Hide Articles List

15 articles on this Page
















HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THVRSDAY, MAY 2. The Bristol and Gloucester Railway Bill, and the Bristol Floating Dock Bill, were read a third tirtie and passed. Mr. Roebuck gave notice that he should on Friday ask Sir 0 G. de Hochcpied Larpent, Sir J. C. Hobhouse, Mr. H. Wpliinstone, Captain Plumbridge, Viscount Chelsea, and Mr. < Russell, whether they were cognisant of, or parlies to, any -r.angement by which any one of them was to accept the stew. miship of the Chihern Hundreds, and thereby vacate his seat III that house, notwithstanding that he should have been declared inly elected by the committee appointed to try the merits of the j'nxion against his return. He should also move, at the same lime, for a select committee to inquire whether certain facts onnecred with the proceedings of election committees did not .-institute a breach of the privileges of that house. The hon. member added, that he would put the question of which he <ad already given notice, to Mr. J, Attwood, and Major Be. msfoid. Air- Hutt rose to move for copies of circulars sent by the Se- retary of State for the Home Department to the various town. 1 k-rks or clerks to the magistrates, between the months of Aug. nd Dec. 1841, requiring information as to the state of the ma- gistracy in their respective towns. He supported his motion •>y referringto the understanding on which the Municipal Corpo- itions Act was finally agreed to, with respect to the recommen- .itions of town councils in the appointment of magistrates, and reviewed some of the recent appointments in different boroughs ii,ide since the accession of the present government to office. Ile said that the system which had been introduced by Sir J. Graham was full of danger to the country and if it was to be nnrsued, it might shake the confidence of the people in the ad. ministration of justice. Sir James Graham had hoped that a distinctive motion would lave been made on which he could have asked the house for a lecided expression of its opinion. He said that Lord J. Rus. .e!I, while he was Home Secretary, had not invariably adopted he recommendations of the town councils in the appointment "f magistrates, of which several instances were given, stress iicing laid more especially on the case of Bristol. The propor- noa of Whigs and Radicals to Conservatives appointed in va. I ¡OilS boroughs was very great, as evinced by a list in which the n-iines and numbers were given, and from which it appeared ihatof the 1,026 magistrates nominated by the late Govern- ment, the proportions, not Including fifty-seven to thirteen places which he had not made any additions, and which, therefoie, vore not taken into his calculation, were Ihese: Whig- Radicals 713 Conservatives 226. From this number he had excluded none, but added many and the gross number now stood, in. .tud of 1,206, 1,435. The right hon. baronet concluded by .aying, that if ever there was an evil that wanted redress, it was this unequal disiribution of the magistracy, committed by 1m predecessors in office for party purposes, and by which jus. ii. e was prostitnted in the boroughs of England and he, there. lore, was prepared to vindicate his conduct, cither generally or specifically, with respect to the use which he had made of the prerogative of the Crown, in tempering and moderating this injustice. He had not, whatever might have been the charac. ter of his appointments, the meiitof recommending any one who had been convicted of treason—he was not respjnsible for having made John Frost a magistrate. Mr. F. Maule expressed his astonishment that a Home Se. cretary should venture in the House of Commons to maka the assertion that justice had been prostituted in the boroughs of Kngland. He called in question the accuracy of the list which had been read by Sir James Graham, and endeavoured to show that, in several instances, he had destroyed the previously-ex- isting balance of parties, and had converted the magistracy in these places into a Tory one. Several members then spoke, each addressing his observations with reference to the particular place which he represented, and the object of each being, according to his local knowledge or information, to vindicate or criminate the late Government in their magisterial appointments. Sir. R. Peel said that the Government did not vindicate its appointments on the score of political partisanship. With the present constitution of our society and institutions, it was im- possible to keep the magistracy free from political imputation but it was necessary for the satisfaction of the public mind hat the magistracy shonld not be composed almost wholly of one political party. The present Government, in altering a propor- tion which, in the cases of most of the larger towns, and many of the smaller ones, was glaringly unjust, were merely trying lo equalise the number of magistrates from the two parties in. stead of giving the preponderance to one and they, therefore, rested their vindication, not on the plea that their predecessors had acted from political motives, they also did the same, but on the ground that it was essential to the effectual administration of justice to compose the magistracy of more than one political Lord John Russell said, that if the Whigs, on coming into othee in 1830, had acted upon principles now avowed, there must have been then a sweeping change in the county magis- tracy, fortbed as it was under Tory Lord-Chancellors and Tory overntnents. But he was of opinion that such a consideration aS_r°-j,Cai Pr'nciP,es s^ou'(l be a very minor one in selecting individuals to fill judicial stations. He did not deny that the town councils generally recommended a great preponderance of magistrates of liberal opinions but if the majority of peo- ple were of .these opinions, it was natural that there should be such a preponderance. The noble lord conceded his speech by some references to the steadiness of his own political course as compared with that of S,r James Graham. After some observat.ons from Mr. Williams. Mr. Collins, Lord VVorsley Mr. Struti, and Captain Layard, the debate, .Inch lasted from five till half-pasl twelve, was dosed by are. ply from Air. Hutt, and then the morion was agreed to. F rioav, MAY 6. Mr. Roebuck brought forward his motion, of which he had .ven notice on ihe previous night. On putting the question to the individual members whom he charged with submitting to 1 compromise, Lord Chelsea, Mr. Russell, Sir J. Hobhouse, and Majof tieresford, denied his light to make the inquiry. Captain Plumbridge and Mr, H. Elphioitone admitted that t o-npromises had taken place, though without their cognizance. After an exciting conversation, the debate was adjourned. The Income-Tax Bill was then resumed. Mr. Hume moved that the income should be calculated on profits for one year, and not of three which was rejected by 76 to 27. Mr. Huine then moved that the Act remain in iree for one year only which was negatived by a majority ol ) hundred and twenty-two. I Mr. Yorke then moved a clause to exempt attorneys subject io the tax from the payment of certificate duties; but it was rejected by a majority of a 165.