moved, that the—order of the day for resuming the adjourned debate on the election of Liskeard be read, which having been read accordingly,

recalled the attention of the house to the situation of the debate on the day of its adjournment. The original motion was, that the order of the day for taking into consideration the petition of Mr. Huskisson on the 9th instant be read in order to be discharged.—The question therefore having been accordingly put, that the said order be discharged,

rose, and opposed the discharge of the order. He animadverted particularly on the inconsistency of Mr. Sheridan's opposing, in the first instance, the legality of the return, and on the next day objecting to the legality of the election. He contended, that the petition of Mr. Huskisson did not complain of a double return, but of the inconveniency of being prevented from taking his seat, by means of a schedule annexed to the indenture of his election, purporting to be a return, but which in fact, was nothing, as it had not been legally signed by the returning officer. He laid the more stress upon this, as neither of the petitions denied the mayor to be the legal returning officer. The question to be tried by the committee was quite competent to the house, as Mr. Sheridan had given up the double return, and included by urging, that there was no reason whatever for discharging the order in question.

stated, that he had formerly moved the adjournment, in order that members, as there existed some difficulty in regard to the rules of the house, on the subject, might have time to make up their minds, and to ascertain the usual practice of the house in such cases. The hon. gent. who had just sat down, he thought, had gone much further than he ought, as the decision of the house on a former day in referring the question of return to a committee had completely superseded every opinion in that respect. But the petition of Mr. Huskisson, he contended, did complain of a double return, or a false return, which to all intents and purposes was the same thing, so far as the proceedings of the house were concerned, and which equally required the appointment of a committee. He argued farther, that Mr. Sheridan might withdraw his petition against the return, and support, notwithstanding, the rights of his election. The right hon. gent. adverted minutely to every objection that could be started, and concluded by warmly supporting the motion.

could not be convinced, notwithstanding all that had been said, that the return in question was a double return; not a single allegation even in Mr. Sheridan's petition went to make a double return of such a nature as required the interference of the Grenville act. He argued that the conduct of the sheriff was highly culpable, and adduced several cases, to shew that the house ought not to be deprived of the presence of members, either from caprice in the electors, or obstinacy in a disappointed candidate. He argued that no return was good, unless signed by the returning officer; but the return in question was not only not signed, but was positively refused to be signed by the mayor, who was allowed on all hands to be the returning officer.

at some length, repelled the various objections that had been offered, He maintained that Mr. Huskisson's petition did complain of a double return, and turned over to the words which he apprehended must admit of that construction. At any rate the double return had been already recognized by the house, in as much as they had sent it to a committee. So far was the conduct of the sheriff to be condemned, that measures were how taking against the mayor, on account of his obstinacy, in refusing to sign the return in question. The double return, however was not the shape in which they wished the business to go to the committee. They wished the right only to be considered certain that in that respect they must have a very decided superiority.

opposed the motion from the inconveniency of keeping the house empty by such measures, and defeating the legal representation of the country. He would appeal to both parties if the schedule in question was not a paper which they could both wish had never existed; but as he already perceived the inclinations of the house, he was unwilling to trespass on their time.—The question was then put and carried, that the order should be discharged. And on the motion of Mr. Sheridan, that the said petition be taken into consideration on the 3d of May next, the day appointed for the consideration on Mr. Sheridan's petition.

then moved, according to a standing order of the house, that the petition of Mr. Huskisson be heard first, as they were now both fixed or the same day.

begged leave to remind the hon. gent. that the standing order of the house, to which he had alluded, applied only to the conduct of committees in regard to the priority in question.

moved, that the order for the consideration of the right be now read, in order that it might be postponed to the same day fixed for the petitions. His reason was, that the parties that would be in consequence of this business brought up to London, might not be detained longer than was absolutely necessary.

observed, that, if the question of right was once ascertained, the other two questions would follow of course, and would therefore save the trouble of any farther attendance of witnesses.

did not think, that any witnesses that might be brought up would refuse their farther attendance.

then stated that, on account of the thinness of the house, he was willing to withdraw his motion, and gave notice that he would again bring it forward to-morrow.

presented another petition respecting the Liskeard election, which was ordered to be taken into consideration with the others, formerly presented, on the 3d of May next.