In Obedience to the Order of the House, we have examined the Votes of the House of Commons, and do find the following Precedents relating to the Charges and Expences arising in Cases of Complaint enquired into by the House.

In the Parliament of the Twenty-first of James I. the Mayor of Arundel having misbehaved himself in the Election of a Burgess for that Town, was sent for, and ordered to pay the Charges of the Witnesses, to be assessed by three Members.

In the Eighteenth and Nineteenth of the same Reign, a Constable of York was sent for up, and accused of Misdemeanors; but being acquitted, he had Five Pounds ordered him for his Charges. Also one Napper being committed to the Serjeant for serving a Subpoena on Mr. Brereton, was dismissed, after paying Costs to Mr. Brereton, and due Fees to the Officers of the House.

In the Fourth of Charles I. the Sheriff and one of the Aldermen of York, having conducted an Election illegally, to the Prejudice of Alderman Hoy, a Candidate, were ordered to pay all the Charges of the Witnesses of the said Hoy, to be assessed by four of the Committee.

In 1699, March 9. Thomas Hawksly, and Roger Hunt, Overseers of the Poor for Nottingham, being summoned to attend the Committee of Privileges and Elections, by George Gregory, Esq; Petitioner against Robert Sacheverell, Esq; prayed that they might be relieved for their Charges in coming to Town, Expences in Town, and returning home. And it was ordered, that the said Gregory do pay the Petitioners their reasonable Charges, to be assessed by the Chairman of the Committee.

In 1711, the 22d of March, a Complaint being made to the House, that John Cunningham was summoned in Behalf of Major General Hamilton, to attend the Committee of Privileges and Elections, to testify his Knowledge touching the late Election of a Member to serve in Parliament; and that Major General Hamilton refuses to pay him his reasonable Charges for his Journey and Attendance; it was ordered that the said John Cunningham have his reasonable Charges for his Journey and Attendance on the Committee, to be ascertained by the Chairman.

In 1715, September 8. Ann Cater, John Burton, James Coot, and Stephen Norman, praying that they may be relieved for their Charges in coming up and staying in Town, being summoned as Witnesses by John Hervey, Esq; to attend the Hearing of the Merits of the Election for the County of Bedford; and the said Hervey having refused to give them reasonable Satisfaction, it was ordered that the said Mr. Hervey do pay the Petitioners their reasonable Charges, to be settled by Mr. Speaker.

In 1717, June 18. Thomas Prowse, Steward of the Manor of Minehead, complained, that he was required, by a Warrant from Mr. Speaker, to permit George Speke, Esq; or his Agents, to inspect the Rolls of the said Manor, and to take Notes or Copies therefrom, and to attend the House with the said Rolls; and that he did appear accordingly, and was examined; but that Mr. Speke’s Agent refused him reasonable Satisfaction for the same; and praying Relief, it was ordered, that the said Prowse be paid his reasonable Charges, to be settled by Mr. Speaker.

In 1695, December 21. It was resolved, that Sir George Meggot, having preferred to the House a groundless and vexatious Petition, relating to the Election of Members to serve in Parliament for Southwark, do make Satisfaction to the Members he petitioned against for the Costs and Expences they have been put to by Reason of such Petitions.

In the same Year, March 4. It was resolved, that Sir Richard Gipps, having preferred to the House a frivolous, vexatious and groundless Petition, relating to the Election of Members for Totness, be taken into Custody of the Serjeant, and make Satisfaction to the Members he petitioned against, for the Costs and Expences they have been put unto by reason of such Petition.

The Votes of Parliament being voluminous, and mostly without Indexes, these are all the Precedents that the Committee, in so short a Time, have been able to find relating to the Payment of Witnesses Charges. Many there are in which no Application appears for the Payment of such Charges, nor any Determination who should pay them; but whether there are any Determinations different or contrary in like Cases, we cannot say. These, without presuming to make any Remarks upon them, are humbly submitted to the Consideration of the House, by