The Sun.
London, England, 1812-06-26 00:00:00

BANBURY PEERAGE.

The consideration of the claim of General
Knollys to the Earldom of Banbury being re-
sumed,

Lord ERSKINE, in a speech of considerable
length, made a variety of observations favourable
to the claim of the worthy General, and stated a
number of resolutions which he meant to propose
for the adoption of the Committee in the same
view : these principally related to facts, which he
wished to establish, as having resulted from for-
mer investigations of the case.
The first of the.: being formally moved, a dis-
cussion of some length ensued, in which Lord El-
leuborough, his Grace of Norfolk, and the Lord
Chancellor, delivered their sentiments ; the first-
mentioned Peer argued against the adoption of
the Resolutions proposed by his Noble and Learn-
ed Friend. The Noble Duke was decidedly against
the propositions of his Noble and Learned Friend
(Lord Erskine), and thought their Lordships
should come to a decision in a way and form
in which the question could never be again re-
sumed; and intimated his intention of MOVIII,, as
a resolution, that the Petitioner, WilliamKnolivs,
had not made out his title to the Earldom of
Banbury, and therefore that he was not entitled to
the same.

The LORD CHANCELLOR declared, that the best
consideration he had been able to give the sub-
ject, did not sutler him to draw any other eon-
elusion than that, on which he had founded his
opinion last Session, "which was unfavourable to
the elaims of the Petitioner. .

After'soine explanation between Lords Erskine
and Ellenborough, it,was agreed to postpone the
further consideration- of the case till this day sc'n-
night.

The House then resumed, and prayers were
read;

SHORT HAND WRITERS.

Earl STANHOPZ rose and observed, that the
rigtt.of petition;ng the LegiSlature 'Was_ one of
the most sacred of those enjoyed by the subject
under the Constitution: they had a. right to be
heard either by themselves or their Counsel. It
was the duty of witnesses to attend 'on Commit-
tees of the House ; shut it was not justifiable to
make any charges against them upon that account.
On this occasion, he had no complaint to make
against any of their Lordships Qificers. A cus-
tom had lately been introduced for Short Hand
Writers to be employed on such occasions, they
were employed to save the time of their Lordship,
and to- shorten the business of Committees, He
-did not apprehend, ho*ever, that it was proper,
and it was perfectly new, to make charges of
the kind against individual petitioners ar wit-
nesses. A bill, or charge of the kind, was made
by a short hand writer of the name of Gurrrey, in
a way which he conceived perfectly improper.—
Any thing which went to obstruct the course
of justice in the House, appeared to him in the'
nature of a breach of privilege, and that the
parties were liable' to be brought before the
House. •

Lord WALs INGHAM observed, that the employ-
ment of short hand writers on such Committees,
was the usual custom. It was at the option of
parties to employ them or not, and the practice in
general appeared to be of much benefit.
Earl STANHOPE said, he did not refer to a case
where it was proposed by parties, but to a case
where it`was not proposed by parties.
Lord KENYON said a few words to a similar
effect with the Noble Chairman of the Commit-
tees. He noticed that the Noble Earl had seen
the short hand writers employed at the Commit-
tee, and-that no objection was made to' the indul-
genee

Earl STANHOPE replied, it was not a case of in-
dulgence he referred to ; what he required was
justice, and that no pan should be obliged to pay
a charge to which he was not liable. H repeat-
ed his idea of its involving a gross breach of pri=
vilege, and as suchihe felt his duty to bring it be-
fore the House.,

LON REDESDALE also. observed, that the Noble
Earl must have.seen the Short Band Writers em-
ployed, and to which he had made no objection.
.could not conceive how the proceeding in-
volved a case of privilege. The practice wr,s ge-
nerally understood to be for thetenefit of all par-
ties, and it considerably shortened the proceedings,
.and saved time. it did not follow that because
seine particular persons were not bound to pay,
that tie short hand writers were not to be paid.—
They were generally employed by some of those
who were parties to the transaction. The. 'iCoble
Earl must have greatly strained his mind to con-
ceive such a thing a breach of privilege ; not(could
he conceive any ground for thinking the House
could take up the matter. The question was merely
between the individuals.

Earl, STANHOP
Einsisted that the charge to
..
which he referred was not justly made ; .aud _let
those men, he 'said, if they dare, -attempt to en-,
force .the charge by law, and he would bring them
mere seriously before the House.

. .
. Their Lordships then proce.:;:ed. to forward the
Bills upon the table. . . A
short -converatioti, took place 'reflecting a
Welsh Inclosure Bill to which Lord Stanhope pro
posed some amendments ; after which. the House
adjourned till to-Morrow.