§ Mr. Protheroesaid, he held in his hand a petition which he understood members of that House, of greater experience and judgment than he possessed, had refused to present. From his views of the invaluable right of petitioning, he had agreed to present it. It was from Mr. James Mills, an engineer of Bristol, complaining that at a late trial at the Old Bailey for a libel, where the petitioner was prosecutor, the judge who presided refused to allow him to address the jury; and further stating that the verdict was not the result of a fair trial.
Mr. Courteney,highly as he valued the right of petitioning, viewed the present application as an abuse of that right. In what way could the House interpose, the petitioner did not himself state; and it was most desirable that such ex parte allegations against those who administered the law should not be inserted on the Journals.
§ Mr. Protheroesaid, he had very little knowledge of the circumstance to which the petition related; but that he felt considerable delicacy in taking any objection to it, as the petitioner was one of his most active opponents during the last election for Bristol.
§ The motion that the petition do lie on the table, was negatived.