Journal of the House of Lords: Volume 20, 1714-1717. Originally published by His Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1767-1830.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
DIE Veneris, 5 Aprilis.
Paragraphs in News Papers complained of:
Complaint was made to the House of several News Papers, intituled, "The St. James's Post, from Monday, April 1, to Wednesday, April 3, 1717," mentioned to be printed for J. Baker, at The Black Boy, in Pater Noster Row; "The St. James's Evening Post, from Tuesday, April 2, to Thursday, April 4, 1717," mentioned likewise to be printed for the same Person; and "The Flying Post, or The Post-master, from Tuesday, April 2, to Thursday, April 4, 1717," mentioned to be printed by R. Tookey, in St. Christopher's Court, behind The Royal Exchange; and sold by S. Popping, at The Black Raven, in Pater Noster Row.
L. Visc. Montague versus Maxwell & Ux.:
Whereas, on the Seventeenth of May last, after hearing Counsel, upon the Petition and Appeal of Henry Lord Viscount Mountague, to which Sir George Maxwell Baronet and Mary Viscountess Dowager Mountague his Wife were Respondents, this House did vary the Decree of the Court of Chancery complained of in the said Appeal, and directed an Issue at Law, to try, "Whether Francis late Lord Viscount Mountague was of sane Memory at the Time of executing the Codicil then in Question?" and reserved several Matters until after the said Trial should be had: Which Trial having been accordingly had, and a Verdict found, "That the said late Lord Viscount Montague was not of sane Memory at the Time of the Execution of the said Codicil:" And this Day being appointed for hearing Counsel upon the said Matters and Equity reserved as aforesaid.
And, on due Consideration had thereof, it is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Decree, so far as the same relates to the Five Hundred Pounds Annuity devised by the said Codicil, be, and is hereby, reversed; and that the Respondents Bill in the Court of Chancery, so far as concerns the Demand of the said Annuity, be, and is hereby, ordered to stand dismissed; and that so much of the said Decree as allows Costs of Suit generally to the Respondents be so far varied, as to except such Costs as relate solely to the Matter of the said Annuity; and that, in respect to the Circumstances of this Case, no Costs for the said Trial at Law be allowed or paid to the Appellant; and that the said Decree, as to the Matters complained of in the said Appeal, be, and is hereby, affirmed.