Journal of the House of Lords Volume 23, 1727-1731. Originally published by His Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1767-1830.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
April 1727, 21-30
DIE Lunæ, 29o Aprilis.
York Buildings Company versus Sir J. Meres.
Herne's Petition against E. Buchan's Bill.
Upon reading the Petition of Paston Herne Esquire; praying, "That he may be heard, by his Counsel, touching his Right and Interest, and against the passing of the Bill, intituled, "An Act for vesting in Trustees divers Lands in the several Counties of Berks, Bucks, Wilts, Oxford, and York, the Estate of David Earl of Buchan, for the Purposes therein mentioned, before the passing thereof:"
It is Ordered, That the said Bill be read the Third Time on Friday next; and that the Petitioner may be then heard, as desired, against the said Bill; and that the Earl of Buchan may be heard, by his Counsel, for the said Bill, at the same Time, if his Lordship shall think fit.
The Lord Wilmington reported from the Lords Committees to whom the Bill, intituled, "An Act for vesting the Real Estates of William Scourfield the Elder Esquire, Catherine his Wife, and William Scourfield the Younger Esquire and Anne his Wife, in the Counties of Pembrocke and Brecon, in Trustees, to certain Uses therein mentioned," was committed: "That they had examined the Allegations of the said Bill, and found the same to be true; that the Parties concerned had given their Consents; and that the Committee had gone through the Bill, and made some Amendments thereunto."
Grafton Common Fields to enclose, Bill.
Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for enabling Charles Duke of Grafton, Lord of the Manor of Grafton, in the County of Northampton, to enclose the Common Fields and Waste Grounds within the said Manor, in Pursuance of several Agreements between the said Duke and the Rector and Churchwardens of the Parish of Grafton Regis; and to establish the said Agreements."
Cromy versus Holland, alias Ash:
After hearing Counsel, upon the Petition and Appeal of Elizabeth Cromy Widow; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Exchequer in Ireland, made the Fourth of December 1718, in a Cause wherein Mary Holland, alias Ash, was Plaintiff, and John Cromy, since deceased, the Appellant his then Wife, Thomas Edwards, and Alexander Gordon, were Defendants; and also of an Order of the said Court of Exchequer, made the Eighteenth of November 1724, affirming the said Decree; and praying, "That the said Decree and Order may be reversed:" As also upon the Answer of the said Mary Holland, alias Ash, Widow and Relict of Stephen Holland, alias Ash, deceased, put in to the said Appeal; and due Consideration and Debate had of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:
Decree and Order reversed, with Directions.
It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Decree, and Order affirming the same, complained of in the said Appeal, be, and are hereby, reversed: And it is hereby further Ordered and Adjudged, That the Appellant do convey the Lands particularly contained and mentioned in certain Articles of Agreement recited in the said Appeal, and bearing Date the Tenth of June 1702, to the Uses and Trusts therein mentioned, as far as the same are yet subsisting; and that the said Court of Exchequer do cause this Judgement to be put in Execution.
Pauncefort and George versus Meade et al.
Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Robert Pauncefort Esquire and Robert George Gentleman, Executors of Edward Pauncefort Esquire, deceased; complaining of a Decree, or Decretal Order, of the Court of Chancery, made the Eighth Day of November last, in a Cause wherein the Appellants, by the Bill of Revivor, were Plaintiffs, and Jane Meade Widow, John Meade and William Meade, Executors of John Meade, William Wotton Administrator de Bonis non &c. of Thomas Wotton, and John Fowle Administrator de Bonis non &c. with the Will annexed of Robert Fowle, were Defendants; and praying, "That the same may be reversed:"
It is Ordered, That the said Jane Meade and the other Defendants, may have a Copy of the said Appeal; and they are hereby required to put in their Answer or respective Answers thereunto, in Writing, on or before Monday the Thirteenth Day of May next.
DIE Martis, 30o Aprilis.
Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for vesting the Real Estates of William Scourfield the Elder Esquire, Catherine his Wife, William Scourfield the Younger Esquire and Anne his Wife, in the Counties of Pembrocke and Brecon, in Trustees, to certain Uses therein mentioned."
Message to H.C. with it.
Hammond's Composition Bill:
The Earl of Findlater reported from the Lords Committees to whom the Bill, intituled, "An Act to enable the Commissioners of the Treasury, or the Lord High Treasurer for the Time being, to compound with Thomas Hammond late of London Merchant, and his Sureties, for a Debt due to the Crown, for Customs on Tobacco and Wines," was committed: "That they had considered the said Bill, and gone through the same, and directed him to report the Bill to the House, without any Amendment."
Mr. Howard's Bill.
The Lord Bishop of Lincoln reported from the Lords Committees to whom the Bill, intituled, "An Act for empowering the Honourable Charles Howard Esquire to raise Money, by Sale or Mortgage of the Manors of Walden, alias Chipping Walden, Brook Walden, and other Manors and Lands therein mentioned, for the Payment of the Debts of Charles William late Earl of Suffolk and Bindon, deceased," was committed: That they had considered the said Bill; that the Parties concerned had given their Consents; and that the Committee had gone through the Bill, and made some Amendments thereunto."
York Buildings Company versus Sir J. Meres, Motion for a Bye-day.
The House being moved, "That Thursday the Twentythird Day of May next may be appointed, for hearing the Cause wherein the Governor and Company of Undertakers for raising the Thames Water in York Buildings are Appellants, and Sir John Meres Knight is Respondent:"
Byrne versus Morley et al.
Staines versus Maddocks
After hearing Counsel, upon the Petition and Appeal of John Staines; complaining of an Order and Decree, made by the Master of the Rolls, the Fifth of May 1724, and the Seventeenth of May last, in a Cause wherein Edward, Robert, Thomas, John, William, and Sarah Maddock, Infants, by Robert Maddock their prochein Amie, were Plaintiffs, and the Appellant and Alicia his late Wife were Defendants; and wherein the said Infants, by the said Robert Maddock, by Bill of Revivor, were Plaintiffs, and the Appellant was Defendant; and also of the Affirmance of the said Decree of the Master of the Rolls, by the Lord Chancellor, the Twenty-eighth Day of October last; and praying, "That the same, and all other subsequent Orders in the said Cause, may be reversed, and the said Plaintiff's Bill dismissed with Costs:" As also upon the Answer of the said Infants, by their said prochein Amie, put in to the said Appeal; and due Consideration had of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:
Decree and Affirmance affirmed, with a Variation.
It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Decree, made the Seventeenth of May last, and the Affirmance thereof, be affirmed, with a Variation as to the Appellant's accompting; which Variation is to be by leaving out of the said Decree these Words; (videlicet,) ["is come to his Hands, or to the Hands of his late Wife Alicia Staines, deceased, or to the Hands of any other Person, for his their, or either of their Use; for the better Discovery whereof"]; and, instead thereof, inserting these Words ["came at any Time to his Hands, or to the Hands of any other Person for his Use; and also for what of the Testator's Estate came to, or was in the Hands of, his late Wife Alicia Staines, or to the Hands of any other Person for her Use, since the Fifth of May One Thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty-four, or at any Time thereafter; and that an Accompt be likewise taken of what of the said Testator's Personal Estate came to the Hands of the said Alicia, after the Death of the said Testator, to the said Fifth of May 1724, which was not paid or delivered over by her to her Husband; and that what shall be found so due from her, shall be paid, by the Defendant her Executor, out of Assets, and be applied in the same Manner as is in the said Decree after directed, concerning the said Testator's Personal Estate that shall appear to be in the said Defendant's Hands; and if he doth not admit Assets, then an Accompt is to be taken of Assets come to his Hands; and, as far as it shall appear that he hath Assets, he is to satisfy the said Demand in a Course of Administration; and for the better Discovery and taking the said Accompts"]; which said Decree of the Court of Chancery, as thus varied, is hereby declared to be the Judgement of this House, and to be observed and put in Execution accordingly.