House of Lords Journal Volume 39: February 1791 1-10

February 1791 1-10

DIE Martis, 1^o Februarii 1791.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

PRAYERS.

Lords take the Oaths.

This Day William Archbishop of York, William Earl of Dartmouth, and John James Lord Lovel and Holland, took the Oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration, and also took and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.

Thanks to Bp. of Chester for his Sermon.

Ordered, That the Thanks of this House be and are hereby given to the Lord Bishop of Chester, for the Sermon by him preached before this House Yesterday in the Abbey Church Westminster; and he is hereby desired to cause the same to be forthwith printed and published.

Morison et al. against Douglas et al:

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Alexander Morison, Merchant in Dundee, and others, complaining of four Interlocutors of the Lords of Session in Scotland, of the 12th of November, the 16th of December, and 22d of December 1790, and 18th of January 1791; and praying, "That the same may be reversed, varied or amended, or that the Appellant may have such other Relief in the Premises, as to this House, in Their Lordships' great Wisdom, shall seem meet; and that William Douglas of Bridgetoune, Charles Hunter of Burnside Esquires, and others Trustees under the Act of Parliament for repairing the Roads in the County of Forfar, may be required to answer the said Appeal:"

It is Ordered, That the said William Douglas, Charles Hunter Esquires and others, may have a Copy of the said Appeal, and do put in their Answer or respective Answers thereunto in Writing, on or before Tuesday, the 1st Day of March next; and Service of this Order upon the said Respondents, or upon any of their known Counsel or Agents in the Court of Session in Scotland, shall be deemed good Service.

Spottiswoode to enter into Recognizance on said Appeal.

The House being moved, "That John Spottiswoode of Sackville Street, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for Alexander Morison Merchant, and others, on account of their Appeal depending in this House, they residing in Scotland:"

It is Ordered, That the said John Spottiswoode may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellants, as desired.

Erskine against Erskine:

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Colonel James Francis Erskine, of Forrest, complaining of two Interlocutors of the Lord Ordinary on the Bills in Scotland, of the 28th of August and 30th of December 1790, and also of an Interlocutor of the Lords of Session there of the 19th of January 1791; and praying, "That the same may be reversed, varied, or amended, or that the Appellant may have such other Relief in the Premises, as to this House, in Their Lordships' great Wisdom, shall seem just; and that the Honour able James Erskine of Alva may be required to answer the said Appeal:"

It is Ordered, That the said James Erskine may have a Copy of the said Appeal, and do put in his Answer thereunto in Writing, on or before Tuesday the 1st Day of March next; and Service of this Order upon the said Respondent, or upon any of his known Counsel or Agents in the Court of Session in Scotland, shall be deemed good Service.

Spottiswoode to enter into Recognizance on said Appeal.

The House being moved, "That John Spottiswoode of Sackville Street, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for Colonel James Erskine, on Account of his Appeal depending in this House, he residing in Scotland:"

It is Ordered, That the said John Spottiswoode, may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellant, as desired.

Morehead against Johnston:

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of William Morehead Esquire, Younger, of Herbertshire; complaining of two Interlocutors of the Lords of Session in Scotland, of the 23d of December 1790, and 20th of January 1791; and praying, "That the same may be reversed, varied, or amended, or that the Appellant may have such other Relief in the Premises as to this House, in Their Lordships' great Wisdom, shall seem meet; and that John Johnston Esquire of Alva may be required to answer the said Appeal:"

It is Ordered, That the said John Johnston may have a Copy of the said Appeal, and do put in his Answer thereunto in Writing, on or before Tuesday the 1st Day of March next; and Service of this Order upon the said Respondent, or upon any of his known Counsel or Agents in the Court of Session in Scotland, shall be deemed good Service.

Spottiswoode to enter into Recognizance on said Appeal.

The House being moved, "That John Spottiswoode of Sackville Street, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for William Morehead Esquire, on account of his Appeal depending in this House, he residing in Scotland:"

It is Ordered, That the said John Spottiswoode, may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellant, as desired.

Chalmer to enter in Recognizance on Elliot's Appeals.

The House being moved, "That James Chalmer of Abingdon Street, Westminster, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for William Elliot Esquire, on account of his Appeal depending in this House, he living in Scotland:"

It is Ordered, That the said James Chalmer may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellant, as desired.

The House being moved, "That James Chalmer of Abingdon Street, Westminster, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for William Elliot Esquire, on account of his Appeal depending in this House, he living in Scotland:"

It is Ordered, That the said James Chalmer, may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellant, as desired.

The House being moved, "That James Chalmer of Abingdon Street, Westminster, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for William Elliot Esquire, on account of his Appeal depending in this House, he living in Scotland:"

It is Ordered, That the said James Chalmer, may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellant, as desired.

The House being moved, "That James Chalmer of Abingdon Street, Westminster, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for William Elliot Esquire, on account of his Appeal depending in this House, he living in Scotland:"

It is Ordered, That the said James Chalmer, may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellant, as desired.

Morehead against C. Edmonstone.

The House being informed, "That Charles Edmonstone Esquire, Respondent to the Appeal of William Morehead Esquire, of Herbertshire, one of the Freeholders of the County of Stirling in Scotland, had not put in his Answer to the said Appeal, though duly served with the Order of this House for that Purpose:"

And thereupon an Affidavit of William Handyside, of the due Service of the said Order being read:

Ordered, That the said Respondent do put in his Answer to the said Appeal peremptorily in a Week.

Morehead against G. Edmonstone.

The House being informed, "That the Reverend Mr. George Edmonstone, Respondent to the Appeal of William Morehead Esquire of Herbertshire, one of the Freeholders in the County of Stirling in Scotland, had not put in his Answer to the said Appeal, though duly served with the Order of this House for that Purpose:"

And thereupon an Affidavit of William Handyside, of the due Service of the said Order being read:

Ordered, That the said Respondent do put in his Answer to the said Appeal peremptorily in a Week.

Spier against Sir. A. Campbell.

The House being informed, "That Sir Alexander Campbell, of Ardkinlass Baronet, Respondent to the Appeal of Peter Spiers Esquire of Culcroich, one of the Freeholders of the County of Stirling in Scotland, had not put in his Answer to the said Appeal, though duly served with the Order of this House for that Purpose:"

And thereupon an Affidavit of William Handyside, of the due Service of the said Order being read:

Ordered, That the said Respondent do put in his Answer to the said Appeal peremptorily in a Week.

Chandos Peerage, Committee to meet.

Ordered, That the Committee for Privileges, to whom is referred the Petition of the Reverend Edward Tymewell Brydges Clerk, to his Majesty, claiming the Title and Dignity of Baron Chandos of Sudeley, with His Majesty's Reference thereof to this House, and the Report of His Majesty's Attorney General thereunto annexed, do meet to consider further of the said Claim on Tuesday next, and that the Judges do then attend.

Penruddocke et al. Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Anne Henrietta Penruddocke Widow, Henry Penruddocke Wyndham Esquire, and James Sutton Esquire, Testamentary Guardians of the Infant Children of Charles Penruddocke Esquire, deceased, for and on the Behalf of the said Infant Children of the said Charles Penruddocke, and of the said Anne Henrietta Penruddocke, and William Pierce Ashe-a-Court Esquire, for and on the Behalf of themselves, praying leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the said Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Justice Buller, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill; and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands, and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Jovis, tertium diem instantis Februarii, horâ undecimâ Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Jovis, 3^o Februarii 1791.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

PRAYERS.

Gibson and Johnson against Minet and Fector, in Error:

The Order of the Day being read for the further Consideration of the Writ of Error, wherein Thomas Gibson and Joseph Johnson are Plaintiffs, and Hughes Minet and James Peter Fector are Defendants; and for the Judges to deliver their Opinions upon the Questions of Law proposed to them on Monday the 26th Day of April last:

The Lord Chancellor acquainted the House, "That the Judges differed in their Opinions upon the said Questions."

Ordered, That the Judges present do deliver their Opinions upon the said Questions seriatim with their Reasons,

Judges' Opinions delivered seriatim.

Accordingly, Mr. Baron Thomson was heard upon the said Questions;

And, upon the first Question delivered his Opinion, "That the making of the Instrument declared upon, does not appear upon the special Verdict, to be so criminal that the Policy of the Law will not suffer an Action to be founded upon such Instrument."

Upon the second Question delivered his Opinion, "That upon the Matter found in the special Verdict the Bill mentioned in the fifth Count may be deemed in Law a Bill payable to Bearer;" but if not,

Then in Answer to the third Question, delivered his Opinion, "That the Matter of the special Verdict will sustain the first Count of the Declaration." And gave his Reasons.

Then Mr. Justice Heath was heard upon the said Questions;

And to the first Question desired Leave to decline giving any Answer, as he was of Opinion in Answer to the Second and Third Questions, "That the Plaintiff below, the now Defendant in Error, ought not to recover upon any of the Counts contained in the Declaration;" and gave his Reasons.

Then Mr. Baron Perryn was heard upon the said Questions;

And upon the first Question delivered his Opinion, "That the making of the Instrument declared upon does not appear upon the special Verdict, to be so criminal that the Policy of the Law will not suffer an Action to be founded upon such Instrument."

Upon the second Question delivered his Opinion, "That upon the Matter found in the special Verdict, the Bill mentioned in the fifth Count may be deemed in Law a Bill payable to Bearer."

Upon the third Question delivered his Opinion, "That the Matter of the special Verdict will sustain the first Count of the Declaration;" and gave his Reasons.

Then Mr. Baron Hotham was heard upon the said Questions;

And, upon the first Question, delivered his Opinion, "That the making of the Instrument declared upon, does not appear upon the special Verdict, to be so criminal that the Policy of the Law will not suffer an Action to be founded upon such Instrument."

Upon the second Question delivered his Opinion, "That upon the Matter found in the special Verdict, the Bill mentioned in the fifth Count may be deemed in Law a Bill payable to Bearer;" but if not,

Then in Answer to the third Question delivered his Opinion, "That the Matter of the special Verdict will sustain the first Count of the Declaration;" and gave his Reasons.

Then Mr. Justice Gould was heard upon the said Questions;

And upon the first Question delivered his Opinion, "That the making of the Instrument declared upon, does not appear upon the special Verdict, to be so criminal that the Policy of the Law will not suffer an Action to be founded upon such Instrument."

Upon the second Question delivered his Opinion, "That upon the Matter found in the special Verdict, the Bill mentioned in the fifth Count may be deemed in Law a Bill payable to Bearer."

Upon the third Question delivered his Opinion, "That the Matter of the special Verdict will sustain the first Count of the Declaration;" and gave his Reasons.

Then the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer was heard upon the said Questions;

And upon the first Question delivered his Opinion, "That the making of the Instrument declared upon does not appear upon the special Verdict, to be so criminal that the Policy of the Law will not suffer an Action to be founded upon such Instrument."

Upon the second Question delivered his Opinion, "That upon the Matter found in the special Verdict, the Bill mentioned in the fifth Count cannot be deemed in Law a Bill payable to Bearer."

Upon the third Question delivered his Opinion, "That the Matter of the special Verdict will not sustain any other Count in the Declaration;" and gave his Reasons.

Ordered, That the further Consideration of the said Cause be put off to Monday the 14th Day of this instant February.

Election of Peers for Scotland, E. Selkirk and E. Hopetoun's Petition for Committee to meet.

Upon reading the Petition of Dunbar Earl of Selkirk, and James Earl of Hopetoun, setting forth, "That the Petitioners presented their Petition to Their Lordships, complaining of an undue Return made of the Peers to represent the Peerage of Scotland in the present Parliament, and for the Reasons therein set forth, praying, "That the Return might be amended by inserting the Names and Titles of the Petitioners as of the Number returned as duly elected:" "That Their Lordships were pleased on the 23d of December last, to order that the said Petition be referred to the Committee for Privileges, but no Day was appointed for the Meeting of the said Committee;" and therefore praying, "That Their Lordships will be pleased to order that the Lords Committees for Privileges do meet to consider of the Matter of the said Petition on such early Day as Their Lordships shall appoint:'

It is Ordered, That the said Petition do lie on the Table.

Govan and Mitchel against Govan.

Upon reading the Petition of Jean Govan and William Mitchel her Husband, who prosecute in Formâ Pauperis, Appellants in a Cause depending in this House, to which John Govan of Mains is Respondent; setting forth, "That the Respondent hath agreed that the Judgments recovered by him in this Cause, and the Decree therein made and appealed from, should be set aside in the Court of Session, on Condition of the Appellants withdrawing their Appeal, to which no Answer has been put in;" and therefore praying, "Their Lordships will be pleased to order that they may be at Liberty to withdraw their Appeal:"

It is Ordered, That the said Petition do lie on the Table.

Webb, Leave for a Bill.

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of Nathaniel Webb, of Saville Row, in the County of Middlesex, Esquire, praying Leave to bring in a private Bill for the Purposes therein mentioned:

It is Ordered, That Leave be given to bring in a Bill pursuant to the said Petition and Report.

Bill read.

Hodie 1^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act to empower Nathaniel Webb Esquire and others, to grant building and repairing Leases of certain Estates in the Parish of Saint-Giles-in-the-Fields, in the County of Middlesex."

Parslow's Divorce Bill.

Ordered, That Joseph Dunwell Michell, Robert Ironside, Elizabeth Crisp, Mary Jackson, James Aspinall, Letitia Hude, James Wilkinson, Mr. Holman, and Mr. Michell, do attend this House on Tuesday the 8th Day of this instant February, in order to their being examined as Witnesses upon the Second Reading of the Bill, intituled. "An Act to dissolve the Marriage of John Parflow Esquire with Elizabeth Hall his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again, and for other Purposes therein mentioned."

Day's and Skillett's Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Elizabeth Day the Younger, and Henrietta Maria Day, Spinsters, John Skillett Shipwright, (on Behalf of himself and Edward Day Skillett, Daniel Skillett, and Elizabeth Skillett, his Infant Children,) and Elizabeth Day the Elder, Widow, praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the said Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be and is hereby referred to Mr. Justice Ashhurst and Mr. Justice Grose, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and after hearing them are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties who may be concerned, in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Lunæ, septimum diem instantis Februarii, horâ undecimâ Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Lunæ, 7^o Februarii 1791.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

PRAYERS.

Morehead against Edmonstone.

The Answer of Charles Edmonstone Esquire, Counsellor at Law, to the Appeal of William Morehead Esquire, was this Day brought in.

Morehead against Edmonstone.

As was also, The Answer of the Reverend George Edmonstone, third lawful Son of Sir Archibald Edmonstone, of Duntreath, Baronet, to the Appeal of William Morehead Esquire.

Spiers against Sir A. Campbell.

Also, The Answer of Sir Alexander Campbell Baronet, to the Appeal of Peter Spiers Esquire.

Erskine against Erskine.

And also, The Answer of James Erskine, of Alva, Esquire, to the Appeal of James Francis Erskine Esquire.

Lords take the Oaths

This Day Jacob Earl of Radnor, Edwyn Lord Sandys, and Nathaniel Lord Scarsdale took the Oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration; and also took and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.

Stewart against Sir J. Colquhoun, et al:

After hearing Counsel, as well on Wednesday the 22d Day of December last, as this Day, upon the Petition and Appeal of Charles Stewart, of Dalguise, complaining of Two Interlocutors of the Lords of Session in Scotland of the 17th and 29th of January 1789; also of Two Interlocutors of the Lord Ordinary there of the 19th of February and 11th of March 1789; and also of another Interlocutor of the said Lords of the 1st of July 1789; and praying, "That the same might be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Appellant might have such other Relief in the Premises as to this House, in Their Lordships' great Wisdom, should seem meet:" As also upon the Answer of Sir James Colquhoun Baronet, George Home, Alexander Menzies, Robert Sinclair, Charles Gordon, and Samuel Mitchelson, Esquires, principal Clerks of Session in Scotland, put in to the said Appeal, and due Consideration had of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:

Interlocuors affirmed.

It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Interlocutors complained of in the said Appeal be and the same are hereby affirmed, reserving to the Appellant Liberty to insist upon his Pleas as to any Parts of the Action to which the Court shall look upon the same to be applicable, and to insist upon all Defences other than those contained in the said Pleas.

Davidson against Bruce:

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Harry Davidson, Writer to His Majesty's Signet in Scotland, complaining of Three Interlocutors of the Lords of Session in Scotland, of the 11th of December 1790, the 22d of January and 1st of February 1791; and praying, "That the same may be reversed, varied, or amended, or that the Appellant may have such other Relief in the Premises as to this House, in Their Lordships' great Wisdom, shall seem meet; and that Colonel Andrew Bruce the Younger, of Stenhouse, may be required to answer the said Appeal:"

It is Ordered, That the said Colonel Andrew Bruce may have a Copy of the said Appeal, and do put in his Answer thereunto in Writing on or before Monday the 7th Day of March next; and Service of this Order upon the said Respondent, or upon any of his known Counsel or Agents in the Court of Session in Scotland, shall be deemed good Service.

Spottiswoode to enter into Recognizance on said Appeal:

The House being moved, "That John Spottiswoode of Sackville Street, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for Harry Davidson. Writer to His Majesty's Signet in Scotland, on account of his Appeal depending in this House, he residing in Scotland:"

It is Ordered, That the said John Spottiswoode may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellant, as desired.

and on Sir T. Dundas's Appeals.

The House being moved, "That John Spottiswoode of Sackville Street, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for Sir Thomas Dundas, of Kerse, Baronet, on account of his Appeal depending in this House, he being out of Town:"

It is Ordered, That the said John Spottiswoode may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellant as desired.

The House being moved, "That John Spottiswoode of Sackville Street, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for Sir Thomas Dundas, of Kerse, Baronet, on account of his Appeal depending in this House, he being out of Town:"

It is Ordered, That the said John Spottiswoode may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellant, as desired.

Godeffroys' and Thornton for a Naturalization Bill:

Upon reading the Petition of Peter Godeffroy and Johanna Catherine Godeffroy his Wife, and John Thornton, praying Leave to bring in a Bill for their Naturalization:

It is Ordered, That Leave be given to bring in a Bill according to the Prayer of the said Petition.

Bill presented.

Accordingly, The Lord Cathcart presented to the House a Bill, intituled, "An Act for naturalizing Peter Godeffroy, Johanna Catherine Godeffroy, and John Thornton."

The said Bill was read the First Time.

E Warwick et al. Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of the Right Honourable George Earl Brooke, of Warwick Castle, and Earl of Warwick; and the humble Petition of William Parkes, of the Borough of Warwick, in the County of Warwick, Mercer and Draper, and Thomas Read, of Kidderminster, in the County of Worcester, Woolstapler, and Mary his Wife, praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the said Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to Mr. Baron Hotham and Mr. Justice Heath, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill; and after hearing them are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands, and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also, that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Petition of Debtors in Winchester Gaol, praying Relief.

Upon reading the Petition of the Debtors in the County Gaol at Winchester complaining of their Distress, and praying Relief:

It is Ordered, That the said Petition do lie on the Table.

Walford's Divorce Bill.

The Lord Cathcart presented to the House (pursuant to an Order of Leave of the 21st of December last) a Bill, intituled, "An Act to dissolve the Marriage of John Walford the Younger with Sophia Elizabeth Jeanes, his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again, and for other Purposes therein mentioned."

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Ordered, That the said Bill be read a second Time on Tuesday the 22d Day of this Instant February, and that Notice thereof be affixed on the Doors of this House, and the Lords summoned; and that the said John Walford may be heard by his Counsel at the said Second Reading to make out the Truth of the Allegations of the Bill; and that the said Sophia Elizabeth Jeanes may have a Copy of the Bill, and that Notice be given her of the said Second Reading, and that she be at Liberty to be heard by her Counsel what she may have to offer against the said Bill at the same Time.

Webb's Bill.

Hodie 2^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act to empower Nathaniel Webb Esquire, and others, to grant Building and Repairing Leafes of certain Estates in the Parish of Saint Giles-in-the-Fields, in the County of Middlesex."

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords following:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Tuesday the 22d Day of this Instant February, at Ten o'Clock in the Forenoon, in the Prince's Lodgings, near the House of Peers; and to adjourn as they please.

Belsches against Buchanan.

The House being informed, "That Walter Buchanan, of Balfunning, Esquire, Respondent to the Appeal of Robert Belsches, of Greenyards, Esquire, one of the Freeholders of the County of Stirling, had not put in his Answer to the said Appeal, though duly served with the Order of this House for that Purpose:"

And thereupon an Affidavit of James Ferrier, Clerk to His Majesty's Signet, of the due Service of the said Order, being read:

Ordered, That the said Respondent do put in his Answer to the said Appeal peremptorily in a Week.

Dean and Chapter of Canterbury and Clutton's Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of the Dean and Chapter of Canterbury under their Common Seal, and of Thomas Clutton, of Walworth, in the County of Surrey, Brickmaker; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the said Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be and is hereby referred to Mr. Baron Perryn and Mr. Justice Buller, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and after hearing them are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon under their Hands, and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also, that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

National Debt Accounts delivered.

The House being informed, "That Mr. Newland from the Bank of England attended:"

He was called in, and delivered at the Bar, pursuant to the Directions of an Act of Parliament,

"An Account from the Bank of England of the Receipt and Expenditure of £1,220,211 14s. 6d. in one Year, from February 3d 1790 to January 31st 1791, by the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, and of £305,875 to be applied in the Quarter between the 1st of February and the 1st of May 1791."

And then he withdrew.

And the Title thereof being read by the Clerk;

Ordered, That the said Account do lie on the Table.

Byng's Leave for a Bill:

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of George Byng Esquire, praying Leave to bring in a private Bill for the Purposes therein mentioned:

It is Ordered, That Leave be given to bring in a Bill, pursuant to the said Petition and Report.

Bill read.

Hodie 1^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for vesting the Estates devised by the Will of the Honourable Elizabeth Byng deceased, in the County of Somerset, in Trustees, to be sold; and for investing the Money arising by the Sale thereof in the Purchase of other Estates to be settled to the like Uses, to which the Estates so to be sold are subject."

Brand Leave for a Bill:

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of Thomas Brand Esquire, on Behalf of himself and his Infant Children, praying Leave to bring in a private Bill for the Purposes therein mentioned:

It is Ordered, That Leave be given to bring in a Bill, pursuant to the said Petition and Report.

Bill read.

Hodie 1^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act to enable Trustees to cut down and sell Timber upon the Estates devised by the Will of Thomas Brand Esquire, and to invest the Monies arising therefrom in the Purchase of Lands and Hereditaments to be settled to the Uses of the Will, and for other Purposes therein mentioned."

Election of Peers for Scotland, M. Tweeddale et al. Petition respecting.

Upon reading the Petition of George Marquis of Tweeddale, David Stewart Earl of Buchan, John Bowes Earl of Strathmore, Archibald Earl of Dundonald, Alexander Lord Saltoun, Hugh Lord Sempill, Alexander Lord Elibank, George Lord Kinnaird, and John Lord Kirkcudbright; setting forth, "That the Petitioners having presented their Petition to Their Lordships, complaining of an undue Election and Return of the Peers who are to represent the Peerage of Scotland in the present Parliament, Their Lordships were pleased on the 23d of December last, to refer the said Petition to the Committee of Privileges: That the Petitioners have amongst other Things stated and alledged, that no legal or proper Evidence was produced at the Election of the Earl of Roseberry, the Earl of Deloraine, the Lord Viscount Dumblaine, the Lord Sinclair, Lord Lindores, or Lord Fairfax of Cameron, being qualified as the Law requires to vote at the said Election: That the Petitioners have procured Copies (attested by the Keeper of the Records in Scotland), of the several Instruments under the Seal of the High Court of Chancery, which were produced at the Election, as Evidence of the said Noble Lords having taken the Oaths to qualify themselves to vote at the said Election; and the Petitioners are ready to prove the said Copies by Witnesses at the Bar, who compared the same with the Originals: That the Petitioners are to submit to Their Lordships that the said Instruments were informal and void, and ought not to have been received as Evidence, but as the Objection to these Instruments arises from the Tenor, Teste, and Date thereof, the Petitioners are advised by their Counsel, that, notwithstanding of the said Copies being attested and proved as aforesaid, and although the same should be admitted as Evidence on the Part of the Noble Lords whose Votes are objected to (as the Petitioners have Reason to believe they would be), Their Lordships may nevertheless think it necessary to have the Originals produced: That the said original Instruments were, with other Documents respecting the late Election, deposited according to Custom, by the Returning Officers, in the Public Register House at Edinburgh, and it is not in the Petitioners' Power to procure them exhibited to this House, without an Order from Their Lordships; the Petitioners therefore make this Application, and humbly pray that if Their Lordships think it necessary that the said original Instruments should be produced, they will be pleased to order that the Lord Clerk Registrar of Scotland, and Alexander Robertson and William Robertson Esquires, his Deputies, and Keepers of the Records, or one or other of them, do transmit to the Clerk of Parliament the Instruments which were produced at the late Election of the Peers of Scotland, with a View to certify that the Lords Roseberry, Deloraine, Dumblane, Sinclair, Lindores, and Fairfax had taken the Oaths in Chancery, or that one or other of the said Lord Clerk Registrar, Alexander Robertson and William Robertson, do bring up and produce the said Instruments at Their Lordships' Bar, or that Their Lordships' will make such other Order or Orders in the Premises as in their great Wisdom may seem proper:"

It is Ordered, That the said Petition do lie on the Table.

Parslow's Divorce Bill.

Ordered, That the second Reading of the Bill, intituled, "An Act to dissolve the Marriage of John Parslow Esquire, with Elizabeth Hall, his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again, and for other Purposes therein mentioned," which stands appointed for To-morrow, be put off to Thursday next, and the Lords summoned, and that the several Witnesses who were ordered to attend on that Day, do then attend.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Martis, octavum diem instantis Februarii, horâ undecimâ Auroræ; Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Martis, 8^o Februarii 1791.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

PRAYERS.

Brand's Bill.

Hodie 2^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act to enable Trustees to cut down and sell Timber upon the Estates devised by the Will of Thomas Brand Esquire, and to invest the Monies arising therefrom in the Purchase of Lands and Hereditaments, to be settled to the Uses of the Will; and for other Purposes therein mentioned."

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords following:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Wednesday the 23d Day of this Instant February, at Ten o'Clock in the Forenoon, in the Prince's Lodgings, near the House of Peers; and to adjourn as they please.

Byng's Bill.

Hodie 2^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for vesting the Estates devised by the Will of the Honourable Elizabeth Byng, deceased, in the County of Somerset, in Trustees, to be sold, and for investing the Money arising by the Sale thereof in the Purchase of other Estates, to be settled to the like Uses to which the Estates so to be sold are subject."

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Thursday the 24th Day of this Instant February, at the usual Time and Place; and to adjourn as they please.

Morehead against G. Edmonstone.

The House being moved, "That a Day may be appointed for hearing the Cause wherein William Morehead Esquire is Appellant, and the Reverend George Edmonstone is Respondent:"

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause by Counsel at the Bar on the first vacant Day for Causes after those already appointed.

Morehead against G. Edmonstone

The House being moved, "That a Day may be appointed for hearing the Cause wherein William Morehead Esquire is Appellant, and Charles Edmonstone Esquire, is Respondent:"

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause by Counsel at the Bar on the first vacant Day for Causes after those already appointed.

Spiers against Sir A. Campbell.

The House being moved, "That a Day may be appointed for hearing the Cause wherein Peter Spiers Esquire is Appellant, and Sir Alexander Campbell Baronet, is Respondent:"

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause by Counsel at the Bar on the first vacant Day for Causes after those already appointed.

Erskine against Erskine.

The House being moved, "That a Day may be appointed for hearing the Cause wherein James Francis Erskine Esquire is Appellant, and James Erskine, of Alva, Esquire, is Respondent:"

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause by Counsel at the Bar on the first vacant Day for Causes after those already appointed.

Election of Peers for Scotland, Committee of Privileges to meet on Petitions respecting.

Ordered, That the Committee for Privileges do meet to take into Consideration the several Petitions referred to them, relative to the Return of the Peers chosen for that Part of Great Britain called Scotland, upon Friday the 18th Day of this Instant February.

Ordered, That the said several Petitions be printed.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Mercurii, nonum diem instantis Februarii, horâ undecimâ Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Mercurii, 9^o Februarii 1791.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

PRAYERS.

Lords take the Oaths.

This Day Thomas Marquis of Bath, and Brownlow Earl of Exeter, took the Oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration; and also took and subscribed the Oaths of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.

Arbuthnot against Smart:

This Day being appointed for hearing Counsel upon the Petition and Appeal of the Honourable John Arbuthnot, complaining of Three Interlocutors of the Lord Ordinary in Scotland, of the 1st and 17th of July, and 4th of August 1789; and also of an Interlocutor of the Lords of Session there, of the 11th of August 1789; and praying, "That the same might be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Appellant might have such other Relief in the Premises as to this House, in Their Lordships' great Wisdom, should seem meet:" As also upon the Answer of Robert Smart, Merchant in Marykirk, put in to the said Appeal; and Counsel appearing for the Appellant and Respondent in the said Appeal:

The Counsel for the Appellant were fully heard upon the same.

The Counsel were directed to withdraw.

Interlocutors affirmed.

Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Petition and Appeal be and is hereby dismissed this House, and that the said Interlocutors therein complained of be and the same are hereby affirmed: And it is further Ordered, That the Appellant do pay, or cause to be paid, to the said Respondent, the Sum of Fifty Pounds for his Costs in respect of the said Appeal.

Godeffroys and Thornton takes the Oaths in order to their Naturalization.

Peter Godeffroy, Johanna Catherine Godeffroy, and John Thornton took the Oaths appointed, in order to their Naturalization.

Hodie 2^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for Naturalizing Peter Godeffroy, Johanna Catherine Godeffroy his Wife, and John Thornton."

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords following:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet Tomorrow, at Ten o'Clock in the Forenoon, in the Prince's Lodgings, near the House of Peers; and to adjourn as they please.

Erskine against Haldane.

The House being moved "That a Day may be appointed for hearing the Cause wherein Colonel James Francis Erskine is Appellant, and George Haldane, of Gleneaglos, Esquire, is Respondent:"

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause by Counsel at the Bar on the first vacant Day for Causes after those already appointed.

Grahame against Erskine:

The House being moved, "That a Day may be appointed for hearing the Cause wherein Robert Grahame of Gartmore Esquire is Appellant, and James Erskine, of Alva, Esquire, is Respondent:"

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause by Counsel at the Bar on the first vacant Day for Causes after those already appointed.

Sir T. Dundas against Campbell.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Sir Thomas Dundas, of Kerse, Baronet, one of the Freeholders of the County of Stirling complaining of Two Interlocutors of the Lords of Session in Scotland, of the 10th of December 1790, and 5th of February 1791; and praying, "That the same may be reversed, varied, or amended, or that the Appellant may have such other Relief in the Premises as to this House, in Their Lordships' great Wisdom, shall seem meet; and that John Campbell Esquire, Counsellor at Law, in London, may be required to answer the said Appeal:"

It is Ordered, That the said John Campbell Esquire may have a Copy of the said Appeal, and do put in his Answer thereunto in Writing, on or before Wednesday the the 9th Day of March next; and Service of this Order upon the said Respondent, or upon any of his known Counsel or Agents in the Court of Session in Scotland, shall be deemed good Service.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Jovis, decimum diem instantis Februarii, horâ undecimâ Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Jovis, 10^o Februarii 1791.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

PRAYERS.

Lords take the Oaths.

This Day Francis Duke of Bridgewater, Henry Lord Middleton, and Thomas Lord Grey de Wilton took the oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration, and also took and subscribed the oath of Abjuration pursuant to the Statutes.

Godeffroy's and Thornton's Naturalization Bill.

The Lord Cathcart reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, "An Act for naturalizing Peter Godeffroy, Johanna Catherine Godeffroy his Wife, and John Thornton," was committed: That they had considered the said Bill, and examined the Allegations thereof, which were found 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."

Ordered, That the said Bill be engrossed.

Spottiswoode to enter into Recognizance on Sir T. Dundas's Appeal.

The House being moved, "That John Spottiswoode, of Sackville Street, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for Sir Thomas Dundas, of Kerse, Baronet, on account of his Appeal depending in this House, he being absent from Town:"

It is Ordered, That the said John Spottiswoode may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellant, as desired.

Walford's Divorce Bill.

Ordered, That Ann Porter, William Stone, John Hurford Stone, and Margaretta Sumfield, do attend this House on Tuesday the 22d Day of this instant February, in order to their being examined as Witnesses upon the second Reading of the Bill, intituled, "An Act to dissolve the Marriage of John Walford the Younger, with Sophia Elizabeth Jeanes his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again, and for other Purposes therein mentioned."

Writs of Error delivered:

The Lord Kenyon, Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench, in the usual Manner, delivered in at the Table four Writs of Error.

In the First of which

Ogden against Folliott:

David Ogden Esquire is Plaintiff, and

George Folliott Defendant.

In the Second

Aylett against Fleetwood:

Edward Aylett is Plaintiff, and

Gerrard Dutton Fleetwood Esquire, Defendant.

In the Third

Swann against Stirling, et al.

Samuel Swann is Plaintiff, and

Andrew Stirling, and others, are Defendants.

And in the last,

Tilliard against Curtis, et al.

John Tilliard is Plaintiff, and

William Curtis, and others, are Defendants.

Parslow's Divorce Bill:

The Order of the Day being read, for the Second reading of the Bill, intituled, "An Act to dissolve the Marriage of John Parslow Esquire, with Elizabeth Hall his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again, and for other Purposes therein mentioned;" and for hearing Counsel for and against the same; and for the Lords to be summoned:

Counsel were accordingly called in.

And Mr. Russell appearing as Counsel for the Bill, and no Counsel appearing on behalf of Mrs. Parslow, Mr. Russell was heard to state the Allegations of the Bill.

Then Mr. Joseph Dunwell Michell was called in, and' being sworn, acquainted the House, "That on the 25th of January last, he went to No. 27, Brompton Row, and having enquired whether Mrs. Parslow was at home, was informed she was; that he was shewn into a Dining Room where a Lady was sitting, that he asked her, "If her Name was Parslow, and whether she was not the Wife of Captain Parslow?" to which she made Answer in the Affirmative: That thereupon he gave her a Copy of the Bill, and of the original Order of this Right Honourable House, for the Second Reading thereof, upon which she informed him, That she should make no Opposition to the Bill."

Being asked, "If he had seen the Lady since," he said, "That on Tuesday last, he went to the same House with a Mr. Ironside, a Servant of Captain Parslow's; that the Lady came to the Window whilst he and Mr. Ironside were there, and that he the Witness asked Mr. Ironside, "Whether that was Mrs. Parslow," to which he made Answer that it was.

He was directed to withdraw.

Then James Wilkinson Esquire was called in, and, being sworn, acquainted the House, "That he was present at the Marriage of Elizabeth Hall with Captain Parslow, at Wall's End in Northumberland." Being asked, "If Wall's End was a Parish?" he said, "It was a Chapelry." Being asked, "In what Parish it was?" he said, "He believed it was in the Parish of Jarrow." Being asked, "If it was a Place where Marriages were usually celebrated?" he said, "There was a Register of Marriages kept there." Being asked, "If he had a Copy of the Register of the Marriage of the said Elizabeth Hall with Captain Parslow, and whether he had compared the same with the original Register?" he said, "He had a Copy, that he had compared it with the Original, and that it was a true Copy."

Then the Witness delivered in the said Copy; the same was read, and is as follows:

"Marriages in Wall's End. Anno Domini 1785.

"March 9th Mr. John Parslow and Mrs. Elizabeth Hall, both of the Chapelry of Wall's End, were married in the said Chapel by Licence, (by and with the Consent of those, whose Consent is required by Law,) this 9th Day of March 1785.

"By me Em. Potter, Minister.

"This Marriage was solemnized between us,

John Parslow, Elizabeth Hall, now Parslow.

"In the Presence of us,

"Adam Hall, Jane Wilkinson, James Wilkinson, Mary Hall, J. Hall, Fras. Hall."

"The above is a true Extract of the Parish Register of Wall's End, taken this 4th Day of February 1791, by me,

"Joseph Ireland, Curate."

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Mr. Robert Ironside was called in, and, being sworn, acquainted the House, "That he had lived as Servant with Captain Parslow a little more than three Years, and whilst Mrs. Parslow lived with him: That about the Month of July last, Mrs. Parslow left her Husband, and went away with Captain Sykes in his own Carriage to Ipswich: That the Witness was not in the House when she went away, but in the Street at a little Distance near the House, and saw her get into the Carriage which was a Gig; this was about four or five o'Clock in the Afternoon." Being asked, "If he understood that Mrs. Parslow and Captain Sykes were going a Journey together, or only to take an Airing?" he said, "He supposed an Airing, for that he had previously carried a Message from Mrs. Parslow, with her Compliments to Captain Sykes, desiring to know at what Time he would call on her, to take an Airing in the Gig; to which Captain Sykes sent for Answer, that he was going to take a Ride, but would call and let her know."

Being asked, "If he had gone at any Time to Brompton Row, with a Person of the Name of Michell?" he said, "He had lately, that he there saw a Person whom Michell also saw, and that she was his the Witness's Master's Wife."

Being asked, "If Mrs. Parslow was expected Home in the Evening of the Day she went with Captain Sykes in the Gig?" he said, "Yes, that upon her not returning, Captain Parslow was alarmed, concluding some accident had happened, and that about Eleven o'Clock he was in a Hurry about it, not knowing the Meaning." Being asked, "How soon it was that Captain Parslow heard of her again?" he said, He believed the next Morning by a Captain Pye, an Officer in the same Regiment with Captain Parslow, who saw them go through some Place together, and as the Witness believed, sent Captain Parslow Word of it." Being asked, "What Captain Parslow did when he heard of it?" he said, "He was very much troubled and affected at it."

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Letitia Hude, being called in and sworn, acquainted the House, "That she knows Mrs. Parslow: That she remembers her and her Husband, but she cannot exactly say how long ago, coming to the Royal Hotel together, with a little Girl their Daughter: That she had never seen them before that Time." Being asked, If she had ever seen Mrs. Parslow at any other Hotel?" she said, "Yes, at Osborne's Hotel with a Mr. Sykes." Being asked, "About what Time she saw her at the Royal Hotel?" she said in the Month of April, that she cannot tell exactly in what Year, but about three Years ago." Being asked, "If she was sure that the Person she saw with Captain Sykes at Osborne's Hotel, was the same Person she saw with Caprain Parslow before?" she said, "Yes." Being asked, "How long it was since she saw this Person at Osborne's Hotel?" she said, "She could not recollect, but it was above a Year ago, about a Year and a Half ago, but she did not recollect the Day nor the Month." Being asked, "How long Mrs. Parslow and Mr. Sykes staid together at Osborne's Hotel?" she said, "One Night and till past Eleven o'Clock the next Morning." Being asked, "If they slept together?" she said, "They did, she saw them in Bed together."

She was directed to withdraw.

Then Mr. Andrew Edge was called in, and being sworn, produced an Office Copy of a Record of the Court of King's Bench, of a Judgement given in that Court, in Hilary Term, 31st of His present Majesty, against Francis William Sykes, in an Action for criminal Conversation with Elizabeth Parslow, Wife of John Parslow, for £10,000 Damages, besides Costs of Suit; the same was read.

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Mr. Mark Holman was called in and, being sworn, produced the original definitive Sentence of Divorce in the Consistory Court of the Bishop of London, against Elizabeth Parslow for Adultery, committed by her with Francis William Sykes, dated 2d July 1790; the same was read.

He was directed to withdraw.

The Counsel were directed to withdraw.

Then the said Bill was read a Second Time.

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to a Committee of the whole House.

Ordered, That the House be put into a Committee upon the said Bill on Monday next.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum effe usque ad et in diem Lunæ, decimum quartum diem instantis Februarii, horâ undecimâ Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.