House of Lords Journal Volume 33
March 1772, 1-10

Sponsor

History of Parliament Trust

Publication

Year published

1767-1830

Pages

270-292

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 33: March 1772, 1-10', Journal of the House of Lords volume 33: 1770-1773 (1767-1830), pp. 270-292. URL: http://british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=113558 Date accessed: 02 September 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

Contents

Die Lunæ, 2o Martii 1772.
Cheap et al against Alton and another. E. Sandwich and L. Hinchingbrook, Leave for a Bill: Bill read. L. Bathurst et al. Leave for a Bill. Bill read. Hall et al. Petition referred to Judges. Eliot et al. Petition referred to Judges. Winterflow, &c. Road Bill. Gladwin et al. Petition referred to Judges. Harper’s Petition referred to Judges. Collier’s voice Bill. Jones’s Bill. Huttons to take the Name of Long, Bill. Enfield, &c. Road Bill. Fincham Enclosure Bill. Islington Lighting and Watch Bill. Welby against D. Rutland. Spottiswoode to enter into Recognizance on Deas et al. Appeal. and on Mac Nan’s Appeal. Da Costa against Mayhew and Ince. Noah against Watson: Writs of Error Nonprofs’d, with Costs. For regulating the future Marriages of the Royal Family, Bill. Adjourn. Die Martis, 3o Martii 1772.
Harries et al. Petition referred to Judges. E. Sandwich and L. Hinching brook’s Estate Bill. Islington Lighting and Watch Bill. Shelley’s Petition referred to Judges. Russell’s Petition referred to Judges. Bank of England and Drapers Company Petition referred to Judges. E.Carlisle, Petition referred to Judges. Huttons to take the Name of Long, Bill. Enfield, &c. Road Bill. Fincham Enclosure Bill. Winterslow &c. Road Bill: Message to H. C that the Lords have agreed to it. Chester Canal Bill. Cheap et al. against Aiton et al. Witnesses to attend on Skinn’s Divorce Bill. Kemys et Ux. Petition referred to Judges. Sir John Colleton’s Divorce Bill. For the better regulating the future Marriages of the Royal Family, Bill: Protests against the passing it. Message to H.C. with the Bill. Adjourn. Die Jovis, 5o Martii 1772.
Islington Lighting and Watch Bill. E. Ferrers Petition referred to Judges. Chester Canal Bill. L Willoughby de Brake’s Petition referred to Judges. Blundell et al Petition referred to Judges. L Bathurst’s Estate Bill. Bydges et al. Petition referred to Judges. Tea Duty Bill. Spackman’s et al. Petition for a Bill. Vansittart et al. Petition referred to Judges. Huttons to take the Name of Long, Bill. Enfield, &c. Road Bill. Message to H.C. that the Lords have agreed to the Two preceding Bills. Heatley, for a Divorce Bill. Crespigny’s Petition referred to Judges. Barbor et al. Petition referred to Judges. Bunting’s Petition referred to Judges. Fenwick’s Petition referred to Judges. Rashleigh et al Petition referred to Judges. Comptons et al Petition referred to Judges. Hulton et Ux. Petition referred to Judges. Batson’s Petition referred to Judges. Cookes and Molloy, Petition referred to Judges. Bullock et Ux Petition referred to Judges. D Buccleugh’s Petition referred to Judges. Hay against M. Tweeddale. Witnesses to attend on Collier’s Divorce Bill. Da Costa against Scrope, in Error. Great Ormside Enclosure Bill. Scaftworth Enclosure Bill. Skeffington Enclosure Bill. Halhed et Ux. for a Bill: Bill read. Adjourn. Die Veneris, 6o Martii 1772.
Isdall against Fitzgerald. Skeffington Enclosure Bill. Islington Lighting and Watch Bill. Message to H C that the Lords have agreed to it. Sir John Colleton’s Divorce Bill. Skinn’s Divorce Bill. Chester Canal Bill. E. Pomfret et Ux. against South et al. Iselin Nat. Bill. Stapleford Enclosure Bill. Stainby Enclosure Bill. Denshanger Enclosure Bill. Soulbury Enclosure Bill. Causes put off. Adjourn. Die Lunæ, 9o Martii 1772.
Kenrick and Skey against Roger et al. Isdall against Fitzgerald: Decretal Orders reversed. Chester Canal Bill: Message to H.C. that the Lords have agreed to it. Iselin’s Nat. Bill. Rushton James Enclosure Bill. Rigg Moor and Brearton Moor Enclosure Bill. City of Norwich to New Buckingham Road Bill. Plymouth Paving, &c. Bill. Rigg Moor and Brearton Moor Enclosure Bill; the King’s Consent signified to it. E. Cranville takes the Oaths. Proceedings and Accounts of Commissioners for paving Westminster Streets, &c. delivered. Woolley Enclosure Bill. Little Kington, &c. Enclosure Bill. Handborough Enclosure Bill. Message from H. C to return L. Ligonier’s Divorce Bill, with Amendments. Eliot, Leave for a Bill Bill read. L. Ligonier’s Divorce Bill. Soulbury Enclosure Bill. Stainby Enclosure Bill. Stapleford Enclosure Bill. Denshanger Enclosure Bill. Sir John Colleton’s Divorce Bill: Message to H. C. with it. Great Ormside Enclosure Bill. Scaftworth Enclosure Bill. Skeffington Enclosure Bill. Fincham Enclosure Bill. Spottiswoode to enter into Recognizance on Hay’s Appeal. Rogers against Dyer and Dolge: Writ of Error nonprofs’with Costs. Tea Duty Bill. Skinn’s Divorce Bill. Hanckwitz Divorce Bill. Adjourn. Die Martis, 10o Martii 1772.
Plymouth Paving, &c. Bill. Woolley Enclosure Bill. Nugent and Eliot’s Bill. Foxley’s Charity Bill. Great Ormside Enclosure Bill. Scaftworth Enclosure Bill. Iselin’s Nat. Bill. City of Norwich to New Buckingham Road Bill. Halhed’s Bin. Rigg Moor and Brearton Moor Enclosure Bill. Perrott et al. Leave for a Bill. Bill read. Little Kington, &c. Enclosure Bill. Handborough Enclosure Bill. Skinn’s Divorce Bill: Message to H. C. with it. Tea Duty Bill. Skeffington Enclosure Bill: Fincham Enclosure Bill. Message to H. C.that the Lords have agreed to the Two preceding Bills. Rutherford, et al. against Hamilton. Duncans against Fouke and Stormont. D Devonshire Leave to present a Petition for a Bill: His Petition referred to Judges. Hanckwitz’s Divorce Bill. Adjourn. Footnotes

Die Lunæ, 2o Martii 1772.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Archiep. Cantuar.Ds. Apsley, Cancellarius.Ds. Harwich, Unus Primariorum Secretariorum.
Archiep. Ebor.Comes Grower, Præses.Ds. Le Despencer.
Epus. Londin.Dux Grafton, C.P.S.Ds. Abergavenny.
Epus. Winton.Dux Richmond.Ds. Willoughby Br.
Epus. Eliens.Dux Beaufort.Ds. Willoughby Par.
Epus. Wigorn.Dux St. Albam.Ds. Clifton.
Epus. Cicestrien.Dux Bolton.Ds. Craven.
Epus. Glocestr.Dux Devonshire.Ds. Boyle.
Epus. Bangor.Dux Marlborough.Ds. Trevor.
Epus. Lincoln.Dux Gordon.Ds. Masham.
Epus. Exon.Dux Ancaster, Magnus Camerarius.Ds. Romney.
Epus. Oxon.Dux Portland.Ds. Cadogan.
Epus. Asaphen.Dux Chandos.Ds. Ducie.
Epus. Carliol.Dux Dorset.Ds. King.
Epus. Landaven.Dux Bridgewater.Ds. Godolphin.
Epus. Petriburg.Dux Newcastle.Ds. Edgecumbe.
Epus. Cestrien.March. Rockingham.Ds. Sandys.
Epus. Litch. & Cov.Comes Talbot, Senescallus.Ds. Bruce.
Comes Hertford, Camerarius.Ds. Ravensworth.
Comes Pembroke.Ds. Archer.
Comes Suffolk.Ds. Ponsonby.
Comes Exeter.Ds. Vere.
Comes Denbigh.Ds. Hyde.
Comes Westmorland.Ds. Walpole.
Comes Peterborough.Ds. Mansfield.
Comes Stamford.Ds. Lyttelton.
Comes Thanet.Ds. Wycombe.
Comes Sandwich.Ds. Sondes.
Comes Essex.Ds. Scarsdale.
Comes Carlisle.Ds. Boston.
Comes Doncaster.Ds. Pelham.
Comes Litchfield.Ds. Milton.
Comes Abingdon.Ds. Beaulieu.
Comes Holdernesse.Ds. Camden.
Comes Rochford.Ds. Digby.
Comes Albemarle.Ds. Sundridge.
Comes Coventry.
Comes Jersey.
Comes Strathmore.
Comes Abercorn.
Comes Loudoun.
Comes March.
Comes Marchmont.
Comes Rosebery.
Comes Oxford.
Comes Strafford.
Comes Dartmouth.
Comes Tankerville.
Comes Bristol.
Comes Sussex.
Comes Macclesfield.
Comes Pomfret.
Comes Waldegrave.
Comes Ashburnham.
Comes Orford.
Comes Harrington.
Comes Bucks.
Comes Fitzwilliam.
Comes Powis.
Comes Temple.
Comes Cornwallis.
Comes Hardwicke.
Comes De Lawarr.
Comes Northington.
Comes Radnor.
Comes Spencer.
Viscount Montague.
Viscount Say & Sele.
Viscount Weymouth.
Viscount Bolingbroke.
Viscount Falmouth.
Viscount Torrington.
Viscount Dudley & Ward.

PRAYERS.

Cheap et al against Alton and another.

The Answer of Andrew Aiton and another, to the Appeal of James Cheap and others, was this Day brought in.

E. Sandwich and L. Hinchingbrook, Leave for a Bill:

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of the Right Honourable John Earl of Sandwich, and the Honourable John Montagu, commonly called Lord Viscount Hinchingbrook; praying Leave to bring in a Private Bill, for the Purposes therein mentioned:

It is Ordered, That Leave be given to bring in a Bill, pursuant to the said Petition and Report.

Bill read.

Hodie 1a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to enable the Right Honourable John Earl of Sandwich, and the Honourable John Montagu, commonly called Lord Viscount Hunchingbrook, and the Survivor of them, to grant Leases of the Countess of Sandwich’s Moiety of Estates in the Counties of Ardmagh and Limerick, in the Kingdom of Ireland.”

L. Bathurst et al. Leave for a Bill.

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of Allen Lord Bathurst, and Henry Lord Apsley and others; praying Leave to bring in a Private Bill for the Purposes therein mentioned:

It is Ordered, That Leave be given to bring in a Bill, pursuant to the said Petition and Report.

Bill read.

HoDie 1a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for Sale of a Capital Freehold Messuage in Saint James’s Square, in the County of Middlesex, Part of the Entailed Estate of the Right Honourable Allen Lord Bathurst, unto Sir Watkin Williams Wynne Baronet, pursuant to an Agreement; and for settling an Estate, in the County of Northampton, of greater Value in Lieu thereof.”

Hall et al. Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of William Hall, otherwise Pearce, and Catherine his Wife, Charles Pearce Esquire, the Reverend John Pearce Clerk, William Thomson Doctor of Physic and Ann his Wife, James Wakeman Newport Esquire and Elizabeth his Wife, Thomas Browne Esquire and Catherine his Wife, Charles Baldwyn and William Lutwyche, Esquires; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, and Mr. Baron. Perrott, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Eliot et al. Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Edward Eliot Esquire, on Behalf of himself and Edward James Eliot, John Eliot, and William Eliot, his Sons, who are Infants under the Age of Twenty-one Years; the Right Honourable Robert Craggs Lord Viscount Clare, in the Kingdom of Ireland, on Behalf of himself; the Right Honourable James Earl of Abercorn, Uncle and Guardian of John James Hamilton Esquire an Infant, on Behalf of the said John James Hamilton; and Sir John Hynde Cotton Baronet; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, and Mr. Baron Smythe, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Winterflow, &c. Road Bill.

The Earl of Radnor reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Ant to continue and enlarge the Term and Powers of an Act, made in the Twenty-sixth Year of the Reign of King George the Second, for repairing and widening the Road, leading from Lobcombe Corner, in the Parish of Winterflow, to Harnham Bridge, in the County of Wilts; and from the West Corner of Saint Ann’s Street, in the City of New Sarum, to the Parishes of Landford and Brook, and from thence to Ealing; and from Landford aforesaid, through Ower and Testwood, to Ealing aforesaid, in the County of Southampton; and for repairing and widening the Road from the Rumsey and Ringwood Turnpike Road, near the House of Francis Fry, to Lindhurst; and from a Place called Hampton Ford, to Lamb’s Corner, in the said County of Southampton; and for repairing the Footways within the said City;” was committed: “That they had considered the said Bill, and examined the Allegations thereof, which were found to be true; and that the Committee had gone through the Bill, and directed him to report the same to the House, Without any Amendment.”

Gladwin et al. Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Henry Gladwin Esquire of Wingerworth, in the County or Derby, and of the Governors, and Assistants to the Governors in the Rule and Government of the Possessions, Revenues, and Goods, of the Free Grammar School of Elizabeth Queen of England, in the Town of Ashburne, in the County of Derby; who are also the Trustees of Six Alms Houses in Ashburne aforesaid, founded and endowed by Christopher Pegge Esquire deceased praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, and Mr. Justice Willes, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Harper’s Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Robert Harper the Younger, late of Lincoln’s Inn, in the County of Middlesex, but now of Heath, in the County of York, Esquire; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, and Mr. Baron Smythe, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill; and after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands, and whether all Parties who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Collier’s voice Bill.

The Earl of Oxford (pursuant to an Order of Leave of the 26th of February last) presented to the House a Bill, intituled, “An Act to dissolve the Marriage of George Collier Esquire with Christiana Gwyn his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Ordered, That the said Bill be read a Second Time on Tuesday the 17th Day of this instant March, and that Notice thereof be affixed on the Doors of this House, and the Lords summoned and that the said George Collier Esquire may be heard, by his Counsel, at the said Second Reading, to make out the Truth of the Allegations of the Bill; and that the said Chi if tiana Gwyn may have a Copy of the Bill, and that Notice be given her of the said Second Reading, and that me be at Liberty to be heard, by her Counsel, what she may have to offer against the said Bill, at the same Time.

Jones’s Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for granting to William Jones Esquire, on certain Contingencies therein mentioned, a Term for Ninety-nine Years, if he shall so long live, in the Real Estates late of William Jones Esquire deceased, in the several Counties of Wilts and Berks, upon such Terms as are therein mentioned.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords following:

Ld. President.L. Abp. Canterbury.L. Harwich.
Ld. Privy Seal.L. Abp. York.L. Le Despencer.
D. Richmond.L. Bp. London.L. Abergavenny.
D. Beaufort.L. Bp. Winchester.L. Willoughby Br.
D. St. Albans.L. Bp. Ely.L. Willoughby Par.
D. Bolton.L. Bp. Worcester.L. Clifton.
D. Devonshire.L. Bp. Chichester.L. Craven.
D. Marlborough.L. Bp. Gloucester.L. Boyle.
D. Gordon.L. Bp. Bangor.L. Trevor.
D. Ancaster.L. Bp. Lincoln.L. Masham.
D. Portland.L. Bp. Exeter.L. Romney.
D. Chandos.L. Bp. Oxford.L. Cadogan.
D. Dorset.L. Bp. St. Asaph.L. Ducie.
D. Bridgewater.L. Bp. Carlisle.L. King.
D. Newcastle.L. Bp. Landaff.L. Godolphin.
M. Rockingham.L. Bp. Peterborough.L. Edgecumbe.
Ld. Steward.L. Bp. Chester.L. Sandys.
Ld. Chamberlain.L. Bp. Litch. & Cov.L. Bruce.
E. Pembroke.L. Ravensworth.
E. Suffolk.L. Archer.
E. Exeter.L. Ponsonby.
E. Denbigh.L. Vere.
E. Westmorland.L. Hyde.
E. Peterborough.L. Walpole.
E. Stamford.L. Mansfield.
E. Thanet.L. Lyttelton.
E. Sandwich.L. Wycombe.
E. Essex.L. Sondes.
E. Carlisle.L. Scarsdale.
E. Doncaster.L. Boston.
E. Litchfield.L. Pelham.
E. Abingdon.L. Milton.
E. Holdernesse.L. Beaulieu.
E. Rochford.L. Camden.
E. Albemarle.L. Digby.
E. Coventry.L. Sundridge.
E. Jersey.
E. Strathmore.
E. Abercorn.
E. Loudoun.
E. March.
E. Marchmont.
E. Rosebery.
E. Oxford.
E. Strafford.
E. Dartmouth.
E. Tankerville.
E. Bristol.
E. Sussex.
E. Macclesfield.
E. Pomfret.
E. Waldegrave.
E. Ashburnham.
E. Orford.
E. Harrington.
E. Bucks.
E. Fitzwilliam.
E. Powis.
E. Temple.
E. Cornwallis.
E. Hardwicke.
E. De Lawarr.
E. Northington.
E. Radnor.
E. Spencer
V. Montague.
V. Say & Sele
V. Weymouth.
V. Bolingbroke.
V. Falmouth.
V. Torrington.
V. Dudley & Ward.

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Tuesday the 17th Day of this instant March, at Ten o’Clock in the Forenoon, in the Prince’s Lodgings, near the House of Peers; and to adjourn as they please.

Huttons to take the Name of Long, Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to enable Mary and William Hutton, and the other Persons therein described, to take and use the Surname, Arms, and Crest, of Long, pursuant to the Will of James Long deceased.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet To-morrow, at the usual Time and Place; and to adjourn as the please.

Enfield, &c. Road Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to continue and render more effectual several Acts for repairing the Roads from the Parish of Enfield, in the County of Middlesex, to the Town of Hertford, and other Roads in the said Acts mentioned; and also for repairing the Road from the End of the Town of Hertford to Amwell End, near Ware, in the said County of Hertford.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on the same Day, at the same Place and to adjourn as they please.

Fincham Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 1a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing, allotting, and enclosing, the Common Fields, Half-Year Enclosures, and Commons and Waste Lands, within the Parish of Fincham, in the County of,Norfolk”

Islington Lighting and Watch Bill.

Hodie 1a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for lighting such Part of the Town of Islington as lies in the Parish of Saint Mary Islington, in the County of Middlesex, and for establishing a regular Nightly Watch therein.”

Welby against D. Rutland.

The House being moved, “That a Day may be appointed for hearing the Cause wherein William Welby Esquire is Appellant, and John Duke of Rutland is Respondent:”

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause, by Counsel at the Bar, on the First vacant Day for Causes after those already appointed.

Spottiswoode to enter into Recognizance on Deas et al. Appeal.

The House being moved, “That John Spottiswoode Gentleman may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for John Deas Esquire and others, on Account of their Appeal depending in this House, they living in Scotland:”

It is Ordered, That the said John Spottiswoode may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellants, as desired.

and on Mac Nan’s Appeal.

The House being moved, “That John Spottiswoode Gentleman may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for Robert Mac Nair Merchant in Glasgow, on Account of his Appeal depending in this House, he living in Scotland:”

It is Ordered, That the said John Spottiswoode may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellant, as desired.

Da Costa against Mayhew and Ince.

Upon reading the Petition of John Mayhew and William Ince, Defendants in a Writ of Error depending in this House, wherein Joshua Mendes da Costa is Plaintiff:

Noah against Watson:

Also, Upon reading the Petition of William Watson, Defendant in a Writ of Error depending in this House, wherein Samuel Noah is Plaintiff; setting forth, “That the Plaintiffs in Error have not assigned Errors within the Time limited by their Lordships Standing Order, and that the same are brought merely for Delay;” and therefore praying, “That the same may be Nonpros’d, with such Costs as to the House shall seem meet:”

Writs of Error Nonprofs’d, with Costs.

It is Ordered, That the Petitioners do forthwith enter a Nonpros. on the said Writs of Error, as desired, and that the Records be remitted to the Court of King’s Bench, to the End Execution may be had upon the Judgements given by that Court as if no such Writs of Error had been brought into this House; and further, that the Plaintiffs in Error do pay, or cause to be paid, to the Defendants in Error, the Sum of Twenty Pounds for their Costs, by Reason of the Delay of the Execution of the said Judgements.

For regulating the future Marriages of the Royal Family, Bill.

The Order of the Day being read for the House to be again in a Committee upon the Bill, intituled, “An Act for the better regulating the future Marriages of the Royal Family;” and for the Lords to be summoned:

The House was adjourned during Pleasure, and put into a Committee upon the said Bill.

After some Time the House was resumed:

And the Lord Sandys reported from the Committee, “That they had gone through the Bill, and directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be engrossed.

Ordered, That the said Bill be read a Third Time To-morrow, and that the Lords be summoned.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Martis, tertium diem instantis Martii, hora undecima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

March 29th 1787.

Hitherto examined by us;

Moray.

Scarsdale.

Hawke.

Die Martis, 3o Martii 1772.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Archiep, Cantuar.Ds. Apsley, Cancellarius.Ds. Harwich, Unus Primariorum Secretariorum.
Archiep. Ebor.Comes Gower, Præses.Ds. Le Despencer.
Epus. Londin.Dux Grafton, C.P.S.Ds. Abergavenny.
Epus. Winton.Dux Richmond.Ds. Willoughby Br.
Epus. Wigorn.Dux Beaufort.Ds. Willoughby Par.
Epus. Cicestrien.Dux St. Albans.Ds. Clifton.
Epus. Sarum.Dux Bolton.Ds. Craven.
Epus. Lincoln.Dux Devonshire.Ds. Boyle.
Epus. Oxon.Dux Marlborough.Ds. Trevor.
Epus. Carliol.Dux Gordon.Ds. Masham.
Epus. Landaven.Dux Ancaster, Magnus Camerarius.Ds. Romney.
Epus. Cestrien.Dux Portland.Ds. Cadogan.
Epus. Litch. & Cov.Dux Chandos.Ds. Ducie.
Dux Dorset.Ds. Edgecumbe.
Comes Talbot, Senescallus.Ds. Sandys.
Comes Hertford, Camerarius.Ds. Bruce.
Comes Pembroke.Ds. Ravensworth.
Comes Suffolk.Ds. Archer.
Comes Exeter.Ds. Vere.
Comes Northampton.Ds. Hyde.
Comes Westmorland.Ds. Mansfield.
Comes Stamford.Ds. Lyttelton.
Comes Sandwich.Ds. Wycombe.
Comes Essex.Ds. Sondes.
Comes Doncaster.Ds. Scarsdale.
Comes Litchfield.Ds. Boston.
Comes Abingdon.Ds. Pelham.
Comes Holdernesse.Ds. Milton.
Comes Rochford.Ds. Digby.
Comes Albemarle.Ds. Sundridge.
Comes Abercorn.
Comes Loudoun.
Comes March.
Comes Marchmont.
Comes Rosebery.
Comes Oxford.
Comes Strafford.
Comes Dartmouth.
Comes Tankerville.
Comes Bristol
Comes Sussex.
Comes Pomfret.
Comes Waldegrave.
Comes Ashburnham.
Comes Bucks.
Comes Fitzwilliam.
Comes Temple.
Comes Cornwallis.
Comes De Lawarr.
Comes Northington.
Comes Radnor.
Viscount Say & Sele
Viscount Weymouth.
Viscount Falmouth.
Viscount Torrington.
Viscount Courtenay.
Viscount Dudley & Ward.

PRAYER

Harries et al. Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of William Harries Clerk, Reactor of the Parish Church of Manerdivy, in the County of Pembroke, Walter Lloyd Esquire, James Walker, William Dermer, and Griffith Howell Gentleman; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for confirming a Cut or Canal, in the Petition mentioned, to Walter Lloyd and others, their Heirs and Assigns, upon Payment of a certain Yearly Sum to the Rectors of the said Parish Church:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, and Mr. Baron Adams, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

E. Sandwich and L. Hinching brook’s Estate Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to enable the Right Honourable John Earl of Sandwich, and the Honourable John Montagu, commonly called Lord Viscount Hinchingbrook, and the Survivor of them, to grant Leases of the Countess of Sandwich’s Moiety of Estates in the Counties of Ardmagh and Limerick, in the Kingdom of Ireland.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords following:

Ld. President.L. Abp. Canterbury.L. Harwich.
Ld. Privy Seal.L. Abp. York.L. Le Despencer.
D. Richmond.L. Bp. London.L. Abergavenny.
D. Beaufort.L. Bp. Winchester.L. Willoughby Br.
D. St. Albans.L. Bp. Worcester.L. Willoughby Par.
D. Bolton.L. Bp. Chichester.L. Clifton.
D. Devonshire.L. Bp. Salisbury.L. Craven.
D. Marlborough.L. Bp. Lincoln.L. Boyle.
D. Gordon.L. Bp. Oxford.L. Trevor.
D. Ancaster.L. Bp. Carlisle.L. Masham.
D. Portland.L. Bp. Landaff.L. Romney.
D. Chandos.L. Bp. Chester.L. Cadogan.
D. Dorset.L. Bp. Litch. & Cov.L. Ducie.
Ld. Steward.L. Edgecumbe.
Ld. ChamberlainL. Sandys.
E. Pembroke.L. Bruce.
E. Suffolk.L. Ravensworth.
E. Exeter.L. Archer.
E. Northampton.L. Vere.
E. Westmorland.L. Hyde.
E. Stanford.L. Mansfield.
E. Sandwich.L. Lyttelton.
E. Essex.L. Wycombe.
E. Doncaster.L. Sondes.
E. Litchfield.L. Scarsdale.
E. Abingdon.L. Boston.
E. Holdernosse.L. Pelham.
E. Rochford.L. Milton.
E. Albemarle.L. Digby.
E. Abercorn.L. Sundridge.
E. Loudoun.
E. March.
E. Marchmont.
E. Rosebery.
E. Oxford
E. Strafford.
E. Dartmouth.
E. Tankerville.
E. Bristol.
E. Pomfret.
E. Waldegrave.
E. Ashburnham.
E. Bucks.
E. Fitzwilliam.
E. Temple.
E. Cornwallis.
E. Lawarr.
E. Northington.
E. Radnor.
V. Say &Sele.
V. Weymouth.
V. Falmouth.
V. Torrington.
V. Courtenay.
V. Dudley &Ward.

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Wednesday the 18th Day of this instant March, at Ten o’Clock in the Forenoon, in the Prince’s Lodgings, near the House of Peers; and to adjourn as they please.

Islington Lighting and Watch Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa intituled, “An Act for lighting such Part of the Town of Islington as lies in the Parish of Saint Mary Islington in the County of Middlesex, and for establishing a regular Nightly Watch therein”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Thursday next, at the usual Time and Place and to adjourn as they please.

Shelley’s Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of John Shelley of Field Place in the County of Sussex Esquire, eldest Son and Heir of Timothy Shelley late of Horsham in the said County Esquire deceased, and Bysshe Shelley Esquire Brother of the said John Shelley, for and in Behalf of himself and of Timothy Shelley and John Shelley his Two Sons, who are Infants; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, and Mr. Baron Smythe, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Russell’s Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of William Russell of the City of London Gentleman; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, and Mr. Baron Perrott, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Bank of England and Drapers Company Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of the Governor and Company of the Bank of England, and of the Matter and Wardens, and Brethren and Sisters, of the Guild or Fraternity of the Blested Mary the Virgin, of the Mystery of Drapers (commonly called The Company of Drapers) of the City of London; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Baron Perrott, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon under their Hands, and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

E.Carlisle, Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of the Right Honourable Frederick Earl of Carlisle, praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Justice Willes, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Huttons to take the Name of Long, Bill.

The Lord Sandys reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act to enable Mary and William Hutton, and the other Persons therein described, to take and use the Surname, Arms and Crest of Long, pursuant to the Will of James Long deceased,” was committed: That they had considered the said Bill, and examined the Allegations thereof, which were found to be true; and that the Committee had gone through the Bill, and directed him to report the same to the House, withput any Amendment.”

Enfield, &c. Road Bill.

The Lord Sandys made the like Report from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act to continue and render more effectual several Acts for repairing the Roads from the Parish of Enfold in the County of Middlesex, to the Town of Hertford, and other Roads in the said Acts mentioned; and also for repairing the Road from the End of the Town of Hertford, to Amwell End, near Ware> in the said County of Hertford,” was committed.

Fincham Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 4a vice lesta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing, allotting, and enclosing the Common Fields, Half-Year Enclosures, and Commons and Waste Lands, within the Parish of Fincham, in the County of Norfolk.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Thursday next, at the usual Time and Place and to adjourn as they please.

Winterslow &c. Road Bill:

Hodie 3a vice leata est Billa, intituled, “An Act to continue and enlarge the Term and Powers of an Act, made in the Twenty-sixth Year of the Reign of King George the Second, for repairing and widening the Roads leading from Lobcombe Corner, in the Parish of Winterslow, to Harnham Bridge, in the County of Wilts; and from the West Corner of Saint Ann’s Street, in the City of New Sarum, to the Parishes of Landford and Brook, and from thence to Ealing; and from Landford aforesaid, through Ower and Testwood to Ealing aforesaid, in the County of Southampton; and for repairing and widening the Road from the Rumsey and Ringwood Turnpike Road, near the House of Francis Fry, to Lindhurst, and from a Place called Hampton Ford to Lamb’s Corner, in the said County of Southampton; and for repairing the Footways within the said City.”

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. Anguish and Mr. Cuddon:

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

Chester Canal Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir Charles Banbury and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for making a Navigable Cut or Canal from the River Dec, within the Liberties of the City of Chester, to or near Middlewich and Nantwich, in the County of Chester;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Cheap et al. against Aiton et al.

The House being moved, “That a Day may be appointed for hearing the Cause, wherein James Cheap of Leith Merchant and others are Appellants, and Andrew Aiton and Company are Respondents:”

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause, by Counsel at the Bar, on the First vacant Day for Causes after those already appointed.

Witnesses to attend on Skinn’s Divorce Bill.

Ordered, That William Webley, Thomas Stirling, Elizabeth Morris, Ann Liddell, Lydia Jones, and Mark Holman, do attend this House on Friday the 6th Day of this instant March, in order to be examined as Witnesses upon the Second Reading of the Bill, intituled, “An Act to dissolve the Marriage of William Skinn with Ann Shnn his now Wife, and to enable him to marry against and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

Kemys et Ux. Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of John Gardner Kemys and Jane his Wife, for themselves and on Behalf of John Kemyt, Gardner Kemys, Jane Gardner Kemys, and Susannah Gardner Kemys, their Infant Children; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Baron Smythe, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Sir John Colleton’s Divorce Bill.

The Order of the Day being read for the Second Reading of the Bill, intituled, “An Act to dissolve the Marriage of Sir John Colleton Baronet with Ann Fullford his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again, and for other Purposes therein mentioned;” and for hearing Counsel for and against the same:

Counsel were accordingly called in; and Mr. Impey appearing as Counsel for the Bill, but no Counsel appearing against it:

William Jones was called in; and, being Sworn, acquainted the House, “That he personally served Mr. Anne Fullford with the Order for the Second Reading of the Bill; and also delivered to her, at the same Time, a true Copy of the Bill.”

He was directed to withdraw.

Then the said Bill was read a Second Time.

Then Mr. Impey was heard in Support of the Bill and to make out the Allegations thereof; and in order to prove the Marriage, again called the said William Jones, who produced an Extract from the Regifter of Marriages of the Parish of Saint Stephen’s, and declaring, that the same was a true Copy, he having examined it with the Original. The same was read, whereby it appeared, “That the said Sir John Colleton and the said Ann Fullford were married at the Parish Church of Saint Stephen on the 10th of February 1759.”

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Mr. Wenman Nutt was called in; and, being Sworn, acquainted the House, “That he became acquainted with Sir John Colleton and his Lady soon after their Marriage; that they went to South Carolina in the Year 1759, and a little Time before their Departure, they took Leave of him and his Family; that Lady Colleton arrived in England from South Carolina at Bristol in the Year 1767; that the was at his House before Christmas 1767, and that he and his Family frequently visited her till July following; that the Intervals of their Visits were so short, that it was impossible for her to have returned to South Carolina during that Time; that he saw Sir John Colleton in England in September 1769, who then told him, he was just arrived from South Carolina.

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Abigail Fryer was called in; and, being Sworn, acquainted the House, “That she went to live with Lady Colleton as a Servant on the 7th of August 1768, and lives with her now; that she never saw Sir John Colleton till about Two Months ago; that Lady Colleton was brought to bed of a Son on the 21st of February 1769; and that the and Mr. Lucas were present, and that the Child was put out to nurse.”

She was directed to withdraw.

Then John Channing was called in; and, being Sworn, acquainted the House, “That he knew Sir John Colleton in South Carolina, and was acquainted with him there for Ten Years; that he never was out of South Carolina till May 1769, when he came to England, and left Sir John Colleton at South Carolina; that he visited Sir John Colleton so often, during his Acquaintance with him, that it was impossible for Sir John, during any of the Intervals, to have come to England and returned to South Carolina.

He was directed to withdraw,

Then Mark Holman, Deputy Register of the Consistory Court of the Bishop of London, was called in; and, being Sworn, produced the Original Definitive Sentence of Divorce in the said Court, against the said Lady Colleton, for Adultery:

And the same was read.

He was directed to withdraw.

The Counsel was directed to withdraw.

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to a Committee of the whole House.

Ordered, That the House be put into a Committee upon the said Bill on Friday next.

For the better regulating the future Marriages of the Royal Family, Bill:

The Order of the Day being read for the Third Reading of the Bill, intituled, “An Act for the better regulating the future Marriages of the Royal Family;” and for the Lords to be summoned:

The said Bill was accordingly read the Third Time.

Proposed, “That the Bill do pass:”

Which being objected to:

After long Debate;

The Question was put, “Whether this Bill shall pass?”

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Protests against the passing it.

DISSENTIENT.

1st. Because we think the declaratory Principle in the Preamble of the Bill to be without Foundation in Law, (in the Extent there stated), to be unnecessary for the avowed Purposes of the Bill, and likely to be attended with very dangerous Consequences; as that Preamble does assert, “that we are sensible that Marriages in the Royal Family are of the highest Importance to the State, and that therefore the Kings of this Realm have ever been entrusted with the Care and Approbation thereof:”

The Maxim here laid down, “That, because Marriages of the Royal Family are of the highest Importance to the State, they are therefore entrusted to the Kings of this Realm,” is founded on a Doctrine absurd and unconstitutional, but which hereafter will have the Force of a Parliamentary Declaration of Law, the immediate Tendency of which is to create as many Prerogatives in the Crown as there are Matters of Importance in the State; and, indeed, to extend them in a Manner as vague and exceptionable as had ever been done in the worst and most despotic Periods in the History of this Nation: And we apprehend that some future and even more dangerous Use may be made of this Preamble, as it is much more extensive than is necessary for any Purpose avowed in the Bill:

2dly. Because this declaratory Preamble seems to justify the Words which His Majesty has been advised (we think very improperly) to use in His Message to His Parliament, whereby a Prerogative is assumed in an Extent for which Nine of His Judges, in their unanimous Opinion delivered to this House, do not find any Authority:

3dly. Because the Term Royal Family being general, and not qualified by the Exception of “the Issue of Princesses married into Foreign Families,” seems to carry very idly (as we apprehend) the Royal Prerogative beyond the Jurisdiction of the Crown of Great Britain, can therefore, as applied in the Preamble, be warranted by no Law, and is indeed contrary to common Sense:

4thly. Because, if this Parliamentary Declaration of Law can operate in any Degree as a Retrospect, (an Operation against which we have no Security by any Thing contained in the Bill), it is pernicious and unjust; if it can have no such Retrospect, (as was asserted in Argument by the Friends by the Bill), it is then, at best, frivolous and unnecessary:

5thly. Because the enacting Part of the Bill has an inconvenient and impolitic Extent; namely, to all Defendants of George the Second. In Course of Time that Description may become very general, and comprehend a great Number of People; and we conceive it would be an intolerable Grievance that the Marriages of so many Subjects, perhaps dispersed among the various Ranks of Civil Lile, should be subject to the Restrictions of this Act, especially as it has been asserted in Argument, and endeavoured to be maintained by the Authority of the grand Opinion given by the Judges in the Year 1717, that the Care and Approbation of the Marriage includes the Education and Custody of the Person; we fear that thes extensive Power would come in Time to make many of the First Families in the Kingdom totally dependent on the Crown; and we therefore lament that the Endeavours, so earnestly used in the Committee in some Degree to limit the Generality of that Description, were not suffered to take Effect:

6thly. Because, as the Line is too large with Regard to the Description of the Royal Family, so we think that the Time of Non-age for that Family is also improperly extended. We conceive that the Age of Twenty-one Years is that Limit which the Laws of this Country and the Spirit of the Constitution have, with great Wisdom, given to Minority. It seems indecent to the Royal Family to suppose they will not be arrived at the Age of Discretion as soon as the lowest Subjest of the Realm; and we cannot conceive but they may be as capable of chusing a Wife at the Age of Twenty-one, as of being entrusted with the Regency of the Kingdom, of which by Law they are, at that Age, capable. We also conceive, that the deferring their Age of Majority, as to Marriage, till Twenty-six, is impolitic and dangerous, as it may tend to drive them into a disorderly Course of Life, which ought the more to be guarded against in Men of high Rank, as the Influence of their Example is the most forcible and extensive:

“7thly. Because the Power given by this Bill to a Prince to marry after the Age of Twenty-six, having first entered in the Books of the Privy Council his Intention so to do for Twelve Calendar Months, is totally defeated by the subsequent Proviso, unless both Houses of Parliament shall, before the Expiration of the said Twelve Months, expressly declare their Disapprobation of such intended Marriage:”

We think this Proviso lays great Difficulties on o future Parliaments, as their Silence, in such a Case, must express a Condemnation of the King’s Refusal; and their Concurrence with such Refusal may prove a perpetual Prohibition from Marriage to the Person concerned:

We conceive the Right of conferring a discretionary Power of prohibiting all Marriages (whether vested in the Crown alone, as intended by the Message, or in the Manner now enacted by the Bill) to be above the Reach of any Legislature, as contrary to the original inherent Rights of human Nature, which, as they are not derived from or held under Civil Laws, by no Civil Laws whatsoever can be taken away. We freely allow that the Legislature has a Power of prescribing Rules to Marriage as well as to every other Species of Contract; but there is an essential and eternal Difference between regulating the Mode in which a Right may be enjoyed, and establishing a Principle which may tend entirely to annihilate that Right. To disable a Man during his whole Life from contracting Marriage, or, what is tantamount, to make his Power of contracting such Marriage dependant neither on his own Choice nor upon any fixed Rule of Law, but on the arbitrary Will of any Man or Set of Men; is exceeding the Power permitted by the Divine Providence to Human Legislators. It is directly against the earliest Command given by God to Mankind, contrary to the Right of domestic Society and Comfort, and to the Desire of lawful Posterity, the First and bell of Instincts planted in us by the Author of bur Nature, and utterly incompatible with all Religion natural and revealed, and therefore a mere Act of Power having neither the Nature nor Obligation of Law:

8thly. Because we conceive this Bill to be pregnant with Civil Discord and Confusion: It has a natural Tendency to produce a Disputed Title to the Crown. If those who may be affected by it are in Power, they will easily procure a Repeal of this Act, and the Confirmation of a Marriage made contrary to it and if they are not, it will at least be the Source of the most dangerous Party that can exit in any Country, a Party attached to a Pretender to the Crown, whose Claim he may assert has been set aside by no other Authority than that of an Act to which the Legislature was not competent, as being contrary to the common Rights of Mankind. Such a Claim, supported as it may be by peculiar Hardship in the Case, must, as we conceive, at no very remote Period create great Mischief and Confusion:

Lastly. Because this Bill, which resorts to such harsh and unusual Methods, at the same Time provides for its own Purpose very uncertainly and very imperfectly; for it secures no Remedy against the improper Marriages of Princesses married into Foreign Families and those of their Issue, which may full as materially affect the Interest of this Nation, as the Marriages of Princes residing in the Dominions of Great Britain, It provides no Remedy at any Age against the improvident Marriage of the King reigning, the Marriage of all others the most important to the Public. It provides nothing against the in Discreet Marriage of a Prince of the Blood being Regent at the Age of Twenty-one, nor furnishes any Remedy against his permitting such Marriages to others of the Blood Royal, the Regal Power fully vesting in him as to this Purpose, and without the Assistance of His Council. We cannot therefore, on the Whole, avoid expressing our strong Disapprobation of an Act, shaking so many of the Foundations of Law, Religion, and Public Security, for Ends wholly Disproportioned to such extra ordinary Efforts, and in Favour of Regulations so ill calculated to answer the Purposes for which it is pretended they are made. And we make this Protest, that it may stand recorded to that Posterity which may suffer from the mischievous Consequences of this Act, that we have no Part in the Confusions and Calamities brought upon them, by rendering uncertain the Succession of the Crown.

Richmond.

Fitzwilliam.

Devonshire.

Abergavenny.

Stamford.

Albemarle.

Milton.

Portland.

Dorset.

Craven.

Abingdon.

Torrington.

John Bangor.

Rockingham.

DISSENTIENT.

Because the Liberty of Marriage is a natural Right inherent in Mankind:

Because this Right is confirmed and enforced by the Holy Scriptures, which declare Marriage to be of divine Institution, and deny to none the Benefit of that Institution:

Because the Law of Nature and Divine Institutions are not reversible by the Power of Human Legislatures:

Because there is a total Difference between regulating the Mode of exercising a Right derived from the Law of Nature, and assuming or granting a discretionary Power of taking it quite away:

Because, though we think it expedient and agreeable to the Dictates of Reason, that Minors should not marry without the Consent of their Parents or Guardians, and that such Consent should be necessary to render their Marriages good and valid, as it likewise is in the Exercise of all their other Rights during the Term of their Nonage; it can no more be inferred from thence that we acknowledge a Right to continue such Restraint throughout their whole Lives, than that we acknowledge a Right to keep Men or Women in a State of endless Nonage, which, unless in the Case of Idiots or incurable Lunatics, would be absurd, unjust, and a manifest Violation of the Law of Nature:

Because, if a perpetual Restraint upon Marriage, or Power given to restrain it without Limitation of Time or Age, be contrary to the natural and divine Laws, (as we apprehend it to be), a Law authorizing such Restraint, or conferring such a Power, must be null and void in itself:

Because, in any Case where the Right of succeeding to the Crown of these Realms, may come to depend on the Force or Invalidity of the Power given by this Bill, an Appeal made against it would probably bring upon the Royal Family and the Nation all the Miseries and Horrors of Civil War:

Because, though the placing such a Power in the King, with the Interposition of both Houses of Parliament, is a better Security against the Abuse of it than if it had been entrusted to the King alone; yet it may be so used, in corrupt or violent Times, as to be made, in some Cases, a perpetual Negative on the Freedom of Marriage:

Because, if the Power be grievous and contrary to the inherent Rights of Mankind, the Grievance is encreased by the infinite Number of Persons over whom, in the Course of Time, it is likely to extend:

Because we are convinced, that all the good Purposes and Objects of the Bill, which we have greatly at Heart, might have been answered without giving that Perpetuity of Restraint over the Freedom of Marriage, which we think ourselves bound in Conscience to oppose:

Radnor.Temple.
Clifton.Lyttelton.
Abingdon.
Craven.

And because the Bill is essentially wanting to its avowed Purpose, in having provided no Guard against the greater Evil, the improper Marriages of the Princes on the Throne.

“Radnor.”

Message to H.C. with the Bill.

Ordered, That a Message be sent to the House of Commons, by Two of the Judges:

To carry down the said Bill, and desire their Concurrence thereto.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Jovis, quintum diem instantis Martii, hora undecima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

Die Jovis, 5o Martii 1772.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Epus. Glocestr.Ds. Apsley, Cancellarius. (fn. 1) L. Willoughby Br.
Epus. Bangor.Comes Gower, Præes. (fn. 1) L. Clifton.
Epus. Lincoln.Dux Chandos. (fn. 1) L. Sandys.
Epus. Landaven.March. Rockingham. (fn. 1) L. Ravensworth.
Epus. Cestrien.Comes Denbigh. (fn. 1) L. Walpole.
Epus. Litch. & Cov.Comes Westmorland. (fn. 1) L. Mansfield.
Comes Stamford. (fn. 1) L. Scarsdale.
Comes Albemarle.
Comes Abercorn.
Comes Rosebery.
Comes Oxford.
Comes Dartmouth.
Comes Northington.
Comes Radnor.
Viscount Montague.
Viscount Torrington.

PRAYERS.

Islington Lighting and Watch Bill.

The Lord Boston reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for lighting such Part of the Town of Islington as lies in the Parish of Saint Mary Islington, in the County of Middlesex, and for establishing a regular Nightly Watch therein,” was committed: “That they had considered the said Bill, and examined the Allegations thereof, which were found to be true; and that the Committee had gone through the Bill, and directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment.”

E. Ferrers Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Washington Earl Ferrers Viscount Tamworth; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Baron Smythe, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Chester Canal Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for making a navigable Cut or Canal from the River Dee, within the Liberties of the City of Chester, to or near Middlewich and Nantwich, in the County of Chester.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords following:

Ld. President.L. Bp. Gloucester.L. Willoughby Br.
D. Chandos.L. Bp. Bangor.L. Clifton.
M. Rockingham.L. Bp. Lincoln.L. Sandys.
E. Denbigh.L. Bp. Landaff.L. Ravensworth.
E. Westmorland.L. Bp. Chester.L. Walpole.
E. Stamford.L. Bp. Litch. & Cov.L. Mansfield.
E. Albemarle.L. Scarsdale.
E. Abercorn.
E. Rosebery.
E. Oxford.
E. Dartmouth.
E. Northington.
E. Radnor.
V. Montague.
V. Torrington.

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

L Willoughby de Brake’s Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of John Peyto Lord Willoughby de Brooke, on Behalf of himself and of John Peyto Verney an Infant, his eldest Son and Heir Apparent; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Baron Smythe, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Blundell et al Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Henry Blundell of Ince Blundell, in the County Palatine of Lancaster, Esquire, eldest Son and Heir Apparent of Robert Blundell late of Ince Blundell aforesaid, but now of Liverpool in the said County Esquire; and of the said Robert Blundell on Behalf of and as the Guardian of his younger Son Robert Blundell, an Infant of the Age of Eighteen Years or thereabouts, and of Mary Blundell of Liverpool aforesaid Spinster, Daughter of the said Robert Blundell the Father; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Baron Smythe, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

L Bathurst’s Estate Bill.

Bodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for Sale of a Capital Freehold Messuage in Saint James’s Square, in the County of Middlesex, Part of the Entailed Estate of the Right Honourable Allen Lord Bathurst, unto Sir Watkin Williams Wynne Baronet, pursuant to an Agreement; and for settling an Estate, in the County of Northampton, of greater Value, in Lieu thereof.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Friday the 20th Day of this instant March, at the usual Time and Place; and to adjourn as they please.

Bydges et al. Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of James Brydges of the Parish of Saint George Hanover Square, in the County of Middlesex, Esquire, Annabella Inwood of the Parish of Saint Mary le Bone, in the said County of Middlesex, Widow, Mary A. Deane of Twickenham, in the said County of Middlesex, Widow, and Henrietta Kearney of the same Place Widow; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Baron Perrott, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Tea Duty Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir Charles Whitworth and others:

With a Bill, intituled, An Act for explaining and amending an Act, made in the Seventh Year of His present Majesty, intituled, “An Act for taking off the Inland Duty of One Shilling per Pound Weight upon all Black and Singlo Teas consumed in Great Britain; and for granting a Drawback upon the Exportation of Teas to Ireland and the British Dominions in America, for a limited Time, upon such Indemnification to be made in Respect thereof, by the East India Company, as is therein mentioned; for permitting the Exportation of Teas in smaller Quantities than One Lot to Ireland, or the said Dominions in America, and for preventing Teas seized and condemned, from being consumed in Great Britain;” and for settling certain Doubts and Disputes which have arisen upon the said Act of Parliament; to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Spackman’s et al. Petition for a Bill.

Upon reading the Petition of the Reverend Francis Spackman Vicar of Thatcham in the County of Berks, James Head of Newbury, in the said County of Berks, Gentleman, the Reverend William Dodwell Doctor in Divinity, Parson of Bucklebury, in the said County of Berks, the Reverend Christopher Garrard Parson of Little Sheffield, in the said County of Berks, and William Le Merchant Esquire; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for vesting a School-House and Premises at Thatcham aforesaid, together with an Annuity or Rent Charge, in the Petition mentioned, in the Petitioners and their Successors, upon the several Trusts limited and declared by an Indenture of the 30th of June 1707:

It is Ordered, That Leave be given to bring in a Bill, according to the Prayer of the said Petition.

Vansittart et al. Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Arthur Vansittart, Robert Vansittart, Edmund Boehm, and Robert Palk, Esquires, Trustees and Executors under the Will of Henry Vansittart late of Greenwich, in the County of Kent, Esquire; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to Mr. Justice Ashurst and Mr. Justice Nares, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Huttons to take the Name of Long, Bill.

Hodie 3a vice lesta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to enable Mary and William Hutton, and the other Persons therein described, to take and use the Surname, Arms, and Crest, of Long, pursuant to the Will of James Long deceased.”

The Question was put, “Whether this Bill shall pass r”

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Enfield, &c. Road Bill.

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to continue and render more effectual several Act for repairing the Roads from, the Parish of Enfield, in the County of Middlesex, to the Town of Hertford, and other Roads in the said Acts mentioned; and also for repairing the Road from the End of the Town of Hertford to Amwell End, near Ware, in the said County of Hertford.”

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 the Two preceding Bills.

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Anguih and Mr. Cuddon:

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

Heatley, for a Divorce Bill.

Upon reading the Petition of Richard Heatley of London Merchant; praying Leave to bring in a Bill to dissolve his Marriage with Arabella Dawson his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned:

It is Ordered, That Leave be given to bring in a Bill according to the Prayer of the said Petition.

Crespigny’s Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Philip Champion Crespigny Esquire; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas and the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Barbor et al. Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Robert Barbor of Somerford in the County of Stafford Esquire, sames Barbor of Hunnington in the County of Salop Gentleman, Thomas Barbor of the same Place Gentleman, Ralph Barbor of Newport in the same County Esquire, John Barbor of The Four Crosses in the County of Stafford aforesaid Gentleman, and Michael Mayo of James Street in the Parish of St. Andrew Holborn, in the County of Middlesex, Gentleman, on Behalf of himself and his Two Infant Sons James Mayo and Charles Mayo; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to Mr. Baron Smythe and Mr. Baron Perrott, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Bunting’s Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Ann Bunting, the Widow, Residuary Legatee and Sole Executrix named in the last Will and Testament of Tomlinson Bunting, late of the City of York, deceased, on Behalf of Elizabeth Bunting and Dorothy Bunting her Two Infant Children; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to Mr Baron Perrott and Mr. Justice Ashurst, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Fenwick’s Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Ann Fenwick, Widow and Relict of John Fenwick late of Burrow Hall, in the County Palatine of Lancaster, Esquire, deceased; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court ot Exchequer and Mr. Baron Smythe, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Rashleigh et al Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Philip Rashleigh Esquire, Son and Heir of Jonathan Rashleigh Esquire deceased, who was the surviving Trustee in the Settlement made upon the Marriage of John Pendarves Basset Esquire deceased, and of the Reverend John Collins Clerk, John Enys Esquire, and Swete Nicholas Archer Esquire, Executors of the last Will and Testament of Francis Basset Esquire deceased; and also the Guardians, appointed by the High Court of Chancery, of the Persons and Estates of the Two Infant Sons of the said Francis Basset, on the Behalf of the said Infants; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Baron Smythe, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and alsothat the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Comptons et al Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of Henry Compton the Younger Esquire, eldest Son of Henry Compton the Elder Esquire by Lucretia his late Wife, and also eldest Son and Heir at Law of the said Lucretia, who was One of the Two Daughters and Coheirs of John Mills late of Kimpston, otherwise Kimpston, otherwise Culmeston Gennings, in the County of Hants, Esquire, deceased; John Compton Esquire, Second Son of the said Henry Compton the Elder by the said Lucretia his late Wife; the said Henry Compton the Elder, on Behalf of Charles Langley Compton, Willett Compton, and Robert Compton, the Third, Fourth, and Fifth Sons of the said Henry Compton the Elder, by the said Lucretia, and who are Infants under the Age of Twenty-one Years; and William Palmer Clerk, and Elizabeth Anstis Widow, the only acting Guardians of Sir John William Pole Baronet, an Infant, on Behalf of the said Sir John William Pole, who is the only Son of Elizabeth, the only Daughter of the said John Mills, by Sir John Pole Baronet, both deceased, and the other Coheir at Law of the said John Mills; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Baron Smythe, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Hulton et Ux. Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of William Hulton of Hulton Park in the County of Lancaster Esquire, and Ann his Wife, on Behalf of themselves and Ann Hulton, William Hulton, Henry Hulton, Adam Hulton, and Beatrix Hulton; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas and the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Batson’s Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of James Balson and Edward Buckley Batson, Esquires, Testamentary Guardians of the Person and Estate of Edward Perry Buckley, an Infant under the Age of Twenty-one Years; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Baron Adams, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Cookes and Molloy, Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of George John Cooke of Harefield in the County of Middlesex, William Cooke of the Inner temple, London, Esquire, and Charles Molloy of Linstead, in the County of Kent, Esquire, the Sons and only surviving Children of George Cooke late of Harefield aforesaid Esquire deceased praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, and Mr. Baron Smythe, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, arc to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Bullock et Ux Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of John Bullock Esquire and Elizabeth his Wife; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to Mr. Baron Perron and Mr. Justice Ashurst, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

D Buccleugh’s Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of His Grace the Most Noble Henry Duke of Buccleugh; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Justice Willes, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Hay against M. Tweeddale.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Robert Hay Esquire, Second Son, now alive, of Alexander Hay of Drummelzier Esquire, complaining of an Interlocutor of the Lords of Session in Scotland, of the 19th Day of February last; and praying, “That the same may be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Appellant may have such Relief in the Premises, as to this House, in their Lordships great Wisdom, shall seem meet; and that George Marquis of Tweeddale may be required to answer the said Appeal:”

It is Ordered, That the said George Marquis of Tweeddale may have a Copy of the said Appeal, and do put in his Answer thereto, in Writing, on or before Thursday the 2d Day of April next; and Service of this Order upon the said Respondent, or on his Procurators or Agents in the said Court of Session in Scotland, shall be deemed good Service.

Witnesses to attend on Collier’s Divorce Bill.

Ordered, That Jane Christie, Sarah Rood, Mary Staines, Harriet Quarter, and Frances Pocock, do attend this House on Tuesday the 16th Day of this instant March, in order to be examined upon the Second Reading of the Bill, intituled, “An Act to Dissolvethe Marriage of George Collier Esquire with Christiana Gwyn his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

Da Costa against Scrope, in Error.

The Lord Mansfield, Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King’s Bench, in the usual Manner, delivered in at the Table a Writ of Error, wherein Joshua Mendes da Costa is Plaintiff, and Gervase Scrope Esquire is Defendant.

Great Ormside Enclosure Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir Anthony Abdy and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Common and Waste Grounds within the Manor of Great Ormside, in the Parish of Ormside, in the County of Westmorland;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Scaftworth Enclosure Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir Robert Franklin and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Commons and Waste Lands and Grounds, in the Township of Scaftworth, in the County of Nottingham;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Skeffington Enclosure Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by General Vernon and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing, allotting, and enclosing, the Open Fields and Commonable Places, in the Parish of Skeffington and County of Leicester;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Three Bills were, severally, read the First Time.

Halhed et Ux. for a Bill:

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of William Halhed Esquire and Frances his Wife; praying Leave to bring in a Private Bill for the Purposes therein mentioned:

It is Ordered, That Leave be given to bring in a Bill, pursuant to the said Petition and Report.

Bill read.

Hodie 1a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for vesting the Settled Estate of William Halhed Esquire, in the County of Hereford, in Trustees, in Trust to sell and convey the same to James King Esquire and his Heirs, pursuant to an Agreement for that Purpose; and for laying out the Money arising by such Sale in the Purchase of other Lands and Hereditaments, to be settled in Lieu thereof, to the same Uses.”

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Veneris, sextum diem instantis Martii, hora undecima Aurora, Dominis sic decernentibus.

Die Veneris, 6o Martii 1772.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Archiep. Cantuar.Ds. Apsley, Cancellarius.Ds. Le Despencer.
Epus. Wigorn.Dux Chandos.Ds. Willoughby Br.
Epus. Cicestrien.Comes Suffolk.Ds. Paget.
Epus. Petriburg.Comes Westmorland.Ds. Craven.
Epus. Cestrien.Comes Stamford.Ds. Edgecumbe.
Epus. Litch, & Cov.Comes Sandwich.Ds. Hyde.
Comes Strathmore.Ds. Sondes.
Comes Abercorn.Ds. Grosvenor.
Comes Oxford.Ds. Scarsdale.
Comes Pomfret.Ds. Boston.
Comes Hardwicke.
Viscount Hereford.
Viscount Montague.

PRAYERS.

Isdall against Fitzgerald.

After hearing Counsel, in Part, in the Cause wherein Isdall against Oliver Isdall Esquire is Appellant, and Oliver Fitzgerald Esquire is Respondent:

It is Ordered, That the further Hearing of the said Cause be put off till Monday next.

Tea Duty Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for explaining and amending an Act, made in the Seventh Year of his present Majesty, intituled, “An Act for taking off the Inland Duty of One Shilling per Pound Weight upon all Black and Singlo Teas consumed in Great Britain; and for granting a Drawback upon the Exportation of Teas to Ireland and the British Dominions in America, for a limited Time, upon such Indemnification to be made in respect thereof, by the East India Company, as is therein mentioned; for permitting the Exportation of Teas, in smaller Quantities than One Lot, to Ireland or the said Dominions in America; and for preventing Teas seized and condemned from being consumed in Great Britain;” and for settling certain Doubts and Disputes which have arisen upon the said Act of Parliament.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to a Committee of the whole House.

Ordered, That the House be put into a Committee upon the said Bill on Monday next.

Skeffington Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing, allotting, and enclosing, the Open Fields and Commonable Places, in the Parish of Skeffington and County of Leicester.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords following:

D. Chandos.L. Abp. Canterbury.L. Le Despencer.
E. Suffolk.L. Bp. Worcester.L. Willoughby Br.
E. Westmorland.L. Bp. Chichester.L. Paget.
E. Stamford.L. Bp. Peterborough.L. Craven.
E. Sandwich.L. Bp. Chester.L. Edgecumbe.
E. Strathmore.L. Bp. Litch & Cov.L. Hyde.
E. Abercorn.L. Sondes.
E. Oxford.L. Grosvenor
E. Pomfret.L. Scarsdale.
E. Hardwicke.L. Boston.
V. Hereford.
V. Montague.

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

Islington Lighting and Watch Bill.

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for lighting such Part of the Town of Islington as lies in the Parish of Saint Mary Islington, in the County of Middlesex; and for establishing a regular Nightly Watch therein.”

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. Harris and Mr. Montagu:

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

Sir John Colleton’s Divorce Bill.

The House (according to Order) was adjourned during Pleasure, and put into a Committee upon the Bill, intituled, “An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of Sir John Colleton Baronet with Ann Fullford his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

After some Time the House was resumed.

And the Lord Sandys reported from the Committee, That they had gone through the Bill, and directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be engrossed.

Skinn’s Divorce Bill.

The Order of the Day being read for the Second Reading of the Bill, intituled, “An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of William Skinn with Ann Skinn his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned;” and for hearing Counsel for and against the same:

Counsel were accordingly called in:

And Mr. Chetwynd appearing as Counsel for the Bill but no Counsel appearing against it:

Thomas Stirling was called in; and, being Sworn, acquainted the House, “That he personally served Mrs. Skinn, at her Lodgings in Buckingham Street in the Strand, with the Order for the Second Reading of the Bill; and also delivered to her, at the same Time, a true Copy of the Bill; and that the then declared to him, the was satisfied with the Provision made for her, and would not oppose the Bill.”

He was directed to withdraw.

Then the said Bill was read a Second Time.

Then Mr. Chetwynd was heard in Support of the Bill; and to make out the Allegations thereof, and in order to prove the Marriage, again called the said Thomas Stirling, who produced an Extract from the Register of Marriages of the Parish of Saint Giles in the Fields, and declaring, “That the same was a true Copy, he having examined it with the Original:” The same was read, whereby it appeared, that the said Mr. Skinn was married to Ann Masterman at Saint Giles’s Church on the 29th of June 1767.

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Elizabeth Morris was called in; and being Sworn, acquainted the House, “That the lived as Servant with Mrs Skinn in the Year 1769; that the went with her to Hull in Yorkshire that Mrs. Skinn was there visited by one Mr. Browne; that the has seen them in Bed together several Times at Mrs. Skinn’s Lodgings at Hull; that the don’t know where Mr. Skinn then was, but the never saw him at Hull; that Mrs. Skinn went to Hull without her Husband’s Consent; that the, the Witness, went with Mrs. Skinn and Mr. Browne to Edinburgh, where the likewise saw them several Times in Bed together; that the never saw Mr. Skinn at Edinburgh; that Mrs. Skinn went by the Name of Browne at Edinburgh, and that the and Mr. Browne were visited there as Man and Wife; that the lest Mrs. Skinn at Edinburgh, and came away without receiving her Wages, and that her Reason for leaving Mrs. Skinn was on Account of her living with Mr. Browne in a continued State of Adultery.”

She was directed to withdraw.

Then the said Thomas Stirling was again called in; and produced an Office Copy of the Proceedings and Verdict obtained by Mr. Skin in the Court of King’s Bench, against the said Mr. Browne for Criminal Conversion with the said Mrs. Skinn.

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Mark Holman, Deputy Register of the Consistory Court of the Bishop of London, was called in; and, being Sworn, produced the original Definitive Sentence of Divorce in the said Court against the said Mrs. Skinn for Adultery with the said Mr. Browne.

And the same was read.

He was directed to withdraw.

The Counsel (fn. 2) were directed to withdraw.

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to a Committee of the whole House.”

Ordered, That the House be put into a Committee upon the said Bill on Monday next.

Chester Canal Bill.

The Earl of Stamford reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for making a navigable Cut or Canal from the River Dee, within the Liberties of the City of Chester, to or near Middlewich and Nantwich, in the County of Chester,” was committed: “That they had considered the said Bill, and examined the Allegations thereof, which were found to be true; and that the Committee had gone through the Bill, and directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment.”

E. Pomfret et Ux. against South et al.

Upon reading the Petition of the Right Honourable George Earl of Pomfret and Anna Maria Countess of Pomfret his Wife, Appellants in a Cause depending in this House, to which Thomas Smith and others are ReSpirituales; setting forth, “That this Appeal is brought against Six several Orders of the Court of Chancery, dated the 13th of June, the 2d, 9th, and 18th, Days of July, and Two Orders of the 17th Day of December last; by the last of which it: was ordered, That unless the Appellants should bring such Action as they should be advised, in order to try the Question of Right, between the Parties, and proceed to Trial thereon, at the Bar of the Court of Common Pleas, by a Special Jury of the County of York, the then next Easter Term, or at such other Time as that Court should appoint, the Injunction Issued against the Respondents, to restrain them, their Servants, Workmen, and Agents, from opening or working any Mine, within the Parcel of Land in Dispute, beyond those Ten Bounds and Meers that had been set out by the Plaintiffs in that Cause (the now Respondents) to their Under Lessees, should be Dissolved; and so much of the said Order, of the said Second Day of December 1769, as directed the Duties or Shares reserved from the Under Lessees to their Lesssrs, arising out of the Ten Meers or Bounds that had been set out as aforesaid, to be paid into the Bank, should be Discharged; and that the Plaintiffs (the now Respondents) should be at Liberty from thenceforth to receive such Duties and Shares from their Under Lessees, as at the Time of making the said Order were, and since that Time had, and for the Time to come should, become due and payable to them respectively; but in Case the said Defendants (the now Appellants) should bring such Action, and proceed to Trial thereon as aforesaid, by the Time aforesaid, then his Lordship did reserve the Consideration of all further Directions until after the said Trial should be had, and any of the Parties were to be at Liberty to apply to the Court, as there should be Occasion: That this Appeal is set down to be heard: That under the Circumstances of this Case, and as the Time limited by such Order for bringing the Action is drawing near, a Delay would be greatly detrimental to the Parties;” and therefore praying, “Their Lordships to appoint an early Bye-Day for the Hearing of this Cause; the Agent for the Respondents having signed the said Petition as consenting thereto:”

It is Ordered, that this House will hear the said Cause, by Counsel at the Bar, on Tuesday the 17th Day of this instant March,

Iselin Nat. Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Mr. Bacon and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for naturalizing John Luke Iselin;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Stapleford Enclosure Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Mr. George Brudenell and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and the Open Fields, Meadows, Common Pastures, and other Commonable Lands, in the Liberties of Stapleford, in the County of Leicester;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Stainby Enclosure Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Mr. George Brudenell and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing all the Open Fields, Meadows, Common Pastures and other Commonable Lands, in the Liberties of Stainby, in the County of Lincoln;“ to which they desire, the Concurrance of this House.

Denshanger Enclosure Bill.

A Message was brought, from the House of Commons by Mr. Hanmer and others:

With Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Open and Common Fields, Common pastures, Common Meadows, Common Grounds, and Commonable Lands, within the Hamlet of Denshanger, in the Parish of Passenham, in the County of Northampton;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Soulbury Enclosure Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Mr. Hanmer and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Open and Common Fields, Common Meadows, Common Pastures, and other Commonable Lands and Grounds, within the Manor and Liberties of Soulbury, with the Hamlet of Hollindon, in the County of Bucks;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Causes put off.

Ordered, That the Hearing of the Cause, wherein John Dunbar late of London Merchant is Appellant, and William Lem and Ann his Wife are Respondents, which stands appointed for Monday next, be put off to Monday Sevennight, and that the Rest of the Causes be removed in Course.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Lunse, nonum diem instantis Martii, hora undecima Aurora, Dominis sic decernentibus.

Die Lunæ, 9o Martii 1772.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Archiep. Ebor.Ds. Apsey, Cancellarius.Ds. Le Despencer.
Epus. Londin.Dux Bolton.Ds. Abergavenny.
Epus. Eliens.Comes Denbigh.Ds. Willoughby Br.
Epus. Wigorn.Comes Westmorland.Ds. Paget.
Epus. Glocestr.Comes Sandwich.Ds. Clifton
Epus. Lincoln.Comes Rochford.Ds. Hyde.
Epus. Landaven.Comes Abercorn.Ds. Walpole.
Epus. Petriburg.Comes Oxford.Ds. Lyttelton.
Epus. Cestrien.Comes Dartmouth.Ds. Scarsdale.
Epus. Litch. & Cov.Comes Granville.Ds. Boston.
Comes Northington.Ds. Sundridge.
Viscount Dudley & Ward.

PRAYERS.

Kenrick and Skey against Roger et al.

The Answer of Frederick Rogers Esquire and others, Kenrick and to the Appeal of Matthew Kenrick Esquire and John Skey, was this Day brought in.

Isdall against Fitzgerald:

After hearing Counsel, as well on Friday last as this Day, upon the Petition and Appeal of Oliver Isdall of the County of in the Kingdom of Ireland Esquire; complaining of Two Decretal Orders of the Court of Chancery in Ireland, of the 2d of June and 2d of July 1770; and praying, “That the same might be reversed and set aside, of that the Appellant might have such Relief in the Premises, as to this House, in their Lordships great Wisdom, should seem meet;” as also upon the Answer of Oliver Fitzgerald Esquire, put in to the said Appeal, and due Consideration had of what was offered on either Sidein this Cause:

Decretal Orders reversed.

It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in Parliament assembled, That the said Decretal Orders complained of in the said Appeal be, and the same are hereby reversed: And it is further ordered, That the Respondent’s Bill be Dismissed.

Chester Canal Bill:

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for making a navigable Cut or Canal from the River Dee, within the Liberties of the City of Chester, to or near Middlewich and Nantwich, in the County of Chester.”

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. Harris and Mr. Montagu:

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

Iselin’s Nat. Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for naturalizing John Luke Iselin.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords following:

D. Bolton.L. Abp. York.L. (fn. 3) Despencer.
E. Denbigh.L. Bp. London.L. Abergavenny.
E. Westmorland.L. Bp. Ely.L. Willoughby Br.
E. Sandwich.L. Bp. Worcester.L. Paget.
E. Rochford.L. Bp. Gloucester.L. Clifton.
E. Abercorn.L. Bp. Lincoln.L. Hyde.
E. Oxford.L. Bp. Landaff.L. Walpole.
E. Dartmouth.L. Bp. Peterborough.L. Lyttelton.
E. Granville.L. Bp. Chester.L. Scarsdale.
E. Northington.L. Bp. Litch. & Cov.L. Boston.
V. Dudley & Ward.L. Sundridge.

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

Rushton James Enclosure Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir John Wrottesley and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the several Commons and Waste Grounds within the Manor of Rushton James, in the Parish of Leek, in the County of Stafford:” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Rigg Moor and Brearton Moor Enclosure Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Mr. Lascelles and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the several Moors or Commons, called Rigg Moor and Brearton Moor, within the Manor of Brearton, in the Parish of Knaresborough, in the County of York;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

City of Norwich to New Buckingham Road Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Mr. De Grey and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for amending and widening the Road from Berstreet Gates, in the City of Norwich, to New Buckingham, in the County of Norfolk;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Plymouth Paving, &c. Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir Charles Hardy and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act to explain and amend an Act, passed in the Tenth Year of His present Majesty’s Reign, for paving, lighting, and watching, the Town of Plymouth, in the County of Devon; and for regulating the Carmen and Porters within the said Town;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Four Bills were, severally, read the First Time.

Rigg Moor and Brearton Moor Enclosure Bill; the King’s Consent signified to it.

The Earl of Rochford acquainted the House, That His Majesty having been informed of the Contents of the Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the several Moors or Commons, called Rigg Moor and Brearton Moor, within the Manor of Brearton, in the Parish of Knaresborough, in the County of York,” was pleased to consent (as far as His Majesty’s Interest is concerned) that their Lordships may proceed therein as they mall think fit.”

E. Cranville takes the Oaths.

Robert Earl Granville took the Oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration, and also took and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.

Proceedings and Accounts of Commissioners for paving Westminster Streets, &c. delivered.

The House being informed, “That Mr. Box, from the Commissioners for paving Westminster Streets, attended:”

He was called in; and delivered at the Bar, pursuant to Act of Parliament, the Proceedings and Accounts of the said Commissioners:

“Copy of the Proceedings of the Commissioners for putting in Execution the several Acts of Parliament, made in the 2d, 3d, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 11th, Years of His present Majesty’s Reign, for paving, cleansing, and lighting the Squares, Streets, Lanes, and other Places, within the City and Liberty of Westminster, and Parts adjacent, from the 4th Day of December 1770, to the 31st Day of December 1771, both inclusive.”

“Also, An Account of all Contracts and Agreements made by the said Commissioners, from the 4th Day of December 1770, to the 31st Day of December 1771, both inclusive.”

And then he withdrew.

And the Titles thereof being read by the Clerk:

Ordered, That the said Accounts do lie on the Table.

Woolley Enclosure Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by the Lord Hinchingbrook and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Common and Open Fields, and other Commonable Lands and Waste Grounds, within the Manor and Parish of Woolley, in the County of Huntingdon;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Little Kington, &c. Enclosure Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Mr. Skipwith and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for allotting, dividing, and enclosing, the Open and Common Fields, and Common or Commonable Meadows, Pastures, Lands, and Grounds, and Common or Waste Land, of and within the Manor of Little Kington, Combrooke, and Brookehampton, in the County of Warwick;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Handborough Enclosure Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Mr. Skipwith and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Common Fields, Common Meadows, Common Grounds, and Commonable Places, in the Parish of Hanborough, in the County of Oxford;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Three Bills were, severally, read the First Time.

Message from H. C to return L. Ligonier’s Divorce Bill, with Amendments.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Mr. Dundas and others:

To return the Bill, intituled, “An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of the Right Honourable Edward Viscount Ligonier with Penelope Pitt, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned;” and to acquaint this House, that they have agreed to the same, with some Amendments, to which they desire their Lordships Concurrence.

Eliot, Leave for a Bill

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of Edward Eliot Esquire, on Behalf of himself and his Infant Sons, praying Leave to bring in a Private Bill for the Purposes therein mentioned:

It is Ordered, That Leave be given to bring in a Bill, pursuant to the said Petition and Report.

Bill read.

Hodie 1a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for raising, out of the Estates late of Ann Nugent deceased, the Sum of Ten Thousand Pounds for the Benefit of the Right Honourable Robert Craggs Lord Viscount Clare, in the Kingdom of Ireland, her late Husband; and for raising, out of the Estates late of Elizabeth Eliot deceased, the like Sum of Ten Thousand Pounds for the Benefit of Edward Eliot Esquire, in Recompence and Satisfaction to the said Robert Lord Viscount Clare and Edward Eliot for their severally consenting to give up and relinquish certain Powers of leasing for Lives, or Years determinable on Lives, reserved to them respectively, in and by the several last Wills of them the said Ann Nugent and Elizabeth Eliot, and the Settlements which have been made in pursuance thereof; and for vacating, annulling, and extinguishing, the said Powers of leasing; and for other the Purposes therein expressed.”

L. Ligonier’s Divorce Bill.

The House proceeded to take into Consideration the Amendments made by the Commons to the Bill, intituled, “An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of the Right Honourable Edward Viscount Ligonier with Penelope Pitt, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned:

And the same being read Three Times by the Clerk, were agreed to by the House:

And a Message was sent to the House of Commons, by the former Messengers:

To acquaint them therewith.

Soulbury Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 1a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Open and Common Fields, Common Meadows, Common Pastures, and other Commonable Lands and Grounds, within the Manor and Liberties of Soulbury, with the Hamlet of Hollindon, in the County of Bucks.”

Stainby Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 1a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing all the Open Fields, Meadows, Common Pastures, and other Commonable Lands, in the Liberties of Stainby, in the County of Lincoln.”

Stapleford Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 1a vice lect aest Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing all the Open Fields, Meadows, Common Pastures, and other Commonable Lands, in the Liberties of Stapleford, in the County of Leicester.”

Denshanger Enclosure Bill.

Hodie a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Open and Common Fields, Common Pastures, Common Meadows, Common Grounds, and Commonable Lands, within the Hamlet of Denshanger, in the Parish of Passenhom, in the County of Northampton”

Sir John Colleton’s Divorce Bill:

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of Sir John Colleton Baronet with Ann Fullford his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

The Question was put, “Whether this Bill shall pass?”

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Message to H. C. with it.

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by the former Messengers:

To carry down the said Bill, and desire their Concurrence thereto.

Great Ormside Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Common and Waste Grounds, within the Manor of Great Ormside, in the Parish of Ormside, in the County of Westmorland.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, of any Five of them, to meet To-morrow, at the usual Time and Place; and to adjourn as they please”

Scaftworth Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Commons and Waste Lands and Grounds, in the Township of Scaftworth, in the County of Nottingham”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on the same Day, at the same Place; and to adjourn as they please.

Skeffington Enclosure Bill.

The Lord Boston reported from, the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing, allotting and enclosing, the Open Fields and Commonable Places, in the Parish of Skeffington and County of Leicester,” 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 directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment.”

Fincham Enclosure Bill.

The Lord Boston made the like Report from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing, allotting, and enclosing, the Common Fields, Half-Year Enclosures, and Commons and Waste Lands, within the Parish of Fincham, in the County of Norfolk,” was committed.

Spottiswoode to enter into Recognizance on Hay’s Appeal.

The House being moved, “That John Spottiswoode of Northumberland Street Esquire may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for Robert Hay Esquire, on Account of his Appeal depending in this House, he being out of the Kingdom:”

It is Ordered, That the said John Spottiswoode may enter into a Recognizance for the said Appellant as desired.

Rogers against Dyer and Dolge:

Upon reading the Petition of John Dyer and Joachim Frederick Dolge, Defendants in a Writ of Error depending in this House, wherein Nehemiah Rogers is Plaintiff; setting forth, “That the Plaintiff in Error has not assigned Errors within the Time limited by their Lordships Standing Order, and that the same is brought merely for Delay;” and therefore praying, “That the same may be Nonpros’d, with such Costs as to the House shall seem meet:”

Writ of Error nonprofs’with Costs.

It is Ordered, That the Petitioner do forthwith enter a Nonpros. on the said Writ of Error as desired, and that the Record be remitted to the Court of King’s Bench, to the End Execution may be had upon the Judgement given by that Court, also no such Writ of Error had been brought into this House: And further, That the Plaintiff in Error, do pay, or cause to be paid, to the Defendant in Error the Sum of Twenty Pounds for his Costs, by Reason of the Delay of the Execution of the said Judgement.

Tea Duty Bill.

The House (according tb Order) was adjourned during Pleasure, and put into a Committee upon the Bill, intituled, “An Act for explaining and amending an Act, made in the Seventh Year of His present Majesty, intituled, “An Act for taking off the Inland Duty of One Shilling per Pound Weight upon all Black and Singlo Teas consumed in Great Britain; and for granting a Drawback upon the Exportation of Teas to Ireland and the British Dominions in America for a limited Time, upon such Indemnification to be made in respect thereof, by the East India Company, as is therein, mentioned; for permitting the Exportation of Teas, in smaller Quantities than One Lot, to Ireland or the said Dominions in America; and for preventing. Teas seized and condemned from being consumed in Great Britain;” and for settling, certain Doubts and Disputes which have arisen upon the said Act of Parliament.”

After some Time the House was resumed:

And the Lord Boston reported from the Committee, That they had gone through the Bill, and directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment.”

Skinn’s Divorce Bill.

The House (according to Order) was adjourned during Pleasure, and put into a Committee upon the Bill, intituled, “An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of William Skinn with Ann Skinn his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

After some Time the House was resumed:

And the Lord Boston reported from the Committee, That they had gone through the Bill, and directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be engrossed.

Hanckwitz Divorce Bill.

The Order of the Day being read for the Second Reading of the Bill, intituled, “An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of Ambrose Godfrey Hanckwitz with Dorothy Ashcrost his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned;” and for hearing Counsel for and against the same:

Counsel were accordingly called in:

And Mr. Cox appearing as Counsel for the Bill, but no Counsel appearing against it:

Zachary Stephens was called in; and, being Sworn, acquainted the House, “That he personally served Mrs. Godfrey with the Order for the Second Reading of the Bill; and also delivered to her, at the same Time, a true Copy of the Bill.”

He was directed to withdraw.

Then the said Bill was read a Second Time.

Then Mr. Cox was heard in Support of the Bill; and to make out the Allegations thereof, and in order to prove the Marriage, again called Zachary Stephens, who produced an Extract from the Register of Marriages of the Parish of Saint Paul Covent Garden, and declaring, “That the same was a true Copy, he having examined it with the Original:” The same was read, whereby it appeared, That the said Ambrose Godfrey Hanckwitz was married to Dorothy Ashcroft at Saint Paul’s Church Covent Garden, on the 22d of May 1756.

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Elizabeth Fulcher was called in; and, being sworn, acquainted the House, “That the lived as a Servant with Mr. Godfrey about a Year and a Quarter ago; that Mr Lambertson lived there at the same Time; that, upon going into the Dining Room one, Night, the saw Mr. Lambertson sitting on Mrs. Godfrey’s Knee; that the has often seen them in her Mistress’s Dressing Room together; that upon Mr. Godfrey’s going into Yorkshire, Mr. Lambertson’s Bed was not lain in for Five or Six Nights together; that the has seen Mr Lambertson follow her Mistress into her Bed Room; that upon making Mr. Lambertson’s Bed one Morning, the found upon the Sheets the Marks of a Woman having lain in it, whom the believes was Mrs. Godfrey; that once, upon making her Mistress’s Bed, during Mr. Godfrey’s being out of Town, the found Mr. Lambertson, Night Cap and Fillet in her Mistress’s Bed; that the has often seen him in her Mistress’s Room when the was in Bed; that the has seen him kiss her in Bed, and has left him in the Room with her Mistress. when the was in Bed; that the has heard them talking together both in her Mistress’s Bed Chamber and in Mr. Lambertson’s; that the has seen them through the Window Curtains sitting in her Mistress’s Bed Chamber when the Family were in Bed; that the is certain the Person the heard talking in Mr. Lambertson’s Bed Chamber was her Mistress; that the never saw them naked in Bed together, nor ever saw any Thing pass between them (fn. 4) amounted to an Act of Adultery.”

She was directed to withdraw.

Then Thomas Laurie was called in; and, being Sworn, acquainted the House, “That he lived with Mr. Godfrey for Two Years; that, during that Time, he observed several Familiarities pass between Mrs. Godfrey and Mr. Lambertson; that upon going up Stairs one Morning to call Mr. Lambertson, who always laid in the Room next to Mrs. Godfrey’s Bed Chamber when Mr. Godfrey was out of Town, he went into his Room, but found him not in Bed, and the Bed appeared as if it had not been lain in; that he went out of his Room and listened at Mrs. Godfrey’s Bed Chamber Door, and heard Mr. Lambertson and Mrs. Godfrey talking, and that, by the Sound of their Voices, they seemed to be in Bed; that on the 31st of October he, in the Morning, went to Mr. Lambertson’s Room, who then lay up Three Pair of Stairs, Mr. Godfrey being in Town, and found his Room Door fastened; that, upon his listening at the Door, he heard Mr. Lambertson and Mrs. Godfrey talking together, and that, by the Sound of their Voices, they seemed to be in Bed.”

He was directed to withdraw.

Then John Owens was called in; and, being Sworn, acquainted the House, “That he lived with Mr. Godfrey, and has seen great Familiarities pass between Mrs. Godfrey and Mr. Lambertson; that, once in particular, he saw Mrs. Godfrey put Mr. Lambertson’s Shirt over his Head on his naked Body; that one Night, upon hearing a Tapping at Mrs. Godfrey’s Bed Chamber Door, when Mr. Godfrey went out of Town, he went to see what it was, and saw Mr. Lambertson, without his Cloaths, go into Mrs. Godfrey’s Bed Chamber, and, upon his going in, the Bolt of the Room Door was let down.”

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Zachary Stephens was again called in, and produced an Office Copy of the Judgement obtained in the Court of King’s Bench against Mr. Lambertson, for Criminal Conversation with the said Mrs. Godfrey.

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Mark Holman, Deputy Register of the Consistory Court of the Bishop of London, was called in; and, being Sworn, produced the Original Definitive Sentence of Divorce obtained in the said Court against the said Mrs. Godfrey for Adultery with the said Mr. Lambertson.

He was directed to withdraw.

The Counsel was directed to withdraw.

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to a Committee of the whole House:

Ordered, That the House be put into a Committee upon the said Bill To-morrow.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Martis, decimum diem instantis Martii, hora undecima Auroras, Dominis sic decernentibus.

May 1st, 1787.

Hitherto examined by Us,

Moray.

Elphinstone.

Scarsdale.

Die Martis, 10o Martii 1772.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Epus. Cicestrien.Ds. Apsley, Cancellarius.Ds. Willoughby Par
Epus. Asaphen.Comes Denbigh.Ds. Clifton.
Epus. Cetsrien.Comes Westmorland.Ds. Sandys.
Epus. Litch.& Cov.Comes Abercorn.Ds. Ponsonby.
Comes Marchmont.Ds. Walpole.
Comes Rosebery.Ds. Scarsdale.
Comes Granville.
Comes Northington.

PRAYERS.

Plymouth Paving, &c. Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to explain and amend an Act, passed in the Tenth Year of His present Majesty’s Reign, for paving, lighting, and watching, the Town of Plymouth, in the County of Devon; and for regulating the Carmen and Porters within the said Town.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords following:

E. Denbigh.L. Bp. Chichester.L. Willoughby Par.
E. Westmorland.L. Bp. St. Asaph.L. Clifton.
E. Abercorn.L. Bp. Chester.L. Sandys.
E. Marchmont.L. Bp. Litch. & Cov.L. Ponsonby.
E. Rosebery.L. Walpole.
E. Granville.L. Scarsdale.
E. Northington.

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

Woolley Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Common and Open Fields, and other Commonable Lands and Waste Grounds, within the Manor and Parish of Woolley, in the County of Huntingdon.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on the same Day, at the same Place and to adjourn as they please.

Nugent and Eliot’s Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for raising, out of the Estates late of Ann Nugent deceased, the Sum of Ten thousand Pounds, for the Benefit of the Right Honourable Robert Craggs Lord Viscount Clare, in the Kingdom of Ireland, her late Husband; and for raising, out of the Estates late of Elizabeth Eliot deceased, the like Sum of Ten thousand Pounds, for the Benefit of Edward Eliot Esquire; in Recompence and Satisfaction to the said Robert Lord Viscount Clare and Edward Eliot, for their severally consenting to give up and relinquish certain Powers of leasing for Lives, or Years determinable on Lives, reserved to them respectively in and by the several last Wills of them the said Ann Nugent and Elizabeth Eliot, and the Settlements which have been made in pursuance thereof; and for vacating, annulling, and extinguishing, the said Powers of leasing; and for other the Purposes therein expressed.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Wednesday the 25th Day of this instant March, at the usual Time and Place, and to adjourn as they please.

Foxley’s Charity Bill.

The Lord Sandys reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for establishing and regulating a Charity, called Foxley Charity, in the County of Northampton, founded by Lady Katherine Leveson,” 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 several Amendments thereto.”

Which Amendments, being read Twice by the Clerk, were agreed to by the House.

Ordered, That the said Bill, with the Amendments, be engrossed.

Great Ormside Enclosure Bill.

The Lord Boston reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Common and Waste Grounds within the Manor of Great Ormside, in the Parish of Ormside, in the County of Westmorland,” 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 directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment.”

Scaftworth Enclosure Bill.

The Lord Sandys made the like Report from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Commons and Waste Lands and Grounds in the Township of Scaftworth, in the County of Nottingham,” was committed.

Iselin’s Nat. Bill.

The Lord Sandys also reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for naturalizing John Luke Iselin,” was committed: That they had considered the said Bill, and examined the Allegations thereof, which were found to be true; and that the Committee had gone through the Bill, and directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment.”

City of Norwich to New Buckingham Road Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for repairing and amending the Road from Bersreet Gates, in the City of Norwich, to New Buckingham, in the County of Norfolk.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet To-morrow, at the usual Time and Place; and to adjourn as they please.

Halhed’s Bin.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for vesting the Settled Estate of William Halhed Esquire, in the County of Hereford, in Trustees, in Trusts to sell and convey the same, to James King Esquire and his Heirs, pursuant to an Agreement for that Purpose; and for laying out the Money, arising by such Sale, in the Purchase of other Lands and Hereditaments, to be settled in Lieu thereof to the same Uses.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Wednesday the 25th Day of this instant March, at the usual Time and Place and to adjourn as they please.

Rigg Moor and Brearton Moor Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the several Moors or Commons, called Rigg Moor and Brearton Moor, within the Manor of Brearton, in the Parish of Knaresborough, in the County of York.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Thursday next, at the usual Time and Place; and to adjourn as they please.

Perrott et al. Leave for a Bill.

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of Frances Pertott Widow, and others; praying Leave to bring in a Private Bill for the Purposes therein mentioned:

It is Ordered, That Leave be given to bring in a Bill, pursuant to the said Petition and Report.

Bill read.

Hodie 1a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for veiling a Messuage, called Highfield House, and divers Lands, with the Appurtenances, in the County of Gloucester, the Settled Estates of Benjamin Jason Perrott Esquire, in Trustees, to be sold and conveyed as therein mentioned; and for laying out the Money, arising by such Sale, in the Purchase of other and and Hereditaments, to be settled to the like Uses.”

Little Kington, &c. Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for allotting, dividing, and enclosing, the Open and Common Fields, and Common or Commonable Meadows, Pastures, Lands and Grounds, and Common or Waste Land, of and within the Manor of Little Kingston, Combrooke, and Brookehampton, in the County of Warwick.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet To-morrow, at the usual Time and Place; and to adjourn as they please.

Handborough Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Common Fields, Common Meadows, Common Grounds, and Commonable Places, in the Parish of Handborough, in the County of Oxford.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees aforenamed:

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Thursday next, at the usual Time and Place; and to adjourn as they please.

Skinn’s Divorce Bill:

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of William Skinn with Ann Skinn his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

The Question was put, “Whether this Bill shall pass?”

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Message to H. C. with it.

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Harris and Mr. Montagu:

To carry down the said Bill, and desire their Concurrence thereto.

Tea Duty Bill.

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for explaining and amending an Act, made in the Seventh Year of His present Majesty, intituled, “An Act for taking off the Inland Duty of One Shilling per Pound Weight upon all Black and Singlo Teas consumed in Great Britain; and for granting a Drawback upon the Exportation of Teas to Ireland and the Brish Dominions in America for a limited Time, upon such Indemnification to be made in respect thereof, by the East India Company, as is therein mentioned; for permitting the Exportation of Teas, in smaller Quantities than One Lot, to Ireland or the said Dominions in America; and for preventing Teas seized and condemned from being consumed in Great Britain;” and for settling certain Doubts and Disputes which have arisen upon the said Act of Parliament.”

The Question was put, “Whether this Bill shall pass?”

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Skeffington Enclosure Bill:

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing, allotting, and enclosing, the Open Fields and Commonable Places, in the Parish of Skeffington and County of Leicester.”

The Question was put, “Whether this Bill shall pass?”

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Fincham Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing, allotting, and enclosing, the Common Fields, Half-Year Enclosures, and Commons and Waste Lands, within the Parish of Fincham, in the County of Norfolk.”

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 the Two preceding Bills.

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by the former Messengers:

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

Rutherford, et al. against Hamilton.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of James Rutherford Writer in Kinghorn, John Aitken Shipmaster there, David Sibbald Merchant there, and Walter Rymer Innkeeper there; complaining of Two Interlocutors of the Lord Ordinary in Scotland, of the 9th and 10th of March 1769 of an Interlocutor of the Lords of Session there, of the 18th of July 1769; as also of Two other Interlocutors of the said Lord Ordinary, of the 20th of July and 4th of August 1769; and also of Two other Interlocutors of the said Lords of Session, of the 10th of August 1771 and 21st cf February last; and praying, “That the same may be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Appellants may have such other Relief in the Premises as to this House, in their Lordships great Wisdom, shall seem meet; and that Robert Hamilton, Provost of the Burgh of Kinghorn, may be required to answer the said Appeal:”

It is Ordered, That the said Robert Hamilton may have a Copy of the said Appeal, and do put in his Answer thereto, in Writing, on or before Tuesday the 7th Day of April next; and Service of this Order upon the said Respondent, or any of his known Agents or Counsel in the said Court of, Session in Scotland, shall be deemed good Service.

Duncans against Fouke and Stormont.

The House being informed, “That Francis Fouke and James Stormont, Respondents to the Appeal of Margaret and Elizabeth Duncans, had not put in their Answer to the said Appeal, though duly served with the Order of this House for that Purpose:”

And thereupon an Affidavit of Alexander Gordon Writer in Edinburgh, of the due Service of the said Order, being read:

Ordered, That the said Respondents do put in their Answer to the said Appeal peremptorily in a Week.

D Devonshire Leave to present a Petition for a Bill:

A Petition of the Most Noble William Duke of Devonshire, was presented and read; praying, “In regard the Petitioner hath been prevented by an unavoidable Delay from presenting a Petition for a Private Bill, within the Time limited by their Lordships Order, that he may be at Liberty to present his said Petition, not with standing the Time limited for receiving them is elapsed:”

It is Ordered, That the Petitioner be at Liberty to present his said Petition as desired.

His Petition referred to Judges.

Whereupon, Upon reading the Petition of the Most Noble William Duke of Devonshire; praying Leave to bring in a Bill for the Purposes in the Petition mentioned:

It is Ordered, That the Consideration of the said Petition be, and is hereby referred to the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer and Mr. Baron Smythe, who are forthwith to summon all Parties concerned in the Bill, and, after hearing them, are to report to the House the State of the Case, with their Opinion thereupon, under their Hands; and whether all Parties, who may be concerned in the Consequences of the Bill, have signed the Petition; and also that the Judges, having perused the Bill, do sign the same.

Hanckwitz’s Divorce Bill.

The Mouse (according to Order) was adjourned during Pleasure, and put into a Committee upon the Bill, intituled, “An Act to Dissolve the Marriage of Ambrose Godfrey Hanckwitz with Dorothy Ashcroft his now Wife, and to enable him to marry against and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

After some Time the House was resumed:

And the Lord Boston reported from the Committee, That they had gone through the Bill, and made several Amendments thereto, which he was ready to report when the House will please to receive the same.”

Ordered, That the said Report be received To-morrow.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Mercurii, undecimum diem instantis Martii, hora undecima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

Footnotes

1 Sic.
2 Sic.
3 Sic.
4 sic