§ Lord Wharncliffesaid, he had a petition to present against Church-rates.
§ Lord WharncliffeYes.
Lord Hollandunderstood it was contrary to the order of the House to receive printed petitions. He had frequently had petitions which he was most anxious to present, but his desire to do so was overruled on the ground that they were printed. If a Committee were appointed, their Lordships would find that it had been repeatedly ruled that printed petitions should not be received in that House.
§ Lord Wharncliffehad been informed, that numbers of printed petitions had been presented to and received by their Lordships.
§ The Earl of Devonsaid, that the rule not to receive such petitions had existed up to three or four years ago; but on the occasion of the abolition of slavery, or some other important question, printed petitions were received after the subject had been discussed.
Lord Hollandsaid, he would beg to observe, that unless some decision was come to which would permit such petitions to be received, he would take exceptions to any that might come before their Lordships. It was the rule of that House not to print any petitions presented to it, and it would be monstrous if they did not print petitions presented to them, that they should receive petitions which were printed. This question was, therefore, a more important question than at first sight it appeared, and was one on which a decision should be come to in one way or the other, for he could not understand how the rule of the House could be got rid of by an understanding, or a mere conversation over the table.
§ Lord Lyndhurstsaid, that there was no order against the reception of printed petitions. Hundreds and thousands of them had been presented on the subject of the abolition of slavery, and the understanding under which this occurred was just as much an order as that alluded to by the noble Baron, as there was no written order on the subject.
§ Petition laid on the table.