date

30 Aug 1809 Parl y. Reform
30 Aug 1809

Parl y. Reform

Ch Curwen's Act

3

3

The persons to whom the mischief and guilt of bribery & corruption ought to be imputed are - not the bribed or bribers - but those who rival[?] a state of things in which such corruption is unpreventable. So of Perjury &c of Jurors &c Bribery of an Examiner &c two [...?] made necessary.

The act has two professed objects.

One is to prevent places from being given for seats by Ministers.

The other is to prevent money or money's worth from being given for seats by persons at large.

Of these the effect (and can it be too much to say the design?) the effect at any rate is to facilitate and protect what it professes to prevent.

What it forbids to be done - it forbids to be done - how? - answer "by any express Contract or Agreement." - What then is the inference? that it may be done "by any" implied "contract or agreement": by any contract or agreement that is not " express". Now as to any thing that could never be called an express contract or agreement, in what instance was such a business ever done? In none whatever. What then is it that is done by the pretended prohibition? It prohibits, though even that in a manner that as will be seen presently would never be effectual, the doing the thing in a manner in which it never was done, nor ever would be attempted: and in and by the very terms of the pretended /this sham/ prohibition, it tips the wink to the intended transgressor, and points out to him that he is still at perfect liberty to do it in the only way in which it would ever have entered into head to attempt doing it.
Similar Items
  • Title: [[129b-411] 16 Mar. 1817 Parl]
    Description: [129b-411]

    16 Mar. 1817

    Parl Cat

    2 o

    Introd

    §.{8. Freedom of Suffrage}

    10 Seat Traffic

    5

    p 1015

    Inserendum?

    {These things considered, anxious to secure themselves /itself/ against all hazards, with no less frankness than prudence, the Tories, taking the matter out of the hands of the Whigs, manufactured A o 1809 that Act /49 G.3.c./ by which the moneyed men with their money /men with money in their hands/ being with the most elaborate industry endeavoured to be drawn out of the market, the faculty and by means of that exclusion the monopoly /exclusive faculty/ was expressly reserved /reservation was made/ to the C – r General whose means of purchase are for the most part not in money but in moneys worth: expressly and by the very word express: for when as in other part of the Act proposition /the proposition/ was made to include in the description of the prohibited contract as well the case in which the agreement was implied as that in which it was express the word express was upon a division put in, and the word implied put out. So that in this particular the sense of Parliament was on that occasion not merely by implication but in express terms and by the word express declared

    That to the frankness by which this proceeding stands characterised the good quality of uniformity might be added an amendment it appears was moved by L d Folkestone to the title: an amendment in virtue of which instead of standing as at present the title would have stood thus. An Act for more effectually preventing the sale of seats for money: and for promoting a Monopoly thereof to the Treasury by the means of Patronage. [+] The improvement which would thus have been made was however rejected by a majority of 133 to 28: this being the case the design thus pursued is not to be found announced in the title of the Act, nor at any less expence than that of trailing[?] through /poring over/ the body of it: but it can not be too faithfully or carefully registered in the memory and in the hearts of the people.}

    [+] Cobbet’s Debates Jun 13 th 1809. Vol. XIV p.1015.
  • Title: [[129b-413] 19 March 1817 Parl]
    Description: [129b-413]

    19 March 1817

    Parl Cat

    2 o

    Introd

    §.10. Seat Traffic

    4

    Omitt?

    With what shadow of reason /On what ground were it ever so slight/ could they /the/ expectation of any such self-denying ordinance be entertained, when not satisfied with the sure but to the eye of anxiety /concupiscence/ not yet speedy enough arrival of the Millennium of misrule, the Act was passed by which, {while in form[?] a prohibition was put upon the sort of purchase /trade/ in question in the case the article in which the commodity is /was/ paid for was that sort of article viz. money in quantities more or less considerable which all persons without distinction are capable of having in their hands alike acceptable /within the reach/ to all hands.} by which in express words and even by the very word express the faculty of giving office in exchange /barter/ for office a commodity of which C – r General has the monopoly was with a degree of hardyhood sufficient of itself to shew the state in which the Constitution stands, excepted from the prohibition, by which in the forms /due form/ of law, and under an assurance such as to a set of minds labouring under a less morbid state of anxiety might have been deemed sufficient, the continuance of the so prohibited practice was secured. By the Act in question (49 G.3. c.| |) buying seats with money is pretended to be restrained; restrained by penalties, by which under the circumstances of the case nobody ever has been, nor will any body ever be, restrained. By the same Act Buying seats with offices is in express terms allowed: allowed – by implication only, but that implication a necessary one, the very word express being the very word expressly employed for the giving admission to it. To any man to whom the Act, and the debates by which it was preceded are unknown, this account of the matter may have the air of a riddle. But a glance at either will suffice for the solution of it.
  • Title: [[129b-410] 17 March 1817 Plan]
    Description: [129b-410]

    17 March 1817

    Plan Cat

    2 o

    Introd

    §.80. Seat Traffic

    5

    Superseded but consultable

    {On the occasion of the seat-traffic business A o 1809 To the eyes of M r /the head/ Speaker of Honourable House the subject presented itself in a different point of view {from that which is given here}. Content[?] {was to} that those who had nothing to offer /give for a seat/ but money should not be able to purchase it in any way neither by an express contract nor by an implied one. His only anxiety was not those who had office to give should not be able to purchase it by an implied act: i.e. {the only one of the three[?] media[?] in which it is customary or necessary to do the business Lest by implication over coming the his declared reluctance “to mix in the debates”, + once and again did he stand up and insist that to the prohibition should be attached the limitation conveyed by the word express. Lest in the prohibition put by the Bill implied

    contracts should in this case be considered as included By the /these/ two short and unpremeditated speeches of the 7 th of June, an interpretation and that one unquestionable may be seen put upon the long and elaborate one of the 1 st.

    “A Bill for more effectually preventing the sale of seats for money; and for promoting a monopoly thereof to the Treasury by the means of Patronage. Such was the title moved for by Lord Folkestone Out of 161 28 voted for this amendment. Cobbets debate June 13 th 1809.}

    + Speech 1 June 1809 Cobbets Debate