drawn up. There was no case in which greater confidence should be placed in the report of a committee than when it went to criminate a member of that house. The speech of his hon. friend was not in mitigation, but for the complete abandonment of punishment. He should therefore vote for the resolution.

Captain Herbert, in explanation, asserted that he was authorised to state, that no agreement existed at the late election, and declared upon his honour, after every inquiry he could make, that no such agreement ex isted at that election.

Mr. Lee Keck argued from the evidence, to shew, that the report of the committee was fully borne out by it. He did not think it just or fair, that the hon. baronet, because he had secured his seat for another place, should be in a different situation from others under similar circumstances, because so far as Penryn was concerned, he was no longer a member of that house.

Mr. E. Stewart contended that the house had delegated its powers to the committee, and that it had then only to determine what proceeding it should adopt upon the report. One fact was certain, that the hon. baronet had agreed to give 24 guineas to each voter, and the gentlemen who had read the minutes would agree that this was one of the grossest instances of barefaced bribery that had ever been brought under the consideration of parliament.

agreement. If the agreement was of a different nature, and not for giving twenty-four guineas a man to the voters, why did not sir C. or his agents produce that agreement which had taken place? Mr. Stona said he burnt those papers; but it was easy to guess what sort of papers those were that people were so eager to burn. He trusted, therefore, that the house acting upon the principle, that he who bought his seat would be most likely to sell his vote, would, with a view to purify itself, adopt the same course that had been pursued in the Cricklade, Shoreham, and lately in the Aylesbury case, and throw open the borough of Penryn, with a view to prevent similar bribery in future.

Mr. Windham said, that he knew nothing more of the present matter than what he had heard and read in the course of this evening's discussion. He thought that too much had been said on the subject of purifying the house in the estimation of the country. We ought always to be actuated by such a motive, but the great object should be first to know our duty, and then to pursue it. Such language seemed rather to suggest, that some victim should be sacrificed for the reputation of the rest. He lamented that the house had not seen reason to hear the indirect evidence which an hon. member had proposed to introduce. He wished then to lay aside all extrinsic considerations; and concluded with saying, that he would not vote at all on the question, not feeling competent to decide upon it,

Mr. Whitbread professed, that he was not in the same situation with his right hon. friend. He had examined the evidence with the utmost attention, and thought the case perfectly clear. But this was not the time to enter into the evidence. The committee appointed by the house had come to a decision, and the house were now to determine whether their resolution should be adopted. They were not calling for a victim, and it was material to come to a decision, for if it was not come to now, it would not come to it at all. What would the country think, should the house blink the present question, and say, in effect, that the offending member shall not be punished?

Mr. Hurst explained the reasons that governed his conduct, both in the committee and since. He considered the evidence with reference to the criminal law of the country. The proceedings upon that evidence might be for the expulsion of the hon. baronet, or for a criminal prosecution, and before they should determine upon either, he thought the house ought to consider whether the evidence was such as to bear it out. The evidence of Stona and Moon was contradictory, and if he were to decide, he should say, that neither was to be believed; concluding therefrom that no agreement existed. He had no knowledge of the hon. baronet until after the report of the committee, when in a conversation he had with him, that hon. baronet had declared to him upon his honour, Mr. Rose had read the report with attenthat no agreement was ever entered into bytion, and thought the resolution of the comhim.

Sir W. W. Wynne said, that whatever sir C. Hawkins might deny, still, as his agent (who must be considered as an unwilling witness,) had admitted it upon his oath, he could not but believe that there was such an

mittee well warranted by facts. He conceived the house were in the situation of a grand jury, and fully warranted by the evidence to send the matter to a special jury in a court of justice, where it would be tried with perfect impartiality.

Mr. Simeon did not think the discussion (a probability of an election soon taking ought to be deferred.

Mr. Lethbridge thought that there were grounds for putting the hon. member on his trial, though the opinion of this house was not binding in any other court.-The previous question was then put and negatived.A discussion then arose on the original question.

Mr. Simeon thought the resolution was not founded on evidence sufficiently clear. He observed that there had been corrupt practices, but he did not think that actual bribery had been proved. He drew a distinction between agreeing to bribe, which he thought had been proved, and actual bribery which he thought had not been proved. In support of this opinion, he commented at considerable length on the evidence in the report of the committee.

Mr. Leycester argued also at considerable length from the evidence, from which he drew an opposite conclusion, and considered that bribery had been made out.

place.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer thought the house must feel, that after the report of their select committee, they were bound to take some proceedings on it, and order a prosecution. It did appear to him, that there was upon the face of the report sufficient evidence to justify the resolution that the committee had come to. He preferred a prosecution to expulsion, as it appeared to him a little unfair that he should be first punished by expulsion, and then sent to a trial, where, perhaps, he might be acquitted. If he had been returned for but one place, the house could have done nothing more than order a prosecution.

Mr. Bankes said, there was no instance on the Journals of a member being ordered to be prosecuted, and yet allowed to keep his seat. He instanced the cases of Mr. J. Ridge, in the reign of queen Anne; Mr. Carnagie, in the year 1715; and sir A. Grant, who had all been expelled from the Mr. Hurst repeated his former arguments, house, and afterwards ordered to be prose and added, that giving the pound notes in-cuted. The Shepherds, father and son, were stead of a dinner could not be considered as bribery.

him of his seat; and he did not think that he should be in a better situation, because he had been returned for three places.

Mr. Fuller was sorry to differ from the hon. gent. who spoke last; but he thought that nothing was fairer than to send the member to another tribunal, and the house might afterwards act upon its decision.

Sir W. W. Wynne thought that when a committee had reported any member of that house to be guilty of bribery, he should be no longer permitted to sit among them.

expelled and prosecuted for bribery, in the year 1700. If sir Christopher had been reMr. Swann (member for Penryn), de- turned for but one place, the report of the clared, that he never heard of such an agree-committee would have immediately deprived ment, at the time he joined his interest with sir Christopher, and if he had believed that there was such an agreement, he would not have joined him. He would state for himself, and for 162 freemen of Penryn, who voted for him, that they knew of no such agreement, and if they had, they would not have given sir Christopher their independent votes. [A laugh.] He knew the town of Penryn well: they had never asked from him even a single solitary shilling, and he knew they were not corrupt. [A laugh.] As for the business of the one pound notes, it was this: he had always considered it necessary to follow an old custom, which, perhaps, would be "more honoured in the breach than in the observance," of shewing some attention to his constituents. Instead, however, of opeuing public houses, he found that it was less expensive to distribute small sums of 5 or 10s. a man. When a compromise was made between his friends and those of sir Christopher, it was thought right that sir Christopher should give a dinner; but afterwards, the one pound notes were substituted in the place of a dinner, and were certainly only meant as a mark of attention, and by no means as a bribe, as no opposition was expected in the borough, nor was there VOL. IX.

Mr. S. Bourne thought, that the house ought not both to inflict the punishment of expulsion, and order a prosecution. He much preferred the latter course, and thought that if he were found guilty upon a trial in a court of justice, his expulsion from that house would be merely a matter of course.

Mr. Whitbread said, that he could easily conceive a case, although he would not say that this was that case, where a person might be acquitted in a court of justice, and yet where the house of commons might be so convinced of his criminality, as to think it necessary to expel him In the present instance, however, he was for the prosecution. The gallery was then cleared, but we understood that the resolution of the committee 2 L

-

was adopted without going to a division. | noble friend to be highly beneficial. He While strangers were excluded, Mr. Atkins argued forcibly for the introduction of Trial Wright moved, That the Attorney General by Jury as recognised by that bill; and be directed to prosecute sir C. Hawkins for which, with such an arrangement of the bribery, &c.; to which motion Mr. Bankes business as would separate the law from the moyed, as an amendment, to leave out all facts, would in the Scots courts constitute a the words after That," and to substitute, "sir great part of that remedy. He likewise arChristopher Hawkins be expelled."-After gued in support of various other parts of the debating some time, Mr. Bankes's amend bill, and the superior advantages of a diviment was withdrawn. The original motion sion of the court of session into three chamfor an address to his majesty, praying him bers, instead of two, as proposed by the to direct the attorney general to prosecute other bill of which the noble lord (Hawkessir C. Hawkins, was carried, as were also bury) had given notice. A division of the similar motions for the prosecution of eight-court into two would be a good thing, he een persons of the committee of the electors of Penrhyn, who had fixed the price for which the votes were to be sold, and who had invited sir C. Hawkins, by a deputation from their body, to purchase them.-It was moved by Captain Herbert, that Moon, an accomplice in the transaction, but who had given evidence before the select committee of the house of commons, should also be prosecuted by order of the house. This motion was resisted on the ground of his having already given evidence before the committee of the house, and of his testimony being essential to the prosecutions that had been ordered. The house divided on this question For Captain Herbert's motion 13, against it 46.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Thursday, April 23.

said, as far as it went; but it would not operate as a remedy to the evils complained of; no more than if, should he have sent for a surgeon to perform an operation on him, that surgeon, instead of the faithful discharge of professional duty, should make him a present of a horse or a carriage, or set him down in his will: these would all be very good things, and argue a very friendly disposition in his surgeon, but would be no remedy whatever for his complaint. He also argued, that the court of review, as originally proposed, was not contrary to the spirit of the Scots union; and that some establishment of the kind was essentially necessary to diminish the number of appeals. In the course of his speech the noble lord adverted to eighteen or nineteen questions, which he read, and which he proposed should be put to the learned judges then be fore the bar, for their opinions upon the same. The first question, which was afterwards read from the Wool-sack and the question distinctly put upon it, was to the following effect: "Whether, in the action for the recovery of personal property, or for the vindication of private wrong, especially where parole proof was necessary, the expenses of the proceedings, according to the Lora Erskine then addressed their lord-present mode and practice of the court of ships on the important subject under consi- session, did not, in very many cases, greatly deration, the end and object of which was exceed the value of the thing at issue, indea considerable improvement in the adminis pendent of delay and other inconvenientration of civil justice in Scotland. His ces?" The leading propositions in the sublordship took a review of the proceedings sequent questions were-1, "To learn what which had taken place in the present and in degree of power the Scots courts now posthe last session, in reference to the bill now sessed within themselves, to reform the inpending before their lordships, and noticed conveniences and evils complained of. 2, the general admission that evils did exist in Respecting the preferable division of the some parts of the administration of the court of session into two or into three chamScots laws, which were even felt to affect bers, with a view to the more efficacious rethat house in its appellant jurisdiction, and medy of the evils complained of. 3, Resfor all which a speedy and efficacious reme-pecting the effects of the introduction of dy was declared to be necessary. For these objects, he held the bill brought in by his

[SCOTCH JUDICATURE BILL.] The order having been read for the attendance of the lord president and other judges of the court of session, five of the judges of that court, namely, the lord president, the lord justice clerk, lords Glenlee, Cullen, and Newton entered the house, and took their seats in chairs provided for them in a space inclosed without the bar.

Trial by Jury into civil causes; and of enabling the court to separate the consideration

of law from that of fact. 4, Respecting tion. The lord justice clerk observed, that the diminution of the number of appeals much would depend on the consideration, to the house of lords, which may be natu- whether the answers were to be delivered rally expected from the establishment of a verbally or in writing. He also adverted to court of review; and whether an establish- the inconvenience of detaining the Scots ment of the kind would not be necessary for judges much longer in town; and hoped that purpose. And lastly, whether the es- their lordships would not fix upon a longer tablishment of such a court, with judges, as interval than Mondayfor receiving the answers. proposed by the bill, be inconsistent with the 18th and 19th articles of the union with Scotland?"-The first question was put and agreed to. On the question for proposing the subsequent queries,

within the year, and accordingly proposed the a total misconception or misrepresentation property-tax, and various war-duties on excise of the subject. The tonnage duty in quesand customs. Subsequent additions had beention and its produce were so inconsiderable, made to those several modes of supply, and that they could not have any perceptible particularly in the last session, when the effect, even if exclusively levied on British late chancellor of the exchequer had raised ships; but, in fact, the duty is imposed on the property-tax from 6 to 10 per cent. In the ships of all nations, and, therefore, so the result, the whole annual produce of the far as it may operate, the competition was war-taxes is now estimated at 21 millions; of left where it was found. The petitioners which 11 are furnished by the property- are equally inaccurate in asserting that intax, and 9 by the excise and customs. Lord jury had resulted to them from the encouGrenville's ministry, in adjusting their plan ragement given to the trade of neutral naof finance, had determined at all events not tions. It would be an untruth on their part to burthen the country with the property- to say that any encouragement had been tax beyond the duration of the war, and had given by the late government to neutral therefore pledged only the war-duties of trade, beyond what the law of nations, as customs and excise for the liquidation of declared by the court of admiralty, had alsuch war-loans as might remain unredeemed lowed; or beyond what is necessary to the on the return of peace. This eventual re-export of our manufactures, the interests of striction had been censured and resisted by which would otherwise be sacrificed, with their opponents as unnecessary and unwise. out doing any good to what is called "the But what was the line now adopted? Those shipping interest." Parliament had heard who contended that the whole consideration much of this same "shipping interest," and should have been left open and unfettered through the same agency, in the last session. to the return of peace, have still further re- And it had been made the watch-word stricted the pledge in question, and have against the American intercourse bill, the confined it to the war duties of excise. In effects of which bill, he was prepared to objecting to this restriction, he (lord Auck-prove, had been peculiarly beneficial to Briland) did not mean to argue that the pledge was insufficient, though certainly it was a violation of the engagements made with the contractors for the loan. But he strongly censured the selection made, and thought it the worst that could have been adopted. shipping interest," which is raised at the The war duties of excise, so far as they af- present day respecting a more serious subfect the malt, cannot be continued after the [ject. The words " shipping interest," and war without injury to the landed property; the protestant church," vibrate forcibly on so far as tobacco, spirits, and tea, are cona British ear. He reprobated the misuse of cerned, those duties cannot exist after the such senseless appeals, and was not afraid to return of peace, with safety to fair trade and reprobate them, because no individual in to the revenue. The war duties on customs, either house of parliament bad shewn himwhich were at all events set free by the self more openly, more zealously, or more change made in the bill, consisted of duties uniformly, attentive to the interests of Brion imports and exports, and on the tonnage tish navigation, or to the more essential of of shipping. He could not hesitate to as- all public objects, the safety of the church sert, that some of those duties were the of England. He must lament the political least exceptionable of any of the war duties, depravity of those who raised such cries, and to be continued on the return of peace. It the folly of those who were misled by them. appeared, however, in the votes of the house Little minds have in all ages availed themof commons, that a petition against the selves of these occasional perversions of pofinance measure had been presented by cer-pular opinion; great minds have always tain persons, on the part of what they called been apt to disregard and undervalue them. "the shipping interest;" and that petition War-whoops of this description had been was understood to have occasioned the se- made the chief engines in the dissolution of lection to which he objected. He had rea- the French monarchy; and the mere word son to believe that the petition was signed "aristocrat" had brought to the guillotine by very few of the respectable men who thousands and tens of thousands of the nopossess the shipping property of the British bility and magistracy. His lordship conempire; but at any rate it was founded included his speech with stating several details

tish shipping. He had no doubt, that if amidst the debates on that bill, the late mi nistry had then been removed, the whole nation would have been stunned with the same senseless and unjust cry about the

66