Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2." -(The Lord Westbury.) THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, that the principle of the Bill was one which all their Lordships would approve, and that the Select Committee by whom its details had been scrutinized was so constituted as to entitle it to confidence. jesty's Government through the Home | that evidence. It naturally became the Secretary. He trusted their Lordships duty of the Attorney General, on the would now read the Bill a second time, Report being issued, to consider whether and he would then postpone the next he should not prosecute the persons stage for a fortnight or more, in order therein scheduled as guilty of bribery; that the measure might receive the at- and the hon. and learned Gentleman, in tention of his noble and learned Friends, a speech on the Beverley and Bridgand also, as he trusted, of his noble and water Disfranchisement Bill, remarked unlearned Friends. that the duty was a very painful one, but that he had no choice but to prosecute where there seemed a proper case for a filed a criminal information against Mr. jury. The Attorney General accordingly Stracey, the entire case against him resting on this same transaction, and Allen was again examined as a witness; but, as often happened, a witness who, under Commissioners, told a very lucid story, the manipulations of somewhat eager before a Judge and under the examination of counsel adopted a different course. The result was that Stracey was acquitted; and as the present clause provided that no person against whom any criminal proceedings had been instituted by the Attorney General should be disqualified under the Act until he had been adjudged guilty of such bribery, he would be exempted from the operation of the measure. As to Mr. Bignold, the Attorney General came to the conclusion that there was no case to go to a jury, and no prosecution was instituted against him. Now he had received from a Member of the House of Commons and also of the Bar a communication, which he understood he was at liberty to use, and which was in these terms Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly; and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday the 20th June next. NORWICH VOTERS' DISFRANCHISE- COMMITTEE. House in Committee (according to Order). Clause 1 (Disfranchisement of certain Voters of the City of Norwich). pro Clause 2 (Persons against whom ceedings have been instituted not disqualified until adjudged guilty of bribery). LORD CAIRNS said, he had to propose an Amendment to provide for a case so very peculiar that he thought their Lordships would admit that it justified exceptional treatment. The Commissioners appointed by the Crown to inquire into corrupt practices at the last Norwich Election entered at length in their Report into a transaction in which Mr. Edward Stracey, son of one of the candidates, and a Mr. Allen were concerned. According to the Report, a consultation occurred on the polling day between Stracey and Allen respecting the expenditure of £200 in bribery, Mr. Arthur Bignold being also present, and the Commissioners on account of this transaction scheduled the last-named gentleman as a briber. According to Allen's evidence, however, Mr. Bignold, though he knew of the arrangement, took no active part in it, remarking that it was not a bad idea, but was a dangerous one. The Commissioners inserted Mr. Bignold's name in Schedule A on Lord Westbury "I have seen the Attorney General, and he acquiesces in being quoted as saying that the only matter in which Bignold was implicated was that on which the charge against Stracey rested, and that the evidence connecting him with the offence charged was less than that upon which Stracey was acquitted." From this it was quite absurd to suppose that any criminal charge could have been substantiated against Mr. Bignold. Moreover, before the issue of the Commission, the election inquiry now provided had been held before Mr. Baron Martin, and in the course of the inquiry the name of Mr. Bignold was not mentioned; and Mr. Bignold, therefore, did not think it necessary to present himself before the Commission for examination, not supposing that any charge would be brought against him. He admitted that, as a rule, the Reports of the Commissioners should be accepted, and that Parliament was not to sit as a Court of Appeal to revise their decisions. The Webster, and was employed for the Commissioners, however, apparently at- purpose of bribery, the arrangement tributed the absence from the country being discussed by Allen and Stracey both of Stracey and Bignold at the time in the presence of Bignold; and Allen of their inquiry, to a desire to avoid in his evidence made every attempt to giving evidence which would criminate excuse Bignold, afterwards seeing him themselves; but the latter had informed and telling him it was all right. That, one of the witnesses before the Commis- of course, was not sufficient to convict sion issued that he was going abroad as Bignold of bribery, and he thought the usual for the benefit of his health; but Commissioners had erred in that respect. exceptions necessarily arose, and in the He should, however, have been loth to Beverley and Bridgwater Bill a person enter into the case were it not for the who had been included in the Schedule fact that Stracey had been tried for the of the Commissioners' Report was ex- same transaction and acquitted. He did cluded from the operation of the Bill; not suppose the Attorney General would and what he proposed was that similarly think of prosecuting every person in a Mr. Bignold's name should be made an list of 150 names against whom the exception in this case. The case against offence seemed proved-he would natuBignold was so weak and unsatisfactory rally prosecute those who most deserved that proceedings against him would in- prosecution, and Stracey was obviously evitably have resulted in an acquittal, such a person. On the ground of his and it was, therefore, obviously just that acquittal, and not on the mere ground he should be put in the same category as that Bignold had not been prosecuted, those who were referred to in the 2nd he acceded to the Amendment. clause. Amendment moved, to leave out ("No") and insert "Neither Arthur Bignold, mentioned in Schedule A. annexed to the said Report, nor."-(The Lord Cairns.) THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, he quite agreed with his noble and learned Friend that as a rule it was undesirable to try over again questions which had been tried by Commissioners in whom confidence must naturally be placed. Their Report was, of course, sifted like any other judgment or public document; but it was impossible to enter into minute distinctions as to particular cases, and there was no further opportunity of sifting the matter and coming to a more correct conclusion. A strong representation had been made to him with reference to another person the case against whom was not very strong, but who happened to be in England at the time of the inquiry; whereas Mr. Bignold had apparently the good fortune of not being in England. Looking at the evidence he was bound to say that the case against the latter was not brought up to conviction. It was one of very grave suspicion; but the Commissioners were not entitled, on account of his absence, whatever the cause of it might be, to draw a conclusion in a matter requiring proof. There was no doubt that £200 was obtained by a publican named On Question, agreed to; Amendment made: The Report thereof to be received on Monday the 13th of June next; and Bill to be printed, as amended. (No. 128.) BRIDGWATER AND BEVERLEY DIS- (The Lord Chancellor.) (NO. 87.) COMMITTEE. Order of the Day for the House to go into Committee, read. LORD COLCHESTER said, he must beg leave to say a few words before going into Committee. The Government had thought right to press the second reading of this measure at a late hour when the House was nearly empty. There seemed to be a false impression that it was intended to attack the Judges as to this matter. On the contrary, the proceedings of the Commissioners which were complained of had been considered by Her Majesty's Judges, and an unfavourable opinion had been pronounced with regard to them by no less an authority than the Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench. What he desired, however, to bring under their Lordships' notice was - not the wit or sarcasm of the Commissioners, for that had met with sufficient reprobation in public estimation-but the cruel and undeserved attack which was made in the Report itself on a large and innocent body of men. There was a wide distinction between the old constituency of Bridgwater, which was undoubtedly corrupt, and the 800 voters added by the late Reform Act. The Commissioners stated that a witness (Mr. Barham) had described the new voters as standing about to be bought like cattle at a fair. He had really said nothing as to new voters. Of these only 12 were proved to have been bribed; and yet they were all involved in one common censure. The total number of persons bribed at the last election was 57 out of a constituency of 1,500. Undoubtedly, the past experience of Bridgwater was unfavourable, and, therefore, he did not ask the House to reject this Bill; but in common justice they ought not to confound the innocent with the guilty. He had no personal interest to serve in bringing forward this question; and, looking to the antecedents of Bridgwater, the course which he was taking could not be said to have any party purpose in view. It might be remembered also that he had refused to join in opposing the issue of the Commission to inquire as to the Dublin freemen; but, certainly, if that Commission had been conducted in the same spirit and manner as the kindred inquiry at Bridgwater it was hardly probable that it would be attended with beneficial results in a public point of view. THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY said, he thought the time had arrived when he might fairly make a suggestion to the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack. There could be no doubt that these Election Commissioners had carried out the powers with which they were intrusted with a very high hand, and that in one instance they had been censured by a legal authority whose rank only yielded to that of the noble and learned Lord himself. He was sorry, therefore, to hear the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack speak in terms of approval of the manner in which these Commissioners conducted their inquiries. Considering that theirs was a strictly penal investigation, upon which future legislation was intended to be founded, he must say that their inquiries had been conducted in a spirit alien not only to the practice of English Courts of Justice, but, as far as he knew, to the practice of Courts of Justice anywhere. No doubt, cross-examination to the point of torture was applied by juges d'instruction to prisoners accused of crime; but that was with the object of obtaining information for the purpose of the particular criminal proceeding, not with a view of eliciting answers upon which penal legislation could afterwards be founded. It was the peculiarity of these Election Commissioners that the witnesses had been tortured by bullying and browbeating in a way that no Law Officers since the days of Chief Justice Jeffreys had ever attempted; and upon the evidence so obtained they were asked to proceed by legislation. He confessed that, for his own part-and he doubted not the case was so with others—he had been slow to speak upon this subject, knowing that the crime of bribery had grown to a very great height, and that it was most desirable it should be repressed. But, in connection with the present Bill, he certainly should have expected from the highest legal authority something like a repudiation of a mode of investigation that was utterly alien from all previous practice. If there was anything that would turn the sympathies of Englishmen - which at present were strongly in favour of purity of election in favour of persons who were guilty of bribery it would be the manner and spirit in which these elecClause 1 (Disfranchisement of Bridg- tion inquiries had been conducted. water and Beverley). THE EARL OF FEVERSHAM said, there was one result of these Disfranchisement Bills which occasionally was lost sight of, and that was that, by throwing the voters of the disfranchised borough into the county constituencies the relative strength of parties was altogether disturbed. There was a very strong feeling in Yorkshire that the seats which were taken from Beverley ought not to be lost to the county, and he begged accordingly to ask the noble Earl opposite whether he could give any intimation to the House as to the probable destination of the seats which were to be taken away under this Bill? EARL GRANVILLE was very sorrybut he was not in a position to give any answer to the question. House in Committee. Lord Colchester LORD LYVEDEN thought the fault had been any particular delinquency lay in the manner in which these Com- brought before their Lordships, or in missioners were selected; and he could any other quarter, he had endeavoured not help observing that, in the case of to discharge his duty; but he would Bridgwater, one of the Commissioners not volunteer to perform so invidious a was evidently a person that ought never task as had been assigned to him by to have been appointed. His proceed- the noble Marquess. ings in every stage had been of a most THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY said, intemperate character-intemperate at he had not asked the noble and learned Hong Kong, and in the Court at Bridg- Lord to perform any such invidious task water as now in Bombay. There never as he supposed: what he complained of was a man more manifestly unfit for was, that the noble and learned Lord the duty which had been assigned to should have expressed approbation of him. He had conducted the inquiry the procedure before these Commisin a most unbecoming and indecorous sioners, although he had at hand the manner. The Commissioners were ap- means of knowing how high-handed pointed at so much-£5_58.—a day; these proceedings sometimes were. and it was perhaps after all not surpris-doubt, in some cases these inquiries ing that the inquiry should have been were carried out in a more odious manner so protracted, as the Commissioners hav- than in others; but in the case of ing little practice in the Courts, were Beverley, as the noble and learned Lord only too glad to be employed during the must have been aware, they had been whole of the long vacation. That was occasion of public scandal. He thought not the manner in which these inquiries that a system of procedure which adshould be conducted; they ought to be mitted of such things without reproof conducted with something like solem- was likely to produce an injurious effect nity, so as to carry with them the in- on the public mind. fluence of authority, instead of in such a manner as to excite the ridicule of the Bar and of the public. THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, he was quite unconscious of having spoken in terms of high approval of the way in which these Commissioners had conducted their examinations. What he did say was, that having entrusted a certain investigation to Commissioners, they must be prepared to repose some degree of confidence in them. For himself, he was unwilling to go behind this Report in order to consider the conduct of gentlemen who had been entrusted with judicial functions; and nothing but a very strong case could have justified the noble Marquess -in asking him to express an opinion condemnatory of their proceedings. He was not disposed to give any such opinion. He was too much occupied by his usual judicial business to have been able to inform himself minutely on these matters; and he could not take on himself to pronounce any opinion on the conduct of one set of Commissioners or another; and to pass a general censure on all Commissioners would certainly be far from becoming in one holding the position which he did in a profession the members of which he had always honoured and esteemed. Whenever there VOL. CCI. [THIRD SERIES.] No Amendment made: The Report thereof to be received on Monday the 13th of June next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 129.) REAL ESTATE SUCCESSION BILL. QUESTION. LORD REDESDALE asked the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, as to the intentions of Her Majesty's Government with respect to the Real Estate Succession Bill? That was one of the measures announced in the Speech from the Throne to be brought forward by the Government; it was, therefore, to be presumed that they had made up their minds on the subject before Parliament met. He need not say that a measure relating to the succession to real estate must have a most important bearing on the constitution of their Lordships' House, and all the Members connected with it. On a former occasion-on the 17th of February-when the question regarded the business before the House, he drew particular attention to that Bill, and suggested that it was one which might very well originate in that branch of the Legislature. No notice was taken of that suggestion; but, on the 18th of March, the Bill was brought in and read 3 I a first time in the other House of Parlia- | occupied, and a good deal more would ment. Notice was also given of the be spent, in discussing other Bills-the second reading for the 28th of March. Education Bill, the Universities Bill, the That day came, and the Bill was deferred Extradition Bill, and two or three others, till the 2nd of May. It was afterwards all of which would require to be brought deferred till the 16th, and then, on on in due course. The Bill in question Friday, the 13th, it was deferred till had been set down on the earliest day the 16th of June. There it now stood. that could be conveniently fixed, regard But the most extraordinary thing con- being had to the progress of other meanected with the Bill was that, though sures of more leading importance which brought in and read a first time on the must be carried through. Like other 18th of March, it was not printed, or in measures, it must take its chance of bethe hands of any one till the 13th of ing discussed in regular course. It was May. He thought such procedure very the intention of the Government to prounusual. The Bill, as he had stated, ceed with the Bill, and, if possible, to now stood for a second reading on the carry it up to their Lordships' House. 16th of June, and was not likely to reach If that was not possible, they could do their Lordships' House till that period nothing more than retain it for another of the Session when it would be ex- opportunity. At the same time, he could tremely difficult to consider it. Under not sit down without saying that, notthese circumstances, he should like to withstanding all the noble Lord's exknow the reason for all this delay, and hortations that these legal Bills should what the intentions of Her Majesty's be introduced in that House, he did not Government were with respect to this find, practically, much encouragement to follow the suggestion; and he certainly was not disposed to take that course. Bill? THE LORD CHANCELLOR thought his noble Friend had certainly travelled a little beyond his Question. He was prepared to give an answer to the Question, of which his noble Friend had given Notice, What were the intentions of Her Majesty's Government with respect to the Real Estate Succession Bill? but he confessed he was not prepared to answer him categorically as to all the proceedings in relation to it in the other House, although, if his noble Friend had apprized him of his wishes in that respect, he should have been prepared with all the dates and figures. The Bill had been prepared for some time; but the subject was by no means an easy one. Though the Bill was confined to a very few clauses, the subject was one for very grave and anxious consideration. It was considered in its principle, of course, before it was announced, and also after it was announced in its details. It was announced with the expectation that it would have a very liberal acceptance on the part of the legal profession; but a very eminent member of that profession announced in the other House, on its introduction, that it would be opposed. The Bill then became an opposed Bill, and their Lordships might take almost judicial notice of the fact that the Irish Land Bill had been for some time pending in the House of Commons. very considerable time had also been Lord Redesdale A DEBTORS (IRELAND) BILL [H.L.] A Bill for the abolition of Imprisonment for Debt and for the punishment of fraudulent Debtors in Ireland, and for other purposes-Was presented by The Marquess of CLANRICARDE; read 1a. (No. 126.) PRAYER BOOK (LECTIONARY) BILL [H.L.] House adjourned at Seven o'clock, to |