House of Lords Journal Volume 20: 31 May 1717

DIE Veneris, 31 Maii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

PRAYERS.

E. of Exeter & al. Bill.

Hodie 3^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for confirming a Partition lately made of the Estate of Sir John Brownlowe Baronet, deceased, in the Counties of Lincoln, York, Middlesex, and Hertford, remaining unsold, and Articles of Agreement relating thereunto; and also the several Conveyances made of the divided Parts; and for making effectual a Fine and Recovery intended to be levied and suffered, of a Fee Farm Rent of Twenty Pounds per Annum, Part of the Estate in the said County of Hertford."

The Question was put, "Whether this Bill shall pass?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Browning and Mr. Holford:

To carry down the said Bill, and desire their Concurrence thereunto.

E. Clanricarde versus Burke & Ux.

Whereas, on the 22d of July 1715, an Appeal of John Earl of Clanricarde of the Kingdom of Ireland, and the Lord Dunkellin his Eldest Son, was presented to the House, and read; complaining of Part of an Order of the Court of Chancery in Ireland; to which Appeal Thomas Burke Esquire and Hellen Countess Dowager of Clanricarde were ordered to put in their Answer in a Fortnight:

The House being this Day moved, "In regard no Answer has been as yet put in, though the said Order was duly served, as by Affidavit appears, that a peremptory Day may be appointed for that Purpose; or that a Time may be appointed for hearing the Cause:"

It is thereupon Ordered, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That this House will hear the said Cause, by Counsel, at the Bar, on Tuesday the Second Day of July next, at Eleven a Clock; and that the Respondents have forthwith Notice of this Order, that they may put in their Answer to the said Appeal in the mean Time, if they think fit.

Heath's Bill:

Hodie 3^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for vesting the Estate late of Sir Thomas Heath Knight, deceased, in Trustees, to be sold, for Payment of his Debts, and other Uses."

The Question was put, "Whether this Bill shall pass?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

Message to H. C. with it.

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Browning and Mr. Holford:

To carry down the said Bill, and desire their Concurrence thereunto.

Rotherhith Church Bill.

The Earl of Clarendon reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, "An Act to enable the Parishioners of St. Mary Rotherhith, in the County of Surrey, (by certain Funeral Rates therein mentioned) to finish the said Parish Church," was committed: "That they had considered the said Bill, and found the Allegations thereof to be true; and that the Committee had gone through the Bill, and directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment."

Address for a Lord High Steward, for the E. of Oxford's Trial.

The Earl of Clarendon, from the Committee appointed to search Precedents, and report what is further proper to be done, in order to the Trial of the Earl of Oxford, acquainted the House, "That the said Committee, having inspected Precedents, observed, That the First Step usually taken, after the appointing a Trial upon an Impeachment for High Treason, has been to address for the appointing a Lord High Steward."

And his Lordship thereupon, by Direction of the said Committee, moving for an Address to His Majesty for that Purpose:

It is Ordered, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty, humbly to desire, "That His Majesty will be graciously pleased to appoint a Lord High Steward, for the Trial of the Earl of Oxford, on Thursday the Thirteenth Day of June next."

Ordered, That the said Address be presented to His Majesty by the Lords with White Staves.

Representation of the Commissioners for the forfeited Estates in England.

The House being informed, "That Mr. Branthwaite, from the Commissioners appointed to inquire of the Estates of certain Traitors and of Popish Recusants, and of Estates given to superstitious Uses, in order to raise Money out of them, severally, for the Use of the Public," attended:

He was called in; and delivered, at the Bar, a Representation of such of the Commissioners of Inquiry as have been appointed to execute the several Trusts and Powers, in relation to England, and any other Parts whatsoever, except Scotland, pursuant to the Act appointing the said Commissioners, and the Order of this House, on the Twentieth Instant.

And then he withdrew.

Appeals from the House of Lords in Ireland.

The Earl of Stamford (according to Order) reported from the Committee, appointed to consider the Petition and Appeal of Maurice Annesley Esquire, presented to this House the Seventh of May Instant; complaining of a Decree, made by the House of Lords in Ireland, the 19th of June 1716, upon an Appeal of Hester Sherlock to that House, from several Decrees made in the Court of Exchequer in that Kingdom, and to inspect Precedents as to Matters of the like Nature, That the Committee have considered the Matter to them referred; and also have inspected Precedents of the like Nature; and find,

Report of Precedents.

"That, upon the 7th of January 1697, a Petition and Appeal of the Society of the Governor and Assistants, London, of the new Plantation in Ulster, in the Kingdom of Ireland, against the Order or Judgement given by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal of Ireland, in Parliament there assembled, the 24th of September then last past, upon the Petition and Appeal of William Lord Bishop of Derry; against an Interlocutory Order, and several subsequent Orders, made in the High Court of Chancery in the said Kingdom of Ireland, in a Cause there depending, between the said Lord Bishop Plaintiff, and the Petitioners and others Defendants, was offered to this House; setting forth, amongst other Things, "That the Petitioners were advised, no Appeal did lie to the House of Lords in Ireland, from any Decree of the Court of Chancery in that Kingdom; but that all Appeals from any Decree of that Court ought to be prosecuted immediately before this House, as being the Supreme Court of Judicature, as well for Matters arising in Ireland as in this Kingdom;" and the Petition therefore prayed, "That the said Order of the House of Lords in Ireland might be reversed and set aside; and that the Petitioners might receive such Relief as should be agreeable to the great Wisdom and Justice of this House."

"Upon which, a Committee was appointed, to consider the proper Methods of appealing from Decrees made in the Court of Chancery in Ireland; and had Power given them to send for Persons, Papers, and Records.

"The next Day, being the 8th of the same Month, Report was made from the Committee, of their Opinion, "That the Lord Chancellor should write to the Lords Justices of Ireland, to send to this House an Account of the Methods of appealing from Decrees made in the Court of Chancery in Ireland." To which Report the House agreed. And the Lord Chancellor accordingly prepared a Letter, which was read, and agreed to; acquainting the said Lords Justices, "That this House, having Occasion to be informed of the Methods which had been practised in appealing from Decrees made in the Court of Chancery in Ireland, had commanded him to desire their Lordships Assistance in that Matter; and that they would with all convenient Expedition transmit to this House as full and particular an Account thereof as could be found.

"That, on the 21st of the same February, Report was made from the Committee appointed to consider of proper Methods of appealing from Decrees in the Chancery of Ireland, "That they had received a Letter from the Lords Justices of Ireland, with 39 Papers enclosed, purporting to be Precedents relating to that Matter, with an Abstract of the same; and were of Opinion, that Eight of them, marked 15. 16. 17. 19. 22. 33. 37. and 38. together with the said Abstract, should be presented to this House, as most proper for their Lordships Consideration."

"The Substance of the said several Papers, which are attested Copies or Extracts of the Proceedings entered in the Journals of the House of Lords in Ireland, is as follows:

"N° 15. 9 Februarii 1662. An Order, "That the Judges prepare a Draught, to be presented to the House, that no Cause, which might be determined in the Courts of Justice, or Equity, should be admitted or heard in that House, except in Cases of Appeals, Writs of Error, or Matter of Privilege."

"N° 16. 25 Junii 1662. The Cause between Lea and Leslie, being concerning Matter of Title, and in regard it did not come from any other Court by Way of Appeal, therefore was dismissed."

"17. & 33. 20 Decembris 1662. Parks having obtained Judgement in the King's Bench, in Debt, against O'Harah; O'Harah brought his Writ of Error, to remove it into Parliament; and Lord Santry, being at that Time Chief Justice, brought in the Writ and the original Record, and delivered them into the House, according to Custom:

"9 Aprilis 1663. A Day was appointed, for hearing the Errors argued.

"19. 5 Julii 1661. Upon Application by the Earl of Clancarty for a Writ of Error, for reversing his Outlawry; the House ordered, they would make Use of the speediest and nearest Expedient for taking it off; and ordered, that the Lord Chancellor should be desired to grant him a Writ of Error returnable into this House; and that the Earl of Barrymore and Baron of Kingston should wait on him to that Purpose.

"N° 22. 27 Julii 1661. The Lord Viscount Ranelagh appealed from a Decree given against him by the late pretended Court of Chancery in 1658, in the Time of the late Usurper, for £. 300. It appeared, the Appeal was received; that Pawlet appeared, and took out a Copy of the Petition; but, not having answered, a further Day was given; and if he did not put in a full Answer, the said Lord Viscount was to be heard ex. Parte: It appeared also, he was served with that Order; and, he not appearing, the House proceeded, heard the Cause, and reversed the Decree; but left Pawlett at Liberty to take his Remedy, if any he had, by Course of Law or Equity, and the said Viscount to waive his Privilege as to that Particular.

"37. 29 Octobris 1695, An Appeal was brought, by the Earl and Countess of Meath, against a Dismission given in the Chancery of the Palatinate Court of Tipperary; and, on Hearing, the Dismission was reversed; and a Decree was made, for Possession of the Lands in Difference; and that the Chancellor in that Court should cause the Appellants to be put into Possession.

"N° 38. 29 Octobris 1695. An Appeal was brought, by Samuel Maynard Esquire, against a Verdict given in the same Palatinate, on an Issue by leading Order out of the Chancery Court there; and, on full Hearing, the same was dismissed.

"Which Precedents being read out of the said Abstract, and the House being informed the Parties concerned desired Copies thereof; it was Ordered, That all the said Parties concerned for and against the Proceeding of the House of Lords in Ireland, might have Copies of the Precedents returned to this House from that Kingdom.

"That, on the 20th of April 1698, a Petition of the said Society of the Governor and Assistants, London, was presented to this House, and read; setting forth, "That they, having obtained Copies of some Precedents, or Cases, from Ireland, relating to the Method of appealing from Decrees in the Chancery in the said Kingdom, were ready to offer several Things to the Consideration of this House, in order to their Lordships receiving and proceeding upon the Petitioners Appeal;" and praying, "That a Day might be appointed, to hear both Parties, by their Counsel, touching the Jurisdiction and Merits of the said Cause, as set forth in their said Appeal:" It was Ordered, "That the Petitioners should give the Agents for the Bishop of Derry a Copy of the said Petition; and Notice, that this House would hear Counsel, as to that Part of it which related to the Jurisdiction of the House of Lords in Ireland only, on the 9th of May then next."

"That, on the 10th of May, an Order was made, to hear Counsel peremptorily the 20th of the same May, the House not sitting on the 9th.

"That, on the said 20th of May, upon hearing Counsel on both Sides, it was Resolved, "That the Appeal to the House of Lords in Ireland, from the Decree of the Court of Chancery in that Kingdom, made in a Cause wherein the Bishop of Derry was Appellant, and the said Society of the Governor and Assistants, London, were Respondents, was coram non Judice;" and that all the Proceedings thereupon were null and void: And a Committee was appointed, to draw up an Order pursuant to the said Resolution.

"That, on the 24th of the same May, Report was made from the said Committee, of a Draught of an Order accordingly; which was agreed to by the House; and thereby it was declared, as an Addition to the forementioned Resolution, "That the Court of Chancery in Ireland ought to proceed in the said Cause, as if no such Appeal had been made to the House of Lords in Ireland; and if either of the said Parties found themselves aggrieved by the Decree on Orders of the said Court of Chancery, they were at Liberty to pursue their proper Remedy, by Way of Appeal to this House." And their Lordships then ordered the Lord Chancellor to write a Letter to the Lords Justices of Ireland, and send them a Copy of the said Order, Judgement, and Declaration, of this House.

"That, on the 22d of June then next following, the Lord Chancellor acquainted the House, "That he had received a Letter from the Lords Justices of Ireland, wherein they acknowledge the Receipt of a Copy of the said Order."

"That, on the 11th of February 1698, a Petition of Edward Ward Esquire, an Infant, Grandson and Heir Apparent to the Right Honourable Edward Lord Dudley and Ward, by Frances Ward Widow, his Mother and Guardian, and of John Levett Esquire and Mary his Wife, was offered to this House; which complained of an Order and Judgement of the House of Peers in Ireland, made and given on the 29th of October 1695, upon their hearing the Appeal of the Earl and Countess of Meath, against an Order of Dismission of the Court of Chancery in the County Palatine of Tipperary; and which set forth, amongst other Things, "That the Petitioners were turned out of Possession of the Estate in Question, and the said Earl and Countess put into the same; which Proceedings of the said House of Lords in Ireland were, as the Petitioners were advised, arbitrary, illegal, and unwarrantable, and tended to the Destruction of the legal Rights and Privileges of the House of Peers in England;" and prayed, "That the said Order and Judgement of the House of Peers in Ireland, and all Proceedings thereupon, might be reversed and set aside, and made null and void ab Initio; and the Petitioners restored to the Possession of their said Estate." And thereupon a Committee was appointed, to consider of the said Petition; and likewise what had been done in Pursuance of the said Judgement of this House, on the 24th of May, in the Case upon the Petition of the Society of the Governor and Assistants, London, aforementioned.

"That, upon Report from the said Committee, the 14th of the same February, the Lord Chancellor was ordered to write to the Lords Justices of Ireland, to desire an Account of what had been done in Pursuance of the Judgement of this House, transmitted to them; and the same Day, upon reading the abovementioned Petition of the said Edward Ward and of John Levest and Mary his Wife, the said Earl and Countess of Meath were ordered a Copy of the said Petition, and to answer thereunto on the 28th of March then next following.

"That, on the 20th of the same March, the Lord Chancellor acquainted the House, "He had received a Letter from the Lords Justices of Ireland, dated at Dublin Castle the 7th of that Month, in Answer to his Letter to them of the 14th of February then last past, desiring an Account of what had been done in Ireland in Pursuance of the said Judgement of this House of the 24th of May; which Letter was to the Effect following; (videlicet,) "That, as soon as the Lord Chancellor came out of England, they the Lords Justices shewed his Lordship the Judgement of this House aforementioned, and were by him assured, that, since their receiving the same, there had not been any Proceedings in the Chancery in Ireland, in the Cause between the Bishop of Derry and the said Society of the Governor and Assistants, London, neither of the said Parties having made Application to the said Court in any Matter relating to that Cause." And upon reading the said Letter in this House, the Lord Chancellor was ordered to write again to the said Lords Justices, to let them know, "This House was not satisfied with their Answer; but desired a particular Account of what had passed in Ireland since the said Judgement of this House."

"That, on the 24th of the same March, a Petition of the said Society of the Governor and Assistants, London, was offered to this House; setting forth the several Proceedings of this House formerly had thereupon; and, "that with much Difficulty and Hazard they had procured the Bishop of Derry to be personally served with the forementioned Order of this House of the 24th of May; that the said Bishop moved the House of Lords in Ireland, the 2d of November 1698; and obtained Two Orders of that House, to take into Custody the Sheriffs of Derry, for not obeying their Orders; and the Serjeant at Arms of the House of Lords in Ireland, in a tumultuous Manner, carried them Prisoners to Dublin, and forced the late Sheriffs to abscond; and, on the 19th of the same November, the said Bishop obtained an Order of the House of Lords in Ireland, for apprehending the Petitioners Agent, for serving the Bishop with the Order of the House of Lords in England; and obtained another Order from the Lords in Ireland, to put him into Possession, and for the aprehending Five of the Petitioners Tenants, for opposing the giving the said Possession; and had by these unwarrantable Proceedings got Possession accordingly; all which, and many other irregular Proceedings of the said Bishop, contrary to the said Order of this House of the Twenty-fourth of May, the Petitioners were ready to prove; and prayed such Redress in the Premises, as to the great Wisdom of this House should be thought fit."

"Then a Committee was appointed, to consider of the said Petition, and what was fit to be done thereupon.

"The next Day, being the 25th of the same March 1699, Report was made from that Committee, "That, upon Examination of Persons, and reading several Orders of the House of Lords in Ireland, and an Affidavit of one John Campbell, it was the Opinion of the said Committee, That an Address should be presented to His Majesty, That the Lords Justices in Ireland should send over in Custody the Bishop of Derry, Mr. Lloyd Serjeant at Arms to the House of Lords in Ireland, Mr. Scott his Deputy, and Lieutenant Colonel Livesay Commander in Chief at London Derry." Which Report the House agreed to; and the same Committee was appointed to draw an Address thereupon.

"That, on the 29th of the same March, Report was made from the Committee, of the said Address; setting forth at length the Petition of the said Society and Assistants, London, last mentioned; and that the Allegations thereof had been examined by this House, and was proved upon Oath; which Address alledged, "That the Proceeding of the said Bishop of Derry, Lloyd, Scott, and Livesay, was an high Contempt of the said Order of this House, of the 24th of May;" and took Notice, "that that illegal Proceeding had been committed in another Kingdom, though dependant on this, and consequently subject to the Judgement of this House in all Cases brought by Appeal hither;" and concluded, "That this House conceived it the most respectful Way, to address His Majesty, that He would be pleased to give effectual Order for the forthwith bringing over in Custody, to appear at the Bar of this House, the said several Persons, in order to answer for their said high Contempt." Which Address being read, and agreed to; the Lord Chancellor was ordered to attend His Majesty with the same.

"That, on the 18th of April following, the Lord Chancellor gave the House an Account of the Proceedings he received from the Lords Justices of Ireland, to the Effect following; (videlicet,) A Letter from the Lords Justices of Ireland to his Lordship, dated at Dublin Castle, the 8th of April 1699; expressing "their great Concern, that their Letter to him, of the 7th of March then last past, was not satisfactory to this House; that they had not known or heard of any Thing which had passed relating to the Case of the Society and Bishop of Derry, since the aforementioned Order of this House of the 24th of May, save only what had been transacted in the House of Lords in Ireland, and what had happened in the Execution of their Orders; they therefore required from the Speaker of the House of Lords in Ireland an Account of the Proceedings of that House; which Proceedings were fully stated in the said Speaker's Report; and they were assured, that, in Pursuance of the Orders in the said Report mentioned, the Tenants of the Society had been turned out and dispossessed of the Lands in Dispute, and Possession delivered to the Bishop of Derry, or his Agent; that the Two present Sheriffs of London Derry were taken into Custody about Midnight, at the Officer's Arrival, in a Manner somewhat extraordinary: Lieutenant Colonel Livesay, who had officiously intermeddled, they the Lords Justices had suspended (fn. 1) him from his Command and Pay, under which he continued."

"The Representation of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, which was enclosed in the above-mentioned Letter, was dated the 8th of April 1699; and first took Notice of the Receipt of the Lords Justices Letter of the 4th of the same April, requiring an Account of what had passed in the House of Lords in Ireland; then informed their Excellencies, "That the House of Lords in Ireland did, the 24th of September 1697, order Possession of the Lands in Question to be delivered to the Bishop of Derry, or his Order; and on the 30th of November then next following, upon Complaint of the said Bishop of the Under-tenants re-entering into Possession, the House of Lords in Ireland ordered the Sheriffs to put the said Bishop, or his Attorney, again into the actual Possession of the said Lands, and quiet him therein.

"On the 2d of November 1698, the Sheriffs were ordered into Custody, by the House of Lords in Ireland, for not obeying their said Order of the said 30th of November; and on the 12th of November 1698, some of the Under-tenants were also taken into Custody, for disturbing the said Bishop's Possession.

"That, on the 18th of the same November, the House of Lords in Ireland ordered the said Bishop to be put into the actual and peaceable Possession of the said Lands; and the next Day ordered one John Campbell to be taken into Custody, for serving the said Bishop with an Order of the House of Lords in England; and on the 3d of December then next following, several Persons were ordered into Custody, by the House of Lords in Ireland, for opposing the Coroners in giving the said Bishop Possession."

"Next, the Lord Chancellor acquainted this House, That he had attended His Majesty, with their Lordships Address aforementioned; and that His Majesty had commanded him to let the House know, He would always have a great Regard to their Privileges, and would consider of some proper Method for doing what was desired by the Address."

"That, on the 26th of April 1699, a Petition of the said Society of the Governor and Assistants, London, was presented to this House, and read; praying, "That the Petitioners might be ordered to be put into the quiet Possession of the Premises then in Question." And thereupon it was ordered, "That the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, or Commissioners for executing that Office, should forthwith give Order, that the Petitioners and their Tenants should be restored to, and kept in the quiet Possession of, the said Premises, as they were at the Time of making the Orders and Decree by the Chancery in Ireland, from which the said Bishop appealed to the House of Lords in Ireland."

"The same Day, this House took into Consideration the Plea of the Earl of Meath and his Wife, to the Appeal of Ward and others, put into this House the 20th of the same April; which Plea alledged, "That the Parliament in Ireland was the Supreme Judicature in that Realm; and that the Courts of Justice, Magistrates, Judges, Officers, and Subjects therein, were liable to the Judgement of the said Parliament in Ireland, which had been, were, and ought to be, definitive and conclusive to them; and the said Earl and his Wife did therefore plead, and insist upon, the Decree of the House of Peers in Ireland to be final to the said Appellants; and the said Earl and his Wife did plead and insist upon the said Decree, and also on the Privilege of the said Earl, and prayed the Benefit thereof; and demanded the Judgement of this Court, if they should be compelled to answer the Appeal of the said Ward and others, then depending in this House." And thereupon this House ordered the said Plea to be over-ruled and set aside; and the said Earl, or his Agent, to put in an Answer to the said Appeal on the 28th of the same April; and appointed the 29th, being the next Day, for hearing the Cause.

"That, on the said 28th of April, a Petition of the Agent for the said Earl of Meath and his Wife, praying further Time for answering, was read, and rejected.

"That, the said 29th of April, Counsel attended, and were heard, in Behalf of the Petitioners, the said Ward and others; but the said Earl and Countess of Meath neither put in any Answer, nor appeared, nor attended by their Counsel. The said Counsel for the Petitioners acquainting this House, "That, in the House of Lords in Ireland, the Order of Dismission in the Chancery Court in the County Palatine of Tipperary, made in the Cause between the said Earl and Countess and the Petitioners, had been reversed;" it was thereupon Ordered, Declared, and Adjudged, by this House, That the Appeal of the said Earl and Countess of Meath, from the said Order of Dismission, to the House of Lords in Ireland, was coram non Judice; and that all the Proceedings thereupon were null and void; and that the Petitioners then before this House should be put into Possession of all such Lands as the said Earl and Countess had obtained the Possession of by the Order of the House of Lords in Ireland; and if the said Earl and Countess should find themselves aggrieved by the said Order of Dismission, they were at Liberty to pursue their proper Remedy, by Way of Appeal to this House."

"That, on the 1st of May following, the Lords with White Staves were ordered to acquaint His Majesty, That, the End of this Session approaching, this House only desired that the Bishop of Derry might be brought to this House, in Custody, at the Beginning of the next Session."

"That, on the 29th of November 1699, the Lord Chancellor acquainted the House, "That he had received a Letter from the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, dated at Dublin, November the 18th, 1699; which took Notice, "He had lately informed his Lordship of what passed in the Chancery in Ireland, relating to the Order of this House concerning the Bishop of Derry; but, believing this House would be willing to have all the Satisfaction possible in that Matter, he had sent the Account he had from the Sheriffs of Derry, of the full Execution of his Order, and the peaceable and quiet Possession the Society were now in of all the Lands in Question; that the said Bishop of Derry had not made the least Attempt in the Court of Chancery, that Term, to alter the State of that Matter; and there was likewife the same entire Obedience given to the Order relating to my Lord Meath, for the Possession of the Lands in Tipperary; and if there remained any Thing further to satisfy this House, he said; he had received His Majesty's Leave, and hoped to be in London in a very short Time."

"That, on the 6th of December following, a Petition of Andrew Lloyd was read; setting forth, "That he was taken into Custody, pursuant to the Address of this House, for apprehending, amongst others, Andrew Lloyd, Serjeant of the House of Lords in Ireland; whereas the Petitioner never was Serjeant at Arms, nor officiated the said Place; and therefore prayed to be discharged." And he was thereupon discharged accordingly.

"Also, the same Day, a Petition of Lieutenant Colonel Livesay, was read; setting forth, "That he, hearing there was a Warrant against him, for Contempt of an Order of this House, surrendered himself to the Messenger who had the said Warrant, and humbly submitted himself to this most Honourable House;" whereupon it was ordered, that the said Messenger should deliver the Petitioner into the Custody of the Black Rod; who was directed to bring him to the Bar of this House the next Day.

"Accordingly, the next Day, the said Lieutenant Colonel was brought to the Bar; and reprimanded, on his Knees, for his Offence; and was discharged, paying his Fees.

"That, on the 9th of January then next following, some Letters relating to the Bishop of Derry were laid before this House, by His Majesty's Command.

"Which the next Day being read; a Committee was appointed to draw what should be entered in the Journals, upon Debate and Consideration of the aforementioned Matter.

"That, on the 11th of the same January, Report was made from the Committee, of the Two Letters laid before this House. The First was from the Bishop of Derry to Mr. May, Secretary to the Lords Justices of Ireland, dated London Derry, December the 15th 1699; representing his Disability, through Want of Health, to come to London; and entreating the said Mr. May to lay his Circumstances before their Excellencies; hoping they would represent them to His Majesty, to excuse his Delay, till he was able to pay that Obedience which he owed to His Majesty's Gracious Pleasure.

"The other Letter was from the Bishop of Down and Connor to the Lords Justices; giving an Account of the deep Sense the said Bishop of Derry had of his Duty to His Majesty; and that he could not at that Season go to England, without manifest Danger of his Life.

"Upon which, this House, being sensible that their Address to His Majesty for the said Bishop's being sent over could not be complied with, by reason of his Disability, without Hazard of his Life, were willing to acquiesce in that plain and true Excuse, and did therefore dispense with the said Bishop's Attendance.

"That, on the 9th of February 1711, a Petition and Appeal of John Haltridge Esquire and Grace his Wife, was presented to this House, and read; setting forth, "That the Court of Exchequer in Ireland, the 5th of December 1710, upon hearing the Cause then depending in the said Court, wherein Dame Charity Sands was Plaintiff, and the said Haltridge and his Wife were Defendants, the said Court ordered and decreed the said Plaintiff's Bill to be dismissed; from which Order and Decree the said Dame Charity appealed to the House of Lords in Ireland, then in Parliament assembled; whose Lordships pretending to have a Jurisdiction, though really they had none, the said Cause came on to be heard the 16th of October then next following; and the 26th of the same Month the said House of Lords in Ireland did decree, "That the said Decree of Dismission of the said Court of Exchequer, and all Proceedings thereon, should be reversed;" and, amongst other Things, ordered the said Haltridge and his Wife to pay the said Dame Charity £. 20. Costs, for the Prosecution of her said pretended Appeal; and directed, that the Costs in the said Court of Exchequer then expended, or to be expended, by the said Dame Charity, should be taxed by the proper Officer of that Court, and paid by the said Haltridge and his Wife, to her the said Dame Charity; and, by the said Decree of the House of Lords in Ireland, the said Court of Exchequer were directed to put the same in Execution forthwith." And the said Appeal of Haltridge and his Wife to this House further set forth, "That they were aggrieved by the said Proceedings of the House of Lords in Ireland; and were advised, the said pretended Appeal ought not to have been received by them, nor ought they to have examined or reversed the said Decree of the said Court of Exchequer; but that the whole Proceedings of the House of Lords in Ireland were coram non Judice, and entirely null and void, they having no Jurisdiction or Power to intermeddle therein; yet the said Court of Exchequer, on the 15th of November 1711, did order, that the said pretended Decree, made by the said House of Lords in Ireland, should be received and entered in the Chief Remembrancer's Office in the said Court; and several subsequent Orders were made by the said Court thereupon." And the said Petition and Appeal of the said Haltridge and his Wife to this House complained of the said Orders of the said Court of Exchequer, for that the same were grounded solely on the pretended Decree of the House of Lords in Ireland; and prayed, "That this House would reverse the said Order of the said Court of Exchequer, of the 15th of November 1711, and all Proceedings subsequent or pursuant thereto; and confirm the said Decree of Dismission made by the said Court of Exchequer, the said 9th of December 1710; and relieve the Petitioners the said Haltridge and his Wife, according to the great Wisdom and Justice of this House." And thereupon this House ordered, That the said Dame Charity Sands might have a Copy of the said Appeal; and she was thereby required to put in her Answer thereunto, on or before the 15th of March then next following.

"That, on the 17th of the same March, the said Appeal of Haltridge and his Wife was, upon Motion, ordered to be dismissed this House; they having not entered into a Recognizance, pursuant to their Lordships Standing Order.

"And the Committee further report to your Lordships, That they have considered the said Petition of Maurice Annesley, to them referred; as also the several Proceedings hereby particularly laid before your Lordships; and observe, That, in the Case upon the Appeal of the Society of the Governor and Assistants, London, aforementioned, against the Bishop of Derry, the Appellants complained of the Want of Jurisdiction in the House of Lords in Ireland, as well as of the Decree made by that House; and that, in the Case upon the Appeal of Ward and others, against the Earl and Countess of Meath, the Appellants complained only of the Want of Jurisdiction in the House of Lords in Ireland; and that, in the Appeal of Haltridge and his Wife, against Dame Charity Sands, the Appellants complained as well of the Want of Jurisdiction in the House of Lords in Ireland to receive any Appeal; as also of several Proceedings of the Court of Exchequer in that Kingdom, in Pursuance of the Decree of the said House of Lords there. But the Committee observe, that, in the present Appeal of the said Maurice Annesley, the Appellant does not complain of the Want of Jurisdiction in the House of Lords in Ireland, but only that he is aggrieved by the Decree made by their Lordships. And the Committee conceiving some Doubt, whether the receiving this Appeal may not be construed as an Admission, by this House, of the Jurisdiction of the House of Lords in Ireland to hear Appeals from the Courts of Equity there, do submit it to your Lordships, whether this Appeal be fit to be received and proceeded on or not."

Which Report being read by the Clerk:

Ordered, That the further Consideration thereof be adjourned to this Day Sevennight; and that the Lords be summoned then to attend.

Thanks to Bp. Exeter, for his Sermon.

Ordered, That the Thanks of this House be, and are hereby, given to the Lord Bishop of Exeter, for his excellent Sermon preached before this House, on Wednesday last, at the Abbey Church, Westminster; and he is hereby desired to cause the same to be forthwith printed and published.

Austen & al. versus Nicholas.

The House being moved, "That a Day may be appointed, for hearing the Cause wherein Robert Austen Esquire and others are Appellants, and Mathew Nicholas Clerk is Respondent:"

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause, by Counsel, at the Bar, on Thursday the Fourth Day of July next, at Eleven a Clock.

Rotherhith Church, Bill.

Hodie 3^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act to enable the Parishioners of St. Mary Rotherhith, in the County of Surrey, (by certain Funeral Rates therein mentioned) to finish the said Parish Church."

The Question was put, "Whether this Bill shall pass?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

Message to H. C. that the Lords have agreed to it.

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Browning and Mr. Holford:

To acquaint them, that the Lords have agreed to the said Bill, without any Amendment.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Sabbati, primum diem (fn. 2) instantis Junii jam prox. sequen. hora undecima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

Die Veneris, 12 Julii, 1717,
hitherto examined by us,

Westmorland.
Stamford.
Clarendon.
Rochester.
Say & Seale.
Coningesby.