Star.
London, England, 1819-02-13 00:00:00

NOTTINGHAM PETITION.

Mr. BROUGHAM said, he now rose to make the
Motion, of which he had given notice, for deferring
the consideration of the Election Petition from Not-
tingham. On the 25th of Jaen:lr)% a Petition had
been presented to the House, signed by two Electors;
on the 3d of February, another Petition, in the same
terms, but signed by other two Electors, had been
presented. 'The first Petition had been fixed for con-
sideration on the Std of March ; the second was fixed
for the same early day, although it would have been
fixed for a much later day, if the first had been with-
drawn before the second was presented. Petitions
presented on' the 25th of January, were fixed for
some day from the 2d to the I I th of March ; those
presented on the 3d of February were fixed in the
period from the 23d to the 30th. Thus, by keeping
the first Petition alive, and not abandoning it till the
second was presented, the second Petition had been
forced into a day four weeks earlier than its regular
day. This was the short ground of his Motion. He
wished to put the only Petition now in force into the
same situation that it would hold it there had been
no petition presented but that-on the 3d of February.
Since the petition of.the 3d was the only one, it would
•be violating the usual terms allowed to the parties to
take it into consideration so early as the 2d of March.
After the petition had been presented, 14 days were
Allowed for entering into recognizances; after which
eight days were required for making arrangements
and preparing lists, which were again to be exchang.
ed by the parties, eight days before the petition was
taken into consideration. The lists in this case must
therefore be exchanged on the 24th of February ; the
14 days for the tecognizances extended to the 17th.
Between the 17th and 24th there was not the neces-
sary time, it being only seven days.
The SPEAKER stated, that the question wls, that
the order as it stood be discharged.
Mr. B. BATHURST said, that the Hon. and Learn-
ed Gentleman appeared to him to have shewn no
necessity for his Motion. The history of the case had
not been stated, although he was sure the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman must have known it. The agent
for the petitioners had not been aware of the time
limited Cnr entering, into recognizances ; he had,
therefore, be.. surprised, upon coming up to town,l
to find that it was s.s late. The plan advised and
adopted in consequenct, was, nct to apply for en-
largement of the time, but to resent another petition
in the same terms, but different wa...os subscribed.—
At the election a scrutiny had indeed bet..4emanded
and refused—he would not say improperly, for it
for fear of increasing the agitation which then pre-
vailed. Ever since, too, Committees had been sitting,
to consult and arrange what measures they should
adopt, and for preparing for this very thing. The
lion. and Learned Gentleman had shewn no incon-
venience arising to the sitting Member, and therefore
he saw no reason for the delay.
Mr. BROUGHAM said, that the time for recog-
nizances on the Petition on the '2sth January, did
not expire till the 7th of February, and that Petition
had not been abandoned till the '2d of February ;
upon the second Petition of the 3d, the time for re-
cognizances extended to the 17th ; and thus ten days
were gained by the Petitioner. So much for the ad-
vantage of the Petitioner. But the second Petition
put the sitting Member to the greatest inconvenience,
as it allowed him to be proceeded against earlier
than he ought. Members did not at once prepare
as if they were sure that the petition against him
would be prosecuted. There were many instances
of petitions presented and not prosecuted ; there were
instances of petitions being presented without any in-
tention of prosecuting. But if this case should re-
main unrcdressed, a sitting Member, so soon as he
learnt that any petition at all had been prepared
against him, must have all his agents at work, and
make every preparation for defence—(llear, hear).
All this he must do without being at all certain that
any recognizances are entered into till fourteen days
elapse—(hear, htar). The inconvenience of this to
the sitting Member was most obvious. If the second
petition had been presented after the first irad been
abandoned, the period would have beer. longer for
the various preparatory steps required. The Honour-
able Member then said, that he had been asked in
what manner the sitting Member had beer. injured?
lie would reply to that question by asking another,
and that was, in what mariner is the Petitioner in-
jured? The proceeding, on the Camelford Petition
appeared to support his view of the subject. The''
Right lion. Gentleman gave one reason for his op-
position, and another Gentleman on the other side of
the House had, from courtesy, given him another in
private conversation.
Mr. BROUGHAM said that he should move, that
the Petition be taken into consideratiOn on the first
open day between the 23d of February and the 13th
Of March.
The SPEAKER then intimated, that the regular
method of proceeding would he to withdraw theire-'
sent Petition, and bring forward a rfrw Motion.
Mr. C. WYNN considered that no injury could
accrue to the sitting Member, if the considefation-ar

;this Petition were delayed. The tiittal practice of the
House was to take the Petitions into consideration on'
the day ori3inally appointed. The (louse did, how-
ever, sometimes defer it, when it was not likely to be
attended with onerous expense to either of the parties.
Lord CASTLEREAGH said, that he should pro-
pose to the Honourable Member to move, that the
present Order should be discharged, and the farther
consideiation of the Petition be fixed on 9th March.
Mr. BROUGHAM acceded to this proposal, and
moved that his original motion should be withdrawn,
and the proposal of Lord Castlereagh adopted in its
stead.—Adjourned at half past five.