The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1822-03-29 00:00:00

Par.
Itke

be buil he hoe* Is IV
if 1801; WOO .imi A. , I
one. hal
t Hon. 4 4 - 4ti
his prede
t reentry, sent'
ik:,
.. 4.,,, ..... .
Dose
some
etery
sodifto e through
them to prove, that the '4"1" ' Alf the year
be bed before menrwitier Tegle-ver miftwpt
stituted as any of those pinkies, alluded to
in the Petilift could mike it._ 'nese prac-
tices were steed by the PetiliegleveQ- as feels,
but as statements publicly waft i$ uricootra.
dieted, 'whieh . if true, ought no built' to be 'of.
Awed, and Anted the necessity of 2 reform of Rif-
Nooses ; and the Petition had been rejected be-
came one of the assertions mentioned therein, as
having been made by so ex-member of' Parliament,
was, that " boys voted in that House." Every one
most know what that expression want. By the
term 44 boys" was not meant " children"—nut
boys from Westminster or Eton schools—but per-
sons whose age, inexperience, and inattention, ren-
dered them little better qualified for the situation
of Members of Parliament. The rejection of •
Petition. in every respect preper, on such • ground,
be agreed with his Hon. Pnend: in thinking. did
lIIIIIVE atom strongly this. any thing could do the
necessity of reform. That reform would come no
man could doubt ; that reform was not fir diatonic
' he did firmly hope, and the sooner the Home set
*bout reforming itself the better; furl in the ern..
phone word, of Lord Chatham "If the Home did
not speedily reform itself within. it would be re-
formed with a vengeance from without."
Sir I. NEWPORT said, he could not agree with
those who were of opinion that the House had any
tight to reject, unheard, soy Petition whoteser, on
do sere statement of its substance by the Hon.
Member who prevented it ; for it often happened
that Petitions were seat to Members to present,
even against their own particular wishes and opi-
nions, and in such cases it would only be for a
Member to select so obnoxious peerage, even
Wimp the meaning might be distorted by detach-
big it from the body of the Petition, in ordet to
blue the Petition to be reje,ted. if the Petition
had been read, and there bad appeared any thing
objectionable in its lauguage, he would himself
botrobeen ready to jeiu in rejecting it, but the
Penske' net beviog been reed. it was impossible
that the House could be cognisant of any thing
objectionable is its 'media& and it had therefore
no
oSrir a right
to reject
seit. id be wished to guard himself
st be' understood spun tag to have made any qua-
lified statement of the easteuts of the Petition.
In stating the substance of it. as he had done, he
ofteeinet with the desire of calling upon the House
to divide upon his statement whether they would
reject the Petition or oats but of calling the atten-
tion of the House to the Datum of the PAWNq that
it might be reed in full by the clerk at the table, if
if it were thought proper, in order that the Haiti
might •ftereise its judgment on the matter; the
common practice being for the clerk to read any
Petition not particularly noticed short, so that the
partic,ular language was not limiest.
1 .1111o.:Diceinson said it was the business of •
illiintser presenting a petition to state shortly the
substance of it to the Mousey_ in order that it might
judge from such statement of the propriety of re-
ceiving it. On the present °mains, it appealed
Sem the statement of the Hon. Member by whom
am peutioe was presented, that it averred what was
smeary to the fact, 44 tint boys voted in that
Morse." There was but one instance in the his-
tory of the House of any person under age haviug
spoke* in the House, that of the late Mr. Fes, sand
be had never voted while under age. That term
bad been applied contedtptuously to the construc-
tion of the House, and on that ground it was, in
his opinion, decidedly objectionable.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY did not think the Home
mob, have a right to reject • petition without hear-
ing it read. Such a practice was likely to lead to
a wrong decision. The Petition in question op-
peered, on referring to it, to have stated those things
which were considered uhjectioneble. not as facts,
but as published statemeots, which, if true, proved
the necessity of Reform. If the petition had bete
read, there was reason to think that it would not
have base foetid to cootaiu any thing objection-
able, and therefore would not have bees rejected.
Mr. Alderman WOOD said, even those words
which had formed the only ground of objection to
the Petition. were used in it. trot es a statement
from the Petitioners of their own opirtioo, bat as a
statement mode tied published by Mr. Spooner,
who was formerly a Member of the House.

•
The Petition haring been brought up...
Mr. Huns said, in moving that it be reed, he
wool take the oppoetniiity of noticing the ob-
servation et the Noble Lord, that he did not con-
sider it as the Petition of the Mayor and Coin-
mortally of the town and borough of Monmouth.
It had been forwarded to bits by the late Mayor,
whose signature it bete, as the Petition of this
Mayor Bailiff. and Commonalty of Monmouth,
and such in fact it was. The Noble Lord's reason
for thinking it otherwise in all probability was, that
he did not find attached to it the signsteresof any of
his friends. He (Mr. H.) had been at Monmouth, and
he knew many of the parties who hadsigntil the
Petition to be members of the Commonalty. and to
be persons of great respectability. The Right
Hon. Gentleman who had seconded the bringing
up of the Petition, had entirely misunderstood his
(Mr. Home's) observations on the right of the
House to reject a Petition. What he had said was,
that it had no right to reject any Petition without
hearing it read. That was his opinion. and he ad-
hered to it for the reasons stated by the Right
Hon. Baronet below him (Sir J. Newport).
Lord G. SOlatitaltT said he did not mean to cast
the slightest imputation on the persons who had
signed the Petition ; they might, no doubt, he
highly respectable; but his region fo. not consider-
ing it as the Petition of the Mere and Corninon•
alty was. that he did not see attached to it the
amines of soy respectable persons, whom he knew,
and that the greater part of the respectable mem-
bers of the Commonalty bad not signet it.
Ordered to be printed.

Mr. W. LAMB presented • Petition from the
owners and occupiers of liud in the hundred of
Hoddesdost, in the county of Hertford, preying the
attention of the House to the &stream of the Agri.
culturists.—Ordered to be printed..