§ Sir John Newportrose to present a Petition from the agent acting in London on behalf of the freeholders of the county of Cork, whose petition had been presented on the 22d of January last, complaining of an undue return in the elections for that county. The present petition prayed that time for entering the recognizances on the former petition might be enlarged. The ground on which the prayer of the petition was supported was, that an opinion had prevailed, almost universally throughout Ireland, that the act 53rd Geo. 3rd, which prescribed the time within which recognizances should be entered on election petitions did not extend to Ireland. The petition stated that several opinions from high legal authorities confirmed this construction of the act.
§ The petition was then read. On the motion that it do lie on the table,
Mr. Wynnsaid, that according to the general rule kid down by the House, the prayer of this petition could not be attended to. To state that the petitioner, or the party concerned, had acted on a misconception of that rule was not a sufficient reason to induce the House to depart from the rule. In the present case the misconception was most extraordinary and yet it was one which seemed to have pervaded the whole of Ireland, The only 462 ground on which he could conceive it to have been founded was, that the operation of the first clause of the act was expressly confined to England and Scotland. But then, the other parts of the act most explicitly comprehended Ireland. Yet throughout the latter country the opinion prevailed that the operation of the act did not extend to it. Nor was this mistake confined to a few, for even persons of a high reputation in the law had fallen into it. Amongst the rest, Mr. Gabbet, a lawyer, whose character stood deservedly very high, and who was the author of "A Digest of the Comparative State of the Laws of England and Ireland," had made the very same mistake. In so extraordinary a case he did think that it might be allowable for parliament to grant the prayer of this petition. At the same time he could not but remark that it was not in the power of the House to extend this indulgence generally. Perhaps a remedy for this particular class of cases might be provided by passing a short act, which should recite the prevalence of the mistake in Ireland, and enact, that therefore a further time should be allowed for entering the recognizances on petitions already presented from that country. This, he submitted to the House, was a measure that would obviate the difficulty. He did not think it would be just, in this instance, to adhere to precise rules, because that would have the effect of striking off all the petitions from Ireland, and of shutting the doors of parliament against complaints, some of which, at least, might be just and constitutional.
Mr. Bathurstthought the question deserved the serious consideration of the House. As to introducing any bill to settle the question, it was to be considered that its operation would be retrospective, and as such he could not think it desirable.
§ Mr. Bankes, said, it was absolutely necessary for the House to consider the most proper course to pursue. In his opinion, either the subject should be referred to a committee, or an early day should be appointed to proceed on it in the House. It was not right to keep the petitioners in suspense. He was greatly inclined to lean to the proposition of his hon. friend. In his opinion it would be much better to introduce a short bill than to shut out the entire of the Irish petitions.
§ Sir John Newportsaid, that he would 463 to morrow submit to the House a motion upon the subject of it.
§ The Speakersaid, that after what had passed on this subject, it would perhaps be proper for him to apprise the House that two other applications had already been made to them on the same subject, but that no definitive order had been yet entered upon the Journals respecting them, nor had the applications yet been absolutely discharged. The order with respect to them stood on the order book. The observations which might be offered to the House, now or on a future occasion would therefore include the case of the Drogheda and Galway petitions, as well as that just now laid upon the table.
Mr. Wynnthought that, under the present circumstances, there were several considerations which demanded the attention of the House. The words of the act expressly provided, that the time for entering the recognizances could only be enlarged once. But on looking into the precedents on the subject, he found that on several occasions the House had thought itself competent to revive as well as to enlarge the time. The Shaftesbury case he thought a sufficient authority on this point.
§ The Speakerbegged to remind the House, that in two out of the three cases in which the application had now been made for enlarging the time, that application had been refused by the House; therefore, if on the petition now presented an order was made for enlarging the time, there would appear on the Journals contradictory orders on precisely the same question.
§ Ordered to lie on the table