right hon. Gentleman had better move that no Member of Parliament should be made a Judge.

Proviso struck out.

Section, as amended, agreed to.
Section 9,

"The expression "the Court" shall, for the
purposes of this Act, mean the Court of Common
Pleas, and such Court shall, subject to the provi-
sions of this Act, have the same powers, jurisdic-
tion, and authority with reference to an Election
Petition and the proceedings thereon as it would
have if such Petition were an ordinary cause
within their jurisdiction-"
read.

"by a jury to be selected as hereinafter provided." If that Amendment were adopted, all matters of law relating to these Election Petitions would be tried by a Judge, while all questions of fact would be decided by a Jury of the people of this country.

MR. ROEBUCK pointed out a more convenient method by which the questions before the Committee could be put, and concluded by observing that in the multitude of words there was not much wisdom.

THE CHAIRMAN said, possibly the course proposed by the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) was a more convenient one than that which had been taken. Still the hon and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets had a right to put his Amendment in the way he had done.

SIR ROBERT COLLIER said, it was utterly impossible that the scheme proposed by the hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton) could be carried out practically. A jury might decide one or two issues of fact easily enough; but it was too much to expect them to come to a unanimous decision upon questions of the complicated character that were sure to arise at the trial of Election Petitions, where they would have to agree upon not one, but perhaps twenty issues of fact. The result would be that in every case the jury would have to be discharged without giving a verdict.

Amendment negatived.

MR. AYRTON said, they had now ar rived at that part of the Bill which provided that the Petition should be tried not before the Judge, but by the Judge without the assistance of a jury. It was proposed that he should not only without the intervention of a jury determine questions of fact, but also decide questions of law affecting the seat of a Member, his capacity to sit in Parliament for seven years, and the qualifications of electors. This was an enormous power to give to a single Judge. If an act of corruption was to be tried, involving a comparatively small punishment, the question of fact must be decided by a jury; but where the act of bribery was to affect the validity of the Election and deprive a Member of his seat, the Judge alone was to determine it. In fact, the person tried for bribery-it might be in the same Court, if not at the same sitting-might be acquitted by the jury, so that there would be an absolute reversal of the decision of the Judge by the verdict of the jury. That was a very unfortunate position in which to place a Judge. Would it be competent in such a case to sue out a pardon from the Crown against the decision of a Judge in these circumstances? Looking at the penal consequences of a conviction under these petitions, it was necessary that the case should be tried, as in other criminal cases, by a jury. The consciences of twelve men afforded a better guarantee for impartiality than that of a MR. AYRTON said, he would beg to single Judge did. If the Committee as- move an Amendment binding the Judges sented to the proposition that all matters in their procedure to respect the decisions of fact were to be tried by a jury, it would and judgments of the House. The inquibe easy enough to adopt a course which ries of Election Committees were various would secure a jury whose minds were un-in their character, and there was only one biassed with reference to the matter under inquiry. He begged to move as an Amendment, to leave out all the words in the clause after the word "tried" in line 15, for the purpose of inserting the words

MR. GOLDNEY moved in line 22, after "Petition," to insert, "in which Corrupt Practices are charged or alleged shall."

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL said, that these words would confine the trial on the spot to cases in which corrupt practices were charged; but he thought that in other cases - for instance, in the case of a scrutiny-there should be a local proceeding.

Amendment withdrawn.

way by which proper relations between the House and the new tribunal could be preserved, and that was that the authority of the House should be fully recognized, and that the new tribunal should be guided in

everything they did by the course followed by the House, whether that course were right or wrong. It was quite clear that unless they did that there would at no very distant date be a continual conflict between the House and the Court they were now setting up.

Amendment proposed,

At the end of the Clause, to add the words "Provided always, That no court or judge shall call in question, or suffer to be called in question, in any proceedings under this Act, any resolution or order of the House of Commons touching the privileges of the House, or of any Member thereof, or the duties of any returning officer, or of any officer of the House of Commons; and a printed copy of the Journals of the House, or of any such resolution or order printed by the printer of the House, shall be sufficient evidence thereof; and such order or resolution shall be binding and conclusive on such court or judge, and all parties ap. pearing in any such proceedings."—(Mr. Ayrton.) THE SOLICITOR GENERAL objected to the Amendment, because he regarded it as unnecessary, and feared that it would be dangerous. Indeed, he looked upon it as the last effort on the part of the hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton) to retain the jurisdiction in the House of Commons by making the House a kind of Court of Appeal to the tribunal they were now establishing. There was nothing in this Bill which gave the decision of the Judge any greater effect than the decision of an Election Committee; and, therefore, if any danger would exist after this Bill was passed, it had existed a long time. The Amendment served no good purpose, and could lead to nothing but ill.

MR. BOUVERIE said, that the House had had control over Committees, but the Judges might treat the Orders and Resolutions of the House as waste paper. There had been a struggle for centuries between the House and the Bench, and now the House with their eyes open were going to part with their privileges. They were

about to rush with haste into what those who came after them would repent at leisure. He would support the Amendment as calculated to mitigate the evils the Bill would entail.

Question put, "That those words

there added."

be

Ayes 53;

The Committee divided: Noes 185 Majority 132. On Question, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill," MR. J. STUART MILL said, he had intended, before the clause was finally

agreed to, to make some observations in
vindication of a plan which was embodied
in three pages of Amendments that stood
on the Notice Paper in his name. As the
Committee had, however, already virtually
decided against his plan, he would not now
press his Amendments.
Clause agreed to.

Clause 15 (House of Commons to carry out Report).

MR. BOUVERIE said, he hoped the House, out of regard for its own dignity and character, would reject that clause, which was without parallel in the history of their legislation. Surely, when the law had been declared by a tribunal over which the House was to have no control, it was not to be supposed that the House would break the law. It should be left entirely to the House itself to say what it should or should not enter on its own Journals.

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL pointed out-as a precedent for that clause-that by the 86th section of the 11 & 12 Vict. c. 98 it was enacted that the decisions of Election Committees should be entered on the Journals of the House.

the Clause stand part of the Bill." Motion made, and Question put, "That

The Committee divided :- Ayes 174; Noes 54; Majority 120.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 16 agreed to.

Clause 17 (Report of the Judge as to Corrupt Practices).

MR. SANDFORD moved to leave out

the clause, and insert a new clause in its stead. His object was to provide that in every case in which a Member was unseated be issued to inquire into the extent of the for corrupt practices a Commission should existence of corrupt influences on the spot; for as matters now stood it was often the wish even of the Petitioner to stifle the circumstance of their extensively prevailing, in order that a new writ might be issued. The best way, he might add, to put a stop to bribery was in his opinion to make it the interest of the inhabitants of a locality to put it down, and a candidate would no longer be looked upon as popular, but rather as a pest, if his conduct in promoting corruption should lead to the imposition of an additional burden

on the rates.

Amendment proposed,

At the end of the Clause, to add the words "And in every case where a Member for a County or a Borough may be unseated for corrupt practices, then and in every such case a Commission shall be issued according to the provisions of the Act of the Session of the fifteenth and sixteenth years of the reign of Her present Majesty, intituled An Act to provide for more effective inquiry into the existence of Corrupt Practices at Elections of Members to serve in Parliament, for the purpose of inquiring into the prevalence of Corrupt Practices in such County or Borough; and the expenses of such Commission and such inquiry shall be defrayed by the County or Borough

to which such Commission shall be issued."(Mr. Sandford.)

MR. SERJEANT GASELEE said, he was happy to be able, on the present occasion, to vote with the Government.

MR. HENLEY said, that if the object was to prevent bribery, they had better not throw the expense of checking it on the offending locality, or they never would be able to discover the commission of corrupt practices, as people would band together in order to keep them from becoming known.

MR. LABOUCHERE asked whether it was necessary to carry the delusion further, that the respectable inhabitants of a borough knew nothing about the corruption which took place in their midst? In some boroughs it was necessary to settle the

the voters who objected to bribery and those who were in favour of it before a candidate could be chosen. He believed that the imposition of a fine on a borough for corruption would tend to lessen the evil.

MR. AYRTON said, that the latter portion of the clause cut two ways, and would be likely to do more harm than good." difficulty" which arose with regard to If, in the case of corrupt practices, all the inhabitants of the locality were to be fined by paying the expenses of a Commission, the result would be that everyone of them would be interested in preventing corrupt practices being proved. The real danger of the Bill already was that it tended to prevent the discovery of corrupt practices, and this provision would add another motive to those which already prevailed to induce persons to refrain from giving evidence. He hoped the hon. Member for Maldon (Mr. Sandford) would leave out that portion of the clause which threw the expenses of Commissions on the locality.

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL said, it was the opinion of the Committee, which sat on the subject last year, that the object to be kept in view was rather the prevention of corrupt practices in the first instance than the disclosure of such practices when they had taken place. They thought that to throw the expenses of the inquiry upon the locality, where it was proved that corrupt practices had prevailed, would have the effect of preventing those corrupt practices being committed. It appeared, however, to him that the addition moved by the hon. Member would inflict injustice in certain cases.

MR. LOWTHER said, he thought the most effectual way of preventing corrupt practices was by charging the expense of the inquiry upon the locality.

SIR FRANCIS GOLDSMID said, he objected to the expense being thrown upon the whole of the inhabitants of a locality, as it would be making the innocent suffer with the guilty. He feared that such a provision would render it the interest of the inhabitants of a borough where bribery had prevailed to have no petition presented.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL pointed out that the proposed Amendment would make the issue of a Commission imperative when a single case of bribery had been committed, although the Judge might be of opinion that bribery had not extensively prevailed. He thought it would be a hardship to the inhabitants of the county or borough to issue a Commission in cases where the Judge was of opinion there were only one or two cases of bribery.

MR. AYRTON observed that a Commission would issue under the clause as it stood only on the Address of both Houses of Parliament. He thought a Commission should issue unless the Judge should certify that no further acts of bribery had occurred beyond those he had already inquired into.

MR. RUSSELL GURNEY reminded his hon. and learned Friend the Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton) that the Judge was, under a previous clause, bound to report in writing to the Speaker whether there was reason to believe that corrupt practices had extensively prevailed.

MR. BOUVERIE contended that it should be imperative to issue a Commission where corrupt practices had extensively prevailed; and therefore it was necessary to consider by whom the proceedings were to be carried out after the Judge had decided that corrupt practices had prevailed. He remembered a case which had come before an Election Committee, of which the hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Baxter) was Chairman. The Committee reporte

MR. O'BEIRNE seconded the Motion.
Amendment proposed,

To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "in

Prison Dietaries, "as necessary for the pre- | workhouse dietaries. There were 164 servation of the health of the prisoners." unions. In 91, there were only 2 meals; A year ago be brought under the notice in 73, there were 3 meals given. Forty of the noble Earl the Chief Secretary for excluded the old and infirm from the third Ireland the deficiency of the gaol dietaries meal. Three unions excluded women only in Ireland. The noble Earl gave an as- from the third meal, and three more resurance that the subject would be inquired fused a supper to infants. The exclusion into, and soon after a Commission was of the old and infirm was most inhuman; issued for the purpose consisting of three far better instead of killing them by inches gentlemen most eminent in their profes- would it be to do as was done in India with sion. They recommended that the dietary old people-put them on a raft and send should be increased by a supper of six them off to sea. Humanity, independent ounces of bread and half a pint of milk. of everything else, required that the State The county prison dietary now consisted should see that those whom it undertook of 28 ounces of solid food a day, or 196 to protect should have their health and ounces per week. He would take the strength maintained at a fair standard. Waterford Union as an illustration of the From the success which attended his apworkhouse dietary, as it was quite as good peal to the Chief Secretary on behalf of there as almost anywhere else. The able prisoners, he had every hope that with his men had about 170 ounces of solid food characteristic humanity he would take meain the week, or 26 ounces less than the sures to have the poor people obliged to prisoners confined for terms beyond a resort to the sad alternative of entering a month, so that the latter got more in poorhouse placed in at least as good a poseven days than the paupers got in eight sition as those who did not merit the same days. In Clonmel and other unions the sympathy. condition of the pauper was even worse. Some unions gave a supper; but, although that was an improvement, still, with very few exceptions, there was no actual increase in the quantity of food, as the supper was usually made up of reductions from the breakfast and dinner. When three competent gentlemen had laid down a certain amount of food as essential to keep county prisoners in health, the same rule ought to be applied to the paupers. Except for the seclusion the condition of the prisoner was better than that of the workhouse pauper. He had a better bed, a nicer sleeping apartment, a pleasant temperature kept up, and not harder work to do, on the whole, than the pauper. As the Gaol Commissioners had recommended in the event of the same hard labour being introduced in the Irish county prisons as existed in England, that meat should be added to the dietary, it was as impolitic as it was unjust to place the person compelled, as was often the case, to enter a work house for no fault of his own, in a worse position as regarded the necessaries of life than the prisoner expiating a crime; indeed, it offered a direct incentive to the violation of the law. Besides, as a matter of economy, it was better for the ratepayers to maintain the able-bodied pauper in a state of health that would enable him to gain a livelihood outside. A Return, ordered at the instance of Mr. Cogan, showed some curious facts with regard to

the opinion of this House, the Poor Law Commissioners of Ireland should establish a minimum scale of dietary for the Paupers in the Union Workhouses not less than that now in existence in the Irish County Gaols, and which was recommended by the Commission appointed to report on the County Prison Dietaries, as necessary for the preservation of the health of the prisoners,' ” -(Mr. Blake,)

instead thereof.

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

THE EARL OF MAYO said, that the question raised by the hon. Member was one of considerable importance; but he thought the Motion was based on a misapprehension as to the scale of diet recommended by the Commissioners who inquired last year into the question of the dietary in county gaols. They recommended four classes of diet, proportioned to terms of imprisonment, for those who were respectively imprisoned one week, one month, three months, and more than three months; and the reason was that those undergoing the longer terms of imprisonment evidently required the more generous diet, particularly if their imprisonment was accompanied with hard labour. The scale for one-week prisoners was precisely the same as the