; the sitting members for Penryn only raising their voices against
it, and a bill was ordered to be brought in in accordance with the
third resolution. This bill having been read a second time, the house
proceeded to examine further evidence in proof of the corruption. In
that evidence there was much of mere belief, and much prevarication on
the part of some of the witnesses; but the house came to the conclusion
that a clear case of bribery and corruption had been established. The
grand point, therefore, to consider was, the punishment to be inflicted,
or the remedy to be applied. On that subject there was a diversity
of opinions. Mr. Keck proposed the extension of the franchise to the
hundreds, while Lord John Russell contended that the borough, like
that of Grampound, should be disfranchised altogether. He moved as an
amendment, "that the borough of Penryn shall be excluded hereafter from
returning burgesses to serve in parliament." The original motion was
supported by the ministry, who contended that though enough had been
proved to call for the interference of the house, yet there was not
sufficient to induce it to proceed to total disfranchisement. Mr.
Canning remarked, that he thought it clear that a verdict of "guilty"
must be given; but he did not think such a degree of guilt was
established as would warrant the extinction of that which in its
blameless exercise was a valuable possession, and the taking it entirely
away from those who had exercised it innocently because others had
abused it. He protested, however, against its being supposed that, in
such a case as Grampound, he should feel any difficulty in erecting a
new representation in lieu of that which might be taken away; and in
giving his vote for the original motion, he would give it with reference
to this particular case, avoiding the general question, and the general
principles on which it was to be considered. The amendment was supported
by Lords Althorp and Milton; by Messrs. Ferguson, Hobhouse, and
Brougham; and by Sir John Newport. Such a case, they argued, had been
made out that it would be an injustice to the constitution and to the
principles on which the house had acted towards other places if Penryn
were not disfranchised, and the right transferred elsewhere. The
transfer of its privileges, they said, to the adjoining hundreds, would
merely bestow them on a few wealthy individuals. On a division the
amendment was carried by a majority of one hu
|