BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. (Hansard, 28 July 1843)

§ Mr. Christopher

said, that it would be in the recollection of the House that a committee was appointed some time back to inquire into a breach of the privileges of that House. Petitions had been presented to the House on the subject of the Corn laws from Epworth, which were represented to have forged signatures attached to them. The select committee which was appointed to investigate the matter, had come to the conclusion,

1.—" That it appears to this committee that Samuel Potts was employed by John Hastie, of Doncaster, to obtain signatures to the Epworth petition for a repeal of the Corn laws; that when the said Samuel Potts received that petition, no signatures were attached thereto; that it is now in the same state as when the said Samuel Potts returned it to the house of the said John Hastie; that it never was out of the custody of the said Samuel Potts from 1494 the time he received it until the time he returned it; that there are 214 names attached to the said petition; that thirteen of such names are proved to have been either the sig.. natures of the parties themselves, or written with their consent.
2.—" That the said Samuel Potts has been guilty of an extensive forgery of names to the said petition."

It was his duty, therefore, to move "that Samuel Potts had been guilty of a Breach of Privilege, and that he be taken into the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms. It was accordingly resolved, That Samuel Potts, in forging signatures to a petition to the House of Commons, has been guilty of a high breach of the privileges of this House. And Ordered— That Samuel Potts, having been guilty of a high breach of the privileges of this House, be for his said offence taken into the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms attending this House; and that Mr. Speaker do issue his warrant accordingly.