28th May 1624

FRIDAY, 28 MAY 1624

I. JOURNAL OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, PA, HC/CL/JO/1/14

[CJ 714; f. 61v]

Veneris, 28⁰ Maii, 22⁰ Jacobi

Earl of Middlesex's bill, presently, in the Court of Wards. Ordered, upon question.

MR. SOLICITOR reports the bill for York House, with amendments, ready brought in paper, which thrice read. And the bill thirdly read.

After very long debate, the question being put and the voice doubtful, the House divided:

7 being retired into the Committee Chamber and refusing to give voice one way or other were sent for and their names taken, and the resolution stayed until those which were gone out returned.

[f. 62] With the No: 143

With the Yea: 168      25 difference

Resolved, the orders of the lords of the Council for the usage in the Fleet shall be observed until the next session.

The amendments in the bill for murdering of bastards passed.

The proviso in the bill for levying fines, etc. in others' names passed.

Agreed, Mr. Solicitor shall present the grievances to the King this afternoon with 30, viz.:

Mr. Solicitor trusted with the preamble, which left to his discretion. Mr. [William] Hakewill and Mr. Solicitor to make the report.

Sir Edwin Sandys

Mr. [Nicholas] Ferrar

Sir Thomas Estcourt

Mr. [John] Lister to examine the grievances for trade.

Mr. [Edward] Alford

Mr. [Nicholas] Stoughton

Sir Thomas Denton

Sir William Pitt to examine the other.

Mr. Speaker to be here again this afternoon.

[f. 62v] Earl of Middlesex's bill recommitted:

Sir Robert Harley

Knights and burgesses of Middlesex

Sir Thomas Denton

Sir Thomas Estcourt

Sir Francis Barrington

Mr. [Thomas] Gewen

Sir William Fleetwood

Mr. Richard Spencer

Mr. [Richard] Knightley

Sir H[enry] Mildmay added to this committee.

Veneris, 28⁰ Maii, 22⁰ Jacobi, [afternoon]

MR. SOLICITOR reports the bill of the Earl of Middlesex, with amendments.

The amendments thrice read, and then the bill thirdly read.

After long debate upon the bill with these amendments, upon question, the voice doubtful.

The Yea went out.

Tellers for the Yea: 125

Tellers for the No: 89

Passed.

SIR EDWIN SANDYS delivers in the complaint against the Lord of Middlesex concerning oppressions to be kept in the House, which was read in the House.

The patent to be delivered in again to the Trinity House.

Mr. [John] Pym to collect the proceedings against the Lord of Norwich and to bring it in tomorrow morning.

Sir Robert Phelips to deliver in to the Clerk tomorrow morning all the petitions to the courts of justice.

Ordered, that all petitions of what kind so ever exhibited in Parliament shall be delivered in to the Clerk to be safely kept until the next sessions [sic] without dishonour to them against whom they are preferred, or prejudice or molestation of the petitioners who preferred them, for that, by reason of many weighty occasions, the House of Commons could not at this present examine the same.

[f. 63] Upon a petition/

Ordered, that all that have any bills in their hands shall bring and deliver them in to the Clerk tomorrow, sedente Curia. And this order to be set up tomorrow morning within the door.

The bill for the poor to be committed to Mr. [William] Noye's care to be framed against next session.

MR. [JOHN] GLANVILLE reports for Haverfordwest. Resolved, to stand in statu quo until next session.

Resolved now.

For Ferdinand Huddleston, kt. for Cumberland. Resolved, he may serve, notwithstanding he be outlawed.

This also now resolved, upon question.

For East Retford. Mr. [John] Darcy returned and complaints about it. He now dead. Complaints about the election. Resolved, by the committee, to let this rest until next session.

For Pontefract. 2 points:

1. Who the electors? Resolved, by the committee, there being no charter nor prescription for choice, the election is to be made by the inhabitants householders residents [sic].

Resolved also so now, upon the question.

2. That the committee also of opinion, in respect the poll demanded, though interrupted, by [Sir Richard] Beaumont, yet the poll not being pursued, the choice of Sir John Jackson void, and a new warrant to issue for a new choice.

For Winchelsea. Mr. John Finch being newly elected, the question: [Paul] Wymond, an intruding mayor, disfranchised divers.

Resolved, the election and return of Mr. John Finch good.

For Pembrokeshire. The election not questioned, but a desire to have the misdemeanour punished. But resolved by the committee, they admitting the election should not question the other.

Resolved so here, upon question. And Sir James [Perrot] left at his liberty to take his remedy for the misdemeanours of the adverse party elsewhere.

[f. 63v] The bill of pardon carried up by [William] Lord Cavendish, who brought word the Lords desired a present conference about the bill of pleading in the Exchequer. And exceptions being taken, this ought not to have been done by our messengers but their own.

Resolved.

[Blank] Mascall, a servant to Mr. Cholmley, a member of this House, committed by Mr. [Roger] Horton, saying Mr. Cholmley not worthy to be a member of this House.

Ordered, a warrant to be made by Mr. Speaker for enlarging Mascall, and a warrant for Horton to be brought here tomorrow morning.

For Cambridgeshire. Scholars and fellows of houses and parsons, vicars, etc. came and gave voices for knights of the shire.

1. Resolved, no scholars, or fellows of colleges, halls, etc. having no other freehold, ought to have voice in election of knights of the shire.

[Blank]

Resolved, upon question, as at the committee supra, nor are to have any hereafter.

2. Resolved, the scholars or fellows having chambers above 40s. yearly value give no voice in elections; nor are to have any hereafter.

He that has a chamber comes not in by livery and seisin, nor by deed enrolled. No assize lies. The freehold of it is in the corporation; his fellowship like wages and diet given a servant.

3. Resolved, parsons and vicars, etc. ought to have no voice in election of knights of the shire.

Resolved, also upon question. Nor are to have any hereafter.

A petition exhibited 25⁰ Maii upon a new election for Newcastle-under-Lyme in Staffordshire. Mr. [John] Keeling against Mr. [Charles] Glemham. Has attended with his witnesses. [CJ 715] Could not proceed for want of time.

Resolved, Mr. Keeling may, if he will; may proceed at the next session, if he will.

[f. 64] For the Feltmakers' petition, they attended but could not be heard. This also to stand in the same plight at the next meeting.

Resolved, upon question, that the election of Mr. Francis Stewart [sic] [blank] void in law, and a new writ to issue for a new choice.

Resolved, Sir Richard Lydall, [George] Mole, Ferrar and [blank] Beale, Sir H[enry] Yelverton's man, to be warned to be here tomorrow morning to give their consents to the delivering of the bonds unto them, and to their cancellation.

The Lords, upon the conference, returned. They were contented to pass the bill of pleading of alienations, with the amendments passed by this House, without the proviso; but that they having passed the proviso there, they could not pass the bill without it. Therefore, if we would begin a new bill without the proviso, according to the former amendments, they would pass it.

L. 1a. L. 2a. Whereupon a new bill was presently drawn, with the former amendments and without the proviso, which twice read.

Upon first question, not to be committed.

Upon second question, to be engrossed.

L. 3a. The same bill thirdly read and, upon question, passed.

[House adjourned]

II. JOURNAL OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, PA, HC/CL/JO/1/13

[CJ 797; f. 223]

Veneris, 28 Maii 1624

Earl of Middlesex's bill, presently, Court of Wards. Ordered, upon question.

MR. SOLICITOR reports the bill for York House that came from the Lords. Amendments thrice read and the bill thirdly read, and after 3 hours dispute pro et contra, the House divided upon the question:

168 for the Yea, 143 for the No.

The bill passed.

[f. 223v] Resolved, the order of the lords of the Council to be observed concerning the Fleet until our next meeting.

The proviso of the bill of levying fines in other men's names thrice read and passed.

Mr. Solicitor to present the grievances to the King this afternoon, and 30 to attend him:

Sir Edwin Sandys

Mr. [Nicholas] Ferrar

Sir Thomas Estcourt

Mr. [John] Lister to examine the grievances concerning matter of trade.

Mr. [Edward] Alford

Mr. [Nicholas] Stoughton

Sir Thomas Denton

Sir William Pitt to examine the grievances concerning matter of/

[f. 224] Earl of Middlesex's bill recommitted.

Sir Robert Harley

Knights, burgesses, Middlesex

Sir Thomas Denton

Sir Thomas Estcourt

Sir Francis Barrington

Mr. [Thomas] Gewen

Sir William Fleetwood

Mr. Richard Spencer

Mr. [Richard] Knightley

Sir Henry Mildmay added to this committee.

Veneris, 28 Maii 1624, post meridiem

MR. SOLICITOR reports the bill for the sale of the lands of the Earl of Middlesex that came down from the Lords, which thrice read.

L. 3. An act to make the lands of Lionel, Earl of Middlesex, liable to the payment of his debts.

The House divided upon the question of passage of the bill:

Bill passed.

SIR EDWIN SANDYS delivers in to the House the substance of the complaint against the Lord Treasurer for oppression. Read.

Ordered, the patent of the Trinity House to be delivered out to them.

Mr. [John] Pym to collect the charge against the Bishop of Norwich and to present it to this House.

[f. 224v] Ordered, that all petitions of what kind so ever exhibited in Parliament shall be delivered in to the Clerk to be safely kept until the next session without dishonour of them against whom they are preferred, or prejudice of the petitioners who preferred them, for that, by reason of many weighty occasions, this House could not at this present examine the same.

Ordered, that all bills that are in committees' hands shall be delivered in to the Clerk before we rise.

MR. [JOHN] GLANVILLE reports from the committee of privileges:

1. For Haverfordwest. The committee of opinion to let it rest until the next session.

So resolved by the House.

2. For one of the knights of Cumberland, Ferdinand Huddleston, that was outlawed. Resolved, this ought not to prejudice his election.

So resolved by the House.

3. Concerning East Retford. Lord Darcy's son returned, who dead. To let this sleep and pass it over.

So resolved by the House.

4. Concerning Pontefract. Question of Sir John Jackson. Committee resolved all the inhabitants householders ought to have voice. Second, committee resolved upon the latter writ no burgess duly chosen but a new writ to go.

Resolved, that the election ought to be in Pontefract by the inhabitants householders residents there.

[CJ 798] Resolved, that neither Sir John Jackson nor Sir Richard Beaumont are duly elected, and that a new writ shall go out for a new election.

5. Concerning Winchelsea. The mayor there an intruder; disfranchised divers persons that stood for Sir Alexander Temple. Committee clear of opinion that the election of Mr. [John] Finch good. He a good mayor to this purpose.

Resolved, Mr. John Finch was duly elected for Winchelsea.

6. Concerning one of the knights of Pembrokeshire against Sir James Perrot. Committee resolved not to meddle with it because it came after the time 6 weeks.

Resolved, the election and return of Sir James Perrot is due and good.

[William] Lord Cavendish sent up to the Lords with the pardon that came down from the Lords.

7. A servant of Mr. Cholmley arrested by one [Roger] Horton. The opinion of the committee to have him sent for, and to have a warrant to enlarge Mascall.

Ordered.

8. Concerning Cambridgeshire. Freeholders complain that the scholars and fellows of colleges came to the election and claimed to have voices.

Resolved, that members of colleges, halls or corporations at large not having freehold, saving in right of their colleges or corporations, ought not to have voice in elections. Second, that scholars having chambers above 40s. a year ought not to have voice in elections. Third, that parsons and vicars that have glebe lands/

[f. 225v] [Blank]

MR. [WILLIAM] NOYE reports from the Lords about the bill of pleading alienations. The Lords are willing to pass the bill without any proviso, but cannot now sever the proviso from the bill because thrice read with them and passed. They desire to have this bill sleep and to begin with another in our House.

Agreed.

MR. [JOHN] GLANVILLE goes on with his report. [Blank]

[f. 226] Resolved, upon question, that members of colleges, halls or corporations not having freehold, saving in right of their colleges, halls or corporations, ought not to have voice in elections of knights or burgesses.

Resolved, upon a second question, that fellows and scholars that have fellowships and chambers above 40s. ought not to have voice in elections.

Resolved, upon question, that parsons and vicars that have no other freehold but glebe lands ought not to have voice in elections.

9. A petition from Newcastle-under-Lyme, which, if true, very considerable.

Resolved, to continue this unto the next session.

A petition to them from the Feltmakers concerning the privilege of the House. They had no time to examine it.

Resolved, to let it rest in statu quo until the next session.

10. A petition from Weobley in Hereford[shire] to be restored to send burgesses to Parliament.

Resolved, upon question, the election of Mr. Walter Steward, being no natural-born subject, is void, and a warrant to go for a new writ for Monmouth.

Sir Richard Lydall, Mr. [George] Mole and Ferrar and Beale to be here.

L. 1. An act for ease in the pleading of alienations.

L. 2. An act for ease in the pleading of alienations.

Ordered, to be engrossed.

[f. 226v] L. 3. An act for the ease in the pleading of alienations.

Upon question, passed.

[House adjourned]

III. DIARY OF JOHN HAWARDE, WILTSHIRE AND SWINDON ARCHIVES, 9/34/2

[p. 301]

Vendredis, 28 Maii 1624

Novel jour appoint pur committee del bill del Counte de Middlesexe, presentmente.

3. L. Bill pur exchange del Yorke Huise ove le Roye. Came from the Lords and reporte par le SOLLICITOR ove addicions et amendments. A greate and longe debate in this busynes and a stronge opposition, and, upon the question twyse put, the Howse was divided. The I wente oute and caryed it by 26 [sic]. Upon our retorne in, it was mooved by MR. [WILLIAM] NOYE that the No showlde goe now out and bringe in the bill, which is the auncyente use of the Howse, but in regarde of the multitude of busynes and shortenes of time it was now forboarne.

[p. 302] In the afternoon

The Speaker in the chaire.

MR. [JOHN] GLANVILLE reporte pur privileges.

• 1. Haverfordweste. Adjorne al prochein cession.
• 2. Chivaler de Cumberland. Sir [blank] Huddleston utlage. Bon.
• 3. East Retford in Countie de Nottingham.
• 4. Pomfret. Touts inhabitants householders resiants ont voices.

Sur question, rule.

• 5. Winchelsie.
• 6. [Pembrokeshire] chivalers, de [John] Wogan, Sir James Perrot.
• 7. Lake pur dette.
• 8. Cholmley pur baillie electe constable committe. Garrante pur le justice de peace and pur delyverance.
• Retorne del pardon [pur] les prelats, seignours et subjects.
• [p. 303] 10. Schollers de Cambrige null voice en election del chivalers. Ne corporacion. Fellowes, vicars, parsons, null voices.
•       1. Schollars, fellowes de colleges, sur queston, null voice, ne hereafter.
•       2. Chambers et fellowships auxy.
•       3. Parsons et vicars auxy.
• 11. Newcastle-under-Lyme.
• 12. Weobley.
• 13. Feltmaker's arreste.
• 14. Monmouthe: Sir [blank] Steward [sic] denised not naturalised. Novel brief, for yf naturalized he is another person. Sur question.

Staplers' bonds to be cancelled, delyvered or safe kepte.

Bill pur pleadante licenses and pardons d'alienation. Sente to the Lords and retorne ove amendments et proviso, et sur conference ils relinquishe le proviso et retorne. Mes [bill] fuit presentment novel escrie in paper et engros, et lie thrice, et sur question ne fuit committe, et sur second question fuit ingrosse, et sur third question passe pur leye.

IV. DIARY OF EDWARD NICHOLAS, TNA, SP 14/166

[f. 235]

Friday, 28⁰ Maii 1624

An act for the assuring of the messauge of York House and divers other messauges and tenements thereto belonging, part of the possessions of the Archbishop of York, situate[d] in the parish of St. Martin-in-the-Fields in comitatu Middlesex, to his Majesty in exchange for the manor of Brighton, Acomb, alias Ackom, with Holgate and the grange called Beckhey Grange in comitatu York and in the county of the city of York. 3. L. This bill came from the lords, and r.p.

SIR ROBERT HATTON desires that this bill may sleep, for that he was not satisfied neither of the value, title nor rents of the lands allotted to the Archbishop on this exchange, neither was there any man from the Archbishop to affirm his consent to this bargain and exchange, nor from the dean and chapter to testify their consent, and yet they are interested in part of the lands belonging to York House.

MR. SOLICITOR says that the Archbishop has but £7 per annum for York House and the other messuages and tenements thereto belonging, and the King has £140 per annum in present from the lands he gives in exchange for the same.

MR. [WILLIAM] NOYE. He knows not the value of the one land nor of the other. [Nicholas] Heath, Archbishop of York, did purchase York House of a Bishop of Norwich, with the rest of the tenements, and the manor of Acomb was once parcel of the possession of Sir James Strangways, and would have descended to [f. 235v] the King though he had not been King of England. He leaves the rest to the consideration of the House and thought it his duty to inform the House of it.

SIR ROBERT PHELIPS says he was at the committee and satisfied that the lands given by the King in exchange for York House and the rest of the tenements are of better value than those the Archbishop shall part with for the same, and that it is much for the advancement of the see of York. As for those that would have the Archbishop have a house here in this town, it is needless to provide him here a lodging since he comes seldom here; neither is it for a bishop to neglect his charge and live here; but in former times when bishops were more ambitious, it was useful for their Lordships to have houses here in town, but now the kingdom is not so much governed by the bishops. It appears that the Archbishop gave consent to this bill, and he conceives no right that the dean and chapter have to these messuages; if they have, there is no doubt but they heard of this bill, and yet no man ever moved as from them against it. He likes the bill and would have it passed.

[f. 236] SIR GEORGE MORE says that it is needless for the Archbishop to have a house here in town, and yet though his Grace part with York House he has a fair house within 2 miles of this town, videlicet at Battersea. That the rent of York House, etc., is small in comparison of the value of the lands given in exchange.

MR. [HENRY] ROLLE would not pass [sic] the bill pass because the dean and chapter, whom he thinks to be interested herein, were not called.

MR. [JOHN] WHISTLER says that in this case the dean and chapter need not be called, for they have nothing to do with land leased by bishops. He wishes that no bishops would make worse exchanges for the good of their sees. He likes the bill and would have it passed.

SIR THOMAS HOBY says that the Archbishop's hand being to the bill, testifying that his Grace is satisfied and content that the bill should pass as it then it [sic] was, but if there were any alterations his Grace knew not how it might be. He is satisfied that the Archbishop is so worthy that he would not have given his consent to the passing of the bill if he had not been well satisfied for the value of the lands given in exchange, which being in Yorkshire he might easily be satisfied in. That the dean and chapter might not, since the statute 1⁰ Regis, to meddle with the sales made by the bishops of the lordship land belonging to their Lordships' sees.

[f. 236v] SIR E[DWIN] SANDYS. That the Archbishops of York did never make any profit of York House until of late years since Buckingham had it; he had £40 per annum for it. But Chancellors Bromley, Egerton and Bacon never paid any rent or fine for that house. That his father, after the death of Chancellor Bromley, was possessed of York House. He was offered 1,000 marks fine for it, but he refused it and left it void to the see. He says never [a] Bishop of York did yet receive any benefit or profit of this house, nor is ever like to have any benefit or profit by the same; it is so near seated to the court, and every great man's eye is on it, and the bishops, being out of town, will never deny to let them have the possession of it as the Archbishop's predecessors have let it to such great men's predecessors.

This bill for York House exchange being put to the question, the House was divided and the number of voices for the passing of the bill was 168 and the number against the bill was but 143.

It is ordered that the orders made by the lords of the Council in Queen Elizabeth's time for the well usage of the prisoners of the Fleet shall be put in execution by the warden of the Fleet until our next meeting.

MR. [EDWARD] ALFORD says that he that presents to the King our petition of grievances must make a [f. 237] short speech to the King's Majesty. He would therefore have us now appoint the committee to attend his Majesty and to name the man that shall present the petition of grievances. That the last Parliament, Sir Francis Bacon, being then his Majesty's Solicitor, was sent to present the said petition and twenty of the members of this House were appointed to attend him.

Ordered, that there shall thirty of the members of this House attend the King when the petition of grievances is delivered to his Majesty, and that Mr. Solicitor shall present the same and make a brief speech to his Majesty to this effect: that we do present his Majesty with our grievances and do humbly desire his Majesty's gracious answer to the same and that he will be graciously pleased to take some such speedy order for remedy therein as may give his subjects relief and comfort, etc.

Friday, 28⁰ Maii 1624, sitting the House in the afternoon

An act for making the lands of Lionel, Earl of Middlesex, subject to the payment of his debts. 3. L. This bill came from the Lords, had in this House many amendments.

MR. CHRISTOPHER BROOKE says that the Earl of Middlesex has had harder measure than any [f. 237v] man that ever had his place but he knows not whether his deserts were no worse than any of his predecessors'. That this bill is a bill primae impressionis and without precedent. He never heard that a bill was passed in Parliament to relieve the creditors of any man without complaint made to Parliament. That this bill cannot help the King to come by his Majesty's fine better than the common law of this realm does, and there is no reason to be so careful for the creditors since they are so secured already, as that they complain not nor desire us to relieve them. He thinks it is too much officiousness in the Parliament to pass this bill or to embrace them.

MR. [THOMAS] GEWEN. If this bill does relieve the King no more than the common law, then is it the more reasonable; as it is primae impressionis, so are the faults of the Lord of Middlesex. We allow of the fine and if it had been more we should have consented to it, and therefore let us not then think it unjust to pass this bill for the due payment of it. We know not whether all of the creditors of the Earl of Middlesex know of this bill.

MR. LAURENCE WHITAKER. That he is a creditor, and if the bill may pass to relieve him and other of the creditors he shall be glad of it, and desire it may pass.

[f. 238] SIR BAPTIST HICKS says that he has the Earl of Middlesex's bond and seal for the ten thousand pounds he has lent the King and desires to know whether this bill will relieve him or no.

MR. [WILLIAM] NOYE. That the bill is mistitled, for if it had been entitled, An act for the defeating of the creditors of the Earl of Middlesex from their just and due debts and freeing of his lands from the payment thereof, then had the title of the bill been answerable to the body of this bill. That this bill does reach to the making of any of the lands that are tied for the jointure of any of his daughters liable to the payment of this fine and his debts. Admit that the Earl of Middlesex do procure this fine to be made over to any of his friends in trust for him, and that friend does by virtue of it extend for the same fine and so keep out all the creditors from the payment of their debts. He would have this bill rejected.

MR. RICHARD SPENCER says that if this bill pass not, then the creditors have no hope of relief, for it is and will be in the power of the King or whosoever shall have the fine of the Earl of Middlesex to bar all the [f. 238v] creditors and preserve his land from being liable to the payment of his debts, for they will keep this land long in extent. He would have the bill pass.

SIR E[DWIN] SANDYS. That the King has all the favour of the law for the extending for a debt due to his Majesty on account, but the law is not so strictly construed on the behalf of the King for the payment of fines. He thinks we shall do well to pass the bill if it extend not to prejudice any of his daughters or children in other lands than what they have or are to have from the Earl of Middlesex.

SIR ROBERT PHELIPS says that this bill is a new precedent and he believes there is something in it that he knows not of, and would have it sleep because no creditors of the Earl of Middlesex have here complained.

SIR E[DWARD] COKE says that this bill makes all the Earl of Middlesex's lands purchased in other men's names by his Lordship and all his lands in tail liable to the payment of his debts, which by the common law are not liable to the payment of his debts, and that this bill hurts no man but the Earl of Middlesex and such as are in nature bound to pay his debts, and would have it pass.

This bill being put to the question [f. 239] for passing the House, the House was divided and the number of those that were for the bill was 125 and the number against the bill was 89.

The committee is now sent away with the petition of grievances to the King, who is at Whitehall expecting the same, and Mr. Solicitor is to make report of the King's answer.

SIR EDWIN SANDYS delivers here unto the House [the] substance of the complaint against the Lord Treasurer for matter of oppressions delivered to the Lords at a conference at Whitehall in this Parliament. The points thereof consisting of oppressions, first, concerning impositions laid on the wines; second, the sugars; and, thirdly, touching the impositions laid on the groceries.

Resolved, that the substance of the complaint against the Lord Treasurer now delivered by Sir E[dwin] Sandys shall be entered of record here in the House by the Clerk.

Ordered, that the substance of the complaints against the Bishop of Norwich as they were delivered from this House to the Lords shall be tomorrow delivered into this House to be here entered into the Clerk's book.

Ordered, that such petitions as have been delivered into this House and are not rejected but retained shall remain [f. 239v] with the Clerk of this House without dishonour to the persons complained against or prejudice to the petitioners.

Ordered, that all such as have any bills in their hands that have been retained by this House and delivered them from the House shall bring the same into this House tomorrow morning and deliver them to the Clerk to be here kept until the next sessions [sic].

Ordered, that the question on the election of the burgess of Haverfordwest shall remain to be debated here at our next meeting the next sessions [sic].

Ordered, that a man chosen in the country to serve here as a burgess in Parliament, though he be outlawed, shall sit as a member of this House. This was now resolved in the case of Sir Ferdinand Huddleston complained against by Sir Robert Bannister. And the case of Sir Francis Goodwin in 2⁰ et 3⁰ Regis did lead us as a precedent in this case before mentioned, for Sir Francis Goodwin, being chosen knight for Buckinghamshire, was returned by the sheriff accordingly, and the sheriff did also endorse the writ that Sir Francis Goodwin was a man outlawed and yet the House resolved the return of the [f. 240] inside of the writ was good and the endorsement of the return was not so.

Ordered, by vote of this House, that the election of Mr. John Finch to serve as a burgess in Parliament for Winchelsea is good, because the freemen of that town (who Sir Alexander Temple in his petition alleged had right to have voice in that election being de facto disfranchised) ought not to have voice in that election.

It is informed that Mr. Cholmley's man, a member of this House, called Mascall, was committed by Roger Horton, esq., a justice of peace of Middlesex, for refusing to be a constable because he was servant and bailiff to the said Mr. Cholmley, a member of this House.

It is ordered now that Mr. Speaker shall forthwith send his warrant for the releasement [sic] of the said Mascall out of prison, and ordered that the said Mr. Horton, a justice of peace (who said the said Mascall, because he was a servant to a member of this House and did refuse to be constable, was the fitter to be sent to prison and thereon did commit the said Mascall to prison), shall be sent for to be here tomorrow morning to answer his contempt to this House and the members thereof.

[f. 240v] Ordered now in the case of a knight of Cambridgeshire knight [sic], that such scholars and fellows as were members of any college or hall in that university and have no other freehold of their own ought not to have voice in elections to Parliament, and that parsons and vicars that have no lay fee nor freehold but his parsonage, vicarage or benefice, shall not nor ought to have any voice in election of any burgess of Parliament.

Some of the reasons of these orders are that clergymen have voice in election of ministers to sit in Convocation; that they come not to their benefices by the common law of England, and upon an exigent or extent or scire facias after judgement against a parson or vicar, the sheriff does not, nor can, meddle with any of the glebe lands or spiritual living of such beneficed man, but if such parson or beneficed man has no other land that is temporal, the sheriff does return non habet ullum laicium feodum.

Ordered, and resolved, that the election of Mr. Walter Steward to serve in this Parliament as burgess for Monmouth is void because he was not at that time naturalized, and now it is [f. 241] ordered that a writ shall go for a new election in the said town of Monmouth.

An act for the ease in obtaining of licences of alienation and in pleading of alienation with licence and or pardon of alienations without licence. 1.[L.] and 2. L.

This bill is ordered to be engrossed, and being now delivered into the House engrossed, it is the third time read and passed, on the question.

V. DIARY OF RICHARD DYOTT, STAFFORDSHIRE RECORD OFFICE, MS D661/11/1/2

[f. 170v]

May 28

Bill for the exchange of York House and other tenements for land in Yorkshire between King and Archbishop. Passed, upon question and division.

The land given in exchange is of better present value and better improved value and so will be beneficial and advantageous to the bishop. The bishops' houses here [a]re by reason of their [f. 171] residence here when they had the government of the kingdom; but now not such occasion and better they should reside at their several charges for instruction and hospitality. The rent is very small and it will be in likelihood always in lease, so that it will not be for the benefit of succession. It is not ancient inheritance of the bishop nor the land of the King, for York House was Norwich House, and Whitehall was the York House, and this York House was purchased by Archbishop Heath of the Duke of Suffolk who had bought it. The land came to the King by the Duke of Lennox that lived here in Queen's time, so not crown land.

No need for the dean and chapter to consent, for the bishop alone may make leases without them and with their consent cannot pass their inheritance. [f. 171v] We should put the church in better estate, otherwise we could not do it with a good conscience.

Essex House, Salisbury Court, etc. were bishops' houses.

A Parliament is the key of David that opens and no man shuts that shuts [sic] and no man opens.

The hand of the Archbishop is to it (but answers that he had passed away divers of his lands of [?Durham]) and that he is an old man, and old man twice a child.

It has been the happiness of this kingdom that the King's revenues have been his crown lands, not customs, which may be diminished by wars; not subsidies, which given by Parliaments, which seldom meet; not impositions, which unlawful if not by consent of the people.

£140 present rent of the land, but £7 rent of the houses and land better too for the future. (Freehold rent, copyhold rent and demesne rent.) [f. 172] The houses not worth above 10 years' purchase and 16 in respect of decay and casualty of houses and surety and improvement of land.

An Athenian said, “I rule the Athenians”; my wife rules me, and my son rules my wife. I will not apply it to the Archbishop.

If we deny the King in this, it may be he will deny us redress of our grievances, etc.

That sat, 143; that went out, 168.

If a man that has acknowledged statutes, judgements, etc. and after if he be fined to the King, the King's fine must have priority though it be later in time. So the King may keep the land in extent from the creditors 20 years.

[Afternoon]

Bill to make the lands of Lionel, Earl of Middlesex, liable to the payment of his debts, etc. Upon question and division of the House, passed.

[f. 172v] Notwithstanding that now the lands of his children are liable though they have them settled from a collateral ancestor, or upon marriage. And though the creditors shall have no priority, nor that the land shall not be divided between the King and creditors that these might be satisfied together. And though he do prejudice such creditors who had statute upon land that he purchased, yet because they thought he was not punished enough and because they [sic] creditors by some were conceived to be in no worse case than before (though the novelty of the precedent did not please some), it passed.

Ordered, that those that have any bills in their hands shall bring them in to the Clerk.

[f. 173] The Lords referred the Bishop of Norwich, who was transmitted to them by us, to the High Commissioners, which was taken unkindly by the House because the parties grieved might have gone there of themselves as to ordinary judge.

Report by [MR. JOHN] GLANVILLE.

Resolved, upon question, that an outlaw may be elected and serve in the House and it is no just exception to him.

And MR. SPEAKER said that Sir Francis Goodwin was chosen (being outlawed) and the sheriff made a special return upon the back of the indenture that he was outlawed, yet the House admitted him and would not reject him for that cause though he by his own assent went out, and so there was a new election.

[f. 173v] Pontefract is a borough discontinued and lately restored, so that the manner of their election is not known, and therefore resolved that the election must be according to law, that is, that inhabitants housekeepers and residents shall have voices. This was in the case of Sir John Jackson.

Resolved, upon question, in case de Winchelsea between Mr. [John] Finch and Sir Alexander Temple, that if a mayor be unlawfully elected and do disenfranchise some burgesses, yet being an officer de facto his acts are valid, and those that were disenfranchised had no voices until they were restored. And it would be dangerous to let man [sic] question the right of officers in possession, and so [Mr. John] Finch having most voices of actual burgesses [f. 174] stood elected.

An order was made that elections should be questioned within a fortnight after the return or else be concluded.

A petition was preferred against Sir James Perrot after the fortnight for misdemeanours, not to avoid the election. Resolved, because the principal matter came in too late, that we should not entertain the accessary, and so it was rejected

Thomas Draper petitioned against Mr. [sic] [Henry] Ley, a member of this House, that he might proceed against him in suit, being his debtor. It was denied by the committee of grievances. They would not surrender the privileges of [f. 174v] the House, etc. and that allowed in the House.

Mr. Cholmley's man was arrested and though he were known to be a servant of a member of this House, yet they would not deliver him. Upon complaint to the committee of privileges, it was ordered that Mr. Speaker should make out a warrant for the discharge of the prisoner, and that Serjeant should bring the creditor, the offender, to the bar.

Resolved, in the case of Cambridgeshire, that fellows or members of colleges, having no freehold but in right of colleges, have no voice in election of knights. That in respect of chambers worth 40s. per annum, no voice. That parsonages, etc. having no lay freehold have no voices.

[f. 175] Reasons: that fellows part of a politic body, which does nothing but by common seal and so in that capacity have no voices at elections. And if in respect of interest in the lands of the corporation should enable a man to have a voice, all burgesses should have voices in election of knights of the shire though they have no freehold of their own.

A fellow cannot have an [?assize] of his chamber, etc. having but lodging and the freehold in the corporation. Parsons are not represented here and belong to another body, and therefore they have no voice at our elections. Scholars not to have voices hereafter in respect of fellowships, [f. 175v] chambers, nor parsons, vicars, etc. who have no freehold of their own have no voices, nor are not to intermeddle at elections. Resolved, upon question.

A petition preferred by some burgesses of Newcastle[-under-Lyme] on the behalf of Mr. [John] Keeling against Mr. [Charles] Glemham in due time; but the committee by other business was hindered, but he attended every day with his counsel and witnesses.

Ordered, that it shall continue in statu quo until the next session.

The election of a denizen who is not naturalized is void. So resolved in Mr. Walter Steward's case. And that a new writ should go out for a new election, notwithstanding the [f. 176] naturalization was this session, and that session shall relate to the first day.

The bill of alienations, etc. came down with a proviso from the Lords. They upon a conference received satisfaction, and said they were content to pass the bill without the proviso, but the bill must be new engrossed, and begin with us again, and so it was done.

The business not ripe for question.

VI. DIARY OF SIR WALTER EARLE, BL, ADD. MS 18,597

[f. 196]

Friday, the 28th of May

The bill touching York House, after great debate and the House divided, passed.

Friday afternoon

Bill for making the Earl of Middlesex['s] lands liable to the payment of his debts. Passed, but the House first divided.

Upon SIR ROBERT HARLEY'S motion, the charge against the Bishop of Norwich to be collected and remain with the Clerk.

Upon MR. [EDWARD] ALFORD'S motion, the petitions preferred this Parliament ordered to be brought in and to remain with the Clerk without prejudice to the parties complaining or complained of.

Ordered also, that the bills in the committees' hands to be brought in and a note of them to be set up at the door.

MR. [JOHN] GLANVILLE'S report from the committee of privileges:

1. The case of Haverfordwest. Referred until the next session.

2. The case [f. 196v] of election of Mr. [Ferdinand] Huddleston upon an outlawry, whether void or no.

Resolved, that the outlawry made not the election void. The case of Sir Francis Goodwin vouched.

3. The case of East Retford. The Lord Darcy's son, whose election was questioned, lately dead.

Resolved, not to meddle further with it now.

4. The case of Pontefract, Sir John Jackson. A corporation in H. 4['s] time, discontinued sending burgesses, renewed last Parliament. Those now of common right, all the householders, to have voice in the election. At the election, the poll being interrupted.

Resolved, no good election.

The case of the second election of Winchelsea. Paul Wymond, a mayor not duly elected but doing the office of a mayor, disenfranchised divers who claimed voice because he was no true mayor, but this was not allowed of.

Resolved, the choice of Mr. [John] Finch was good, notwithstanding because he was a mayor de facto.

5. A petition complaining of undue carriage in the election of Sir James Perrot in Pembrokeshire.

Rejected.

One Mascall, bailiff to Mr. Cholmley, a member of the House, claiming privilege and refusing to be sworn constable, was committed by one Mr. Horton, a justice of peace, who when Mascall showed a testimonial, said/

Ordered, Mascall should be enlarged, and Horton sent for.

[f. 197] A petition of freeholders of Cambridgeshire, showing that scholars and fellows of colleges in Cambridge at the election of the knights of the shire intruded themselves, claiming voice.

Resolved:

• 1. They ought not to have voice.
• 2. Fellows having chambers worth 40s. per annum ought not, etc.
• 3. Parsons and vicars having no freehold but in right of their parsonages ought to have no voice.

Reasons guiding the committee:

• 1. Fellows and scholars are but parts of a politic body, which can give no voice but speak by seal, no more than deans and chapters, and mayors and commonalties. Besides, the university has burgesses of the King's grace granted them, though it be merely a society of men and not local.
• 2. For the second, he that has a chamber comes not to his place as a freeholder by conveyance descent; he has but residence, lodging, habitation, use as a servant.
• 3. For the third, for parsons and vicars ought not, etc.:
•           1. They have the bishops.
•           2. They have the convocation.
•           3. They are not persons fit. Glebe land is not as a lay fee, but in respect of the church.

A petition concerning the second election of Mr. [Charles] Glemham, burgess of Newcastle-under-Lyme, Mr. [John] Keeling complainant.

This referred to the next session.

[f. 197v] The petition of the Feltmakers', complaining of breach of privilege of the House by imprisoning those that had preferred their bill.

Petition of the borough of Weobley in Herefordshire to send burgesses. Not admitted.

The manner of recording the royal assent to bills. To a public bill which the King passes, Le Roi le veut. To a private bill, soit fait comme il désire. If denied, Le Roi s'avisera. To the bill of subsidy, Le Roi remercie ses loyaux sujets, accepte leurs benevolences, et ainsi le veut. To the general pardon, Les prelats, Seigneurs et Communs en cet Parlement assemblés au nom de tous autres sujets remercient tres humblement votre Majesté et prient dieu vous donner en santé bonne vie et longue.

[f. 208v] In one of the rolls presented to his Majesty were these particulars following presented as grievances:

• 1. The patent of fishing.
• 2. Of gold wiredrawing.
• 3. Of pretenders of concealments and defective titles.
• 4. Against the multiplicity of briefs.
• 5. The Apothecaries' letters patents.
• 6. The patent for the light Dungeness.
• 7. Sir Simon Harvey.
• 8. The patent of custody of gaols and prisoners.
• 9. The patent of coals.
• 10. Against seditious, popish books.
• 11. A proclamation concerning buildings.
• 12. Dr. [Thomas] Anyan.
• 13. Instructions concerning the Court of Wards.

In the other concerning free trade:

• 1. The Merchant Adventurers.
• 2. Turkey merchants.
• 3. Patent of Guinea and Benin, etc.
• 4. Alnage.
• 5. Serges and perpetuanas.
• 6. Prisage of wine.
• 7. Clothworkers.
• 8. Tobacco.
• 9. Eastland Company.

VII. JOURNAL OF SIR SIMONDS D'EWES, BL, HARL. MS 159

[f. 34]

[28 May 1624]

Sir Robert Heath, the Solicitor General, being commanded by the Lower House of Parliament, presented his Majesty with a schedule of the petitions of right and grace or grievances upon Friday, the 28th of May, being the first day of Trinity term, in the new Banqueting House at Whitehall, most of the Lower House accompanying the Solicitor. He, before the delivery, spoke to this effect/

[f. 34v] His Majesty at the same time being in the new Banqueting House at Whitehall, after the Solicitor's speech and upon the delivery of the grievances, made them this short answer which at first much distasted, but being better weighed was found to be no otherwise than that his Majesty spoke like himself.

I will begin with your conclusion. Whereas you desire an answer before the end of this sessions [sic], you have given yourself an answer in saying the grievances you offer unto me are long, and you know that tomorrow you must rise. I am sure that it has not been the use of Parliaments since I came, nor I believe before, to look for a present answer, for I must confer with my judges and with my Council before I can determine of them. You gave this as a reason of the number of your grievances, because it has been so long a time since there was any Parliament. But I must tell you there was never any king has taken more care than I, nor ever shall be, that his people might not be burdened with grievances, and especially since the last Parliament I am sure nothing has passed which has not been viewed and reviewed by my Council, by my judges, by my Attorney and by you, Mr. Solicitor, who knows this to be true; and if anything be passed which is amiss, it is their faults and not mine, for I have done nothing alone.

But now you have showed me the way to present grievances, I will return to you my grievances. But I have but two in all and you have two scrolls of them, whereas I expected rather you should have presented your thanks unto me that you have so little cause of grievance, for I dare boldly say never had Commons less.

The first of my grievances is this. You have passed many bills, but I heard if some of them had had the like passage otherwhere, in the Upper House among my Lords as they had in the Lower House among you, you had left me little or nothing to live on. This was not the errand you were sent for. Kings do not use to call their people to rob them. You would, if you had had your wills, taken away from me a rent of £30,000 [sic] upon the wines, besi[d]es the pretermitted customs, and you had another bill which would have so [f. 35] troubled my customers that nobody would have been my farmer of them. And I find best for me to let them to farm, and that is almost all my revenue. If you find any of my means to be raised against law, your course is to complain to me and it shall be redressed so as you think how to make it good to me another way. It has been common for courtiers to be still begging and getting from the King, but it is a popular humour, which I shall be loath to see in my Commons, to be so forward in taking from me to ease the people. But as I said, find me the way how I may be supplied otherwise, I shall be willing to leave that which you shall think amiss of.

My second grievance is anent the patents. I see it is enough to make it a grievance if you do but hear the name of a patent. And then you have a custom (which I'll know whether it be agreeable to ancient usage or not) presently upon any complaint to send for the patent and to keep it with you. I am sure you will not take upon you to be judge of my seal. It is not enough for me if some of your doctors of law stand up and say this patent is against law. I must for the law rely upon my learned counsel and upon my judges whether the patent be in itself good by law or not. But if there fall out any inconvenience in the execution of it, you may complain of it, and then I must consult with my Council of it or else I cannot judge of it. But when once you have a patent, you take upon you to keep it from my patentees? [sic]. You have nothing to do but to read it and see that it agree with the patent and then to deliver it back to the patentees. And if you do not so, I must take a course it be done.

For your grievances, I know you expect no present answer. Perchance some of them I have heard of and would not answer, but some of them I have not heard of at all; but in a convenient time I will take order they shall be perused over and over by my Council and myself, with the advice of my learned counsel and my judges, and when I shall find cause you shall have present redress. But upon some of them I may have cause to demur, and where there is cause you shall perceive my answer by the effects of it in the country between this and the next sessions [sic], which as I am a true king shall be, if I live, in the beginning of winter, as you shall hear tomorrow.

[f. 35v] The grievances presented to his Majesty by Sir Robert Heath, the Solicitor General, upon Friday the 28th of May, in the name of the Lower House of Parliament, in the Banqueting House at Whitehall, 1624, which though they might have been inserted between the Solicitor's and the King's speech do here justly follow.

That part of the grievances presented to his Majesty which concern trade.

[f. 120v]

May 28, Friday

An act for the confirmation of York House to be settled upon the King by reason of other lands given for it by his Majesty to the Bishop of York.

After 3 hours' debate and a great deal of unwillingness either to alienate the land of the crown or of the church, the House was divided and upon plurality of voices the bill passed.

[Afternoon]

An act to make the lands of the Earl of Middlesex liable to pay his debts and such restitutions as the Lords should think fit. Passed.

An act [sic] that all bills resting in the hands of the committees should be brought in and left with the Clerk.

A report from the committee of privileges. Sir [sic] Ferdinand Huddleston, a knight for Cumberland, though outlawed yet approved as fit to serve there for his country, and instance was given of others that had done the like before him.

Upon the election of Cambridgeshire, the question grew whether scholars and fellows of the colleges could have voices in choosing knights of the shire or no, because their places seemed to be in nature of freeholds. It was resolved [f. 121] upon question negatively, and that for these reasons:

1. Because, being members of one body, they are not to vote severally but speak by their common seal. By the same reason, deans and chapters might challenge voices in elections as well as fellows of colleges, and members of any corporation might do the like, which would breed a great confusion.

2. Because the King has given them burgesses of their own, 2 for either university; ergo, it is no reason they should elect for themselves and the shire too.

3. Because a chamber which they hold perhaps to the value of 40s. per annum is not freehold in law. A man is not so put into it, but enters by right of election and not otherwise, and a fellowship is but an entertainment like wages to a servant upon such and such conditions to be performed; and the like is to be said of parsons and vicars that have no other land than what they hold merely as churchmen.