Sir J. Grahampresented a Petition from 429 Edward Alderson, the agent of the petitioners against the Drogheda election, praying that the petitioners, who had not put in proper recognizances within the fourteen days allowed by law, might have further time allowed to do so.
§ The Speakersaid, that the question here appeared to him to be, not whether the House was disposed to grant the prayer of the petition, but whether they were not precluded by the act from interfering at all. The case was not one in which the recognizances had been entered into before the fourteen days had elapsed, and the report had not been made in time to the House; neither was it a case in which the enlargement of the time was prayed for before the expiration of the fourteen days; but it was a case in which the recognizances had not been entered into before the fourteen days had elapsed after the petition had been presented. The House had already enlarged the time for giving information to that House, but that enlargement had no reference to the case now before them. The act said, that good and sufficient security must be got within fourteen days, and it allowed that period to be enlarged only once, and that for thirty days. But the question really was, whether it was not imperative on the House to have granted that enlargement before the fourteen days elapsed. In the present case, it would not be an enlargement, but a revival of the time. The question then was, whether the House, having prolonged the period once, for receiving information as to recognizances having been entered into, could now revive the period for entering into those recognizances?
Mr. Wynnobserved, that the petitioners deserved the favourable consideration of the House, because this being the first general election since the last act was passed, it was doubtful whether they were acquainted with the nature of it. But it seemed from the statement of the case, that it was not in the power of the House, bound down as it was by an act of parliament, to grant the relief which had been prayed. It might be a question whether this was not a case for a special act of legislation, and whether, as in former cases in which petitioners had been prevented from entering into their recognizances, being absent on public service, a special bill might not be brought in to enable the House to grant relief.
Sir J. Grahamsaid, he thought it ad- 430 viseable—as the House could not act in the matter, to withdraw the petition for the present.—The petition was then withdrawn.