§ Earl Stanhope
made a variety of observations, but particularly upon the language and diction of the Bill, which he contended was erroneous, and liable to much misconstruction. He dwelt a good deal on what be conceived the necessity of having certain parentheses in the Bill, properly distinguished in the Bill. It was well known that all the stops, colons, commas, semicolons, and so on, were introduced by the King's printer, when Bills came under his hands; but never the parentheses, for which proper blanks were left in the original Bill or Record; and he defied either of the noble and learned lords (Redesdale and Ellenborough) on the right and on the left of a much better judge than either of them, (the Lord Chancellor) to controvert what he said. By his construction of the part of the Bill to which he more especially 241 referred, an individual might be indicted for the non-commission of an offence against the Act, as well as for the commission of one; and to obviate this glaring defect, as he Considered it to be, he moved for the omission of certain words in that part of Bill.
The Bill being read a third time, the question was formally put on the amendment proposed by the noble earl, which was negatived, and the Bill was then passed.