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 Martis, 23 die Junii.
Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:
Bangor Cathedral Bill.
Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, "An Act for the Repair of the Cathedral Church of Bangor, and for the Maintenance of the Choir there; and for the Augmentation of the Revenue of the Bishopric of Bangor; and also of an Augmentation of several Vicarages."
ORDERED, That the Consideration of this Bill is committed to these Lords following:
Their Lordships, or any Five of them; to meet at Four of the Clock in the Afternoon, To-morrow, in the Lord Keeper's Lodgings; and to adjourn as they please.
Message from H. C. with a Bill.
A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir Thomas Clarges and others:
Who brought up a Bill, passed by the Commons, intituled, "An Act for erecting a new Parish, to be called the Parish of S't James, within the Liberty of Westminster;" to which their Lordships Concurrence is desired.
ORDERED, That this Bill be read the First Time on Thursday Morning next.
Sir Oliver Butler versus Regem, &c.
Upon reading the Petition of Sir Oliver Butler Baronet; praying, "That the Judges may deliver their Opinions in his Case, upon the Writ of Error, on a Day for that Purpose to be appointed:"
It is ORDERED, That the Judges do give their Opinions thereupon, in this House, on Friday the 26th of June Instant, at Ten of the Clock in the Forenoon.
Eyre versus Eyre.
After hearing Counsel this Day, in the Cause wherein Thomas Eyre of Hassop Esquire and others are Plaintiffs, against the Queen Dowager and Her Trustees, and His Majesty's Attorney of the Dutchy, and Thomas Eyre and others, Relators, are Defendants:
It is ORDERED, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That this House will hear Counsel further in the said Cause on Thursday next, at Nine of the Clock, the First Business.
ORDERED, That such Committees as were appointed to sit this Afternoon are to sit To-morrow in the Afternoon, at Four of the Clock.
Report concerning the Title of Earl of Banbury.
The Earl of Aylesbury reported, from the Committee of Privileges, "That their Lordships have read the Petition of the Person that claimeth the Title of Earl of Banbury, referred by the House to them, to examine all former Proceedings of the House relating to that Case.
"That their Lordships find, that, 13° Julii 1660, it was moved, that there being a Person that now sits in the House as a Peer, who, it is conceived, hath no Title to be a Peer, videlicet, the Earl of Banbury; it was ordered, That this Business should be heard, by Counsel at the Bar, on Monday Sevennight following.
"That, 6° Junii 1661, the House referred to the Committee for Privileges, to hear Counsel upon a Petition of Nicholas Earl of Banbury; whereby he prayeth a Writ of Summons to this Parliament as Earl of Banbury, and to enjoy all the Precedencies and-Privileges thereunto belonging, granted by His Majesty's Letters Patents to the last Earl of Banbury; which Petition was directed to His Majesty, and by His Majesty's Order delivered to the House to consider of.
"That, 15° Junii 1661, the Earl of Banbury desiring Witnesses might be examined at the Committee for Privileges on his Behalf; the House gave the said Committee Power to send for Witnesses.
"That, Junii 1661, the Report from the said Committee, concerning the Earl of Banbury, was appointed to be made on the 28th of the same Month.
"That, 1° Julii 1661, the House, upon Report from the said Committee concerning the Earl of Banburie's Petition, ordered that the Cause should be heard, by Counsel at the Bar, on the 8th of the same Month; and that Mr. Attorney should be likewise heard on the King's Behalf.
"That, 8° Julii 1661, the House ordered that the Earl of Banburie's Cause should be heard on the Ninth.
"That, 9° Julii 1661, the Cause was heard upon the said Earl's Petition; as also Mr. Attorney, &c. were heard on the King's Behalf; but the Consideration thereof was put off till the Tenth.
"That, 10° Julii 1661, the Matter in Debate concerning the Earl of Banbury was referred to the Consideration of the Committee for Privileges; and also the Matter of the Right of Precedency between the said Earl and several Peers of the Realm.
"That, 19° Julii 1661, the Committee reported as their Opinion, That the Earl of Banbury is, in the Eye of the Law, Son of the late William Earl of Banbury; and that the House should advise the King to summon him to Parliament.
"That the said Earl of Banbury ought to have Place in the House of Peers according to the Date of his Patent, and not according to the Tenor of that Part thereof which ranks him before other Earls created before William Earl of Banbury.
"That, 25° Julii 1661, the House appointed to take into Consideration the Report from the Committee of the Earl of Banburie's Business on the Second Thursday after the next Meeting of the House after the Adjournment.
"That, 28° Novembris 1661, the House, after debating the Report concerning the Earl of Banbury formerly made to the House, put off the Consideration thereof to the Monday Sevennight following.
"That, 9° Decembris 1661, a Bill was Once read, intituled, "An Act declaring Nicholas called Earl of Banbury to be illegitimate."
"That, 26° Octobris 1669, Notice being taken, upon calling the House, that the Earl of Banburie's Name is not in the List by which the Lords were called; it was referred to the Committee for Privileges, to examine why the said Earl's Name is left out of the said List, he having formerly sat as a Peer in the House.
"That, 23° Februarii 1669, the House, upon reading a Petition of Nicholas Earl of Banbury, whereby he prays that he might receive a Writ of Summons to Parliament, referred it to the Committee for Privileges, to consider thereof, and to report their Opinion to the House."
Claim to the Title of Earl of Banbury to be heard.
Upon Report from the Committee for Privileges, of the State of Proceedings in the Journals of this House, in the Business referred to them concerning the Claim of a Person to the Title of Earl of Banbury:
It is ORDERED, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That this House will hear His Majesty's Attorney General, on His Majesty's Behalf, against the said Claim, as also Counsel for the Person who claims the said Title of Earl of Banbury, on Monday the 6th of July next, at Ten of the Clock in the Forenoon.
Fountaine and Coke versus Guavas.
The Earl of Aylesbury reported, from the Committee for Petitions, "That their Lordships have heard the Counsel of Mr. Fountaine and Mr. Coke, upon their Petitions referred to them by the House; as also the Counsel of Mr. Guavas; and that they find that no Bill of Review hath been brought by the said Mr. Fountaine in the Court of Exchequer, where the Decree complained of was made; but their Lordships find it questionable, whether a Bill of Review doth lye in this Case, or not, by Reason of the Difficulty of distinguishing whether the Error be in Law or in Fact; but if the House shall think fit, upon hearing Counsel on that Point, to hear the Cause, that then the House will be pleased to order Mr. Guavas to produce, at Mr. Bows's Chamber, upon Oath, all Letters, Vouchers, and Papers, he hath, that may be of Use to Mr. Coke in defending the Decree complained of; to the End Copies may be taken by the said Mr. Coke, he being most fit to be a Party."
Upon Report from the Committee for Petitions, to whom was referred the Consideration of the Petitions of Andrew Fountaine and Edward Coke Esquire, "That they find no Bill of Review hath been brought by Fountaine in the Exchequer, and do question whether a Bill of Review lyes in this Case; and that Mr. Guavas may be ordered to produce, at Mr. Bows's Chamber, upon Oath, all Letters, Vouchers, and Papers he hath, that may be of Use to Mr. Coke, in defending the Decree complained of; to the End Copies may be taken by the said Mr. Coke, he being most fit to be a Party:"
It is ORDERED, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Mr. Coke be, and is hereby, made a Party, by his Guardian; and that Mr. Guavas be, and is hereby, required to deliver in to the Clerk of the Parliaments all such Letters, Vouchers, and Papers as he hath, that may be of Use to Mr. Coke, or have been made Use of in the said Cause in the Courts below; to the End he may have Copies thereof, in order to their putting in their several and respective Answers to the Appeal of the said Andrew Fountaine, which they the said Edward Coke and William Guavas be, and are hereby, required to do on Saturday next, at Ten of the Clock in the Forenoon.
Warcup versus Rowney.
Upon hearing Counsel this Day at the Bar, upon the Petition of Edmond Warcup Esquire (now Sir Edmond Warcup Knight), being an Appeal from a Decree made the 25th of February 1675, in the Court of Chancery, concerning the Manor of Northmore in the County of Oxford, being the Lands of Edward Twiford Gentleman, deceased; and from the Dismission of his Bill of Review brought against Thomas Rowney, Executor of the said Edward Twiford, concerning the same Matters; as also upon the Answer of Thomas Rowney, put in thereunto:
After due Consideration had of what was offered by Counsel on either Part thereupon, it is ORDERED and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Petition and Appeal of Edmond Warcup Esquire be, and is hereby, dismissed this House; and that the Decree or Judgement from which he appealed be, and is hereby, affirmed: And it is further ORDERED, That the said Edmond Warcup (now Sir Edmond Warcup Knight,) do pay or cause to be paid, unto the said Thomas Rowney, the Sum of Twenty Pounds of good and lawful Money, for his Costs and Charges in defending the said Appeal in this House.
Buckeridge versus Regem, in Error.
Upon reading the Petition of Joice Buckridge; praying, "That a Day may be appointed for arguing a Writ of Error, wherein Buckridge is Plaintiff, and our Sovereign Lord the King Defendant:"
It is ORDERED, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That His Majesty's Attorney General do join Issue in the said Writ of Error; and that this House will hear the said Errors argued, by Counsel, at the Bar, on Wednesday the Eighth of July next, at Ten of the Clock in the Forenoon; whereof the said Joice Buckridge is to cause timely Notice to be given to His Majesty's Attorney General for that Purpose.
Dominus Custos Magni Sigilli declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque in diem Jovis, videlicet, 25um diem instantis Junii, hora nona Aurora, Dominis sic decernentibus.