HC Deb 27 February 1807 vol 8 cc1032-3

The following members were chosen a committee to try the merits of the petition complaining of an undue election and return for Wick, Dornock &c.: J. Shaw, T. Brooke, H. Thornton, B, Hobhouse, R. E. D. Grosveror, sir W. Middleton, H. Fane, R. Sharp, R. Wigram, T.Baring, W. Jones, R H. Bradshaw, lord Bernard. Nominees, Peter Moore, right hon. H Erskine.—Lord Folkestone begged leave to call the attention of the house to the Petition of Mr. Paull, which he had presented the preceding day, and upon which he had given notice of a motion for Monday next. His object in presenting the petition had been to have witnesses called and examined at the bar, touching the allegations contained in it. As no order had yet been made on it, he proposed to move then, that the petition be taken into consideration on Monday, with a view to move afterwards that certain witnesses should be ordered to attend at the bar of that house, at the time when the petition was to be taken into consideration. He had mentioned the course he proposed to pursue to a right hon. gent. (Mr. Sheridan), whom he did not then see n his place, and he was authorized to state to the house that neither that right hon. gent., nor any of his friends, had any objection to his motion. The petition was then ordered to be taken into consideration on Monday, and W. Drake, W. Drake .jun., Ann Drake, T. Weatherhead, John Richards, and several other persons, were ordered to attend the house at the same time. Mr. Sheridan, if he had been in his place at the time, would have seconded the motions of the noble lord. Neither these, nor any other motion that could be brought forward by that noble lord, which would have the effect of expediting the decision of the charges contained in the petition, would meet with any opposition from him, or from any of his friends. As he was on his. legs, he thought it not amiss to give, notice, that he should on Monday next present a petition from certain electors of Westminster, charging upon the petitioner in this case, and upon his agents, subornation of. perjury.—Mr. Sheridan. presented a petition from certain landholders in the city of Westminster, praying for leave to bring in. a bill for the erection of a bridge over the river. Thames, between Westminster and. Blackfriars bridges. The right hon. gent. stated, that the plan for the bridge was in considerable forwardness, and that the part of the river over which it was proposed to erect the bridge, was that which was nearly in the line of Southampton-street; and that a high road was to be constructed to the Obelisk, St. George's-fields, Surrey. The petition was then brought up, and referred to a committee composed of the members of the, cities of London and Westminster—Mr. Hibbert presented a petition from certain West-India merchants, planters, &c stating the losses winch they should sustain by the abolition of the slave trade, and praying for compensation for the same. Ordered to lie on the table. Mr Hibbert gave notice, that on the 9th of March, he should move to refer this petition to the consideration of a select committee (see March 12.)—Mr Hibbert then rose, in pursuance of his motion of the. preceding day, on the subject of compensation. No case was more deserving of consideration, than that of the planters who had been induced to settle by grants of land. There were many precedents of similar compensations. He now, therefore, begged leave to ask his majesty's ministers, whether they were authorized to give the royal assent to this proposition for compensation, which he should in that case bring forward. Lord Howick replied, that his majesty's ministers were not authorized so to do. This was all which it was his duty to state upon the subject, for it would be highly improper for him to go into the grounds on which the refusal was founded. This alone he would say, that any claims for compensation might be brought forward at some future period, but not at the present.