House of Lords Journal Volume 62: 2 July 1830

Die Veneris, 2 Julii 1830.

DOMINI tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

PRAYERS.

M'Lellan v. M'Leod.

After hearing Counsel fully in the Cause wherein John M'Lellan is Appellant, and Alexander Norman M'Leod is Respondent:

It is Ordered, That the further Consideration of the said Cause be put off sine Die.

M'Gavin v. Stewart.

Ordered, That the Cause wherein James M'Gavin is Appellant, and James Stewart is Respondent, be further heard by Counsel at the Bar on Tuesday next.

Marquess Conyngham takes the Oaths.

This Day Henry Marquess Conyngham took the Oaths, and also took and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.

The House was adjourned during Pleasure.

The Lord Chancellor not being present, and The Lord Tenterden and The Lord Wynford, appointed Speakers by His late Majesty's Commissions, being absent, the Lords unanimously chose The Earl of Shaftesbury to be Speaker pro tempore:

And his Lordship took his Seat upon the Woolsack accordingly.

Lords take the Oaths.

This Day Montagu Earl of Abingdon and Henry Stephen Earl of Ilchester took the Oaths, and also took and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.

Glasgow & Kilmarnock Road Bill:

Hodie 3^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for amending and continuing an Act for repairing Roads in the County of Renfrew, and for altering the Line of Road between Glasgow and Kilmarnock, in the said County."

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

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Message to H. C. with Amendments to it.

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Cox and Mr. Stephen;

To return the said Bill, and acquaint them, That the Lords have agreed to the same with some Amendments, to which their Lordships desire their Concurrence.

The King's Answer to Address.

The Lord Steward reported, "That the Lords with White Staves had (according to Order) waited on His Majesty with their Lordships Address of Wednesday last; and that His Majesty was pleased to receive the same very graciously, and to return the following Answer:

William R.

I thank you for this loyal and affectionate Address.

It affords Me the greatest Satisfaction to be assured of your ready Determination to adopt, without Delay, such Measures as the Exigencies of the Public Service may, under present Circumstances, appear to require.

"W. R."

Fees, Courts of Common Law, Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir Alexander Grant and others;

With a Bill, intituled, "An Act for regulating the Receipt and future Appropriation of Fees and Emoluments receivable by Officers of the Superior Courts of Common Law;" to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Ordered, That the said Bill be printed.

Beer Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir Alexander Grant and others;

With a Bill, intituled, "An Act to permit the general Sale of Beer and Cyder by Retail in England;" to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Ordered, That the said Bill be printed.

Rye Harbour Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir George Cockburn and others;

With a Bill, intituled, "An Act to amend an Act passed in the Forty-first Year of His late Majesty King George the Third, intituled, "An Act for more effectually improving and maintaining the old Harbour of Rye, in the County of Sussex;" and to appoint new Commissioners; and to enable the Commissioners to raise additional Funds on the Tolls, by way of Mortgage or otherwise;" to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Crommelin Harbour Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir George Cockburn and others;

With a Bill, intituled, "An Act for establishing and maintaining the Harbour of Port Crommelin, in the Bay of Cushendun, in the County of Antrim;" to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

New River Co's Estate Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by General Gascoyne and others;

To return the Bill, intituled, "An Act to authorize the granting of Leases of Lands, Parcel of the Prebend of Stoke Newton or Newnton otherwise Newington, in the County of Middlesex, founded in the Cathedral Church of Saint Paul, in London, to The Governor and Company of the New River brought from Chadwell and Amwell to London; and for empowering the Prebendary of the said Prebend, and the Rector of the Rectory or Parsonage of Stoke Newington respectively, to grant Building Leases; and for other Purposes;" and to acquaint this House, That they have agreed to the same, with One Amendment, to which they desire their Lordships Concurrence.

D. of Bedford's Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir Robert Wilson and others;

To return the Bill, intituled, "An Act for prohibiting Burying and Funeral Service in a Chapel of Ease intended to be built for the Parish of Saint George Bloomsbury, in the County of Middlesex;" and to acquaint this House, That they have agreed to the same, with One Amendment, to which they desire their Lordships Concurrence.

Buckle's Estate Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir Robert Wilson and others;

To return the Bill, intituled, "An Act to enable John Buckle Esquire, or other Committee of the Estate of William Buckle, a Lunatic, for and in the Name and on behalf of the said William Buckle, to consent to the Exercise of a Power of Sale over Estates settled on the said William Buckle for his Life, and which Power is exerciseable with the Consent of the said William Buckle;" and to acquaint this House, That they have agreed to the same, with some Amendments, to which they desire their Lordships Concurrence.

Boydell's Divorce Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir Robert Wilson and others;

To return the Bill, intituled, "An Act to dissolve the Marriage of Samuel Boydell with Jane Boydell Boydell his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes;" and to acquaint this House, That they have agreed to the same, without any Amendment.

New River Co's Estate Estate Bill.

The House proceeded to take into Consideration the Amendment made by the Commons to the Bill, intituled, "An Act to authorize the granting of Leases of Lands, Parcel of the Prebend of Stoke Newton or Newnton otherwise Newington, in the County of Middlesex, founded in the Cathedral Church of Saint Paul, in London, to The Governor and Company of the New River brought from Chadwell and Amwell to London; and for empowering the Prebendary of the said Prebend, and the Rector of the Rectory or Parsonage of Stoke Newington respectively, to grant Building Leases; and for other Purposes:"

And the said Amendment, being read Three Times by the Clerk, was agreed to by the House.

And, A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by the former Messengers, to acquaint them there with.

D. of Bedford's Bill.

The House proceeded to take into Consideration the Amendment made by the Commons to the Bill, intituled, "An Act for prohibiting Burying and Funeral Service in a Chapel of Ease intended to be built for the Parish of Saint George Bloomsbury, in the County of Middlesex:"

And the said Amendment, being read Three Times by the Clerk, was agreed to by the House.

And, A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by the former Messengers, to acquaint them therewith.

Buckle's Estate Bill.

The House proceeded to take into Consideration the Amendments made by the Commons to the Bill, intituled, An Act to enable John Buckle Esquire, or other Committee of the Estate of William Buckle, a Lunatic, for and in the Name and on behalf of the said William Buckle, to consent to the Exercise of a Power of Sale over Estates settled on the said William Buckle for his Life, and which Power is exerciseable with the Consent of the said William Buckle:"

And the said Amendments, being read Three Times by the Clerk, were agreed to by the House.

And, A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by the former Messengers, to acquaint them therewith.

Accounts delivered:

The House being informed, "That Mr. Tomlins, from the Treasury, attended;"

He was called in; and delivered at the Bar, pursuant to Orders of the 9th, 14th and 22d Days of June last,

Hops re-exported:

"An Account of Hops re-exported in each Year, from 1800 to 1829 inclusive, and of the Drawback of Duty paid thereon:"

Woollen Rags imported:

Also, "An Account of Woollen Rags imported into this Country from the Year 1828 to the Year 1830, both inclusive; also an Account of the Duty paid on the above:"

Wool imported & exported:

Also, "An Account of the Quantity of Sheep and Lambs Wool annually imported from the Year 1828 to the Year 1830, both inclusive; distinguishing the Country from which it has been imported, and each Year's Importation; also the Amount of Duties levied on the above, distinguishing the Year:"

Also, "A Return of the Quantity of Sheep and Lambs Wool that has been exported from the Year 1828 to the Year 1830, both inclusive, distinguishing the Country to which it has been exported:"

British Produce exported in American Vessels to China, &c:

And also, "A Statement of the several Articles of British Produce and Manufacture exported in American Vessels to China and to the East Indies, in each of the Years from 1818 to the present Time, together with the Official and Declared Value of each Article."

Mr. Tomlins also delivered at the Bar, pursuant to the Directions of an Act of Parliament,

Expences under Land Tax Redemption Acts.

"A Statement of the Expences incurred under the Acts for the Redemption and Sale of the Land Tax, and for discharging the incidental Expences attending the Execution of those Acts, from the 5th April 1829 (the Period to which the last Account was made up) to the 5th April 1830."

And then he withdrew.

And the Titles thereof being read by the Clerk;

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

Ordered, That the Five first-mentioned Papers be printed.

Personal Estates, (Scotland,) Petition of Ld. Provost, &c. of Perth, respecting.

Upon reading the Petition of The Lord Provost, Magistrates and Town Council of the City and Royal Burgh of Perth, under their Common Seal; praying their Lordships "to investigate the Mode of collecting the Duty on Moveable Estates of Persons deceased, in Scotland; and to substitute, in levying the same, more practical and simple Rules, in place of those which do now exist, and which appear to them so glaringly impolitic:"

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

Beer Bill, Petition from Winchester respecting.

A Petition of The Mayor, Magistrates and Inhabitants of the City of Winchester was presented and read; taking notice of a Bill depending in this House, intituled, "An Act to permit the general Sale of Beer and Cyder by Retail in England;" and praying, "That in passing the same into a Law their Lordships will introduce sufficient Restrictions to prevent the Consumption of it on the Premises where sold, except under proper Authority and Sanction."

It is Ordered, That the said Petition be received as the Petition of "Giles K. Lyford, Mayor of Winchester," who only has signed it.

Bogs Draining (Ireland) Bill, &c. Petition of T. Flanagan in favor of.

Upon reading the Petition of Thomas Flanagan Gentleman, taking notice of a Bill depending in this House, intituled, "An Act for the draining and allotting the Bogs of Ireland;" and praying their Lordships "to pass the same, to improve the Ports, Harbours and Commercial Towns of Ireland, and build and erect Quays and Lighthouses, and also to extend Inland Navigation in that Country, the whole of which can be done by advancing adequate Sums of Money, the Repayment of which can be secured; to repeal the Act 21st Geo. 2nd, and to appropriate the Corporation forfeited Property of Ireland to the Establishment of a proper System of Poor Laws:"

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

The House was adjourned during Pleasure.

The House was resumed by The Lord Chancellor.

Shubenaccadie Canal Bill.

The Order of the Day being read for the Second Reading of the Bill, intituled, "An Act to authorize the Advance of a certain Sum out of the Consolidated Fund, for the Completion of the Shubenaccadie Canal in Nova Scotia;"

It was moved, "That the said Bill be now read a Second Time."

Which being objected to;

It was moved, "to leave out ("now") and insert ("this Day Six Months")

The Question was put, "Whether the Word ("now") shall stand stand Part of the Motion?"

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

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.

Capital Punishment (Scotland) Bill.

The House (according to Order) was adjourned during Pleasure, and put into a Committee upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to amend an Act of the Ninth Year of His present Majesty, to facilitate Criminal Trials in Scotland; and to abridge the Period now required between the pronouncing of Sentence and Execution thereof, in Cases importing a Capital Punishment."

After some Time, the House was resumed:

And The Earl of Shaftesbury reported from the Committee, "That they had gone through the Bill, and made some Amendments thereto, which he was ready to report, when the House will please to receive the same."

Ordered, That the said Report be received on Monday next.

East Retford Election Bill:

The Order of the Day being read for the Lords to be summoned;

It was moved, "That the further Consideration of the Bill, intituled, "An Act to prevent Bribery and Corruption in the Election of Burgesses to serve in Parliament for the Borough of East Retford," be adjourned."

Which being objected to;

The Question was put thereupon?

It was resolved in the Negative.

Then the Order of the Day being read for the further Consideration and Second Reading of the Bill, intituled, "An Act to prevent Bribery and Corruption in the Election of Burgesses to serve in Parliament for the Borough of East Retford;" and for the Lords to be summoned; and for permitting Counsel to examine Witnesses in support of the Bill; and for hearing Counsel on the Petition of the Burgesses of the Borough of East Retford, in the County of Nottingham, whose Names are thereunto subscribed, praying their Lordships, "That the said Bill may not pass into a Law;"

Counsel were accordingly called in.

Then Robert Smithson was again called in, and further examined as follows:

(By a Lord.) "Have you known Mr. Hornby for a long Time?"

"Yes."

"Have you known much of him?"

"Only during the Time he was with me."

"Have you known much of his general Character?"

"Not since he left me."

"Did you know his Character well at that Time?

"Perfectly well."

"Is he a Person whom you would believe when speaking on his Oath?"

"Certainly not, after I have seen the Facts."

"You think he is a Person not entitled to Credit when speaking upon his Oath?"

"Certainly not."

"How long is it since you have known him?"

"Not since the Year 1813."

"What was his Age?"

"When he left me he was Seventeen Years of Age."

Further examined by Mr. Adam.

"I understood you to say that Mr. Hornby had Charge of your Accounts?"

"He had."

"Had you at any Time any Difference with Mr. Hornby in the Course of his Life upon Accounts?"

"Certainly."

"Did you part with Mr. Hornby in consequence of any Jealousy that had been entertained by him against a young Man in your Office of the Name of Richardson?"

"Certainly not."

"That was not one of the Reasons why you parted with him?"

"Certainly not."

"Had you any Cause of Difference whatever with Hornby, arising out of Richardson having been in your Office?"

"Not the least; the Subject was never mentioned to me by him or by Mr. Richardson."

"Did you then part with him in consequence of any Conversations that had arisen from your having dispatched Richardson on Journeys, in the Course of your Business, instead of Hornby?"

"Certainly not."

"I will now put a general Question, which has been put by a Noble Lord already. Would you, from your general Knowledge of Mr. Hornby, and all the Facts you have known of him before and since he was in your Office, believe him on his Oath?"

"Certainly not; from the Evidence he has chosen to give in this House, and from my previous Knowledge of his Conduct, I have no hesitation in declaring that I would not believe him upon his Oath."

"Have you had an Opportunity of reading the Evidence, as printed by Order of this House, which Mr. Hornby has given?"

"I have."

"Have you read with Attention that Part of his Evidence which is applicable to his having been in your Office, and connected with you?"

"Certainly."

"Do you mean to state that it is because that Evidence was inconsistent with the Facts, that you would not believe him on his Oath?"

"That, and his previous Conduct."

Cross-examined by Mr. Law.

"You stated just now, that Mr. Hornby was Seventeen when he quitted your Office?"

"Yes, I should think he was."

"Are you certain of that?"

"I should think he was Sixteen and a Half."

"You undertake to say he was more than Fifteen Years of Age?"

"Yes; he was Fifteen when he was articled to me, and he was articled to me on the 13th of July 1812.

"I know he was turned of Sixteen when he left me."

"How many Years ago is it since he left you?"

"He left me on the 2d or 3d of December 1813; therefore it would be in December Seventeen Years ago."

"Sixteen Years and a Half ago?"

"Yes."

"You have had no Knowledge or Acquaintance with him for the last Sixteen Years and a Half?"

"No, I have not; he has been out of my Sight completely."

"Were you ever present, in the Course of your Life, when he was examined upon his Oath?"

"No; I think I was out of Court when he was examined in the Will Cause."

"Am I to understand you, that you were never present when he was examined on his Oath in your Life?"

"I think I may say that that was so."

"Have you the slightest Doubt upon that Subject?"

"Not the least."

"Do you recollect whether your Clerk, Mr. Richardson, was, in point of fact, the Person you employed on Journeys?"

"I do not know that I should employ him more than the other."

"I ask you as to the Fact."

"It is impossible that I can say, except that I had not Confidence in Hornby, and therefore I did not send him out on Journeys."

"Did you, or not, in point of fact, employ Richardson on Journeys?"

"Yes, certainly; and Hornby too."

"You will excuse my asking you the Question, but as you adverted to his Evidence, had you, at the Time Mr. Hornby was with you, an Acquaintance with a Lady by whom you had several Children?"

"No, I had not several Children?"

"How many?"

"Two; he has said there were a large Family."

"That is one of the Facts; you differ with Mr.Hornby in the Number of the Children you had by this Lady?"

"I think it is an unimportant Thing, and that it is not necessary it should be referred to."

"Was the Lady in the habit of coming to your Office?"

"Not to my Knowledge."

"Were you in the habit of being there, or absent from it?"

"I was as attentive as my Clerks."

"Is it not necessary, where a Person has been an Articled Clerk in the Country and comes to be admitted, that he should have a Certificate from the Person with whom he has served?"

"Yes, certainly."

"Did you not, at a Time not long ago, give him a Certificate of his having served with you?"

"No; he left me to go to Mr. Garland; it was not necessary I should give him a Certificate."

"Do you mean to say you did not give a Certificate, upon your Oath, to which your Clerk was an attesting Witness?"

"Not that I know of; I am not aware of having given it. I may have signed it. I certainly never wished to do the young Man any Harm, and I was very reluctant to come forward when they wanted me as a Witness in the Will Cause, for I knew he was a young Man, and I thought he might reform; but I can only certify for so long as he served with me. If I have signed a Certificate, it is not in my Recollection at this Moment."

Mr. Adam submitted, "That the Certificate must be produced, and that parol Evidence of it could not be received."

(The Witness in continuation.) "I believe, with regard to the Service, that would be stated in the Assignment, which of course is attested with my Hand and Seal; but I gave no Certificate, previous to his Admission, to my Knowledge."

"When was it you say you discovered any Inaccuracy in the Accounts of Mr. Hornby?"

"At several Periods during his Clerkship; between July 1812 and December 1813."

"Can you fix any Period?"

"The last was in December 1813, when I discharged him."

"Had you any Communication with his Father upon the Subject?"

"Yes; both at that Period and previous to it, on his own Defalcation; it was at his Father's particular Request I continued the Service."

"Do you mean to represent that you had a Communication with Hornby himself upon the Subject?"

"To be sure I do; with the Father."

"Upon your Oath, had you a Communication with Hornby upon the Subject?"

"With John Hornby, certainly, verbally; I had several, no doubt."

"Do you mean to say, you have such a Recollection as to be able to state the Fact?"

"Yes; I know his borrowing Money in my Name was the very Occasion of his being discharged."

"I ask you what you said to Hornby as the Occasion; upon your Oath, did you ever state to Hornby, the Person who has been called here as a Witness, that that was the Reason for parting with him?"

"No, I do not think that I should state any thing to John Hornby; I should state it to his Father."

"Am I to understand that, in point of fact, you did not state to him that that was the Reason for your parting with him?"

"No doubt I must have remonstrated with him for his Conduct."

"Did you state that as your Reason for parting with him?"

"Yes, no doubt; I must have done so."

"You mean to state that that was the Fact?"

"Yes, I do."

"I ask you whether, at the Time Hornby ceased to continue with you, he was not suffering from Illness, and not in attendance at the Office?"

"He pretended to be ill; he absented himself soon after I discovered he had been borrowing Money."

"Do you mean to swear that he was not ill?"

"It is totally impossible for me to say that; I know it was the 2d or 3d of December he absented himself; probably he was ill, or he might not be."

"During the Period he absented himself from your Office, alleging that he was ill, did you ever state that your Reason for parting with him was with reference to his Accounts?"

"It was not necessary for me to state this; but he has been remonstrated with by me several Times on the Subject of Money Matters. I have no doubt I have done it."

"Do you mean to state, that while he was in your Service, and before he was ill, you remonstrated with him upon the Subject of your Accounts?"

"Upon my Word, I cannot say that he was ill."

"What did you mean by saying to their Lordships that he pretended to be ill, if you have no Recollection of his being absent from alleged Illness?"

"He might have been ill, I know he was absent after

"I discovered that he had been acting incorrectly in respect of the Accounts."

"You having stated as an affirmative Fact that he pretended to be ill, have you any Recollection that he was ill or not?"

"No, I certainly have not. I say that if he was absent from Illness, he probably pretended to be ill. I cannot recollect, at this Distance of Time, whether he was ill or not."

"You, for Seventeen Years, have not had the slightest Knowledge of the Person whom you say To-day you would not believe on his Oath?"

"No; only the Information I had from his Master, Mr. Garland. I have had no Knowledge of him since that; he has been out of my Sight."

"You are representing to their Lordships that you would not believe him on his Oath, though you have not known him since he was Sixteen Years and a Half old?"

"I have stated my Reason."

"And you never heard him examined in the whole Course of his Life?"

"No; but from the Evidence I have read, which he has given before this House, and his previous Conduct to me, I would not believe him on his Oath."

"Were you irritated when you read his Account of those Transactions with this Lady?"

"Not in the least."

"Have you not so expressed yourself that you were displeased with his having mentioned this about the Lady?"

"Not the least."

"Have you not expressed yourself angrily on his having stated the Fact of your having had that Acquaintance?"

"Perhaps I might."

"Did you?"

"I will not say whether I did or did not."

"Did you or not within this Week?"

"No, I do not think I did; I might accidentally say it was perfectly irrelevant to the Subject of this Enquiry, and that it was improperly mentioned, but not with Anger."

"You did not complain of it?"

"I may, or may not."

"Have you?"

"I cannot say indeed whether I have or not; I think it is a Matter of so little Importance that it is not necessary I should give an Answer to it."

"Upon your Oath, will you state to their Lordships that you ever saw Mr. Hornby after the Time that you made the Discovery which you state to be your Reason for parting with him?"

"After the 2d or 3d of December he never attended my Office, for I told his Father he should never come again."

"Did you arrange that he should never come again on that 2d or 3d of December?"

"I did arrange with his Father."

"Did you with him?"

"No; I never spoke to Mr. Hornby upon the Subject; I had spoken to him in the intermediate Time of his borrowing Money in my Name and his having received Money and not accounting for it, but I believe I never have spoken to him after I had discovered that he had borrowed this Money; it was to his Father I spoke."

"It was to the Father, and not to him?"

"I think it was."

"Was it not to his Father, and not to him, you assigned the Reason for parting with him?"

"Yes; because I would not permit him to come into the Office again."

Re-examined by Mr. Adam.

"Did you remonstrate with Mr. Hornby after you discovered he had been borrowing Money in your Name.?"

"No, not after that; but after he had been receiving Money for me, and not accounting for it."

"Did you remonstrate with him upon the Subject of the Accounts?"

"No doubt of it."

"After you had remonstrated with him on the Subject of the Accounts, you discovered that he had been borrowing Money in your Name?"

"Yes; that was a separate Transaction."

"That separate Transaction induced you to dismiss him?"

"Yes."

"You dismissed him in a Conversation with his Father, and not by conversing with himself?"

"I sent for his Father; and in that Interview I told him I could not keep his Son any longer."

"I understood you to say you did not dismiss Hornby in the Course of any Conversation you had with himself?"

"No, certainly not."

"But in a Conversation you had with his Father?"

"Yes; I think I had not an Opportunity of seeing John Hornby."

"And you have not seen him to converse with him since December 1813?"

"Certainly not."

"You were at York, subponaed as a Witness on the Trial?"

"I was."

"Were you not in Court during Hornby's Examination."

"No, I was not; I was there during his Father's Examination."

"Though you have not seen him since December 1813, having read the Account he has given about the

"Cause for his parting with you, and knowing the Facts, would you believe him upon his Oath?"

"Certainly I would not."

"You felt it to be unnecessary to have said any thing about this Lady?"

"Yes, I did."

"How long have you been a Married Man?"

"Ever since the 6th of April 1813; that was before he left me."

"Is it true that this Lady did come to your Office in an Evening, constantly?"

"Not to my Knowledge."

"If she did, she come introducing herself against your Will, and without your Knowledge, when you were not there?"

"Most undoubtedly."

"Whether she did come you do not know?"

"No; certainly I had no Knowledge of that Circumstance."

"Richardson was employed going Journeys, and so was Hornby?"

"Yes."

"That had nothing to do with the Causes of your parting with him?"

"No, certainly not."

"You have referred to what you heard from Mr. Garland."

Mr. Law objected to the Statement of any Information derived from Mr. Garland.

Mr. Adam was heard in support of the Evidence.

Mr. Law was heard in reply.

The Counsel were informed, "That this did not appear to be Evidence."

The Witness was directed to withdraw.

Then Thomas Walker was called in; and having been sworn, was examined as follows:

(Mr. Alderson.) "Are you a Solicitor at York?"

"I am."

"How long have you been a Solicitor at York?"

"Fifteen Years."

"Do you know a Person of the Name of John Hornby?"

"I do."

"Were you the Solicitor in the Cause of Flint's Will?"

"I was."

"Was that Cause tried Twice?"

"It was."

"By a Special or a Common Jury of the County of York?"

"A Special Jury both Times."

"Before Mr. Justice Bayley both Times, was it not?"

"It was."

"Do you remember Mr. John Hornby being examined in support of that Will?"

"I do."

"He was the Person who had made it, was he not?"

"He was."

"Do you recollect seeing the Will itself?"

"Yes; I saw it in Court."

"Do you remember whether it was written fair, and without any Erasure?"

"To the best of my Recollection there appeared none."

"Was there any Question made at that Trial, and any Question put to Mr. Hornby, whether, that Will containing no Erasure, but being all fairly written, it had been prepared from written Instructions?"

"Yes, there was."

"Was that a Point mainly relied upon?"

"One of the Points."

Mr. Law submitted, "Whether this was a proper Course of Examination."

"The Evidence of John Hornby on the Matter in question was read.

(Mr. Alderson.) "I have read to you the Examination of this Person before their Lordships; have you had an Opportunity of refreshing your Recollection by the Notes of Counsel?"

Mr. Law objected to the Question.

Mr. Alderson was heard in support of the Question, and referred to a Decision of Mr. Justice Bayley, that a Reference to Notes shortly after the Trial took place might be received.

The Counsel was informed, "That he might ascertain the Time of the Reference to the Notes."

(Mr. Alderson.) "Did you refresh your Memory by reading the Notes of the Counsel soon after the Trial?"

"I did."

"Have you refreshed your Memory since with them?"

"I have."

"Upon your Oath; having refreshed your Memory by the Notes of Counsel on the Back of the Brief, did Mr. Hornby-"

Mr. Law objected to the Question.

The Counsel were informed, "That the Witness might answer the Question if he spoke from his own Recollection, refreshed by Reference to the Notes taken in his Presence immediately after the Trial."

(By a Lord.) "Have you a Recollection of the Case itself?"

"Most distinctly."

(Mr. Alderson.) Were you yourself present at the "Examination?"

"I was."

(By a Lord.) "Were you engaged in the Cause?"

"Yes; I was Solicitor in the Cause."

"Was your Attention particularly engaged by the Evidence of Mr. Hornby?"

"It was."

"You gave Instructions for the Cross-examination of Mr. Hornby?"

"I did."

"You were therefore quite alive to the Evidence he gave?"

"Yes."

(Mr. Alderson) "Had you subponaed Mr. Smithson?"

"I had."

"Had you also subponaed Mr. Garland, he then being alive?"

"I had."

"Was Mr. Hornby the principal Witness to the Will?"

"He was the principal Witness, because he had prepared the Will."

"Who were the other Two; do you recollect their Names?"

(Mr. Law.) "Have you got the Will?"

"No; it is on Record."

(Mr. Alderson.) "Did you know Gray and Harris?"

"I did not know them personally."

"Did you know Two Persons of those Names?"

"I did."

"Were they also examined?"

"One of them, Harris was; I will not speak to the other."

"Did you attend minutely to Mr. Hornby's Examination?"

"I did."

"Do you remember whether it was one of the Points in the Cause that the Will had been prepared with written Instructions?"

"It certainly was."

"Did Mr. Hornby swear distinctly or not, that he had no Instructions for that Will?"

"Upon his Cross-examination he distinctly swore that he took no written Instructions whatever."

"Do you remember Observations being made on the extraordinary Nature of a Will of that sort, drawn without written Instructions?"

"There was an Observation made on that Subject by his Lordship in summing up."

"Who was the Judge?"

"Mr. Justice Bayley."

"Do you recollect Mr. Justice Bayley remarking the extraordinary Circumstance of the Will without Erasure being drawn without written Instructions?"

"He certainly did."

"Do you remember Mr. Hornby's Account of himself then?"

"Yes; I recollect it very well."

"What Account did he give of his leaving his Brother at Scarborough?"

"He had left Mr. Garland."

"How came he to leave his Brother?"

Mr. Law objected to the Question."

The Counsel were informed, "That it did not appear to their Lordships necessary to go into this Account, after the Cross-examination of Mr. Hornby."

Cross-examined by Mr. Law.

"You were yourself the Solicitor adverse to the Parties supporting the Will?"

"I was."

"Have you such a Recollection of the Will to which Mr.Hornby spoke, as to state whether he derived One Farthing Benefit under that Will, or any body connected with him?"

"Not to my Knowledge."

"Did it come out, as we have heard so much of his Examination, that he was interested to the Extent of One Farthing in the Event of the Cause?"

"I believe not."

"You have been asked, whether he did not say that he had taken no written Instructions; did he not swear that the Will itself was not made from written Instructions?"

"He said that he never took any written Instructions."

"Will you undertake to say he did not state that the Will itself was not taken from written Instructions?"

"From my own Memory, refreshing it from the Counsel's Notes, I am prepared to say, he said that he never had written Instructions."

"Did he not state distinctly that the Will was not prepared from written Instructions?"

"He swore that he never took any written Instructions."

"Mine is a different Question; did he not state that the Will itself was not prepared from written Instructions?"

"No."

"Was that asked?"

"I believe it was."

"Did he not say that the Will was not drawn up from written Instructions, the Will produced?"

"I will just explain if you please; he said he did not prepare the Will from any written Instructions; he said, I took it from his own Dictation," that was Flint's;

"I took Pen, Ink and Paper, and made the Will from his own Dictation."

"Did he ever state that, taking it from the Dictation of Flint, he had made no Memorandum of what Flint had said?"

"No."

"Do you mean that that was asked?"

"I do not recollect whether that Question was asked."

"You do not recollect whether the Question was put to him, whether he took down by Memorandum or otherwise what Flint said?"

"He said it was merely Matter of Conversation, the first Onset he had at Scarborough."

"Did he say that Flint had a Conversation with him?"

"Yes, at Scarborough."

"Did he say whether he took down Minutes of that Conversation?"

"No; that he took no Minutes, none whatever."

"Do you mean to say that he took no Minutes of the Conversation?"

"His Answer was, it was a mere Matter of Conversation."

"Do you mean to represent that he stated, he took no Minutes of the Conversation?"

"He did not say one way or another; that it was mere Matter of Conversation."

Re-examined by Mr. Alderson.

"Did he say he had no written Instructions whatever?"

"He certainly swore he prepared the Will from no written Instructions whatever; that he never took any."

"Do you recollect the Will being before the Court?"

"Yes."

"Did he state, that he prepared that Will from the verbal Instructions of Flint at the Time?"

"Yes; he swore that most distinctly."

"Did he state that he had written that Will from the Dictation of Mr. Flint?"

"Yes, he did."

"You have been asked whether it came out, that Mr. Hornby had any Interest in the Will; did any thing come out about his being at his Father's House with the Devisor?"

"It did in Evidence."

"Who brought Flint to Mr. Hornby's Father's House, according to the Statement at the Trial?"

"It certainly came out in Evidence."

The Witness was directed to withdraw.

"Mr. Adam stated, "That after the Intimation which had been given, he did not mean to call further Evidence in respect of the Character of Mr. Hornby."

Mr. Law stated, "That he should probably have to apply to their Lordships to allow Evidence to be received in support of the Testimony and Character of Mr.Hornby."

Then William Richardson was called in; and having been sworn, was examined as follows:

(Mr. Adam.) "You are an Attorney practising at York?"

"I am."

"How long have you been in Business for yourself?"

"About Seven Years and a Half."

"Are you in a regular Line of Practice at York?"

"Pretty fair Practice."

"Did you serve your Time with Mr. Smithson?"

"I did."

"How many Years were you in Mr. Smithson's Office?"

"About Nine; between Eight and Nine."

"While you were in Mr. Smithson's Office, was a Person of the Name of Hornby a Clerk there?"

"He was."

"How many Years was he in the Office while you were in it?"

"About a Year and a Half."

"Which came there first?"

"Hornby."

"Do you remember Hornby quitting Mr. Smithson's Office?"

"I do."

"Do you know whether, previous to that, there had been any Differences between Mr.Smithson and Hornby respecting the Accounts that Hornby kept for Smithson?"

"Yes, there was some Difference."

"Difference respecting the Amount of the Accounts?"

"Money Transactions; Hornby had the Charge of some Accounts."

"Some of the Office Accounts?"

"Yes."

"Do you recollect whether any Charge was brought against Hornby of Misapplication?"

"I recollect his not accounting for a Sum of Money which it appeared he had received."

"Do you know, of your own Knowledge, the Causes why Smithson dismissed Hornby?"

"Mr. Law objected to the Question, unless the Reason was assigned to Hornby.

(Mr. Adam.) "Did you ever hear Smithson and Hornby have any Conversation respecting those Money Matters?"

"Yes."

"Do you know, from what passed between Smithson and Hornby, what was the Occasion of Smithson parting with Hornby?"

"The precise Cause I cannot state."

"Do you know that, previous to Hornby quitting the Office, there had been those Differences about Money?"

"Yes."

"Do you know whether there had been any Jealousy entertained of you, and expressed to Mr. Smithson?"

"I am not aware that there could have been any."

"Did you at any Time, while Hornby continued in the Office, take charge of the Accounts?"

"I did."

"How did that happen?"

"Some Misunderstanding. Hornby not having accounted for the Money he had received, and Mr. Smithson being dissatisfied with the Manner in which the Accounts were kept, they were given to me."

"Was it shortly after that that Smithson dismissed Hornby?"

"I cannot state how shortly afterwards; a few Months afterwards; I really cannot say how long."

"Can you state to their Lordships whether it was in respect of any Unpleasantness about you that Smithson and Hornby separated?"

"It could not be so, certainly."

"Was there any Unpleasantness existing upon that Subject?"

"I am not aware that there was any Cause for any."

"Used you to go Journeys on account of Mr. Smithson?"

"I believe I oftener went from Home than Hornby did."

"Do you remember, at any Time after that Change of the Accounts, any Money being missed?"

"I recollect on one Occasion missing some Money."

"Where did you miss it from?"

"From my Desk."

"How much was it?"

"It was a small Sum; a Pound, I think."

"(By a Lord.) "Was that Money belonging to yourself, or to Smithson?"

"It was Money I had received on account of Mr. Smithson."

The Counsel were informed, "That this Examination appeared interminable, if Witnesses were to be called on both Sides to every Fact of this Nature; that if the Counsel in support of the Bill proposed to call Witnesses, not only to the Testimony but to the general Character of Mr. Hornby, this might possibly be relevant."

Mr. Law prayed to reserve to himself the Liberty of calling Evidence to both Points."

Mr. Adam submitted, "That if there was a probability of Evidence being adduced to the general Character of Mr. Hornby, this was relevant."

The Counsel were informed, "That it appeared to their Lordships the Examination in respect to Mr. Hornby, though out of the usual Course of Examination, might be permitted in the present Case, but that this appeared to be carried very far beyond the usual Course."

"How long were you acquainted with Hornby altogether?"

"I think I did not know him before I went to Mr. Smithson's; or perhaps I might know him a short Time before I went there, in consequence of his being there."

"Did you know him afterwards, when he resided in York?"

"I think after I left Smithson I had no Acquaintance with him; I do not know that I spoke to him afterwards."

"Were you examined on the Trial respecting Flint's Will?"

"No, I was not."

"Have you read that Part of Mr. Hornby's Evidence which has reference to yourself as a Clerk in Mr. Smithson's Office?"

"I have."

"Bearing in your Recollection the Facts, as they really took place, and the Evidence as stated by Mr. Hornby, would you believe Mr. Hornby upon his Oath?"

"After having read that Evidence I certainly would not; I can speak from nothing further."

Cross-examined by Mr. Law.

"Did you ever hear him examined upon Oath in the Course of your Life?"

"Yes, I think I did: Yes, I did during the Trial referred to."

"Was that to any Fact within your own Knowledge?"

"No."

"Had you any Communication with Mr. Hornby from the Day of his quitting Mr. Smithson's?"

"No."

"Then may I take it that for Seventeen Years you have had no Acquaintance with Mr. Hornby?"

"No, I have had no Acquaintance with Hornby since he left Mr. Smithson."

"As my Learned Friend has asked you with respect to this Evidence of Mr. Hornby's, which you have been invited to peruse, will you point out what Part of it it is that induces you to say you would not believe him on his Oath?"

"Taking it generally."

"We will take it particularly?"

"Particularly with regard to his having been ruined, as he states, at Mr. Smithson's Office."

"Will you point out where he states that he was ruined at Mr. Smithson's Office?"

"You will probably not allow me to refer you to the Evidence."

"Yes, here is the whole Book; you may take it, and refer to it."

The Evidence was handed to the Witness.

"With regard to his stating that the Woman was never out of the Office an Hour in the Evening; and with regard to his having no Charge of the Accounts."

"Was she in the habit of coming there?"

"Occasionally she was; she did occasionally come to see Mr. Smithson; and Mr. Smithson was always angry when she did come there, very angry whenever she came to the Office."

(By a Lord.) "You say Mr. Hornby stated in his Evidence, that this Woman was never more than an Hour at a Time away from the Office?"

"Hornby says, "My Father had a great Objection to my continuing, because Mr. Smithson had a kept Mistress, and she was never out of the Office for an Hour in the Evening."

(By a Lord.) "Is that true?"

"Certainly not."

(Mr. Law.) "Had he a kept Mistress?"

"I believe he had."

"Have you any Doubt of that?"

"I can have no Doubt of it."

"Had he Children by that Mistress?"

"I believe he had."

"Was she in the habit of coming to the Office to him?"

"I believe she did."

"Both before and after he married?"

"I will not swear she came after he was married; she might have come."

"Upon your Oath, did she not frequently come?"

"No, I think not."

"What do you call frequently?"

"If she came once a Month, it would be often, after he was married."

"How often did she come before he was married?"

"Probably once a Fortnight."

"Will you swear she did not come once a Week?"

"I do not think she did once a Week."

"Will you swear that she did not?"

"I believe that she did not."

"Will you swear she did not come once a Week?"

"My Memory has been recently called to it; it had passed out of my Mind Sixteen or Seventeen Years, and therefore I cannot speak positively to this."

Re-examined by Mr. Adam.

"You have stated that this Woman came to the Office once a Fortnight; or once a Month; did she come, as far as you could form an Opinion, with the Concurrence of Mr. Smithson, or against his Will?"

"Against his Will."

"Did she come in an offensive Manner, or to see Mr. Smithson on familiar Terms at his Office?"

"Certainly not on familiar Terms; my Impression was, that she sometimes came for some Allowance; certainly she came against his Will."

"What other Parts of his Evidence are there that are so incorrect as to induce you to say you would not believe him upon his Oath?"

"I think he stated that he was not with any body but Smithson and his Brother; I cannot think that such an important Circumstance as that of his being with Mr. Garland would pass out of his Memory."

"You have stated, in the early Part of your Examination, that you were not aware of any Jealousy entertained respecting you?"

"No, I am not aware there was any Cause for Jealousy."

(By a Lord.) "Are you aware that there was any Jealousy?"

"No, I believe not."

(Mr. Adam.) "Could there be such a Jealousy as to lead to Mr. Hornby quitting Mr. Smithson without your Knowledge?"

"Certainly not; and as to the Reference he makes to my Mother, that she was a Widow, what he means by that I cannot say."

"That is not the Reason, probably, why you would disbelieve him on his Oath?"

"No; I should say certainly that I should not believe him."

The Witness was directed to withdraw.

Then William Golland was called in; and having been sworn, was examined as follows:

(Mr. Alderson.) "Are you a Freeman of East Retford?"

"I am."

"What are you by Trade?"

"A Draper."

"Where do you live?"

"At Sheffield."

"When were you admitted a Freeman?"

"In 1821."

"Did you ever, in the whole Course of your Life, receive any Money at East Retford?"

"No, never."

"Had you any Promise?"

"No."

"Or any Packet or Packets?"

"No."

"Or any body for you?"

"No."

"No Wife, nor Father, nor Son, or any thing of the kind, has received Money, to your Knowledge, for you?"

"I have neither Father nor Son."

"Do you remember Mr. Ogilvy?"

"I do."

"Do you remember his coming to East Retford?"

"Yes."

"What Time was it before the last Election?"

"Perhaps it might be Six Months before the last Election."

"The last Election was about Four Years ago?"

"Yes."

"Do you remember collecting a Number of Burgesses to meet him?"

"I do."

"At what Public House did you meet?"

"At the Royal Oak in Moorgate."

"Did you do this in consequence of any Communication with Mr. Hornby?"

"Yes; saying that he was coming."

"Were Mr. Ogilvy and Mr. Hornby in some way connected at Retford?"

"Yes; before he came they were."

"Was Mr. Hornby the Person who proposed Mr. Ogilvy?"

"He was."

"You say you met at the Royal Oak?"

"Yes."

"Was Mr. Hornby present at this Meeting?"

"He was."

"Did you go, in consequence of any Communication made by Mr. Hornby at the White Hart, to see Mr. Ogilvy?"

"I did; hearing from him that Mr. Ogilvy was coming."

"When you got to the White Hart, did you find Mr. Ogilvy there?"

"Yes."

"Did you see Joshua Cottam there?"

"No; I think not Joshua Cottam."

"Do you remember his coming in during that Time?"

"I think he did."

"Was Meekly there?"

"I think not."

"Who were there?"

"There were a great Number there, but I cannot state their Names."

"Did Mr. Ogilvy make a Speech to the Persons there?"

"He did."

"What was the Subject of his Speech?"

"That he should be a Gentleman to our Principles."

"Did he state what were your Principles?"

"To vote against Catholic Emancipation."

"Did you hear that?"

"I think I was the Third Person from him."

"Did you remain there the whole Evening?"

"Perhaps at Intervals I might be out of the Room, but I was there the whole Evening."

"During the Time you were there, was there any Allusion to Money by Mr. Ogilvy to the Voters, or by any Voter to Mr. Ogilvy?"

"Not any thing."

"Were you there all the Time?"

"I was; I might go out from Five to Ten Minutes."

"How long were you there?"

"From Half past Eight to Twelve o'Clock at Night."

"You went out Five or Ten Minutes?"

"I might do so."

"Did you do so?"

"Yes, I did."

"The next Day, did you see Mr. Ogilvy again?"

"Yes, I did."

"Was it arranged at that Time that you should go with Mr. Ogilvy to canvass?"

"Yes; the next Morning; on the Monday Morning."

"The first Speech was on the Sunday Night, was it?"

"On the Saturday Night."

"On the Monday Morning you were to go out canvassing?"

"Yes."

"Did you accompany Mr. Ogilvy through the Town?"

"I did."

"Did you see Mr. Joshua Cottam during Part of the Time?"

"I did."

"Was he one on Monday?"

"He went Part of the Way."

"Had you a Book in which you minuted the Promises?"

"I had; but Mr. Hornby had it again."

"That was the Book in which you minuted the Promises?"

"Yes."

"You did not hear any Allusion made to Money during the whole of that Time?"

"Not by one single Person."

"Were there any Winks, or any thing of that sort?"

"No."

"Did this pass in your Presence the Night before, that any Hint was given to Mr. Ogilvy that he should frequently be asked as he passed through the Town, whether he had come to a proper Understanding with the Gentlemen who accompanied him?"

"No such Thing was said."

"Do you remember Mr. Ogilvy being told that that was the Method by which they knew whether to promise the Votes or not, because the Parties who accompanied him by some Motion or other signifies to them?"

"No."

"Was there any Mention of any Motion on the Part of the Persons who canvassed with him being made to the Freemen?"

"There was not."

"Is there any such Practice, to your Knowledge, at Retford?"

"I have no Knowledge of any thing of the sort."

"Did that take place while you were canvassing with Mr. Ogilvy?"

"No, it did not."

"Did you receive any Money from Mr. Ogilvy for the Purpose of discharging the Bill at the Inn?"

"I did."

"What was the Sum?"

"I cannot exactly recollect the Amount."

"Did you with that Money discharge the Bill?"

"I had Two Bills."

"Had you any Balance?"

"Four Pounds some odd Shillings."

"To whom did you give that?"

"To Mr. Hornby for Mr. Ogilvy."

"You were employed to do these Things for Mr. Ogilvy?"

"I was."

"Were you very much with Mr. Ogilvy during the Time he was at Retford?"

"A great deal."

"Were you with him as much as any body?"

"More than any one."

"Did he know you?"

"Not 'till I was introduced to him."

"How many Days did you go with him?"

"Three Days."

"Did he know there was such a Person as William Golland?"

"He did then."

"You would be surprised, then, that he did not mention your Name in his Evidence, should you not?"

"Certainly, I have been."

"Did he know you as well as he did Mr. Cottam?"

"He sent for me to take a Dinner with him alone, and take Tea with him alone."

"How many Times did you dine with him?"

"I dined with him, and teaed with him once."

"You conversed with him confidentially about the Borough?"

"Yes."

"In any Part of those Conversations, did you ever tell Mr. Ogilvy that it was necessary he should give Money to the Voters, in order to get their Votes?"

"No, never."

"Had you any Conversation with him upon the Subject?"

"No, never."

"Did he ever tell you of any body that had spoken to him upon the Subject?"

"No, never."

"Did you canvass with him the second Day, the Tuesday?"

"Yes."

"How long were you with him the second Day, canvassing?"

"Perhaps Two or Three Hours."

"Do you say the same respecting the second Day as the Monday, that there was no Hint, or any thing of the kind?"

"Not any thing at all."

"So far as you know, did Mr. Ogilvy canvass the Burgesses of East Retford on the Catholic Question, and on the Catholic Question alone?"

"He did."

"Did he get Promises there?"

"He got Promises, if we had Sir Henry Wright Wilson safe that we would then promise him."

"Sir Henry Wright Wilson was the favourite Man of that Party?"

"He was."

"Do you remember, on any former Election at Retford, that the Publicans Bills had been left unpaid?"

"They had been."

"By whom?"

"By Maddox."

"Do you remember any thing being said upon the Subject of a Security for the Publicans Bills?"

"Yes."

"To Mr. Ogilvy?"

"Yes."

"What Sum was mentioned as to that?"

"I cannot say to prove it; but from a Thousand to Fifteen hundred Pounds."

"What was mentioned upon the Subject?"

"It was mentioned that we had had a Person before, who had gone away and left the Town in great Debt; and we wished to have a Person, if he was to carry on the Election, who would guarantee that the Publicans should be paid."

"Was Maddox's Debt mentioned?"

"Yes, certainly; they are not paid to this present Day."

"Do you know when Mr. Ogilvy left Retford?"

"I believe it was on the Thursday; I cannot positively say."

"You say you lived a great deal with him?"

"Yes."

"Did you know of his going away?"

"No."

"Was it a Surprise to you the next Day that he was gone?"

"No; my Impression was, that he would do the same as Maddox had done before; I left him before he left Retford."

"And he did go away?"

"He did go away."

"Was there any other Mention of Money made to Mr. Ogilvy than that you have now described?"

"I never heard of any."

Cross-examined by Mr. Law.

"You were not a Burgess, you say, in the Year 1820?"

"I believe I was, but not sworn in at that Time; in 1821 I was a Burgess sworn in."

"Do you know a Person of the Name of George Padley?"

"Yes, I do."

"What is he?"

"A Grocer."

"Is he a Burgess?"

"No."

"Where does he live?"

"In the Market Place."

"At Retford?"

"Yes."

"I ask you, upon your Oath, have you never said to him, that you were afraid Sir Henry would not pay, and you should lose your Election; did you not say that to him, or in his Presence?"

"Upon my Oath, I deny that."

"Did you ever live with Persons of the Name of Swan and Edgar?"

"I did."

"Was that in London?"

"Yes."

"Where?"

"In Piccadilly."

"When did you leave them?"

"Perhaps Five Years ago."

"How came you to leave them?"

"On no particular Occasion, as I know of."

"Do you mean to say you did not leave them in Disgrace?"

"Not to my Knowledge."

"No Complaint of any sort was made?"

"No Complaint was made to me."

"Did you leave suddenly at all?"

"No."

"How long Notice did you give them?"

"A Month's Notice."

"Why did you leave them?"

"Because I was not comfortable."

"Were you jealous of any body?"

"No."

"What were you uncomfortable about?"

"I was not very well at the Time."

"It was your Health?"

"Yes."

"Was that the sole Reason?"

"It was the sole Reason."

"You gave them a Month's Notice, being out of Health?"

"I had a View, as others have, to look after other Situations that might be more advantageous."

"Did you leave on account of your Health?"

"Not, perhaps, exactly for that; but I was not well, and therefore I was not comfortable there."

"Did you leave on account of your Health; was that the Reason?"

"Yes, I did."

"Was that the Reason?"

"Yes, that was my Reason."

"Did you assign that Reason?"

"I assigned no Reasons; I was asked no Questions."

"Had you been confined to your Room?"

"Yes, I had."

"And you left on that Account?"

"Not exactly; before I left them I was confined to my Room; not perhaps within a Month before I left."

"That was the Reason of your leaving, and the only one?"

"Yes."

"Did you reside afterwards with a Mr. Spiers, a Draper, at York?"

"Yes."

"What was the Reason of your leaving him?"

"That I cannot exactly say."

"Was it an Illness of the same Description?"

"No."

"An Illness of a different Description?"

"No."

"What was the Reason?"

"Because I had a Communication from him; he gave me Notice that he wished me to leave."

"Do you know the Reason of the Notice?"

"Yes, I do."

"What was it?"

"Because I was keeping a Female at the lower Counter, which is next to the Window looking into Ouse Gate, and he wished me to take her forward, and I did not do it, and was perhaps saucy, and he gave me Warning."

"You were impertinent?"

"Not perhaps for that, but I left upon that Account."

"That we may not be at all mistaken about what I said about George Padley, I am not asking what you said in addressing yourself to George Padley, but whether you have not said to him, or in his Presence, that you were afraid Sir Henry would not pay, and you should lose your Election?"

"Never; for I did not believe that he would pay."

"I do not ask your Reason, but will you swear that did not pass?"

"Yes, I will."

"Were you ever Bail for a Person of the Name of John Walker?"

"No."

"Did you ever offer yourself as Bail?"

"No, I did not."

"Were you ever Security for him?"

"No."

"Did you ever offer yourself as Security?"

"No."

"Have you ever been a Householder?"

"I have a House now I rent, which I pay the Rent of for my Mother."

"Is it your Mother's House, or yours?"

"It is my House, because I pay the Rent."

"Have you ever been Bail or Security for any body?"

"No, I have not."

"And not for John Walker in particular?"

"No, I have not."

"With regard to the White Hart, how many Burgesses were with you at the Time?"

"I cannot say; a great many."

"Do you think there were as many as Seventy or Eighty?"

"Not so many as Seventy; perhaps Forty or Fifty."

"At a Time?"

"Yes."

"Were they in different Rooms?"

"The first Night there were some above and some below."

"There were about Fifty Persons?"

"Yes."

"On the first Night of Ogilvy's Arrival, were you in the same Room with Mr. Ogilvy?"

"Yes, I was."

"All the Time?"

"No; I dare say I was out for a short Time."

"Were you absent Half an Hour?"

"Not so long as that."

"How long?"

"Perhaps a Quarter of an Hour."

"More than once?"

"Yes; at different Times."

"You did not hear the Conversation that passed while you were absent?"

"No, certainly not."

"Were all the People Burgesses who were there?"

"No; there were other Persons."

"Were there any who were not Burgesses who were there?"

"I could not know them; there were some Burgesses below, and some who were not Burgesses."

"Where was the Entertainment given?"

"Up in the front corner Room, up Stairs."

"Were there any but Burgesses up Stairs?"

"I believe not; I saw none to my Knowledge but Burgesses."

"Was there a Constable at the Door?"

"No, not that I know of; I never saw one."

"Was there a Person put to prevent any Persons coming in who were not Burgesses?"

"No, I believe not; they passed in and out as they pleased."

Re-examined by Mr. Alderson.

"You have a House you say at Sheffield?"

"No; I have a House at Retford, where my Mother lives; but I live at Sheffield, with a House there."

"What are their Names?"

"Cohen and Dixon at Sheffield."

"Are they respectable Persons?"

"Yes."

"Did you go to them from Mr. Spiers?"

"No; I was not with them at the Election, and did not go to them for some Time."

"How long have you been with them?"

"A Twelvemonth the 20th of last April."

"Are you with them still?"

"Yes; and I am to remain with them, I expect."

"In what Station are you in their Service?"

"I have principally the Care of the Books."

"Have you the Care of any Money?"

"When Mr. Dixon is from Home. We have Two Shops, One at Rotherham and One at Sheffield; I have the Care of the Books and the Cash when he is away from Home."

"They are in a large way of Business?"

"Yes; we have Forty Hands altogether."

"Do you superintend those Forty Hands?"

"Yes, principally so."

"You say you were unwell when you were with Swan and Edgar?"

"I was."

"How long were you unwell?"

"Perhaps for Two or Three Months before I left."

"How long were you with them?"

"Perhaps Ten Months."

"Were you dismissed by them, or did you leave them on any disgraceful Account?"

"No; on account of no Disgrace whatever."

"They are People residing in Town, and well known?"

"Yes; Mr. Edgar is."

The Witness was directed to withdraw.

Then Joshua Cottam was called in; and having been sworn, was examined as follows:

(Mr. Adam.) "Are you an Alderman of Retford?"

"Yes."

"How long have you been an Alderman?"

"Twenty Years, I should suppose."

"How many Years have you been a Burgess?"

"Thirty."

"How many Elections have you attended?"

"I am sure I cannot say."

"Have you ever received any Money for your Vote?"

"No."

"Nor any Promises?"

"No."

"Nor any Packets?"

"No."

"On any Occasson?"

"No."

"Do you remember Mr. Ogilvy's coming to Retford in 1826?"

"Yes."

"Do you remember the Day of the Week?"

"On Saturday."

"Where did he stop?"

"At the White Hart in Retford."

"Were you there at the Time, or were you sent for after his Arrival?"

"I was sent for; I was there in the Evening."

"Had you any Reason to expect Mr. Ogilvy's Arrival before he came?"

"No; I had never heard of him, that I recollect."

"Had you seen Mr. Hornby in the course of that Day or the Day before?"

"I cannot say as to Conversation with any one."

"Were you sent for to attend him, or meet him at the White Hart?"

"Yes."

"Whom did you go with?"

"I do not recollect going with any one."

"Whom did you find there?"

"There were several Freemen there in the Evening."

"How many were there when you first went in?"

"I suppose Thirty or Forty."

"Do you know how long Mr. Ogilvy had been in the White Hart before you came in?"

"I cannot speak to that; it was Market Day, and we were busy with one Thing and another."

"Do you think the Company had been long assembled when you arrived?"

"Yes, I suppose so; there were several there at the Time."

"Was there Entertainment, eating and drinking, and so on?"

"Yes."

"Any Conversation about the Election?"

"Yes; there was nothing very particular occurred that I recollect, any further than that he was going to offer himself as a Candidate."

"How long did you remain there; 'till the Meeting broke up?"

"I was there for some Time."

"Did you remain there 'till the Meeting broke up?"

"I know I was there most of the Time; there might be a few left when I came away."

"During the whole Time you were there, did you ever hear any Conversation respecting Money from Mr. Ogilvy to the Burgesses, or the Burgesses to Mr. Ogilvy?"

"No."

"Or any thing about the usual Gratuity?"

"I never heard such a thing proposed; it was not then, I am sure."

"Are you certain; you must have heard if such a thing had taken place?"

"Certainly; I am sure there was nothing of the kind occurred while I was there, and I was there during the most of the Evening."

"Did you see Mr. Ogilvy the next Day?"

"The next Day was Sunday; I go to few Parties on Sunday."

"Did you see him on the Monday Morning?"

"Yes, I did."

"Where did you see him on the Monday Morning?"

"I was going out canvassing with him; I never had much Opinion of Mr. Ogilvy; we wanted to secure Sir Henry Wright Wilson in the first place, and to know more of Mr. Ogilvy."

"You did not go canvassing with him?"

"I was only at One or Two Houses with him, for I never thought much of him."

"Who did accompany him to the Houses to which he went; did William Golland go?"

"William Golland went round with him, I believe; but I did not attend at the Canvass; I know that he did go, and John Thornton was another."

"John Thornton is dead, is he not?"

"He is dead."

"Do you remember going with Mr. Ogilvy to Clumber at any Time?"

"Yes; at the Suggestion of some of the Friends, I went with Mr. Ogilvy to Clumber; it was not from my own Wish at all."

"Will you recollect whether any Conversation to this Effect took place at this Meeting, that Mr. Ogilvie must come to a proper Understanding with the Gentlemen?"

"I never heard him come to a proper Understanding with the Gentlemen."

"Did you ever hear it stated by Mr. Ogilvy that he would be asked as he passed through the Town, whether he had come to a proper Understanding with the Gentlemen who were accompanying him upon the Canvass?"

"No, I never heard any thing of the kind."

"Or that there was to be any Motion or Sign made?"

"I never heard any thing of a Sign made; I have been in the habit of canvassing with the Gentlemen who have come to Retford, and I never heard of any thing of the kind."

"What was Golland at this Time?"

"I rather think he was a Journeyman at that Time."

"You did not act with him?"

"No; only knowing him as a Shopman in the Town, at Mr. Ginever's."

"Is he a Draper?"

"Yes."

"Is he in a respectable Line?"

"Yes; a very respectable Man."

"Mr. Golland you did not know?"

"Further than knowing him in the Town; he was a younger Man than I."

"Is he a Man of respectable Character?"

"For any thing I know."

"Who accompanied you to Clumber besides Mr. Ogilvy?"

"Nobody."

"Did you go in a Chaise?"

"Yes."

"When you got to Clumber, did you find His Grace at Home?"

"No."

"Did Mr. Ogilvy leave any Letter or Message for His Grace?"

"I think not."

"What passed when you arrived; did you enquire for His Grace?"

"We rode up to the Door, but we never got out of the Chaise."

"Did you enquire for His Grace?"

"Yes; Mr. Ogilvy did."

"What did Mr. Ogilvy say?"

"My Opinion was very bad upon that; for he told me that it suited his Purpose just as well the Duke not being at Home as if he was."

"Having taken you to Clumber, to wait upon the Duke, he told you that it suited his Purpose just as well for the Duke not to be at Home?"

"Yes; I thought from that he had no Connection with the Duke, and that his Principles might not be the same."

"Did you accompany him on the Idea that his Principles were the same as the Duke's?"

"Yes, I thought so; that if The Duke of Newcastle had any thing to do with him, he must be a Man of the Principles we wanted."

"On the Journey, there or back, had you any Conversation with Mr. Ogilvy about Money?"

"No; Mr. Ogilvy never mentioned any thing about Money; but he said, that if he had a proper Man that he could find as Agent he should not mind giving him some Money."

"An Agent to carry on the Business?"

"Yes."

"That he did not mind giving him Money to carry on the Business?"

"Yes."

"What Sum did he say?"

"A Sum of £100, or something of that kind; that was as he was going; I had no Conversation with him going back, and I never went near him any more."

"Previous to that, had Mr. Ogilvy and you, with reference to the Election, a confidential Conversation?"

"No; in fact I never had any Conversation with him further than I have stated."

"You say, you never heard of any Sign or Motion, though you have canvassed on several Elections?"

"Yes."

"Did you ever hear any thing about "all is right?"

"I have heard it, but not to know what it meant; there have been many different Things said on Election Purposes, but not to know what it meant."

Cross-examined by Mr. Law.

"Do you know Mr. Bullivant?"

"Yes."

"Mr. Cromwell Brown?"

"Yes."

"Mr. Gilbee?"

"Yes."

"Mr. Sharp?"

"Yes."

"Did you, in the Presence of those Gentlemen, or any of them, make use of the Expression on the 9th of June 1830, on a Wednesday, in the White Hart, in respect to the Proceedings before this House, that they are attempting to take away the Livelihood of those Forty-guinea Devils?"

"No, never."

"If those Gentlemen should assert this, you would undertake to say you never said it?"

"I think not."

"Will you undertake to swear you never said it?"

"I never said that; I never called them Forty-guinea Devils."

"For taking away the Livelihood from the Burgesses, and their Forty Guineas?"

"To the best of my Recollection, I never did."

"Will you undertake to swear you did not say so?"

"I will undertake to say that I do not believe I have said so; I will not say so positively; I believe I never did say no such thing."

"Will you swear you never did?"

"No; I would not like to swear to that I cannot be certain of."

"Will you swear, or will you not swear, you did not say this in the Presence of some of those Gentlemen?"

"If I have said any thing as to taking the Forty Guineas away from them, I am certain I never said any thing about the Devils."

"We will drop the Devil, and keep to the Forty Guineas; do you remember saying that they were taking away their Livelihood?"

"To the best of my Recollection, I never did."

"Will you swear you never did, on the 9th of June?"

"I will."

"Do you remember being at the White Hart on Wednesday the 9th of June?"

"No."

"Do you remember being there when Mr. Butt from this House was there?"

"I am so frequently at the White Hart; I am there Six Times a Week."

"Do you remember being there when Mr. Bullivant, Mr. Brown, Mr. Silbel and Mr. Sharp were there?"

"I do not recollect being there with them."

"Do you recollect complaining of Mr. Sharp for the Part he was taking, and saying they were attempting to take away their Livelihood and their Forty Guineas?"

"I may have said something about their taking away their Livelihood, for I know they have been too busy; more than they ought to be."

"What did you say about their Livelihood?"

"I have told Mr. Sharp that I thought he made himself more busy in the Concern than he ought to do."

"Will you swear you did not say that Sharp and the others were taking away from them their Livelihood, and taking away their Forty Guineas?"

"I cannot swear it; but I have every Reason to think I never said such a thing."

"Have you a Brother of the Name of Cottam?"

"Yes."

"Do you know Clark?"

"Yes."

"He is an Alderman?"

"I believe he is one of the Aldermen."

"Do you know where he lives?"

"At Retford."

"Do you know where he is now?"

"I cannot say."

"Do you know where Darker Parker is?"

"He is in London."

"John Thornton is dead, we hear?

"Yes, he is."

"When did you see Darker Parker last?"

"I saw him this Morning."

"Where was that; was he walking?"

"Yes, he was walking, with his Son with him."

"Was he walking in the Street?"

"Yes, he was walking in the Street."

"How far from this House?"

"I was with my Brother at a Coffee House, and he was passing."

"At a Coffee House close to this House?"

"I do not know the Name of it."

"Was it at Brown's Coffee House?"

"No; a Coffee House near to Storey's Gate; he was going with his Son."

"To-day, this was?"

"Yes; he was going to see a Relation of theirs, I understood."

"Do you know James Bayley the Whitesmith?"

"Yes."

"Have you seen him in London?"

"Yes."

"Do you know whether he is attending here as a Witness To-night?"

"I am sure I do not know; I have not seen him Tonight."

"Was he attending in Town?"

"Yes; I saw him a Day or two ago."

"Is John Cottam attending in Town?"

"Yes."

"Is he your Brother?"

"Yes."

"Is William Meekly attending in Town?"

"Yes."

"And George Thornton?"

"I think George Thornton is not in Town."

"Has he been in Town?"

"He was in Town about a Week ago; I saw him."

"Has he gone back?"

"I do not know indeed where he is now."

(By a Lord.) "How many Years have you been an Alderman?"

"About Twenty Years; I am not certain as to the Time, but I suppose it must be about that from the Time I have been a Freeman."

(Mr. Law.) "Did you accompany any of the Aldermen to Mr. Ogilvy, respecting the Deposit of a Sum of Money?"

"Never."

"Do you know whether John Cottam did?"

"I cannot say; I never heard any such thing as about depositing Money."

Re-examined by Mr. Adam.

"You never heard of such a thing as what?"

"As a Deposit of Money by Mr. Ogilvy."

"John Cottam is your Brother?"

"Yes."

"Are you on intimate Terms with your Brother?"

"I hope so."

"Was Clark of the same Opinion with you about the Catholic Question, and Sir Henry Wilson?"

"Yes, I believe he was."

"Was John Thornton?"

"I am sure I cannot exactly say, it is so many Years ago."

"I am talking of 1826. Darker Parker you saw To-day?"

"Yes."

"Was his Son leading him?"

"His Son was with him; I can only tell a remarkable Circumstance that occurred To-day respecting him; it was merely being with a Friend of his."

"Was his Son leading him by the Hand?"

"Yes, his Son was along with him."

"Is he a very old Man?"

"I suppose he is towards Seventy."

"Do you know whether he has had several Apoplectic Fits?"

"Yes."

"You say you thought Sharp was more busy than he ought?"

"Yes."

"But you have every Reason to believe you did not say any thing about Forty Guineas?"

"I believe I did not."

(By a Lord.) "Have you ever heard about Forty Guineas?"

"Oh yes, I heard of those."

"In what way have you heard of it?"

"I have heard of some of the Freemen receiving Forty Guineas after the Elections took place."

"Have you heard that from the Freemen themselves?"

"I have heard it spoken by several, at Times."

"The Freemen themselves?"

"Yes; that they had received Packages; that they had received Money."

"Was that after different Elections, or after one Election?"

"I have heard them speak of it after one or two Elections."

(Mr. Adam.) "Do you recollect after which Election it was that you heard of this Forty Guineas?"

"No; I cannot say to that; I know I have heard Freemen say that they had received Money; but I cannot speak to any thing of the kind."

(Mr. Law.) "When did you first hear from the Freemen that they received Forty Guineas; Thirty Years ago?"

"No; not so long ago as that."

"When was the first Time you heard of it?"

"I cannot say, indeed."

"Did you hear it as early as 1807?"

"Oh no; I am sure I cannot exactly say as to that."

"Do you believe you heard that as long ago as 1807?"

"Indeed I cannot say to that."

"When did you first hear it?"

"I am sure I cannot positively say; it might be Fifteen or Twenty Years ago, probably."

(By a Lord.) "When did you last hear it?"

"I have not heard any thing of the kind lately."

"You have not heard any thing of the kind, you say, of late; you have not heard any thing of that since the last Election?"

"No; before the last Election."

"How long was it, usually, before the Packages were received?"

"I should think Two or Three Years."

"After an Election?"

"Yes."

The Witness was directed to withdraw.

The Counsel were directed to withdraw.

Ordered, That the further Consideration and Second Reading of the said Bill be put off to Monday next; and that the Lords be summoned.

Witnesses discharged from further Attendance on it:

Ordered, That Robert Smithson, Thomas Walker, Joshua Cottam and William Golland be discharged from further Attendance on this House on the last-mentioned Bill.

Gell to attend forthwith on it.

Ordered, That Mr. Gell do attend this House forthwith, in order to his being examined as a Witness upon the Second Reading of the last-mentioned Bill, and do bring with him Mr. Hornby's Articles of Clerkship to Mr. Smithson.

County Rates, Return respecting, delivered.

The Lord Chancellor acquainted the House, "That the Clerk Assistant had arranged, and laid on the Table, Returns of all Monies levied for the County Rate in each County of England and Wales, with the Items of Expenditure in each County, from 5th April 1815 to 5th April 1829," made pursuant to an Order of the 15th Day of June 1829; together with an Abstract thereof."

And the Title thereof being read by the Clerk;

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

Ordered, That the said Abstract be printed.

Slave Bounties Bill.

Ordered, That the House be put into a Committee upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to reduce the Rate of Bounties payable upon the Seizure of Slaves," on Monday next.

Newborough Church Bill.

Ordered, That the House be put into a Committee upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act for endowing the Parish Church of Newborough, in the County of Northampton, and Three Chapels called Portland Chapel, Oxford Chapel and Welbeck Chapel, situate in the Parish of Saint Mary-le-bone, in the County of Middlesex, and also a Chapel erected on Sunk Island, in the River Humber," on Monday next.

Bayley's Divorce Bill.

The House (according to Order) was adjourned during Pleasure, and put into a Committee upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to dissolve the Marriage of James Bayley Esquire with Louisa his Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes."

After some Time, the House was resumed:

And The Earl of Shaftesbury reported from the Committee, "That they had gone through the Bill, and directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment."

Then an Amendment was made by the House to the said Bill.

Ordered, That the said Bill, with the Amendment, be ingrossed.

Forgeries Bill reported & re-committed.

It was moved, "That the Report of the Amendments made by the Committee of the Whole House to the Bill, intituled, "An Act for reducing into One Act all such Forgeries as shall henceforth be punished with Death, and for otherwise amending the Laws relative to Forgery, be now received."

The Question was put thereupon?

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Accordingly, The Earl of Shaftesbury reported the said Amendments.

The said Amendments were read by the Clerk as follow; (vizt.)

"Pr. 3. L. 32. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill.

"Pr. 4. L. ult. Leave out from ("mentioned") to ("And") in Line 1 of Clause A. added to the Bill in Press 6, Line 29.

"In Clause A. added to the Bill:

"Press 1. Line 21. After ("Bill") insert ("or any Will, Testament, Codicil or Testamentary Writing")

"Line 35. Leave out from ("shall") to the End of the Clause, and insert ("suffer Death as a Felon")

"In Clause B. added to the Bill:

"Press 1. Line 12. After ("Law") insert ("a Will, Testament, Codicil or Testamentary Writing, or")

"Line 31. Leave out from ("and") to the End of the Clause, and insert ("punished with Death accordingly")

"Pr. 7. L. 26. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("suffer Death as a Felon")

"Pr. 8. L. 23. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("such")

"L. 24. Leave out the first Interlineation to the Bill, and in the same Line leave out the second Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("the")

"L. 29. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("suffer Death as a Felon")

"Pr. 9. L. 6. After ("any") insert ("such") and in the same Line leave out the Interlineation to the Bill.

"L. 7. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("the")

"Pr. 10. L. 38. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill.

"Pr. 11. L. 4. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill.

"Pr. 12. L. 30. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("such")

"L. ult. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("such")

"Pr. 13. L. 9. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("such")

"L. 17. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("such")

"Pr. 15. L. 2. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("an")

"L. 3. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("for that Purpose from")

"L. penult. After ("it") insert ("further")

"Pr. 16. L. 9. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("an")

"L. 10. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("for that Purpose from")

"Pr. 17. L. 9. After ("it") insert ("further")

"Pr. 20. L. ult. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("an")

"Pr. 21. L. 1. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("for that Purpose from")

"Pr. 22. L. 15. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill.

"L. 18. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("in any such Register")

"Pr. 26. L. 1. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("by an Act passed in the Second and Third Years of the Reign of Queen Anne, for the public registering of all Deeds, Conveyances and Wills of any Honors, Manors, Lands, Tenements or Hereditaments within the West Riding of the County of York; and also by another Act passed in the Fifth Year of the same Reign, for the public registering of all Deeds, Conveyances, Wills and other Incumbrances that shall be made of or that may affect any Honors, Manors, Lands, Tenements or Hereditaments within the East Riding of the County of York, or the Town and County of the Town of Kingston-upon-Hull; and also by another Act passed in the Seventh Year of the same Reign, for the like Purpose, with regard to any Honors, Manors, Lands, Tenements or Hereditaments within the County of Middlesex; and also by another Act made in the Eighth Year of the Reign of King George the Second, for the like Purpose, with regard to any Honors, Manors, Lands, Tenements or Hereditaments within the North Riding of the County of York; Persons convicted of certain Offences mentioned in each of the said Acts respectively")

"Pr. 26. L. 6. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill.

"L. 12. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("each of the several") and in the same Line after ("Acts") insert ("herein-before mentioned")

"L. ult. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("of the several") and in the same Line, after ("Acts") insert ("herein-before mentioned")

"Pr. 28. L. 5. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("tried")

"Pr. 32. L. 9. Leave out the Interlineation to the Bill, and insert ("the same")

Ordered, That the said Bill be re-committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.

Adjourn.

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