The could quite understand that; but, never- | ing, abetting, counselling, or procuring theless, it still left them very much in the offence of personation." He saw the dark. At present, they knew that no reason why personation should be bribery and personation would entail placed in a different category, and he the loss of the seat and all the other thought that all corrupt practices would consequences provided in the Bill; and, more properly be treated alike. as there would also be the finding of the effect of putting personation in another Election Judge of undue influence and category was to make it a slightly more treating, he wanted to know from the severe penalty than it was at present Attorney General what his ideas were made. Instead of a misdemeanour, it as to the powers of the Election Judge, was made a felony punishable by two if he were to arrive at the conclusion he years' imprisonment with hard labour; had been speaking of in reference to whereas other offences were punished undue influence and treating? Was he by only one year's imprisonment with to have the power of declaring that the or without hard labour. It seemed to election was not void, and of freeing the him much more reasonable that there candidate from all consequences? should be the same punishment for personation as for other corrupt practices. At any rate, the maximum should be the same for all corrupt practices. He knew that at the time the Ballot Act passed there was a great fright and scare got up that there would be an immense amount of personation under that Act, and the punishment was made severe in order to satisfy some people who thought that there ought to be an aggravated punishment for the offence of personation. He should like to ask the Attorney General how many people had been punished under the Ballot Act for personation? He thought it would be found that the number tried or convicted had been extremely few; and he did not think there was a single instance in which a person convicted of personation had ever received so heavy a punishment as one year's imprisonment. What, then, was the good of keeping up a distinction between personation and other corrupt practices? Why not simplify THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES) said, he would take the Amendment of his hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton (Mr. H. H. Fowler). He would take up the 1st clause, which required to be safeguarded, by the fact that the corrupt practices were committed with the knowledge and consent of the candidate. He would also take the 2nd clause, subject also to verbal alteration; and would apply both provisions only to bribery and personation, and not to treating and undue influence. He would do more than that. Instead of only making the election void, he would carry it further, and remove the disqualification from the candidate. SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE said, that, after the very clear and satisfactory statement of the Attorney General, he hoped his hon. and learned Friend would withdraw his Amendment, and that the Committee would be able to finish the 4th clause before the hour for adjourn ment arrived. SIR HARDINGE GIFFARD intimated that he would withdraw his Amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 5 (Punishment of persons convicted on indictment of corrupt practices). MR. GORST said, he proposed to move an Amendment in the first part of the clause. The clause provided that a person who committed any corrupt practice other than personation, or aiding, abetting, counselling, or procuring the offence of personation, should be guilty of a misdemeanour. He proposed to omit the words, "other than personation, aidMr. Gibson the clause and the law? to Amendment proposed, in page 2, line 30, leave out from "other than "personation" in line 32, inclusive.(Mr. Gorst.) Question proposed, "That the words 'other than stand part of the Clause." THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES) said, he intended to accept the Amendment in form only, but not in substance. He accepted the proposal to omit the words referred to in the Amendment; but he proposed to accede to an Amendment which stood further down on the Paper in the name of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South-West Lancashire (Sir R. Assheton Cross), in order that the specific sonment with hard labour. He wanted to make it clear what the punishment for personation was; and he was afraid he could only agree to strike out these words, not in substance, but as a matter of drafting, with a view of making the subject more clear, when he came to the sub-section which declared what the punishment for personation should be. punishment for the offence should ap- | felony punishable by two years' impripear in the Bill, instead of simple reference to the punishment provided by Section 24 of the Ballot Act of 1872. He wished, however, to retain the punishment as it stood, and that he understood to be the desire of the right hon. Gentleman opposite. The hon. and learned Member for Chatham (Mr. Gorst) wanted to go further and reduce the punishment. He thought it would be more convenient to have the punishment specified in the Bill; and, therefore, to that extent, he accepted the hon. and learned Gentleman's Amendment; but he intended in substance to adopt the Amendment of the right hon. Member for South-West Lancashire, which provided that a"Person guilty of the offence of personation, or of aiding, abetting, counselling, or procuring the commission of that offence shall be guilty of felony, and any person convicted thereof shall be punished by imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, together with hard labour." The Ballot Act of 1872 made personation a felony. It was felt that there would be considerable difficulty under the Ballot Act in avoiding personation; and he was afraid, to a great extent, that it did go on. There could be no unintentional personation, and, therefore, no person whatever could suffer innocently; and the Government felt that they ought to retain the penalty already enacted for the offence. It should be remembered that many persons had been deterred from personation by the severity of the penalty; and if they were now to make it less than they had made it 11 years ago the effect might be bad. They had made it a felony, and they must mark their sense of the fact that the offence was as bad as it could be. He proposed in the 1st section of Clause 5, after the words "corrupt practice," to strike out the words "other than personation, or aiding, abetting, counselling, or procuring the offence of personation." The clause would then read "A person who commits a corrupt practice shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and on conviction on indictment shall be liable to be imprisoned with or without hard labour for a term not exceeding one year, and be fined any sum not exceeding £200." Then, in the 2nd section of the clause, he proposed to insert the Amendment of the right hon. Member for South-West Lancashire (Sir R. Assheton Cross), making the offence of personation a MR. GORST said, he could not accept the proposal of the Attorney General, and he should feel obliged to take a Division on the matter, not as a friend of personation, because he wished to put a stop to personation, but because he knew that people had not been deterred from committing the offence by the severity of the penalty. The offence of personation was very common in the North of England-[Cries of "No!"]it might not be so common in the South of England, but it was very common in the North-Cries of "No!"]-probably not all over the North; but, still, it was very common in parts of the North of England. [Cries of "No!"] Perhaps hon. Gentlemen who said "No!" did not hard labour never was or never would be put in force, that they were not deterred from committing this offence. For this reason persons were never afraid of the punishment, and so committed the offence with impunity. A lighter punishment would be far more effectual than a severe penalty which nobody dreamt of putting in force. If the punishment for the offence of personation was one month's imprisonment, or a fine of £20, £30, or £100, according to the means of the offender, it would have been found that a great many more persons would have been brought up for that offence, instead of nobody receiving any punishment at all. Many persons would have received a light and speedy punishment; and, in short, the law would be certain to be enforced much more effectually. Не would like to ask the Government to tell the Committee whether, as a matter of [Eighth Night.] fact, the provisions of the Ballot Act had | Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton), who not been a dead letter; whether it was not so severe a law that it had never been enforced? In the interest of purity of election and a stoppage of the offence of personation he advocated a milder punishment, a punishment which would not shock the sense of public justice, and which could be enforced. was now in Ireland; and it was, practically, similar to an Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member for Londonderry (Mr. Lewis). Seeing that the hon. Member for Londonderry had taken so much interest in the Bill, he (Mr. Biggar) and his hon. Friends thought they might allow the Amendment of the hon. Member for Sligo to pass, and let the issue be raised upon the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lewis). Perhaps, however, he had better move the Amendment of the hon. Member for Sligo. It was, page 2, line 31, before "personation," insert " undue influence or." As the Bill now stood, a MR. LEWIS said, he was justified in the remark that, although the Amendments had been on the Paper for 14 days, the Attorney General (Sir Henry James), who had charge of the Bill, had not yet arrived at a right understanding in regard to them. At all events, they had the admission of the hon. and learned Gentleman himself that some-person guilty of the offence of undue times he did not deliberate quite as much upon the Amendments as he ought to do. He (Mr. Lewis) had understood they were going to put the law relating to corrupt practices in a compact state. After all, they were not going to do anything of the sort; for, whereas they had been told over and over again that bribery was the grand climax of all electioneering offence, it appeared that in the estimation of the Government it did not stand at the top of the tree, but that personation did. It was absurd to class personation with all sorts of things which in the mind of man formed the category of felonious offences. If his hon. and learned Friend (Mr. Gorst) went to a Division he should vote with him. influence was liable to all the penalties proposed in the Bill. It had been agreed by the Government that a distinction should be made between bribery and personation, treating and undue influence. His hon. Friend (Mr. Sexton), therefore, had put this Amendment on the Paper, so that the offence of undue influence, which was acknowledged by the Government to be comparatively of a slight nature, should not render the guilty person liable to the severest punishment under the Bill. It must be remembered that in many cases-in most cases in fact-undue influence was not used by the candidate himself, but by persons of more or less responsibility. 31, before the word "personation," to Amendment proposed, in page 2, line insert the words "undue influence or." -(Mr. Biggar.) Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted." THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES) said, they had already declared undue influence to be a corrupt practice. They ought not, therefore, to allow the offence to go unpunished. It was not possible to accept the Amendment, because it would allow undue influence to be used with impunity and without any punishment. MR. R. N. FOWLER said, he was glad attention had been called to this question. His hon. and learned Friend (Mr. Gorst) seemed to think that personation was confined to the North of England. That, however, was not the fact, as it prevailed in other large constituencies. Ho (Mr. R. N. Fowler) recollected a remarkable case of personation in the constituency he had the honour of representing. A member of the Conservative Committee in the City was polled for the Liberal candidate, though it was well known at the time that he was sailing through the Straits of Gibraltar. It was questionable, however, MR. LEWIS said, he considered the whether, by making the law too strict, Amendment most important; and he they would put a stop to personation. asked what was the punishment attachQuestion, "That the words 'othering to a person guilty of undue inQuestion, "That the words 'other than' stand part of the Clause," put, and agreed to. MR. BIGGAR said, the next Amendment stood in the name of the hon. Mr. Gorst fluence? It seemed to him that those who had drafted the Bill had entirely forgotten the relation of the guilt of the offence to the extent of the punishment. He would not go into the gene ral question of hard larbour; but he thought it was entirely out of the question to go to such extremes with a person who might be found guilty of such an offence as undue influence. What was a common form of undue influence, leaving, for the moment, Ireland out of the question? That of exclusive dealing. A person went into a shop, and said to his tradesman-"I will take away my custom if you don't oblige me on this occasion." Unquestionably, that would be the extent of the undue influence in many cases. It had never been suggested in the House -it had not even been suggested by the Attorney General (Sir Henry James)that that was an offence which ought to involve imprisonment at all, much less imprisonment with hard labour. There was no corrupt practice that was more elastic in its definition or interpretation than undue influence. It might mean anything that a Judge chose. Expressions used professionally might be construed into undue influence, although they might have comparatively harmless application. What difficulty was there in meeting the various classes of cases? Why should not the Attorney General have pointed out and made a distinction, as he had already promised to make a distinction in the 4th clause, with reference to bribery? There was no difficulty in saying that a person found guilty of treating or undue influence should be liable to a milder punishment than those found guilty of bribery. Though the Amendment now under consideration was not so comprehensive as the one which he had placed on the Paper, it was one which deserved support. THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (Sir FARRER HERSCHELL) said, he hoped the Committee would observe they were not now dealing with the question of punishment, or whether there should not be imprisonment with hard labour for undue influence. What they were dealing with was whether the offence should be punished at all; and what was proposed was that the candidate should be unseated, but that his agent should go free, even if he exercised as much undue influence as he pleased. The hon. Membor for Londonderry (Mr. Lewis) had spoken about the severity of the punishment. They did not admit that treating or undue influence was always in its character a minor offence to bribery. There were many cases of undue influence quite as serious as cases of bribery. It was suggested that discretion as to punishment should be left to the Judges. Technically, a boy who put his hand through a window and stole an apple was liable to penal servitude for life; but no Judge would think of passing such a sentence in such a case. MR. EDWARD CLARKE said, it would have been well if the Solicitor General (Sir Farrer Herschell) had made these obversations an hour ago, when the previous Amendment was under consideration. The hon. and learned Gentleman had just said that the law left such very great power to a Judge as to punishment that he might sentence a boy who had done a certain thing to one day's imprisonment, or to a long term of penal servitude. The very Solicitor General who said this had, a short time ago, argued against any extension of the power of the Judges. THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (Sir FARRER HERSCHELL) said, in this case the Judges would know the facts; but in the case which might have arisen under the previous Amendment they would not know the facts. MR. CALLAN said, it was a regrettable circumstance that the Law Officers of the Crown did not leave the conduct of the Bill in the hands of the President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Chamberlain), and the President of the Local Government Board (Sir Charles W. Dilke), both of whom seemed to have a more practical knowledge of the law than either of the hon. and learned Gentlemen, and certainly they were more imbued with the spirit of justice and fair play than either of the Representatives of Justice in the House of Commons. The Solicitor General said there were many cases of treating which were much more gross and criminal in their character than cases of bribery. Would the hon. and learned Gentleman give the Committee one or two examples? He (Mr. Callan) supposed the Solicitor General could furnish examples from the experience of some near neighbours of his on the Treasury Bench. And it being ten minutes before Seven of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to report Progress; Committee to sit again upon Monday next. [Eighth Night.] The House suspended its Sitting at nately, when the Local Government Seven of the clock. Board was constituted in 1870, or 1872, its powers of relieving the poor were The House resumed its Sitting at Nine strictly defined by Statute, and no disof the clock. ORDER OF THE DAY. SUPPLY.-COMMITTEE. Order for Committee read. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair.". LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (IRELAND).-RESOLUTION. COLONEL COLTHURST, in rising to call attention to the failure of the Irish Poor Law in dealing with exceptional distress; and to move "That, in the opinion of this House, the Local Government Board in Ireland should have powers to deal with exceptional distress similar to those enjoyed by the Local Government Board in England, and the Board of Supervision in Scotland; and, further, that Boards of Guardians in Ireland should have the same discretion with regard to outdoor relief that Boards of Guardians have in England, subject to the control of the Local Government Board," cretion was left to them; so that in 1879 the Government had to come to the House for temporary powers to relieve exceptional distress, and as the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell) had since said "Boards of Guardians had been so long educated to a dread of outdoor relief that, as a rule, they used the powers entrusted to them in 1879 and 1880 most sparingly." There were distressed districts where the rates in that period were as low as 18. in the pound. Coming, however, to the present distress, he might say at once he had no fault to find with the Local Government Board. Its permanent officials were gentlemen of great official experience, and were Irishmen intimately acquainted with the circumstances of the country; and he had no doubt that they had done their best with the means at their disposal. What those means were he would endeavour to show the House. Last autumn, after the Government had declared in that House their determination to deal with said, he would ask the House and the the impending distress by means of the Government to approach the considera- Poor Law, the Local Government Board tion of the question in the spirit in which issued a Circular to the Guardians rethe late Chief Secretary for Ireland de-commending that stores, bedding, &c., clared, two years ago, it ought to be approached-namely, that the burden of proof should lie upon those who defended the perpetuation of the present differences in the law of the two countries. He could not better describe the powers, or rather the want of powers, of the Local Government Board in Ireland, than by using the words of Dr. Hancock, the eminent statistician, who said "All the English officials who represent the Crown in Ireland are deprived by Statute of the most important powers vested in the Local Government Board in England." The number of persons in receipt of outdoor relief in Ireland in proportion to the population bore a proportion of little more than one-half to what it was in England and Scotland; and the rates, taking them as a whole, were, in comparison with the rates charged in England and Scotland, moderate, if not low. This question of outdoor relief had often been brought before the public opinion of Ireland by eminent men. Unfortu should be provided. That Circular, he |