Journal of the House of Lords: Volume 15, 1691-1696. Originally published by His Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1767-1830.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
DIE Veneris, 22 Decembris.
Message from H. C. with a Bill.
Dut. Grafton versus Judges of the King's Bench:
Question, whether she shall have Leave to withdraw her Petition:
Amendments proposed to it.
Then this Question was put, "Whether these Words shall be Part of the Question, (videlicet,) "That Mr. Attorney General do bring Witnesses to the Bar of this House, to prove that a Bill of Exceptions was offered and refused in the Court of King's Bench, in the Case of William Bridgeman and Rowland Holt and others, in a Cause there lately depending."]?"
Then this Question was put, "Whether these Words shall be Part of the Question, (videlicet,) ["And that, by what hath arisen upon the Debate which hath happened on the Dutchess of Grafton's Petition, and the Answer put in by the Judges, there are Grounds to apprehend that the Proceedings of the Justices of the King's Bench, in the Case between the Dutchess of Grafton and the Lord Chief Justice Holt, have occasioned a Precedent, which may streighten the Jurisdiction of this House, and the Rights of the People; and do therefore think fit to take a further Consideration of that Matter; and, to this End, that a Committee be appointed, to consider of such Methods as may be most proper for the further Information of this House in this Particular, and report their Opinions to this House; and that Mr. Attorney General be ordered to attend that Committee."]?"
Dutch. of Grafton Leave to withdraw her Petition:
Protest against, withdrawing it, without enquiring further into the Conduct of the Judges of the King's Bench.
"Because we conceive it proper, at the Time that Leave was granted to withdraw the Petition, that an Order should be given to have a further Information brought before this House, of the Proceedings of the Judges of the King's Bench, in the Case of William Bridgman and Rowland Holt and others, in order to have directed a Criminal Prosecution against the said Judges, in case the House should have thought fit to proceed so far against them.
Dominus Custos Magni Sigilli declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Veneris, (videlicet,) vicesimum nonum diem instantis Decembris, hora decima Aurora, Dominis sic decernentibus.