HC Deb 24 April 1807 vol 9 c538

Sir J. Henderson gave to notice of his intention to move, on Tuesday, for leave to bring in a bill for making better provisions to enable members against whom election petitions may be presented, to recover costs from such petitioners as may afterwards abandon their petitions without due notice to such members. The hon. bart. stated, that in consequence of due notice, not having been given in a recent case, the sitting member was at the expense of bringing several witnesses from a distance of no less than 400 miles, and was proceeding to remark upon the probability and injustice of many similar instances, when the Speaker stopped him, by stating the irregularity of offering more on this occasion than a mere statement of the motion he meant to bring forward.—Mr. Vausittart appeared at the bar, and read the report of the committee upon the Shrewsbury election. This report stated, that the hon. H. G. Bennet was not duly qualified according to law, and therefore that he ought not to have been elected; that the petitions against him from Mr. T. Jones and others, and the defence made against them, were not frivolous or vexatious; and that the election, so far as regarded the said H. G. Bennet, was void. After the report was delivered in at the table, a new writ was ordered for the election of a representative for Shrewsbury, in the room of Mr. Bennet.—Mr. Horner gave notice of a motion for Wednesday, for the production of papers relative to the Polygar war, adding, that be should bring this motion forward, after the business with regard to the Carnatic, which an hon. baronet (sir T. Turton) had announced his intention to bring forward, should be disposed of.— Sir Francis said, that he meant in the course of next week, upon a day, which, early in the week, he should take occasion to mention, to bring forward a motion for the production of all the papers and information received by government or the India company, with respect to the late transactions at Vellore, or the probable consequences of those transactions. At the same time, the hon. member seeing the chancellor of the exchequer in his place, took occasion to ask, whether it was intended on the part of ministers, to propose, or to support any grant to the India company from the public money, by loan or otherwise, in the course of the present session: and if so, whether it was meant that such grant should be made before the statement of the general concerns of India (the India budget) should be laid before the house. The chancellor of the exchequer, in reply, stated, that government did not entertain the intention to which his question referred.