On the same evening an attempt was made by Mr.
Raikes, M.P. for the University of Cambridge, to obtain a Committee of Inquiry into the circumstances of the Hereford election in 1880, on the ground that some corrupt compromise had been arrived at between the two parties,.of which a long story was told. As it was evident, however, on the face of the matter that the understanding, corrupt or otherwise, had not been acted upon and had been openly repudiated by the Members for Hereford, as no charge was made against those Members, and as, lastly, it was certain that the Committee would not have been able to exercise any jurisdiction over the persons to whom corrupt practices are imputed, so as either to satisfy the House of their guilt, or to punish them if their guilt was proved, the
Attorney-General advised the House to refuse the perfectly unprecedented and very impotent investigation which alone they could institute. And the House accepted his advice, and refused the demand for inquiry by • 107 votes against *55. On this point the Fourth Party sided against the Government and in favour of the meaningless inquiry, in- sisting that only a bad conscience could keep the Liberal Party so quiet, when an abuse had to be brought to light. In fact, however, the House might as well have granted a Com- mittee of Inquiry into the nature of the quarrel between Lord Salisbury and Lord Randolph Churchill, as have granted Mr. Raikes's request.
