§ Mr. Peter Moorebrought up a petition from certain freeholders of Middlesex, against the return of Mr. Mainwaring, on the ground that he was not properly qualified. The ground of qualification was the only point to which the petition went. A petition 184 on this ground had before been presented; but at that time Mr. Mainwaring, by the decision of the committee, was not a member of the house, and of course the petition fell to the ground. The object now was to renew this petition. He thought it right to state, that this petition had been put into his hands only about ten minutes previous to the meeting of the house this day, and therefore he could say nothing more about it than that it was presented at the instance of certain gentlemen whom he understood to be freeholders of the county of Middlesex. The house would therefore consider whether it was to be received.
§ The Speakerobserved, that if the matter of the petition came within the election laws on the subject, then the hon. member had a right to insist that the petition should lie on the table. If there was any doubt on that point, the passage of the act that bore upon it ought to be read, and then the house might judge upon the case.
Mr Pereevalsaid, that from the first view of the thing he thought it impossible that this petition could be received, as it followed the decision of a committee, which had been appointed to try the merits of this election, before which this point might have regularly come. It would have been better to have brought forward this point there instead of going on from time to time harassing the house. He had not had such an opportunity of investigating the point of law on this subject as to enable him to give a positive opinion, but upon principle and analogy he thought it clear that it ought not to be received.
Mr. Secretary Foxadmitted that his first impression was, that this petition could not be received, but if it was possible to have it deferred till to-morrow, as he understood it was, it might be proper to do so, that the members might have time to consider the peculiar circumstances attaching to this case. The circumstances were these: a petition had been presented against the return of Mr. Mainwaring, and the committee had decided on the return generally, declaring that sir F. Burdett ought to have been returned. The question of qualification could not come in here. But a petition had been presented on the part of Mr. Mainwaring, sir F. Burdett had declined defending his seat, and the freeholders had come forward in his place. If sir Francis had persisted in his defence, the qualification might have been here brought forward, butt as the matter stood 185 there was certainly cause for consideration, in order to remove difficulties, if they existed, and prevent their recurrence for the future. He hoped therefore that the matter would be allowed to stand till tomorrow.
§ Mr. Percevalcomplained of the manner in which the house had been used in this business. It was evidently the intention of the persons concerned to take the house by surprise, by deferring the presenting of this petition till the last day, and then only putting it into the hands of the hon, gent. a few minutes before the meeting of the house.
Mr. Secretary Foxsaid, that this affair depended not on the common law, but on a particular statute, and the question was, whether the qualification could have been properly tried till now?
§ The Speakerthen read the passage of the act, from which it appeared, that the freeholders who took up the cause in the place of any member, stood, to all intents and purposes, in his situation, so that the qualification might have been tried before.
§ Mr. Mainwaringcontended, that this petition could not be admitted on this ground, namely, that it was a petition to renew a petition that had been presented last session, which was not now renewable; because, in all cases of this nature, such a petition for a renewal must be presented four clays after the commencement of the session.
§ The Speakerobserved, that the hon. gent. was perfectly correct in his remark. It was the duty of every gentleman who presented a petition, to make himself master of the contents, in order that he might explain them to the house; he therefore requested the hon. gent. would have the goodness to state, whether or not this was a petition for the renewal of a former petition.
§ Mr. Moorereplied, that he believed he might take upon himself to say, that it was a petition for the renewal of a former petition.—On which the Speaker declared, that the rule of the house was perfectly clear, which rendered any such petition inadmissible.