HC Deb 24 March 1823 vol 8 cc683-4
Mr. Hume

said, he had a petition to present from Mr. Joseph Wilfrid Parkins. The petition stated, that the petitioner had that day attended at the House, to enter into the requisite recognizances to prosecute his petition against the election of Mr. Kemp, for the borough of Arundel, accompanied by one of his sureties, Joseph Stevenson, and his agent, Henry Taylor; but that his other surety did not attend The petition went on to declare, that, in consequence of the representations made by the petitioner and his agent, the consideration of the validity of his recognizances was postponed till eight o'clock that evening; that at that hour he again attended, with one of the sureties; but that the other, whose name was Wm. Harris, did not even then appear, and, as the petitioner verily believed, voluntarily refused to attend. The petitioner, therefore, prayed the House to extend the time for his entering into recognizances. The act was impera- tive, that the recognizances in question, should be entered into before 12 that night (it was then 1 o'clock); but, perhaps, under the circumstances which had been stated, the House would feel inclined to extend the time to a further day.

Sir T. Baring

was of opinion, that no grounds had been laid for the indulgence requested. He understood that a letter had been received from Mr. Harris, who was an auctioneer, stating, that he was that day attending the appraisement of goods, and that it was therefore quite impossible that he could spare time to attend the House.

Mr. Wynn

contended, that it was quite impossible for the House to accede to the prayer of the petition. The petition did not contain any allegation that Mr. Harris had promised to attend. If petitions so loosely worded were once admitted as just grounds for extending the time of entering into recongnizances, the 14 days allowed might always be enlarged to 28; as it would be easy to state that a surety had refused to attend at the time and place which the act specified.

Mr. Hume

said, he had asked Mr. Parkins whether he had any written document, from which it could be shown, that Mr. Harris had undertaken to become his surety. Mr. Parkins replied in the negative; but added, that both his sureties had voluntarily offered to become so. The hon. member concluded by moving, that the time for entering into recognizances be extended till that day week.

The motion not being seconded, fell to the ground. After which, the order of the day for taking into consideration the petition against the return of Mr. Kempt, was discharged.