§ Mr. B. Escottwished to put a question to the hon. Member for Bath, arising out of a discussion which had taken place at an earlier hour of the evening. He wished to ask, whether it was the determination of the committee that in future all persons who were accused, whether Members of that House or not, should not have a right to attend during the examination of witnesses brought forward to propound charges against them?
§ Mr. Roebucksaid, he could not answer for what the committee would do in future, but he would tell the hon. Member what they had already determined. If anything fell from a witness which touched any party in any way, they had resolved to refer to that party, to state to him what the witness had said, to ask him if he had any statement to make on the subject of that evidence, or if there was any witness he desired to call to rebut it. The committee felt that this would be the most agreeable and delicate mode of conducting their very invidious inquiry, and on the part of the committee, he might say that they believed that by such means they would best carry out the investigations they were appointed to make; and further, that they trusted the House would defer giving any opinion until they had brought up their report.
§ Mr. Escott:The hon. Member has not answered my question.
§ Mr. Roebucksaid, it was very true he had not answered the hon. Member's inquiry. On that point, therefore, he would say that he believed the committee would con- 643 tinue to persevere in its present mode of conducting the inquiry.