Journal of the House of Lords: Volume 12, 1666-1675. Originally published by His Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1767-1830.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
DIE Veneris, 28 die Maii.
|His Royal Highness the Duke of Yorke.|
Epus. Bath & Wells.
Epus. (fn. 1) Bangor.
Ds. Finch, Ds. Custos Magni Sigilli.
Ds. Thesaurarius Angliæ.
Ds. Custos Privati Sigilli.
L. Great Chamberlain.
Comes Marescallus Angliæ.
Comes St. Albans.
Ds. Arundell de Ward.
Ds. Howard de Esc.
Ds. Gerard de Brand.
Ds. Arundell de Trer.
Ds. Butler de M. Parke.
Ds. Grey de Roleston.
Watermen on The Thames Bill.
Ld. Maynard's Bill.
Ly. Clifford versus Percy, Privilege.
Upon reading the Petition of Elizabeth Lady Clifford; complaining, "That one James Percy hath brought several Actions at Law against her, and Sir John Copleston her Trustee, for Lands in Cannington, in Somersettshire, and is putting on a Trial the next Term at the King's Bench Bar in Ejectment; and praying, That she may enjoy the Privilege of a Peeress in Time of Parliament:"
It is ORDERED, That all Proceedings in the said Suit against the said Lady Clifford be, and are hereby, stopped during the Privilege of Parliament; and that the said James Percy and Mr. Utting his Lessee, and Robert Leake and Andrew Innis his Attorney and Solicitor, be, and are hereby, required to appear at the Bar of this House to answer to the said Complaint of Breach of Privilege, on Tuesday next, being the First Day of June next, at Ten of the Clock in the Forenoon.
E. Bolingbrooke, and Bedford Inhabitants Petition, about making The Owse navigable.
Upon reading the Petition of Oliver Earl of Bollingbrooke, on the Behalf of himself, and the Mayor and several Aldermen, Burgesses, and Inhabitants, of the Town of Bedford, concerning the making the River of Owse, in the County of Bedford, navigable, in Pursuance of an Act made in the 16th and 17th Years of His Majesty's Reign that now is, for making divers Rivers navigable, or otherwise passable, for Boats, Barges, and other Vessels; there being some Question, whether the doing thereof will be of Advantage or Damage to the County of Bedford:
It is ORDERED, That the Persons empowered by the said Act do forthwith proceed to make the said River navigable; or shew Cause to the contrary, at the Bar of this House, on Friday the 4th Day of June next, at Ten of the Clock in the Forenoon.
Bulkley versus Bulkley.
Upon reading the Petition of William Bulkley Merchant, complaining of a Decree made in the Court of Chancery against him, for the Payment of Thirteen Hundred Pounds to one Bartholmewe Bulkley, in the said Petition mentioned; and praying Relief, according to the Justness of his Cause:
It is ORDERED, That the said Bartholmew Bulkley may have a Copy of the said Petition, to which he is hereby required to put in an Answer in Writing on Wednesday, being the Second Day of June next, at Ten of the Clock in the Forenoon.
Bulkley versus Bulkley, in Error.
It is ORDERED, upon Motion made on the Behalf of the said Defendant, That this House will hear Counsel, to argue the said Errors on both Parts, at the Bar, on Thursday the Third Day of June next, at Ten of the Clock in the Forenoon; whereof the said Bartholmewe Bulkley is to cause timely Notice to be given to the said William Bulkley for that Purpose.
Ld. Crew versus Eyres, Privilege.
It is ORDERED, That the Examination of the Matter of Reflection on the said Trustees, contained in the said Case, together with a Paper signed by the Lord Crewe's Counsel, be, and is hereby, referred to the Committee for Privileges, who are to make Report thereof unto the House.
Jenkins versus Blake.
ORDERED, That the Cause which should have been heard on Monday next, between John Jenkins and Margaret his Wife, and others, Plaintiffs, and Francis Blake and Elizabeth his Wife, and others, Defendants, be, and is hereby, appointed to be heard, by Counsel on both Parts, at the Bar of this House, on Tuesday the First Day of June next, at Three of the Clock in the Afternoon; whereof all Parties concerned are hereby to take Notice, and attend accordingly.
Wright versus Stevenson, in Error.
It is this Day ORDERED, That this House will hear Counsel, to argue the Errors (thereon assigned) at the Bar of this House, on Tuesday the First Day of June next, at Three of the Clock in the Afternoon; whereof both (fn. 2) Parts are to take Notice hereby, and attend accordingly.
Bill to prevent Dangers from disaffected Persons.
Sir N. Stoughton, Counsel assigned.
Whereas Sir Nicholas Stoughton having an Appeal depending in this House, against Arthur Onslow Esquire, a Member of the House of Commons, this House was moved, "That Counsel may be assigned to the said Sir Nicholas Stoughton, to plead his Cause upon the said Appeal:"
It is ORDERED, That Mr. Jeofferies, Mr. Ossley, Mr. Williams, and Mr. Heath (named for the said Sir Nicholas Stoughton), be, and are hereby, appointed to manage and plead the said Cause, at the Bar of this House, on the Part and Behalf of the said Sir Nicholas Stoughton, on Wednesday the Second Day of June next, at Ten of the Clock in the Forenoon; and at such other Times as it shall be depending in this House.
Onslow, Counsel assigned.
Whereas there is an Appeal depending in this House, wherein Sir Nicholas Stoughton is Plaintiff, against Arthur Onslow Esquire, a Member of the House of Commons, who hath appeared, and answered; the House being moved, "That Counsel may be assigned to plead his Cause upon the said Appeal:"
It is ORDERED, That Mr. Serjeant Scroggs, Serjeant Pemberton, and Mr. Anthony Keck, (named for the said Arthur Onslowe) be, and are hereby, appointed to manage and plead the said Cause, at the Bar of this House, on the Part and Behalf of the said Arthur Onslow, on Wednesday the Second Day of June next, at Ten of the Clock in the Forenoon; and at such other Times as it shall be depending in this House.
Crispes versus Ly. Cranborne & al.
This Day the House heard the Counsel of Sir Nicholas Crispe, John Crispe, and Thomas Crispe, upon their Petition and Appeal depending in this House; and also the Counsel of the Lady Bowyer and Mr. Dalmahoy, upon their Answer thereunto.
Protest against dismissing the Appeal.
Crispes versus Ly. Cranborne, Dalmahoy, & al.
"Upon hearing Counsel this Day at the Bar on both Parts, upon the Petition and Appeal of Sir Nicholas Crispe Baronet, and Thomas Crispe and John Crispe Esquires, and the Answer of Diana Viscountess Cranborne Widow, the Lady Anne Bowyer Widow, and Thomas Dalmahoy Esquire, put in thereunto, concerning a Decree made in the Court of Chancery, on the Seventh Day of July, in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Six Hundred Seventy and Four, whereby it was decreed that the Petitioners should pay (to the Use of the Plaintiffs in the Bill and Proceedings upon which the said Decree was grounded according to Orders of that Court) Interest for Four Thousand Pounds paid by James Maxwell Esquire, from the Time of his Payment thereof to the East India Company, to the Time the same was repaid; which Interest, with Costs of Suit in Chancery concerning the said Money, are computed at Four Thousand Five Hundred Eighty-four Pounds, Nine Shillings, and Six Pence, which was, by final Decree of the 20th of February last, confirmed and made absolute: Upon due Consideration had of what was offered on either Part thereupon, it is Resolved and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Petition and Appeal of the said Sir Nicholas Crispe, John Crispe, and Thomas Crispe, be, and is hereby, dismissed."