Journal of the House of Lords: Volume 14, 1685-1691. Originally published by His Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1767-1830.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
DIE Lunæ, 2 die Decembris.
Keeling at the Bar:
King's Deposition against him:
"That, hearing of a Plot discovered by Mr. Jo. Keeling, it being then about Seven Days after he had sworn it, I did endeavour to find him; and being with him that Evening at a Coffee-house in Sweeting's Ally, I charged him with it, which he utterly denied. I urged him, "That, as the Discourse was public, to make a public Vindication of himself; which I proposed to him to do by Printing." He told me, "it would cost Money;" and I told him, "I would pay for it." He then told me, "He would discourse a Friend in The Minorys;" and then left me. I, being jealous that he might go some other Way, went after him towards The Minories; but, finding he was not gone that Way, went to his Brother's in Black Fryers, and enquired for him there. His Brother's Man (as I took him to be) told me, "They were just gone together to the Waterside." The next Morning I went to Mr. Jos. Keeling's House, and went with him to a Coffee-house by Tower Hill. I asked him, "Whether he went to his Friend in The Minoryes, according to his Promise?" He told me, "He did." I replied, "It was false; that, instead thereof, he went to his Brother's in Blacke Fryers." While we were discoursing, came in one Mr. Belchar: I charged him with the foresaid Discovery of a Plot. He told me, "It was all false; that he had not, neither knew any Thing of it;" and told me, "if I found any such Thing, he was the veriest Rogue that ever spake with a Tongue." After, when Mr. Belchar was gone, he said, "He was sorry I charged him so home; for, had Mr. Belchar believed it, he had been a dead Man; but, if I would go along with him, he would discover to me the Whole." Accordingly I went with him: He then told me, "There was the greatest Plot that ever I heard of; that many or most of the Nobility and Gentry, and many others, were concerned." I being desirous to know who he had charged, told me several Names; "but he was sorry for One, that was Mr. Richard Rumbold." I asked him, "Why he did it?" He told me, "Because he could not make the Plot without it."
"That, about Ten or Twelve Months before a Discovery of a pretended Plot, I came into Mr. Keeling's Acquaintance; and not long after he told me, "he was under great Necessities for Money, and desired me to lend him £. 100 Sterling;" which I did, and he gave a Judgement for the same to one Nich. Pigg; and about Fourteen Days, or thereabouts, before the Discovery of a Design as he informed of, he did say, "he was again greatly straitened for Money;" and, to my best Remembrance, Two Hundred Pounds was the Sum; but I would not lend it. But soon after I heard of this Discovery; and the same Day the Warrants were out for apprehending Men about his Plot, the £.100 was paid to my Son; which £.100 was supposed to be borrowed of one Mr. Gale.
"One Thing more comes to my Mind; that, about Two Days before the Warrants came out for apprehending Men for that Design, he did solemnly protest, "that he had made no Discovery, nor given in any Information against any Man; and he knew not of any Plot, neither had any Thing against any Man;" when before he had gotten his Brother to Whitehall, to inform what he had heard from Goodenough and others; which his Brother, with great Trouble of Mind, after he had hurried him in a Coach so to do, told one Mr. Steph. Tory.
Keeling not to give Bail.
Turner versus Turner and Gardiner.
Upon reading the Petition of Sir Edward Turner Knight and Anne Gardiner Widow, in Answer to a Petition of Dame Mary Turner; shewing, "That there being a Bill exhibited in the Court of Chancery against your Petitioners, and a Decree obtained against them, and they being aggrieved thereat as unjust, did appeal from the same to this Honourable House; and upon hearing Counsel on both Sides, the 22th Day of November, 1680, it was by this House Ordered and Adjudged, That the said Decree from which the said Sir Edward Turner and Anne Gardiner appealed should be reversed; under which the said Dame Mary Turner acquiesced, until she petitioned this House, the 16th Day of November last, to have the said Judgement of this House set aside and reversed; and the said Sir Edward Turner and Anne Gardiner humbly praying that the said Order, made on the said 22th of November, 1680, may stand confirmed, and that the said Lady Turner's Petition may be dismissed:"
After Debate thereupon, it was Resolved, upon the Question, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said last Order made in this Cause, the 16th of November, 1689, be, and is hereby, set aside; and that the Petition of the said Dame Mary Turner, upon which the said Order was made, be, and is hereby, dismissed this House.
Edwards & al. versus Duvall.
Bill to revive the Act for Triennial Parliaments.
Whereas this Day was appointed for the House to be put into a Committee upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act for reviving a former Act, made in the 16th Year of King Charles the First, intituled, An Act for preventing Inconveuiencies happening by the long Intermission of Parliaments:"
It is ORDERED, That this House shall be put into a Committee, to consider of the said Bill, on Thursday next, at Ten of the Clock in the Forenoon; at which Time all the Judges are to be present, and all the Lords summoned to attend the House.
Witnesses to be examined by the Committee for Inspections.
ORDERED, That Crispe Grange and Nathaniell Wade do attend this House on Wednesday next, at Ten of the Clock in the Forenoon, to be sworn, in order to be examined at the Committee for Inspections at Four of the Clock in the Afternoon of the same Day.
L. Hereford's Bill.
Committee for Inspections.
Robertus Atkins, Miles de Balneo, Capitalis Baro de Scaccario, Orator Procerum, declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque in diem Martis, videlicet, 3um diem instantis Decembris, hora decima Aurora, Dominis sic decernentibus.