HC Deb 23 May 1828 vol 19 c903

Colonel Davies moved the further consideration of the report of this bill.

Colonel Sibthorpe

was no friend to unnecessary expense, but thought that the bill curtailed constitutional enjoyment, on occasions which were not of frequent occurrence.

Mr. F. Palmer

said, that, if the hon. member meant by constitutional enjoyment, eating and drinking for fifteen days, he thought that a detestable nuisance, and a disgrace to the country. At the same time he did not agree as to the time laid down in this bill. He thought there ought to be a graduated scale of time, adapted to the number of voters, and the facilities or difficulties of bringing them to the poll. It was his intention to amend this bill as far as he was able; and if he could not effect the amendments he wished to introduce, then he would do his utmost to throw it out, in order that he might introduce another bill, more congenial to the feelings of the country.

Colonel Davies

said, that if the hon. member had been with him in the committees upon this bill, he would have seen that so far from being able to effect a graduated scale, he had found the greatest difficulty in getting any scale of time at al agreed to.

Mr. Sugden

opposed the bill, as calculated to cramp the free exercise of the elective franchise. He thought the time allowed for the poll not sufficient.

Mr. Batley

thought the time allowed quite sufficient.

Mr. Monck

believed that the learned member had greatly overrated the difficulties of the bill.

Mr. O'Neil

opposed the bill, as calculated to restrict the time allowed for polling in an inconvenient degree.

Mr. Robinson

thought the time ought to be extended to ten days.

Mr. Fyler

supported the bill, and thought six days sufficient.

Mr. Trant

opposed the bill, and moved that the report be taken into consideration that day three months.

The amendment was negatived.