House of Lords Journal Volume 23: February 1731, 1-10

February 1730, 1-10

DIE Lunæ, 1^o Februarii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Fredericus Princeps Walliæ.

PRAYERS.

Thanks to Bp. of Peterborough, for his Sermon.

Ordered, That the Thanks of this House be, and are hereby, given to the Lord Bishop of Peterborough, for the Sermon by him preached at the Abbey Church, Westminster, on Saturday last; and he is hereby desired to cause the same to be forthwith printed and published.

Westby & al. Pet. referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Robert Westby Esquire, Alexander Osbaldeston Gentleman and Catherine his Wife, John Benison and Anne his Wife, and Mary Westby; and also of William Shuttleworth Gentleman, on the Behalf of himself and Margaret his Daughter, an Infant; praying Leave to bring in a Bill, for Sale of divers Lands, Tenements, and Hereditaments, in the County of Lancaster, for Payment of Debts, and for other Purposes therein mentioned:

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

Shafto's Pet. referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of John Shafto Esquire; praying Leave to bring in a Bill, to enable the Petitioner to make a suitable Settlement upon such Woman as he shall marry, and Provision for Younger Children:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby, referred to Mr. Baron Comyns and Mr. Baron Thomson; with the usual Directions, according to the Standing Orders.

Folkes versus Lewis.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Silence Folkes, Widow, Executrix, and Residuary Legatee named in the last Will and Testament, of Thomas Folkes Esquire, who is lately dead; complaining of an Original Decree of the Court of Exchequer, of the Nineteenth of June 1727, and an Order of the Twenty-second of November 1729, and of a Final Order and Decree, made the Fifth of February following, in a Cause wherein Maurice Lewis Esquire was Plaintiff, and the said Thomas Folkes Defendant; and praying, "That the same may be reversed; and that the said Maurice Lewis may be ordered to pay the Appellant One Hundred and Sixteen Pounds, Two Shillings, and a Penny, found by Verdict, together with Costs both at Law and in the said Court of Exchequer:"

It is Ordered, That the said Maurice Lewis may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and he is hereby required to put in his Answer thereunto, in Writing, on or before Monday the Fifteenth Day of this Instant February.

Tong and Wekett versus Robinson & al

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Edward Tong and William Wekett, Clerks; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Chancery, of the Sixth of November last, made in a Cause wherein Ralph Robinson, Edward Harle, and others, Creditors of John Tong, were Plaintiffs, and the Appellants and others were Defendants; and praying, "That the same, as to so much thereof as the said Appellants do complain of, may be reversed:"

It is Ordered, That the said Ralph Robinson and the other Plaintiffs may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and they are hereby required to put in their Answer or respective Answers thereunto, in Writing, on or before Monday the Fifteenth Day of this Instant February: And, in regard it is alledged the greatest Part of the Respondents, being near Forty in Number, live in the Northern Counties, remote from each other, it is further Ordered, That Service of this Order on their Clerk in Court be deemed good Service.

Marino de Ghettoff & al. versus London Assurance:

After hearing Counsel upon the Petition and Appeal of Gio Marino de Ghettoff A Du Bois de Vroylande, Egidius de Connincke, John Baptist Coghells, Peter Melyn, John Michael Melyn, Charles Jvan Colen de Boucheur, and Mathias Vandernoot Baran Van Kieseghem; complaining of an Order of the Court of Chancery, made the Twenty-first of November 1729, in a Cause wherein the Appellants were Plaintiffs, and the Governor and Company of the London Assurance were Defendants; and praying, "That the same may be reversed:" As also upon the Answer of the said Defendants put in to the said Appeal; and due Consideration had of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:

Order affirmed.

It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Petition and Appeal be, and is hereby, dismissed this House; and that the said Order therein complained of be, and is hereby, affirmed.

Fitz Gerald's Appeal:

The House was informed, "That a Person attended, and desired to deliver in certain Pleadings and Proceedings, in the Cause wherein Edward Fitz Gerald Esquire is Appellant, and Thomas Fitz Gerald Gentleman Respondent, on the Behalf of the said Appellant."

Pleadings proved.

And thereupon Thomas Bradish Gentleman was called in; and, at the Bar, delivered the said Pleadings and Proceedings; and attested, upon Oath, "The same were true Copies, he having examined them with the Originals in the proper Offices in Ireland."

And then he withdrew.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Mercurii, tertium diem instantis Februarii, hora undecima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Mercurii, 3^o Februarii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Fredericus Princeps Walliæ.

PRAYERS.

Ranby versus Downes.

The Answer of George Downes Gentleman, to the Appeal of John Ranby Esquire and Jane his Wife, was brought in.

Pitt versus Ly. Clavering.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of George Pitt Esquire; complaining of an Order, or Decree, of the Court of Chancery, of the Nineteenth of November 1728, and the Certificate thereupon, and the final Order, or Decree, of the said Court, of the Twentieth of November last, made in a Cause wherein the Appellant was Plaintiff, and Dame Jane Clavering Defendant; and praying, "That the same may be reversed, and the Appellant quieted in the Possession and free Use of the Waggon-way in Question:"

It is Ordered, That the said Dame Jane Clavering may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and she is hereby required to put in her Answer thereunto, in Writing, on or before Wednesday the Seventeenth Day of this Instant February.

Fuller and Pargiler versus Sir R. Mill & al.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Samuel Pargiter Fuller, an Infant, by Thomas Pargiter Gentleman, his Guardian, and of Edmund Pargiter; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Chancery, of the Fifteenth of November in the Seventh Year of the Reign of His late Majesty King George, made in a Cause wherein Sir Richard Mill Baronet, Margaret Mill, Sir Thomas Hobbey Baronet and Dame Elizabeth his Wife, Executrix of Mary Mill deceased, and Philadelphta Mill, were Plaintiffs, and Samuel Pargiter, alias Fuller, the Appellant the Infant's late Father, was Defendant; and praying, "That the same may be reversed:"

It is Ordered, That the said Sir Richard Mill and the other Plaintiffs may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and do put in their Answer or respective Answers thereunto, in Writing, on or before Wednesday the Seventeenth Day of this Instant February.

R chardson & Ux. versus Sedgwick & al.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Robert Richardson Esquire and Elizabeth his Wife; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Chancery, of the Third of July last, made in a Cause wherein the Appellants were Plaintiffs, and John Sedgwick and Elizabeth his Wife, and Edmund Duckett, were Defendants; and in a Cross Cause, wherein the said Defendants were Plaintiffs, and the said Appellants and Robert Richardson Junior were Defendants; and praying, "That the same may be reversed; and that they may have the Relief sought by their Original Bill; and that the said Cross Bill may be dismissed, with Costs:"

It is Ordered, That the said John Sedgwick and Elizabeth his Wife, and Edmund Duckett, may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and they are hereby required to put in their Answer or respective Answers thereunto, in Writing, on or before Wednesday the Seventeenth Day of this Instant February.

Clayton to enter into a Recognizance for Mrs. Folkes.

The House being moved, "That Alexius Clayton Gentleman may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for Silence Folkes Widow, on account of her Appeal, she being ill:"

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

Furnese versus Sir C. Peers & al.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Henry Furnese Esquire; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Exchequer, of the Eleventh of June last, made in a Cause wherein John Tutt was Plaintiff, and Sir Charles Peers and Dame Lucy his Wife, the Honourable Charles Howard Esquire, and Edward Spackman, were Defendants; which Cause was, upon the Death of the said Tutt, revived in the Name of the Appellant; and praying, "That the said Decree may be reversed, and such other Decree made for the Appellant's Relief as the Nature of his Case requires:"

It is Ordered, That the said Sir Charles Peers and the other Defendants may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and do put in their Answer or respective Answers thereunto, in Writing, on or before Wednesday the Seventeenth Day of this Instant February.

Magenis versus Magenis & al.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Arthur Magenis Esquire; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Chancery of Ireland, of the Twenty-fourth of February 1728, made in a Cause wherein Anne Magenis was Plaintiff, and the Appellant and others were Defendants; and praying, "That the same may be reversed:"

It is Ordered, That Anne Magenis, Fortescue Dogherty, Thomas Plunkett, and James Dunkin, may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and they are hereby required to put in their Answer or respective Answers thereunto, in Writing, on or before Wednesday the Tenth Day of March next; and that Service of this Order on the Respondents Clerk in the said Court of Chancery of Ireland be deemed good Service.

Alston's Pet. referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Joseph Alston, of Newhouse, in the County of Suffolk, Esquire, and of his Son and Heir Apparent; praying Leave to bring in a Bill, for Sale of the Real Estate of Mary Clayton Widow, devised to the Petitioners, for Payment of Debts and Legacies charged thereon:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby, referred to Mr. Baron Comyns and Mr. Justice Lee; with the usual Directions, according to the Standing Orders.

Foord versus Foord:

Counsel (according to Order) were called in, and heard in Part, in the Cause wherein William Foord Esquire is Appellant, and Ellen Foord, an Infant, by William Jolly Esquire, her Guardian, and the said Jolly, are Respondents.

And being withdrawn:

Judges to attend.

It is Ordered, That the further hearing the said Cause be adjourned till To-morrow; and that the Judges do then attend.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Jovis, quartum diem instantis Februarii, hora undecima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Jovis, 4^o Februarii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Fredericus Princeps Walliæ.

PRAYERS.

Foord versus Foord:

After hearing Counsel, as well Yesterday as this Day, upon the Petition and Appeal of William Foord Esquire; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Exchequer in Ireland, of the Twenty-seventh of May 1728, made in a Cause wherein the Appellant was Plaintiff, and Ellen Foord, an Infant under the Age of Twenty-one Years, by William Jolly Esquire, her Guardian, and others, were Defendants; and praying, "That the same may be reversed; and that the Appellant may have such Relief as to the House shall seem meet:" As also upon the Answer of the said Ellen Foord, and of her said Guardian, put in to the said Appeal; and hearing the Judges present, upon a Matter to them proposed; and due Consideration had of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:

Judgement.

It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That as to so much of the said Decree complained of, as relates to the Mortgages and other Personal Estate of the Testator John Foord, the Appellant's Father, the same is hereby affirmed; but as to the Real Estate of the said Testator, the said Decree is hereby reversed: And it is hereby further Ordered, That the Respondents do come to an Accompt for the Rents and Profits of the Real Estate come to the Hands, or received by them, or either of them, that have grown due since the Decease of Rawlinson Foord, the Appellant's Brother; and that the Respondents do pay the same to the Appellant; and that the Respondents do likewise deliver Possession of the Real Estate to the Appellant, and all Deeds, Evidences, Writings, and Leases, relating thereto; and that the said Court of Exchequer do cause this Order and Judgement to be put in effectual Execution.

Frederick versus Sir T. Frederick & al.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Thomas Frederick Esquire, Eldest Grandson of Thomas Frederick Esquire, deceased; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Chancery, of the 25th of August 1721, made in a Cause wherein Leonora the Widow and Relict of Thomas Frederick Esquire was Plaintiff, and the Appellant, then an Infant, and Sir Thomas Frederick the Appellant's Father, and the Appellant's Brothers John and Charles Frederick, and others, were Defendants; and in a Cross Cause, wherein the Appellant's said Father and Brothers were Plaintiffs, and the said Leonora and others were Defendants; and praying, "That the same may be reversed, and the Will of the said Thomas Frederick established; and that the Appellant may have the full Benefit thereof:"

It is Ordered, That Sir John Frederick, Executor of the said Leonora Frederick, Sir Thomas Frederick, Thomas Powell and Mary his Wife, Romney Diggle and Leonora his Wife, James Duke of Atholl and Jane his Wife, William Peer Williams, John Borrett, and Robert Chapman, Executors of the said Thomas Frederick, and John and Charles Frederick, the Appellant's Younger Brothers, may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and do put in their Answer or respective Answers thereunto, in Writing, on or before Thursday the Eighteenth Day of this Instant February.

V. Stormont versus Henderson & al.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of David Viscount of Stormont; complaining of Two Interlocutories of the Lords of Council and Session in Scotland, of the 24th of November and 27th of December 1726, made on the Behalf of John Henderson and others; and praying, "That the same may be reversed:"

It is Ordered, That the said John Henderson, and John Gibson, Mathew Rae, Thomas Moffatt, and Thomas Richardson, for themselves and others, Tenants in the Four Towns of Lochmaben, may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and they are hereby required to put in their Answer or respective Answers thereunto, in Writing, on or before Thursday the Fourth Day of March next; and that Service of this Order on the Respondents respective Attornies, or Procurators, before the Court of Session in Scotland, be deemed good Service.

Baynes & al. versus Ranby & al.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of John Baynes Esquire, Serjeant at Law, John Milner Esquire, and Sarah Barrett Widow; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Chancery, made by the Master of the Rolls, the Fifth of January 1727, and the Confirmation thereof by the Lord Chancellor, the 15th of November 1729, in a Cause wherein George Downes was Plaintiff, and the Appellants and others were Defendants; and praying, "That the same may be varied so far, as that the Appellants and Jane Ranby may have Liberty to pay off a Mortgage to the said George Downes; and that, upon such Payment of One Hundred and Fifty Pounds, and Interest, and Costs, he may assign the same over, for the Benefit of the Appellants, and John Ranby, and the said Jane, according to their respective Interests, to such Persons as they shall for that Purpose appoint:"

It is Ordered, That the said George Downes, and the said John Ranby and Jane his Wife, may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and they are hereby required to put in their Answer or respective Answers thereunto, in Writing, on or before Thursday the Eighteenth Day of this Instant February.

Sir W. Barker versus Vis Ikerrin & al.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Sir William Barker Baronet; complaining of several Orders and Decrees of the Court of Chancery of Ireland, made the 21st and 22d of February 1728, and the 6th of May 1729, so far as the same relate to the directing an Issue to be tried; and of all the Orders and Proceedings subsequent to the Order by which the said Issue was first directed to be tried; and of the Decretal Order of the 19th of December 1730; and praying, "That the said Order first directing the Trial of the said Issue, and the several Orders and Decrees subsequent thereto, may be reversed; and the Decretal Order for dismissing the Bill exhibited by the Lord Viscount Ikerrin and Phannel Cook, with Costs, may be affirmed; and that the Appellant may have such Relief as to this House shall seem meet:"

It is Ordered, That Somerset Hamilton Viscount Ikerrin and Phannel Cook may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and do put in their Answers thereunto, in Writing, on or before Thursday the Eleventh Day of March next; and that Service of this Order on the said Respondents Six Clerk or Clerks in the Court of Chancery of Ireland be deemed good Service.

De Rons versus Van Neck.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of John Martin De Ron, Administrator with the Will annexed of Cornelia De Ron, Executrix of John Martin De Ron Semor, and Administrator de Bonis non &c. with the Will annexed of the said John Martin De Ron Senior, and John De Ron, Merchants; complaining of so much of an Order of the 30th of July 1730, whereby the Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Exceptions taken by the Appellants, to the Report made by Mr. Alderman Barnard and Samuel Holden Esquire, dated the 19th of March 1729, were over-ruled, in certain Causes, wherein Gerard Van Neck Merchant, surviving Assignee of Sir Justus Beck Baronet, a Bankrupt, deceased, by Bill, of Revivor, was Plaintiff, and the Appellants and others were Defendants, et è contra; and praying, "That the same may be reversed:"

It is Ordered, That the said Gerard Van Neck may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and he is hereby required to put in his Answer thereunto, in Writing, on or before Thursday the Eighteenth Day of this Instant February.

Van Neck versus De Rons.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Gerard Van Neck Merchant; complaining of Part of a Decree of the Court of Chancery, of the Seventh of December in the Tenth Year of His late Majesty's Reign, made in certain Causes, wherein the Appellant and others were Plaintiffs, and Martin De Ron and Partners were Defendants, et è contra; and praying, "That the same may be varied and altered in the Matters complained of:"

It is Ordered, That the said John Martin De Ron and Partners may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and they are hereby required to put in their Answer there unto, in Writing, on or before Thursday the Eighteenth Day of this Instant February.

Sankey versus Graham

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Margaret Sankey, Widow and Administratrix of Henry Sankey Esquire, deceased; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Chancery of Ireland, of the Sixteenth of February 1724, made in a Cause wherein Anne Graham Widow and Administratrix of Winwood Graham, deceased, and Anne, Margaret, and Sarah Graham, were Plaintiffs, and the Appellant's late Husband and others were Defendants; and praying, "That the said Decree, and all subsequent Proceedings thereon, may be reversed:"

It is Ordered, That the said Anne Graham and the said other Plaintiffs, together with Francis Foster and Sarah his Wife, may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and they are hereby required to put in their Answer or respective Answers thereunto, in Writing, on or before Thursday the Eleventh Day of March next; and that Service of this Order on the said Respondents Clerk in Court in Ireland be deemed good Service.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Veneris, quintum diem instantis Februarii, hora undecima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Veneris, 5^o Februarii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

PRAYERS.

Ranby versus Williamson.

The Answer of Robert Williamson Esquire, to the Appeal of John Ranby Esquire and his Wife:

Sir W. Barker versus Damer.

Also, the Answer of John Damer and others, to the Appeal of Sir William Barker Baronet;

Were brought in.

Jervoise and Rudyerd versus Feild.

Counsel (according to Order) were called in, to be heard, in the Cause wherein Thomas Jervoise and Benjamin Rudyerd Esquire are Appellants, and James Field Gentleman is Respondent.

And the Appellants Counsel being heard accordingly:

They were all directed to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

It is Ordered, That the further hearing the said Cause be adjourned till To-morrow.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Sabbati, sextum diem instantis Februarii, hora undecima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Sabbati, 6^o Februarii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

PRAYERS.

Pitt versus Lady Clavering.

The Answer of Dame Jane Clavering, to the Appeal of George Pitt Esquire:

Baynes versus Downes.

Also, the Answer of George Downes Gentleman, to the Appeal of John Baynes Esquire, Serjeant at Law, and others;

Were brought in.

Jervoise and Rudyerd versus Feild:

After hearing Counsel, as well Yesterday as this Day, upon the Petition and Appeal of Thomas Jervoise and Benjamin Rudyerd Esquires; complaining of several Orders, or Decrees, of the Court of Chancery, of the Thirteenth of January 1726, and Fifteenth of December 1727, and the subsequent Proceedings thereon, in certain Causes, wherein John Bays and his Wife were Plaintiffs, and Richard Bird and Catherine his Wife, the Appellants, and James Feild Gentleman, since deceased, and others, were Defendants; and wherein the said Bird and his Wife were Plaintiffs, and the said Bays and his Wife, and the Appellants, and others, were Defendants; and wherein Sophia Zouch, an Infant, by her prochein Amie, was Plaintiff, and the said Bays and his Wife, Richard Bird and his Wife, the said Appellants, and James Feild Gentleman, and others, were Defendants; and wherein the Attorney General, at the Relation of Richard Rogers, and others, were Plaintiffs, the said Bays and his Wife, Richard Bird and his Wife, the Appellants, and the said James Feild, and others, were Defendants; and praying, "That the said Orders and Proceedings may be reversed; and that the Appellants First, Second, and Seventh Exceptions to the Master's Report may be allowed; and that James Feild, Son of the said James Feild, may be ordered to accompt for the Timber and Wood cut down by his Father upon the Trust Estate whilst he acted as Receiver:" As also upon the Answer of the said James Feild the Son put in to the said Appeal; and due Consideration and Debate had of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:

Orders affirmed, with a Vanation.

It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the Orders and subsequent Proceedings of the said Court, complained of in the said Appeal, be, and are hereby, affirmed; with this Variation: "That the Respondent do allow the Sum of Seven Hundred and Forty-two Pounds, Twelve Shillings, in Satisfaction of the Matters contained in the Seventh Exception to the Master's Report, and the special Matter of the said Report, in relation to the felling of Timber by the Respondent's Father."

Carroll versus Viocais.

The House being moved, "That a Day may be appointed, for hearing the Cause wherein Barnaby Carroll Esquire is Appellant, and Richard Viccars Gentleman Respondent:"

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

Pitt versus Ly. Clavering.

The like Motion and Order, for hearing the Cause wherein George Pitt Esquire is Plaintiff, and Dame Jane Clavering Respondent, on the next vacant Day for Causes after those already appointed.

V. Barrington versus Searle: Judges to attend.

Ordered, That all the Judges do attend this House on Monday next, when the Errors assigned upon a Writ of Error, wherein John Barrington Esquire, commonly called Viscount Barrington in the Kingdom of Ireland, is Plaintiff, and Susannab Searle Widow Defendant, are appointed to be argued.

Bowry's Pet. referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Lucy Bowry Widow, in Behalf of herself and her Son John Bowry; praying Leave to bring in a Bill, for Sale of an Estate, in the Parishes of Edmonton and Tottenham, in the County of Middlesex, to discharge the several Incumbrances thereupon; and for placing the Residue of the Purchasemoney on some Government or other Security, for the Support and Maintenance of the Petitioners, in such Manner as to this House shall seem meet:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby, referred to Mr. Justice Price and Mr. Baron Comyns; with the usual Directions, according to the Standing Orders.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Lunæ, octavum diem instantis Februarii, hora undecima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Lunæ, 8^o Februarii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

PRAYERS.

Sir W. Gordon versus Gordon.

The Answer of Lodowick Gordon, Merchant in Elgin, to the Appeal of Sir William Gordon Baronet, was brought in.

D. of Cleveland and Southampton takes his Seat.

This Day William Duke of Cleveland and Southampton sat first in Parliament, after the Death of his Father Charles Duke of Cleveland and Southampton; his Grace having first, at the Table, taken the Oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration, and also taken and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.

V. Fauconberg's Cause to be heard peremptorily, and Judges to attend.

The House being moved, "That the Cause wherein Thomas Fowler Lord Viscount Fauconberg and his Wife are Appellants, and Richard Fitz Gerald Esquire and his Wife, and others, are Respondents, which stands for Wednesday the Twenty-fourth Instant, may be then heard peremptorily; and that the Judges may attend:"

It is Ordered, That the said Cause be then heard peremptorily; and that the Judges do then attend, as desired.

D. of Chandos and his Son, Pet. referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of James Duke of Chandos and Henry Bridges Esquire, commonly called Marquis of Carnarvon, his only Son and Heir Apparent; praying Leave to bring in a Bill, for vesting several Manors, Lands, and Hereditaments, in the said Duke and his Heirs, in Pursuance of Articles of Agreement made on the Marriage of the said Henry Bridges with the Honourable Mary Bruce, Eldest Daughter of Charles Lord Bruce:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby, referred to Mr. Baron Comyns and Mr. Justice Lee; with the usual Directions, according to the Standing Orders.

V. Barrington versus Searle, in Error:

Whereas, by virtue of His Majesty's Writ of Error, returnable into the House of Lords in Parliament assembled, a Record of the Court of Exchequer was brought into this Court, the Third Day of March last, with the Transcript thereof, wherein John Barrington Esquire, commonly called John Lord Viscount Barrington of the Kingdom of Ireland, Administrator of the Goods and Chattels of John Wildman Esquire, deceased, is Plaintiff, and Sujanna Searle Widow, Administratrix of the Goods and Chattels of George Searle Gentleman, deceased, Defendant; upon which said Writ, Errors being assigned by the said Plaintiff, and Issue joined by the said Defendant; and this Day being appointed, for hearing the Errors argued in this Case, by Counsel, at the Bar:

Counsel were heard accordingly.

And the Judges attending (according to Order), delivered their Opinions seriatim, in relation to a certain Matter to them proposed.

And due Consideration and Debate had of what was offered on either Side in this Case:

Judgement affirmed, with Costs.

It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the Judgement given in the Exchequer Chamber, affirming the Judgement in the Court of King's Bench, be, and is hereby, affirmed; and that the Record be remitted, to the End Execution may be had thereupon, as if no such Writ of Error had been brought into this House: And it is further Ordered, That the said Plaintiff do pay, or cause to be paid, to the said Defendant, the Sum of Five Pounds, for her Costs sustained by reason of the bringing the said Writ of Error.

The Tenor of which Judgement, to be affixed to the Transcript of the Record to be remitted, follows; (videlicet,)

"Sed quia Cur. Parliamenti præd. nunc hic de Judicio suo de er super Præmiss. reddend. nondum advisatur, Dies inde dat. est Partibus præd. coram eadem Cur. Parliamenti, ubicunque &c. usque Diem Lunæ, Octavum Diem Februarii prox. sequen. de Judic. suo inde audiend. eo quod Cur. Parliamenti præd. nunc hic inde nondum &c.; ad quem Diem, coram eadem Cur. Parliamenti præd. apud Westm. ven, Partes præd. per Attorn. suos præd.; super quo, vis. et per Cur. Parliamenti nunc hic plenius intellectis omnibus et singulis Præmissis, diligenterque examinatis et inspectis tam Record. et Process. præd. ac Judic. Præd. super eisdem reddit. quam præd. Causis et Materiis per præd. Joh'em Vicecomitem Barrington superius pro Error. assige et. allegat. maturaque Deliberatione inde habita, vidctur eidem Cur. Parliamenti, quod nec in Record. et Process. præd. nec in Redditione Judic. præd. nec in Affirmatione inde, in ullo est Errat. ac quod Record. illud in nullo vitiosum aut defectivum existit: ldeo cons. est per eandem Cur. Parliamenti præd. quod separalia Judicia præd. in omnibus affirmentur, ac in omnibus suis Robore et Effectu stent, dictis Causis et Materiis per præsat. Joh'em Vicecomitem Barrington superius pro Error. assign. in aliquo non obstant. Et ulterius per eandem Cur. Parliamenti præd. nunc hic cons. est, quod præd. Susanna recuperet versus præfat. Joh'em Vicecomitem Barrington Quinque Libras, eidem Susanna, ex Assensu suo, per eandem Cur. Parliamenti præd: juxta Formam Statuti inde edit. et provis. adjudicat. pro Dampnis, Misis, et Custagiis suis, quæ habuit Occasione Dilationis. Executionis Judic. præd. Prætextu Prosecutionis dicti Brevis de Errore; ac superinde Record. præd. necnon Process. in eadem Cur. Parliamenti, in Præmiss. habit. per eandem Cur. Parliamenti, Cur. dicti Domini Regis, coram ipso Rege, ubiounque &c. remittuntur, et in eadem Cur. dicti Domini Regis, coram ipso Rege, jam resident. &c."

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Mercurii, decimum diem instantis Februarii, hora undecima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Mercurii, 10^o Februarii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Fredericus Princeps Walliæ.

PRAYERS.

Ranby versus Baynes.

The joint and several Answer of John Baynes Esquire, Serjeant at Law, and others, to the Appeal of John Ranby Esquire and Jane his Wife, was brought in.

Radcliffe versus Fursman:

After hearing Counsel, upon the Petition and Appeal of Walter Radcliffe Esquire; complaining of an Order of the Court of Chancery, made the Third Day of March last, in a Cause wherein Martha Fursman, an Infant, by Peter Burnaford Clerk, her prochein Amy, was Plaintiff, and the Appellant Defendant; and praying, "That the same may be reversed and set aside; and that so much of the Appellant's Demurrer to the Respondent's Bill as hath been over-ruled may be allowed; and that such other Order may be made in the Premises as to this House shall seem meet:" As also upon the Answer of the said Martha Fursman, by her said Guardian, put in to the said Appeal; and due Consideration had of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:

Order affirmed.

It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Petition and Appeal be, and is hereby, dismissed this House; and that the said Order therein complained of be, and is hereby, affirmed.

Lewis's Pet concerning Folkes's Appeal, referred to a Committee:

Upon reading the Petition of Maurice Lewis Esquire; praying the Determination of this House, "Whether the Appeal of Silence Folkes, Executrix of Thomas Folkes Esquire, is so legally lodged, that their Lordships will proceed to determine thereupon; the Petitioner being advised the Appellant should proceed upon a former Appeal of the said Thomas Folkes, and cannot upon the present Appeal before the Proceedings below are revived against her."

The Lords following were appointed a Committee, to consider of the said Petition; and report what they shall think proper thereupon to the House; (videlicet,)

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

Barons of the Exchequer to attend Committee, and Clerks to search Precedents.

Ordered, That some of the Barons of the Court of Exchequer do attend the said Committee; and that the Clerks do search for Precedents.

Deeds, &c. to be delivered back to Respondents to Fyke's Appeal

A Petition of Nicholas Dee and Edward Dee, Gentlemen, was presented, and read; praying, "That a canceled Deed and Bond, and other Title Deeds and Writings, concerning an Estate formerly in Question, upon an Appeal of one Thomas Pyke, to which the Petitioners and others were Respondents, left with a Master in Chancery pursuant to an Order of this House, may be delivered back to the Petitioners; the said Writings being the Tenth of April last ordered by this House to be delivered back by the Master; but, the Appeal not being then determined, the said Order was so far varied the next Day, as that the said Writings should not be delivered back till the then next Session, and further Order of the House."

And thereupon the last mentioned Orders being read; and the House informed, "There was no Appeal of the said Pyke subsisting:"

It is Ordered, That the Master in whose Custody the said Writings now are, do deliver the same back to the Petitioners, as desired.

Sir W Gordon versus Gordon.

The House being moved, "That a Day may be appointed, for hearing the Cause wherein Sir William Gordon of Invergordon Baronet is Appellant, and Lodovick Gordon Merchant in Elgin is Respondent:

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

Sir W. Banker, versus Damer & al.

The like Motion and Order, for hearing the Cause wherein Sir William Barker Baronet is Appellant, and John and Joseph Damer, Executors of Joseph Damer Esquire, deceased, and Nathaniel Evans Gentleman, are Respondents, on the next vacant Day for Causes after those already appointed.

French, to enter into a Recognizance for Magenis.

The House being moved, "That Edward French Gentleman may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for Arthur Magenis Esquire, on account of his Appeal; he residing in Ireland:"

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

Goodere for Mrs. Barrett & al.

The like Motion and Order, for John Goodere Esquire, to enter into a Recognizance for Sarah Barrett Widow and others, on account of their Appeal; she being ill.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Veneris, duodecimum diem instantis Februarii, hora undecima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.