litical character to divert that fund to parliament-that they were, for instance any other than its legitimate purposes, as legal as those of assessor or counsel, or there could not be a case of grosser any other expenses of that class. Then impropriety, one better entitled to a legal the question resolved itself into this-was remedy, or one more imperatively de- it justifiable in the corporation to apply manding a solemn inquiry upon oath. its own undoubted funds to such a purIf the view of the subject were just, pose? To explain himself more clearly, which he founded on the passage in the by giving an instance:-Might a peer, petition referred to, he had not the against whose interference in election slightest hesitation in saying, that a re- matters there'existed much jealousy-might medy by law was to be preferred to any peer pay any of the expenses of a candimeasure that might be adopted by that date, those expenses not being in themHouse. The allegation in the second selves illegal? It had never been alleged petition was, that the corporation were that such conduct in a peer would be unnot at liberty to apply their own undis- lawful. Then, was a corporation to be puted property to such a purpose. Now, placed within narrower limits than an inthe distinction between these allegations, dividual? Here he had been confining it was material for the House to observe; himself to what a corporation might for it was one thing to affirm that it was legally do; not what would be judicious a diversion of charitable funds, and quite or expedient. If he were a member of another to allege, that it was illegal in the such a corporation, and the question were corporation so to apply their own funds. propounded to him, he would certainly This question presented itself-had the advise that there should not be any such corporation a right, from funds legally application of their funds; a corporation, their own, to pay the legal expenses of an composed of members, having an eternal election? Now, this could scarcely be existence, possessing, perhaps, unlimited answered in the affirmative, if the doc-funds- he would say, that they ought trine of the hon. mover, respecting the general powers of corporations, be founded in law. He maintained, that, unless the funds of a corporation be applied to purposes strictly corporate, it was a misapplication, in which the majority had no power to bind the minority. While these observations were being made, he observed, that the hon. member for London listened with much anxiety. That doctrine must, indeed, to him, have proved new. What! the majority not bind the minority, in cases where there was an application of funds to purposes not directly corporate. If that doctrine were true, what became of the vote which gave 1,000l. for the encouragement of the Greeks? He stopped not then to inquire whether such an application was right or wrong, he merely observed, that it wasnot for corporate purposes. Under the influence of a classical taste, they had voted a sum of money for the relief of a classical people. How could the gallant officer affirm, that, in the application of money so applied, the majority could not bind the minority. The question as it stood before the House, founded on the two allegations, was one on which he would rather not then give a positive opinion. He would, for the present at least, assume, that the expenses were legal and perfectly recognized by

seriously to pause, before they made such an application of the funds placed at their disposal. But, though he should feel bound to give that advice, he would be far from saying, that as the law now stood, the corporation had been guilty of a breach of the privileges of that House. It was by no means an unusual circumstance, for a corporation to vote 5001, or 200l. to the chief magistrates on retirement from office-or 1,000l. to their last Lord Mayor, to reimburse him for the expenses of certain elegant entertainments-though, certainly, those, it must be confessed, were for strictly corporate purposes [a laugh.] Whatever views might be entertained on either side of this question, he thought it extremely desirable that the House should be furnished with a plain statement of what the practice in such cases had been; and, without prejudging what the law of the case would turn out to be, he would be rather inclined to vote for a committee to inquire into the practice, The question was a very important one, and he should be extremely unwilling to say any thing that might seem like prejudging it in a legal point of view; but, whatever might turn out to be the law of it, he repeated, that, were he a member of a corporation, he would never advise such an appropriation of public money; at the same time, he

stitutional. It appeared to him, as he was sure it must also appear to the right hon. gentleman, that if every corporation in the kingdom were to be permitted to apply its funds as the corporation of Northampton was stated to have done (and if one corporation made such an appropriation, all had an equal right to do so), the practice would be a direct infringement upon the privileges of that House, and could not fail to be attended with the most pernicious consequences to the country.

must add, that he did not believe the cor- be necessary to prevent the recurrence of poration of Northampton wished to pre-proceedings so reprehensible and unconjudice the inquiry, or to do any thing that was wrong. They, there was every reason to believe, had acted all along, as if they thought themselves perfectly warranted in the course they were pursuing they had consulted the most eminent lawyers-they denied that the funds were appointed for charitable purposes. For years past, they had been in the habit of disposing of these funds in such manner as they thought proper; and, so far as could be perceived, it had never entered into their contemplation to doubt that they were doing otherwise, than disposing of their lawful property, in supporting a candidate, whose political opinions coincided with their own. They spared no pains to satisfy themselves that they were pursuing a course warranted by the general law of the land, and the privileges of parliament. They took the opinion of Mr. Warren, and that was decidedly with them. It was perfectly clear that the corporation had no wish to offend: it was evident that they had taken every pains to avoid offence, and nothing but the great question remained, as to their legal right, both as to the nature of the expenses paid, and the source whence the funds were derived. If it appeared to be manifestly a misapplication of charitable property to election purposes, then he would at once say, go before a court of law, and assert your right; and even if it should appear, as there was reason, from the second petition, to expect it might, to have been an application of property, in the disposal of which they were not specially limited, to election purposes, he would not be disposed to shrink from such an inquiry as would put the House in possession of the practice; and, when that was once ascertained, it only remained to determine whether any, and what, legislative measure might be required.

Lord Althorp said, that the present complaint was one which affected the rights and privileges of the House, and as such it was their duty to inquire into the circumstances out of which it arose. He concurred with the right hon. Secretary, that it was desirable that the House should acquire a knowledge of facts, before any distinct measure was adopted. If it should turn out upon investigation that the facts, as stated in the last petition, were true, some act of legislative interposition would

But,

Mr. Abercromby considered this to be a question on which it was desirable that the House should act upon some clear, definite, and ascertained principle. The right hon. Secretary seemed to have fallen into a misconception, and to have attached the whole importance to the questionwhether or not the money had been diverted from charitable purposes. the real and single point with which the House had to deal, was the fact as alleged, that 1,0007. had been appropriated to election purposes. The sole question was, whether the House should suffer all corporations to appropriate their funds to election purposes? If it should appear on investigation that any portion of this 1,000l. had been so employed, that would form a case in which the House would be bound to adopt measures, founded upon the ascertained fact, that a sum of money had been applied in a practice such as that House did not sanction. If it were found that the funds appointed for charitable purposes had been misappropriated in the manner complained of, it would devolve upon the House, as a duty, to order the attorney-general to take means to vindicate the rights of those charities. But he protested against that which would be contrary to the known principles of that House-namely, against its affording a sanction to the attorneygeneral, or any other person, going to a court of law or equity, to obtain from it a decision as to the rights and privileges of that House.

Mr. Alderman Waithman denied that the corporation, to which he had the honour to belong, had ever made an improper application of the charitable funds intrusted to their care. It had happened to him that he had been obliged to differ with the corporation of London as to the

625

Corn Laws.

626

for the question was of too much importance to be speedily decided.

tween the great interests of the state however, help expressing his sincere regret FEB. 22, 1827. which had been most unjustifiably aug- on account of the illness of the noble earl mented; and, undoubtedly, there was no whose motion it was proposed to discharge. man whose character and disposition ren- As a public man, he was looked up to by dered him better able to interfere with the people of England, and was well quaeffect than his noble friend. Unfortunately, lified to be the mediator between those he was now prevented from doing as he conflicting interests to which the noble had proposed by his sudden illness, which earl had just alluded; for no man's chamade it impossible for him to give their racter stood higher. As a peer, there lordships the explanations he had intended. He would, therefore, move that earl, whose absence their lordships all denever was a fairer debater than the noble the order for their lordships to be plored. But he hoped and believed that summoned on Monday be discharged. the friends of the noble earl would not be Before he sat down, he thought it proper deprived of the pleasure of his society, to state, that certain resolutions on the whatever might be the case with that subject of the Corn-laws would be moved House. With regard to bringing forward in the other House on Monday, which the question of the Corn-laws at any would make the substance of the measures future period, whether he should think to be proposed known to their lordships, proper to submit any resolutions to the, and give them an opportunity of judging House, or whether he should think proper whether any further inquiry was necessary. He felt it his duty, however, to add, that tioned by the noble earl, in whatever manto propose such an inquiry as that menif any of their lordships should make a motion for a general inquiry, to such ancient time must be taken for consideration; ner he might trouble their lordships, suffiinquiry there were so many real objections, and it would open such a wide field for delay, that he should be obliged to oppose it. To a limited inquiry, similar objections could not be made; and such an inquiry would, probably, involve two different questions. The first was, into the rate at which the home-grower could bring his produce to market; and the second into the rate at which the importer could bring foreign corn into our markets. If any inquiry were to be made as to the first question, their lordships would be doing what had already been done to a great extent. Parliamentary committees had carefully inquired into this subject; and, after all that had been done, any of their lordships acquainted with the subject would form as correct an opinion of the sum at which the home-grower could bring his corn to market, as any of the witnesses who would be examined. As to the second part of the inquiry, his majesty's government had thought that the information was deficient, and they had sent a gentleman abroad to collect information. The report made by that gentleman was before the House, and if any of their lordships should think fit to propose further inquiries into this part of the subject, he should be ready to agree to any reasonable proposition.

The Earl of Lauderdale did not rise to make any objection to the course just proposed by the noble earl. He could not,

opposite had been pleased to allude to the Lord King observed, that the noble earl conflict of interests which he said had been most unjustifiably augmented; but, if it had been augmented, it had been done by the most unjustifiable delays to which this question had been subjected. It was to be brought forward one session; it was then postponed to the next. another, and then came the dissolution of come on this year; it was then put off to It was to parliament. by the noble earl, he looked on the After what had been stated tion with despondency, and almost despair, particularly as they were deprived quesof the assistance of that noble lord, whom he regarded as the most sincere in wishing to get rid of the Corn-laws. He had hoped, that before this time their lordships would have seen the necessity of agreeing to such a measure as would content the people. He was afraid that the plan would only be an alteration, and scarcely an improvement. He had now to present a place at which the people were suffering a petition from Blackburn. It came from the deepest distress. were, indeed, so great, that they were distinguished in the midst of general distress. Their sufferings lordships if he did not state, that the peHe should not be dealing fairly by their tition contained many hard things against parliament, and particularly against that