Journal of the House of Lords Volume 24, 1732-1737. Originally published by His Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1767-1830.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
February 1732, 1-10
DIE Martis, 1o Februarii.
Norton versus Heror.
Thanks to the Bp of Chichester, for his Sermon.
Ordered, That the Thanks of this House be, and are hereby, given to the Lord Bishop of Chichester, for the Sermon by him preached before their Lordships Yesterday, in the Abbey Church; and he is hereby desired to cause the same to be printed and published.
Rouquier versus Bolton:
After hearing Counsel, upon the Petition and Appeal of Moses Rouquier Merchant; complaining of a Decretal Order of the Court of Exchequer in Ireland, of the Second of December 1730, made in a Cause wherein the Appellant was Plaintiff, and Thomas Bolton and Joseph Bolton were Defendants; and praying, "That the same may be reversed; and such other Order therein made for the Appellant's Relief as to this House shall seem meet:" As also upon the several Answers of the said Thomas Bolton and Joseph Bolton put in to the said Appeal; and due Consideration had of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:
Decretal Order reversed, with Directions.
It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Decretal Order complained of in the said Appeal be, and is hereby, reversed; and that the Appellant do hold and enjoy his Mortgages in the Appeal mentioned, against the Respondents and either of them: And it is hereby further Ordered, That the Deputy Remembrancer of the said Court of Exchequer do take an Accompt of what is due to the Appellant, for Principal, Interest, and Costs of Suit, in the said Court; and what shall be found due upon taking such Accompt shall, within Six Months after Report made, be paid by the Respondent Joseph Bolton to the Appellant; or otherwife the said Respondent is to stand foreclosed: And in case he be so foreclosed, then the Respondent Thomas Bolton is to pay to the Appellant, within Six Months more, what shall be found due to him; or otherwise he the said other Respondent is to stand likewise foreclosed.
DIE Veneris, 4o Februarii.
Norton versus Kyffin.
E. of Abingdon & al. Pet. referred to Judges.
Upon reading the Petition of Mountague Earl of Abingdon, James Bertie and Willoughby Bertie Esquires; praying Leave to bring in a Bill, for vesting several Estates, in the Petition mentioned, in Trustees, in order that the same may be sold, for Payment of Debts, and discharging Incumbrances:
Mitchell' Pet. referred to Judges.
Upon reading the Petition of Margery Mitchell, Widow of Thomas Mitchell, late of Studley, in the County of Warwick, Yeoman, deceased, on the Behalf of herself, and Anne and Mary Mitchell, her Insant Daughters; praying Leave to bring in a Bill, for settling an Estate, in the Parish of Solihull, in the said County, for Payment of the Debts of the said Thomas Mitchell, and making Provision for the Petitioner and her said Daughters:
Boddicott to enter into a Recognizance for the East India Company:
The House being moved, "That Mr. Edmund Boddicott may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for the United Company of Merchants of England trading to The East Indies, on account of their Appeal depending in this House:"
Abraham Cortissos for Joseph:
Ellis, for L. Dunsany:
and Brougham, for Robertson & al.
Furness versus Sir C Peers & al.:
After hearing Counsel, upon the Petition and Appeal of Henry Furnese Esquire, Administrator of John Tutt deceased; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Exchequer, of the Eleventh of June 1730, made in a Cause wherein the Appellant was Plaintiff, and Sir Charles Peers and Dame Lucy his Wife, the Honourable Charles Howard Esquire, now Earl of Suffolk, and Edward Spackman, were Defendants; which Cause was, upon the Death of the said Tutt, revived in the Name of the Appellant; and praying, "That the said Decree may be reversed; and that he may have such Relief as to the House shall seem meet:" As also upon the several Answers of the said Defendants put in to the said Appeal; and due Consideration had of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:
Decree affirmed, with an Addition.
It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Decree complained of in the said Appeal be, and is hereby, affirmed; with this Addition, "That, at any Trial at Law to be had, in any Action to be brought by the Appellant at any Time before the End of Hillary Term next, the Respondents shall not be permitted to plead or insist on the Statute made in the Twenty-first Year of the Reign of King James the First, intituled, "An Act for Limitation of Actions, and for avoiding of Suits in Law;" and that the Note in the Pleadings mentioned, given by the said John Tutt to the Respondent the Lady Peers, for Re-payment of Three Thousand Pounds, and Interest, borrowed of her, for which he assigned to her, as a collateral Security, a First Subscription Receipt, No 439, for One Thousand Pounds in The South Sea Company, be produced at such Trial; and that it be admitted, upon the said Trial, that the said Lady Peers did, in September 1720, deliver to one Baptist Tanner, since deceased, the said Subscription Receipt, in order to borrow One Thousand Pounds thereon, by Way of Pledge, which was done accordingly:" And it is hereby further Ordered, That the said Appeal, as against the said Earl of Suffolk, be, and is hereby, dismissed this House; and that the Appellant do pay, or cause to be paid, to the said Earl, the Sum of Twenty Pounds, for his Costs in respect of the said Appeal.
Brown called L. Kenmare versus Lavallin & al.
The House being moved, on the Behalf of Valentine Brown, commonly called Lord Kenmare in the Kingdom of Ireland, "That the hearing his Appeal, to which James Lavallin and others are Respondents, which stands appointed for Monday next, may be put off to Wednesday the Eighth Day of March next, in regard the Respondents have not as yet put in their Answer to the said Appeal:"
DIE Mercurii, 9o Februarii.
Wynne & Ux. versus Sir G. Wynne.
Arbuthnot & al. against Read and Marsland.
Burrough against Sir F. Whichcote and Harding.
E. of Craufurd's Election, Certificate delivered.
This Day the Deputy Clerk of the Crown in Chancery delivered a Certificate of the Name of the Peer of Scotland, who, by virtue of His Majesty's Proclamation, is chosen to sit and vote in this House, in the room of the Earl of Loudoun, deceased; which is as follows:
"We do hereby certify, that, by Virtue of His Majesty's Proclamation of the Ninth of December 1731, a Certificate, under the Hands and Seals of Mr. William Hall and Mr. James Justice, Clerks of Session attending the Election aftermentioned, in virtue of the Lord Register's Commission to them granted, has been delivered into the Crown-office in Chancery; whereby it appears, that John Earl of Craufurd was unanimously elected and chosen to sit and vote in the House of Peers, in this present Parliament, in the room of Hugh Earl of Loudoun, deceased.
|"Stephen Bisse and||Cler. Coron."|
E Shaftesbury takes his Seat; and E. of Craufurd takes the Oaths.
Anthony Ashley Earl of Shaftesbury sat first in Parliament, after the Death of his Father Anthony Ashley Earl of Shaftesbury; his Lordship, together with John Earl of Craufurd, having taken the Oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration, and also taken and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.
Sir Francis Henry Drake's Petition referred to Judges.
Upon reading the Petition of Sir Francis Henry Drake Baronet; praying Leave to bring in a Bill, for advancing and applying Five Thousand Pounds, Part of the Portion of Dame Anne Drake, the Petitioner's Wife, for Payment of the remaining Debts and Legacies of Sir Francis Drake, the Petitioner's Father; and for leasing out certain Premises, in the County of Devon, for Lives or Years, according to the Custom of the Country; and for other Purposes therein mentioned:
Mr Bathurst's Petition referred to Judges.
Upon reading the Petition of Benjamin Bathurst Esquire and Finetta his Wife, and Elizabeth Poole Spinster; praying Leave to bring in a Bill, for Sale of certain Estates in the County of Wilts; and for applying the Money arising thereby to provide Fortunes for the Younger Children of the Petitioners Benjamin Bathurst and his Wife, and other Purposes, according to the Will of Henry Poole Esquire, late Father of the Petitioners Finetta and Elizabeth:
Messages from H. C. with Bills.
Sir W. Barker against Vis. Ikerrin and Cook.
After hearing Counsel, upon the Petition and Appeal of Sir William Barker Baronet; complaining of several Orders and Decrees of the Court of Chancery in Ireland, made in a Cause wherein Somerset Hamilton Lord Viscount Ikerrin in that Kingdom, a Minor, by his Mother and Guardian, and Phannel Cook Esquire, were Plaintiffs, and the Appellant was Defendant; and in another Cause, wherein the Appellant was Plaintiff, and the said Lord Viscount Ikerrin and Phannel Cook were Defendants; and praying, "That the Order of the said Court, made the 3d Day of February 1727, directing an Issue to be tried at Law, as to the Possession of certain Lands in Controversy, and the other Orders and Decrees made subsequent thereto, in both Causes, may be reversed; and the Decretal Order, for dismissing the Bill exhibited by the said Lord Viscount Ikerrin and Phannel Cook, with Costs, may be affirmed:" As also upon the Answer of the said Lord Viscount Ikerrin and Phannel Cook put in to the said Appeal; and due Consideration had of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:
Orders and Decrees affirmed, with Costs.
It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the said Petition and Appeal be, and is hereby, dismissed this House; and that the several Orders and Decrees therein complained of be, and the same are hereby, affirmed: And it is further Ordered, That the Appellant do pay, or cause to be paid, to the said Respondents, the Sum of Fifty Pounds, for their Costs in respect of the said Appeal.
Coussmaker's Nat. Bill:
Lockman's Nat. Bill:
Malan's Nat. Bill:
Alstrom and Wynantz etal. Petitions to be added to it.
Also, a Petition of Francis Wynantz, James Caulet, John Caulet, Thomas Du Bisson, John Henry de Morin, James Chalie, Jochim Van Coln, Frederick de Veer, Ernst Godrfried Opitz, and Michael Miller; praying, "That their Names may be inserted in the Bill now depending, to naturalize Thomas and Joseph Malan, in order to their being naturalized;"
Devereux against Phelan.
The House was informed, "That Anthony Fury attended, and desired to deliver in Copies of several Pleadings and Proceedings, in the Cause wherein Robert Devereux Esquire is Appellant, and Richard Phelan Respondent."
He was thereupon called in, and sworn; and delivering in the several Papers at the Bar, attested, "The same were true Copies, he having examined them with the Originals in the proper Offices in Ireland."