§ Mr. Alderman Prinsepstated, that in compliance with the suggestion of a right hon. member (Mr. H. Addington, see p. 242.) he had the other day consented to omit the word "bullion," out of a motion which was then agreed to, not being aware that he thereby, as he now found, destroyed the object of his own motion. He therefore moved, that the order be read and discharged, for the purpose of having one containing the word bullion substituted in its place.—The order was accordingly discharged; and on the question being 286 put, for the insertion of the word "bullion,"
Mr. Huddlestoneobjected to it, on the ground, that the account was a detail of commercial concerns, which he did not think was proper to be made known. He was unavoidably absent, on the day when the hon. alderman brought forward his motion, or he should then have opposed it.—The hon. gent. said, that the evils which now oppressed the East-India company, were not imputable to the directors.
§ Mr. Alderman Prinsepappealed to the candour of the hon, director, whether it were a fair proceeding to object to the amendment of adding a single word to a motion, which had already received the sanction of the house, and to which no objection had, been made, previous to the order being discharged?
§ Mr. H. Addingtonsaid, the word "bullion" was in the original motion, and the hon. alderman had agreed to its being struck out, on his suggestion to the hon. alderman that it. was unnecessary. If, however, the hon. alderman now thought that the purposes of his motion would be better answered by the "bullion" being again inserted, he saw no reason why it should be objected to.—The amendment was agreed to.