Journal of the House of Lords: Volume 4, 1629-42. Originally published by His Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1767-1830.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
DIE Jovis, 12 die Februarii,
Lord Goringe Privilege.
Complaint was made to the House, That Samuell Wright, Servant to the Lord Goringe, was detained Prisoner in The Compter in the Poultry, London, during Privilege of Parliament. Ordered, A Habeas corpus cum causa, &c. to bring the said Samuell Wright before the Lords ret. Sabbati proxim.
The Lord Archbishop of Yorke reported, That the Committee had conceived a Petition to be delivered unto His Majesty, concerning the Precedency of Foreign Nobility, which was read 1a et 2a vice, and re committed to them again, to set down the Reasons of Dis-service unto His Majesty, mentioned in the said Petition.
Lord Deyncourts Complaint against the L. Ke pertor a Decree in Chancery censured.
Dame Mary Leke, Widow, and William Leke, Esquire, Relict and Son of Sir Francis Leke, Knight, deceased, exhibited their Petition unto this House, shewing (amongst other Things) that the said Sir Francis did make a Lease of his Lands unto his eldest Son, the now Lord Deyncourt, at Fourteen Hundred Pounds Rent per Annum, the Rent whereof was unpaid, in January 1625, for a Year and a Half, being One and Twenty Hundred Pounds, for which the said Sir Francis did sue the said Lord Deyncourte in the Chancery; which Suit was delayed by the Lord Deyncourt's Privilege in Parliament, until, by Order of this House, 15 Maii, 1626, it was Ordered, To proceed, notwithstanding the said Privilege, but the said Sir Francis Leke died before the said Suit took any Effect, having made the Petitioners his Executors, who commenced then Suit for the same in Chancery, against the said Lord Deyncourt, for the said Arrearages, being One and Twenty Hundred Pounds, and obtruned a Decree, upon full Hearing of the Lord Deyncourt's Counsel, and in his Presence, in Hilary Term, 1627, but they can receive no Benefit thereof, by reason of the Lord Deyncourt's Privilege of Parliament, and prayed, that this House would consider thereof, and order that the said Lord Deyncourt, as to the Premises, may take no Benefit of Privilege of Parliament.
This Petition being read, the Lord Deyncourt (being then absent) was sent for to come to the House, who, hearing the same read again, demanded to have Counsel assigned him, and to be heard here at the Bar, touching the Justness of the said Decree.
The Lord Keeper, removing to his Place, did put their Lordships in Mind of the Proceedings of the Lord Deyncourte here on the Fifth of this February; but, since the Lord Deyncourte did not rest satisfied there, the Lord Keeper desired that, for the Lord Deyncourt's further Satisfaction, and to the Intent no Scruple might remain in any touching the said Busi ness, that the Lord Deyncourt, who had once confessed that there was no Injustice done him, but now seemed to wave and depart from that Acknowledgement, might declare to this House those particular Points wherein he pretends he hath had any Injustice, and that then he might have Counsel assigned him to set forth and maintain the best of his Cause; which the House thought fit; and therefore they commanded the said Proceedings of the Fifth of February, and the Order thereupon, to be read, and then required the Lord Deyncourte to de clare wherein he took Exception to the said Decree; who answered, that the Lady Leeke hath not proved the Will, whereby the claims the said Arreuages; unto which it was answered, Before the Hearing, the Will was proved in the Ecclesiastical Court; and that the Lord Deyncourt himself did wave the Proof thereof at the Hearing; and it was demanded of him, whether the Lord Keeper had done him any Injustice or not; unto which he answered, No.
Then the Lord Keeper shewed the Proceedings in the Chancery therein, and the Equity of the said Decree, and prayed that he might either be acquitted, or specially charged herein by the Lord Deyncourt, who then said, that he demuried to the Bill, because the Executors might sue at the Common Law The Lord Keeper replied, that Mr. Justice Harvy, a Reverend Judge of the Law, in his Lordship's Absence, overruled the said Demurrer.
And Mr. Justice Harvy (being present) did affirm as much, and gave his Reasons why he overruled the same, which the House approved Yet the Lord Deyncourt, being required by the House to shew what he would insist upon, answered, that he desired his Cause might be heard, either here or by the Lord Keeper again.
Whereupon the Lord Deyncourt was commanded to withdraw; and the House taking into Consideration these Proceedings of the Lord Deyncourt, they thought his Lordship wo thy to be censured for the same, never theless, perceiving that these Courses of the Lord Deyncourte tended but to a Delay of the Execution of the said Decree, he being unwilling to pay the Money so justly decreed against him; and their Lordships having considered of the said Decree, thought the most moderate and just Way to be to confirm the same by Order of this House; and to Order, That the said Lord Deyn courte should take no Benefit of his Privilege of Parliament herein, and shall pay Damages from the Time the said Money was to be paid by the said Decree; and that, in case the said Lord Deyncourte should not pay the same by the Time assigned, then he should be com mitted to The Fleet, and to remain Prisoner there until he had performed the said Decree in all Points; and the Lord Keeper to have Power from this House to continue the said Imprisonment, after the End of this Session of Parliament, until the said Lord Deyncourte had performed the said Decree.
Whereupon the Lord Bishop of Lincoln and the Lord Mohun were appointed to signify then Lordships Order unto the Lord Deyncourte, and to know of him whether he would submit himself unto the House herein or no, who returned with this Answer, That the said Lord Deyncourt doth acknowledge the Order of this House to be most just, and will pay the said Money decreed against him; and that he will not tax the Lord Keeper with any Injustice in this Cause; only he desired Refpite for the Payment of the Money.
Decree in Chancery Lady Leeke, &c. versus Ld Deyncourt confirmed.
Then it was Agreed, upon he Question, That the said Lord Dyncourt shall pay Damages after Five Pounds pro Cent. and it was further Ordered as followeth: videlicet, It is this Day Ordered, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That le Decree made in Chancery, on the Fourth Day of February, in the Third Year of His Majesty's Reign that now is, between Dame Mary Leeke, and William Leke her Son, Plaintiffs, and Francis Lord Deyncourt, Defendant, shall be confirmed in all Points, and that the said Lord Deyncourt shall pay (at the Place appointed by the said Decree) unto the said Plaintiff the Sum of One and Twenty Hundred Pounds, in the said Decree mentioned, upon St James's Day next, with Five Pounds pro Cent. Damages from the several Times and Days of Payments whereon the same was payable by the said Decree And it is furthered Ordered, That, if the said Lord Deyncourt shall fail in Paymen thereof, then his Lordship shall stand committed to The Fleet, by virtue of this Order, until he hath paid the same. And the Lord Keeper to put this Order in Execution, notwithstang any Privilege of Parliament, which the said Lord Deyncourt may claim.
The Lord Deyncourt being called in, and standing up in his Place, the Lord Keeper rehearsed the said Order unto him, whereunto the Lord Deyncourt humbly submitted himself; and the whole House declared themselves to be satisfied, that no Aspersions do now rest upon the Lord Keeper herein; so which his Lordship gave them hearty Thanks; and the House, upon the humble Request of the Lord Keeper, were pleased that the further Examination of this Business, as well against the Lord Deyncourt, as against David Waterhouse, should cease.