conversation upon that subject with their opponent. They were then assmed, that there was no intention of taking the votes by tallies, or many other way that would be injurious to Mr. Evans's interest. A few days afterwards, however, when the persons interested for the Corporation shewed those gentlemen the plan intended to be adopted, it appeared that the voters were to be polled in three distinct pens, one of which was to be assigned to each candidate. As soon as these gentlemen were informed of the plan, they remonstrated against it, and that remonstrance was adopted and signed by several respectable inhabitants; who declared they would not accede to any such mode of taking the votes, and expressed a hope that the polling would be entirely free. But, notwithstanding all the arguments which could be addressed to the good sense or impartiality of the Corporation, they were determined that the polling should be taken by pens. Accordingly, pens were assigned to sir Charles Hastings and Mr. Cave, immediately adjoining each
1204
other, and a third was given to Mr. Evans. The consequence of this arrangement, and of the support given by the Corporation to the two former gentlemen, was, that their voters polled to double the number of those of Mr. Evans; for each voter for the Corporation giving two votes at once, the first to sir Charles Hastings and the other to Mr. Cave, and their votes being thus exchanged, the result was, that when sixty persons had voted, forty of those votes had been given for sir Charles Hastings and Mr. Cave, and only twenty for Mr. Evans. Now, he would venture to assert, that there was no gentleman, who was at all acquainted with the nature of the proceedings at county elections, who would deny the unfairness of such a system with respect to its operation upon Mr. Evans. Such gentleman must be aware, that there was always a number of voters who, not liking to be of the losing party, staid behind till they saw the probable issue of a contest, and who then came forward to give their votes to the strongest candidate. The consequence of this plan of the Corporation was such as might have been anticipated. The whole thing was illegal, and, in its operation upon Mr. Evans very unjust. The only way to get rid of the consequence of such a plan appeared to be by putting a new candidate in nomination, and in fact another candidate was set up. Mr. Denman was proposed, and it was intended that the independent votes should be divided between him and Mr. Evans, in the same manner as the Corporation votes were divided between sir Charles Hastings and Mr. Cave. But the mischief was already done; and the time for remedying it was gone by. Besides, the Corporation afforded a new obstacle; for when Mr. Denman was put forward, and a pen was demanded for him; it was refused; and the notable reason given for the refusal was, that as his name had not been put forward in the early part of the contest, the returning officer was not bound to assign him a pen for his voters. Now, these proceedings appeared to him to be wholly unjustifiable, and he trusted the House would not suffer them to pass without parliamentary notice and animadversion. It was impossible that the petitioners could proceed in any other kind of way, than by this application to the House. The process in the courts of law, it had been said, was immortal; and in

1205
the court of equity, it was needless to say, that the proceedings were equally immortal; indeed, it was said that the lord chancellor himself was nearly immortal [a laugh]. In point of fact, the petitioners had no other remedy than by an application to that House, and the case was a very aggravated one, and resembled one relating to the Corporation of Durham, mentioned in Smollett's History. He would conclude, therefore, by moving, "That a Select Committee be appointed to take into consideration the allegations of the Petition of the Electors of the Borough of Leicester, and to report their observations thereupon to the House." The House, he trusted, would inquire strictly into this mode of manufacturing votes; and he hoped that some remedy would be suggested against the misapplication of Corporation funds, and recommended to the consideration of the Committee, the act of the 3rd of George 3rd relative to the Corporation of Durham.
Mr. Wynnsaid, he came to the consideration of this question with a mind perfectly unbiassed, not having heard one word of the circumstances, except what he had read in the petition, therefore not knowing how far they were denied; but he must say he was not at all inclined to adopt the course pointed out by the motion of the hon. member, because he thought, that, even taking the facts stated in the petition to be proved, nothing illegal had been done by the Corporation of Leicester. He did not wish to give any opinion as to whether or not the mode of polling was regular; because, if it were not the regular mode, that would be a sufficient ground for a petition to be referred to an election committee. If the city officer had persevered in his refusal to admit freemen to vote for Mr. Denman, upon the ground that he had not been proposed three days before, that would be a question upon which an election committee would decide; and he had no doubt that if that refusal had been persevered in, the committee would say, "Here is a candidate who comes forward in the usual way, and the legal voters who tended their votes for him have been rejected, and therefore, this election is void." He could not see any one illegal act charged against the Corporation; but, taking for granted that the acts were illegal, the question was one for an election committee, or it might be made the subject of an application to
1206
the court of King's-bench, for a criminal information against the Corporation for having abused their powers. What were the charges against the Corporation? It was stated in the petition, that the right of voting was in the mayor, aldermen, common-council, freemen, and householders paying taxes; but it was urged as a ground of complaint, that the Corporation had created a large number of nonresident freemen, for the purpose of voting at the election. If the Corporation had done so to any great and inconvenient extent, that circumstance might probably be a sufficient ground for bringing in a bill to limit the powers of Corporations to make out-voters; but, as there could be no doubt that the Corporation had, at present, a legal right to make out-voters, such a proceeding, on their part, could not be matter of investigation to a Select Committee. Would that House, in open violation of the first principles of justice, attempt to question the right of the Corporation of Leicester to do what was generally done by the Corporations throughout the kingdom? It was stated, that the Corporation had sent a circular letter to the freemen, expressing their wish that the freemen would elect a candidate of a certain way of thinking—a candidate whose political opinions coincided with those of the Corporation. Was there any thing illegal, unconstitutional, unfair, or unusual, in such a proceeding? Was it not, on the contrary, the general practice of electors, to look out for a candidate of their own way of thinking? It was next stated that the Corporation had remitted the fees payable by the out voters. Was that any thing uncommon or extraordinary? Was it not the common practice of the different Corporations of the kingdom, when they conferred the freedom of their respective Corporations upon non-residents, to remit the fees? He did not know whether there was any hon. member present upon whom the Corporation of the city of London had conferred the honour of the freedom of that city, but, if any such member were present, he could state to the House what the practice of that Corporation was. Now, he could state, from his own knowledge, that in two instances in which he had been honoured with the freedom of boroughs, of which he was not a resident, he had no recollection of having paid any foes. The hon. member for

1207
Hull had cited the Limerick case; but that was not applicable to the present. Upon that occasion, the House had thought fit to pass a bill for regulating the application of Corporation funds, which had been applied to election purposes; and the deficiency in the funds so applied, was made up by a rate upon the inhabitants. He must also say, that he could see nothing wrong in the conduct of the Corporation, in sending about the country for a candidate whose politics coincided with their own. It was further alleged, that the leading members of the Corporation had paid, or engaged to pay, the expenses of the election; and that the money for that purpose was raised upon the bonds of individuals. Was it to be said, that an elective body had no right to subscribe their own funds to defray the expenses of an election? Now, in the city of Westminster, which prided itself upon the purity of election, it was one of the leading principles laid down by the electors, that the members should be returned free of expense; and to such an extent was that principle carried, that a deputation of the Westminster committee had waited upon the hon. baronet opposite to repay him the sum of 2s. paid by him, as a fee upon taking the oaths at the table of that House. Surely, it could not be considered a criminal act on the part of the Corporation of Leicester, to do that which was considered highly meritorious and praiseworthy, when done by the electors of Westminster. But the petition further stated, that those individuals were to be indemnified out of the funds of the Corporation, "as the petitioners believe." If this indemnity were given, that might form aground of inquiry; but the petitioners did not state that fact positively: all they stated was, "if the House of Commons will institute an inquiry, we shall probably be able to find out that such is the fact." He objected to granting any such inquisitorial power, upon so slight an allegation. With respect to the letter, said to be written by the town clerk, stating the different shades of blue and green, and the persons whom the Corporation wished to support, he must say, that he saw no ground for imputing to this Corporation as a crime, the doing of that which the numerous corporations in the kingdom were in the constant habit of doing. The hon. member had cited the Durham act; but that act, which regulated the period of voting
1208
by honorary freemen, did not apply to the charges preferred against the Corporation of Leicester. If it did apply, it would form a ground of application to an election committee; but it formed no ground for bringing the Corporation as criminals before that House. The hon. member had not stated his object in making this motion; and he wished the hon. member would state, whether it was his intention, if this motion should be agreed to, to ground upon it a general measure, or only a particular measure, directed against this Corporation. If the charges stated in the petition were true, they might form a ground for inquiry before an election committee; but there could not be any ground for a special inquiry; and he, therefore, trusted the House would negative the motion.
Sir C. A. Hastingssaid, he had hoped that the hon. member would, upon reading the petition, have withdrawn the motion made upon such slight grounds as those stated in the petition, which contained imputations upon as honest, as respectable, and as independent a body of electors, as any in the kingdom. The petitioners did not go so far as to say that they would prove, or even endeavour to prove, any of their charges; but they merely said that they suspected this, that they believed that, and that they apprehended the other. If the House, upon allegations of suspicion and belief, were to call upon a respectable body to answer charges, they would be opening a door which would lead to much mischief and inconvenience; because any private individual, having a pique against a corporation, might bring them before that House, at a considerable expense, to answer charges which had no other foundation than his suspicion and belief. If the corporation of Leicester, in supporting a member entertaining principles similar to their own, had been guilty of a crime, they had been guilty of a crime of which every corporation in England had, at one time or another, been guilty. Another charge was, that the corporation had assisted the candidates with funds, to defray the expenses of the election. Now, he thought that he should have been one of the first persons made acquainted with that circumstance; but he must say, that it had never been stated to him, that any funds had been voted for that purpose. He admitted that, before the commence-

1209
ment of the election, some friends of the candidates had come forward, and contributed towards the expenses incurred in canvassing, &c, and he had no doubt that they had an unquestionable right so to apply their private funds; but of any other subscription he knew nothing. He agreed with the hon. member for Hull, that the contest was an expensive one, and he should at any time willingly travel from Leicester to Hull, if the hon. member would state in what way a contested election could be conducted without expense. With respect to the honorary freemen who had voted at the election, he would say, that he was perfectly disinterested; because, if the number of honorary freemen who had voted for him were deducted, he should still have a decided majority. He could not help stating to the House one circumstance, which would shew the candour of the petitioners in complaining against the non-resident voters. Of the petitioners, not less than eighteen were honorary freemen of Nottingham; and at the last election for that borough, every one of those individuals exercised that right of voting, which they made the subject of complaint, when exercised by the honorary freemen of Leicester. The hon. baronet concluded, by expressing a hope, that the House would agree with him, that there were not in the petition sufficient grounds to warrant the appointment of a select committee.
Mr. OtwayCave admitted that there was an agreement between the committees of the several candidates to pay the expenses of the out-voters. Of the learned gentleman who had acted as assessor at that election, and who was suspected of having acted in a partial manner, he must say, that so anxious was that gentleman to avoid all appearance of partiality, that, in one or two instances, his decisions were against the party whom he was supposed to favour. He denied that the corporation had gone to hedges and highways to select honorary freemen. Those gentlemen were as respectable as any other voters of the borough.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, he could not suffer the House to come to a vote upon this motion, without expressing his earnest wish that the House would, by their vote, mark this course of proceeding with the signal reprobation that it deserved. If that House were to listen to motions of the kind, they would be preparing the way to
1210
supersede the operation of the Grenville act, and he believed that the object of the petition was to supersede that act, in the present instance. He believed that the parties, who had presented this petition, had taken a legal opinion, to ascertain whether or not they could prove a case, under the Grenville act, against the sitting members; and that, having received an answer in the negative, they had suffered the time limited by the Grenville act to pass by, in the hope that that House would grant a select committee, and thereby rid them from those liabilities, which they must have incurred, if they had brought their complaints before the regular and ordinary tribunal, in cases of this description. If the petitioners had proceeded under the Grenville act, they must have entered into recognizances: they must have defrayed the expenses of the opposing party, if the allegations in the petition should be deemed frivolous or vexatious: and, in any case, they must have borne the expenses of their own witnesses. It was, therefore, infinitely more convenient to the petitioners, after having obtained a legal opinion, that they could not make out a case for the ordinary tribunals, to come down to that House and ask them to step out of their way, and appoint a select committee, before which an inquiry might be taken at the public expense. Nothing, in his opinion, could be more unjust, more undignified, or more unconstitutional, than that that House should enter into an inquiry into the local politics which prevailed in borough and county elections. The hon. member had read letters, directed to the freemen of the borough, in order to secure a majority for a favourite candidate-Taking all the charges to be true, he put it to the House whether they could not make better use of their time, than by employing it in investigating, upon an election petition, the different shades of blue which distinguished the different interests in that borough. He thought that House could not occupy their time more uselessly, or in any manner which could tend more to lower their dignity, than by going into an inquiry to ascertain whether or not certain individuals in the borough of Leicester were Blues, or Indigo Blues, or Sky Blues. If any charge was to be preferred against the Corporation of Leicester, for the mode in which they had conferred the freedom of the Corporation upon non-residents, why was not that

1211
charge preferred before an election committee? The hon. mover had said, that his hon. and learned friend, the Attorney-general would say that this case was a case for a court of equity, and that his hon. and learned friend, the Solicitor-general, would say that it was a case for a court of law. But neither of his hon. and learned friends had said any thing of the kind: And why? Because the case was not a case for any court at all: much less could it be expected that the time of the House could be wasted by entering into an inquiry upon such a trumpery case. The hon. member came down so unprepared with his motion, that the clerk of the House had to write it out at the table; but he must do the hon. member the justice to admit, that he had not come down to the House more unprepared with his motion than with his case. He said to the petitioners "If you complain of any offence, cognizable in a court of law, go to a court of law—if you complain of a matter which is cognizable in a court of equity only, go to a court of equity—if you complain of any violation of the election laws, go before an election committee—but do not ask the House of Commons to institute an inquiry into the different shades of Blue, which distinguish the parties in your Corporation." Some of the allegations in the petition were of the most frivolous description. One of them was, that "Sir C. A. Hastings was carried in procession to the Guildhall." Was it fitting that the House of Commons should institute an inquiry, for the purpose of ascertaining whether or not such was the fact? An inquiry into-such an allegation was beneath the dignity of the House. When the petitioners complained of the conduct of the Corporation, in making outvoters, the House would bear in mind, that eighteen out of the sixty abhorrents of corporation corruption, who had signed this petition, had, after voting at Leicester, left the election unfinished, and actually scampered off to Nottingham, to exercise their right of voting as honorary freemen of that borough. If the petitioners, who had called into question the acts of the Corporation of Leicester, should obtain a select committee, that would establish a precedent for those who complained of the acts of the corporation of Nottingham; and to such an extent would applications of this kind spread, that, in a very short time, the time of the House would be
1212
occupied solely in investigating election squabbles. If the House thought that corporations had made an improper use of their power, in conferring the freedom of the respective boroughs upon non-residents, for election purposes, let such power be limited by law; but let not one corporation be selected, because some of its members were Blues, or Indigo Blues, or that description of Blues, of which the petitioners did not approve. The hon. member had said, that there was no precedent upon their Journals for appointing a select committee in a case of this kind. That there was no such precedent, did not in the least surprise him; but the hon. gentleman, having failed in finding any authority in the Journals, had recourse to the works of Dr. Smollett, and had at last found in Peregrine Pickle, or Roderick Random, [a laugh], a case in point. He took the whole charge of the hon. member to amount to this, and nothing more—that the hon. member did not approve of the politics of those gentlemen who had been returned for Leicester. Considering that some of those petitioners had acted at Nottingham in the manner which they complained of others for having acted at Leicester—considering that if motions of this kind were acceded to, it would prevent parties complaining from appealing to the tribunals constituted by that House in cases of this kind, and constituted because that House thought that such tribunals would be exempt from the influence of large majorities—and, considering, that it was beneath the dignity of that House to interfere with disputes arising out of local politics, he could not avoid expressing his sincere hope that the House would make a stand against such applications, and would, by a large majority, reject the motion for a select committee.
Sir F. Burdettsaid, he thought that his hon. friend, the member for Hull, had not been fairly dealt by. When he saw right hon. gentlemen having recourse to gross exaggerations—to palpable misrepresentations—attributing what had never been said, and what never could have been believed to have been said, it was quite evident that it was the last resource of those who felt that there was more in the case than they were able, in any other way, to answer. Every body who heard the right hon. gentleman—nay, the right hon. gentleman himself—well knew that; the hon. member for Hull had never quoted-

1213
Peregrine Pickle, nor Roderick Random. Such trifling might amuse, but it could not satisfy; and he was surprised that the right hon. gentleman, for the sake of so poor a joke, could lay aside the candour for which he had recently obtained credit. A volume of Smollett's History was less cumbersome than a volume of the Journals; and Smollett was an historian in some credit. Therefore, unless the right hon. gentleman could establish, that Smollett had misquoted the Journals, the attempt at ridicule, because the same individual had written certain novels, recoiled upon itself. The right hon. gentleman might excite a laugh among his friends and adherents; but such a specimen of wit could only produce a smile rather of pity than satisfaction among those who were not connected with him in office or expectancy. Both the hon. members for Leicester had boasted of the respectability of their constituents; but surely it was unnecessary that they should vouch the fact; seeing that it would be taken for granted, that those who sent particular members to parliament would be declared by those members to be men of great judgment, and high virtue, both private and political. A right hon. gentleman had said, that the corporation of Leicester had done no more than the electors of Westminster, in paying the legal expenses of the election; but the charge of the hon. mover was, that the corporation had abused and misapplied the corporate funds, by employing them for the purposes of the election. If it had been merely stated, that individual gentlemen had subscribed their own money to forward a particular election, such a charge, so grossly absurd, could not be entertained for a moment. If this were decidedly stated, then there would be an end to the case. But he did not understand the fact to be so. And even if it appeared, on the first view, that the subscriptions were of this nature, still, in his opinion, it ought to be clearly proved before they refused inquiry; because the business might be done in so covert a manner—corruption having arrived at such a pitch in this country, especially in corporations,—as to prevent discovery, unless it were narrowly investigated. The petitioners complained of the excessive number of voters that had been created. "But," said the right hon. gentleman, "the corporation had a right to make them; and if they had not, why did not
1214
the petitioners proceed against them under the Grenville act?" What, however, was the real state of the case? The petitioners complained of the abuse of a legal power; and that could not be the subject of a prosecution under the Grenville act. Here was alleged the positive abuse of a legal' power; and if that abuse had taken place, he contended, that the House was imperiously called on to institute an investigation of all the circumstances, connected with the offence. What did the hon. member for Hull demand? He asked for a committee, in whose power it should be-to call for whatever evidence they might deem necessary. Could any thing be more fair—could any thing be more necessary—where such a statement was made as that contained in the petition? He denied that this proceeding would cast any reflection on the sitting members. The petition contained no allegation against' them. They might be perfectly unconscious of the practices complained of. The hon. baronet had said, that if any improper practices were going on, he must have heard, of them. This, however, he must deny. On the contrary, the hon. baronet would be the last man in the world whom the parties complained of would make acquainted with any practices of this description. The corporation were too much; au fait at this business to let him know any thing about it. The right hon. gentleman had spoken of the honorary or temporary electors for Nottingham, who went in such a hurry from one place to the other to vote. But what answer was that to the statement of his hon. friend? He complained that the same kind of thing had been done at Leicester as appeared to have been done at Nottingham; and he laid before the House a particular case, which had fallen into his hands, and which he wished to have investigated. It was no answer to say to him, that similar proceedings had occurred elsewhere. He, therefore, contended, that his hon. friend had a right to call on the House to interfere in a case, with respect to which redress could not be obtained in a court of law. It was only in that House that the justice of the case could be satisfied; and, therefore, he called upon them not to dismiss it with that levity, which the right hon. gentleman appeared, by his manner, to sanction. If this motion was rejected, the public would consider it as the declaration of a denial of justice in every

1215
case of this kind that might be brought before parliament. It would show, that the House was destitute of that constitutional jealousy which it ought to feel for the purity of its members; and that instead of opening wide its doors to representations of the kind, it was anxious to throw every difficulty in the way of investigation.
Mr. V. Fitzgeraldcontended, that his right hon. friend was justified in his allusion to Peregrine Pickle and Roderick Random, by the fact, that in that portion of Smollett's History which had been referred to upon this occasion, the author had shown more of the novel writer and the political pamphleteer, than of the liberal and impartial narrator of events.
Lord Miltonsaid, the question was, whether the act of the Corporation in creating such a number of additional voters, was or was not illegal. No one had said that, under ordinary circumstances, the Corporation of Leicester had not a right to make freemen. But the case became very different, when the proposition for creating additional voters was hawked all over the country. It appeared that 2,000 letters had been issued to various individuals, and that eight hundred persons were in consequence placed in the situation of electors. This being the case, the hon. member for Hull surely had a right to bring the business forward, for the purpose of investigation. But the right hon. gentleman had, with a great deal of solemnity, called on the House to make a stand, and to support the Corporation. He hoped that the House would do no such thing; especially as a complaint which had been recently made against another corporation, for improper practices in the course of an election, had not been thus dismissed, but had been referred to a committee for consideration. With the labours of that committee they had not yet been made acquainted; but he expected that they would be soon laid on their table. The present was, in his opinion, a gross abuse of legal rights, by the members of this Corporation. It was clear that vast numbers of persons having no connection with the town of Leicester had been created freemen; and it was the duty of that House to inquire, whether they were so created for the purpose of influencing the election in a particular way. He contended, that the House had a right to interfere, to prevent, in future,
1216
the recurrence of such a transaction. It was no answer to the petitioners to say, that a similar transaction had taken place at Nottingham. That, on the contrary, ought to operate as an additional reason for rooting out such a system altogether.
Mr. Legh-Kecksaid, he was himself a freeman of Leicester, and he could safely aver, that a more respectable body of electors could not be found in the kingdom. The funds of that Corporation were strictly applied to the purposes for which they were originally intended. There was not a corporate body in England, who watched over the charitable and other funds placed under their care, with more unremitting attention. As to the formation of additional freemen, it could not have been done for the purpose of influencing the election. That would have been a needless precaution; because the resident freemen would, over and over again, have secured the return of the favourite candidate, without any adventitious aid.
Mr. Spring Ricesupported the motion.
Mr. Goulburncontended, that the present case bore no analogy to that of Northampton, inasmuch as no misapplication of corporate funds was charged against the Corporation of Leicester. As to the remission of fees to the eight hundred freemen, it could not have been made with a view to influence the election, as the freedom was conferred on them in 1822, and the election took place four years after. The absence of any illegality in the mode of taking the poll was proved by the fact, that counsel, who had been consulted on the policy of petitioning against the return, under the Grenville act, declared that there were not sufficient grounds to support such a charge.
Lord Rancliffesaid, that as the corporation of Nottingham had been alluded to in the course of the discussion, he was bound to admit that the practice complained of had prevailed there to some extent. He, however, disapproved of it, and would as willingly support a motion for inquiry into the conduct of that corporation, as into that of Leicester.
Mr. Hudson Gurneysupported the motion. He said, that the matter loudly called for the intervention of the House. This infamous system of overpowering the bonâ fide voters, by creation of honorary freemen, had been begun by the corporation of Nottingham; who, he was informed, had made twelve hundred utterly un-

1217
connected with the place; and the example had been followed by that of Leicester, who were said to have made nearly two thousand: and he hoped equal justice would be done to both corporations.
Sir F. Burdettwas about to read a passage from the petition, in order to prove the incorrectness of the statement made on the other side of the House; namely, that the petition did not allege that the Corporation money had been misapplied, when
The Speakerinformed him, that it was not competent to him to do so, he having already addressed the House.
Lord Howick, therefore, read the passage, which declared, that the Corporation had borrowed money to carry on the election, and that the lenders were to be indemnified out of the Corporation funds.
Mr. C. N. Pallmerwas of opinion that the freemen in question had been made in contemplation of the election, and that their votes were improperly used in it. On that ground he should support the motion.
The House divided:—For the motion 68: Against it 92; Majority 24.

List of the Minority.

Althorp, lord

Kennedy, T. K.

Baring, F

Lester, B.

Baring, J.

Lombe, E.

Bringham, J.

Maberly, J.

Barrett, S. B.

Maberly, col.

Brownlow, C.

Martin, John

Burdett, sir F.

Marshall, John

Buxton, T. F.

Monck, J. B.

Colborne, R.

Milton, lord

Clive, E. B.

Morpeth, lord

Campbell, W. F.

Nugent, lord

Cradock, col.

Ord, W.

Dundas, hon. T.

Pallmer, C. N.

Dundas, sir R.

Pendarvis, E. W.

Ebrington, lord

Prothero, E.

Easthope, J.

Powlett, hon. W. J.

Folkestone, lord

Ponsonby, hon. F.

Forbes, sir C.

Price, Robert

Forbes, J.

Russell, lord W.

Fazakerly, J. N.

Rancliffe, lord

Cordon, R.

Robinson, George

Graham, sir J.

Rumbold, C.

Gurney, Hudson

Sefton, Earl of

Guest, J. J.

Stanley, hon. E. G.

Heneage, G. F.

Smith, W.

Heron, sir R.

Tomes, John

Hobhouse, J. C.

Thompson, C. P.

Howard, H.

Tennyson, C.

Howick, lord

Waithman, ald.

Hume, J.

Warburton, H.

Ingleby, sir W.

White, col.

Jermyn, lord

Wood, C.

1218

Wood, ald.

ELLERS.

Wrightson, W. B.

Sykes, D.

Whitmore, W. W.

Rice, T. S.