House of Lords Journal Volume 64
9 February 1832

Sponsor

History of Parliament Trust

Publication

Pages

43, 44, 45

Annotate

Comment on this article
Double click anywhere on the text to add an annotation in-line

Citation Show another format:

'House of Lords Journal Volume 64: 9 February 1832', Journal of the House of Lords: volume 64: 1831-1832, pp. 43-45. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=19261 Date accessed: 16 September 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

Die Jovis, 9° Februarii 1832.

DOMINI tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Dux Cumberland.
Ds. Brougham & Vaux, Cancellarius.
Epus. Laonen, &c.
-
Ds. Monson.
Ds. Holland.
Ds. Foley.
Ds. Suffield.
Ds. Kenyon.
Ds. Auckland.
Ds. Selsey.
Ds. Redesdale.
Ds. Ellenborough.
Ds. Ponsonby of Imokilly.
Ds. Penshurst.
Ds. Tenterden.
Ds. Plunket.
Ds. Stuart de Rothesay.
Ds. Wallace.
Ds. Sefton.
Ds. Dover.
Ds. Chaworth.
March. Lansdowne, Præses.
Dux Norfolk, Marescallus.
Dux Devonshire, Camerarius.
Dux Richmond.
March. Salisbury.
March. Thomond.
March. Westmeath.
March. Cleveland.
Comes Denbigh.
Comes Doncaster.
Comes Shaftesbury.
Comes Carnarvon.
Comes Wicklow.
Comes Gosford.
Comes Harrowby.
Comes Grey.
Comes Mulgrave.
Vicecom. Hood.
Vicecom. Lorton.
Vicecom. Gordon.
Vicecom. Beresford.

PRAYERS.

The Earl of Shaftesbury sat Speaker by virtue of a former Commission.

Maule v. Maule.

The Answer of William Maule Esquire, of Edinburgh, to the Petition and Appeal of The Honorable William Maule of Panmure, was this Day brought in.

Corporation of Dublin v. The Attorney General for Ireland, et al.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of The Right Honorable The Lord Mayor, Sheriffs, Commons and Citizens of the City of Dublin, and The Reverend William Henry Archer, Executor of William Henry Archer deceased; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Chancery in Ireland, of the 7th Day of July 1831, and also of an Order of the said Court of the 25th Day of January 1832; and praying, "That the same may be reversed, or that the Appellants may have such further and other Relief in the Premises, as to this House, in their Lordships great Wisdom, shall seem meet; and that The Right Honorable Francis Blackburne, His Majesty's Attorney General for Ireland, John M'Mullen, Richard Purdy and Henry Staines, may be required to answer the said Appeal:"

It is Ordered, That the said Francis Blackburne, His Majesty's Attorney General for Ireland, and the several other Persons last named, may have a Copy of the said Appeal, and do put in their Answer or respective Answers thereunto, in Writing, on or before Thursday the 15th Day of March next; and Service of this Order upon the Six Clerk and Solicitor of the said Respondents, shall be deemed good Service.

Bush et al. v. Locke, Respondent's Petition to lodge her Case, referred to Appeal Com ee.

Upon reading the Petition of Susannah Locke, Respondent in a Cause depending in this House, to which John Bush, and others, are Appellants; praying, "That their Lordships will be pleased to order that the Petitioner may be at liberty to lay her printed Case upon the Table of the House:"

It is Ordered, That the said Petition be referred to the Appeal Committee.

Maule v. Maule, Respondent's Petition to lodge his Case, referred to Appeal Com ee.

Upon reading the Petition of William Maule Esquire, Respondent in a Cause depending in this House, to which The Honorable William Maule is Appellant; praying, "That their Lordships will be pleased to permit him to lodge his Case:"

It is Ordered, That the said Petition be referred to the Appeal Committee.

2d Report from Appeal Com ee.

The Earl of Shaftesbury reported from the Lords Committees appointed to consider of the Causes in which Prints of the Parties Cases, now depending in this House upon Appeals and Writs of Error, have not been delivered, pursuant to the Standing Orders of this House, and of other Matters relating thereto; and to report to the House; and to whom were referred certain Petitions in the following Causes; The North British Insurance Company against Barker; Vaughan against Gronow; The Duke of Hamilton and Brandon against Aikman; White and others against Baugh and another; Bush and others against Locke; Howard against The Earl Digby; Lewis against Colmer and others; Reddie against Syme; Dixon and others against Dixon and others; and Morris against Davies and others; "That the Committee had met, and considered the Respondents Petitions in the Causes The North British Insurance Company against Barker, Vaughan against Gronow, and The Duke of Hamilton and Brandon against Aikman, severally praying their Lordships for Leave now to lodge their printed Cases; and had heard the Agents thereon, and the Committee are of Opinion, That the Petitioners may respectively be allowed now to deliver in their printed Cases: That the Committee had also considered the Appellants Petition in the Cause White and others against Baugh and another, praying their Lordships that they may have Six Weeks further Time for lodging their Cases; and had heard the Appellants Agent thereon, and the Committee are of Opinion, That the Petitioners may be allowed Six Weeks further Time to deliver in their printed Cases: That the Committee had also considered the Appellants Petition in the Cause Bush and others against Locke, praying their Lordships for a Month's further Time to lodge their printed Cases; and had also considered a further Petition of the said Appellants, praying their Lordships that they may be at liberty now to lodge their printed Cases; and had heard the Appellants Agent thereon, who stated to the Committee that the Cases were now ready for Delivery; and had also heard the Respondent's Agent thereon; and the Committee are of Opinion, That the Petitioners may be allowed now to deliver in their printed Cases: That the Committee had also considered the Petition of Henry Howard Esquire, praying their Lordships that he may be at liberty forthwith to lodge his Petition of Appeal against a Decree pronounced on the 8th of November last, by The Vice Chancellor of England, in a Cause in the Court of Chancery, wherein Edward Earl Digby (the Respondent to the said Petition of Appeal) was Plaintiff, and the Petitioner Defendant; and had heard the Agents thereon, and the Committee are of Opinion, That the Petitioner may, under the Circumstances of the Case, be allowed now to lodge his said Petition of Appeal, as desired: That the Committee had also considered the Petition of James Lewis of Great Russell Street, Bloomsbury, Pencil Manufacturer, praying their Lordships to grant him Leave to present his Petition of Appeal against a Decree or Decretal Order pronounced on the 2d of December last, by The Master of the Rolls in England, in a Cause depending before him, wherein the Petitioner was the Plaintiff, and Robert Colmer, and others, (the Respondents to the Petition of Appeal) were the Defendants; and had heard the Petitioner's Agent thereon, and the Committee are of Opinion, That the Petitioner may, under the Circumstances of the Case, be allowed to present his said Petition of Appeal, as desired: That the Committee had also considered the Appellants Petition in the Cause Dixon and others against Dixon and others, praying their Lordships to permit them to amend their Appeal by adding thereto an Interlocutor of the Lords of Session, of the First Division, of the 20th of January 1832; and had heard the Appellants Agent thereon, and the Committee are of Opinion, That the Petitioners may be allowed to amend their said Appeal by adding the said Interlocutor of the 20th of January 1832 thereto, as desired, the Petitioners amending the Respondents Copy: That the Committee had also considered the Appellant's Petition in the Cause Morris against Davies and others, praying their Lordships to be pleased to cause Application to be made for the Notes of the Learned Judges who presided at the Trials referred to in the Petition, furnished to Lord Lyndhurst, as then Lord Chancellor, or to the respective Judges who presided at the Trials; and that the Petitioner may be allowed to take a Copy of such Notes to enable the Petitioner's Counsel finally to settle his Case; and that the Petitioner may be allowed Three Weeks further Time to lay the Prints of his Case upon the Table of the House, to be calculated from the Time when a Report shall have been made upon this Petition; or that their Lordships will be pleased to make such other Order, and grant the Petitioner such other Time to complete his Case, as to their Lordships shall seem meet; and had heard the Agents thereon, and the Committee are of Opinion, That so much of the Prayer of the Petition as relates to the Notes of the Learned Judges ought not to be complied with, but that the Petitioner may be allowed a Month's further Time to deliver in his printed Case: And that the Committee had also considered the Petition of Charles Murray Barston, Accountant in Edinburgh, stating, that, by a Trust Deed dated the 25th of November last, David Syme, the Respondent in the Cause Reddie against Syme, conveyed and made over to and in favor of the Petitioner his whole Right and Interest in the Subject Matter of this Appeal, and that the Petitioner accepted of the Trust thereby vested in him the said Charles Murray Barston; and praying their Lordships to order that the Petitioner be added as a Party Respondent to the Appeal; and had heard the Respondent's Agent thereon, who stated to the Committee that there was no Objection made thereto on the Part of the Appellant; and the Committee are of Opinion, That the said Charles Murray Barston may be added as a Party Respondent to the said Appeal, as desired; and that he should put in his Answer thereunto, in Writing, within Four Weeks."

Which Report, being read by the Clerk, was agreed to by the House; and Ordered accordingly.

Howard v. E. of Digby.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Henry Howard of Corby Castle, in the County of Cumberland, Esquire; complaining of a Decree of the Court of Chancery, of the 8th of November 1831, which Decree was enrolled on the 14th Day of January 1832; and praying, "That the same may be reversed, or that the Appellant may have such other Relief in the Premises, as to this House, in their Lordships great Wisdom, shall seem meet; and that The Right Honorable Edward Earl of Digby may be required to answer the said Appeal:"

It is Ordered, That the said Edward Earl of Digby may have a Copy of the said Appeal, and do put in his Answer thereunto, in Writing, on or before Thursday the 23d Day of this instant February; and Service of this Order upon the Solicitor or Clerk in Court of the said Respondent shall be deemed good Service.

Few to enter into a Recogce on it.

The House being moved, "That Charles Few, of Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, in the County of Middlesex, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for Henry Howard Esquire, on account of his Appeal depending in this House, he residing in the Country:"

The same was agreed to; and Ordered accordingly.

Ashford Roads Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for maintaining and improving the Turnpike Roads leading from Ashford to Buxton, and from Tideswell to Blackwell, and from Edensor to Ashford, all in the County of Derby."

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords present this Day:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet Tomorrow, at Ten o'Clock in the Forenoon, in the Prince's Lodgings, near the House of Peers; and to adjourn as they please.

The House was adjourned during Pleasure.

The House was resumed by The Lord Chancellor.

Liverpool Marine Assurance Co's Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Viscount Sandon and others;

With a Bill, intituled, "An Act for enabling The Liverpool Marine Assurance Company to sue and be sued in the Name of the Chairman for the Time being, or of any One of the Directors of the said Company;" to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Court of Session Bill:

The Order of the Day being read for the Third Reading of the Bill, intituled, "An Act to provide for carrying on the Business of the Court of Session in Scotland when interrupted by the Death or necessary Absence of any of the Judges thereof;"

The said Bill was accordingly read the Third Time.

The Question was put, "Whether this Bill shall pass?"

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Message to H.C. that the Lords have agreed to it.

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Wingfield and Mr. Trower;

To acquaint them, That the Lords have agreed to the said Bill, without any Amendment.

Aston Rowant Inclosure Bill: The King's Consent signified:

The Earl of Shaftesbury acquainted the House, "That His Majesty, having been informed of the Contents of the Bill, intituled, "An Act for inclosing Lands in the Parish of Aston Rowant, in the County of Oxford," was pleased to consent (as far as His Majesty's Interest is concerned) that their Lordships may proceed therein as they shall think fit."

Bill reported.

Then The Earl of Shaftesbury reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the last-mentioned Bill was committed, "That they had considered the said Bill, and examined the Allegations thereof, which were found to be true; that the Parties concerned had given their Consents to the Satisfaction of the Committee; and that the Committee had gone through the Bill, and made One Amendment thereto."

Which Amendment was read by the Clerk as follows; (vizt.)

"Pr. 70. L. 34. Leave out from ("Effect") to ("Provided") in Press 72, Line 34, and insert Clause A.

"Clause A. Provided always, and be it enacted, That no Lease or Leases to be made by virtue of the said first-recited Act or this Act of any Land or Ground to be allotted to the said Vicar shall be good, valid or effectual unless the Consent of The King's Most Excellent Majesty, His Heirs and Successors, as Patron of the said Vicarage, shall be had or obtained thereto before the Execution of such Lease or Leases."

And the said Amendment, being read a Second Time, was agreed to by the House.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Veneris, decimum diem instantis Februarii, horâ undecimâ Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.