House of Lords Journal Volume 34
April 1776, 21-30

Sponsor

History of Parliament Trust

Publication

Year published

1767-1830

Pages

661-683

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 34: April 1776, 21-30', Journal of the House of Lords volume 34: 1774-1776 (1767-1830), pp. 661-683. URL: http://british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=113704 Date accessed: 01 August 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

Contents

Die Linæ, 22o Aprilis 1776.
Osman et at. Leave for a Bill: Bill read. Stokes to enter into Recognizance on Rowley et al. Appeal. Duchess of Kingston’s Trial: Duchess of Kingston’s Defence. Bishops Protestation: Question to be put to the Lords: Duchess of Kingston adjudged guilty of Felony: Claims the Benefit of Peerage: Question to the Judges, and their Answer. L. Chief Baron desired to favour the House with a Copy of his Argument. Trial ordered to be printed. Adjourn. Die Mercurii, 24o Aprilis 1776.
America, Licences for exporting Provisions, &c. to, Address for. Ld Clifford’s Pedigree delivered: Takes his Seat, &c Coney Weston Enclosure Bill. Nuthall’s Executors Bill. Onslow’s Bill. Sir William Wake’ Estate Bill. Dash wood’s Bill. Upsold’s Bill. Sir Charles Whitworth’s Estate Bill. Hathcrop Rectory Bill. Estcourt’s Bill. Jenking’s Divorce Bill. Abdy Leave for a Bill: Bill read. Sir William Molesworth’s Estate Bill. Borthwick Peerage; Hearing deferred. Sir Charles Bunbury’s Divorce Bill. Deer, Stealing of, Bill. Rogers against Holled et al. Lords summoned. Adjourn. Die Jovis, 25o Aprilis 1776.
King’s Answer to Address of Yesterday, reported. Dolman’s Bill. Sir John Abdy’ Estate Bill. V. Irwin et Ux Leave tor a Bill. Bill read. Message from H. C. to return Hoineck’s Divorce Bill. Eyre’s Bill. Walgrave Enclosure Bill. Messages from H. C. to return Owens’s Bill: and Liardet’s Patent Bill: and De Morsier’s Nat. Bill. Great Bowden Enclosure Bill. Nuthall’s Executors Bill. Stapilton’s Bill. Heywood’s Bill. Gordons Leave for a Bill: Bill read. Person Leave for a Bill. Bill read, and Notice to be given to James Peirson. D. St Albans Petition for a Bill. Leave for a Bill. Adjourn. Die Veneris, 26o Aprilis 1776.
Ross against Mackenzie. Jellett et Ux Leave for a Bill: Bill read. Nuthall’s Executors Bill: Message to H C with it. Salford Charity Bill. L. lrwin’s Estate Bill: Motion for shortening the Committee on it. Address to His Majesty on the Birth of a Princess. Gordon’s Bill. Coney Weston Enclosure Bill. Walgrave Enclosure Bill: Ross against Ross, et e con. Sir Charles Bunbury’s Divorce Bill. Adjourn. Die Lunæ, 29o Aprilis 1776.
Ross against Mackenzie: Interlocutors affirmed. L. Irwin’s Estate Bill; Committee shortened. Clipston and Newbold Enclosure Bill. Yelvertost Enclosure Bill. King’s Answer to Address of Congratulation on the Birth of a Princess, reported. Message from H. C. to return Mulhausen’s Nat. Bill. Sir Charles Bunbury’s Divorce Bill: Message to H. C. with it. Trent and Mersey Navigation Bill. Onslow’s Bill. Upfold’s Bill. Dashwood’e Bill. Onslow’s Bill: Upfold’ Bill: Dashwood’s Bill. Messages to H C. with the Three preceding Bills. Tadcaster to Halton Dyal Road Bill. Glatton and Holme Drainage Bill. Dolman’s Bill; Motion to dispense with Standing Order on it. America, Licences for exporting Provisions, &c. to, delivered. Clarebrough and Welhem Enclosure Bill. Returns respecting the Poor, Bill. Leigh’s Bill: Message to H. C. with it. Crowcombe Enclosure Bill. Message from H C. to return Williams’s Divorce Bill. Jenkins’s Divorce Bill. Returns respecting the Poor, Bill. Deer, Stealing of, Bill. Adjourn. Die Martis, 30o Aprilis 1776.
Rogers against Holled et al. Eyre’s Bill; the King’s Consent signified to it. Dolman’s Bill; Standing Order dispensed with. Causes, Time limited for hearing them. D. Ancaster’e Estate Bill. Sir William Wake’s Estate Bill. Whitfeld’s Bill. Sir Charles Whitworth’s Estate Bill. Walgrave Enclosure Bill. D. St. Albans Leave for a Bill. Bill read. Smith et al. Leave for a Bill: Bill read. D. Ancaster’s Estate Bill: Message to H C. with it. Jellett’s Bill: Motion for shortening Committee on it. Deer, Stealing of, Bill: Message to H. C that the Lord, have agreed to it. Yelvertost Enclosure Bill. Trent and Mersey Navigation Bill. Ashburton Roads Bill. Clipston and Newbold Enclosure Bill. Tadcaster to Halton Dyal Road Bill. Glatton and Holme Drainage Bill. Clarebrough and Welham Enclosure Bill. Eyre’s Bill. Crowcombe Enclosure Bill. Mercers Company, Accounts delivered. Adjourn. Footnotes

Die Linæ, 22o Aprilis 1776.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Archiep. Cantuar. Comes Bathurst, Cancellarius, Summon Senescallus Mag. Brit, pro hac Vice. Ds. Le Despencer.
Epus. Londin. Ds. Abergavenny.
Epus. Cicestrien. Ds. De Ferrars.
Epus. Norvicen. Ds. Willoughby Br.
Epus. Lincoln. Dux Cumberland. Ds. Willoughby Par.
Epus. Exon. Comes Gower,Præses. Ds. Paget.
Epus. Oxon. Comes Dartmouth, C. P. S. Ds. Clifton.
Epus. Bath, & Wells. Dux Richmond. Ds. Craven.
Epus. Asaphen. Dux Grafton. Ds. Cathcart.
Epus. Petriburg. Dux Beaufort. Ds. Boyle.
Epus. Cestrien. Dux St. Albans. Ds. Middleton.
Epus. Wigorn. Dux Bolton. Ds. Trevor.
Epus. Meneven. Dux Devonshire. Ds. Masham.
Epus. Raffen. Dux Marlborough. Ds. Romney.
Epus. Litch. & Cov. Dux Gordon. Ds. King.
Epus. Bangor. Dux Ancaster, Magnus Camerarius. Ds. Godolphin.
Dux Portland. Ds. Chedworth.
Dux Manchester. Ds. Edgecumbe.
Dux Chandos. Ds. Sandys.
Dux Dorset. Ds. Bruce.
Dux Bridgewater. Ds. Fortescue.
Dux Newcastle. Ds. Ravensworth.
Dux Northumberland. Ds. Archer.
March. Rockingham. Ds. Ponsonby.
Comes Talbot, Senescallus. Ds. Vere.
Comes Hertford, Camerarius. Ds. Hyde.
Comes Derby. Ds. Walpole.
Comes Huntingdon. Ds. Mansfield.
Comes Pembroke. Ds. Lyttelton.
Comes Suffolk. Ds. Wycombe.
Comes Exeter. Ds. Grosvenor.
Comes Denbigh. Ds. Scarsdale.
Comes Peterborough. Ds. Boston.
Comes Stamford. Ds. Pelham.
Comes Winchilsea. Ds. Lovel & Holland.
Comes Thanet. Ds. Beaulieu.
Comes Sandwich. Ds. Vernon.
Comes Essex. Ds. Camden.
Comes Carlisle. Ds. Digby.
Comes Doncaster. Ds. Sundridge.
Comes Berkeley.
Comes Gainsborough.
Comes Plymouth.
Comes Scarbrough.
Comes Rochford.
Comes Coventry.
Comes Jersey.
Comes Cholmondeley.
Comes Abercorn.
Comes Galloway.
Comes Loudoun.
Comes Dalhousie.
Comes Breadalbane.
Comes March.
Comes Marchmont.
Comes Rosebery.
Comes Oxford.
Comes Strafford.
Comes Tankerville.
Comes Aylesford.
Comes Sussex.
Comes Stanhope.
Comes Macclesfield.
Comes Kerr.
Comes Waldegrave.
Comes Ashburnham.
Comes Effingham.
Comes Harrington.
Comes Brooke.
Comes Bucks.
Comes Fitzwilliam.
Comes Temple.
Comes Hardwicke.
Comes Darlington.
Comes Fauconberg.
Comes Northington.
Comes Radnor.
Comes Spencer.
Comes Hillsborough.
Viscount Hereford.
Viscount Montague.
Viscount Say & Sele.
Viscount Townshend.
Viscount Weymouth.
Viscount Stormont.
Viscount Bolingbroke.
Viscount Falmouth.
Viscount Torrington.
Viscount Wentworth.
Viscount Maynard.

PRAYERS.

Osman et at. Leave for a Bill:

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of Henry Osman Clerk, and Mary his Wife, 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 vesting the undivided Moiety of the Reverend Henry Osman Clerk, and Mary his Wife, of and in certain Lands and Hereditaments in the Parish of King’s Langley, in the County of Hertford, in Trustees, to be sold; and for applying Part of the Money anfing by such Sale in Discharge of an Incumbrance upon the said Moiety, and for laying out the Residue thereof in the Purchase of entire Messuages, Lands, or Hereditaments, to be settled in lieu thereof to the same Uses.”

Stokes to enter into Recognizance on Rowley et al. Appeal.

The House being moved, “That John Stokes, of New Inn in the County of Middlesex, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance. for Hercules Lang ford Rowley and others, on Account of their Appeal depending in this House, they living in Ireland:”

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

Duchess of Kingston’s Trial:

The Order of the Day being read for the proceeding further in the Trial of Elizabeth Duchess Dowager of Kingston upon the Indictment found against her; the Lords were called over by the Clerk, Garter King at Arms marking in his Lift those that were present, and the Clerk taking down the Names of the absent Lords.

The Names of the absent Lords are as follow:

L. Ducie.

L. Milton.

L. Holland.

L. Grantham.

L. Sondes.

L. Montfort.

L. Monson.

L. Cadogan.

L. Onslow.

L. Hay of Petwardin.

L. Clifford of Chudleigh.

L. Langdale.

L. Byron.

L. Leigh.

L. Teynham.

L. Dormer.

L. Arundell of Wardour.

L. Petre.

L. st. John of Bletsoe.

L. Stourton.

L. Dacre.

L. Audley.

Bp. Landaff.

Bp. Carlisle.

Bp. Gloucester.

Bp. Salisbury.

Bp. Ely.

Bp. Hereford.

Bp; Winchester.

Bp. Durham.

V. Dudley & Ward.

V. Courtenay.

V. Leinster.

V. Irwin.

E. Chatham.

E. De Lawarr.

E. Ilchester.

E. Cornwallis.

E. Guilford.

E. Harcourt.

E. Egremont.

E. Powis.

E. Portsmouth.

E. Orford.

E. Graham.

E. Pomfret.

E. Harborough.

E. Cowper.

E. Bristol.

E. Ferrers.

E. Bute.

E. Dunmore.

E. Aberdeen.

E. Strathmore.

E. Poulet.

E. Albemarle.

E. Holdernesse.

E. Abingdon.

E. Litchfield.

E. Shaftesbury.

E. Chesterfield.

E. Westmorland.

E. Northampton.

E. Salisbury.

E. Shrewsbury.

D. Montagu.

D. Rutland.

D. Bedford.

D. Leeds.

D. Somerset.

D. Norfolk.

Abp. York.

D. Gloucester.

Prince of Wales.

Then the House was adjourned into Westminster Hall, whither the Lords and others went in the same Order as on Saturday last.

And the Lords being there seated, Leave was asked, and given, for the Judges to be covered.

Proclamation was then made for Silence; as also Proclamation for the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod to bring the Prisoner to the Bar.

Who being brought accordingly, kneeled, till she was acquainted by the Lord High Steward, That she might rise.

Then the Lord High Steward, with the Consent of the Court, went down to the Table.

Then Mr. Wallace, Counsel for the Prisoner, called Mrs. Phillips, who acknowledged a Letter that was shewn to her to be her Hand Writing.

Mr. Attorney General objecting to the Letter being read.

Mr. Wallace was heard in relation thereto.

Then the Prisoner was directed to proceed in her Defence.

Whereupon,

She acquainted the House, “That she had committed to Writing what she had to say,” which she read at the Bar as follows; (videlicet),

Duchess of Kingston’s Defence.

“My Lords,
“This my respectful Address will, I flatter myself, be favourably accepted by your Lordships; my Words will flow freely from my Heart, adorned simply with Innocence and Truth. My Lords, I have suffered unheard-of Persecutions; my Honour and same have been severely attacked; I have been loaded with Reproaches; and such Indignities and Hardships have rendered me the less able to make my Defence before this august Assembly, against a Prosecution of so extraordinary a Nature and so undeserved.
“My Lords, With Tenderness consider how difficult is the Talk of myself to speak, nor say too little nor too much; degraded as I am by my Adversaries, my Family despised, the Honourable Titles on which I set an inestimable Value, as received from my Most noble and late dear Husband, attempted to be torn from me, your Lordships will judge how greatly I stand in need of your Protection and Indulgence.
“My Lords, Were I here to plead for Life, for Fortune, no Words from me should beat the Air 5 the Loss I sustain in my moil kind Companion and affectionate Husband makes the former more than indifferent to me; and when it shall please Almighty God to call me, I shall willingly lay that Burthen down: I plead before your Lordships for my same and Honour.
“My Lords, Logic is properly denned and well represented in this High Court: It is a Talent of the human Mind and not of the Body, and holds a Key which signifies that Logic is not a Science itself, but the Key to Science; that Key is your Lordships judicial Capacity and Wisdom. On the Lest Hand is represented a Hammer, and before it a Piece of false and another of pure Gold. The Hammer is your penetrating Judgement, which by the Mercy of God, will strike hard at false Witnesses who have given Evidence against me; and prove my Intention in this pending Cause as pure as the finest Gold, and as justly distinguished from the Sophistry of Falsehood.
“My Lords, Your unhappy Prisoner is born of an antient not ignoble Family, the Women distinguished for their Virtue, the Men for their Valour, descended in an honourable and uninterrupted Line for Three Centuries and a Half. Sir John Chudleigh, the last of my Family, loft his Life at the Siege of Oslend at Eighteen Years of Age, gloriously preferring to die with his Colours in his Bosom, rather than accept of Quarter from a gallant French Officer, who, in Compassion to his Youth, Three Times offered him his Life, for that Ensign which was shot through his Heart: A happy Death, that saves the Blum he would now feel for the unheard-of Injuries and Dishonour thrown on his unfortunate Kinswoman, who is now at the Bar of this Right Honourable House.
“His Grace the late Duke of Kingsten’s Fortune, of which I now stand possessed, is valuable to me, as it is a Testimony to all the World how high I was in his Esteem. As it is my Pride to have been the Object of Affection of that virtuous Man, so shall it be my Honour to bestow that Fortune to the Honour of him who gave it to me, well knowing that the wife Disposer of all Things would not have put it in his Heart to prefer me to all others, but that I should be as faithful a Steward as I was a faithful Wife; and that I should suffer others, more worthy than myself, to share these his great Benefits of Fortune.
“My Lords, I now appeal to the Feelings of your own Hearts, whether it is not cruel that I should be brought as a Criminal, to a Publick Trial for an Act committed under the Sanction of the Laws; an Act that was honoured with His Majesty’s most gracious Approbation, and previously known and approved of by my Royal Mistress the late Princess Dowager of Wales and, likewise, authorized by the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction: Your Lordships will not discredit so respectable a Court, and disgrace those Judges who there so legally and honourably preside. The Judges of the Ecclesiastical Count do not receive their Patents from the Crown, but from the Archbishop or Bishops. Their Jurisdiction is competent in Ecclesiastical Cases, and their Proceedings are conformable to the Laws and Customs of the Land, according to the Testimony of the learned Judge Blackstone, (whose Works are as entertaining as they are instructive), who says, “It must be acknowledged to the Honor of the Spiritual Courts, that though they continue to this Day to decide many Questions, which are properly of Temporal Cognizance, yet Justice is, in general, so ably and impartially administered in those Tribunals, (especially of the superior Kind), and the Boundaries of their Power are now so well known and established, that no material Inconvenience, at present, arises from their Jurisdiction; and should an Alteration be attempted, great Confusion would probably arise, in overturning long established Forms, new modelling a Course of Proceedings, that has now prevailed for Seven Centuries:” And I must here presume to add, as founded on Truth, that, that Court (of which His Majesty is the Head) cannot be slopped by any Authority whatsoever, while they act in their own Jurisdiction. Lord Chief Justice Hale says, where there has been a Sentence of Divorce, (which is a Criminal Case), if that Sentence is suspended by an Appeal to the Court of Arches, (as a superior Court), and while that Appeal is depending, One of the Parties marries again, the Sentence will be a Justification within the Exception of the Act of Parliament, notwithstanding that the Sentence has been appealed from, and consequently may be reversed by a superior Court: And, my Lords, how much more Reason is there for its coming within the Exception of the Act in my Case, since no Appeal has been had.
“My Lords, I earneslly look up to your Lordships for Protection, as being now a Sufferer for having given Credit to the Ecclesiastical Court; I respectfully call upon you, my Lords, to protect the Spiritual Jurisdiction, and all the Benefit of Religious Laws, and me an unhappy Prisoner, who instituted a Suit of Jactitation, upon the Advice of a learned Civilian who carried on the Prosecution, from which I obtained the Sentence that authorized your Prisoner’s Marriage with the Most Noble Evelyn Duke of Kingston that Sentence, solemnly pronounced by John Bettesworth, Doctor of Law, Vicar General of the Right Reverend Father in God, Richard, by Divine Permission, Lord Bishop of London, and Official Principal of the Consistorial Court of London; the Judge thereof calling on God, and setting him alone before his Eyes, and having heard Counsel in that Cause, did pronounce, that your Petitioner, then the Honourable Elizabeth Chudleigh now Elizabeth Dowager Duchess of Kingston, was free from all matrimonial Contracts or Espousals, as far as to him, at that Time, appeared, more especially with the said Right Honourable Augustus John Hervey.
“My Lords, Had this Prosecution been set on Foot merely for the Love of Justice, or good Example to the Community, why did they not institute their Prosecution during the Five Years your Prisoner was received and acknowledged the undoubted and unmolested Wife of the late Duke of Kingston.
“My Lords, The Preamble of the very Act on which I am indicted, plainly and entirely precludes your Prisoner; it runs thus, “Forasmuch as divers evil-disposed Persons, being married, run out of One County into another, or into Places where they are not known, and there become to be married, having another Wife or Husband living, to the great Dishonour of God, and utter undoing of divers honest Men’s Children, and others,” &c. and, as the Preamble has not been considered to be sufficient in my Favour, to impede the Trial, I beg Leave to observe how much your Prisoner suffers by being produced before this Noble House, on the Penalty of an Act of Parliament, without benefiting by the Preamble which is supposed to contain the whole Substance, Extent, and Meaning, of the Act.
“My Lords, Upon your wife Result on my unhappy Case, you will bear in your willing Remembrance that the Orphan and Widow is your peculiar Care, and that you will be tender of the Honour of your late Brother Peer, and fee in me his Widow and Representative, recollecting how easy it may be for a next of Kin to prosecute the Widows or the Daughters not only of every Peer, but of every Subject of Great Britain, if (fn. 1) can be affected by the Oath of One superannuated and interested old Woman, who declared Seven Years ago, that she was incapable of giving Evidence thereon, as will appear in Proof before your Lordships. And I may further observe to your Lordships, that my Case is clearly within the Proviso of the Statute on which I am indicted; in the Third Clause it is, “Provided that this Act shall not extend to any Person where the former Marriage hath been or hereafter shall be declared by Sentence of the Ecclesiastical Court to be void and of no Effect.” If there is supposed to have been a former Marriage, the same must have been a true Marriage

or a false one. If a true one, it cannot be declared void; and if a false one, or the Semblance of one only, then only, and no otherwise is it, that it can be declared void. Therefore must this Provision have respect to pretended Marriages only and to none other, and such only it is that can be the Objects of Causes of Jactitation, the Sentence in which is a more effectual Divorce and Separation of the Parties than many Divorces which have been determined to fall within this Proviso. The Crime charged in the Indictment was not a Felony, or even a Temporal Offence, till the Act of James the First; till then it was only cognizable in the Ecclesiastical Court; and, though an Indictment could lie for a flight Blow, yet the Common Law did not allow of a Criminal Prosecution for Polygamy until that Period: So that if the Case comes within the Exception of the only Statute upon the Subject, it is no Offence at all. And Doctor Sherlock Bishop of London has said, in such Case the Law of the Land is the Law of God.
“My Lords, I have observed, that I had greatly suffered in same and Fortune by the Reports of Mr. Hervey’s, and I beg leave to mention in what Manner; your Prisoner was, at that Time, possessed of a small Estate in the County of Devon, where Sir George Chudleigh, her Father’s eldest Brother, had large Possessions. The Purchase of that Estate was much solicited in that County, and having frequent Opportunities to dispose of it, it was ever made an insuperable Objection by the intended Purchaser, that I could not make a clear Title to the Estate on Account of Mr. Hervey’s Claim to your Prisoner as his Wife.
“And your Prisoner being also possessed of Building Lands for a great Number of Years, for the same Reasons she never had the Ground covered, (valued at £.1,200 per Annum); and as your Prisoner’s. Health declined and made it necessary for her to seek Relief in Foreign Climes, (which increased her Expences beyond what her Circumstances could support), and her little Fortune daily decreased by Money taken up on Mortgage and Bond, as will appear by the Evidence of Mr. Drummond; her Royal Mistress likewise in the Decline of Life, whose Death would probably have deprived her of £.400 a Year; the Persecutions threatened on Mr. Hervey’s Side, presented but a gloomy Prospect for her declining Life, your Prisoner was induced, as she before observed to your Lordships, to follow the Advice of Doctor Colliery and instituted the Suit of Jactitation; your Prisoner subscribing entirely to his Opinion, and following his Advice and Instructions, which, she presumes, alone is a full Defence against the Charge of Felony; for your Lordships, in your great Candour, cannot think that a Lady can know more of the Civil Law than her learned Civilians could point out to her.
“And, as a criminal and felonious Intent is necessary to constitute the Offence with which I stand charged, certainly I cannot be guilty in following the Advice I received, and in doing what in my Conscience I thought an authorized and innocent Act.
“My Lords, Though I am aware that any Person can prosecute for the Crown for an Offence against an Act of Parliament, yet I will venture to say, that few Instances, if any, have been carried into Execution without the Consent of the Party injured; and with great Deference to your Lordships Judgement, I venture to declare, that in the present Case no Person whatever has been injured, unless your Lordships Candour will permit me to say that I am injured, being now the Object of the undeserved Resentment of my Enemies, it is plain to all the World, that his Grace the Duke of Kingston did not think himself injured, when, in the short Space of Five Years, his Grace made Three Wills, each succeeding One more favourable to your Prisoner than the other; giving the Most generous and incontestible Proof of his Affection and Solicitude for my Comfort and Dignity; and it is more than probable, my Lords, from the well-known mutual Friendship subsisting between us, that, had I been interested, I might have obtained the Bulk of his Fortune for my own Family; but I respected his Honour, I loved his Virtues, and had rather have forfeited my Life, than have used any undue Influence to injure his Family: And though it has been industriously and cruelly circulated with a View to prejudice me, that the First born of the late Duke’s Sister was deprived of the Succession to his Grace’s Fortune by my Influence, the Wills, my Lords, made in Three distant Periods, each excluding him, demonstrate the Calumny of these Reports.
“I must further observe to your Lordships, in Opposition to the Charge against me of Interestedness, that had I possessed or exercised that undue Influence with which I am charged by the Prosecutor, I might have obtained more than a Life Interest in the Duke’s Fortune; and though from the Affection I bear to the Memory of my late much-honoured Husband, I have forbore to mention the Reason of his disinheriting his eldest Nephew: Yet Charles, the Second Son, with his Heirs, appear immediately after me in Succession; William and his Heirs follow next; after him, Edward and his Heirs; and the unfortunate Thomas, Lady Frances’s youngest Son, is not excluded though labouring under the Infirmities of Childhood at the, Age of Manhood, and not able to support himself. For the late Noble Duke of Kingston repeatedly mentioned to your Prisoner, “I have not excluded him, for he has never offended; and who can say God cannot restore him; who cm say that God will not restore him to Health.” My Lords, That Good Man did Honour to the Peerage, Honour to his Country, Honour to human Nature.
“His Grace, the Most Noble Duke of Newcastle, appeared with the Will, which had been intrusted to his Grace for Four Years by his late dear Friend. In Honour to the Lady Frances Medows, the Prosecutor was requested to attend at the Opening of the Will: He retired with Displeasure, disappointed that his eldest Son was disinherited, and unthankful, though the Duke’s Fortune still centered in his Four youngest Sons and their Posterity.
“My Lords, Worn down by Sorrow, and in a wretched State of Health, I quitted England without a Wish for that Life which I was obliged by the Laws of God and Nature to endeavour to preserve; for your Prisoner can with great Truth say, that Sorrow had bent her Mind to a perfect Resignation to the Will of Providence. And, my Lords, while your unhappy Prisoner was endeavouring to re-establish her greatly impaired Health Abroad, my Prosecutors filed a Bill in Chancery upon the Most unjust and dishonourable Motives. Your Prisoner does not complain of his endeavouring to establish a Right to himself; but the does complain of his forming a Plea on dishonourable and unjust Opinions, of his late noble Relation and generous Benefactor, to the Prejudice and Discredit of his much afflicted Widow; and not satisfied with this Prosecution, as a Bulwark for his Suit in Chancery, he ciuelly instituted a Criminal Prosecution, in Hopes by a Conviction in a Criminal Cause, to establish a Civil Claim; a Proceeding discountenanced by the Opinion of the late Lord Northington.
“My Lords, I have heretofore forborn, from the great Love and Affection to my late noble Lord, to mention what were the real Motives that induced his Grace to disinherit his eldest Nephew; and when my Plea and Answer in Chancery were to be argued, I particularly requested of the Counsel to abstain front any Reflections upon my Adversaries, which the Nature of their Prosecution too much deserved, and grieved I am now that I must no longer conceal them: For as Self-Preservation is the Full Law of Nature, and as I am more and more persecuted in my Fortune and my Fame, and my Enemies hand about Pocket Evidence to injure me in every Company, and with double Tongues they sting me to the Heart, I am reduced to the lad Necessity of saying, that the late Duke of Kingston was made acquainted with the fatal Cruelty with which Mr. Evelyn Medows treated an unfortunate Lady, who was as amiable as she was virtuous and beautiful; to cover which Offence he Most ungratefully and falsely declared, that he broke his Engagements with her for Fear of disobliging the Duke, which he has been often heard to say; this, with his Cruelty to his Sifter and Mother, and an Attempt to quit actual Service in the late War, highly offended the Duke; and it would be difficult for him or his Father to boast of the least friendly Intercourse with his Grace for upwards of Eighteen Years.
“My Lords, In a dangerous State of Health, when my Life was despaired of, I received a Letter from my Solicitor, acquainting me, that if I did not return to England to put in an Answer to the Bill in Chancery within Twenty-one Days, I should have Receivers put into my Estates; and also, that if in Contempt of the Indictment I did not return, I should be outlawed. It clearly appeared to me, my Lords, as I make no Doubt it does to your Lordships, that if in the Inclemency “of the Weather, I risked to pass the Alps, my Life would probably be endangered, and the Family would immediately enter into Possession of the Real Estates; and if Female Fears should prevail, that I should be outlawed: Thus was I to be deprived of Life and Fortune under Colour of Law; and that I might not return to these persecuting Summonses, by some undue and cruel Proceedings, my Credit was slopped by my Banker for £.4,000, when there remained an open Account of £.75,000, and at that Instant upwards of £.6,000 was in his Hands, my Revenues being constantly paid into his Shop to my Credit: Thus was I commanded to return Home at the manifest Risque of my Life, and at the same Time every Art used to deprive me of the Means of returning for my Justification; conscious of the perfect: Innocence of my Intention, and convinced that the Laws of this Country could not be so inconsistent as to authorize an Act, and then defame and degrade me for having obeyed it, I left Italy at the Hazard of my Life: It was not for Property I returned, but to prove myself an honourable Woman. Grant me, my Lords, but your good Opinion, and that I stand justified in the Innocence of my Intention, and you can deprive me of nothing that I value, even if you should take from me all my worldly Possessions, for I have rested on that Seat where the poor blind Belisarius is said to have asked Charity of every Passenger after having conquered the Goths and Vandals, Africans and Persians; and would do the same without murmuring, if you would pronounce me, what I hope your Lordships will chearfully subscribe to, that I am an honourable Woman.
“My Lords, Your late Brother, the truly honourable Duke of Kingston, whose Life was adorned by every Virtue, and every Grace; does not his Most respectable Character plead my Cause, and prove my Innocence.
“My Lords, The Evidence of the Fact of a supposed clandestine Marriage with Mr. Hervey depends entirely upon the Testimony of Mary Craddock.
“I am persuaded, your Lordships, from the Manner in which she gave her Evidence, already entertain great Suspicions of the Veracity of her Testimony. She pretends to speak to a Marriage Ceremony being performed, at which she was not asked to be present, nor can she assign any Reason for her being there; she relates a Conduct in Mrs. Hanmer, who she pretends was present at the Ceremony, inconsistent with a real Marriage; she acknowledges that she was in or about London during the jactitation Suit, and that Mr. Hervey applied to her on that Occasion, and swears, that she then and ever had a perfect Remembrance of the Marriage, and was ready to have proved it had she been called upon, and never declared to any Person that fie had not a perfect Memory of the Marriage, and that she never was desired either to give or withhold her Evidence, and from Mr. Hervey’s not calling on this Woman, it is insinuated he abstained from the Proof by Collusion with me; she also swears, that I offered to make her an Allowance of Twenty Guineas a Year, provided she would reside in either of the Three Counties she has mentioned, but acknowledges she has received no Allowance from me. Can your Lordships believe that if I could have been weak enough to have instituted the Suit with a Conviction in my own Mind of a real lawful Marriage between Mr Hervey and myself, that I would not at any Expence have taken Care to have put that Woman out of the Way: But, my Lords, I trust that your Lordships will be perfectly satisfied that great Part of the Evidence of this Woman is made for the Purpose of the Prosecution. Though she has denied she has any Expectation from the Event, or ever declared so, yet it will be proved to your Lordships, that her future Provision (as she has declared) depends upon it; and notwithstanding she has now brought herself up to swear that she heard the Ceremony of Marriage performed, yet it will be proved that she has declared she did not hear it: And it will be further proved to your Lordships, that Mr. Hervey was extremely felicitous to have established a legal Marriage with me for the Purpose mentioned by Mr. Hawkins, and that this Woman was actually applied to, and declared to Mr. Hervey’s Solicitor, that her Memory was impaired, and that she had not any Recollection of it; which was the Reason why she was not called as a Witness.
“My Lords, If she is thus contradicted in these Particulars, and appears under the Influence of Expectations from the Event of this Prosecution, your Lordships will not credit her Evidence, that the compleat Ceremony of Marriage was performed, or any other Particulars which rests upon her Evidence.
“My Lords, With respect to what your Lordships have heard from the Witnesses, of my Desire at Times to be considered as the Wife of Mr. Hervey, your Lordships, in your Candour, will naturally account for that Circumstance after the unfortunate Connection that had subsisted between us.
“My Lords, I call God Almighty, the Searcher of Hearts, to witness, that at the Time of my Marriage with the Duke of Kingston, I had myself the Most perfect Conviction that it was lawful. That noble Duke, to whom every Passage of my Life had been disclosed, and whose Affection for me, as well as Regard for his own Honour, would never have suffered him to have married me, had he not, as well as myself, received the moil solemn Assurances from Doctor Collier, that the Sentence which had been pronounced in the Ecclesiastical Court was absolutely final and conclusive, and that I was perfectly at Liberty to marry any other Person. If, therefore, I have offended against the Letter of the Act, I have so offended without Criminal Intention; where such Intention does not exist, your Lordships Justice and Humanity will tell you there can be no Crime; and your Lordships looking on my distressed Situation with an indulgent Eye, will pity me as an unfortunate Woman, deceived and misled by erroneous Notions of Law, of the Propriety of which it was impossible for me to judge.
“My Lords, Before I take my Leave, permit me to express my warm and grateful Sense of the Candour and Indulgence of your Lordships, which have given me the firmest Confidence, that I shall not be deemed Criminal by your Lordships for an Act in which I had not the least Suspicion that there was any Thing illegal or immoral.

The Prisoner then requested, “That her Physicians might be examined as to Doctor Collier’s State of Health; and that Doctor Collier might, if any Mode of so doing could be adopted, be examined in the strictest Manner with respect to his advising her that she might safely marry with the late Duke of Kingston.”

Then a Letter from Mrs. Phillips to the Prisoner, dated November 7th, 1771, was read by the Clerk.

Then Mr. Attorney General was heard to observe upon the said Letter.

Then Mr. Berkeley was called in, and examined on Behalf of the Prisoner.

Then Mrs. Ann Pritchard was called in, and sworn, and examined on Behalf of the Prisoner.

Then Doctor Warren, Physician to His Majesty, was sworn, and examined as to Doctor Collier’s Health, and as to his Inability by Illness of attending as a Witness for the Prisoner at the Bar.

Then James La Roche Esquire was sworn, and examined on Behalf of the Prisoner.

Then the original Sentence of Jactitation in the Spiritual Court, dated the 10th of February 1769, was read.

Then the Counsel for the Prisoner acquainting the House, “That they should not trouble their Lordships “with any more Evidence on Behalf of the Prisoner:”

Mr. Solicitor General having shortly observed upon the Evidence:

It was moved, “To adjourn to the Chamber of Parliament;”

And being adjourned accordingly;

The Lords and others returned in the same Order they came down.

And (fn. 2) being there resumed:

Bishops Protestation:

The Archbishop of Canterbury, for himself and the Rest of the Bishops, delivered a Protestation, which they desired may be entered.

And the same was read, as follows:

“The Lords Spiritual of the House of Peers do desire Leave of this House to be absent when Judgement is given upon Elizabeth Duchess Dowager of Kingston, saving to themselves and their Successors all such Right in Judicature as they have by Law, and of Right ought to have.”

Then he asked Leave, “That they might withdraw;” which being agreed to, they immediately withdrew accordingly.

Question to be put to the Lords:

Proposed, “That the Question to be put to the Lords in Westminster Hall shall be,

“Is the Prisoner guilty of the Felony whereof the stands indicted, or not guilty?”

The same was agreed to, and ordered accordingly:

Then the House again adjourned into Westminster Hall, and the Peers and others went down in die same Order as before:

And the Peers being there seated, and the House resumed:

Proclamation was made for Silence.

And the Lord High Steward, by a List, called every Peer by his Name, beginning with the junior Baron, and asked him, “Is the Prisoner guilty of the Felony “whereof she stands indicted, or not guilty?”

Duchess of Kingston adjudged guilty of Felony:

And thereupon every Peer present, severally, standing up uncovered, answered, “Guilty upon my Honour,” laying his Right Hand upon his Breast.

The Lord High Steward, standing up uncovered at the Chair as he did when he put the Question to the other Lords, declared his Opinion to the same Effect and in the same Manner.

Then the Lord High Steward declared, “That the Prisoner was found guilty of the Felony whereof she Hands indicted, all the Peers present having unanimously voted her guilty, One hundred and nineteen Peers being present.”

Then Proclamation was made for bringing the Prisoner to the Bar:

Who being brought accordingly, kneeled, till the Lord High Steward told her, “She might rise.”

And Proclamation being made for Silence,

The Lord High Steward acquainted the Prisoner, That the Lords had considered of the Charge and Evidence brought against her, and had likewise considered of every Thing which she had alledged in her Defence; and upon the whole Matter their Lordships had’ found her guilty of the Felony whereof she stands indicted:” And then asked her, “What she had to alledge against Judgement being pronounced upon her.”

Claims the Benefit of Peerage:

Upon which she claimed the Benefit of the Peerage according to the Statutes.

Whereupon,

Mr. Attorney General objecting to her having the Benefit of the Statute of Edward the Sixth, he was heard thereupon.

Mr. Wallace was heard to reply to the said Objection.

Mr. Mansfield was also heard to reply to the said Objection.

Mr. Attorney General was heard to observe.

Then it was moved, “To adjourn to the Chamber of Parliament.”

And being adjourned accordingly:

The Lords and others returned in the same Order they came down:

And the House being there resumed:

It was moved, “That the following Question be put to the Judges; (videlicet),

Question to the Judges, and their Answer.

“Whether a Peeress, convicted by her Peers of a Clergyable Felony, is by Law entitled to the Benefit of the Statutes, so as to excuse her from capital Punishment, without being burnt in the Hand, or being liable to any Imprisonment?”

The same was agreed to; and the said Question was accordingly put to the Judges.

Whereupon,

The Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, having conferred with the rest of the Judges present, delivered their unanimous Opinions upon the said Question, as follow:

“My Lords,
“Your Lordships would probably expect that on a Question of this Importance, the Judges would have desired Time to have considered of it; but as it was easy to foresee from the first Appointment of this Trial that a Question of this Sort would probably arise, we have all looked into the several Statutes from which any Light could be expected; and as on such a Consideration we have been able to form an Opinion in which we all concur, we thought it our Duty to deliver it immediately, and not obstruct the Publick Business by unnecessarily protracting this Trial, which has already taken up so much of your Lordships Time.
“I am therefore authorized by my Brothers to say, we all concur in Opinion, that a Peeress convicted by her Peers of a Clergyable Felony, is by Law entitled to the Benefit of the Statutes, so as to excuse her from capital Punishment, without being burnt in the Hand, or being liable to any Imprisonment.
“My Lords, The Question depends on several Acts of Parliament; the First I shall trouble your Lordships with is, the 20 H. VI. C. 9, which recites, “That by Magna Charta, no Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or disseised of his Freehold, or his Liberties, or free Customs, or shall be outlawed, or in anywise destroyed, that is forejudged of Life or Limb, or put to Death, or shall be condemned, at the King’s Suit, either before the King in his Bench, that is, the King’s Bench, or before any other Commissioner or Judge whatsoever, but by the lawful Judgement of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land; in which Statute, that is Magna Charta, no mention is made how Women, Ladies of great Estate in respect of their Husbands, Peers of the Land, married or sole, that is to say, Dutchesses, Countesses, or Baronesses, shall be put to answer, or before what Judges that they shall be judged upon Indictments of Treasons or Felonies by them committed or done. In regard whereof it is a Doubt in the Law of England, before whom and by whom such Ladies so indicted shall be put to answer and be judged, our said Lord the King, willing to put out such Ambiguities and Doubts, hath declared, by Authority aforesaid, that such Ladies so indicted, or hereafter to be indicted, of any Treason or Felony by them done, or hereafter to be done, whether they be married or sole, that they thereof shall be brought to answer, and put to answer, and judged before such Judges and Peers of the Realm, as Peers of the Realm should be if they were indicted or impeached of such Treasons or Felonies done, or hereafter to be done, and in like, (autiel) Manner and Form, and none otherwise.”

“Your Lordships will observe, that this Statute does not introduce a new Law, but is a declarative Law, explaining, what the true Meaning of Magna Charta was. Peers in that Statute means Equals; and therefore any of the Nobility mull, by Magna Charta, be tried by the Nobility who are their Peers; for all Nobility, whether Barons the lowest, or Dukes the highest, Degree of Nobility, are all Equals in this respect: And Lord Coke, 2 Inst. 45, says, “Though Dutchesses, Countesses, and Baronesses are only named in this declaratory Statute, and Marchionesses and Viscountesses are omitted, notwithstanding they are also comprehended in this 29th Chapter of Magna Charta.” Peers, though originally meaning only Equals, is now by common Use applied to a particular Part of the Nation, distinguished from the rest by superior Rank and Privileges, which they derive from the King originally, by Writ or Letters Patents granted to them or their Ancestors; and in Cases of stich Ladies as are not so ennobled, they obtain that Nobility by Marriage to those who are so ennobled. As the next Statute, 1 E. VI. C. 12, S. 14, speaks of the Benefit of Clergy, it will be necessary to say something upon that Subject: Lord Hale, in his 2d Vol. of his History of Pleas of the Crown, Page 323, says that, “antiently Princes and States, converted to Christianity, granted the Clergy Exemptions of Places, consecrated to religious Duties, from Arrests for Crimes, which was the Original of Sanctuaries; and, 2d, Exemption of their Persons from criminal Proceedings, in some Cases capital, before secular Judges, which was the true Original of this Privilegium Clencale. The Clergy, increasing in Wealth, Power, Honour, Number, and Interest, claimed as a Right what they at first obtained by the Favour of Princes and States; and by Degrees extended these Exemptions to all that had any Kind of subordinate Ministration relative to the Church.” These Exemptions never rose to so great an Height in this Kingdom as in other Places; and therefore the Clergy were not exempted here from Civil Suits, nor was this Privilegium Clencale allowed in the lowest Crimes not capital, nor wherein they were not to lose Life or Limb, nor in High Treason, touching the King himself or his Royal Majesty; but by 25 E, III. C. 4, de Clero, in all other Felonies the Ordinary might demand the Prisoner, as a Clerk; or the Prisoner himself might demand the Benefit of the Clergy. The Canon Law gave the Privilege only to Men in Holy Orders: Our Law, in favour to Learning, and the Desire of the English Bishops, extended it to Lay Clerks, i. e. any Layman that, by reason of his Ability to read, was in a Possibility of being made a Priest. C. J. Treby, State Trials, Vol. V. 171. The Means of trying whether he was entitled to it was by reading; if he could read he was delivered to the Ordinary, that is the Bishop, or the Person who had ordinary Jurisdiction there; but the Ordinary was so much the Minister of the Temporal Courts, and so subordinate to them, that if the Ordinary refused to let the Prisoner read, the Temporal Court could controul, and order a Book to be delivered to him; and if the Ordinary said he could read when he could not, or vice versa, that he could not read when in reality he could, the Temporal Courts gave Judgement according to the Truth of the Case; and those Courts likewise directed whether the Prisoner should be delivered to the Ordinary with Purgation, or without Purgation: In the last Case they were to be kept in the Ordinary’s Prison for Life. If delivered with Purgation, then the Ordinary tried him for the Fact whereof he was accused, by a Jury of Twelve Clerks; and if he was acquitted, as was generally the Case, he was discharged out of Prison. Purgation was the Convict’s clearing himself of the Crime by his own Oath, and the Oaths or Verdict of an Inquest of Twelve Clerks, as Compurgators. The Proceeding was before the Ordinary, and old Books speak of their making Proclamation for Persons to come in against his Purgation, and of their enquiring into his Life, Conversation, and same, and of other Formalities, in all which, several Statutes say, there were great Abuses. The Statute 4 H. VII C. 13, reciting, “That upon Trust of the Privilege of the Church, divers Persons have been the more bold to commit Murder, Rape, Robbery, Thest, and all other mischievous Deeds, because they have been continually admitted to the Benefit of the Clergy as oft as they offended.” It enacts, that “Every Person not being within Orders which once hath been admitted to the Benefit of his Clergy, being again arraigned of any such Offence, be not admitted to have the Benefit or Privilege of the Clergy, and that every Person so convicted for Murder (which was then a Clergyable Offence) should be marked with an M on the Brawn of the Left Thumb; and if he be for any other Felony, to be marked with a T in the same Place of the Thumb, and those Marks to be made by the Jailer openly in the Court, before the Judge, before that such Person be delivered to the Ordinary.”

“This Statute prevented Laymen having their Clergy more than once; and the branding answered the Purpose of discovering whether they had the Benefit of their Clergy before, though it was necessary to prove it by other Means, to prevent their having Clergy a Second Time. The 1 E. VI, C. 12, will come next to be considered; which, after repealing several new-created Treasons and Felonies, and taking away Clergy in several other Felonies, in Sec. 14, enacts that, “in all and every Case where any of the King’s Majesty’s Subjects shall and may, upon his Prayer, have the Privilege of Clergy as a Clerk Convict that may make Purgation, in all those Cases, and every of them, and also in all and every Case and Cases of Felony wherein the Privilege and Benefit of Clergy is restrained, excepted, or taken away by this Statute, (wilful Murder and poisoning of Malice prepensed only excepted), the Lord and Lords of the Parliament, and Peer and Peers of the Realm, having Place and Voice in Parliament, Shall, by virtue of this present Act of Common Grace, upon his or their Request or Prayer, alledging that he is a Lord or Peer of this Realm, and claiming the Benefit of this Act, though he cannot read, without any burning in the Hand, Loss of Inheritance, or Corruption of his Blood, be adjudged, deemed, taken, and used, for his First Time only, to all Intents, Constructions, and Purposes, as a Clerk Convict, and shall be in Case of a Clerk Convict which may make Purgation, without any further or other Benefit or Privilege of Clergy to any such Lord or Peer from thenceforth at any Time after, for any Cause to be allowed, adjudged, or admitted; any Law, Statute, Usage, or Custom, or any Other Thing to the contrary notwithstanding: Provided always, That if any of the said Lords of the Parliament, of any of the Peers of this Realm for the Time being, shall fortune to be indicted of any of the Offence limited in this Act, that then they and every of them shall have his or their Trial by their Peers, as it hath been used heretofore in Cases of Treason.” From the Time of this Statute, whenever a Peer has been convicted of any Felony for which a Commoner might have the Benefit of Clergy, such Peer, on praying the Benefit of this Statute, has always been discharged, without burning or Delivery to the Ordinary; and there are a Series of Precedents from Lord Morley’s Case 1666, till One in this Reign as late as 1765. And C. J. Treby says, “The Statute 1 E. VI. exempts the Peers Convict of Clergyable Felonies from burning in the Hand, and virtually repeals the Statute 4 H. VII. as to so much; and the Statute 18 Eliz. requires burning in the Hand only, according to the Statute in that Behalf before provided; and there being no Statute then or now in Force to subject Peers to such Brand, they are in such Case, upon the allowing the Benefit of the said Statute of E. VI. which is as much as Clergy, (without reading or burning), freed from Discredit and other Penalties of the Felony, as much as Commoners are by having Clergy formally allowed, and being burnt. State Trials, Vol. V. 170.” And he says, “A Peer shall have this Benefit without either Clergy or burning; a Clerk in Orders upon Clergy alone without burning; and a Lay Clerk not without Clergy and burning, ib. 172-3.” And I believe Nobody can dispute but the Law is so. The Question therefore is, Whether a Peeress is not entitled to the same Privilege; and we are of Opinion that she is. Peers is a Word capable of including she whole Body of the Peerage, Females as well as Males; and every Personal Privilege conferred on Peers is, by Operation of Law, communicated to Peeresses, whether by Blood or Marriage, though only Males are mentioned; as Trial by Peers, though only recognized in Magna Charta as belonging to the Male Sex, nec super eum ibimus, nec super eum mistemus, did, by Construction of Law, belong to Females, as appears by 20 H. VI. which is only a declaratory Law. So any other Personal Privilege granted or confirmed to Peers generally, is communicated to Females, if it is of a Nature capable of being communicated to, and enjoyed by them; as Trial by Peers, Freedom from Arrest: Countess Rutland’s Case, Moor 769, and 2 Co. 52. And if those Privileges are so communicated, as they certainly are, why should not this given by 1 E. VI. the Consequence of which is so reasonable and agrees able to Justice, that a Female Offender shall not undergo a greater Punishment than a Male of her own Rank would do for a Crime of the same Sort. But it was insisted at the Bar, that between 1 E. VI. and 18 Eliz. a Peer found guilty of a Clergyable Offence, should be delivered to the Ordinary as a Clerk Convict; and Stamford 130, is quoted for that Purpose, that, by the Words of this Statute, a Peer ought to make his Purgation; and if so, he ought to be delivered to the Ordinary, to be kept till he has made his Purgation. That Opinion of Stamford seems contrary, to Law in many Particulars. The t E. VL C. 3, had, in Effect, suspended Purgation, even as to Commoners; therefore the Legislature could never mean to introduce and establish Purgation as to a Peer, which Hob. says, 289, “Is no Ordinance of the Common Law, but is a Practice among themselves, i. e. the Clergy, rather overseen and winked at than approved by the Common Law;” and Page 291, he says, “The Perjuries were sundry in the Witnesses and Compurgators in the Jury of Clerks, and the Judge himself was not clear, all turning the solemn Trial of Truth by Oath into a ceremonious and formal Lie.” It is not probable the Parliament, intending a great Distinction in favour of Peers, so as to dispense with reading and burning in the Hand, meant to leave a Peer a Prisoner in the Custody of the Ordinary, and to have his Credit and Capacity to acquire Personal Property, and enjoy the Profits of his Lands, to be decided upon in, such a mock Trial; and in fact there is no Instance in any of the Law Books where a Peer convicted of a Clergyable Felony has ever been delivered to the Ordinary, or has made Purgation: And the Jurisdiction of the Ordinary to purge the Clerk only relates to Clerks in Orders, or suck as the Common Law considered as Clerks; and a Peer not being a Clerk he could not make Purgation, the Ordinary having no Jurisdiction over him; and the Words here, “Have the Privilege of Clergy as a Clerk Convict that may make Purgation, and shall be adjudged, deemed, taken, and used, for his First Time only, to all Intents, Constructions, and Purposes, as a Clerk Convict, and shall be in Case of a Clerk Convict which may make Purgation,” do not import or direct that he Shall make Purgation, but give a Peer the same Advantage as a Clerk Convict which might make Purgation, i. e. an absolute Discharge from all further Punishment; and the Statute, as to him, is to be construed to be a Pardon; and it seems moll probable, that Peers never did make Purgation; because, as all who made Purgation were to be tried by a Jury of Clerks, such Trial would be derogatory to their inherent Privilege of being tried by their Peers. Lord Chief Justice Kale, on this Statute (2 H. H. P. C. 376), says, “I think it was never meant that a Peer of the Realm should be put to read, or be burnt in the Hand, Clergy; neither is it said that he shall be discharged by his praying of the benefit of this Statute, where a common Person shall have the Privilege of Clergy, and may make his Purgation, but only where he may have the Benefit of his Clergy in the First Clause of the Statute. The Other Clause (shall be in Case of a Clerk Convict that may make Purgation) is only for his speedier Discharge, and farther Advantage, and not to restrain the general Clause. But it is objected that the Statute 1 E. VI. C. 12, gives this Privilege only to “Lord and Lords of the Parliament, and Peer and Peers of the Realm, having Place and Voice in Parliament;” and that a Peeress, not having Place and Voice in Parliament, cannot have the Benefit of this Statute. This Expression “having Place and Voice in Parliament,” cannot mean to exclude all Peers but such as sat in Parliament; but to describe some of the Incidents of Peerage, or to include Bishops, who are Lords of Parliament though not Peers; and if these Words should confine the Benefit of this Statute to those only who actually sat in Parliament, it would “exclude Peers, Minors, and Papist Peers, who by Statute 30 Car. II. Stat. 2, C. 1, are now rendered incapable of fitting or voting in Parliament. The Words therefore are merely descriptive, and not restrictive; and what makes it very plain is, that in the 4 and 5 P. and M. C. 4, which takes away Clergy from Accessaries before the Fact in Murder and several other Offences, there is a Proviso that every Lord and Lords of the Parliament, and Peer and Peers of this Realm, having Place and Voice in Parliament upon every Indictment for any of the Offences afore-said, shall be tried by their Peers, as hath been accustomed by the Laws of this Realm. Here are the very Words used m 1 E. VI. C. 12, yet it could never be doubted, but notwithstanding those Words, Peeresses mull be tried by their Peers for Offences against that Statute; and Lady Somerset was tried by her Peers for being accessary to the Murder of Sir Thomas Overbury, which was an Offence against that very Statute. What gave Rise probably to this Statute, 1 E. VI. C. 12, was another Statute passed the same Year, Cr 3, providing for the Punishment of Vagabonds by making them Slaves for Two Years; in which Act was a Clause, that no Clerk Convict. shall make his Purgation, but shall be a Slave for One Year to him who will become bound with Two Sureties to the Ordinary to take him into his Service, and he shall be used like a Vagabond; and a Clerk attainted or convict, which by Law cannot make his Purgation, may, by the Ordinary, be delivered to any Man who will give Security to keep him as his Slave for Five Years, and it shall be lawful to every Person to whom any shall be adjudged a Slave, to put a Ring of Iron about his Neck, Arm, or Leg. To avoid all possible Question whether a Peer could be subject to any of these Provisions, this Act, 1 E. VI. C. 12, provides for their immediate Delivery, on praying the Benefit of this Statute. This Statute, 1 E. VI. C. 3, was repealed, 3 and 4 E. VI, C. 16, but was in Force when 1 E. VI. C. 12, was made. The next Statute, 18 Eliz. C. 7, provides, that every Person which shall be admitted and allowed to have the Benefit or privilege of his Clergy, shall not thereupon be delivered to the Ordinary as hath been accustomed: but after such Clergy allowed, and burning in the Hand according to the Statute in that Behalf provided, shall forthwith be enlarged and delivered out of Prison by the Justices before whom such Clergy shall be granted, that Cause notwithstanding. Then follows the Proviso, “That the Justices, before whom any such Allowance of Clergy shall be had, shall and may, for the further Correction of such Persons to whom Clergy shall be allowed, detain and keep them in Prison for such convenient Time as the same Justices, in their Discretions, shall think convenient, so as the same do not exceed One Year’s Imprisonment.” This Proviso plainly relates only to those Persons mentioned in the Clause, that is, such Persons as had been burnt in the Hand according to the Statute in that Case made and provided, meaning 4 H. VII. As Peers therefore are not to be burnt in the Hand, they cannot be imprisoned, for those only are to be imprisoned who have been burnt in the Hand; and the Word Justices (fn. 3) are more properly applicable to other Courts of Judicature than to this House. The 21 Ja. 1. C. 7, cannot relate to this Question, for it relates to common Persons, and was intended to put Women on the same Footing with Men, as to small Larcenies; and 3 and 4 W. and M. C. 9, does the same in all Clergyable Felonies: This shews the Justice of allowing to the Peeresses, the same Benefit of 1 E. VI. C. 12, as Peers have 5 and it is natural to suppose, that when the Legislature were putting Women of inferior Rank on the same Footing as Men, they would have put Peeresses on the same Footing with Peers, had it not then been conceived that the same Privileges were already extended to both.
“Upon the Whole therefore, by Stat. 1 E. VI. a Peer convicted of a Clergyable Felony is entitled to his immediate Discharge without reading or burning in the Hand, or being liable to Imprisonment by 18 Eliz.
“This Privilege given by Statute, being such as may be enjoyed by a Peeress, is by Operation of Law communicated to her, and puts her in the same Situation as a Peer; the Consequence of which is, that a Peeress, convicted of a Clergyable Felony, praying, the Benefit of this Statute, is not only excused from capital Punishment, but ought to be immediately discharged, without being burnt in the Hand, or liable to any Imprisonment.”

Ordered, That the Lord High Steward do acquaint the Prisoner, “That she is allowed the Benefit of the Statute of Edward the Sixth; and that she is discharged, paying her Fees.”

L. Chief Baron desired to favour the House with a Copy of his Argument.

Ordered, That the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer be, and he is hereby desired to favour this House with a Copy of his Argument upon the Question proposed to the Judges by this House this Day.

Then the House was again adjourned to Westminster Hall, and the Peers and others went down in the same Order as before.

And the Peers being there seated, and the House resumed,

Proclamation was made for Silence.

Then the Lord High Steward acquainted the Prisoner, That she was allowed the Benefit of the Statute of Edward the Sixth; and that she was discharged, paying her Fees.”

Then Proclamation being again made for Silence.

The Lord High Steward declared, “That this Proceeding being now at an End, nothing remained to be done here but to determine the Commission; and directed Proclamation to be made for dissolving the Commission of High Steward.”

And Proclamation being made accordingly,

The Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, upon his Knee, delivered the White Staff to she Lord High Steward, and his Grace stood up uncovered, and holding the Staff in both his Hands, broke it in Two and declared the Commission to be dissolved, and then leaving the Chair, came down to the Woolsack.

The House was adjourned to the Chamber of Parliament, whither the Peers and others returned in the same Order they came down, except the Duke of Cumberland, who now walked after the Lord Chancellor.

And the House being there resumed,

Trial ordered to be printed.

Ordered, That the Lord Chancellor do Cause the Trial of the said Elizabeth Duchess Dowager Kingston to be printed and published; and that no other Person, but such as his Lordship shall think fit to appoint, do presume to print or publish the same.

Adjourn.

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

Die Mercurii, 24o Aprilis 1776.

Domini tam tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Epus. Londin. Comes Bathurst, Cancellarius. Ds. Clifford.
Epus. Duresm. Ds. Abergavenny.
Epus. Cicestrien. Comes Gower, Præses. Ds. De Ferrars.
Epus. Norvicen. Dux Beaufort. Ds. Cathcart.
Epus. Bath. & Wells. Dux Ancaster, Magnus Camerarius. Ds. Sandys.
Epus. Cestrien. Ds. Ravensworth.
Epus. Bangor. Dux Portland. Ds. Hyde.
Dux Bridgewater. Ds. Walpole.
Comes Suffolk. Ds. Scarsdale.
Comes Denbigh. Ds. Vernon.
Comes Doncaster.
Comes Coventry.
Comes Abercorn.
Comes Dalhousie.
Comes Marchmont.
Comes Rosebery.
Comes Oxford.
Comes Aylesford.
Comes. Effingham.
Comes Buckinghamshire.
Viscount Hereford.
Viscount Montague.
Viscount Stormont.
Viscount Falmouth.
Viscount Torrington.
Viscount Wentworth.

PRAYERS.

America, Licences for exporting Provisions, &c. to, Address for.

Ordered, That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty, to request that His Majesty will be pleased to order the proper Officer to lay before this House, “True Copies of all Licences granted by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty for exporting Provisions or other Things to America since the passing of an Act, intituled, “An Act to prohibit all Trade and Intercourse with the Colonies of New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pensylania, The Three lower Counties on Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, during the Continuance of the present Rebellion within the said Colonies respectively; for repealing an Act made in the Fourteenth Year of the Reign of His present Majesty, to discontinue the landing and discharging, lading or shipping of Goods, Wares, and Merchandize, at the Town and within the Harbour of Boston, in the Province of Massachusetts Bay; and also Two Acts made in the last Session of Parliament, for restraining the Trade and Commerce of the Colonies in the said Acts respectively mentioned; and to enable any Person or Persons appointed, and authorized by His Majesty to grant Pardons, to issue Proclamations in the Cases and for the Purposes therein mentioned.”

Ordered, that the said Address be presented to His Majesty, by the Lords with White Staves.

Ld Clifford’s Pedigree delivered:

Garter King at Arms delivered in at the Table the Pedigree of the Lord Clifford, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Takes his Seat, &c

The House being informed, “That the Lord Clifford was attending with his Writ of Summons to Parliament,” the Lord Chancellor explained to the House his Lordship’s Descent, as only Son and Heir of Catherine, the last surviving Issue of the Viscountess Sondes, eldest Daughter of Thomas Earl of Thanet and Lord Clifford.

The Lord Clifford was called in, and having presented his Writ of Summons to the Lord Chancellor, the same was read by the Clerk as follows:

“George the Third, by the Grace of God, of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, and so forth: To Our Right Trusty and Well-beloved Edward Clifford Chevalier, Greeting: Whereas, Our Parliament, for arduous and urgent Affairs concerning Us, the State and Defence of Our Kingdom of Great Britain, and the Church, is now met at Our City of Westminster; We strictly enjoining, command you, under the Faith and Allegiance by which you are bound to Us, That, considering the Difficulty of the said Affairs, and Dangers impending, all Excuses being laid aside, you be personally present at Our aforesaid Parliament, with Us, and with the Prelates, Nobles, and Peers; of Our said Kingdom, to treat of the aforesaid Affairs, and to give your Advice: And this you may in no wise omit, as you tender Us and Our Honour, and the Safety and Defence of Our said Kingdom and Church, and the Dispatch of the said Affairs.
“Witness Ourself at Westminster, the Seventeenth Day of April, in the Sixteenth Year of Out Reign.
“Yorke.

Which done,

The Lord Clifford took the Oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration, and also took and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes, and then took his Place on the upper End of the Barons Bench, next above the Lord Abergavenny.

Coney Weston Enclosure Bill.

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

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing, allotting, and enclosing of the Common Fields, Half-year Enclosures, Heaths, Brooms, Breaches, Commons, and Waste Lands, within the Parish of Coney Weston, in the County of Suffolk;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Nuthall’s Executors Bill.

Ordered, That the Committee to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act to enable William Masterman and Thomas Francis, Esquires, to make a Title to certain Leasehold and Copyhold Estates of Thomas Nuthall Esquire, deceased,” stands committed, be revived, and meet To-morrow

Onslow’s Bill.

Ordered, That the Committee to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting an Estate in the County of Middlesex, which was settled by Richard Onslow Esquire deceased, on his Marriage with Poolley Walton, in Trustees, in order that the same may be conveyed to Matthew Winter and his Heirs, pursuant to an Agreement made by him for the Purchase thereof; and for investing the Purchase Money in Three per Centum Consolidated Bank Annuities; and for other Purposes therein mentioned,” stands committed, be revived, and meet To-morrow.

Sir William Wake’ Estate Bill.

Ordered, That the Committee to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting the Free School House, Dwelling House for the Master and Usher, Close, and other Premises thereto belonging, in Courtenhall, in the County of Northampton, in Sir William Wake Baronet, and his Heirs, upon the Conditions therein mentioned,” stands committed, be revived, and meet To-morrow.

Dash wood’s Bill.

Ordered, That the Committee to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for confirming the Settlements made by Charles Vere Dashwood Esquire, in Satisfaction of certain Articles entered into by him previous to his Marriage, and during his Infancy; and for other Purposes therein mentioned,” stands committed, be revived, and meet on Friday next.

Upsold’s Bill.

Ordered, That the Committee to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting the Settled Estates of William Upsold Gentleman, in the County of Middlesex, and City of London, in Trustees, to be sold; and for purchasing other Lands and Hereditaments to be settled to the same Uses,” stands committed, be revived, and meet on Friday next.

Sir Charles Whitworth’s Estate Bill.

Ordered, That the Committee, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for the Sale of the Estates of Sir Charles Whitworth in the County of Somerset; and for exonerating the same, and his Estates in the County of Kent, from the Portions of his younger Children provided by his Marriage Settlement,” stands committed, be revived, and meet on Monday next.

Hathcrop Rectory Bill.

Ordered, That the Committee to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act to enable the Rector of the Parish Church of Hatherop, in the County of Gloucester, to exchange Part of his Glebe Lands there, for other Lands more conveniently situated, the Property of Samuel Blackwell Esquire, in the Hamlet of Williamstrip, adjoining to the said Parish of Hatherop,” stands committed, be revived, and meet on Monday next.

Estcourt’s Bill.

Ordered, That the Committee to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for applying the Money to arise by Sale of certain Messuages, situate in Cheapside, in the City of London, devised by the Will of Edmund Estcourt Esquire, deceased, to Trustees, to be sold, in the building a Mansion House upon the Settled Estates late of the said Edmund Estcourt, at Shipton Moyne and Dovel, in the County of Gloucester, together with the Materials of the ancient Mansion House now standing thereon,” stands committed, be revived, and meet on Thursday the 2d Day of May next.

Jenking’s Divorce Bill.

Ordered, That the Second Reading of the Bill, intituled, “An Act to dissolve the Marriage of the Reverend John Jenkins Clerk, with Mary Jenkins his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned,” which stands appointed for this Day, be put off to Monday next, and the Lords summoned; and that the several Persons who were Ordered to attend as Witnesses on this Day, do then attend.

Abdy Leave for a Bill:

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of Thomas. Abdy Abdy, an infant under the Age of Twenty-one Years; 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 the Sale of a Leasehold Estate, late belonging to Sir John Abdy Baronet, deceased, at Bishops Canning, in the County of Wilts, and of Timber Trees growing on his Estates in the County of Essex, and also of his Medals and Coins, for paying off and discharging certain Incumbrances affecting his Real Estates in Essex and for laying out the Residue of the Monies arising by such Sales in the Purchase of Lands to be settled to the same Uses as his Estates in Essex now stand settled by his Will.”

Sir William Molesworth’s Estate Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to enable certain Persons, during the. Successive Minorities of Sir William Molesworth Baronet, and his Brothers, to grant Leases of the Estates devised to them by the Will of Sir William Morice Baronet, deceased.”

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

Ld. President. L. Bp. London. L. Clifford.
D. Beaufort. L. Bp. Durham. L. Abergavenny.
D. Ancaster. L. Bp. Chichester. L. De Ferrars.
D. Portland. L. Bp. Norwich. L Cathcart.
D. Bridgewater. L. Sandys.
E. Suffolk. L. Bp. Bath & Wells. L. Ravensworth.
E. Denbigh. L. Bp. Chester. L. Hyde.
E. Doncaster. L. Bp. Bangor. L. Walpole.
E. Coventry. L. Scarsdale.
E. Abercorn. L. Vernon.
E. Dalhousie.
E. Marchmont.
E. Rosebery.
E. Oxford.
E. Aylesford.
E. Effingham.
E. Buckinghamshire.
V. Hereford.
V. Montague.
V. Stormont.
V. Falmouth.
V. Torrington.
V. Wentworth.

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Thursday the 9th Day of May next, at Ten o’clock in the Forenoon, in the Prince’s Lodgings, near the House of Peers; and to adjourn as they please.

Borthwick Peerage; Hearing deferred.

Upon reading the Petition of John Borthwick of Crookston; setting forth, “That the Petitioner, in Support of his Claim to the Dignity of Lord Borthwick, has lodged Cases containing the Writs and (fn. 4) Evidents upon which his said Claim is founded;” and there fore praying their Lordships, “That the Committee for Privileges may be revived, and meet on Monday the 13th Day of May next, or upon such other Day in the present Session of Parliament as may appear most proper to their Lordships, for the Purpose of finally trying the Merits of the Petitioner’s Claim to the said Title of Honour:”

It is Ordered, that the Committee of Privileges do meet to consider the said, Claim on the Second Day of Meeting in the next Session of Parliament.

Sir Charles Bunbury’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 Thomas Charles Bunbury Baronet, with the Right Honourable Lady Sarah Lenox 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; and for the Lords to be summoned:

Counsels were accordingly called in; and Mr. Eliot appearing as Counsel for the Bill, but none appearing against it:

John Swale was called, in order to prove the Service of the Order for the said Second Reading; and being sworn, acquainted the House, “That he served Lady Sarah Bunbury personally, at Godwood, in Sussex, on the 9th of this instant April, with the Order of this House for the Second Reading of the Bill, and at the same Time delivered to her a true Copy of the Bill.”

He was directed to withdraw.

Then the said Bill was read a Second Time; and Mr. Eliot was heard in support of the Bill, and to make out the Allegations thereof; and in order to prove the Marriage, again called John Swale, who produced an Extract from the Register of Marriages of the Parish of Kensington, in the County of Middlesex, and declaring, “That the same was a true Copy, he having examined it with the Original;” the same was read, whereby it appeared that Sir Charles Bunbury and Lady Sarah Lenox were married at Holland House Chapel on the 2nd of June 1762.

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Joseph Walker, Clerk to the Deputy Register of the Consistory Court of the Bishop of London, was called in; and being sworn, produced the original desinitive Sentence of Divorce, dated the 17th of June 1769, in the said Court against the said Lady Sarah Bunbury for Adultery; and the same was read.

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Charles Brown was called in; and being sworn, acquainted the House, “That he was Steward to Sir Charles Bunbury: That Lady Bunbury came down to Great Barton on or about the 31st of January 1769, and that the used frequently in a Morning to walk out alone: That on Sunday the 19th of February 1769, her Ladyship walked out as usual, but not returning Home at her usual Time the Family were alarmed, and that he and the Servants went out in search of her, but without Effect; and that the never has returned since that Day.”

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Margaret Frost, now Margaret Webb, was called in; and being sworn, acquainted the House, “That she went down to Redbridge, near Southampton, on or about the 24th of March 1769, to the House of one Martha Bissell, where the staid for a Week: That the there found Lady Sarah Bunbury and Lord William Gordon, both of whom the knew: That they lived and cohabited together there as Man and Wife, and went by the Name of Mr. and Mrs. Gore, and lay in the same Apartment, in which there was but one Bed: That on the 30th of March 1769, the, the Witness, being coming to Town about Eight of the Clock in the Morning, the went into Lady Sarah Bunbury’s Bed Chamber to know if her Ladyship had any Commands to Town, and that the then and there saw Lady Sarah Bunbury and Lord William Gordon in naked Bed together.”

She was directed to withdraw.

Then Roger Rush was called in; and being sworn, acquainted the House, “That he was Servant to Sir Charles Bunbury, and had lived with him Thirteen Years: That in February 1769, Lady Sarah eloped from Great Barton: That he has never seen her since, and believes that Sir Charles Bunbury has never seen her since that Time, he generally attending him, and must have known it, if Sir Charles had seen her.”

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Richard Javelleaux was called in; and being sworn, acquainted the House, “That he lives with Sir Charles Bunbury as his Servant, and lived with him before his Marriage with Lady Sarah as such: That he believes Sir Charles never has seen Lady Sarah since the eloped, as he always went with him when he travelled, and must have known it, if Sir Charles had seen her.”

He was directed to withdraw.

Then John Swale was again called in; and acquainted the House, “That he has been concerned in Business for Sir Charles Bunbury many Years: That when he served Lady Sarah Bunbury with the Order, and Copy of the Bill, on the 9th of this instant April, the then told him, “she had no Expectation of a Reconciliation with Sir Charles from the great Length of Time they had been parted;” and that he, the Witness, verify believes Sir Charles has never seen her since the eloped.”

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.

Deer, Stealing of, Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act more effectually to prevent the Stealing of Deer; and to repeal several former Statutes made for the like Purpose.”

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; and that the Lords be summoned

Rogers against Holled et al.

Ordered, That the Hearing of the Cause wherein Samuel Rogers Clerk, is Appellant, and Thomas Holled and others, are Respondents, which stands appointed for To-morrow, be put off to Tuesday next; and that the Judges do then attend.

Lords summoned.

Ordered That the Lords be summoned to attend the House To-morrow, upon the Hearing of Counsel upon the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of the Most Noble George Duke of St. Albans; praying Leave to bring in a Private Bill for the Purposes therein mentioned.

Adjourn.

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

Die Jovis, 25o Aprilis 1776.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Archiep. Cantuar. Dux Cumberland. Ds. Le Despencer.
Epus. Duresm. Comes Bathurst, Cancellarius. Ds. Clifford.
Epus. Lincoln. Ds. Willoughby Br.
Epus. Exon. Dux Beaufort. Ds. Clifton.
Epus. Bath. & Wells. Dux Bridgewater. Ds. Cathcart.
Epus. Meneven. Comes Talbot, Senescallus. Ds. Sandys.
Epus. Bangor. Ds. Bruce.
Comes Hertford, Camerarius. Ds. Ravensworth.
Ds. Hyde.
Comes Denbigh. Ds. Walpole.
Comes Sandwich. Ds. Mansfield.
Comes Rochford. Ds. Scarsdale.
Comes Abercorn. Ds. Camden.
Comes Dalhousie.
Comes Marchmont.
Comes Oxford.
Comes Waldegrave.
Comes Effingham.
Comes Buckinghamshire.
Comes Northington.
Comes Spencer.
Viscount Hereford.
Viscount Say & Sele.
Viscount Weymouth.
Viscount Falmouth.
Viscount Dudley & Ward.

PRAYERS.

King’s Answer to Address of Yesterday, reported.

The Lord Chamberlain reported, “That the Lords with White Staves had (according to Order) waited on His Majesty with their Lordships Address of Yesterday; and that His Majesty was pleased to say, He would give Directions accordingly.”

Dolman’s Bill.

Ordered, That the Sitting of the Committee on the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting the Settled Estates of Robert Dolman Esquire, and Robert Dolman the Younger, in Pocklington, and elsewhere, in the County of York, in Trustees, to be sold; 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,” which stands appointed for Monday next, be put off to Wednesday next.

Sir John Abdy’ Estate Bill.

Hodic 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for the Sale of a Leasehold Estate, late belonging to Sir John Abdy Baronet, deceased, at Bishop’s Canning, in the County of Wilts, and of Timber Trees growing on his Estates in the County of Essex, and also of his Medals and Coins, for paying off and discharging certain Incumbrances affecting his Real Estates in Essex; and for laying out the Residue of the Monies arising by such Sale in the Purchase of Lands, to be settled to the same Uses as his Estates in Essex now stand settled by his Will.”

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

D. Beaufort. L. Abp. Canterbury. L. Le Despencer.
D. Bridgewater. L. Clifford.
Ld. Steward. L. Bp. Durham. L. Willoughby Br.
Ld. Chamberlain. L. Bp. Lincoln. L. Clifton.
E. Denbigh. L. Bp. Exeter. L. Cathcart.
E. Sandwich. L. Bp. Bath & Wells. L. Sandys.
E. Rochford. L. Bruce.
E. Abercorn. L. Bp. St. Davids. L. Ravensworth.
E. Dalhousie. L. Bp. Bangor. L. Hyde.
E. Marchmont. L. Walpole.
E. Oxford. L. Mansfield.
E. Waldegrave. L. Scarsdale.
E. Effingham. L. Camden.
E. Buckinghamshire.
E. Northington.
E. Spencer.
V. Hereford.
V. Say & Sele.
V. Weymouth.
V. Falmouth.
V. Dudley & Ward.

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Friday the 10th of May next, at Ten o’clock in the Forenoon, in the Prince’s Lodgings, near the House of Peers; and to adjourn as they please.

V. Irwin et Ux Leave tor a Bill.

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of the Right Honourable Charles Lord Viscount Irwin, and Frances Viscountess Irwin his Wife, on Behalf of and for their infant Children; 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 several Estates, late of Samuel Shepheard of Exning, in the County of Suffolk, Esquire, deceased, in Trustees, to be sold; and for purchasing other Estates to be conveyed to the like Uses; and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

Message from H. C. to return Hoineck’s Divorce Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Colonel Egerton and others:

To return the Bill, intituled, “An Act to dissolve the Marriage of Charles Horneck Esquire with Sarah Keppel his now Wife, 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, without any Amendment.

Eyre’s Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons by Sir Cecil Wray and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act to discharge certain Lands, heretofore Part of the Estate and inheritance of Thomas Eyre Esquire, deceased, situate within the Lordship of High Peak, in the County of Derby, from the Payment of a certain Fee Farm Rent of One hundred Pounds a Year, and for securing the same on other Parts of the said Estate;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Walgrave Enclosure Bill.

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

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Open and Common Fields, Common Pastures, Common Meadows, and other Common able Lands and Grounds, of and within the Manor and Parish of Walgrave, in the County of Northampton;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

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

Messages from H. C. to return Owens’s Bill:

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

To return the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting Part of the Estates devised by the Will of Sarah Owen Spinster, deceased, in the Counties of Salop and Montgomery, in Trustees, to be sold; and for laying out the Money arising by such Sale in the Purchase of other Messuages, Lands, and Hereditaments, to be settled in lieu thereof, to the like Uses;” and to acquaint this House, That they have agreed to the same without any Amendment.

and Liardet’s Patent Bill:

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

To return the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting in John Liardet Clerk, his Executors, Administrators, and Assigns, the sole Use and Property of a certain Composition or Cement of his Invention, throughout His Majesty’s Kingdom of Great Britain, and in the Colonies and Plantations Abroad, for a limited Time;” and to acquaint this House, That they have agreed to their Lordships Amendments made thereto.

and De Morsier’s Nat. Bill.

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

To return the Bill, intituled, “An Act for naturalizing John Alexander De Morsier;” and to acquaint this House, That they have agreed to the same without any Amendment.

Great Bowden Enclosure Bill.

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

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

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Nuthall’s Executors Bill.

The Lord Scarsdale reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act to enable William Masterman and Thomas Francis, Esquires, to make a Title to certain Leasehold and Copyhold Estates of Thomas Nuthall Esquire, deceased,” 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.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be engrossed.

Stapilton’s Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for vesting Part of the Settled Estates of Henry Stapilton Esquire, at Wighill, in the County of the City of York, in the said Henry Stapilton, in Fee-Simple; and for settling in Lieu thereof other Lands and Hereditaments of the said Henry Stapilton, lying contiguous to, and interspersed with, the Remainder of the said Settled Estates, and also the Tithes thereof, and of such Remainder, 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 Friday the 10th Day of May next, at the usual Time and Place; and to adjourn as they please.

Heywood’s Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for vesting the Settled Estates of Peter John Heywood Esquire, in the Isle of Man, called The Nunnery, in Trustees, to be sold; and for laying out the Money arising by such Sale in the Purchase of Lands and Hereditaments, in that Part of Great Britain called England, to be settled in Lieu of the said Estates in the Isle of Man, intended to be sold.”

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.

Gordons Leave for a Bill:

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of Isabel Gordon Widow, and Alexander Gordon Esquire, her eldest Son; 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 settling and securing certain Parts of the Lands and Barony of Corsemichael, called Greenlaw, and others, lying in the Stewartry of Kircudbright, to and in Favour of Isabel Gordon of Culvennan, Widow of William Gordon of Greenlaw Esquire, for her Life, and to and in Favour of Alexander Gordon of Culvennan Esquire, his eldest Son, and the same Series of Heirs in Fee Tail, and under the same Conditions and Limitations as are mentioned and contained in a Deed of Entail made in the Year One thousand seven hundred and forty-two, by John Macculloch of Barholm, and Jean Gordon his Wife; and for vesting in the aforesaid Alexander Gordon, and his Heirs and Assigns, in Fee-Simple, the Estate of Culvennan, and others lying in the County of Wigton, together with the Sum of One thousand nine hundred and seventy one Pounds Sterling.”

Person Leave for a Bill.

After reading and considering the Special Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of James Bradshaw Peirson of Stokestey, in the County of York, Esquire, on Behalf of himself and of James Bradshaw Peirson, Victorio William Peirson, and Anthony Peirson, Children of the said Petitioner James Bradshaw Peirson, all infants under the Age of Twenty-one Years; 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, and Notice to be given to James Peirson.

Hodie 1a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for vesting Part of the Estates late of Bradshaw Peirson Esquire, deceased, in the County of York, in Trustees, to be sold; and for purchasing other Estates, to be settled to the same Uses, subject to the Annuity charged thereon; and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

Ordered, That the Agent for the said Petitioner do give Notice to James Peirson of Saint Mary le Bone, in the County of Middlesex, Builder, of the said Bill having been delivered in by the Judges, and read a First Time.

D. St Albans Petition for a Bill.

The Order of the Day being read for hearing Counsel upon the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of the Most Noble George Duke of Saint Albans; praying Leave to bring in a Private Bill for the Purposes therein mentioned.

Counsel were accordingly called in;

And Mr. Hargrave appearing as Counsel for the Duke of Saint Albans, but no Counsel appearing for the Persons interested in the Limitations complained of in the Petition:

Mr. Smith, the Agent for the Duke of Saint Albans, was called in; and being sworn, acquainted the House, “That he had served Mr. Topham Beauclerk with the Order of this House for hearing Counsel upon the said Petition, and he signified his Consent to the Prayer of the said Petition to him, the Witness; and that he had also served the Right Honourable the Lord Vere, the Right Honourable and Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of Hereford, the Honourable Aubrey Beauclerk, and the Reverend Mr. Beauclerk; which Persons are interested in the Limitations complained of in the Petition of the said Duke.”

He was directed to withdraw.

Then Mr. Partington, Agent for the Testamentary Guardians of Beauclerk, an Infant, was called in; and acquainted the House, “That the said Trustees could not consent, for the Minor, to the Prayer of the said Petition, but would not oppose.”

Then Mr. Hargrave was heard for the Petitioner the Duke of St. Albans.

Then the Report of the Judges on the said Petition was read by the Clerk.

Leave for a Bill.

Ordered, That the said Petition and Report be referred back to Mr. Baron Eyre and Mr. Baron Hotham, with Leave to bring in a Bill agreeable to the Prayer of the said Petition.

Adjourn.

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

Die Veneris, 26o Aprilis 1776.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Epus. Cicestrien. Dux Cumberland. Ds. Le Despencer.
Epus. Lincoln. Comes Bathurst, Cancellarius. Ds. Clifford.
Epus. Exon. Ds. Clifton.
Epus. Cestrien. Comes Suffolk. Ds. Cathcart.
Epus. Wigorn. Comes Denbigh. Ds. Mansfield.
Epus. Bangor. Comes Doncaster. Ds. Scarsdale.
Comes Abercorn. Ds. Pelham.
Comes Galloway.
Comes Dalhousie.
Comes Rosebery.
Viscount Stormont.
Viscount Falmouth.

PRAYERS.

Ross against Mackenzie.

After hearing Counsel, in Part, in the Cause wherein John Ross of Auchnacloich is Appellant, and Murdoch Mackenzie of Ardross, Esquire, is Respondent:

It is Ordered, That the further Hearing of the said Cause be put off to Monday next; and that the Cause which stands for Monday next, be put off to Wednesday next; and that the Rest of the Causes, on Cause Days, be removed in Course.

Jellett et Ux Leave for a Bill:

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of Morgan Jellett, and Brilliana his Wife, in Behalf of themselves and their Children; 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 Two Sixth Parts of the Estates, late of Stanhope Mason Gentleman, deceased, in England and Ireland, in Trustees, to be sold; and for purchasing other Estates to be settled in Lieu thereof.”

Nuthall’s Executors Bill:

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to enable William Masterman and Thomas Francis, Enquires, to make a Title to certain Leasehold and Copyhold Estates of Thomas Nuthall Esquire, deceased.”

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. Pepys and Mr. Hett:

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

Salford Charity Bill.

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Consideration of the Bill, intituled, “An Act to enable the Trustees of certain Charity Lands belonging to the Poor of Salford, in the County Palatine of Lancaster, to grant Building Leases thereof.”

Ordered, That the said Bill may be read a Second Time.

The said Bill was read a Second Time accordingly.

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

E. Suffolk. L. Bp. Chichester. L. Le Despencer.
E. Denbigh. L. Bp. Lincoln. L. Clifford.
E. Doncaster. L. Bp. Exeter. L. Clifton.
E. Abercorn. L. Bp. Chester. L. Cathcart.
E. Galloway. L. Bp. Worcester. L. Mansfield.
E. Dalhousie. L. Bp. Bangor. L. Scarsdale.
E. Rosebery. L. Pelham.
V. Stormont.
V. Falmouth.

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Monday the 13th Day of May next, at Ten o’clock in the Forenoon, in the Prince’s Lodgings, near the House of Peers; and to adjourn as they please.

L. lrwin’s Estate Bill:

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for vesting several Estates, late of Samuel Shepheard of Exning, in the County of Suffolk, Esquire, deceased, in Trustees, to be sold; and for purchasing other Estates to be conveyed to the like Uses and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

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.

Motion for shortening the Committee on it.

The House was moved, “That the Standing Order requiring Fourteen Days Notice to be given of the Meeting of Committees upon Private Bills, may be so far dispensed with, as that the Committee, to whom the last mentioned Bill stands committed, may meet on the said Bill on an earlier Day than is appointed, in regard of the approaching Conclusion of the Session:”

It is Ordered, That the said Motion be taken into Consideration on Monday next; and the Lords summoned.

Address to His Majesty on the Birth of a Princess.

Ordered, That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty, “To congratulate His Majesty on the happy Delivery of the Queen, and the Birth of a Princess; and to assure His Majesty of the sincere Part which, with the utmost Duty and Affection, we constantly take in every Event which is attended with Increase of domestic Felicity to His Majesty, and of Security to the Liberties and Happiness of His People.”

Ordered, that the said Address be presented to His Majesty by the Lords with White Staves.

Gordon’s Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for settling and securing certain Parts of the Lands and Barony of Corsemichael, called Greenlaw, and others, lying in the Stewartry of Kircudbright, to and in Favour of Isabel Gordon of Culvennan, Widow of William Gordon of Greenlaw, Esquire, for her Life, and to and in favour of Alexander Gordon of Culvennan, Esquire, her eldest Son, and the same Series of Heirs, in Fee Tail, and under the same Conditions and Limitations as are mentioned and contained in a Deed of Entail, made in the Year One thousand seven hundred and forty-two, by John Macculloch of Barholm, and Jean Gordon his Wife; and for vesting in the aforesaid Alexander Gordon, and his Heirs and Assigns, in Fee-Simple, the Estate of Culvennan, and others. lying in the County of Wigton, together with the Sum of One thousand nine hundred and seventy one Pounds Sterling.”

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 Monday, the 13th Day of May next, at the usual Time and Place; and to adjourn as they please.

Coney Weston Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act. for dividing, allotting, and enclosing of the Common Fields, Half-year Enclosures, Heaths, Brooms, Breaches, Commons, and Waste Lands, within the Parish of Coney Weston, in the County of Suffolk.”

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 Monday next, at the usual Time and Place; and to adjourn as they please.

Walgrave Enclosure Bill:

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled,” An Act for dividing and enclosing the Open and Common Fields, Common Pastures, Common Meadows, and other Commonable Lands and Grounds, of and within the Manor and Parish of Walgrave, in the County of Northampton.”

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.

Ross against Ross, et e con.

Ordered, That the Hearing of the Cause wherein Munro Ross, of Pitcalny, Esquire, is Appellant, and John Ross, of Balnagown, Esquire, is Respondent, et e con. which stands appointed for Tuesday next, be put off to Thursday next.

Sir Charles Bunbury’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 Thomas Charles Bunbury Baronet, with the Right Honourable Lady Sarah Lenox 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 Earl of Abercorn 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.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Lunæ, vicesimum nonum diem instantis Aprilis, hora undecima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

Die Lunæ, 29o Aprilis 1776.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Archiep. Cantuar. Dux Cumberland. Ds. Willoughby Br.
Epus. Duresm. Comes Bathurst, Cancellarius. Ds. Willoughby Par.
Epus. Eliens. Ds. Paget.
Epus. Norvicen. Comes Gower,Præses. Ds. Clifton.
Epus. Cestrien. Dux Ancaster, Magnus Camerarius. Ds. Sandys.
Epus. Meneven. Ds. Bruce.
Epus. Roffen. Comes Hertford, Camerarius. Ds. Ravensworth.
Epus. Litch. & Cov. Ds. Hyde.
Epus. Bangor. Comes Denbigh. Ds. Walpole.
Comes Abercorn. Ds. Mansfield.
Comes Dalhousie. Ds. Scarsdale.
Comes Aylesford. Ds. Vernon.
Comes Effingham.
Comes Buckinghamshire.
Viscount Montague.
Viscount Say & Sele.
Viscount Stormont.
Viscount Falmouth.

PRAYERS.

Ross against Mackenzie:

After hearing Counsel as well on Friday last as this Day, upon the Petition and Appeal of John Ross, of Auchnacloich, complaining of Two Interlocutors of the Lords of Session in Scotland, of the 3d and 24th of February 1714; also of Two Interlocutors of the Lord Ordinary there, of the 24th of July and nth of December 1773; and of another Interlocutor of the said Lords, of the 21st of June 1774, so far as it adheres to the Lord Ordinary’s Interlocutor finding those of 1714 to be final, and to be held as a res judicata; and of another Interlocutor of the said Lord Ordinary, of the 2d of March 1775; and also of another Interlocutor of the said Lords, of the 26th of July last, so far as the same adheres to that of the Lord Ordinary; as also of another Interlocutor of the said Lords, of the 31st of January 1776: And praying, “That the same might be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Appellant might have such other Relief in the Premises as to this House, in their Lordships great Wisdom, should seem meet;” as also upon the Answer of Murdoch Mackenzie, of Ardross, Esquire, put in to the said Appeal, and due Consideration had of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:

Interlocutors affirmed.

It is Ordered and Adjudged by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in Parliament assembled, That the said Petition and Appeal be, and is hereby dismissed this House, and that the said several Interlocutors therein complained of, be, and the same are hereby affirmed.

L. Irwin’s Estate Bill; Committee shortened.

The House (according to Order) proceeded to take into Consideration the Motion made on Friday last, for dispensing with the Standing Order, requiring Fourteen Days Notice to be given of the Time of the Meeting of Committees, upon Private Bills, so far as that the Committee, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting several Estates late of Samuel Shepheard, of Exning in the County of Suffolk, Esquire, deceased, in Trustees, to be sold; and for purchasing other Estates, to be conveyed to the like Uses; and for other Purposes therein mentioned,” stands committed, may meet on an earlier Day than is appointed in regard of the approaching Conclusion of the Session.

And Consideration being had thereof accordingly:

Ordered, that the said Standing Order be dispensed with in this Case, and that the Committee may meet to consider the said Bill on Thursday next.

Clipston and Newbold Enclosure Bill.

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

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Open and Common Fields, Common Pastures, Common Meadows, and other Commonable Lands, within the Parish and Liberties of Clipston and Newbold, otherwise Nobald, in the County of Northampton;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Yelvertost Enclosure Bill.

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

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

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

King’s Answer to Address of Congratulation on the Birth of a Princess, reported.

The Lord Chamberlain reported, “That the Lords with White Staves had (according to Order) waited on His Majesty with their Lordships Address of Friday last of Congratulation on the joyful Occasion of the safe Delivery of the Queen, and the Birth of a Princess; and that His Majesty was pleased to receive the same very graciously; and to say, “He looked upon it as a fresh Instance of their Lordships Duty and Affection to His Person and Family.”

Message from H. C. to return Mulhausen’s Nat. Bill.

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

To return the Bill, intituled, “An Act for naturalizing Engelbert Mulhausen;” and to acquaint this House, That they have agreed to the same, without any Amendment.

Sir Charles Bunbury’s Divorce Bill:

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to dissolve the Marriage of Sir Thomas Charles Bunbury Baronet, with the Right Honourable Lady Sarah Lenox 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. Holford and Mr. Browning:

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

Trent and Mersey Navigation Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir William Bagot and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act to enable the Company of Proprietors of the Navigation from the Trent to the Mersey, to make a Navigable Canal from the said Navigation, on the South Side of Harecastle, in the County of Stafford, to Froghall, and a Rail-way from, thence to or near Caldon, in the said County; and to make other Rail-ways;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Onslow’s Bill.

The Lord Sandys reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting an Estate, in the County of Middlesex, which was settled by Richard Onslow Esquire, deceased, on his Marriage with Poolley Walton, in Trustees, in order that the fame may be conveyed to Matthew Winter, and his Heirs, pursuant to an Agreement made by him for the Purchase thereof; and for investing the Purchase Money in Three per Centum Consolidated Bank Annuities; and for other Purposes therein mentioned,” 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.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be engrossed.

Upfold’s Bill.

The Lord Sandys made the like Report from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting the Settled Estates of William Upfold Gentleman, in the County of Middlesex, and City of London, in Trustees, to be sold; and for purchasing other Lands and Hereditaments, to be settled to the same Uses,” was committed.

Ordered, that the said Bill be engrossed.

Dashwood’e Bill.

The Lord Sandys also made the like Report from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for confirming the Settlements made by Charles Vere Dashwood Esquire, in Satisfaction of certain Articles entered into by him previous to his Marriage, and during his Infancy; and for other Purposes therein mentioned,” was committed.

Ordered, that the said Bill be engrossed.

Onslow’s Bill:

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for vesting an Estate in the County of Middlesex, which was settled by Richard Onslow Esquire, deceased, on his Marriage with Poolley Walton, in Trustees, in order that the same may be conveyed to Matthew Winter, and his Heirs, pursuant to an Agreement made by him for the Purchase thereof; and for investing the Purchase Money in Three per Centum Consolidated Bank Annuities; and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

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

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Upfold’ Bill:

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for vesting the Settled Estates of William Upfold Gentleman, in the County of Middlesex, and City of London, in Trustees, to be sold; and for purchasing other Lands and Hereditaments, to be settled to the same Uses.”

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

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Dashwood’s Bill.

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for confirming the Settlements made by Charles Vere Dashwood Esquire, in Satisfaction of certain Articles entered into by him previous to his Marriage, and during his Infancy; and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

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

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Messages to H C. with the Three preceding Bills.

And Messages were, severally, sent to the House of Commons, by the former Messengers:

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

Tadcaster to Halton Dyal Road Bill.

A Message Was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir John Goodrich and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act to enlarge the Term and Powers of an Act, passed in the Twenty-fourth Year of the Reign of His Majesty King George the Second, so far as relates to repairing the Road from Tadcaster to Halton Dyal, in the West Riding of the County of York;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Glatton and Holme Drainage Bill.

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

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for draining, embanking, and preserving, certain Fen Lands and Low Grounds, called The Parts and Alderlots, in the Parishes of Glatton and Holme, in the County of Huntingdon;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

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

Dolman’s Bill; Motion to dispense with Standing Order on it.

The House being moved, “That the Standing Order, No. 126, concerning Bills for selling Lands in One Place, and buying Lands in another Place, to be settled in Lieu thereof, may be so far dispensed with, as that the Committee to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting the Settled Estates of Robert Dolman Esquire, and Robert Dolman the Younger, in Pocklington, and elsewhere, in the County of York, in Trustees, to be sold; 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;” stands committed, may proceed on the said Bill, notwithstanding the said Order should not be complied with:”

It is Ordered, That the said Motion be taken into Consideration To-morrow; and the Lords summoned.

America, Licences for exporting Provisions, &c. to, delivered.

The House being informed, “That Mr. Jackson from the Admiralty attended:”

He was called in; and delivered at the Bar, pursuant to an Address for that Purpose on the 24th of this instant April,

“Copies of all Licences granted by the Commissioners for executing the Office of Lord High Admiral of Great Britain, for exporting Provisions to America, since the passing of the Act to prohibit all Trade and Intercourse therewith.

Also, “Copies of all Licences granted for Transports, Victuallers, and Ordnance Storeships, since the Act afore-mentioned.”

And then he withdrew.

And the Title thereof being read by the Clerk:

Ordered, That the same do lie on the Table.

Clarebrough and Welhem Enclosure Bill.

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

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing certain Open Fields, Meadows, Stinted Common Pastures, Free Commons, and Waste Grounds, within the Townships of Clarebrough and Welham, in the Parish of Clarebrough, in the County of Nottingham;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Returns respecting the Poor, Bill.

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Sir Walden Hanmer and others:

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for obliging the Overseers of the Poor, within the several Parishes and Places, within that Part of Great Britain called England, to make Returns upon Oath, to certain Questions specified in the Act relative to the State of their Poor; and to authorize and require the Justices of the Peace, within their respective Divisions and Jurisdictions in the several Counties and Cities in England and Wales, to take such Returns upon Oath, and to cause them to be transmitted to the Clerk of the House of Commons;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Leigh’s Bill:

The Lord Scarsdale reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for Sale of Part of the Estates late of John Leigh Esquire, deceased, for Payment of Mortgages, and other Debts, to which the said Estates are liable; and for other Purposes therein mentioned,” 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.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be engrossed.

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for Sale of Part of the Estates late of John Leigh Esquire, deceased, for Payment of Mortgages, and other Debts, to which the said Estates are liable; 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.

Crowcombe Enclosure Bill.

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

With a Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing certain Open and uncultivated Lands and Tracts of Waste Ground, called Crowcombe, Heathfield, and Heddon, and Parcel of Quantock Hills, within the Parish of Crowcombe, in the County of Somerset;” to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

The said Bill was read the First Time.

Message from H C. to return Williams’s Divorce Bill.

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

To return the Bill, intituled, “An Act to dissolve the Marriage of Thomas Williams with Ann Lantware his, now Wife, 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, without any Amendment.

Jenkins’s Divorce Bill.

Ordered, that the Second Reading of the Bill, intituled, “An Act to dissolve the Marriage of the Reverend John Jenkins Clerk, with Mary Jenkins His now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; And for other Purposes therein mentioned,” which stands appointed for this Day, be put off to Thursday next, and the Lords summoned; and that the several Persons who were Ordered to attend as Witnesses on this Day, do then attend.

Returns respecting the Poor, Bill.

Hodie 1a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for obliging the Overseers of the Poor, within the several Parishes and Places, within that Part of Great Britain called England, to make Returns upon Oath, to certain Questions specified in the Act relative to the State of their Poor; and to authorize and require the Justices of the Peace, within their respective Divisions and Jurisdictions in the several Counties and Cities in England and Wales, to take such Returns upon Oath, and to cause them to be transmitted to the Clerk of the House of Commons.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be printed.

Deer, Stealing of, Bill.

The House (according to Order) was adjourned during Pleasure, and put into a Committee upon the Bill, intituled, “An Act more effectually to prevent The Stealing of Deer; and to repeal several former Statutes made for the like Purpose.”

After some Time the House was resumed:

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

Adjourn.

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

Die Martis, 30o Aprilis 1776.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præaelig;sentes fuerunt:

Arche. Cantuar. Comes Bathurst, Cancellarius. Ds. Willoughby Br.
Ds. Willoughby Par.
Epus. Londin. Comes Gower, Præaelig;ses. Ds. Clifton.
Epus. Norvicen. Ds. Sandys.
Epus. Lincoln. Comes Suffolk. Ds. Bruce.
Epus. Meneven. Comes Denbigh. Ds. Ravensworth.
Epus. Raffen. Comes Abercorn. Ds. Hyde.
Epus. Litch. & Cov. Comes Breadalbane. Ds. Mansfield.
Epus. Bangor. Comes Rosebery. Ds. Scarsdale.
Comes Aylesford.
Comes Waldegrave.
Comes Effingham.
Comes Spencer.
Viscount Say & Sele.
Viscount Bolingbroke.
Viscount Falmouth.

PRAYERS.

Rogers against Holled et al.

The Order of the Day being read for hearing Counsel in the Cause wherein Samuel Rogers Clerk, is Appellant, and Thomas Holled and others, are Respondents, being an Appeal from an Order of Dismission of the Appellant’s Bill of the Court of Chancery, of the 3d of February last; and for the Judges to attend:

Counsel were accordingly called in.

Mr. Solicitor General was heard for the Appellant.

The Counsel were directed to withdraw.

Ordered, That the further Hearing of the said Cause be put off till To-morrow; and that the Counsel be called in at Two o’Clock; and that the Judges do then attend.

Eyre’s Bill; the King’s Consent signified to it.

The Lord Hyde, as Chancellor of the Dutchy of Lancaster, acquainted the House, “That His Majesty having been informed of the Contents of the Bill, intituled, “An Act to discharge certain Lands heretofore Part of the Estate and Inheritance of Thomas Eyre Esquire, deceased, situate within the Lordship of High Peak, in the County of Derby, from the Payment of a certain Fee Farm Rent of One hundred Pounds a Year; and for securing the same on other Parts of the said Estate,” was pleased to consent, (as far as His Majesty’s Interest is concerned), that their Lordships may proceed therein as they mail think fit.”

Dolman’s Bill; Standing Order dispensed with.

The Order of the Day being read for taking into Consideration the Motion made Yesterday for dispensing with the Standing Order No. 126, so far as that the Committee, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting the Settled Estates of Robert Dolman Esquire, and Robert Dolman the Younger, in Pocklington, and elsewhere, in the County of York, in Trustees, to be sold; 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,” stands committed, may proceed upon the said Bill, notwithstanding the said Order should not be complied with.

And Consideration being had thereof accordingly:

Ordered, That the said Standing Order be dispensed with in this Case.

Causes, Time limited for hearing them.

Ordered, That this House will hear no more Causes this Session, After that wherein Munro Ross of Pitcalny, Esquire, is Appellant, and Captain John Lockhart Ross, and others, are Respondents, et e contra, which stands appointed for Thursday next.

D. Ancaster’e Estate Bill.

The Lord Scarsdale reported, from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting in Trustees the Settled Estate of the Moll Noble Peregrine Duke of Ancaster and Kesteven, in the County of York, to discharge Incumbrances affecting the same, and other Part of the said Settled Estates; and for purchasing of Estates, to be settled to the several Uses therein mentioned,” was committed: That they had considered the said Bill, and examined the Allegations thereof, which were sound 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 some 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.

Sir William Wake’s Estate Bill.

The Lord Scarsdale also reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for vesting the Free School House, Dwelling House for the Mailer and Usher, Close, and other Premises thereto belonging, in Courtenhall, in the County of Northampton, in Sir William Wake Baronet, and his Heirs, upon the Conditions therein mentioned,” was committed: “That they had considered the said Bill, and examined the Allegations thereof, which were sound 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 some Amendments thereto.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be re-committed to the same Committee, and that they do meet to consider the same To-morrow.

Whitfeld’s Bill.

The Lord Scarsdale reported from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act to enable John Whitfeld Esquire, to charge Part of his Settled Estates in the County of Northampton, in the Manner therein mentioned,” was committed: “That they had considered the said Bill, and examined the Allegations thereof, which were sound 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.”

Ordered, That the said Bill be engrossed.

Sir Charles Whitworth’s Estate Bill.

The Lord Scarsdale made the like Report from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for the Sale of the Estates of Sir Charles Whitworth, in the County of Somerset; and for exonerating the same, and his Estates in the County of Kent, from the Portions of his younger Children, provided by his Marriage Settlement,” was committed.

Ordered, That the said Bill be engrossed.

Walgrave Enclosure Bill.

The Lord Scarsdale also made the like Report from the Lords Committees, to whom the Bill, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Open and Common Fields, Common Pastures, Common Meadows, and other Commonable Lands and Grounds, of and within the Manor and Parish of Walgrave, in the County of Northampton,” was committed.

D. St. Albans Leave for a Bill.

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of the Most Noble George Duke of Saint Albans; 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 re-vesting Part of the Real and Personal Estates of the Most Noble George Duke of Saint Albans, in him; and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

Smith et al. Leave for a Bill:

After reading and considering the Report of the Judges, to whom was referred the Petition of John Smith an infant, 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 vesting certain Estates in the Counties of Wilts and Somerset, late belonging to John Smith Esquire, deceased, in Trustees, to be sold for Payment of his Debts; and for other Purposes therein mentioned.”

D. Ancaster’s Estate Bill:

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for vesting in Trustees the Settled Estate of the Most Noble Peregrine Duke of Ancaster and Kesteven, in the County of York, to discharge Incumbrances affecting the same, and other Part of the said Settled Estates; and for purchasing of Estates to be settled to the several Uses 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. Holford and Mr. Browning:

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

Jellett’s Bill:

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for vesting Two Sixth Parts of the Estates late of Stanhope Mason Gentleman, deceased, in England and Ireland, in Trustees, to be sold; and for purchasing other Estates to be settled in Lieu thereof.”

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

Ld. President. L. Abp. Canterbury. L. Willoughby Br.
E. Suffolk. L. Bp. London. L. Willoughby Par.
E. Denbigh. L. Bp. Norwich. L. Clifton.
E. Abercorn. L. Bp. Lincoln. L. Sandys.
E. Breadalbane. L. Bp. St. Davids. L. Bruce.
E. Rosebery. L. Bp. Rochester. L. Ravensworth.
E. Aylesford. L. Bp. Litch. & Gov. L. Hyde.
E. Waldegrave. L. Bp. Bangor. L. Mansfield.
E. Effingham. L. Scarsdale.
E. Spencer.
V. Say & Sele.
V. Bolingbroke.
V. Falmouth.

Their Lordships, or any Five of them, to meet on Wednesday the 15th Day of May next, at Ten o’Clock in the Forenoon, in the Prince’s Lodgings near the House of Peers; and to adjourn as they please.

Motion for shortening Committee on it.

The House was moved, “That the Standing Order, requiring Fourteen Days Notice to be given of the Meeting of Committees upon private Bills, may be so far dispensed with, as that the Committee, to whom the last-mentioned Bill stands committed, may meet on the said Bill, on an earlier Day than is appointed, in regard of the approaching Conclusion of the Session:”

It is Ordered, That the said Motion be taken into Consideration To-morrow; and the Lords summoned.

Deer, Stealing of, Bill:

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act more effectually to prevent the Healing of Deer; and to repeal several former Statutes made for the like Purpose.”

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

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Message to H. C that the Lord, have agreed to it.

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

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

Yelvertost Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Open and Common Fields, Common Pastures, Common Meadows, and other Commonable Lands, of and within the Parish and Liberties of Yelvertost, in the County of Northampton.”

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.

Trent and Mersey Navigation Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to enable the Company of Proprietors of the Navigation from the Trent to the Mersey, to make a navigable Canal from the said Navigation on the South Side of Harecastle, in the County of Stafford, to Froghall, and a Rail-way from thence to or near Caldon, in the said County; and to make other Rail-ways.”

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.

Ashburton Roads Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for continuing and enlarging the Terms and Powers of Two several Acts of Parliament, respecting Roads near the Borough of Ashburton, in the County of Devon.”

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.

Clipston and Newbold Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing the Open and Common Fields, Common Pastures, Common Meadows, and other Commonable Lands, within the Parish and Liberties of Clipston and Newbold otherwise Nobald, in the County of Northampton.”

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.

Tadcaster to Halton Dyal Road Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to enlarge the Term and Powers of an Act passed in the Twenty-fourth Year of the Reign of His Majesty King George the Second, so far as relates to repairing the Road from Tadcaster to Halton Dyal, in the West Riding of 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 the same Day, at the same Place; and to adjourn as they please.

Glatton and Holme Drainage Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for draining, embanking, and preserving certain Fen Lands and Low Grounds, called The Parts and Alderlots, in the Parishes of Glatton and Holme, 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.

Clarebrough and Welham Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing certain Open Fields, Meadows, Stinted Common Pastures, Free Commons, and Waste Grounds, within the Townships of Clarebrough and Welham, in the Parish of Clarebrough, 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.

Eyre’s Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act to discharge certain Lands heretofore Part of the Estate and Inheritance of Thomas Eyre Esquire, deceased, situate within the Lordship of High Peak, in the County of Derby, from the Payment of a certain Fee-Farm Rent of One hundred Pounds a Year; and for securing the same on other Parts of the said Estate.”

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 next, at the usual Time and Place; and to adjourn as they please.

Crowcombe Enclosure Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, “An Act for dividing and enclosing certain open and uncultivated. Lands and Tracts of Waste Ground, called Crowcombe, Heathfield, and Heddon, and Parcel of Quantock Hills, within the Parish of Crowcombe, in the County of Somerset.”

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.

Mercers Company, Accounts delivered.

The House being informed, “That Mr. Cawne, from the Mercers Company, attended:”

He was called in; and delivered at the Bar, pursuant to Acts of Parliament,

“The Accounts of the Wardens and Commonalty of the Mystery of Mercers of the City of London, from the 10th of October 1774, to the 10th of October 1775, directed to be laid before each House of Parliament, by Two-Acts, One of the 21st Year of the Reign of His late Majesty King George the Second, intituled, “An Act for the Relief of the Annuitants of the Wardens and Commonalty of the Mystery of Mercers of the City of London;” and the. other of the 4th Year of the Reign of His present Majesty King George the Third, intituled, “An Act for the Relief of the Bond and other Creditors of the Wardens and Commonalty of the Mystery of Mercers of the City of London.”

And then he withdrew.

And the Titles thereof being read by the Clerk:

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

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præaelig;sens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Mercurii, primum diem Maii, jam prox. sequen. hora undecima Auroræaelig;, Dominis sic decernentibus.

Footnotes

1 Sic. in Orig.
2 Sic in Originali.
3 Sic in Orig.
4 Sic.