wards," and that both the Motion and the
Amendment should be withdrawn.
MR. AGLIONBY said, he would agree
to the suggestion.

Amendment and Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Order for consideration of Petition of Henry Edwards read.

sures by which St. Paul's Cathedral and Westminster Abbey might be opened to the public free of expense. That petition was probably signed by more artists and men of science and intelligence than any ever presented. The result was that within a week Her Majesty gave instructions to the noble Lord to use every means in his power to carry out the prayer of the petition. The noble Lord accordingly addressed letters to the Deans and Chapters of St. Paul's, Westminster, and several other cathedrals in the country, stating Her Majesty's wish. It was only quite recently that this object had been partially attained. Westminster Abbey had been opened to the public by Dr. Buckland, the dean; and on the 1st of May next he understood St. Paul's was to be opened free of charge. Seeing that we were about to be visited by a number of intelligent strangers, that all the cathedrals on the Continent were open free of charge, and that these places were always visited by strangers, it was most desirable that measures should be renewed by the Government for obtaining free access to all the cathedrals in the country. It ought to be stated, in justice to the capitular bodies of Norwich, Wells, and York, that those cathedrals were already open free of charge; and in those cases the very best results had been effected. There was no better means of improving the moral character of the people than by giving them free access to Serjeant-at-Arms. He also stated "that those fabrics; it was, in fact, a kind of education, exclusive of the reverential awe with which these venerable structures must impress every one that entered them. He would take that opportunity of expressing to the noble Lord his thanks for the efforts which he made at the time.

COLONEL RAWDON said, that Hampton Court was now open on Sundays; he would throw it out for the consideration of the Government whether or not the National Gallery and Kew Gardens might not also be advantageously thrown open on that day.

ST. ALBANS ELECTION. Order read for resuming Adjourned Debate.

Question again proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."

MR. AGLIONBY said, he did not think this a question for much argument or discussion; the matter was in the hands of the House, who, he hoped, would temper judgment with mercy. He would only observe that Edwards had never been called before the Committee, except for the purpose of being identified by those who spoke to the facts with which he was connected. He had never been called as a witness, nor had he been brought to the bar of that House, and asked whether he had anything to say in mitigation of his offence. He (Mr. Aglionby) was not responsible for the course taken by Edwards, or for the accuracy of his allegations, but he had thought it his duty to present the petition entrusted to him. Now, the question was changed. Edwards did not deny the allegations that had been made against him, and he thought had exercised great prudence and discretion in doing so. He had presented a petition, in which he stated that he submitted to the sentence of the House, and that he had been since the 7th of this month in the custody of the

he had been found by that honourable House guilty of a Breach of the Privileges of that House, and begged to express his deep contrition for the same. He submitted himself to the mercy of that honourable House, and having endured imprisonment while those nearest and dearest to him were and had been dangerously ill, he prayed that he might be deemed to have suffered enough, and that that honourable House would order him to be discharged." Leaving the matter in the hands of the House, he should merely move that Henry Edwards be called to the Bar, reprimanded by Mr. Speaker, and discharged on payment of his fees.

Motion made, and Question proposed"That Henry Edwards having submitted himself to the mercy of the House, be called to the Bar of the House, and be reprimanded by Mr. Speaker, and discharged, on payment of his fees." SIR G. CLERK suggested, that the MR. EDWARD ELLICE would merely question would be more conveniently raised observe, as Chairman of the Committee, on the next Order of the Day for the that he thought the Committee, having consideration of the petition of Henry Ed-reported Edwards to the House, had done

with him; it then became a matter between | amounting to an admission, that he was Edwards and the House, and it was not guilty of the conduct charged against him. his duty to recommend to the House any It was rather curious to see that indirectly course respecting him. If there had been his admission, like his denial, was worthany doubt on his hon. Friend's mind with less :-" Your petitioner, having been respect to the terms of the late Reports found by your honourable House to have against Edwards, he trusted that both his been guilty of a Breach of the Privileges hon. Friend and other Gentlemen were now of the House of Commons, begs to express satisfied that there were ample and suf- his deep contrition for his conduct," &c. ficient grounds for the course adopted by The petitioner did not admit that he had the Committee. been guilty of a Breach of the Privileges of the House, though, as he expressed contrition, it might be assumed that he admitted it; and, as he asked pardon, it was to be presumed that he asked pardon for something. For what was it he expressed that contrition, and asked that pardon? It was for a gross and scandalous attempt to obstruct the course of justice by bribing witnesses to go out of the way. The consequence was, that the whole inquiry had been defeated; after all the expense the petitioners had incurred in support of their petition, it turned out to be futile and fruitless; and Edwards having succeeded in his object, and admitted he was guilty of this misconduct, now applied to the House to be discharged, on the ground that he had suffered eight days' imprisonment. He prayed that he might be deemed to have suffered" for his fault, and that he should be set at liberty. It was to be supposed that he meant he had sufficiently suffered for his fault. If the House were to yield to the petition of Edwards, would they not be holding out encouragement to similar persons, to persons disposed to stifle inquiry? and many strong partisans would not be indisposed to submit to a week's imprisonment if they could frustrate inquiry. It would be a most dangerous example were Edwards allowed to escape with so mild a punishment as he asked. Edwards did not propose to offer any further explanation of his conduct. He admitted he was guilty. What ought the House to do in the circumstances? It was a subject for regret that Edwards should refer to the sufferings of " those nearest and dearest to him," who "have been and now are dangerously ill." It generally happened that persons connected with those who were subjected to sufferings for their own acts, suffered as well as the parties themselves. That was one of the checks that punishment gave on the commission of offences. The sufferings endured not only in person by those who were punished, but by those who were near and dear" to them, offered a warning and

SIR F. THESIGER had certainly expected, not that the hon. Chairman of the Committee would have risen, but rather that one of his hon. and learned Friends, the Attorney or Solicitor General, would have risen to inform the House with regard to the course that ought to be pursued under those circumstances. As they had not risen, however, he felt compelled to assume a rather unwelcome office, that of pressing with severity against a person who had humbled himself before the House, who had acknowledged his offence, and expressed his deep contrition. The House would be really trifling if they were to yield to the application now made by Edwards; they would be covering themselves and the proceedings of the Committee with ridicule; they would be abandoning a duty which, however disagreeable and painful, they were imperatively required to discharge. One could perfectly understand why Edwards had not thought proper to petition that he should be brought to the bar, because it was quite evident he could not venture to face the House, to deny the statements made on oath with respect to his practices, and on which the Committee had acted and reported. Edwards had adopted a different course. A petition, whether stamped with truth or falsehood, presented the same appearance; and Edwards had, in the first place, come to the House with a petition, in which, though not in very direct terms, he certainly had denied that he was guilty of those practices which had induced his being reported to the House; and he petitioned for his discharge on that ground. It appeared that the petition of Edwards, presented originally, was entirely false; and he came before the House with this falsehood, and claimed as his right, as a person who was guilty of no offence, to be discharged. Edwards, finding now that the House would not yield to his application, shifted his ground, presented himself in the attitude of a suppliant, and admitted, in extraordinary terms it was true, but in terms

Mr. E. Ellice

66

Resolved-"That George Sealey Waggett, having evaded all attempts to secure his attendance before the said Committee, and John Hayward and Henry Edwards having prevented his attendance before the said Committee, have been severally guilty of a breach of the privileges of this

a preventive. If the House were to yield | April] in the case of the St. Albans Electo these representations, every guilty per- tion, read as followeth :son would escape with impunity. The offence was one of a very serious character. Edwards had endeavoured to deceive the House; and, under the circumstances, he (Sir F. Thesiger) felt it his duty to move, as an Amendment, "That Henry Edwards be committed to Newgate.

House.

"Ordered-That George Scaley Waggett, John Hayward, and Henry Edwards, having been guilty their said offence taken into the custody of the of a breach of the privileges of this House, be for Serjeant-at-Arms attending this House; and that Mr. Speaker do issue his Warrants accordingly." Amendment proposed

"To leave out from the word 'having' to the

The ATTORNEY GENERAL quite concurred in all that had been said by his hon. and learned Friend the Member for Abingdon (Sir F. Thesiger). He did not rise at once, because he felt that, when a question of law was pending, those who end of the Question, in order to add the words, belonged to the legal profession ought to been guilty of a breach of the Privileges of this tender their assistance; but where there House, be committed to Her Majesty's gaol of was no such question, and the only ques-Newgate, and that Mr. Speaker do issue his Warrants accordingly,' instead thereof." tion respected the amount of punishment that should be inflicted on the offender, MR. AGLIONBY said, it was not his that course did not appear to him neces-intention to raise any discussion on the sary. But it was unquestionable that the merits of the case. The House was the House should visit with punishment the sole judge, and all the facts were before it. offence now clearly known to have been It was quite manifest that the feeling of committed. It appeared to him that all the House was that the offence had not must now admit the wisdom of the proceed- been expiated by the punishment which ing of yesterday, when the House, instead this man had already undergone, and that of at once sending the person to Newgate, there must be further punishment. He gave him the opportunity of coming for- assumed that there might be a period of ward to deny the offence alleged against termination for that punishment. Under him, or of admitting it, and submitting these circumstances, he should not divide himself to the mercy of the House. The the House upon this question. petitioner admitted that he had been guilty of an outrageous violation of the Privileges of the House. It was impossible for the House to pass this over; and he concurred with his hon. and learned Friend (Sir F. Thesiger) that the petitioner ought to be sent to Newgate. The expression of contrition was not sufficient atonement for the offence of which he had been guilty. Perhaps the House might take it into consideration on a future occasion, when the question as to the duration of the punishment was brought before them; but at present there was nothing to do but to follow the course recommended by his hon. and learned Friend.

LORD JOHN RUSSELL was very glad that the hon. Member for Cockermouth did not mean to divide the House against the proposed Amendment. It was always desirable that the House should be unanimous, or agree as far as possible, on questions affecting their Privileges, and they must all be of opinion, after hearing the Order and Resolutions of the House read, that they ought to proceed to visit this grave offence with severity.

MR. BANKES said, he did not rise for the purpose of opposing what appeared to be the general desire of the House; but he wished, as the House was on the eve of adjournment for the Easter recess, to ascertain what was to be done with regard to the other parties against whom Mr. Speaker's warrants had been issued. Was it the intention of the Government, under the circumstances, to offer any reward for the apprehension of those parties, such a course having been pursued in the Grantham and Penryn cases? He had another observation to make with regard to the proceedings of the Committee, and had already signified his wish to have copies of

MR. EDWARD ELLICE had no wish

the shorthand writer's notes of its pro- move, as an Amendment to the Motion ceedings on its last day of meeting. The for a Commission, that it be composed of hon. Chairman of the Committee (Mr. Members of the House sworn to inquire Edward Ellice) had made a statement with into the charge of bribery against the borespect to the proceedings of the Commit- rough. tee on that day, which, according to his (Mr. Bankes's) apprehension of it, was to prolong this discussion; but it seemed very different from a statement respecting to him that a charge was made against those proceedings that appeared in the him, of which it was necessary he should public journals. He understood the hon. take notice. He understood that the hon. Chairman to state, that the question of the Member opposite (Mr. Bankes) considered competency of the Committee at the mo- that the Report of the Committee was at ment to give their Report was never raised, variance with what had occurred in the or claimed to be raised, before them; but course of the proceedings; and he could the statement in one of the public journals not let that charge go forth without anwas directly the reverse. From that state-swering it. They had met on the precedment it appeared, that the counsel of the ing day in Committee, to hear any objecpetitioners did claim to be heard on the tion that might be urged against the lequestion of the competency of the Commit- gality of the Committee; but no such obtee; nay, he argued that the Committee jection was formally raised on either side. was incompetent at the time, and ad- They asked what course the parties who dressed them no longer as a Committee, moved the adjournment wished to take; but as hon. Members of the House who no and they stated that none of the witnesses longer did legally constitute a Committee. on whose account the adjournment took He also found from the same authority place were present. They then asked for that the learned counsel of the petitioners a further adjournment. The application did expressly, again and again, urge upon the Committee the propriety of adjourning, in the hope of obtaining the testimony of those witnesses; and it was stated by one person who appeared before the Committee, that within an hour he would be able to give an account of one of those witnesses. Those statements were contrary to what he understood to be the statement of the hon. Chairman. He wished, therefore, when the present question was disposed of, to obtain a copy of the shorthand writer's notes of proceedings on that last day, and, although it was not competent for him to move for the speeches of counsel, he might move for the Minutes of the applications made by them in regard either to the petitioner or the sitting Member. As it was announced that a Commission would be moved for to inquire into this matter, he would suggest a form of Commission different from that which had been adopted on former occasions. It should be composed of Members of the House sworn to deliberate on this particular case, and they might then secure the attendance of the witnesses who had absconded. They could not, of course, review the proceedings of the Committee as regarded the seat of the sitting Member; but he thought that a tribunal should be instituted to inquire into the charge of bribery against the borough. He had no wish to spare the borough, and should Mr. Bankes

was made formally, and the party making it naturally admitted that they were a Committee competent to decide on the question. The Committee took fully into consideration the necessity for further adjournment, and also that there had been an adjournment already for three weeks to obtain the attendance of those witnesses; but, notwithstanding that adjournment, it appeared to them that they were as far from obtaining the attendance of those witnesses as ever. They also took into consideration that some of the witnesses charged with bribery did come before them, and swore they were not bribed; and it naturally struck them that the three persons who were absent would, if they attended, say the same thing, or throw themselves on the mercy of the Committee, and urge that, as they were charged with a crime, the Committee should not ask them to answer questions which would criminate themselves. On these grounds, the Committee thought that it was not their duty to keep the case hanging over the petitioner and sitting Member during the Easter holidays; and that decision was come to by every Gentleman on the Committee, without the slightest doubt of the propriety of what they were doing. He had asked the counsel for the petitioners, whether he was ready to go on with the case. The reply was, he was not prepared to proceed. A conversation then took

LORD JOHN RUSSELL did not think it would be according to precedent for the Crown to offer a reward until addressed for that purpose by the House. The House might address the Crown, and then the Crown might offer the reward. Resolved

place, and perhaps the Committee ought | surrendered themselves, that would be the not to have it allowed to proceed, but proper course to take. ought to have cleared the room when the case was closed; but a discussion took place, in which, as he had stated on a previous occasion, no formal objection was made to their legality; there was certainly an objection suggested, but the nature of that objection was not stated. Under these circumstances, he felt he was borne out in the statement he had made, that no formal objection was made before that Committee as to its legality as a Com

mittee.

MR. BANKES begged to express his satisfaction at the statement that the hon. Gentleman had made.

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question,' put, and negatived; Words added; Main Question, as amended, put, and agreed

to.

MR. AGLIONBY said, that warrants had been issued against the three persons mentioned. The question was, whether, for the purposes of justice, it would not be wise and proper to discharge the warrants against those persons who were not in custody, at all events? If the warrants were not discharged, he would take for granted that the parties would keep out of the way, consequently they could not be brought before the Commission, where their evidence might establish a case of bribery; but if, on the contrary, the warrants were discharged, and the parties were allowed to go home, they might, under a Bill of Indemnity, give evidence, and so further the ends of justice.

"That Henry Edwards, having been guilty of a breach of the Privileges of this House, be committed to Her Majesty's Gaol of Newgate, and that Mr. Speaker do issue his Warrants ac

cordingly."

THE KAFFIR WAR.

MR. ADDERLEY presented a petition from several persons connected with the Cape of Good Hope, praying the House to recommend to Her Majesty to appoint a Commission to proceed to South Africa, and inquire and report as to the best mode of adjusting the relations between this country and the Kaffir tribes. That petition was signed by several of the leading merchants connected with the Cape of Good Hope in London; and be believed, from the information he had received, he might safely state that if there had been more time almost every merchant connected with the Cape in London would have signed it. It was not only signed by those merchants, but it was also signed by an individual whose signature conveyed more weight to it than the signatures of all the merchants who had signed it. That was the signature of a gentleman who was delegated from the Cape of Good Hope to represent the grievances of the colony to Her Majesty in England. Whatever might SIR G. CLERK thought it impossible be considered of that gentleman's character to agree that witnesses who had absconded it mattered very little; for a man who had the moment à Committee had finally re- filled the position he did in troublous times ported, should be freed from the conse- must have many enemies as well as friends; quences of their having absconded. He but at all events it was certain that this would call the attention of the House to gentleman represented in this country (as the course that had been adopted in the he could prove by written documents) the Ipswich case, and suggest that, before any opinions of at least nine-tenths of the step was taken, sufficient lapse of time whole electoral body which was proposed should be allowed for the execution of the to be formed in the Cape of Good Hope. warrants by the Serjeant-at-Arms. That He was the organ of at least nine-tenths of officer should be called upon to state what the future constituency of the Cape of steps had been taken, and if it appeared Good Hope. The petitioners stated that that his officers had used all due diligence at this moment the Colony and its Governin their power to execute the warrants, the House should, as on a former occasion, address Her Majesty to offer a reward for the apprehension of the parties. Perhaps it would be as well that no steps should be taken until the House reassembled after the recess; but if the parties had not then VOL. CXVI. [THIRD SERIES.]

ment were in a most dangerous predicament, and they prayed Her Majesty to send a Commission to the colony to inquire and report upon the best mode of removing the causes of complaint. He had been asked to represent the feelings of the colonists, and to lay their case before

I