The Sun.
London, England, 1807-01-24 00:00:00

MILITIA OFFICERS.

On Mr. W. WYNNE'S moving that the Order of
the Day be read for receiving the Report of the Irish.
Militia Service Bill,

. Lord CASTLEREAGII rose for the purpose of
asking the Right Hon. Secretary opposite, if Any
provision had. been made for extending the addi•-
tional pay granted last year to the Officers of dm
Regulars , to the Officers of corresponding ranks iii
the Militia service, that was froth the Lieutenant-
Colonel down to the Sithalterns.

The SECRETARY at WAR replied, that no such
provision ".frad,been made.

• . Lord CASTLEREAGH hoped that the Noble
Lord (wham be did not see now. in his place) would
bring this 'subje .61 under the consideration of tlit:
House, more especially as he had himself stated,
th'at, in' his opinion; the increase of pay ought to ex-
tend as far as the Captaips of the Militia, • The re-
port was then received, and the Bill -ordere.d to ba
read a third time en Monday. • .

CRIMINAL AND PAUPER LUNA' ICS.
Mr. W WYNNE moved, t!.at a Sete -t Commit-
tee be appointed to inquire into the state of the Cri-
minal and Pauper Lumnics throughout England and
Wales, and of the Laws relative thereto, and to re-
port the same with their observations..to the House:
It was a year and a half since he had called thetit-
tention of the House to this subje&, which deiri•abd-
ed i in-mediate itrterferencer--The ronsequeriee-of.t he
attempt-made by Hatfield on the life of his Majesty,
was, an AaeMpos,vering'the Judges, in cases of ac-
quittal on the ground'of insanity, to order the per.;
bons so antlititd to- betletained in custody until'his
Majesty's pleasure respeCting them should be known.
Under this Act severatunititnnate persons Were noW,
lying :n public jiits; of all places the most impro -
per for then abode. He referred to an instance in
the county which he had the honour to represent,
of a person who, having been tried fbr -fnufd`dr, and
acquitted on the-ground of insanity., had been int'.
prisoncd in the public jail, in which all possible care
was taken Of him that could be .etpeCted from per-;
sons ignorant of the peculiar mode of treatment pe-
culiarly requisite-tor lunatics; eventually another
murder was comthitted upon a felon in the prison
by the same person. Pauper lunatics, as the law
then stood, were maintained by the parish, so that
it became the interest of Overseers that these tin,
happy people sbould commit some outrage by which
the -parishes 'Might be relieved from the burden of
them. •;There were not less than 1700 pauper lu-
natics now in confinement. How to proceed, whe-
ther A.4)411.1114 should be ere&ed to comprehend more
than one-county, or in what Other way relief should
be afforded, would ,be a proper .subject of consider-
ation for the Committee whiCh lie proposed, to in-
stitute.

• Mr. STURGE.S BOURNE-asked why the Hon.
Gentleman did not- include in- his reference to the
Committee the Criminal and Pauper .Luinatics of
Scotland and Ireland ?
. Mr. W. WYNNE replied,
.that in those Coun-:
tries there :were provisions which rendered the ne7
cessily of any interpOsition of the Legislature less
pressing than in England and Wales. A Commit-
tee was then appointed.
IoHN (.7AWI;HORNE, ESQ..

General PORTER rose, conformably to his no-
tice, to make *a Motion, to which he Was sure the
House would do him the justice to belieVe'he was
not instigated by the slightest pariicle of personal
feeling of hostility to the: Gentleman who was the
subjeetef it. He: Could assure them, that he Was
prompted to take thiS'present step by. an imperious
sense ot,diaty. to the House, and more than all
.by a
wish to maintain the purity and character of a prof
fession to which for twenty years he had *.been at-
tached. Feeling as he did; fur the dignity of the
House, and feeling as he'did . for the honour of his-.
profession, he-was irresistibly impelled. to bring for-
ward acase; in which a person haviog.been tried by
a Court composed of 16 of the most respectable Offi-
cers; had'neen.found guilty.on 11 charges but of 14
than had . been preferred against him, and 'in con-
*sequence had sUtfered the . severest punishment that
could be _inflicted hiM. He would not now
• enter into the triode of procedure. He only wished.
that the House* should be put ;iico possession of the
facts, Andle then pin it' to then' honour and dignity,
Whether a person who; under those circumstances,
lead been* expelled 'by a former Parliament, should
be allo4,(ed to retain a Seat in the present ? He
craved the indulgenee oithe House, as he felt • him.'
self un.i.ble to proieed at that moment with the ex-'
piessioo of his sentiments; but he would avail him-'
self of the next 'opportunity to detail them mote
fully, and concluded by Motiing, that the charges.
rriade against John Fenton C.awthorue, Esq. a Metn,
bet; of' that HouSe, and the Sentence of the, Court
l‘lartial, together with, thy: pideeedintrs thereon in
the years 1795 and 1740, be now. read?
Mr. S. STdiVHOP:,,,aeccitided the Itiltitien. •
CA WI N'iF,'W is lied the Hoti.-Gentle-
tnan had Stated mare fully his sentiments, and had ad-
dticeti. precedents which might have indiked the
ILuse to 4? immediately And without delay into the
proceeding. 'There Were certainly many precedents.
for expulsion,
.but not one of them rested on the
grounds on which the present case stood. In the'
Whole code of British- Jurisprudence* there was no
ule more strong than that any man who had been
at goitted or condemned `could not again.be tried for
the same offence: This was a principle of our esta-
blishedlaik, rooted as he. hoped in every
.man's
breast, and 'against which he'.. trusted that no,
one'would dare to set his face. There was another
circumstance which .ought to weigh heavily
,in.l
the ennsideration of tht House. . He stood there .
rbgaliv qualified ; lie. had been returned,,- and re,
tarried without opposition, by Ai very large body
of "Electors.. if he had been thought ineligible, the
moment of election had :been the- time. for stating
that ineligd)ility ; but no such, attempt. had been
made, and he had been. min irrioiasly returned for one
Cif the la Best Canny Towns in the kingderri. He
Wotild not enter into any discussion of the'merits of
the sentence by the Court Martial, although; that
Wa4 a subjeCt 'from which he would never shrfnk
when it came mulaily before the. HotiSe. Witlf
eegaid to precedents of expulsion, there were sever
n the cases of Mr. Wilkes, Mr. Walpole, 'and-
othen ; hut, he -contended, -that none of these-CaSet
was apielitable "to' owb; *The Hon. Gentleman'
}gad disclaimed any feeling of personal hOstility to-
ward him. It awaa -oqtainly very kind of him to
bring the subjeEt f 9 ward. This he NVOhld,deel4e,
that .v hen be steeir.iii beler4',*he
hid felt much rlioreSpfe'sSed; *and much more op-
pressed than he then did. But had he at the titue
:t filch he alluded known what he then knew; he
would not have troubled the House fur a iiiiiaent
on the subject. He Meant, had he known- that' the
first Law Officer in the House, the Attortiey-Ge,
neral of that day, had *declared that the sentence
of a Court Martial was -WO fiiai!;37 a ground 'on
which to found the iiroiieedings which had terminat-
ed in his 'expulsion from the House. •
Lord HO WICK declared that he had not.intend-
ed to say any thing on the subject that evening, but
what had fallen from the. Member Who had: just
gat down rendered it necessary for him to. offer.a
tew observations. The present was not a question
of qualification. The view that his Hon: Friend
took of it, Was simply this,- whether a person la-
bouringainder the stigma:of such a Sentence, passed
upon him by a Court Martial, was a fit Member
of
that House ? If not, Whether the Honse'Lid-ihe
power to expel biro, and if they had the power,

whether in this instance they ought to exercise it ?
This was a question of the utmost importance, as it
a ffeaed the d ivid al -c.‘oncerned—as it a tfeard the
charaeter of that HOuse, and as it involved the 'COn-
stitutional Principles which governed the Right's of
Eleatirs. It was .a great satisfifaion to think
that in a question of this nature, embracing 'so
many considerations of such vast importance, that
there did not appear any disposition- to -depart
from dispassionate investigation. His Honour-
able Friend, in the manner in • which he had
made: his Motion—in the temper which 'he. had
shewn on the occasion, had evinced what, from
a long knowledge of his chara&er, he had con-
fidently .expeaed he would evince-that the aEt•
ed not as a persecutor—not as. an oppressor-7but•
from a conscientious regard for the interests of the
Public and the honour of Parliament. He hoped
his example in this respe& would be followed ; and
he was, therefore, more readily disposed to accede to
the suggestion which seemed to be made by the
Member who had just sat down, and to ascertain
what precedents existed of similar and analogous
cases. It had been his wish, had the Motion for
reading the foemer proceedings passed,• to move for
the appointment of a Committee to search for pre-
cedents. He was not aware that precedents directly
similar could be found, but of analogous precedents
there were many, some of which must be within.
the recolle&ion 9f,many Members that heard him.
At, all events, he was sure it must be the wish of the
House to proceed to the examinatiou and decision of
this Snbjea with their judgments as well insinieted
from the Journals as possible. It was desirable that
their decision should rest on sound and constitutional
grounds, with as little reference as possible to
vidual feelings. The only objection to the appoint
men' of such a Committee that could he urged was,
that it might produce some delay. But their la-
bours would be confined to so small a space, that
he did not think this objection could have much
Weight. If, however, it was made by theper,on
most nearly concerned, he must recolle't, that he
placed hithself in the situation in which, utter what
had passed, he could not help regretting that he
had placed himself; but that was not no.t the point.
The House' must now take the best step they e(iuld
to obtain iliformationon.the subject.
,The appoint-
it-lent of a Committee seemed-to him to he the best
step. After that Committee had made their Report,
an opportunity would be afforded to his Hon Friend
to propose such a Motion as might' appear to him to
be best spited to preserve the .honour of the House,
to advance the interests of the Connity,: and to
maintain the rights and privileges of the Consti-
tution.

Mr. SPENCER STANHOPE having seconded
the Motion, would say merely that be had intended
to submit to the House, after the disposal of the
present Motion, a Motion similar to that which the
.Noble Lord had. just declared it was his intention to
; propose. For the question ought assuredly to come
to.a.solid and impartial decision, .and were it even
only pro forma, it would be the duty of the HotiSe,.
oh such a solemn occasion, to appoint a Committee
to search the Journals fol. precedents.
• Mr. C. HERBERT would not oppose the_ap-
r pointnient of a Committee, but declared, that be
did not think that this was a question- that could pos-
sibly rest on precedents. The first question that
'would come before the House Would' be, had they'
.a prime right of expulsion ? and if they had
.that right, had they the right of re-expulsion 1
this were. also' established, the question theti
'would, be as to the propriety. of expulsion. No.
.person could possibly doubt • the right Which the
.House possessed. of expulsion. The others ap-
pear to follows , and thus it .became a• question
not of precedent but of principle. The right of
exphlsion existed in the House, to enable it to..
• maintain its honour, its dignity,. and its safety.
' Some might argue, that it was to give the EleEtors
an opportunity of reviewing their choice. But this,
.he distinctly denied.' It was for the protedion of the •
House. HOW accumulated would be their disgrace if
they allowed the same man to' be sent back to them
whom they had declared to the Empire, to Europe,,-
and to the World, as unfit for their society. He
wished, therefore,' for-no 'search atter precedent-; but.
► as he was as desironS as the Noble Lord that this.
,subjea should be cOndueled with coolness and
beration, he should certainly not oppose his motion,
to that eirea.
General GASCOYNE could assure the Hon.
Member who was the uhje& of this motion, that he
felt- as. little hostility to him as any man but he
could not remain silent after what he had heard from
the Noble Lord on the subjeetof searching for prece-
dents. Why postpone the discussion without advaac-!
big any arguments for that delay ? Why delay it in
search of precedents, when the Noble Lord himself
admitted that lie did not believe a direct precedent
existed ? The precedents. on the Journals had no
more connection with the present subje& than a case
of bankruptcy had- with a case of murder. No in.;
formation could be derived from precedents. Was
there not this precedent before the House, that John
:FentOu Cawthorne, for fraud, for infainoes and un-
j gentlemanly condu&, had been expelled ? What
other ptecedetrt was necessary ? (The Hon. Gen-
ileman had Voluntarily placed himself in a situation
where he-must hear these things) If there was not
a precedent, would the House make one by passing
oZ et-or rdther. would it not make one by punishing
misconduct ? Was for the glory of the British
Nation, of the Senate,, and of the Military, that .no
case in point did exist: -There wasaio cause for•delay,
and he,advised the Noble Lord to be cautious how
he gave the public any cause .to suspe& that It. was
intended fo throw over the delinquent' the broad
-61-15-61-Ner. (A cry of No •=---Aro from the
Be:nelies.) . He trusted' then that the
Noble Lord would withdraw his motion. ' If
.por,
however, di-id the House should think fit. to appoint
a Committee to search for precedents, which it, was
admitted 'did hot exist, he must submit.
Lord FOLKSTONE remarking that the two last
Speakers bad totally deviated from the qUestion be-
fore the House, hoped they would not think their
arguments assented to because they were not an-
sWered ; he heartily concurred in the Motion of the
Noble,Lord—a Motion which he would himself
have made:bad he not been thus anticipated.. It had
been said that the Hon. Member must thank 'him-
self for the disagreeable _situation in which „he, was
placed. The fairness of this statement woukt not be
very clear, if it were proved, its be thought it would

Ise, that he had as good a right to sit in the House
iSlaily man in it.
V'he ATTORNEY GENERAL, declined, that if
the Noble Lord had not announced his intention of
moving for a Committee to search the Journals, he
'was free to say he would have given the- Motion
"made by his Hon. Friend near him the immediate
negative. Undismayed by the menaces ofany man,
and influenced alone-by-his duty to-the vonotry, by
his ,Wish to maititain the right; of the filet ors of that
he-Wonld-havj2 gi-Ven it his negative, because
he was at a loss to conceive hoW the min'utes pro-
posed to be read could be made'aground of proceed-
ing against any Member recentlyeleeted.. He would
have given it his negative because he was desirous of
guarding against the exercise of poWer not regulated
by law, and which had therefore no consritritional
origin. Leak of all should be have been d4osed to
accede 'to a Alotion for reading , the sentence Of a
Court for which he entertained great respect, as the
best constituted for the trial of military offences, 'and
on the Sentence of that Court Wit bent precedent to
found an ulterior proceeding—on the sentence of
a Court :Martial, in, Which there existed no trial-by
Jury, no power in, the person accused to challenge
his Judges, to indict a punishrnent which nelnece-
dent shewed had ever followed the seiniteurce of 'a
CoOrt of Law .1 had troubled the 'House thifs
early in consequence. of the mmner in which the
Hon. Members had expressed' themselves. • -HiS
Noble Friend had been cautioned not.. to, throw the
shield of power over the Member who was: the ob-
jeet of the) motion. He had not done so : but he
had thrown over him the
,shield of the coustitutioil
a shield which he hoped he would.beteady to throw
.
Ovee every than, even over the, Fion. Gentlemanif-he
should want it. As to,,Vague phrases, such as honor
and dishonor; it •was impossible they could lie rnad4
the sub;tanEe-Of any proceeding. It was impossible
the House hould .be guided by IllakillfS :cif that na--
tore. relied upon it,• that ,as long as the Eleaoit
of "the' country .possessed their reason; they would
know‘ that those Opposed the prilent ,attetntit
were the true friends to their rights and to :the.Con4
stitution.
Gen. G:4SCOYNE rose; and was prOceeding.4
enter into anew argument, but being_called_to,order,'
he intimated his intention of rdservilig-theM:for Th'es
next question.

Mr. BRAGdE BATHURST said, that S.V hathali
fallen from the' Learned Gentleman ma,deit. neces-
sary for some IVlember of that ParliamMit,- thejut-
tice of whOse prOceedingS had beep,M4eaellel4.l6-
rise in defence of it; .not only the sentence:Of the
Court Martial, blit the evidence AlSd;'"Were laid be-
fore that Parliament, and ,would :Oa: Learned Gen'=
. tlemati save that this was not a.Sufficient, ground for
the House to exercise its right ? No such opinion
had then been entertained. As he-wished that into,,
this discussion strong expressions of feeling, if not of
passion, had not, been introduced, however honour
able /6 those by whom„ they were entertained; So..
also he was of opinion thatthis' was a question which
ought to be clientangled .from all legal niceties; if
the House 'possessed gatisfA6tory evidence on, oath,'
proving that a body ofcritheekisted, and that evidence
hs'.sanetioned by! the judgment of a Court, whether
of a military nature or not (for beit observed,: that tilt
crime charged was not merely a charge of a military
natere, beit a char-ge of moral turpitude) i• where
the corpu4 delieli was thus made, .out, Parliament ,
was most assuredly justified in thing as they had
ailed: Whets the question cameto be discussed, he,
trusted, it :would .not be of jeaed that the evidenCe.
was not good -because it ,waS—the same evidenceon'
which the expulsion took •place in a previous Parlia-
Merit: if it were fit to exercise again the right, in.
•the exercise of.Whicli, in 'his opiuion, the former
.Parliament was completely justified; there .could be
noJeLison why the same. evidenCe. should not, be te7
curred

The ATTORNEY GENERAL, in explanation,
declared that he. never meant to question- the grounds
of the proceeding in the last Pariiment, a subjed c ti
which he was notsuffieiently informed. If the House,
thought that the•evidence (independent, of, the sen-.
was conclusive,--Oley had been right in doing
as theOttd crone. All that he bad said was, thyt
'any sentence, and more especially any military Sell-
thce, must be an insufficient ground tbr such a
proceeding.
• Mr 'CHARLES HERBERT asked, if the Learn-
ed
Gentleman thought the sentence of a Court Mar-
tial too flimsy- 4ground of proceeding; what ground
would he exped ?- The Learned Gentleman was in
error when he'Said that no right existed in the per-
son tried by a Cottrt Martial to challenge his Judges.
It was. both the right and the. practice, . He was sur-
prised how the Learned 'Gentleman could, think as
be had expressed himself, without deeming the ACS.
of the last Parliament a flaartnt injustice.

The ATTORNEy Gk',N F:li Ai deified having used
the word flimsy, as applied to. the, 'sentence of a
Court Martial. ' .. ..

General GASCOYNE stated, in explanation, that
he did not say the brOad shield of Gnvernment had
been thrown over the delnquent He only cau-
tioned the Noble Lord to avoid (Ling, any thing
which might .be so unicOnstrued—nor did he say
that .the House should take the proceedings of a
Court Martial for their guide; although 'he differed
from th 'Learned Gentleman on his notions, of ho-
nour, he was as willing to abide by the honour of a
Court Martial as the decision of a Court of Justice.
Lord Wr4. RUSSELL made a few observations,, bui
in so low a tone of voice, that it was impossible. for
as to -conga his Lordship's sentiments
Mr. J3RAGGE
,134vi'nuasr explained, as did the.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
_

AIr.'ADA.III observing that The temper and elia-
raaer of the debate had undergone some clang.
since its commencettient,'was anxious that the House
should understand what was the precise object i hey
had in view. The.O6jea was to inquire what was
best to be done, first,. consistently with justice (for
that must ever be the first consideration), then con:,
sistently with the dignity of the House, and, lastly, ;
consistently with the peCuliarcircumstancesolthecase.
It had.beensaid that this was a question of princi.
ple, and not of precedent. He did not _understand
thedistinaion. He hoped that precedents would be
referred to ; for thui.righ We had 'leng ago formed
a clear opinion on this subje6t, vet ..he wished
that the House should consider 'it deliberately. lie
was old enough to recollect the Resolutions of the'
Elonse ot..C;omi uns With respeat.to Mr. Willies, in
1764 and 1769 : when it was moved tlitit those Re-
wlutions should be rescinded, he was one ill the

minority. He: remembered that that Motion a;-
made annually, and he remembered that in I asa,
those Resolutions were rescinded by a majority, of
which he had the honour to make one. He there-
fore considered the subjeel as settled and fixed an
i the sound foundation of the Law Of Parliament.
He shOuld support the motion for a Committee, as
consistent with justice to the individual, and with re-
; gard tOthodicanity'of The Honse, and alaii as tending
to moderate those , feelings and passions, of which it
was desirable that the discussion of the subjea should
be altogether diveated.
Mr. HURST contended' that there was a very ma-
terial difference between principle and preeedent.--
They Were as opposite as the poles: The principle
was the great general rule; whiCh was illustrated by
the precedents. He had no objeftion to the course
pointed out by the, Noble Lord, to search first for
precedents, but he would ask the Learned Gentle-
' man, whether a if no precedents in point should be
ound, the Haaise 'would not be bound to recur to
the prineiple ?
TberMotion was then breed to, and the sentence
of the,Court Martial, and the proceedi9gs of Parliaa
ment.thereon 10 the Session of-170-? read in brief,
• after which it was 'moved by
Lord HowicK, that a coultuittee. b'6 appointed to
examine into the Journals: of that Mamie, and the
Records of Parliathealt, (fOr-,precedents of cases in
Which. Members had been expelled-from that Ho se
Who had been'returned to it,
.and report there-04
to the • a •
Mr. SPENCER, in seconding the Motion;
.
thought his duty to"ablstaiii froth giving any opie
iron .upon :the caseT by anticipation, one way or thii!
other. •
Mr. RA AWES perfenli agreed With the Noble"
bird as to the course of proceeding which lie re-
commended, but thought, as the motion was word-
ed, it "would'narraw the view of the case.—Gentle:
men convetkirewith the Records of that Rouse)
would be-latarer that•of cases similar to the- present
there was „none,: and of .analogous cases extremely,
few. There Were many cases to he tbund'whch,
as the motion • was werded, the ComMittee .would
think; themselves bound 0.- report: He • thought-,
therefore, that it would be desirable to make tha
wokKatho motion laage6 i*'Order to Cona&'atilia
main a'pring upon' a6l-ed in .such
ca'se§",- which Would enable: them to discharge theii
painful duty in this instance. The Honourable'rGeni
tleman snggested •to enlarge the words Of the-frio--
ti,on to all cases' of exptalsien, diatinguishing those
'Which the expelled Members hbd, been again re'
turned.
mortiick .aaoptA the suggestion .09
: Hon. Gentlemana and ".a Committee was then ap-
pointed to examine the SourUafslof that HouSe,
the RecordeOf Parliament, fir Precedents Of Case
of Members who had been expelled thatHobat, and
for what causeS, and also- of the Cases of persons
whb, After. baVing been *eXpeil.e4 that 116 use,, bald
been again returned to Parliament, topether with the
proceedings• thereon; and to report i'fiejainet4 Ala
House.". ' - • . •
PETITION OF TIE ELECTORS OF LANQASTER•
Lord _GEORGE; kio,l4i-Lpr.6po. sea to pre-,
sent a Petition to the Hodse- from a very considera-
ble number of the Fret.Mienaalf Lancaster. Ica haLl4
been OLit into his bands as he chine into the 11-itaate
and be thought:it hii,i,i344k t& -But in do'
•t)
,r. this he would' tdotprthege himself to any 0000•
on the case. As he had-been a Member of the Court,
Mdrtial a;, hose sentenee had' been 'alhided
should abstain from taking any share in those disettaa
slobs. Of the contents, Of the Petition he was
norant, but if the House-would: eon Sent to receive
it, they would be enabled toajudge of its cOntente
. when it should be read at the table.
The Petition was then ordered to 'be brought UP
and react It stated, in substanCe,
ThA the Subscribers to the Petition, being Free'
men of the town of Lancaster, had been inforine&
that there'were measures pending in that House, It'
which no Petitioners being interested were parties,
and Which had for their objeet to prevent them froaa
being represented by the Member whom they ha&
ehosen. They humbly subrnitted that no Return
could be invalidated, except by Petition presented 10
that House within fourteen days after the Meetinta
cif Parliattent, atid that any other attempt to invali-
date ,the same ,was contrary to law, and ought to 60
diSCountenanced by that House; that that House'.
if'ho ohjeMon had been
.iiiiia-e(liondoya ore the
slymmatdze
ground''of disqualification,•
'cept on matters siib;alqtieiit-_l6 the Return,' wliicn
alOne could invalidate that Return ; that the Peti"
- • :
milers were acquainted with ail the enctimstancei
upon which the messurespend pending fowl-Jed whets
they elthed their present Members and therefore
humbly submitted" that that Hon. House mould
adopt any proceedings thereon Which tvould be situ'
VersiVe of the Rights of Ele6tors, and the Freed to
of Election, and prayed to. be heard by theinaelva
or their agents, 'agaihst ssuch proceedings."
On the MOtion that the Petition do lie on• tb!
table,
Mr.BER BERT asked the Noble Lord who 'pre-
sented it, whether it was really the Petition of tit's
Freemen of Lancaster ? If it was, it appeared t°
him hot to be in the light of a Petition, but as a ditty
tonal and insolent attempt to controul Pailiarne.nti
The ,last paragraph appeared most reprehensible
where they ackhoWledged that they %v.:re acquainteci
With all the infamy that was the objeCt..of the Mc"'
firm. This admission would almost.justity the Hoiis
in disfranchising , the. Borough. There certaialf
Could be no doubt that a peilant -declared incapai-14
of serving his Majesty in any capacity Wits not fit-1°
any -trust.
• Lord GEORGE CAVENDISH declared, that 11°
knew sotrie of the signatures 'to be, those of. very Tel
spe&ahle freemen of Lancaster.
CAWTHORIVE( Observed that the Hanoar!
•Gentleinan had taken up the question ve'lj
warmly, but
.appeared to •be totally unaequi'ai?t,g
with the circumstances of the case; could site
him an alphabetical list of the Subscribers to the re.•
,
tition; which,. bad been taken from the list of s.be
freemen of Lancaster, and trahsmitted him'
Amongst themwere the names 'of theapairOjaif
and Alagistra% ‘of the QUarta "SCssidni, 4rid 11011
land-owners in the hundreds about
.theloWn•
was grit by any personal considerations th it he `;y;'.
influenced- Ott 'this
;occasion, but by a regard to t r
rights .of the Gentlemen who had seat &till • to.:
House.
Mr. SPENCER STANHOPE remarked,

000.
to

J

rc;
th,
otl
'ter

3Q,
fo
II(

C
all

re