The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDEsaid, that the petitions of Mr. George Pryme, of Cambridge, and Mr. James Tyler, of 15, Holloway-place, Islington, which he had presented on the previous day, praying to be heard by counsel against this Bill, had been put into his hand on Monday last; but owing to his not having been acquainted with the Standing Orders on this subject, which were entirely novel to him, he overheld those petitions, instead of laying them on the Table of their Lordships' House, three days after which they could have gone regularly before the Standing Orders Committee. The whole blame rested with him; and that being the case, the parties themselves having done 1273 all that it was in their power to do, he hoped their Lordships would allow them to be heard before the Standing Orders Committee, which, if he had laid their petitions on the Table of the House the day, or even the day after, he received it, they would have been entitled to. He therefore begged leave to postpone the Motion of which he had given notice, for a Select Committee to inquire and report upon those two petitions, and to move that they be referred to the Standing Orders Committee on the Bill, and that leave be given to the petitioners to be heard against it.
§ LORD BEAUMONTthought the course proposed by the noble Marquess was quite irregular. Such petitions should be three clear days on their Lordships' Table before they were sent to the Committee; and he saw no reason for giving an advantage to the petitioners in this case which was refused to others.
§ LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, that the other House of Parliament, where a party had done all that depended on them to do, and that the Member to whom they forwarded their petition, through absence or some other cause, failed to present that petition in due time, had uniformly extended the period not only in courtesy to one of its own Members, but in justice to the case itself. It would undoubtedly be a great hardship on parties who had done all that was necessary, if they were to be damnified by an accidental circumstance, or by neglect on the part of the Member of Parliament in not presenting the petition. If there were neglect on the part of the agents or the parties themselves, the case would be altered; but after the statement of the noble Marquess, he did not think their Lordships could refuse to grant his Motion.
§ EARL GREYhad no objection to the Motion. He thought those parties ought to be heard, in order that the question which they sought to raise should be settled, viz., whether the contract deed now before Parliament was a good and valid instrument, and whether the Bill had been regularly introduced. He did not think any injury could accrue to the promoters of the Bill from having such questions mooted.
LORD CAMPBELLwas also of opinion, that, as not a shadow of blame could be attributed to the parties themselves, the right course to pursue would be that pointed out by the noble Marquess.
The EARL of SHAFTESBURYwas understood 1274 to suggest that if the noble Marquess allowed the question to stand over until Monday, he could then bring it regularly before the House.
§ House adjourned.