stop short in his progress towards taken his principle too wide If its accomplishment? No such he meant that it should be dething; the offence, as far as he clared criminal in a man to endeawas to act, was intentionally com- vour to obtain a seat in that house, mitted; and he had no plea of exte- under those circumstances with nuation because it ultimately failed which they were all acquainted, from the inefficiency of minor that design would embrace much agents. Mr. Whitbread observed, more than this motion. There that the converts to parliamentary was not a place in the kingdom reform were now numerous in that sent members to parliament, to every part of the country, and which, with the exception of Old that if the motion which his noble Sarum, it would not apply. When friend had submitted to the house they were called upon to condemn should be negatived, they would so violently the noble lord, they be still more numerous. Mr. would do well to ask themselves Tierney did not see that it was whether they would hesitate, for any mitigation to say that lord C. the purpose of securing an elecwas so particular about the fitness tion, to recommend a friend to of the person to be recommended government. It was not the into the writership, as those writer- tention of the noble lord, from ships were always given to boys, what he could collect, to put a and the son of a chimney-sweep person in that house to answer an might just be as proper as the son improper purpose. It was incumof a member of parliament, if he bent on the house to give an opihad interest to get a recommenda- nion on the transaction, but not tion. Mr. Windham said, that too strong an opinion on the man. the house in giving their decision Mr. Canning perceived that were called upon, in his opinion, every gentleman who had spoken to make a distinction between the entertained a due sense of the act and the offender. Should they manner in which his noble friend pass to the other orders of the day, had conducted his defence, and he feared it would be regraded as did not wish to press any severe an implied approbation of the prin- sentence upon him. To this consiciple. He admitted that any at- deration, was to be added another, tack on the privileges of that namely, that the intention of the house, or the purity and freedom noble lord was never carried into of elections, was a very fair and execution, and that it certainly fit object for parliamentary cogni- would have been retracted if the zance. But he would be glad to noble lord had afterwards come to know how far the principle was learn the circumstances of the offer, to be carried? Whether it was and the character of the person who to be applied to any man influ- made it. The voting for passing encing, or endeavouring to influ- to the other orders of the day was ence a vote, or procure a seat in according to parliamentary usage, that house, under certain circum- a way of shewing that the house stances, or whether it was meant had taken a case in consideration, to limit it to ministers? He the result of which had been, that feared that his noble friend had they did not think it necessary to come 'come to any criminating resolutions. In order, however, to express this opinion more clearly in the present case, he would rather wish that instead of a vote for passing to the other orders of the day, a resolution should be substituted, declaring that the house saw no reason for a criminating resolution. When therefore the question before them should be disposed of, he should submit to the house the following resolution. "That it is the duty of this house to maintain a jealous guard over the purity and independence of parliament; but that this house duly weighing the evidence before it, and all the circumstances of the case, and considering that the in>ention referred to in that evi On dence was never carried into effect, this house does not think it necessary to come to a criminating resolution on the same." à division of the house there appeared for the original motion 167; against it 216. After this Mr. C. Wynne proposed that there should be added to Mr. Canning's resolution words to this effect, "That the house was confirmed in its opinion that it was unnecessary to proceed farther in the case from the openness which the noble lord had displayed, and the regret he had expressed for his conduct." This motion was negatived without a division. The house adjourned about three o'clock on Wednesday morning. CHAP CHAP. IX. Charges of Corrupt Practices in influencing the returns of Members to. Parliament against Mr. Perceval and Lord Castlereagh, by Mr. Madocks.-Motion of Mr. Madocks on this Subject.-An Amendment proposed by Lord Milton. Another by Mr. Davy Giddy.—The avowed Object of Mr. Madocks's Motion, a Reform in Parliament.-Both Amendments negatived. As well as the original Motion by Mr. Madocks.-Plan and Motion of a Reform of Parliament by Mr. Curwen. -Long Debate on the Bill proposed by Mr. Curwen, with Modifications so great as, in the Opinion of some Members, to reverse its original Tendency and Object, entertained by the House-and passed.A Plan for Parliamentary Reform proposed by Sir Francis Burdett. -His Motion for taking this Plan into its future Consideration nega. tived. Mr. Whitbread's Motion for limiting the Number of Persons holding Seats in the House of Commons, together with Places, Pensions, Sinecures, and Places under the Crown-After a Debate, negatired. Mr. Wardle's Plan for Public Economy-and Motion for the production of Papers for the purpose of justifying his Statement on the Subject. After many Observations or Strictures on those State-. ments, this Motion agreed to.-Attention of the House of Commons directed to the Improvement of both the Criminal and Civil Law of the Country.-Motions respecting the former by Sir Samuel Romilly.Agreed to.-Scotch Judicature Bill.-Relief afforded, and intended to be extended farther to the Poor Clergy-Speech from the Throne.Close of the Session of Parliament. THE principal subject of attention and debate that occupied the House of Commons for the remainder of this session, was the great question of parliamentary reform. On the 5th of May, Mr. Madocks rose to bring forward the motion of which he had given repeated notice, relating to corrupt practices of the treasury, with respect to the return of members of parliament. The charges he had to bring forward were against two of his majesty's ministers. One was against the right hon. Spencer Perceval, for having, through the agency of the hon. Wellesley Pole, been guilty of corrupt practices respecting the return of members to that house: the other, the right hon. lord viscount Castlereagh, for similar practices. He concluded a short speech with moving, that these charges be heard at the bar on Tuesday next. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that throughout the whole of his acquaintance with the proceedings of that house, he had never known an instance when an accusation was brought forward against a member, without the substance of it being previously communicated to him; or that he was not allowed, through the common courtesy of the house, to be heard in his own defence. The honourable member, however. however, was the best judge of the course he meant to pursue; and nothing remained for him but to make his bow and retire from the house. Sir John Anstruther said, that the form of proceeding proposed by Mr. Madocks was one of the strangest he had ever heard. What information had been given as the ground for calling on the house to adopt so solemn a proceeding as a hearing at their bar? What charges had the honourable gentleman specified against Mr. Spencer Perceval or lord Castlereagh? Was it ever heard that a member was to be set down as one under accusation, and consequently obliged to quit the house, without the slightest information being laid before the house in support of the accusation? If every member against whom indefinite and vague charges of this kind might be brought forward must withdraw, as a matter of course, the honourable member might soon have the house to himself.-Mr. Madocks said he was willing to adopt any mode of proceeding the house should recommend, Mr. Can ning, was clearly of opinion that the house ought not to agree to the withdrawing of the motion, (without intending any personal disrespect to the honourable mover) but to mark its disappróbation in so decided a manner as not to render itself liable to the recurrence of such a proceeding. Mr. Whitbread asked if any man could arraign the conduct of his honourable friend who had made the motion, and venture to say that there was not corruption in the election of members of parliament? Corrupt conduct was imputed to Mr. Spencer Perceval and lord Castlereagh; the responsibility was on the mover, and let the house decide fairly. He thought his noble friend might stand on the question of formı, and take the sense of the house. It might have been more prudent to consult the opinion of the chair as to the proper mode of proceeding; but, the motion being made, he thought the principle of the right to make it ought not to be yielded. This was an attack, not on all public men, as had been alleged, but on their corrupt practices; and if this attack should be repelled on the question now, he hoped it would be brought on again almost immediately. Some reasons in support of Mr. Madocks's motion were stated also by Mr. Biddulph; but it was negatived, without a division. House of Commons, May 11. Mr. Madocks rose, and moved that the resolution of that house, passed in the year 1799, be now read, which was done. The resolution stated in substance that it was 66 highly criminal for any minister or ministers, or any other servant of the crown in Great Britain, directly or indirectly, to make use of the power of his of fice in order to influence the election of members of parlia ment; and that an attempt to exercise that influence was an attack upon the dignity, the honour, and the independence of parliament; an infringement of the rights and liberties of the people; and an attempt to sap the basis of our free and happy constitution." The resolution of the 25th of April last, just stated in our last chapter, hapter, stating that it was the duty of that house to maintain a jealous guard over the purity and independence of parliament, was also read. Mr. Madocks then rose, and enumerated various cases in which the influence of the treasury had been exerted, in returning members to that house -"But, (said Mr. Madocks) having enumerated these cases, which, in my opinion, ought to be submitted to a committee to examine, sift, and regulate, I come now, sir, to a case of what I conider as aggravated in the extreme, and one that calls for an immediate investigation at your bar. It is to this case that, for the present, I propose to call the particular attention of the house, and to conclude with a motion for hearing evidence at the bar in support of the statement I am fully prepared to prove." The case was this. In the last general election, Mr. Quintin Dick purchased a seat in that house for the borough of Cashell, through the negociation of lord Castlereagh to Mr. Henry Wellesley, as the agent of the treasury. That, on a recent occasion of great importance, (the inquiry into the conduct of the duke of York) lord Castlereagh intimated to that gentleman the necessity of his either voting with the government, or resigning his seat in that house. That Mr. Dick, sooner than vote against principle and conscience, made choice of the latter alternative. To this transaction Mr. Madocks charged the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Perceval) as being privy, and having connived at it. This he would engage to prove, by wit nesses at the bar, if the house would give him leave to call them; than which they could not take a more direct method to remedy the abuses of the representative system of such places as Hastings Rye, Cambridge, Queensborough, and many other places. The Chancellor of the Exchequer considered this not merely as a criminatory charge against an individual, for alleged mal-practices, (in which case he would have no doubt that the house would readily entertain it). But he did not look upon the present charge in that light: the honourable gentleman had intimated in the opening of his charges, that there was still behind them a mass of other matter; which had been sufficiently illustrated in his detailed statements respecting the boroughs of Hastings, Rye, Cambridge, and Queensborough. It was not so much the vindication of the injured honour of the house that appeared to be the object, as that more general one of following up the system of what was denominated" a cer tain system." This, it seemed, was to be a first step towards general reform.-Whether, at such a time, it would be wise to warrant such charges as merely introductory to the agitation of the great question of reform, he left it to the house to determine. For the present, he declined put-ting in the plea he could conscientiously put in, until that house should have come to a determination on the propriety of entertaining the charge or not; protesting, at the same time, against the slightest inference of his guilt, from his deferring such a plea |