HC Deb 29 April 1853 vol 126 cc875-6
MR. CRAUFURD

said, he begged to move for a new writ for the Borough of Maidstone, in the room of George Dodd, Esq., whose election had been determined to be void.

Motion made, and Question proposed— That Mr. Speaker do issue his Warrant to the Clerk of the Crown, to make out a New Writ for the electing of a Burgess to serve in this present Parliament for the Borough of Maidstone, in the room of George Dodd, esquire, whose Election has been determined to be void.

MR. DISRAELI

said, that the evidence taken before the Committee had not yet been circulated.

MR. PHINN

said, he believed that no evidence was adduced before the Committee. Some charges of a very serious nature were made in the petition; but he understood that the hon. Member who was petitioned against either did not appear, or that, as intimated, he had no defence to offer.

MR. CRAUFURD

said, this was a case in which there was no bribery proved, and no special report made by the Committee. All the Committee reported was— That George Dodd, Esq., is not duly elected a burgess to serve in this present Parliament for the Borough of Maidstone; that the last election for the said Borough, so far as regards the return of the said Dodd, Esq., is a void election; that the said George Dodd was, by his agents, guilty of treating; and that it was not proved to the Committee that such treating was committed with the knowledge and consent of the said George Dodd.

MR. DISRAELI

said that, having had the honour of being a Member for Maidstone, he felt interested in that constituency, but he must admit that there were circumstances of suspicion connected with the last election. He had no wish to take a severe course, but he would suggest that the discussion on the issuing of the writ be adjourned until Friday next.

Debate adjourned till Friday next.