The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-30 00:00:00

SOUTHAMPTON ELECTION.

Mr. MACKINNON stated that, agreeably to the
notice he had given, it had been his intention to move
for the new writ for Southanipton ; but in consequence
of it having been intimated to him that it would be
more convenient that the. Committee of Supply should
be first disposed of, he would postpone his motion till
after the Committee of Supply had been gone through.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE hoped that the Hon. Member
would name some specific day on which to make his
motion. He had a petition from Southampton, praying
the suspension of the writ, which he would now present.
The Hon. Member having presented the petition,
Mr. MACKINNON observed that he would bring the
subject forward after the Committee of Supply had been
disposed of.
. .

Sir J. EASTHOPE wished to know whether it was
competent for the Hon. Member to fix his own time to
bring forward such a motion ?

The SPEAKER said that it was perfectly competent
on the part of any Member to move, at any time, the
issue of a writ.

NOTTINGHAM ELECTION.

Mr. S. CRAWFORD said that he had also a motion
on the paper for the issuing of a new writ for Notting-
ham. But as it appeared to be the wish of the House
that the Committee of Supply should be proceeded with
first, be would postpone the motion till after the Com-
mittee of Supply.
Mr. V. SMITH wished to know what course the Go-
vernment intended to pursue after the disposal of the
Committee of Supply ?
Sir R. PEEL said that of course those Hon. Mem-
bers who had postponed their motions, in order that
the Committee of Supply might be proceeded with,
would have the preference of bringing those measuses
forward after the Committee of Supply had been gone
through.
Mr. O'CONNELL trusted that no measure of import-
ance would be allowed to be brought forward at a late
hour.

Mr: SHARMAN CRAWFORD said he found that se-
veral Hon. Gentlemen objected to his moving for the Not-
tingham writ.after the Committee of Supply. He had no
desire to do anything hostile to her Majesty's Ministers,
but it was important, under the circumstances, that he
should proceed to move for the writ then.
Sir ROBERT PEEL said the motion would take the
precedence of other business.
DUNCOMBE said he hoped that his Hon,.
Friend would persevere in the motion. The Irbil. Metr-
ber opposite (Mr. Mackinnon) had consented to postpone
'his motion, and now it was to be postponed again.
Sir R. PEEL thought that no Member had a right to
bring forward a motion without notice. There was no
notice of the motion for the Southampton writ.
Mr. MACKINNON—I gave notice a week ago.
Sir R. PEEL—Then it was not on the. paper.
An Hon. Member might certainly give notice..at four
o'clock that he intended to bring forward a motion. He
could do that of right, but it was not in conformity with
the practice of the HouSe, and he should be exceedingly
sorry to see that right often exercised. He thought these
notices were for mutual b nefit—Hear, hear)—aad he
did not think that it would be for general convenience
that motions should be brought forward without notice.
He hoped his Hon. Friend would give notice for Monday
next for the Southampten writ.
The SPEAKER said the Right Hon. Gentleman had
misunderstood him. The question which had been asked
was, whether the Hon. Member could move for the writ.
He (the Speaker) said it was perfectly competent for
any Hon. Member to move for a new writ at any time
without notice. He did not think it was competent to
a Member to give notice at four o'clock. That would
not be a notice. If he gave notice it must be for a
future day, and not the same day.
Sir R. PEEL said it appeared that notice had been
given for the Southampton writ, but it did not appear
on the paper. He was referring to the matter as a
dropped order.
Mr. MACKINNON thought it right to explain one
circumstance. On Monday he postponed the Southamp-
ton writ, and he did not think it was necessary for him
to renew his notice. He was not aware that it was ne-
cessary. But he most distinctly stated on Monday last
that he should bring on the Southampton writ this
evening. He did not wish to interfere with the
public business in taking the writ previous to the Com-
mittee of Supply. If the Right Hon. Gentleman wished
him to postpone the writ to Monday, he would have it dis-
tinctly understood that he should bring the motion for-
ward at half-past four on Monday. •
Mr. R. YORKE hoped the discussion would take pre-
cedence of all other motions on Monday, as it was a
matter of great importance.