House of Lords Journal Volume 4: 15 December 1640

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.

'House of Lords Journal Volume 4: 15 December 1640', in Journal of the House of Lords: Volume 4, 1629-42, (London, 1767-1830) pp. 110. British History Online [accessed 19 April 2024]


In this section

DIE Martis, videlicet, 15 die Decembris.


L. Cottington and L. C J of the Com Please to speak with the E. of Strafford.

The Lord Cottington acquainted the House, That His Majesty had commanded him and the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas to go speak with the Earl of Strafford, in The Tower, about some Business in Ireland.

Mr. Longuevile versus E. of Kent, for the Baronies of Hastings and Ruthin

This Day the Counsel did argue the Case for Mr. Longevile, concerning his Claim and Right to the Baronies of Lord Hastings and Lord Ruthin.

Which being done, Counsel on the Earl of Kente's Side did move the House for further Time to be given; alledging that the Pedigree was salse and mistaken in some Places: Thereupon the House did Order, That Counsel on the Earl of Kente's Side do make their Exceptions in Writing to the Pedigree of the said Charles Longevile, Esquire, between this and Saturday next, and deliver them to the Counsel on the other Side; and it is further Ordered, That the said Earl of Kent shall be allowed Time until this Day Fortnight, videlicet, the 29th Day of this Instant December, to make good his Exceptions unto the said Pedigree, by his Counsel at the Bar.

L Awdley versus L Cottington

It was moved, That William Wroughton, Esquire, and William Tyke, Gentleman, might be sent for as Witnesses, and sworn here in Court, in the Cause of the Lord Awdley, against the Lord Cottington; which was Ordered by the House accordingly.

L. Mountague, & al Privilege touching Recusancy.

The Lord Viscount Mountague signified to the House, That his Lordship, and divers other Peers, were lately indicted for Recusancy, now sitting the Parliament; therefore desired their Lordships to take it into their Considerations, whether it be not a Breach of the Privilege of Parliament. Whereupon, after some Debate made, it was Ordered by the House, That the said Lord Viscount Mountague, and the rest of the Lords, being Members of this Honourable House, should enjoy and be allowed their Privilege of Parliament, as Peers of this Realm; and the said Indictments, so prosecuted as aforesaid, shall be stopped during the Continuance of this Parliament, and the Time of Privilege of the same.

Mr Stanhope versus E of Chesterfield.

It was Ordered, That the Cause between the Right Honourable the Earl of Chesterfield and Mr. Stanhope shall be the First Cause before the Lords Committees for Petitions upon Thursday next.


Dominus Custos Magni Sigilli declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque in diem Mercurii, videlicet, 16m diem instantis Decembris, hora nona, Dominis sic decernentibus.