.

him any thing, nor never gave him any morning;” and he said “Grant, how do thing, nor he never received any things you do?" and I said “very well. I hope Did not know if he had ever received you are well.” money from Mr. Mason. Had voted in R. Hodgkinson was called in, and the interest of the duke of Newcastle. examined.-Had not voted at any election Mr. Mason was the agent of the duke of but the last for twenty-one years. ReNewcastle. Could not say he ever received twenty guineas after the members ceived any money from him for election were returned. Had bad that evening a purposes, from him himself, to his know- conversation with alderman Parker in the ledge. He received a present when he lobby, who told him, that no man had voted in the interest of the duke of occasion to commit himself. Newcastle. Could not say from whom. E. C. Brown was called in, and Recollected the election at which Mr. examined. He was town-clerk of Retford. Crompton was returned. Had a present He was an attorney.—Have you received sent him after that election. Could not any election money ?-I appeal to the say if it was 201., 301., or 401. Could not Chair whether I am bound to answer that say if it was more than 201. Did receive question or not. a present at Mr. Osbaldiston's election, The witness was directed to withdraw.' but did not know from whom. A gentle- Mr. Tennyson observed, that other wit man left it at his House. He had never nesses had been obliged to answer similar seen that gentleman before in his life-time. questions, and he did not conceive why He did not know what he received the the last witness should be permitted to money for.

“ He axed me my name, and refuse. gave it into my hand, and said not a word.” The Attorney-General.The witness He could not say how often that gentle was not in law bound to answer any quesman called before he found witness at tion which might criminate himself. The home.

other witnesses who had answered had By Mr. Fergusson.—He always received answered voluntarily. these presents about the time of elections. Sir R. Wilson said, that the House Never received such things at any other might be disposed to take any statement times. The present he received was in as to the practice of the law from the bank-notes. Could not say exactly what learned gentleman, but they would not he did with them. He took care of them. take his authority as to what was the pracHe put them into practice.

tice of parliament. That practice was to By Mr. Fergusson.-Did you count oblige witnesses to answer every question them before you put them into practice ?- put to them. Without that power, their The witness did not answer.

- Did

you

tell privileges, in prosecuting any inquiry of them, or reckon them, in order to see how this kind, were worth nothing. If the wita many there were ?- The witness still re- nesses were allowed to go from their bar mained silent, and the Chairman said he without being compelled to answer the must again caution him against the questions put to them, they ought to go in answers, or rather no answers, which he a body, with their chairman at their head, gave.-Could not say how many there and apologise to the individual whom they were. Knew how many there were when had committed. he received them.

Mr. Littleton said, if the House permitted The frequent repetition of this question the witness to depart without answering to the witness failed to elicit any distinct the question, they would act most unconanswer, whether he had or had not counted stitutionally. What would be the effect the notes. He could not name any candi- of such a course, but to give perfect imdate for East Retford who had not given punity to every man who might be called money to him, excepting Mr. Marsh. Had before them, who wished to suppress the once received payment for an election truth? He was surprised the Attorneywhen he was in London: a sum of money general should have shown himself so had been put into his hand in the cominon ignorant of the law of parliament. But his street; he could not tell how much.- ignorance was the least to be considered. Have

you had any conversation with alder- He had shown a contempt for that law in man Parker, of Retford, since you came to the opinion he had given. Was it to be London ? - Just as we passed on. . He supposed that in asking any questions said “good morning ;” and I said " good from a witness, they would not - extend to him a full protection from the consequences member of that House who sat or voted which in other places would follow from an from any corner in it, voted or acted more admission criminating himself ? It was independently than he did ; and therefore the well-known practice of the House to do he had reason to complain of the rudeness $o, and it would abandon its duty if it did of the hon. member for Staffordshire. He pot compel every witness to answer all the had not given his opinion as Attorneyquestions put to him.

general. He had given it as a member of Sir C. Burrell observed, that the law of that House, and as independently as that parliament, as he understood it, was, that hon. member or any other, and therefore every witness was protected from the con- it was, that he complained of his attack, as sequences which might otherwise follow rude, wanton, and unfounded. from his speaking the truth before the Mr. Secretary Peel said, he was sure his House, but that he was committed only hon. friend, the member for Staffordshire, for prevarication, or for refusing to answer. would see, on more cool reflection, that the He therefore considered that the witness attack he had made upon his learned was bound to answer any question put to friend had called for the warmth of exhim, to the best of his knowledge ; but as pression with which he had met it. He had some witnesses might not be aware of the risen for the purpose of begging that any protection which the House gave to those remarks arising from personal feeling might who were called before it, he would move, give way to the important subject under that the chairman be instructed to state to discussion. They were then acting in a the witness, that in any evidence he gave different course from their ordinary probefore that House, he should be protected ceeding, and it was of the utmost imas far as he spoke the truth.

portance that they should go on with good The Attorney-General said, he rose for temper. His learned friend had laid down the purpose of repelling the coarse, un- the legal rule, consistent with justice and founded, and wanton, attack which had equity, that no man was bound to give an been made upon him by the hon. member answer which might criminate himself; but, for Staffordshire. The hon. member had on the other hand, it was not meant to charged him with ignorance of the law on be denied, that as the witness before the this question, and had added that his committee was to be protected from the ignorance was the least of it. How was consequence of his answers, his case was the hon. member warranted in making such taken out of the general rule ; for if the a wanton attack on him? Had he said witness could refuse to answer any questhat if they compelled the witness to answer tion put to him, no investigation by that any questions put to him, they were not House could take place. In that respect, bound to cast round him the mantle of their the House differed from the courts of law; protection, as to the consequence of his and he remembered the case of a witanswers? But the hon, member had im

ness, an attorney, who was examined at plied that something of this kind was meant that bar, who refused to divulge the secrets by him, and had taxed him with ignorance of his client; but that was overruled, and of the law of parliament. He had been the House declared that the rules of the longer in parliament than the hon. member, law courts did not apply; that for the ends

; and knew the practice of parliament, as of public justice it was necessary that he well as he did : but he would not retaliate should answer, he being protected from the or reciprocate his wanton attack, for he consequences. On these grounds, he was disdained such rustic coarseness. He had compelled to answer. The case before the merely objected that a witness was not House was one which, in his opinion, called legally bound to criminate himself, and at for an application of the same rule; but once the hon. member accused him of he thought it was necessary that the witignorance. He could not tamely bear such ness should be informed that in answering, language as that which the hon. member he would be protected from the consehad vomited forth. The hon. member was quences of his answers. He would suggest, wholly unjustified in the coarse attack he therefore, that the resolution of the House had made upon him: and he trusted it of the 26th of March, 1818, be read to the might be permitted to him, as the Attorney witness. general, who, though Attorney-general, Mr. Wynn rose for the purpose of stating was still a member of that House, to repel the difference between evidence given it as he now did. He would say, that no before that House, and evidence given in At present

courts of law. In that House no evidence any hon. member, that he is not at liberty given could be used against the witness in to give evidence elsewhere of what passes any other place, without the permission of here, without the direct, or at least the the House, and as that permission would implied permission of the House, I wish not be granted where the party spoke to state this principle as broadly as possible; the truth, his protection was complete. In for if I am mistaken, it is high time that the courts of law, the party giving evidence my error should be corrected. might refuse to answer what would I certainly conceive, that on the privilege criminate himself; but if he gave his of preventing what passes here from being answers voluntarily, the court could not communicated elsewhere, vitally depends protect him from the consequences. the dignity and the rights of this House.

Mr. Lyttleton said. that nothing had No hon, member who hears what passes fallen from him, that onght to have excited within these walls (and no other person the irascibility in which the Attorney- has a right to hear it) can be required, or general had so intemperately indulged. In allowed, to give evidence in a court of what he had stated, he was not conscious justice touching the matter which he has that there had been any vulgarity or so heard. coarseness.

The witness was again called in, and the Mr. Horace Twiss wished to make a Chairman having read to him the resolufew observations with respect to the reso- tion of the House respecting the proteclution of 1818. Unquestionably the rule tion given to witnesses, and told him that in a court of justice was, that no man was under such protection he was bound to bound to answer a question the answer answer all questions put to him, his exato which might criminate himself. It had mination proceeded, been said distinctly, with reference to the By Mr. Tennyson. - I have received present case, that if the witness were to election-money after two elections, those criminate himself by his answers, the of 1818 and 1820. About six weeks after House would protect him from all conse- Mr. Crompton and Mr. Evans were requences injurious to himself. The right turned in the first election, two letters, hon. gentleman had read the resolution of without signature, were brought to my the House, which declared that no clerk, house. Each letter contained 201. I do short-hand writer, or other officer of the not know from whom they came. I did House, should give evidence elsewhere of not know the hand-writing. They were what had occurred in that House, without directed to me. After the election of leave first obtained. That leave, he took it, 1820, I received two letters, containing would not be granted. Buthe begged to ask, the same sums, addressed to me, and if a witness was criminally prosecuted, left in a similar way. I should conceive what could prevent his conviction on the the money was left in consequence of the evidence of any two or three hon. mem- election. The lower freemen, I conceive, bers who had heard his confession in that expected money after the election. I House, and whose attendance in the court could not have received the money in conof justice it would not be in the power of sequence of my vote, for I had not voted, the House to prevent? He had made this or promised a vote; but as I am to speak statement, not as presuming to lay down the truth, I believe it was for the purposes the law of parliament, but in order that, if of the election. The practice of receiving wrong, he might be corrected.

money was not general. It was confined The Speaker.-I beg permission to say to the lower freemen. a few words. Some expressions have just By Mr. Peel.—How came it to be sent fallen from the learned member for Woot- to you?-I was at that time a poor boy ton Bassett, which are so directly at vari- writing in the office in which I have now ance with the first and most important the honour to be a partner. privileges of this House, that I feel it my By Mr. F. Clinton. I was agent to duty not to allow them to pass without sir H. W. Wilson. I got a promise of sixtynotice. I understood him to say, that it seven votes for him. I did not promise might possibly happen that a member of money. The freemen did not expect it, and this House might be required to give evi- the reason why I say they did not expect dence in a court of Law of what had passed it is this I met sir H. Wilson one day near within these walls. Now, I conceive, that the town, and I told him the lower freehardly any doubt can exist in the mind of men expected money. He said, “My good fellow, I will not talk about money, custom mentioned. The son of witness is I have come here to do what is right and an apprentice at Retford. Does not rejust.” I mentioned this to the freemen, collect any conversation with the master and they said they would vote for sir H. of his son respecting a different rate to Wilson let the consequence be what it be paid for his board if the borough were might. The witness further stated that, disfranchised. in his belief, there were forty persons at Thomas Appleby examined. — Witness each election who did not receive money. was a burgess of East Retford, and had reThe total number of electors was two sided there all his life. Had received elechundred and sixty, of which number one tion money. Packets had been left at his hundred and twenty were resident. At house with his wife; there were two packthe last election one hundred and seventy ets containing twenty guineas in each. This polled, of whom fifty-three were for was in 1820; it was the same at the former sir H. W. Wilson, none of whom, in the election. Is a miller by trade, and an belief of the witness, received money. alderman of East Retford. At the elec· Jonathan Banks was called in and ex- tion in 1807, he did not receive either amined,

money or present, when sir W. Ingilby By Mr. Tennyson.—Had been a free- and Mr. Crawford were returned. After man of East Retford for twenty years. the election in 1820, he got two packets, Had been junior bailiff. The bailiffs were with the sum of twenty guineas in each.

. the returning officers. Was a smith and He could not say whether others got the farrier by trade. Witness admitted after same. some hesitation that he had received William Clerk, examined by Mr. money. Had received money, at three Tennyson. Has been a burgess and different times. The last occasion was alderman of Retford for thirteen years. after the last election. Two letters had Remembers the 24th of February, 1819. been put into his house late at night, and He received forty guineas on the part at different times; they contained twenty of Mr. Evans. Does not know whether guineas each. At the former election that was double the usual sum. Is not there had been one letter sent to his aware of the precise sum commonly given house containing twenty guineas. Witness to the burgesses. Heard twenty guineas and believed it came from Mr. Crompton. forty guineas only mentioned as the reAfterwards there came another. In 1812, spective considerations to voters. Never the witness received no money. He had received forty guineas except once.

Got promised to vote for Mr. Osbaldiston : no money on the side of Mr. Crompton in but when he applied for the election 1818. After that, on the 29th of May money, witness was told there was none for 1820. he paid twenty guineas. him; he was told that he was not a staunch Never was made the medium of transblue. Never said that he and his family mitting twenty guineas to a Mr. Pierpoint, had received six score guineas. Whilst of Lincoln's-inn. Was thrice bailiff. bailiff, witness belonged to the corporation. Thomas Warwick, examined by Mr. This was in 1820. Had received money Tennyson. The duke of Newcastle's after he had been bailiff.—Did you not steward desired him to go into a certain say, that the man who delivered the letter room and take some packets, which were had concealed his face; but that you had to be found upon the table, for the purfound him out?-No.

pose of distributing them among the William Hodson was called in, and houses of the burgesses of Retford. He examined,

did as he was directed. By Mr. Tennyson.—Had received money William Leadbetter examined. after the election more than once.—How burgess of East Retford, and voted at the much? I cannot tell.—Was it 101.? I elections of 1812, 1818, and 1820. He do not know. – Was it 201.? I do not received nothing for his vote in 1812, know. Perhaps it might be 201.—Was it nothing in 1818, and nothing in 1820. He 201. or 211.? It might be 201. or 21l. did not get either money or present on The witness further stated, that he re- any of those occasions; nor did any memceived the same sum on all occasions. ber of his family, to his knowledge, get There was a custom of paying the bur- money on his account. Knows William gesses. It was not for their votes, it Newton. Having repeated his denial, he was a present.

Witness has heard such a was ordered to withdraw.

was

Is a

William Newton was examined. — Is lliberty of asking what course ministers in-, clerk to a solicitor at Retford. Knows tended to pursue with reference to this W. Leadbetter, and heard him admit that most important matter – whether they he had got money at the election of 1812, meant to take the prosecution of it into their on the part of Mr. Osbaldiston, and a own hands, or to leave it in the hands of similar consideration at the elections in the colonial legislatures? If the latter still 1318 and 1820. Within the last fortnight, opposed every attempt to remedy the evils, Leadbetter had avowed to the fact of his government had the remedy entirely in having received money for his votes. He their own hands. It was a short and himself was not employed by any person simple one. Let a temporary duty be to collect the evidence. His doing so was imposed on all sugar imported from our entirely of his own voluntary impulse. colonies into this country, until the planters Another person named Sharpe did the became sensible of the necessity of a same. He knew a man of the name of change in their conduct. Hodson, and was told by Parnham that Lord F. Gower said, that he was not Hodson had told him he had received immediately able to answer the hon. money from Fox, and changed a 201. note gentleman's inquiry. out of it at Parnham's shop.

Mr. Bernal said, he was as anxio s On the motion of lord Nugent, Lead- as the hon. member for Surrey to know, better was recalled, and the evidence of what course ministers intended to pursue; the last witness having been read over to whether the colonies were still to consider him, he was asked if he still persisted in themselves as component parts of the stating that he never had received any British empire, or whether they were to be. money in the years 1812, 1818, or 1820. entirely isolated and distinct from that The witness persisted in his former ac- empire. It was high time to determine, count, denying that he had received any whether the link which still bound the money at either of those periods, directly colonies to the mother country was to be or indirectly, or that he had ever said so dissolved or not. When the hon. gentleto any person.

man talked of adopting a measure, for the The witness Hodson was also recalled, purpose of bringing the question to a speedy and examined to the same effect. He issue, he seemed to forget that, by imposing said he had never received a shilling from a duty on the sugar exported from our Fox on any body's account, or taken a colonies, a bounty would be given on the 201. note to Parnham's shop to change. increase of the slave-trade, by the enHe admitted that he dealt with Parnham couragement which would thereby be given for grocery, and owed him money at to the importation of sugar from Martindifferent times, but he must have recol-ique, the Havannah, the Brazils,&c. where, lected having changed a 201. note at his the slave trade was still carried on to a shop if he had done so.

horrible extent; more especially under the The House resumed, the Chairman re- French flag. At that very moment an ported progress, and asked leave to sit immense number of slaves were constantly again.

transferring from the coast of Africa to

the colonies he had mentioned. HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Sir A. Grant said, that if the object of,

the petitioners was the annihilation of the Wednesday, March 5.

slave trade, they could not do a greater SLAVE TRADE.] Mr. Denison present- favour to the West Indies than by petitioned a petition from the Auxiliary Anti- ing for its utter annihilation. Great evil Slavery Society of the county of Surrey. resulted to our West-India islands from Above four years had elapsed since the the continuance of the trade in other House had agreed, upon the motion of Mr. quarters. As to the amelioration of the Canning, to certain resolutions expressive state of the slaves, a unanimous feeling of their sense of the expediency of such an pervaded the whole of the West India amelioration of the condition of the Slaves proprietors to contribute to that object as in the West Indies as might gradually lead far as it was in their power to do so; but to their emancipation. He believed, how to pursue that object by the means resorted ever, that no step had been taken by the to by many persons in this country, would Colonial Assemblies in furtherance of that only produce irritation in the minds of the most desirable object. He would take the colonists.