§ Mr. Humerose for the purpose of calling the attention of the House to a subject which intimately concerned every individual Member, not only of the present, but of all future, Parliaments. The object which the motion with which he meant to conclude had in view was, if possible, to ascertain how far the expenses of controverted elections could be lessened. He wished it had been in his power to suggest any plan for regulating the expenses of counsel, as well as the fees of the House in such cases; but although he was not able to say how far their power extended in the former case, he had no doubt whatever, that the latter was a matter which was entirely within their control. The present scale of fees had existed since the year 1785, and certainly it was high time that some alteration on the subject should be made. He would not trouble the House by entering into a detail of the abuses of the system, but he might be pardoned for mentioning one or two instances, which would show how monstrous it was. By the Standing Order, or original rule, the sum of 2s. 6d. was charged for every witness who might be examined. He could refer to one case, in which the number of witnesses was only nineteen, while the charge was for 487, and this arose from the circumstance of every party, who during the investigation, might be called back to answer even a single question being treated as a distinct witness. As often, therefore, as a party giving evidence before a Committee was recalled for examination he was considered as a new witness, and this practice it was that had led to the multiplication he had stated of 19 into 487. In this case, instead of 2l. 10s. a sum of 60l. 17s. was actually paid. He would now show, that the same system prevailed with respect to papers given in evidence. For every paper produced during the inquiry, the charge was 2s., and it followed, according to the present practice, that if the same document were presented twenty times, there would be twenty 2s. fees to pay. By this means, the individual fees payable during the inquiry were swelled to a sum of from 100l. to 1,000l. Now, as every Member of that House might be subject to a proceeding of this kind, it was a duty which they owed to themselves to remedy the evil of which they complained, and to throw as few impediments as possible in 369 the way of trying contested elections. He was anxious last Session to bring the subject forward, but was prevented by the sudden termination of the Session. The fees charged in public offices had undergone inquiry, and two years ago, at his suggestion, a commission was appointed by the Government, and what was the result? Why, that the fees payable in fourteen of the public offices connected with the Customs and Excise had been abolished, and only thirteen offices remained in which fees were once payable. He hoped soon to see all such fees done away with. He was not aware that there could be any objection to the inquiry which he now proposed, as he believed every Member of that House was anxious to ascertain how far the expenses of election petitions could be lessened. It should not be forgotten, that compensation had already been given to the officers of that House for the emoluments in the way of fees of which they had been deprived, and even if the abolition of the fees payable in the investigation of controverted election petitions were to burthen the expense of that House with a few hundreds a-year additional, it would be of little consequence in comparison with the good which such an alteration would effect. With this view he brought forward his present motion, and therefore, without further observation, he begged leave to move "that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the fees on the trial of controverted elections."
§ Mr. Warburtonhoped, that his hon. Friend would comprehend in his motion, not only the fees of that House, but all fees charged under the authority of the Speaker. In cases where petitions were reported to be "frivolous and vexatious" surely some control should be exercised over the charges for fees to counsel. He apprehended that the Speaker had power to allow them or not. [Cries of "No, no."] He believed he stated only what was the fact, as the Speaker had the appointment of the officer by whom such costs were taxed. They all knew how large a proportion of the costs of a controverted election the fees of counsel formed, and, therefore, he hoped that his hon. Friend would make this subject a part of his motion.
§ The Speakersaid, that although he had the appointment of the taxing officer, he had nothing whatever to do with the costs 370 beyond granting the certificate under the Act of Parliament which enabled the parties to recover their costs. He acted merely in his ministerial capacity.
§ Mr. Humesaid, that he had no objection to have such an inquiry as would enable them to ascertain the whole of the expenses, but he doubted whether they could carry the investigation beyond what he proposed,
§ The Speakersaid, that the inquiry must be limited to the fees paid under the authority of the Act of Parliament. He had no authority whatever to do more in such case than to grant, when applied to for the purpose, the certificate to enable the party to recover his costs.
§ Motion agreed to, and Committee appointed.