The Sun.
London, England, 1819-02-02 00:00:00

GENERAL GOURGAUD.

Mr. DOUGLAS, for the purpose of complaint,
wished to be informed of the particulars of the
:,rres! of General Gourgaud lately in this country,
and the cause of his sudden expulsion to the Con-
tinent. The General complained that he had been
refused a heajn;.-; before the Council as he had
earnestly solicited; and that he had experienced
the llost ernel usage in respect to his papers, &c.
Mr. CLlvr, (Unoer Secretary of State) would
no' enter into the minutes of the case, as it would
be i;ng up their attention to little purpose. He
would merely assure the House, that no appeal
los been made 121,e manner represented for a
hearing before the Council: Those who had been
entrusted with the. arrer &c. were desired- to
convl, the foreigner ev-:-v indulgence consistent
with the naturt of the Act of Parliament. From
the persons vvito had attended on the occasion,
he had received information that the person al-
luded to had never solicited fur a bearing before
the Council. He hod only required to be brought
befor- Magistrate. His papers had been trans-
mittd to him act ording to the address given by
himself. It haft been illiberally reported, that
the seals of the r ape! s been broken open,
and other unnecessary indignities exercised. He,
however, cwdd assure the House, that there was
no truth in such an assertion. The whole pro-
gress of conveyance of those papers had been
carefully traced, and the most satisfactory an 7
swers had been received. Communications bad
been made front Cuxhaven and other places, and
the same satisfactory answers received. It was
(idly ascertained that the port-folio of the fo-
reigner had been delivered, to himself personally,
with the seals unopened.
Mr. DOUGLAS wished to know if any impro-
prieties had been taken at the Foreign Office ?
Mr. Guys knew of no improprieties—unless,
for the better security, an additional cover to the
Papers could be construed into such an act.

The business was then dropped.
OXFORD PETITION.

The Order of the Day tor resuming the adjourn-
ed debate respecting the Oxford Petition having
been read on Mr. Wynne's Motion,
.Sir A. Ploorr stated, that the Petition having
been printed, all must be acquainted with its na-
ture ; considering himself in the saute situation as
if he were called upon to deliver a judicial opi-
nion, he should not hesitate to declare that, he re-
garded it as an Election Petition, for it com-
plained of an improper and corrupt interference in
the return of a Membur. This Petition. was now
in the possession of the House, and- the House
had no discretion whatever on the subject, but
must act as the law required. The 10th of his
Majesty prescribed the mode to be adopted on
such occasions, and from that
.mode it was impos-
sible to depart. To allow the form of the Peti-
tion to be altered, and to admit that it was re-
presented with vario intuitu, would be a great
evasion of that Act, highly to be depreciated. He
did not mean to deny to the House the power of
punishing offenders and yindi'eating its privileges,
either by its own acts, or by instituting suits at
law ;- but the present Petition fell under a parti-
cular Act, according to the provisions of which
its merits tnuSt be tried. It mould therefore be
impossible for the House to agree with the pre-
sent motion, which was, that the Petition lie on
the table; but should that motion be withdrawn,
as he trusted it would, then the regular order
would be made as usual in cases of Petitions com-
plaining of undue returns.

Mr. sIjENMAN concurred in considering the pre-
sent as an Election petition. He had thought
that it might have been allowed to be withdrawn,
in order to be presented in a different shape. He
should have no objection, however, to withdraw
the motion, that it lie on the table.

BANKES conceived that no doubt could be
entertained of the present petition being an Elec-
tion petition.
The SPEAKER observed, that the Act of Parlia-
ment said, that when an Election petition had
been presented, an order should be made for its
consideration on some particular• day, and the
parties prohibited trunk withdrawing it. As no
()icier of the kind had yet hzen made out, the pe-
tition might still be withdrawn, and another
sewed before next Thursday.
Mi. C. WYNNE contended, that the petition Was

an Election Petition in point of substance, for the
-facts statel, if established, would prove the agency
of the Noble Duke in effecting the return. He
..hould be sorry to see it,withdrawn in order to
bring *mother forward in its stead, which should
be of a different nature, as the subject would then
he referred to a jorLdietion where witnesses would
not be examined tiro) oath.
Mr. C. TENNYSON contended that the petition
seas not an Election Petition, but merely called
on the House to vindicate its own privileges.—
The facts asset ted could not affect the return
of the Honourable Member for Oxford, unless a
connexion was proved between him and the
Noble Duke, so as to show that the latter had
been his agent. He was convinced thfit the lan-
guage of the petition was so framed as to avoid
bringing the return into question. If that was
the intention of the petitioners, to refer the petie
lion to a Select Committee would make it fall to
he ground, as they would not enter into the r•e-
cognizatrces re►luired. He thought it therefore
desirable that it should be referred to a Commit-
tee of Privileges. An Election Committee would
not be bound to make any report ; and in a case
like the present, be thought that it was of import-
ance that a report should be produced.
Mr. BATHURST concurred with what had ap-
peared to be the general sense of the House. The
Petition was clearly an Election Petition: If
the facts asserted were proved, the Noble Duke
must certainly be viewed in the light of an agent;
and if it were shewed that the return had been
obtained by bribery, the Select Committee would
report it void. As there appeared no doubt of
the nature of the Petition, the House had no
other course to take-than that determined by the
Act, and the Petition roust go to the Tribunal
fixed for its consideration.

'The question that the Petition lie on the table
was then put from the Chair and negatived.
The SPRAKER then suggested the propriety of
entering a Resolution upon the Journals, before
recording the- decision of tire House, to state the
motion which had been made, the adjournment of
the debate, and that it had appeared to the House
that the Petition was an Election Petition.

Mt.BAtitus immediately moved a Resolution:to
the effect, that tl►e Oxford Petition did appear to
be a Petition complaining of an ►endue return for
the said city, which was agreed to ; and on ace.
cond moti►►n by the same Hon. Member, the Pe-
tition was or:lered to he taken into consideration
on the 9th of March next.