§ Sir J. Graham
said, that as there was no immediate business before the House, perhaps he might be allowed to make a few observations upon a matter, which personally concerned himself. He was very unwilling to take such a course, but he thought he was justified in doing so under the circumstances of the case. He was the last person to notice any anonymous assertion, however unfounded, that might be directed against, him, but he thought the conduct of a Member of that House, in his capacity of Member, was a matter that could not be indifferent to the House at large. It was asserted yesterday in theMorning Chronicle, that on Tuesday last he stationed himself in the lobby, and endeavoured to prevent Members from attending to make a House. After prayers, and before four o'clock, the Speaker sent a message to the committees, giving Members notice to attend for the purpose of making a House; and he conceived that any Member who endeavoured to obstruct Members in attending, would be acting in disobedience to that order, and in a manner that was not Parliamentary. It so happened on that day that he was in attendance on the committee upon banks of issue. He certainly did not immediately obey the summons of the Speaker; but on the point of four o'clock he was proceeding to the House, when he was informed that the House had been counted, and that there not being a sufficient number of Members, the Speaker had not taken the chair. He immediately returned to the committee-room and told the hon. Member for Bridport what had occurred. He would not have noticed the statement that had been published, if this morning there had not been an aggravation of the assertion. It was stated in the Morning Chronicle of this day that it was true he was not in the lobby that day at the time the House proceeded to prayers, but that there was an equivocation in his denial, inasmuch as he had previously taken means for preventing a House being formed. He need not repeat that such conduct appeared to him to be highly unbecoming and offensive, and in the most positive terms he begged to be permitted to deny that he directly or indirectly influenced any one Member on the 1263 subject. He hoped the House would forgive him for intruding in a matter personal to himself, but as it related to his conduct as a Member of the House he thought he was justified in bringing it to the notice of the House.
§ Sir C. Burrell
said that an attack made twice ought not to be passed over. He was willing to make every allowance for newspapers falling into errors, but when a mis-statement was reiterated, he did think that was misconduct which the House ought not to pass over without some animadversion. That was his humble opinion, and he felt it his duty to express it.
§ Subject dropped.