The Sun.
London, England, 1841-06-15 00:00:00

ELECTIONS PETITIONS TRIAL BILL.

The Order of the Day for the House resolving itself
into a Committee having been read,
Sir R. PEEL said that the Bill referred princi-
pally to the technical objections in the present
law which it was desirable to amend. • The clauses
of the Bill were mostly df an unimportant a
character, but still on the eve of a general elec-
tion,with the probability that many election petitions would
soon be presented, it appeared to him advisable to make
the Bill as perfect as possible. It should be remembered
Sat the Act would expire at the end of the first Session
of the ensuing Parliament. There were, however, some
alterations of rather an important character. Under
the ' present state of the law a Member was dis-
qualified for serving on the Select Committee, on
the grounds of certain degrees of relationship, or of
his having voted at the election. But it had been
found that in one or two instances Members had in-
advertantly been placed on Committees against whom
reasonable objections might be urged—such, for instance,
as their having taken an active part in the election ;
and in those instances Members tad expressed a regret
that they had not an opportunity of disqualifying them-
selves. He (Sir R. Peel) proposed in the amended
measure, for the purpose of remedying that in-
convenience, that any Member who had satisfied
the mtjority of the Committee that there were
good reasons, not having reference to considerations
of personal convenience, but affecting the im-
partiality of the Committee, why he should be ex-
cused from serving, that in such a case the Committee
should have the power of dispensing with his services.
The amended Act also proiided for the more im-
partial appointment of chairmen, and for a bet-
ter arangement in the selection of the Committee.
He thought these substantial alterations ought to be made
with the decisive opinion of the House in their favour.
He was afraid it would be very difficult to obtain the vo-
luntary consent of Members to fill the office of Chairman,
and if it was a necessary duty, he thought the House (nigh t
to provide for its execution. He would suggest that the
extent of the duty that might be imposed upon 'any
Member to act as Chairman should be limited, and that
if he were called upon to preside at several Committees
it should be provided that if he should claim exemption
(having once served the office), he should be entitled to
it during the Session, and- that the General Committee.

should have the,power of nominating another Chairman.
He felt exceedingly grateful to those gentlemen who had
performed those duties. He thought the Bill a great
improvement ; at all events every one must feel it a relief to
have got rid of those painful scenes which were formerly
exhibited on the nomination of a Select Committee. At all

events that law must be acted on during the next Session,
and therefore it was desirable to make the experiment
as perfect as possible. He trusted the House would ap-
prove of the course he had pursued in re-enacting the whole
Bill, instead of merely introducing a separate Bill to
make the alterations, so that one Act might contain the
whole law of the subject.—(Cheers.)
Mr. C. BILLER would repeat that he considered the
Bill a great improvement, and that it was the more im-

portantbecause it was a very improvable Bill. It had
begun in the right direction. He should not offer any
opposition to the Bill, but there was one alteration to which
he objected. Originally the Committee on Controverted
Elections had suggested that the Committee should be,
chosen by chance—that the numbers be reduced, and the
panel struck as at present. But • they had proposed,
in order to give a permanence to the Committees, that
assessors should be chosen out of the House whO
should act as Chairmen. The 'light Honourable
Baronet had grounded this Bill on a better principle,
because he had done away with• chance altogether.
He took the mode of doing away with chance altogether,
and proposed that they should be selected in rotation.
The Committee, of which he (Mr. C. Buller) was Chair-
man, had not ventured to propose such a plan, but when
proposed by the Right Honourable Baronet he cer-
tainly thought it a great improvement. The Right Hon.
Baronet had refused, however, to adopt the suggestion
of the Committee as to the appointment of one per-
manent Chairman. What he objected to in the
proposal of the Right Honourable Baronet was, that
he did away with the character of permanence in the
Chairman, and he argued that the effect of that would at
least be to deprive the House of any great knowledge and
experience in the person who presided in the Committee.
The law of elections was now so complicated that it was
absolutely necessary to have a lawyer of great legal ex-
perience ; but undoubtedly a Chairman who had sat on
several occasionkwould be far more efficient than one
who was selected to preside on a particular occasion.
He thought that the present subject was so important,
that the sense of the House, no some occasion or other,
ought to be taken upon it ; but it was not his wish, at the
present moment, to adopt that course.