MARCH 8. o.:esee. a - - Walsh. The record consists o f a n indictment, containing seven counts, and of a general verdict, findiniihe pi - WO - fief penal — a - Mt charges; It , was there further stated, that because the Court were • not satisfied of the legal guilt, time was given to the prosecutor and the defendant till the next sessions. It appeared, therefore, that no judgment followed the verdict,—judgment was strayed; and such being the case, he was astonished that it should have occurred to any Member to move vindic tive proceedings on such a business. All that appeared was, that Mr. Walsh was found guilty ot what the Judges conceived did not amount ta felony. If the case could immediately, and in the first instance, have been argued before the Judges, he must have been acquitted. Mr. Walsh had received a pardon, at least what amounted to it,—a warrant of discharge, directed to the Sheriff. If a special verdict had been found, they would have been furnished with materials for their judgment; but now the record supplied none. Granting, that Mr. Walsh had commit ted a breach of a private trust reposed in him what had the House to do wi:h it? The notoriety of the transaction co uld form no ground of in quiry. He trusted, therefore, that the House would not, from a desire to expel a Member whose character might be bad, establish a precedent which twenty or thirty years hence, when Mr. Walsh and his history would be utterly forgotten, might be of mischievous tendency to poste rity. He then went into he case of the Christian Corporation—a case elich was decisively.of a public nature, and bore not the slightest re semblance to t h present. It was an institution established under the charter of Queen Anne. Many allegations of a description entirely false, were made to procure the Royal licence to extend tke subscrip tions—a large sum bad in consequence been raised, and in 1732, when an immense debt was due from the Corporation, petitions were pre sented from the creditors and others, complaining of the flagrant rills condi: eof the managers. The House then immediately proceeded to the investigation of elle case, as being one like the South Sea Scheme, of high public delinquency. They were employed the whole Session in Commieees on the subject; and aftev examinations and resolutions, and reports, and additional reports, and repeated hearings, three Mem bers, Button, Grant, and Robinson, were expelled. So far was it from beiug of a private nature, that seven Acts of Parliament were framed relating to it; and a resolution was moved for an address to the King, tor his Attorney and Solicitor-General (Sir Philip Yorke and Mr. Tal bot) to prosecute the delinquents. The Honourable Member then pro ceeded to state, that an abuse of private confidence could be no just ground ot Parliamentary inquiry: that the House ought not to exercise an inquisitorial power over private crimes. If it did, there were other cases which, in his view, were equally flagrant with that of Mr. "Walsh. Had not Members, he did not say of this Parliament, been found guilty ot adultery, a crime still punishable in the Civil Courts, though not yet is the temporal ; but had such criminality been urge4against such fl/411em hes for the purprese of expulsion ? If they were to proceed on this new system, broached far the first time this night,—the system of purifying the House,—why was not such a crime rendered cognizable m a th dr ju risdiction ? It happened frequently in Chancery, that persons on oath, confessed in their answers, that they had committed the grossest friiiels, and had robbed their wards and relations; and such persons were then compelled by the Chancellor to give relief. If the present system of pu rification were adopted,—thesystem of examining into privateaffairs,— must not such persons also be made subject to the authority of the House?- The propoSed precedent, if established, would go to prove, theta man might, for a private matter, be prosecuted, and tried, and pardoned; and yet, after all, the House of Commons might be resorted to for farther consideration of the ease. The Honourable and Learned Member then concluded, by - stating, that it was from a sincere convice tien that he could not concur in the present motion. Mr. 13eritu its r supeorted the motion. Mr. Firetz opposed the motion, on the grounds that it was not only unprecedented, but was uncalled for, from the fact of its not being a transaction connected with public measures. _Sir Ines:cis BuitneTT did not know of any power claimed by that House that was less open to abuse than that of expelling Members from among their o wn bod y , espec i a lly if t h e 'H ouse o f C om mons wept con stituted as it ought to be. On the expulsion of a Member, it it were thought that the House had abused their power, he had only to present !dins& to his constitu en t s t o b e re - e l ec t e d. If elections were fair, then he could not conceive that any evil possibly could arise from the exercise of such a bower, because the people would always have the ability to correct in t':eir own hands. While, however, there were private bo roughs, and those boroughs made the control of a few, dangers from the txercisa of such a power well might be apprehended ; but, nevertheless, he w o eirernt u____dm , aintain that the House ought to get rid cf a disgraceful er 0! one who hdd contaminated himself so much that it would be to their disgrace to continue him amongst them. By such a feeling, PUblic bodies were or ought to be actuated; indeed, by such a feel ,uigaact the Stock Exchange been guided. In 1809 Mr. Walsh was ex pelled t h e Stock Exchan g e, for having been guilty nf such nefarious Practices, as to unfit hi m foe h Member of that body. Why should that .House be actuated by different motives ? But Mr. Walsh, it appeared, had bought his seat had ;kid for it five eioutand pounds. This fact Was ascertained in sio the course of his examination before the Commis sioners of Bankrupts, the five thousand pounds having been set down r '''ong the as • naturally sets o f th e bankrupt's e ff ects. The (...ommissioners were very :rya, rninhov:t_i_otirrfo.grti, I t t e rised at such a discovery, and put o ff their further purpose of obtaining information. The bankrupt cv , had been superseded, so that the examinatien had come THE NATIONAL REGISTER. 149 to nothing. Some of the berotzl en is, he was aware, were w o rth vity little, for cprtabrreasone; burn werv:lteryitalsdarallrithint.ther would " sell themselves." Amongst that class wise Mr. Walsh's bo rough ; therefore, possibly it had been placedin thiemesite, Iselin cond.. dered a marketable commodity. He, however, would go the.length of Maintaining, that Mr. Walsh had been proved to, have been guilty of such offences as would authorize them in expelling him that House.— He had proves! himself a man that was unfit for any society, and a dis grace to that House. As to precedent, the proposed proceeding waq his estimation, justified by what befut e bad been done ; and h e thisuiiit the House had not done its duty in not creating precedents by the expuli sion of Steele, who had taken 19,0601. of the public money : of Hunt, who, by the by, was it the Brazils, enjoying two pensions to the amouunt of 1,0001.; and of Mills, who had contrived to cheat his cre ditors, by getting eected a Memeier of thatkiouse. The House had not acted rightly in the proceeding between Mr. Pitt and Boyd and Ben field. In that instance, however, it was said, that the proceeding sup ported public credit—( laugh !)—But it had not raised the, credit' of the HouSe in the estimation of the Public. It had been said, that by adopting the proposition before the House, a precedent would be adopt ed which might extend itself to the three-fourths of the Nation ' and possibly to some °fiat- Members of the House besides Mr. Welsh.— Such an observation remanded him of the conversation between Lady, Maeda' . and her Son, in the Play of Macbeth, especially if he were asked who were t 3 the punishment. Lady Macdetil had inform. ed her child that cerain roglies were to he hanged—but, said the child, " Who must hang them ? h --" Why, the honrst men," replied Leidy Macduff: " Then the r.igries are fouls," said the child : " for thai are rogues enough to beat the honest ma, and. hang up them !"-Much laughter !p--But he trusted that sacs a motive would not actuate theta that Ile hoped rt.:A they would not he deterred from ridding thenNelves of a Member. wit , had disgr aced himself, from the idea that the precedent might afr.rct other " rogues." He, for one, certainly should voter for the expulsion, though in sa doing itedid no l / 4 couctive that be should ply any very great compliment to the privileges arid po ers of that I louse. Colonel DILLoN said a few words in favour of the Mistion. Mr. HI:I:BERT and Mr. A uesceostate opposed the Motion. Mr. Wv NNE said, that in the present Motion there were two mate rial points to consider, first, whether it was proper tp expel one of their own Members who had been found guilty by a nay of a fraudulent transaction, and if they did expel him, whether that precedent might not lead to dangerous consequences in future. It had been contended, that the judgment of a Law Court Was necessary before Parliament could found any ground of expulsion. Let them look at the case of Mr. Hall who was ejected for pe n jury ; there was no ludgntent pronounced on him. In the case of Atkinson, too, judgment had not been passed or the verdict of guilty given by the Jury, but yet he was ejected. In all these eases Parliament considered that abundance of infamy existed, and hesitated not to pronounde the sentence of expulsion. With res pect to the commission of adultery, he would say, that though it was a moral offence, it did not at all incapacitate a person from performing the honourable functions of society in which he might be placed. Bar in this case, v. letter, acknowledged and proVed as the letter of. Walsh, confessed all his guilt. He had been summoned to attend the House, and failed toappear, and sent a letter to the Speaker, wherein he said he was prepared to palliate,•but not to defend himFelf. All these were strong proofs agaite.t hint. He therefore wished to take a high and im portant trust from a man altogether unworthy of his situation, and con sidering hint in that light, he would vote decidedly for the Motion. Mr. C. ADAMS briefly supported the Motion. Mr. LAmu e recommended the mast extreme caution to the House in proceeding on the consideration of a case which had excited so much public indignation. Mr. WIIITBerAD disagreed the present Motion. He would counsel the Horte not to expel Mr. Wid:-.li; 11111. if they desired vs effec tually punish him, let them torture his feelings by desiring him to attend in his place every day; nay, compel in'e to appear in his seat, and their purpose would be complete. He c.,)!let:ded, that the precedent quoted of the Members having been expelled because they commi'Ld a fraud on the . Charitable Institution, did rot at all bear upon the present case. It wa n regarding the money of a Public Institution, and that of Walsh concerning that of an individual. He concluded by reminding the House of what had been said at the time of the expulsion just quot ed—" The Honour of the House was as much concerned in proceed ing regularly against a rogue, as in not sitting with i•im." The A.-"TORNEY GENERAL, Mr. HAWKINS BKowNE, and the CHANCELLOR of the Ex" 7 .llEQurtt stipperted the Motion. Mr. BANKES shortly repli d, and the qaestion being loudly called for, the House divided, when there aneared—For alr, Baukes's Mo tion, 131 ; Against it, IG—Mijority for the Motion-85. While strangers .were exchided, Mr. BANXES moye.l, that l‘lr. Benjamin Walsh be therefore xx rent.en which was ag d to. • Mr. BANEES immediately after moved for a r.ew We eor the Bo rough of Wotton Basset, in room of Iseslimin pelled that :louse, being - guilty of gross fraud, and truarcolill b cacb of trust.—Ordered.—Adjourned. !Mini% Y 7 MARCH 6. The CIIANCELLpR of the Excrtequzit . gave notice, that in comm. (Fence of 64: tnotitni or a Right Hon. Gents an (Mt, GrattA;l), r•-• L.Ct ‘..; 1 p,:i;: ..;