Star.
London, England, 1821-05-11 00:00:00

I sit Actscomplained of, so obnotlons as the power of
the House which it was now called upon to exercise.
Sir ROBERT WILSON said, that his Hon. Friend,
the Member for Shrewsbury. was making an attempt
to drag to light that miscreant, that base and das-
tardly assassin—( Loud cries of Hear!)—who,' under
the protection of the Press, had been waging a savage
and unrelenting war against all whom he conceived
to be weak, defenceless, and oppressed. Whatever
might be the issue of the attempt, the gratitude of the
House was due to him for having made it. As many
Members had withdrawn under the idea that an ad-
journment was to take place, he thought that they
had better not decide upon the important point of
placing one of their fellow-subjects in confinement,
until they should be able to discuss it in a fuller Huns...
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE thought the Hon. Member
was entitled to the thanks of the House for having
brought the question forward. The libel was a gross
attack upon the privileges of the House, and conse-
quently upon those of the People. He thought the
Paper in qvestioa was a disgrace to the Press—
(Hear, hear).--Having had the persons brought be-'
fore the House, and heard their prevarication, there
were grounds quite sufficient to warrant their pro-
ceeding at the moment.
The question was then put, and the Amendment
for adjourning the debate until this day was carried
without a division. The persons named in the ori-
ginal Motion were then ordered to attend this day at
the Bar of the house.

BOROUGH OF ORFORD.
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT presented a Petition
from James Mills, who styled himself " a freeborn
Englishman, interested in the freedom and purity of
Election," but without any connection with the 80-,
rough in queition, against the return of the Marquis
of Londonderry for the Borough of Orford. The
Petitioner stated that the Noble Marquis obtained his
seat, not by the unbiassed suffrages of the Burgesses
of Orford, but by the undue influence of the ,Marquis
of Hertford. He complained that in this instance
the laws of Election were grossly violated, and con-
cluded by praying the House to refer his Petition to
a Committee of Privileges.
Mr. W. ‘V INN objected to the Petition being re-
ceived, on the ground of its praying, to be referred
to a Committee of Privileges, when it was properly
a Petition complaining of undue election.
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT denied that the Peti-
tion was one of that description ; it crupplained of
nothing but the interference of a Peer, which he con-
ceived to be a breach of the privileges of that House.
Mr. ROBINSON.—The Petition complaining of
the interference of the Duke of Marlborough in the
Oxford Election, was similar to this, and was referred
to an Election Committee.
Mr. W. WYNN did not see any irregularity in re-
ferring this Petition to a Committee of Privileges ; but
what he complained of was, the irregularity of its
praying to be referred to that Committee, instead of
leaving the disposal of it to the discretion of the House.
The SPEAKER said, it was quite clear that this
was not an Election Petition, as it did not come from
a Voter of the Borough, but frcin a Freeman, com-
plaining of the interference of a Peer. The Petition
was certainly irregular in praying to be referred to a
Committee of Privileges.—The Petition was then
ordered to be laid on the table.

PREVENTION OF SMOTE FROM STEAM-ENGINES.
The Steam-Engines Bill was read a third time, and a clause
added, by way of rider, providing that the Act should not ex-
tend to Furnaces and Engines employed in mines and smelting
ore.—The. Bill then passed.