House of Lords Journal Volume 62: 22 July 1830

Die Jovis, 22 Julii 1830.

DOMINI tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

PRAYERS.

M. of Westmeath v. M. of Salisbury et al. put off to the next Session.

The House proceeded to take into further Consideration the Cause wherein George Thomas John Marquess of Westmeath is Appellant, and James Marquess of Salisbury, and others, are Respondents:

And Consideration being had thereof;

Ordered, That the further Consideration of the said Cause be put off to the second Monday in the next Session of Parliament.

Sir J. Montgomery et al. v. M. of Queensberry, & Selkrig:

The House proceeded to take into further Consideration the Cause wherein Sir James Montgomery Baronet, and others, are Appellants, and Charles Marquess of Queensberry, and Charles Selkrig, are Respondents:

And Consideration being had thereof;

The following Order and Judgment was made:

After hearing Counsel, as well on Friday the 7th as on Monday the 10th and Friday the 14th Days of May last, upon the Petition and Appeal of Sir James Montgomery of Stanhope, Baronet, William Murray of Henderland, Esquire, and Edward Bullock Douglas, sometime of the Inner Temple, Esquire, surviving Trustees and Executors of the late William Duke of Queensberry; complaining of an Interlocutor of the Lords of Session in Scotland, of the First Division, dated the 7th and signed the 11th Day of March 1828; and praying, "That the same might be reversed, varied or altered, or that the Appellants might have such other Relief in the Premises, as to this House, in their Lordships great Wisdom, should seem meet;" as also upon the Answer of The Most Noble Charles Marquess and Earl of Queensberry, and of John Douglas Esquire, of Locherbie, and William Paul Esquire, Accountant in Edinburgh, Trustees of the said Noble Marquess in room of Charles Selkrig Esquire, Accountant in Edinburgh, formerly Trust Assignee of his Lordship, put in to the said Appeal; and due Consideration had this Day of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:

Interlocutor Reversed.

It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the Interlocutor complained of in the said Appeal, be, and the same is hereby Reversed.

Ld. Grantley takes the Oaths.

This Day Fletcher Lord Grantley took the Oaths, and also took and subscribed the Oath of Adjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.

Mackenzie v. Rose:

Upon reading the Petition of Murdo Mackenzie Esquire, Appellant in a Cause depending in this House, to which Hugh Rose Esquire is Respondent; praying their Lordships "to make an Order whereby the Petitioner may be at liberty and enabled to withdraw his Petition and Appeal presented to the House on the 10th Day of June last past, and to substitute his second Appeal presented to the House on the 16th Day of this instant July in lieu and stead thereof; the Agent for the Respondent having signed the said Petition as consenting thereto:

Appeal withdrawn.

It is Ordered, That the Petitioner be at liberty to withdraw his said Appeal, as desired.

His Majesty's Answer to Address respecting Sir J. Barrington.

The Lord Steward reported, "That he and The Lord Chamberlain had, in pursuance of their Lordships Order of Tuesday last, waited on His Majesty with the Address of both Houses of Parliament; to which His Majesty was pleased to return the following most gracious Answer:

"I cannot but regret the Circumstances which have led to this Address. I will give Directions that Sir Jonah Barrington be removed from the Office which he holds of Judge of the High Court of Admiralty in Ireland."

Regulations of the Governments of Bengal, &c. delivered.

The House being informed, "That Mr. Danvers, from the Court of Directors of The East India Company, attended;"

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

"Regulations passed by The Governor General in Council of Bengal in the Year 1829:"

Also, "Regulations passed by The Governor in Council of Fort St. George in the Year 1829:"

And also, "Regulations passed by The Governor in Council of Bombay in the Year 1829."

And then he withdrew.

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

Forbes et al. v. Shaw et al:

The House proceeded to take into further Consideration the Cause wherein William Forbes Esquire, and others, are Appellants, and John Shaw, and others, are Respondents:

And Consideration being had thereof;

The following Order and Judgment was made:

After hearing Counsel on Thursday the 18th Day of February last, upon the Petition and Appeal of William Forbes of Callender, Esquire, and his Curators; and of Mrs. Agnes Chalmers or Forbes, Relict of the deceased William Forbes of Callender, Esquire, David Forbes Esquire, Merchant in London, and James Allan Maconochie Esquire, Advocate, Trustees of the said deceased William Forbes Esquire; complaining of an Interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary in Scotland, of the 16th of February 1827; and also of an Interlocutor of the Court of Session there, of the First Division, of the 5th of June 1827; and praying, "That the same might be reversed, varied or amended, or that the Appellants might have such other Relief in the Premises, as to this House, in their Lordships great Wisdom, might seem proper;" as also upon the joint and several Answer of John Shaw, Land Surveyor in Falkirk, Collector of Assessments for the Heritors of the Parish of Falkirk; George M'Callam Esquire, late of Thornhill, now residing in Edinburgh; Colonel William Duncan, late of Glenfuir, now residing in London; and John Baird, Writer to the Signet, his Mandatory; John Callender Esquire, of Ladysmiln, and John Baird Esquire, of Camelon House, put in to the said Appeal; and due Consideration had this Day of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:

Interlocutors Affirmed, with Costs.

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 Interlocutors therein complained of, be, and the same are hereby Affirmed: And it is further Ordered, That the Appellants do pay or cause to be paid to the said Respondents the Sum of Sixty Pounds, for their Costs in respect of the said Appeal.

15th Report from Appeal Com ee.

The Earl of Shaftesbury reported from the Lords Committees appointed to consider of the Causes in which Prints of the Appellants and Respondents Cases, now depending in this House in Matters of Appeals and Writs of Error, have not been delivered, pursuant to the Standing Orders of this House; and to report to the House; and to whom were referred certain Petitions in the following Causes; M'Donald against M'Donald; Bulkley against Wilford; Scot against Irving; Scot against Irving (presented on the 12th of this instant July;) Rowe against The King; Scott against Paterson; and Johnston against Threshie; "That the Committee had met, and considered the Appellant's Petition in the Cause M'Donald against M'Donald, praying their Lordships that the Time for laying the Appellant's Case on their Lordships Table may be enlarged until the Expiration of One Week from the opening of the next Session of Parliament; and had heard the Appellant's Agent thereon, and the Committee are of Opinion, under the Circumstances of the Case, That the Prayer of the said Petition may be complied with: That the Committee had also considered the Appellant's Petition in the Cause Bulkley against Wilford, praying their Lordships to grant an Order allowing the Petitioner until the First Day of next Session of Parliament to lay his Case upon the Table of the House; and had heard the Appellant's Agent thereon, and had also heard the Respondent's Agent, who prayed of their Lordships, on behalf of the said Respondent, further Time to lodge the Respondent's Case, and the Committee are of Opinion, That the said Appellant may be allowed One Month's further Time to deliver in his printed Case, and that the said Respondent may be allowed Two Months further Time to deliver in her printed Case: That the Committee had also considered that Portion of the Petition of the Appellant's Agent in the Causes Scot against Ker and another, and Scot against Irving, (which Petition was referred to the Committee on the 12th of February last,) relating to the said Cause Scot against Irving, praying their Lordships that the Appellant may be allowed a Fortnight's further Time to apply for the peremptory Order for the said Respondent to put in his Answer to the said Appeal, and that the said Appeal may continue in its Place as at present among the Appeals, and had also considered the Respondent's Petition in the said Cause Scot against Irving, praying their Lordships that the Appeal may be dismissed, and had also considered a further Petition of the said Respondent in the last-mentioned Cause, praying their Lordships that the Consideration of his said Petition to dismiss the Appeal may be resumed; and had heard the Agents thereon, and the Committee are of Opinion, That the said Appeal Scot against Irving should be dismissed this House: That the Committee had also considered the Respondent's Petition in the Cause Scot against Irving, (which Appeal was presented on the 12th of this instant July,) praying their Lordships that the said Appeal may be dismissed; and had heard the Agents thereon, and the Committee are of Opinion, That the said Appeal should be dismissed this House: That the Committee had also considered the Petition of Charles More Ullithorne and John Norman Crampton of Red Lion Square, in the County of Middlesex, Gentlemen, Solicitors, for and on the Behalf of Richard Radford Rowe, the Plaintiff in the Writ of Error Rowe against The King, praying their Lordships to order that the Keeper of His Majesty's Gaol of Newgate, in the City of Dublin, be commanded to bring in his Custody to the Bar of this House, on the Second Appeal Day in the next Session of Parliament, the Body of the said Richard Radford Rowe, and that the said Richard Radford Rowe be then and there permitted to argue his Case in Person, or that their Lordships will make such other Order as to their Lordships shall seem meet; and the Committee are of Opinion, That the Keeper of His Majesty's Gaol of Newgate, in the City of Dublin, should be ordered to bring the said Richard Radford Rowe, a Prisoner in his Custody, to the Bar of this House, on the Second Appeal Day in the next Session of Parliament, and that the said Richard Radford Rowe should be permitted to argue his Case in Person, as desired: That the Committee had also considered the Respondents Petition in the Cause Scott against Paterson and another, praying their Lordships to dismiss (with Costs) the said Appeal, as irregular and incompetent, and to give the Petitioners such other Relief in the Premises as to their Lordships shall seem meet; and had heard the Agents thereon, and the Committee are of Opinion, That the said Appeal should be dismissed this House: And that the Committee had also considered the Petition of George Johnston, praying their Lordships that his Appeal against a Judgment of the Court of Session, to which David Scott Threshie is Respondent, may be received, and that the Petitioner may have Ten Days allowed him to obtain a Certificate of Intimation of the Appeal, and to indorse the same on his Appeal, in Terms of their Lordships Standing Order, and also to obtain the Signature of his other Counsel on the Petition of Appeal; and the Committee are of Opinion, That the Prayer of the said Petition may be complied with."

Which Report, being read by the Clerk, was agreed to by the House; and Ordered accordingly.

Johnston v. Threshie:

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of George Johnston, Tacksman of Redhall Quarry; complaining of an Interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary in Scotland, of the 2d of December 1828; and also of an Interlocutor of the Lords of Session there, of the Second Division, of the 10th of July 1830; and praying "That the same may be reversed, varied or altered, or that the Appellant may have such Relief in the Premises, as to this House, in their Lordships great Wisdom, shall seem meet; and that David Scott Threshie, Writer to the Signet, may be required to answer the said Appeal:"

It is Ordered, That the said David Scott Threshie may have a Copy of the said Appeal, and do put in his Answer thereunto, in Writing, on or before Thursday the 19th Day of August next; and Service of this Order upon the said Respondent, or upon any of his known Agents in the Court of Session in Scotland, shall be deemed good Service.

Macqueen to enter into a Recog ce on it.

The House being moved, "That John Macqueen of Little George Street, Westminster, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for George Johnston, on account of his Appeal depending in this House:"

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

Sir J. Montgomery et al. v. Maxwell, put off to the next Session.

Ordered, That the further Consideration of the Cause wherein Sir James Montgomery Baronet, and others, are Appellants, and Mackill Maxwell is Respondent, be put off to the second Monday in the next Session of Parliament.

Munro & Rose v. Drummond et al. put off to the next Session.

Ordered, That the further Consideration of the Cause wherein Mrs. Catharine Munro, and Hugh Rose her Husband, are Appellants, and Andrew Berkeley Drummond Esquire, and others, are Respondents, be put off to the second Monday in the next Session of Parliament.

References to Acts Mistakes Bill:

Hodie 3^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for correcting mistaken References to Acts of His late Majesty in Acts passed during the present Session of Parliament."

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

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Warehoused Sugar Bill:

Hodie 3^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act to allow, before the Fifth Day of July One thousand eight hundred and thirty-one, Sugar to be delivered out of Warehouse to be refined."

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

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Exchequer Bills (£13,607,600) Bill:

Hodie 3^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for raising the Sum of Thirteen millions six hundred and seven thousand six hundred Pounds by Exchequer Bills, for the Service of the Year One thousand eight hundred and thirty."

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

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Messages to H.C. that the Lords have agreed to the 3 preceding Bills.

And Messages were, severally, sent to the House of Commons, by Sir Giffin Wilson and Mr. Eden;

To acquaint them, That the Lords have agreed to the said Bills, without any Amendment.

Slavery, Petition from Salem Chapel, Leeds, for Abolition of.

Upon reading the Petition of the several Persons whose Names are thereunto subscribed, being Members of the Congregation of Independent Protestant Dissenters assembling for Divine Worship at Salem Chapel in Leeds, in the County of York; praying their Lordships "to pass an Act for the immediate Abolition of Slavery in the West Indian Colonies, accompanied by such Civil Regulations as may be thought necessary for the Maintenance of the Peace and Well-being of the Colonies in passing from a State of Slavery to the only proper Condition of Man, a State of Freedom:"

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

Administration of Justice Bill.

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

To return the Bill, intituled, "An Act for the more effectual Administration of Justice in England and Wales; and to acquaint this House, That they have agreed to their Lordships Amendments made thereto.

Adjourn.

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