said, he would take this opportunity of putting a question to a right hon. gent. opposite (Mr. Yorke), which he supposed he would feel no difficulty in answering. His Majesty's sec. of state had, on a former occasion, intimated to the house, that it was in contemplation to bring down a message from his Majesty, relative to a provision for the family of the late unfortunate Lord Kilwarden. As no such message had yet been brought down, he wished to be informed of the cause of the delay.

replied, that a message on that subject would have been communicated sooner to the house, if a saving had not been expected in the Sinking Fund of Ireland, from which the provision might be made without any direct application for the interference of the house.

rose in pursuance of the notice he had formerly given to the house, to make his motion upon this subject. He said, that what had passed last year relative to Hanover, would strike the attention of the house, in considering of the propriety of what he was about to submit to them. There had been a difference of opinion entertained upon that subject, but, for his part, he viewed the possession of Hanover as a matter of great importance and concern to the country; that the loss of it must, therefore, be considered as a very considerable national calamity, was a truth which, he thought, could not now be disputed, and he would not take up the time of the house in discussing it. He would content himself, at the present moment, with adverting to the circumstance of how far that calamity might have been lessened by some further exertions having been used, in order to save a considerable part of the army in those possessions on the Continent, from the situation to which they were reduced, so as to have enabled his Majesty to have the advantages of their services during the continuance of the war. Under all the circumstances of the case, therefore, and for these beneficial purposes, it was most important that some measures should have been adopted on the Continent, either to preserve Hanover itself from falling into the hands of the enemy, or to preserve the army for the future service of his Majesty. Various reports had been circulated upon this subject, and it was the truth of those common reports that he wished now to ascertain, so as to shew to the house, whether or not the attention of govt. had been sufficiently directed to that important object. He had, indeed, heard, that transports had been actually prepared to convey over the Hanoverian army; but he had also heard, that they had been much too late in sailing for the purpose of accomplishing the end proposed. The hon. gent. concluded with the following motion: "That there be laid before the house an account of the number and tonnage of transports taken up by govt. for the purpose of taking on board the Hanoverian army; also an account of the expence attending the same, with a statement of the dates of the first order sent to the Transport Office on this occasion, of the orders for the sailing of the whole, or any part of the said transports, and of the orders, if any, for countermanding the sailing thereof."

said, he concurred with the hon. gent. who had made this motion, in thinking that the occupation of Hanover by the French troops was a great public calamity, and if it had been possible to have averted that evil, it was, no doubt, incumbent on his Majesty's govt. to have used every means for that desirable end: that was a point, therefore, on which he was not at all inclined to detain the house; all he should ask of them was, that they would look back to the state of the country at the period alluded to, and that gent. would recollect the nature of the treaty of Luneville, and the convention at Ratisbon. They would find that the war was renewed at a time when no part of the disposeable force could actually have been sent to Hanover, for the purpose of protecting it. The convention he had alluded to, had been entered into between the powers of Europe, for the purpose of guaranteeing the neutrality of the north of Germany. There could, indeed, have been nothing more binding upon these powers to resist the incursions of the French upon that country, and therefore govt. had every reason to rely upon its affording sufficient security to his Majesty's possessions. With regard to the propriety of bringing those troops home, he had no objection whatever to agree to the motion in the manner in which it was worded. He was glad to see the style in which it was conceived, and he looked forward to the production of these papers with the utmost satisfaction. Within two days after the commencement of hostilities, a communication had been made to the electoral minister, which led to a recommendation on his part, that measures should be taken to provide shipping for the conveyance of his Majesty's troops from Hanover to this country. This recommendation had been made on the 18th of May, and was instantly acted upon. In a week from that day an agent had been sent to the Continent for the purpose of bringing the troops to their stations. The shipping was completely in readiness previous to the time when the order was given for their destination. Another person had been sent to the Continent for the purpose of preparing small craft to convey the troops to the transports; and he might state, that in point of fact there had been no less than 36 transports prepared. Owing, however, to various circumstances, the expedition had been hindered from taking place in the manner at first intended. These circumstances, he hoped, would justify govt. in their conduct upon that occasion, and on that account he felt no hesitation in agreeing with the motion.—The motion was then put and agreed to.

, in pursuance of a notice formerly given, moved for leave to bring in a bill for the better regulation of Prize Agents. The fourth report of the commissioners of Naval Inquiry stated many abuses in this department, which it was the intention of his bill to correct. That report not only pointed out the abuses, but also the mode in which they might be remedied. From this it appeared that the prize agent had for his trouble 5 per cent. on the gross proceeds. By these means an opportunity was afforded for frauds. There were, however, other emoluments in the power of the agent. He had the use of the money till the time he was compelled to refund it to the owners, and this was productive of the greatest abuses, as it was the interest of the agent to retain the money in his own possession as long as possible. Other emoluments rose to them from brokerage, and similar concerns. It was not the object of the bill which he now proposed to bring into the house, to deprive the owners of prizes of the right of appointing their own agents, but it would prevent those who did nothing, from sharing in the profits with the efficient agent, when more than one was appointed in a single concern. He then stated the nature of the right to property taken from the enemy, and that if there was no call for it till three years had elapsed from the time of the capture, it went to Greenwich Hospital. From the manner in which the prize agency was carried on, and the necessary absence of the seamen on certain occasions, the owners often lost their money. The bill would go to correct this defect. The intention was to appoint a general agency office, where information might be readily obtained on every point. The prize agents would not be deprived of their fair profits, and the expences of the establishment would be defrayed by the deductions of a small part of the prize money. Such was the outlines of what was intended by this measure. He concluded by moving, "that leave be given to bring in a bill for better securing the regular and speedy distribution of prize money, and for the regulation of the business of prize agents."

stated, that the irregularities to which the hon. member alluded, were only the practice of certain West India agents. If the operation of the bill was confined to them only, he should give it his support; but he saw no necessity for the introduction of any general measure on the subject.

objected to it, on the ground that the law at present was sufficient to correct the abuses, and would therefore oppose it when brought in.

approved very much of the intention of the hon. member to expedite the payment of prizes, and to give the net proceeds to the captors, only deducting a regular per centage. He also thought it was extremely proper that the prize agents should not have the use of money, which might encourage them to protract the time of payment beyond what was absolutely necessary. But he thought it fit that the house should understand whether any additional expence was to be created to the public by the regulation which the hon. member proposed.

explained, by declaring that it was not only his own opinion, but was also that of several gent. who had been engaged in the inquiry, that the funds arising from the net proceeds of the sale of prizes, under the proposed regulations, would be amply sufficient, and that it would not be necessary to throw any burden upon the state, to defray the expences of carrying the plan into execution.—After some further conversation, leave was given to bring in the bill.

said, he conceived it his duty to submit to the consideration of the house, the motion of which he had given notice, for the purpose of ordering the Attorney-General to prosecute Mr. Bent, on account of the system of bribery at Aylesbury, in which he appeared to be deeply implicated. He had heard, that in other respects, Mr. Bent was a merchant of irreproachable character and the highest respectability; he thought, however, that in the present case, it was the duty of the house to order a prosecution; if the sense of the house should, however, appear to be against his motion, he had no particular wish for pressing it. He then referred to the minutes which were on the table, of the evidence that had been given before the committee, and particularly to the conduct of Mr. Bent's agents. He said the act of the 2d of Geo. II., notwithstanding its high penalties, had been found inefficient to prevent the practice of bribery at elections, as many gentlemen of opulence appeared to be indifferent to the payment of a single penalty, and they knew how, by friendly prosecutions, to avoid any more. If, therefore, that act had been found inefficient, he thought it necessary to refer to the standing order of the house, which stated, that persons guilty of bribery in the election of members of parliament, should be punished with the utmost severity.—As he considered the penal actions not to be sufficiently severe, he concluded by moving, "that the Attorney General should be ordered to prosecute Robert Bent, Esq. for bribery at the last election for Aylesbury."

did not consider the case sufficiently aggravated to call for so severe a measure.

hoped, from the observations with which the right hon. gent. prefaced his motion, that he would consent to withdraw it; this was really a case of no peculiar circumstances of aggravation. It did not appear that Mr. Bent had been guilty so much of corrupting the electors, as of having listened to the offers of a set of electors who were previously corrupted, and who wished to sell their votes. He remembered, in the course of the present session, in the Grimsby case, in which he was a member of the committee, the committee reported that there had been bribery and corruption, and yet the individual against whom they now made this re-port, was now sitting in the house as a member for another borough, and no prosecution was instituted against him: he, therefore, thought it would appear most unfair, if one person, not a member of the house, was now to be prosecuted by the Attorney-General, for a conduct exactly similar to that which had not been considered to deserve such notice from a gent. who was a member. He also thought the Ilchester case was a much stronger case of bribery than the present. He concluded by expressing a wish that the right hon. gent. would withdraw his motion.

supported the motion, and repeated those observations which he had before urged in the other stages of the proceedings respecting the Aylesbury election bill.

compared the present case with that of the other cases, where the committees had reported bribery; and contended, that if this case, which was by means an aggravated one, should be selected for the severest example, it would appear that there was no fixed rule which governed the conduct of the house on those occasions, but that the decision of them would depend on accident or caprice, the presence of this member, or the absence of another, or what interest was likely to be increased or diminished by letting in the neighbouring hundreds to share with the burgesses in the elective franchise; he therefore opposed the motion.

stated his opinion, as a professional man, that the evidence given before the committee was not such as should lead the house to suppose that Mr. Bent could, before a jury, be convicted of the offence ascribed to him.

opposed the prosecution on the same ground as the Master of the Rolls.

said he was sorry the matter had been mentioned at all. He did not wish for a prosecution; but as the motion had been made, he thought the house ought in duty to agree to the motion, as he feared this was a growing evil; and the house, by putting a negative on the motion, would seem to encourage it.

thought that the house would be proceeding capriciously and partially, if it agreed to the present motion. It was admitted on all hands that the gent. against whom it was directed, as less a criminal than others against whom no prosecutions had been carried on. And in the present case of Ilchester, which was held to be a very aggravated one, no such step as this was considered to be necessary. For these reasons he would move, "that the other orders of the day be read."

said, the present was the only case which had come within his knowledge; and such as it was, he felt it his duty to make the present motion upon it. He had no recollection of the case of Ilchester, to which the hon. gent. alluded; but as it had been mentioned, he would that very day move for the evidence that had been given before the committee for trying the merits of that election, in order to move for leave to bring in a bill similar to that which lately passed the house with regard to Aylesbury. His sole motive in making the present motion was, to prevent the recurrence of bribery and corruption at elections.—After a few observations from Mr. C. Wynne, the amendment was carried without a division, and of course the motion was lost.