§ The Speakerhaving called the attention of the House to the Petition of the Electors of Stamford, respecting the late election for that Borough,
§ Mr. Tennysonpresented a Petition from those electors, praying for an extension of the time for entering into recognizances. He moved that the prayer of the petition be granted.
§ Mr. Maberlyopposed that petition. He said, that his hon. friend (Mr. Tennyson), who was interested in the petition, being himself a lawyer, and a Member of that House, could not plead ignorance of the law or of the forms of Parliament in excuse for the irregularity of his petition. Besides, the House had decided in the negative upon a similar petition, respecting the election for Marlow, in the year 1816.
§ Sir C. Wetherellsaid, that a special Act of Parliament had been passed to regulate the proceedings on those Election Petitions. The persons then applying to the House for further indulgence had neglected the provisions of that Act, and he thought the House ought not to allow them the extension of time which they required.
§ Mr. Tennyson,in moving that the Petition be laid upon the Table, observed, that the House had interfered in six similar cases before—that it had power to do so, and that it ought to enlarge the time for entering into those recognizances, as prayed by the Petitioners. The Borough, he contended, was not a rotten Borough, and if the petition went before a committee, he had not the slightest doubt that such committee would stigmatise, not the electors of the Borough, but other parties who had endeavoured to stigmatise those electors. He thought it would be more becoming in the House to be governed by the spirit and general tenor of the Act, than by a trumpery clause of three lines in an Act of Parliament. The House was bound in every case to administer justice, and ought not to be stopped when it had power to give relief. He wished, before he sat down, to learn the opinion of the Chair on the clause under which the enlargement of time was sought.
§ The Speakerdisclaimed any intention of wishing to influence the decision of the House on that or any other question. The 704 clause which they had then to consider was the 6th. It required, that on the day on which the petition was presented, or the next day the petitioners should deliver in the names with the additions and places of residence of the persons whom they proposed as sureties, and that the same be entered in a book kept open in the office appointed for that purpose. When the subject of the present petition came before him, he inquired if that preliminary proceeding had been complied with, and being answered in the negative, he replied that, unless better instructed by the House, he should not feel himself at liberty to enlarge the time; at least such was his construction of the Statute.
§ Mr. Tennysonsaid, that the point on which he wished to learn the opinion of the Speaker was, whether or not the House had power to interfere. If the facts were verified on oath, could the House dispense with the prescribed regulation?
§ The Speakersaid, the conduct he had pursued in the matter fully indicated his opinion.
§ Mr. Tennysonwould still maintain, that the House was not excluded from entertaining that question.
§ Mr. Maberlyobserved, that the House could have no power to violate an Act of Parliament.
§ Sir E. B. Sugdenconsidered the Act to be imperative upon the House.
§ The Speakersaid, there could not well be any affidavits put in respecting the construction of an Act of Parliament.
§ Mr. Spring Ricethought that his hon. friend would be better advised in not making any motion to enlarge the time, especially after what had fallen from the Chair.
§ Motion withdrawn.