May 1723, 1-10

DIE, Mercurii, 1^o Maii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Georgius Princeps Walliæ.

PRAYERS.

Kelly's Bill:

This Day being appointed, to proceed further on the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on George Kelly, alias Johnson:"

Kelly at the Bar.

The Prisoner was brought to the Bar, by the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod.

And the Counsel for the Bill were directed to proceed.

They then offered a Copy of a Letter, dated "22d April, 1722," directed to "Gordon le Fils, Banquier à Bologne."

Then Peter Thouvois was examined, to prove the same to be a true Copy of the Original, which was stopped at the Post-office, and copied, and sent forward as directed, and signed "Ja. Johnson;" and contained Three other Letters, all of the same Hand.

And Anthony Corbiere was examined, upon Oath, to prove the same to be truly decyphered.

And the Prisoner and his Counsel objecting to the reading the said Letters:

After hearing them, and the Counsel for the Bill, thereupon; they were all ordered to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

The Proceedings of the 26th of April last, concerning the reading the said Letters, in the Case of John Plunket, being read:

And a Question being put, "Whether the said Copies of the said Letters shall be read?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

The Counsel were called in again; and the Prisoner was brought to the Bar.

And the Lord Chancellor acquainted them with the said Resolution.

And the said Letter was read.

The Counsel for the Bill offered a Copy of a Letter, dated "20th of April, 1722," from Jones to Chivers, being One of those enclosed in the aforesaid Letter to Gordon, to be read.

And Peter Thouvois was examined, to prove the same to be a true Copy of the Original, which was stopped at the Post-office, and copied, and sent forward as directed.

And Anthony Corbiere was examined, to prove the same truly decyphered.

And the said Letter was read.

They then offered a Copy of a Letter, dated "20th April, 1722," from Illington to Musgrave, being another of the Three Letters enclosed in that to Gordon.

And John Lefebvre was examined, to prove the same to be a true Copy of the Original, which was stopped at the Post-office, and copied, and sent forward as directed.

And Anthony Corbiere was examined, to prove the same truly decyphered.

And the said Letter was read.

They then offered a Copy of a Letter, dated "20th August, 1722," to Mr. Jackson, signed "1378," being the Third Letter enclosed in the said Letter to Gordon.

Then Peter Thouvois was examined, to prove the same to be a true Copy of the Original, which was stopped at the Post-office, copied, and sent forward as directed.

And Anthony Corbiere was examined, to prove the same truly decyphered.

And the said Letter was read.

Then the Counsel for the Bill offered the Copies of several Letters, as follows; (videlicet,)

One, directed "A Mr. Waters, Banquier, pour fair tenir a Mr. Howell, à Paris;" dated "Monday, April 30th, 1722," subscribed "J. H.;" another, "To Mr. Chivers," under the Cover of Mr. Waters, at Paris, dated "Monday, May 7th, 1722," subscribed "J. J.;" another, "To Mr. Gerrard," dated "Monday, May 7th, "1722," subscribed "J. J.;" another, "To Mr. Musgrave, at Paris," under the Cover of Mr. Waters, dated "May 7th, 1722," subscribed "G. Hatfield;" another, "To Mr. Howell," under Mr. Waters's Cover, at Paris, dated "Thursday, May 10th, 1722," subscribed "J. Hatfield;" another, "To Mr. Howell,' under Cover of Mr. Waters, at Paris, dated "May 14th, 1722," supposed to be from the Person who signs Hatfield;" another, "To Mr. Gerrard," under Mr. Waters's, Cover, at Paris, dated "Monday, June 11th, 1722;" another, "To Mr. Crow," under Mr. Waters's Cover, at Paris, dated "18th June, 1722;" another, "To Mr. Dixwell;" under the Cover of Mr. Waters, at Paris, dated "Monday, June 18th, 1722,' subscribed "J. H.;" another, "A Mons'r Maisonneuve, chez Mr. Waters, Banquier at Paris," dated "Thursday, July 19, 1722;" another, "To Mons'r Maisonneuve," under a Blank Cover, "To Mr. Waters, Banquier at Paris," dated "Thursday, August 2, 1722, subscribed "D. Wilkins;" another, "To Mons'r Duplessis," under Mr. Hugh's Cover, "Banquier à Paris," dated "Monday, August 6, 1722," subscribed "Da. Wilkins;" another, "To Mons'r Maisonncuve," under a Blank Cover, "To Mr. Waters, at Paris," dated "Monday, Aug't 6, 1722," subscribed "Jo. Andrews;" another, "To Mons'r Maisonneuve," under Mr. Waters's Cover, at Paris, dated "Monday, 13 August, 1722," subscribed "Jacob Williams;" another, "To Mr. Joshua Vernon, Merchant, at Will's Coffeehouse, near Covent Gorden," dated "21 April/2 May, 1722," subscribed "Ch. Quitwell;" another, "To Anthony Saunders Esquire, at Will's Coffee-house, near Covent Garden, London," dated "24 April/5 May, 1722," subscribed Ch. Quitwell," another, "To Mr. Hatfield," under Mr. Anthony Saunders' Cover, dated "24 April/5 May, 1722," subscribed "M . . ."/"918"; another, "To James Baker Merchant, at Burton's Coffee-house, near St. James's," dated "1/12 May, 1722," subscribed "Ch. Quitwell;" another, "To Mr. James Baker Merchant, at Burton's Coffee-house, King-Street, near St. James's, 2/13 May, 1722," subscribed "Cane;" another, "To Mr. Jemison, under Cover of Mr. James Baker Merchant, at Burton's Coffee-house, near St. James's," dated "2/13 May, 1722," subscribed "Chitwood;" another, "To Mr. James Buker, at Burton's Coffee-house, in King'sStreet, near St. James's, London," written about the 2d or 3d May, O. S. subscribed "J. T.;" another, To Mr. James Baker Merchant, at Burton's Coffeehouse, in King's-Street, near St. James's," dated Wednesday, 20 May, 1722," subscribed "Ch. Quitwell," another, "To Mr. James Baker Merchant, at Burton's Coffee-house, King's-Street, near St. James's," dated "Saturday, 30th May, 1722," subscribed by the same Hand that signs "Howell" and "Quitwell;" another, "To Mr. Ireton," under Mr. Andrews's Cover, "at The Dog and Duck, in St. James's-Street, London," dated "Wednesday, 1st July, 1722," not signed, but supposed to be from the Person who often signs "Quitwell;" another, "To Mr. David Wilkins, at Will's Coffee-house, near Covent Garden, London," dated Paris, July the 8th, 1722;" another, "To Mr. Ircton," under Cover to Mr. Andrews, "at The Dog and Duck, in King's-Street, London," dated "Wednesday, 8th July, 1722," subscribed "Char. Querry;" another, "To Mr. Ireton," under Cover of Mr. Andrews, at The Dog and Duck, in King's-Street, London," dated Wednesday, July 22d, 1722," subscribed "Charles Querry;" another, "To Mr. David Wilkins, at Will's Coffee-house, near Covent Garden, London, July 28, 1722," subscribed "Charles Querry;" another, "To Mrs. Ireton, at Mr. Andrews', at The Dog and Duck in St. James's-Street, London," dated "Friday, September 14/25, 1722," subscribed "Char. Querry;" another, To Mr. David Wilkins, at Will's Coffee-house, near Covent Garden, London," dated "August 24, 1722," subscribed "Ch. Querry;" and the Translation of a Letter, directed "To Mr. Dupuy, at Sturgis's Coffee-house, in St. Martin's Court, near Leicester Fields," dated Paris, 20/31 October, 1722," and subscribed "Bonnaville;" together with a Cypher in George Kelly's Handwriting, taken amongst Captain Kelly's Papers.

And the said Copies were proved, upon Oath, to be true Copies, by the several Clerks of the Post-office who copied them.

And Edward Wills Clerk was examined, to prove the Letter, directed "A Mr. Waters Banquier, pour fair tenir à Mr. Howell à Paris," to be truly decyphered.

And Charles Delafaye Esquire was examined, to prove the Letter directed to Mr. Dupuy to be truly translated from the French.

And the said Cypher, offered to be read, was proved by John Hutchins, a Messenger, to have been taken as aforesaid.

And the said Letters and Cyphers were severally read.

And the Counsel for the Bill offered a Blank Cover, directed "To Mons'r Contade, at Slaughter's Coffeehouse in St. Martin's Lane, London:"

And also another Blank Cover, directed "A Mons'r Mons'r Lunelle, at Slaughter's Coffee-house, in St. Martin's Lane, London."

And John Lefebvre was examined, to prove that the same were stopped at the Post-office coming from France; and that there was enclosed in each of them a Declaration of the Pretender's.

And the said Directions, and One of the said Declarations, were read.

They then offered a Pocket-book; which was proved, by Daniel Chandler, to have been taken upon the Person of George Kelly.

And some Entries therein were read, to prove that the said George Kelly was the Person intended by the Names of Contade and Lunelle.

Then Andrews, Philip Chareu, and Collet, were sworn; and examined, to prove that the said George Kelly took up, perused, and paid the Postage of, several Foreign Letters, directed to the said Andrews, and to James Baker.

Then John Hutchins, a Messenger, was examined, to prove the said George Kelly's making Resistance with his drawn Sword, and using other violent Behaviour, at the Time he was apprehended.

And Alice Gardyner Widow, and John Gardyner her Son, were examined, upon Oath, to prove George Kelly's offering them considerable Sums of Money, to permit him to escape out of the Custody of the Messenger.

Then the Copy of the Record of the Attainder of Christopher Layer was produced.

And the same, being proved by Nicholas Paxton to be a true Copy, was read.

The Counsel for the Bill having gone through their Evidence:

The Prisoner and his Counsel were directed to proceed in making his Defence.

And they, desiring some further Time, were directed to withdraw.

And being withdrawn;

And the House having taken the same into Consideration:

After some Time, they were called in again; and directed to proceed, as before.

And Sir Constantine Phipps and Mr. Pratt were severally heard, in Behalf of the said George Kelly; and offered, in Evidence, the Three Papers from which the Examination of Philip Neyno before read was extracted.

And the same were severally read.

And Edw'd Bingley was sworn, and examined to the Character of Philip Neyno; and was also further examined touching Conversations between him and Neyno, relating to the Conspiracy.

Anne Ellis was sworn, and examined touching Neyno's having put a written Paper into a Drawer of George Kelly's, at his Lodgings.

The Counsel were ordered to withdraw; and the Prisoner was taken from the Bar.

Ordered, That this House will proceed further on the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on George Kelly, alias Johnson," To-morrow, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon; and that the Judges do then attend.

Kelly remanded.

Ordered, That the said George Kelly, alias Johnson, be remanded to The Tower of London; and be brought to this House again To-morrow, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon.

Ordered, That the several Persons who were ordered to attend, or be brought, this Day, do attend, and be brought to this House, To-morrow.

Bp Rochester's Bill.

Whereas To-morrow is appointed, for the Second Reading of the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester:"

It is Ordered, That the said Bill be read a Second Time on Monday next; and that Counsel be then heard, for and against the said Bill, before the said Second Reading; and the Lords to be summoned, and Judges to attend.

Bp. Rochester to be brought.

Ordered, That the Constable of The Tower of London, or, in his Absence, the Lieutenant or Deputy Lieutenant of the same, do bring Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester to this House on Monday next, at Eleven a Clock.

To the Constable of His Majesty's Tower of London, or, in his Absence, to the Lieutenant or Deputy Lieutenant of the same.

Ordered, That all the several Persons who were ordered to attend, or to be brought to this House, Tomorrow, to be examined as Witnesses upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester," do attend, and be brought, on Monday next, at Eleven a Clock.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad & in diem Jovis, secundum diem instantis Maii, hora decima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

Die Mercurii, 1^o Aprilis, 1724, hitherto examined by us,

Findlater.

Hu. Bristol.

Jo. Norwich.

De Lawarr.

DIE Jovis, 2^o Maii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Georgius Princeps Walliæ.

PRAYERS.

Lords take the Oaths.

This Day James Earl of Salisbury, Edward Lord Leigh, and Thomas Lord Middleton, came to the Table; and took the Oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration, and also took and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.

Ivie versus Gilbert et al.

The House was informed, "That John Gilbert Senior Esquire, and his Son John Gilbert Junior, and Daniel Pomerey, who, by Order of this House of the Eighteenth of March last, were required to put in their Answer or respective Answers to the Appeal of John Ivie Esquire on or before the First of April last, have neglected so to do, though duly served with the said Order for that Purpose."

And thereupon Phineas Cheek was called in; and examined upon Oath, at the Bar, touching the said Service.

And being withdrawn:

To answer peremptorily.

It is Ordered, That the said Respondents do peremptorily put in their Answer or respective Answers to the said Appeal, on or before this Day Sevennight.

Kelly's Bill:

This Day being appointed, to proceed further on the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on George Kelly, alias Johnson:"

The Counsel were called in.

Kelly at the Bar:

And the Prisoner was brought to the Bar, by the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod.

And the Counsel for the Prisoner were directed to proceed in their Evidence.

And the Counsel for the Bill acquainting the House, "That there might be Occasion for them to examine Robert Walpole Esquire, Chancellor of the Exchequer:"

Thereupon the Counsel were ordered to withdraw; and the Prisoner was taken from the Bar.

Message to H. C. for the Chancellor of Exchequer to attend about the Bill.

And a Message was sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Bennet and Mr. Godfrey:

To desire, "That they will give Leave that Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer may attend this House, in order to be examined, as a Witness upon the Bill, intituled, An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on George Kelly, alias Johnson."

Then the Counsel were called in again; and the Prisoner was brought to the Bar.

And the Counsel for the Prisoner proceeded in their Evidence.

And Mr. Dennis Kelly was called in, and sworn; and several Letters were shewed to him, which had before been proved, by the Witnesses for the Bill, to be the Handwriting of the Prisoner.

And the said Dennis Kelly was examined, in order to prove they were not the Hand-writing of the Prisoner.

Then Maurice Brown was sworn, and examined, in order to prove that several of the said produced Letters were not the Hand-writing of the Prisoner George Kelly.

Then the Counsel for the Prisoner produced the Translation of an Affidavit, said to be made by Alexander Gordon, at Boulogne, concerning the Packet of Letters said to have been directed to him, at Boulogne, by the Name of "Mons'r Gordon le Fils, Banquier à Boulogne "sur Mer," and signed "Ja. Johnson," denying the Receipt thereof; or that he had any Acquaintance with the Prisoner George Kelly, or James Talbot, as was alledged.

And George Schutz was sworn, and examined, to prove the Translation offered to be a true Translation of the said Affidavit.

And the said Translation was read.

Then the Prisoner's Counsel offered, and read, (they being admitted) a Letter directed, A Monsieur Gordon le Fils, Banquier à Boulogne sur Mer," dated "London, April 22, 1722," subscribed "Ja. Johnson;" and also an Extract of a Letter directed "To Mr. James Johnson, at Will's Coffee-house, London," dated "Boulogne, 29 April/10 May, 1722," and subscribed "Alexander Gordon."

Then Edward Crofton was sworn, and examined, to prove that James Talbot was in London, the 29th April 1722, and long before.

The Counsel for the Prisoner offered to examine Witnesses, to prove, by several Circumstances, that the Letters, dated the 20th of April, 1722, before read, were not dictated by the Bishop of Rochester to the Prisoner George Kelly.

Which being opposed by the Counsel for the Bill:

They were directed to withdraw; and the Prisoner was taken from the Bar.

After Debate;

Motion for the Prisoner's Counsel to be at Liberty to examine Witnesses, to prove some Letters were not dictated to him by the Bishop of Rochester:

A Motion was made, and the Question was put, "That the Counsel for the Prisoner may be at Liberty to proceed, as they desired, to examine Witnesses, to prove, by several Circumstances, that the Letters, dated the Twentieth of April, One Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty-two, given in Evidence for the Bill, were not dictated by the Bishop of Rochester to the Prisoner George Kelly?"

It was Resolved in the Negative.

Protest against rejecting it.

"Dissentient.

"1st, Because it was insisted on, by the Prisoner's Counsel, that the Proof desired was necessary to his Defence; and, if allowed to be made, would contribute to satisfy the House of the Prisoner's Innocence of the Crimes charged on him by the Bill; for which Reason alone, if there was no other, we think the Witnesses ought to have been examined; it being, in our Opinions, against the constant Course and Rules of Justice, in Criminal Proceedings of all Kinds, to preclude the Prisoner's Defence, by refusing to hear his Witnesses, if they are legal and competent; and in Derogation of the Honour and Justice of the House, on this Occasion, to anticipate the Judgement of the House in the least Circumstance, which the Prisoner or his Counsel insist on to be material to his Defence, and, which may, if proved, be of Weight in the Consideration and Judgement of the House.

"2dly, It appears to us to tend directly to prove the Guilt or Innocence of the Prisoner, to discover whether the Bishop of Rochester did dictate to the Prisoner the Letters mentioned in the Question; because it was declared to the House, by the Counsel for the Bill, in opening the Charge against the Prisoner, that the Letters, though wrote by the Prisoner, were dictated to him by a greater Person: And although the Counsel for the Bill, when called upon, did not think fit to name that greater Person; yet, it being suggested in the Report of the House of Commons communicated to this House, and it being universally supposed hitherto, that the Bishop of Rochester did dictate the said Letters to the Prisoner, it became, in our Opinions, incumbent on the Prisoner, to give the House what Satisfaction he could in that Particular, the same being made a Circumstance and Part of the Accusation against him; and, if falsified, or rendered incredible, might influence the Judgement of the House in other Circumstances.

"3dly, Because the Declaration of Philip Neynoe, deceased, though not signed or sworn by him, hath been allowed by the House to be read, and given in Evidence, in Proof of the particular Facts charged on the Prisoner in the Bill; in which Declaration, the Prisoner is expressly charged by the said Neynoe, to have frequently told him, "That the Bishop of Rochester held Correspondencies with the Pretender and the Pretender's Agents; and that the Prisoner was employed by the Bishop in writing for him, and carrying on the said Correspondencies; and that he had several Times left Mr. Kelly at the Bishop's Door, when Mr. Kelly went into the Bishop's House, and stayed there an Hour or Two; and upon coming back to him, that the Prisoner made Apologies for staying so long, and told him, "He had been writing the Bishop's Letters;" which he always apprehended to be the Foreign Correspondence of the Bishop with the Pretender's Agents;" for which Reason also, we conceive the Proof desired ought to have been received, because it may be thought a Denial of Justice by this House to the Prisoner, not to permit him to answer, even by legal Evidence, the particular and direct Evidence which the House hath allowed to be given against him.

"4thly, Although the Prisoner may be guilty of a treasonable Correspondence, if he wrote the Letters mentioned in the Question, and the same were not dictated to him by any Person whatsoever; yet the Facts charged in the Bill having been endeavoured to be proved, not by direct Proof of the Facts themselves, but by Circumstances; in our Opinions, the Prisoner's Defence must be applied to answer the several Circumstances: And it is, as we conceive, equally unjust, to deny him the Liberty of falsifying that Circumstance of his writing the Letters, being dictated to him by the Bishop, as it would be, to refuse to allow him to prove that the said Letters were not, or could not, be wrote or sent to the Persons to whom they are suggested or charged to have been wrote or sent, or to refuse him to prove, by Circumstances, that the Prisoner himself did not, or could not, write the same at the particular Times and Places the same are suggested to be so wrote or sent by him; or to deny him Liberty to falsify by Circumstances any other Circumstance relating to the supposed treasonable Correspondence charged on him by the Bill.

"5. The Counsel for the Bill having alledged, as One Reason against the Examinations desired, "That they were not prepared to answer that Evidence," might have been a Ground for the House to have allowed them a reasonable Time for such Preparation: But, in our Opinions, that Consideration ought not to weigh against the Prisoner's giving the Evidence to the House which he was prepared to give; especially since it was alledged, "That the Examination now desired was desired on the Prisoner's Part to have been made at the Bar of the House of Commons," and thereby so long ago publicly notified by the Prisoner.

"6thly, Because the Refusal of the Proof of any Circumstance of the Prisoner's Defence, if such Refusal be not just, must, in its Consequence, affect the Justice of this whole Proceeding against the Prisoner; because it deprives the House of the Liberty of forming a Judgement upon the whole Case, and tends, so far as that Particular goes, to subject this Proceeding against the Prisoner to the Objection of Partiality, which is most highly dishonourable to this House, especially considering the Latitude which hath been allowed in other Parts of the Examination on this Occasion.

"Arundell.
Salisbury.
Gower.
Pomfret.
Hay.
Guilford.
Poulett.
Northampton.
Strafford.
Denbigh.
Craven.
Scarsdale.
Litchfield.
Wharton.
Stawell.
Anglesey.
Cardigan.
Cowper.
Bathurst.
Trevor.
Fran. Cestriens.
Osborne. Foley.
Masham.
Compton.
Bruce.
Montjoy.
Willoughby De Broke:
Lechmere.
Brooke.
Dartmouth.
Leigh.
Bingley.
Aylesford.
Berkeley of Stratton.
Uxbridge.
Middleton.
Tadcaster.
Ashburnham.
Exeter.
Weston." 41.

Then the Counsel were called in again; and the Prisoner was brought to the Bar.

And the Lord Chancellor acquainted them with the said Resolution.

Then Margaret Kilburne was sworn, and examined' to prove where the Prisoner was, the 20th of April, 1722, and some Days before and after.

Then William Desborough, Mary Sturgis, Benjamin Marshall, and Humphry Baylie, were severally sworn, and examined touching the Prisoner's taking up Letters at different Coffee-houses, and the Directions of such Letters.

Then the Examination of W'm Sturgis, since dead, was read.

And Anne Ellis, was sworn, and Margaret Kilburne, were severally examined, in relation to the Behaviour of the Prisoner, at the Time he was apprehended by the Messenger.

And the Counsel for the Prisoner Kelly summed up the Evidence.

The House was adjourned during Pleasure.

The House was resumed.

Leave for Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer to attend.

The Messengers sent to the House of Commons return with this Answer:

That they do give Leave that Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer may appear at this House, as their Lordships do desire.

Then the Counsel were called in.

And the Prisoner was brought to the Bar, and heard in his own Defence.

And Mr. Reeves, for the Bill, was heard in Reply.

And Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer was sworn; and gave an Account of several Transactions and Conversations, that had passed between himself and Philip Neyno deceased, relating to the Conspiracy; and produced a Letter, signed "S. T." wrote by Neyno to himself, with Offers of Service to His Majesty.

Which was read.

As were also Two Advertisements in The Daily Courant and London Gazette, pursuant to the said Letter, and which were precedent to, and introduced, those Conversations.

And John Grahme was sworn, and examined to the Character of Edmund Bingley.

And informing the House, amongst other Things, "That he had been convicted at Dublin upon Two Indictments; and (fn. 1) having stood in the Pillory, pursuant to the Judgement given upon One of them:"

Mr. Baron Gilbert, being present in the House, and being asked; gave an Account of the said Proceedings, and the Conviction of the said Bingley, and Judgement against him upon Two Indictments; one for publishing a seditious Libel, and the other for Treasonable Words.

John Downer was sworn, and examined as to Discourse he had lately with Gordon, the Banker, at Boulogne, and as to Gordon's owning the Receipt of the Packet of Letters abovementioned, and his delivering them to the Person described in One of them.

Anthony Sanderson and Roger Garth were sworn, and examined, in relation to Letters put into the Hands of Roger Garth, the Twenty-ninth of March last, by a Servant of Mr. Aikenhead's, to be carried to France; and his inquiring of Mr. May, at whose House the said Aikenhead some Time lodged, as to what was become of the said Aikenhead.

The Counsel for the Bill offered to read in Evidence a Letter, dated "the Twentieth of March, 1723," directed "A Monsieur Monsieur Gordon, Banquier à Boulogne," with a Draught, enclosed in the same, of an Affidavit desired to be sworn in France, and to be sent over hither.

And the Counsel for the Prisoner objecting thereto:

They were ordered to withdraw; and the Prisoner was taken from the Bar.

After Debate;

The Question being put, "Whether the said Letter, and Draught enclosed, be read in Evidence?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

The Counsel were called in again; and the Prisoner was brought to the Bar.

And the Lord Chancellor acquainted them with the said Resolution.

And the said Letter and Draught enclosed were read.

And the Counsel for the Prisoner desiring, "That some Lords in His Majesty's Service would be pleased to give the House an Account of what Advices they had received, from any of His Majesty's Ministers in France, relating to the Prisoner's procuring a Dog at Paris, for some Person here:"

The Lord Carteret gave the House an Account, "That he had received a Letter concerning the same, from His Majesty's Minister at Paris."

And the said Letter was read.

As also an Affidavit of Michael Brimagen, relating to the same Matter.

And John Crawfurd, a Messenger, was sworn, and examined, to prove James Talbot at Paris, the 11th of May, 1722.

And a Letter from Mr. Crawford, at Paris, in relation thereto, was read; having been proved to be his Handwriting, by John Crawfurd the Messenger.

Thomas Salt was sworn, and examined, touching his employing one Collet to observe who took up Letters at Burton's Coffee-house, directed to "James Baker;" and as to his Knowledge of the Prisoner at the Bar; and as to what passed when the Prisoner was seized: And gave a full Account thereof.

Mr. Wearg was heard in Reply.

Then the Bill was read a Second Time, in the Presence of the Counsel and Prisoner.

And the Prisoner being asked, "If he had any Thing further to offer?" and answering, "He had not:"

The Counsel were ordered to withdraw; and the Prisoner was taken from the Bar.

Kelly remanded.

Ordered, That the said George Kelly, alias Johnson, be remanded to The Tower of London.

A Motion being made, "That the Bill, intituled, An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on George Kelly, alias Johnson, be read the Third Time To-morrow Morning:"

It was, upon the Question, Resolved in the Affirmative.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Veneris, tertium diem instantis Maii, hora decima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Veneris, 3^o Maii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Georgius Princeps Walliæ.

PRAYERS.

Witnesses upon Bishop Rochester's Bill:

Ordered, That John Rolles, Alexander Carroll, John Graham, and William Aldrich, be, and are hereby, required to attend this House on Monday next, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon, in order to be examined, as Witnesses upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester," before the Second Reading of the said Bill.

Ordered, That William Dickenson, Edward Stanton, W'm Edwards, Thomas Scutchin, Richard Piper, Margaret Kilburne, Anne Ellis, and George Schutz, be, and are hereby, required to attend this House on Monday next, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon, in order to be examined, as Witnesses upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester," before the Second Reading of the said Bill.

Missirg's Exchange of Lands, Bill:

A Message from the House of Commons, by Mr. Plumtre and others:

With a Bill, intituled, "An Act for confirming Articles of Agreement between the principal Officers of the Ordnance, and Thomas Missing Esquire, for Exchange of some Lands at Portsmouth, for the Service of His Majesty;" to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Then the said Bill was read the First Time.

Linlithgow Duty on Beer, Bill:

A Message from the House of Commons, by Mr. Carr and others:

With a Bill, intituled, "An Act for laying a Duty of Two Pennies Scots, or one Sixth Part of a Penny Sterling, upon every Scots Pint of Ale and Beer, brewed and sold within the Town of Linlithgow and Liberties thereof, in the County of West Lothian, for paying the Debts of the said Town; and other Purposes therein mentioned;" to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Then the said Bill was read the First Time.

Message to H. C. for Members to attend on Bp. Rochester's Bill.

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Lovibond and Mr. Lightboun:

To desire, "That they will give Leave, that Archibald Hutcheson Esquire, John Walter Esquire, and Thomas Chapman Esquire, Members of that House, may attend this House on Monday Morning next, to be examined, as Witnesses for Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester; at which Time their Lordships have appointed Counsel to be heard for and against the Bill to inflict Pains and Penalties on the said Bishop of Rochester."

Kelly, alias Johnson, Bill:

Hodie 3^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on George Kelly, alias Johnson."

Rider to it offered:

A Proviso, by Way of Rider, to be added to the said Bill, to allow the said George Kelly, alias Johnson, to depart His Majesty's Dominions, on giving Security not to return again without Licence, was offered to the House, and read.

And a Motion being made, and the Question being put, "Whether the said Rider shall be read a Second Time?"

It was Resolved in the Negative.

Protest against rejecting it:

"Dissentient.

"Osborne.
Anglesey.
Craven.
Guilford.
Middleton.
Northampton.
Stawell.
Fran. Cestriens.
Scarsdale.
Trevor.
Bathurst.
Cower.
Strafford.
Aylesford.
Salisbury.
Poulett.
Bruce.
Ashburnham.
Dartmouth.
Weston.
Masham.
Hay.
Litchfield.
Foley.
Brooke.
Exeter.
Compton.
Berkeley of Stratton.
Uxbridge.
Arundell.
Cardigan.
Montjoy.
Willoughby Br.
Bingley."

Bill passed:

Then the Question was put, "Whether the said Bill shall pass?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

Protest against it:

"Dissentient.

"1st, Because we think there is no Reason for the Legislature to pass a Law ex post Facto, to punish this Person for the treasonable Correspondence he is accused of; he being in Custody, and may be brought to a legal Trial in One of the Courts of Justice.

"2dly, We conceive the Want or Defect of such clear and plain Evidence, as by the Laws of this Kingdom is required, to convict any Person of High Treason, no sufficient Reason to warrant the Exercise of the Legislative Power, in making a new Law for his Punishment; because, such Laws being made for the Protection of innocent Persons from suffering by false, uncertain, or doubtful Evidence, every Subject is entitled to the Benefit of those Laws, when he shall fall under an Accusation of High Treason.

"3dly, Because, as we conceive, by the Rules of natural Justice, Laws ought to be first made as Directions for Men's Actions and Obedience, and Punishment inflicted for putting those Laws in Execution against Offenders; and that therefore punishing by a Law made after the Offence committed is not agreeable to Reason or Justice, except only in the Case of real and apparent Necessity, to prevent the immediate Ruin of a Government; which we do not think to be the present Case, or can bear any Resemblance to it.

"4thly, Because the Proceedings of the Legislative Power, in making Laws, can be governed by no Rule but that of their own Discretion and Pleasure; and therefore the making Laws to inflict Pains and Penalties on particular Persons must, as we conceive, tend to expose the Lives, Liberties, and Properties, of the Subjects to an arbitrary Discretion, and consequently render them precarious in the Enjoyment of those Blessings, which, by our excellent Constitution and Government, they have always had an uncontroulable Right to hold and enjoy, till forfeited for some Crime, and the Person offending legally convicted thereof upon such full and positive Proof as the Laws of this Kingdom do require.

"5thly, Because, as we conceive, it would be of dangerous Consequence to the Safety of innocent Persons, to allow Copies of Letters, taken by the Clerks of the Post-office, though sworn by them to be true Copies, to be given in Evidence against any Person accused of High Treason, especially when such Copies are not compared with the Originals after they are taken, and the Original Letters forwarded on by them, and not produced; because, the Originals not being produced, such Person is deprived of an Opportunity of falsifying those Copies; and though there should be any Mistake committed by the Clerk in copying, whether wilfully or by Negligence, such Mistake cannot be detected, for Want of the original Writings to compare the Copies with.

"6thly, Because the Proof of Letters, or other Writing, in Criminal Prosecutions, by Similitude and Comparison of Hands, being, as we conceive, a very slight and weak Evidence, because Hands may be too easily counterfeited, and the Persons examined cannot speak positively but to their Belief, and therefore not liable to be prosecuted for Perjury, hath, as we conceive, very justly been discouraged, in such Times when the Administration of Justice hath been most impartial; and Convictions of High Treason, grounded on such Evidence, have been reversed by Act of Parliament, for that and other Reasons.

"Pomfret.
Stawell.
Northampton.
Anglesey.
Fran. Cestriens.
Scarsdale.
Craven.
Strafford.
Denbigh.
Guilford.
Wharton.
Middleton.
Poulett.
Aylesford.
Dartmouth.
Bathurst.
Litchfield.
Salisbury.
Brooke.
Weston.
Gower.
Osborne.
Hay. Berkeley of Stratton.
Compton.
Bruce.
Foley.
Uxbridge.
Masham.
Trevor.
Cardigan.
Arundell.
Montjoy.
Willoughby de Broke.
Exeter.
Ashburnham.
Bingley.
Tadcaster."

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

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Lovibond and Mr. Kynaston:

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

Lord Bellew et al. Petition referred to Judges.

Upon reading the Petition of John Lord Bellew of the Kingdom of Ireland, Frances Countess of Newburgh, Gustavus Hamilton Esquire, Dorothy his Wife, and Sir Thomas Smith Baronet; praying Leave to bring in a Bill, for vesting Part of the Estate of the Petitioner John Lord Bellew in the Petitioners Gustavus Hamilton and Dorothy his Wife, and the Heirs of the said Dorothy; and for vesting another Part of the said Estate in Trustees, to be sold, for Payment of the Debts of Richard late Lord Bellew; and for other Purposes therein mentioned:

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

Doctor Coote and Godsell versus Mammon et al.

Upon reading the Petition of the Reverend Jonathan Bruce, John Mammon, Sarah his Wife, and others, Respondents to the Petition and Appeal of the Reverend Doctor Chidley Coote and James Godsell; setting forth, "That, upon hearing Counsel in the said Cause, the Twentieth of February last, their Lordships did not think sit to proceed in hearing the same upon Minutes only; but declared, that the Parties might procure the Decree to be drawn up and perfected, and then either Side might be at Liberty to apply to this House, to appoint a Day for hearing the said Cause: That the Petitioners have procured the said Decree to be drawn up and perfected accordingly;" and praying, That a Day may be appointed, for hearing thereof:"

And the House being informed, "That one George Harris attended, with a Copy of the said Decree; and desired now to prove the same to be true:"

He was called in; and, at the Bar, produced a Copy of the Decree; and attested upon Oath, "That the same was a true Copy, he having examined it with the Original in the Chief Remembrancer's Office in Ireland;" and delivered the same to the Clerk, to be by him marked.

And being withdrawn:

It is Ordered, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That this House will hear the said Cause, by Counsel, at the Bar, on Monday the Twenty-seventh Day of this Instant May, at Eleven a Clock.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Lunæ, sextum diem instantis Maii, hora decima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Lunæ, 6^o Mail.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Georgius Princeps Walliæ.

PRAYERS.

Witnesses upon Bishop of Rochester's Bill:

Ordered, That Mr. Constable, Mr. Warner, Mrs. Smith, and Captain Weakley, be, and are hereby, required to attend this House immediately, to be examined, as Witnesses upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester."

Ordered, That Corbet Kynaston, Pointz, James Davis, Mr. Francks, Mr. Duddle, and Mr. Ashley, be, and are hereby, required to attend this House immediately, to be examined, as Witnesses upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester."

Bingley to be brought.

Ordered, That Edmund Bingley be brought to this House immediately, to be examined, as a Witness upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester."

Gayer versus Gayer.

The Answer of Thomas Gayer, James Gayer, and Edward Gayer, Esquires, Three of the Respondents to the Petition and Appeal of Robert Gayer Esquire and Robert Gayer Junior Esquire, was this Day brought in.

Bishop of London takes the Oaths.

This Day Edmund Lord Bishop of London took the Oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration, and also took and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.

Harcourt's Bill.

The Lord Delawar reported from the Lords Committees to whom the Bill, intituled, "An Act for vesting Part of the Estate of Sir Richard Anderson Baronet, deceased, in Trustees, to be sold, for the Payment of his Debts; and for other Purposes therein mentioned," was committed: "That they had considered the said Bill, and found the Allegations thereof to be true; that the Parties concerned had given their Consents; and that the Committee had gone through the Bill, and made some Amendments thereunto."

Which were read Twice, and agreed to.

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

Missing's Exchange of Lands, Bill.

Hodie 2^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for confirming Articles of Agreement between the principal Officers of the Ordnance and Thomas Missing Esquire, for Exchange of some Lands at Portsmouth, for the Service of His Majesty."

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

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

Linlithgow, Duty on Beer, Bill.

Hodie 2^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for laying a Duty of Two Pennies Scots, or One Sixth Part of a Penny Sterling, upon every Scots Pint of Ale and Beer, brewed and sold within the Town of Linlithgow, and Liberties thereof, in the County of West Lothian, for paying the Debts of the said Town; and other Purposes therein mentioned."

Ordered, That the said Bill be committed to the Consideration of the Lords Committees beforenamed; to meet likewise on Thursday next.

Members of H. C. Leave to attend about the Bishop of Rochester's Bill.

The Messengers sent on Friday last, to the House of Commons, to desire "That Archibald Hutcheson Esquire, John Walter Esquire, and Thomas Chapman Esquire, Members of that House, may attend this House, to be examined, as Witnesses for Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester, before the Second Reading of the Bill to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester," return Answer: "That the Commons do give Leave that the said Members may attend this House, as desired."

The House was adjourned during Pleasure.

The House was resumed.

Bishop Rochester's Bill.

The Order of the Day being read, for hearing Counsel and Witnesses, upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester;" and for reading the said Bill a Second Time:

After Debate;

The Bishop of Rochester was brought to the Bar, by the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod.

And the Counsel were called in.

And Mr. Reeves and Mr. Wearg having opened the Nature of the Bill, and the Evidence to prove the Allegations in the Preamble thereof:

They then offered an Extract of a Letter from Sir Luke Schaub to Lord Carteret, dated "Paris, 30th April 1722, N. S." and a Translation of a Paper enclosed in Sir Luke Schaub's Letter to Lord Carteret, to prove the Conspiracy in general, alledged in the First Part of the Preamble of the Bill.

And the Bishop of Rochester and his Counsel objecting to the reading the said Extract, or any Extracts of Letters whatsoever:

The Counsel and Bishop were ordered to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

A Motion was made, "That the Counsel and Bishop should be again called in; and that the Bishop be asked, whether he did insist that the Extract of the Letter from Sir Luke Schaub, and the enclosed Advice, should not be read? and if so, that he would state his Objection or Objections thereunto."

And the Counsel and Bishop were called in accordingly.

And the Lord Chancellor acquainted them therewith; and "that he and his Counsel were at Liberty to argue any Objection he should state to the said Extract."

And the Bishop and his Counsel were heard thereupon.

And they were ordered to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

The Resolution of this House, of the Twenty-sixth of April last, in the Case of John Plunket, relating to the reading of Extracts of Letters to prove the Conspiracy in general, was read.

A Motion was made,

And the Question was put, "That the Extract, offered by the Counsel for the Bill, of the Letter from Sir Luke Schaub to the Lord Carteret, be read in Evidence?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

Advice enclosed in a Letter to Lord Carteret to be read:

Then a Motion was made,

And the Question was put, "Whether the Advice enclosed in the said Letter from Sir Luke Schaub be read, though this House be not acquainted with the Name of the Person who gave that Advice?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

Protest against it.

"Dissentient.

"Strafford.
Craven.
Salisbury.
Osborne.
Northampton.
Scarsdale.
Aylesford.
Gower.
Poulett.
Fran. Cestriens.
Masham.
Anglesey.
Cowper.
Brooke.
Litchfield.
Bruce. Denbigh.
Guilford.
Dartmouth.
Trevor.
Foley.
Exeter.
Montjoy.
Willoughby De Broke.
Weston.
Cardigan.
Compton.
Bingley.
Ashburnham.
Berkeley of Stratton."

The Counsel and Bishop were again called in, and acquainted with the said Resolutions.

Then Charles Delafaye Esquire was examined, upon Oath, to prove the said Extracts to be truly translated; and also the Translations of the several Letters, or Parts of Letters, videlicet, An Extract of a Letter from Rome, dated "4 May, 1722, N. S." An Extract of a Letter from Sir Luke Schaub to Lord Carteret, dated "Paris, 29 April/10 May, 1722." A Letter from Mr. Crawford to Lord Carteret, dated "Paris, May 27, 1722, N. S." An Extract of a Letter from Mr. Crawford to Lord Carteret, "Paris, June 7, 1722, N. S." Extract of a Letter from Colonel Stanhope to Lord Carteret, dated "At Madrid, June 8, 1722, N. S." A Letter from Mr. Stanhope to the Marquis of Grimaldo, "Madrid, June 6, 1722."

And the Translations of the said several Letters and Extracts of Letters were read.

Then Anthony Corbiere was examined, upon Oath, to prove the Translation of the Marquis de Grimaldo's Letter to Colonel Stanhope, dated "Balsain, 7 June, 1722," written in Spanish.

And the said Translation was read.

Then the Counsel for the Bill offered in Evidence, for further Proof of the Conspiracy in general, a Scheme, said to be Layer's Scheme.

Hadley Doyley was examined, upon Oath, to prove the said Scheme to be of the Hand-writing of Christopher Layer.

And the same was read.

Then Samuel Mayo was examined, upon Oath, to prove that the Ship Phincas of Bristol was hired to go to Lisbon, under the Direction of Captain Charles Halstead, who went by the Name of Roger Nowell; but went directly to Bilboa, with the said Halstead.

And Enoch Mottram was examined, upon Oath, to prove that, after Halstead's Return from Bilboa, he shewed the said Halstead to the said Samuel Mayo, (who, Mayo declared,) was the Person that went to Bilboa, in the Ship Phineas, by the Name of Nowell.

Then the Counsel for the Bill offered in Evidence the Copy of a Letter, directed "To Mr. Dumville, an Attorney," enclosed in a Letter, directed "To Mr. Thomas Wilmore, at Mr. Stokoe's, a Bookseller, at Charing Cross, April 27;" with the enclosed, being a Copy of O—'s Letter to L—, dated "April 27.'

And the Bishop and his Counsel objecting to the reading the said Letters, Part of them being written in Cypher, and the Decyphering interlined:

They were directed to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

A Motion was made, "That the Letters written in Cypher, and sworn by Two Decypherers to be truly decyphered, may be read."

And a Question being stated thereupon:

These Words were proposed to be added; videlicet, ["without giving the Prisoner an Opportunity to make Proof, of his Part, how they ought to be decyphered]".

The Question was put, "Whether those Words shall be made Part of the Question?"

It was Resolved in the Negative.

Then the Question was put, "Whether the Letters written in Cypher, and sworn by Two Decypherers to be truly decyphered, shall be now read?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

And the Bishop and Counsel were called in again, and acquainted with the said Resolution.

Then Peter Thouvois was examined, upon Oath, to prove the said Letters to be true Copies of the Originals, which were stopped at the Post-office, and copied, and sent forward as directed.

And Edw'd Willes Clerk was sworn, and examined, to prove the said Letters truly decyphered.

And admitting upon his Examination, "that he did use a Key in decyphering the said Letters:"

And the Bishop of Rochester insisting, "that the said Mr. Willes should produce the same:"

And the said Mr. Willes submitting it to the House, whether he should be obliged so to do:

The Counsel and Bishop were ordered to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

Motion for the Decypheret to produce lus Key:

A Motion was made,

And the Question was put, "That Edward Willes be obliged to produce his Key of the Cypher?"

It was Resolved in the Negative.

Protest against rejecting it.

"Dissentient.

"Northampton.
Salisbury.
Strafford.
Scarsdale.
Fran. Cestriens.
Poulett.
Cowper.
Cardigan.
Bruce.
Wharton.
Brooke.
Aylesford.
Trevor.
Guilford.
Gower.
Oxford & Mortimer.
Masham.
Foley.
Anglesey.
Litchfield.
Exeter.
Dartmouth.
Montjoy.
Osborne.
Berkeley of Stratton.
Weston.
Willouhby de Broke.
Bingley.
Compton.
Denbigh.
Ashburnham.
Craven."

Then the Counsel and Bishop were called in, and acquainted with the said Resolution.

Then the said Letters were read.

Then the Counsel and Bishop of Rochester were ordered to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

It is Ordered, That this House will, To-morrow, at Eleven a Clock, proceed to hear Counsel and Winesses further, upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester."

Bishop of Rochester remanded:

Ordered, That the Bishop of Rochester be remanded to The Tower of London; and be brought again to this House To-morrow, at Eleven a Clock.

Witnesses to attend.

Ordered, That the several Persons who were ordered to attend, or to be brought to the House this Day, to be examined, as Witnesses upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester," do attend, and be brought to this House, To-morrow, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Martis, septimum diem instantis Maii, hora decima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Martis, 7^o Maii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Georgius Princeps Walliæ.

PRAYERS.

Harcourt's Bill:

Hodie 3^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for vesting Part of the Estate of Sir Rich'd Anderson Baronet, deceased, in Trustees, to be sold, for the Payment of his Debts; 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. Edwards and Mr. Bennet:

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

Bishop Rochester's Bill.

The Order of the Day being read, for hearing Counsel and Witnesses further, as well for as against the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester;" and for reading the said Bill a Second Time:

The Counsel were called in; and the Bishop was brought to the Bar.

And the Counsel for the Bill offered in Evidence the Examination of Philip Neyno, since deceased, before some of the Lords of the Council.

And an Objection being made to the reading thereof; and some Proofs being heard concerning the same:

The Bishop asked, "Whether Inquiry was made of Neyno, or if he gave any Satisfaction to the Lords of the Council, touching the Fact alledged in the said Examination, That Mr. Henry Watson, who he, Neyno, supposes to have been the Earl Mareschall, was in England all the Spring before; and that he lay with him several Nights."

And insisting, "that he should have Liberty to ask the said Question, before the reading the said Examination:"

And the Bishop's Counsel being heard thereto:

They were ordered to withdraw, and the Bishop to be taken from the Bar.

And being withdrawn:

After Debate;

The Question was put, "Whether the Bishop of Rochester be at Liberty to ask the said Question, before the reading the Examination of Philip Neyno?"

It was Resolved in the Negative.

Then the Counsel were called in again.

And the Bishop was brought to the Bar, and acquainted with the said Resolution.

And the Counsel for the Bill desiring "that the Examination of Philip Neyno might be read:"

And the same being opposed by the Bishop and his Counsel:

They were ordered to withdraw.

But, before they were withdrawn, the Counsel for the Bill acquainting the House, "That they should have Occasion to examine Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer upon this Bill:"

And then the Counsel and Bishop being withdrawn:

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Bennet and Mr. Edwards:

To desire, "That they will give Leave, that Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer may attend this House, in order to be examined, as a Witness upon the Bill to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester."

After long Debate;

The Question was put, "Whether the Examination of Philip Neyno, since deceased, shall be read?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

The Messengers sent to the House of Commons return Answer:

That they do give Leave that Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer may appear at this House, as their Lordships do desire.

The Counsel were called in; and the Bishop was brought to the Bar, and acquainted with their Lordships Resolution concerning the reading of Neyno's Examination.

And the same was read accordingly.

Then a Cypher in the Hand-writing of John Plunket was offered; and Charles Van Reidegg was examined, upon Oath, to prove it to be the said Plunket's Hand.

And Robert Clarke was examined, upon Oath, to prove the Copy of a Letter directed to Digby, dated "the 21st of May, 1722," under Cover, "To Mr. Waters, Banker at Paris," subscribed "J. Rogers," to be a true Copy of the Original, which was stopped at the Post-office, copied, and sent forward as directed.

And Peter Thouvois was examined, to prove the Copy of a Letter directed to Digby, dated "May 31st, 1722," under Cover, "To Mr. Arthur, Banker at Paris," subscribed "J. Rogers," to be a true Copy of the Original, which was stopped at the Post-office, copied, and sent forward as directed.

Then the said Cypher and Letters were read.

John Lefebure was examined, upon Oath, to prove the Copy of a Letter directed to Digby, dated "July the 4th, 1722," under Cover, "To Mr. Waters at Paris," subscribed "J. Rogers," to be a true Copy of the Original, which was stopped at the Post-office, copied, and sent forward as directed.

John Hutchins was examined, upon Oath, to prove the Hand-writing of George Kelly, as to a Letter offered in Evidence.

And John Malone was likewise examined, upon Oath, to prove George Kelly's Hand, as toanother Letter.

Peter Thouvois was examined, touching the Copies of Three Letters stopped at the Post-office; the First, directed to Chivers, dated "April 20th, 1722," subscribed "T. Jones;" the Second, to Musgrave, dated "April 20, 1722," under Cover, "To Mr. Gordon the Son, Banker at Boulogne," subscribed "T. Illington;" the Third, to Mr. Jackson, under the Cover of "Mr. Gordon le Fils, Banquier à Boulogne sur Mer," dated "April 20, 1722," and subscribed "R;" which were copied, and sent forward as directed: And attested the same were true Copies, except such Words as were wrote over the Figures.

And being asked, "If he had an Order to stop and open those particular Letters, or a general Order to open all Letters in such a Hand?"

And the Clauses concerning opening of Letters, in the Act 9^o Annæ Reginæ, intituled, "An Act for establishing a General Post-office for all Her Majesty's Dominions," being read:

The Bishop asked the said Mr. Thouvois, "If he had any express Warrant, under the Hand of One of the Principal Secretaries of State, for opening the said Letters?"

And the Bishop insisting upon an Answer to his said Question:

The Counsel and Bishop were directed to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

After Debate;

This Question was stated, "That it is the Opinion of this House, That it is inconsistent with the public Safety, as well as unnecessary for the Prisoner's Defence, to suffer any further Inquiry to be made, upon this Occasion, into the Warrants which have been granted by the Secretaries of State, for the stopping and opening Letters which should come or go by the Post, or into the Methods that have been taken by the proper Officers at the Post-office in Obedience to such Warrants."

And it being moved, "To leave out these Words ["as well as unnecessary for the Prisoner's Defence"]:

After Debate;

The Question was put, "Whether those Words shall stand Part of the Question?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

Resolution, that it is inconsident with the public Safety, for further Inquiry to be made about Warrants for opening Letters at the Post-office:

Then the Question was put, "That it is the Opinion of this House, That it is inconsistent with the public Safety, as well as unnecessary for the Prisoner's Defence, to suffer any further Inquiry to be made, upon this Occasion, into the Warrants which have been granted by the Secretaries of State, for the stopping and opening of Letters which should come or go by the Post, or into the Methods that have been taken, by the proper Officers at the Post-office in Obedience to such Warrants?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

Protest against it.

"Dissentient.

"1st, We humbly apprehend that, in all criminal Prosecutions, the cross-examining of Witnesses is necessary, for the Defence of the Prisoner, and for the Satisfaction of those who are to judge of the Facts alledged against him, in order to the discovering of Truth, and detecting any fraudulent Evidence which should be offered; and the Resolution above recited does, in our Opinions, debar the Bishop of Rochester, and every other Person concerned, from asking any Questions of the Clerks of the Post-office, who are brought as Witnesses to the Bar, relating to the stopping and opening of Post Letters, though Letters pretended to be stopped and opened at the Post-office are read as Evidence against the Prisoner; and we conceive that the preventing any further Inquiry on these Heads must lay this House under great Difficulties, when they come to form a Judgement on those Letters, the Validity of which will in a great Measure depend on the Proof given of their having been truly stopped and opened, as asserted.

"2dly, We apprehend it to be impossible for this House to determine that the Inquiry which is desired is unnecessary to the Defence of the Prisoner, till he shall come to make the Application; and we conceive he should have the Liberty of asking what Questions he or his Counsel think proper, of the Clerks of the Post-office, relating to the stopping and opening of Letters, without acquainting the House what Use he intends to make of their Answers: And this appears to us to be highly reasonable, essential to Justice, and warranted by the Methods which this House has hitherto allowed the Counsel for the Support of the Bill to proceed in, who have, during the whole Course of this Examination, reserved the Application of the Evidence they have offered, till they should judge convenient to make it.

"Scarsdale.
Northampton.
Poulett.
Anglesey.
Foley.
Craven.
Bathurst.
Ashburnham.
Masham.
Litchfield.
Bruce.
Uxbridge.
Exeter.
Compton.
Gower.
Brooke.
Bingley.
Hay.
Montjoy.
Aylesford.
Cardigan.
Osborne.
Fran. Cestriens.
Pomfret.
Trevor.
Weston.
Strafford.
Wharton.
Willoughby de Broke.
Denbigh."

The Counsel were called in; and the Bishop was brought to the Bar, and acquainted with the said Resolution.

Robert Clarke was examined, to prove the Copy of the said Letter, dated "20 April, 1722," subscribed "T. Illington," to be a true Copy, and the Original forwarded.

And Edward Willes Clerk was examined, upon Oath, to prove the true Decyphering of Three Letters, dated "the 20 April, 1722," subscribed "T. Jones," "T. Illington," and "R—."

And being asked by the Bishop, "Whether it is possible to declare certainly, that any Number stands for a Name beginning with any particular Letter, unless the immediate preceding and immediate subsequent Number appears to denote a Name, or Words, beginning with the same Letter:"

And expressing an Unwillingness to answer thereunto; declaring, "That it would tend to the Discovery of his Art, and to instruct ill-designing Men to contrive more difficult Cyphers:"

The Counsel and Bishop were ordered to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

After some Debate;

The Question was put, "Whether the said Question asked of Mr. Willes by the Bishop should be again put to him?"

It was Resolved in the Negative.

The Counsel were called in again; and the Bishop was brought to the Bar, and acquainted with the said Resolution.

And the Bishop persisting to put several Questions to Mr. Willes, relating to the Method and Manner of Decyphering:

The Counsel were ordered to withdraw, and the Bishop to be taken from the Bar.

Which being done accordingly:

It was proposed, "That the House should come to this Resolution, That it is the Opinion of this House, that it is not consistent with the public Safety, to ask the Decypherers any Questions, which may tend to discover the Art or Mystery of Decyphering."

And a Question being thereupon put;

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

The Counsel were called in again.

And the Bishop was brought to the Bar, and acquainted with the said Resolution.

And the Counsel for the Bill offering the said Letters to be read:

And the Counsel against the Bill objecting thereto, unless it were fully proved that the Bishop was privy, or consenting to, or directed, the writing of them by George Kelly:

And the Counsel for the Bill alledging, "That they now offered them to prove the Conspiracy in general, and would afterwards apply them to the Bishop by other Evidence:"

The Counsel and Bishop were ordered to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

After Debate;

It was Resolved, upon the Question, That the said Letters be now read.

The Counsel and Bishop were called in again, and acquainted with the said Resolution.

Then the said Letters were read; and also a Letter, directed to "Gordon le Fils," dated "London, 22d April, 1722," subscribed "Ja Johnson."

The Counsel and Bishop were ordered to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

It is Ordered, That this House will, To-morrow at Ten a Clock, proceed to hear Counsel and Witnesses further, upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester."

Bishop of Rochester remanded.

Ordered, That the Lord Bishop of Rochester be remanded to The Tower of London; and be brought to this House To-morrow, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon.

Witnesses to attend again.

Ordered, That the several Persons who were ordered to attend, or be brought to this House, this Day, to be examined, as Witnesses upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester," do attend, and be brought to this House, To-morrow, at Ten a Clock.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Mercurii, octavum diem instantis Maii, hora nona Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Mercurii, 8^o Maii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Georgius Princeps Walliæ.

PRAYERS.

Ivie versus Gilbert.

This Day the Answer of John Gilbert Senior Esquire, and John Gilbert Junior his Son, an Infant, by the said John Gilbert Senior his Father and Guardian, to the Appeal of John Ivie Esquire, was brought in.

Lord Lovat versus Mackenzie.

Whereas this Day was appointed, for hearing the Cause wherein Simon Lord Lovat is Appellant, and Hugh Mackenzie is Respondent:

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause, by Counsel, at the Bar, on Saturday the Eighteenth Day of this Instant May, at Eleven a Clock.

Bishop of Rochester's Bill:

This Day being appointed, to hear Counsel further upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester:"

The Bishop at the Bar.

The Counsel were called in; and the Bishop was brought to the Bar.

The Counsel for the Bill proceeded in their Evidence; and offered a Cypher, in George Kelly's Handwriting, taken amongst Captain Kelly's Papers.

And Valentine Randall was sworn, and examined, to prove the same taken out of the Scrutore of the said Captain Kelly, by the Witness, with a Key given him by the said Kelly for that Purpose.

And John Hutchins was examined, to prove the same to be the Hand-writing of the said Kelly.

And Edward Willes Clerk was examined, to prove that the Cypher aforesaid was Part of the Cypher in which the Letters, one, directed "To Mr. Chivers," dated "April 20, 1722," subscribed "T. Jones;" another, "To Musgrave," dated "April 20, 1722," subscribed "T. Illington;" another, "To Mr. Jackson," dated "April 20, 1722," subscribed "R —;" and also a Letter to Dumville, dated "April 27," with the Letter enclosed, from O— to L—, were written.

And John Lesebvre was examined, to prove the Copies of Three Letters; the First, directed "To Mr. Hatfield," under Mr. Saunders' Cover, dated "24April/5 May, 1722," subscribed "M. . .;" "918" the Second, "A Mr. Waters Banquier, pour faire tenir à Mr. Howell, à Paris," dated "April 30th, 1722," subscribed "J. H.;" and the Third, "To Mr. Gerrard," under Mr. Waters's Cover, at Paris, dated "June 11th, 1722," to be true Copies of the Originals, which were stopped at the Postoffice, copied, and sent forward as directed.

And the same were severally read.

And Robert Clarke was examined, to prove the Copy of the Letter directed "To James Baker Merchant, at Burton's Coffee-house, near St. James's," dated "1/12 May, 1722," subscribed "Ch. Quitwell," to be a true Copy of the Original, which himself copied at the Postoffice, and the Original was sent forward as directed.

And the said Copy was read; as also the Copy of a Letter, directed "To Mr. James Baker Merchant, at Burton's Coffee-house, Kingstreet, near St. James's," dated "1/12 May, 1722," subscribed "Cane," which was proved by the said Clarke to be a true Copy, copied at the Post-office, and sent forward as directed.

And Peter Thouvois was examined, to prove the Copies of several Letters; videlicet, One, directed "To Mr. Chivers," under the Cover of Mr. Waters, at Paris, dated "May 7th, 1722," subscribed "J. J.;" another, "To Mr. Baker, Merchant at Burton's Coffeehouse, in King's-Street, near St. James's," dated "20 May, 1722," subscribed "Ch. Quitwell;" another, To Mr. Howell," under Cover of Mr. Waters, at Paris, dated "14th May, 1722," subscribed "G. H.;" another, "A Monsieur Maisonneuve, chez Mr. Waters, Banquier à Paris," dated "July 19, 1722;" another, A Mons. Duplessis," under Cover, "To Mr. Hughes, Banquier à Paris," dated "August 30, 1722." subscribed "J. W." to be true Copies of the Originals, which were stopped at the Post-office, copied, and sent forward as directed.

And Robert Clarke was examined, to prove the Copies of several Letters; videlicet, One, directed "To Mr. Musgrave, at Paris," under the Cover of Mr. Waters, dated "May 7, 1722," subscribed "G. Hatfield;" another, "To Mr. Howell," under Mr. Waters's Cover, at Paris, dated "May 10th, 1722," subscribed "J. Hatfield;" another, "To Mr. Illington," enclosed in Quitwell's, of May 27, dat. "May 11/22, 1722," subscribed "Jo. Motfield;" another, "To Mr. Dixwell," under Cover of Mr. Waters, at Paris, dated "June 18, 1722," subscribed "J. H;" another, To Monsieur Maisonneuve, at Paris," dated "July 26, 1722;" and another, "To Mrs. Ireion, at Mr. Andrews, at The Dog and Duck, in St. James's-Street, London," dated "September 11/25, 1722," subscribed Char. Query," to be true Copies of the Originals, which were stopped at the Post-office, copied, and sent forward as directed.

And the said several Copies were read.

And Daniel Chandler was sworn, and examined, to prove a Paper of Directions, taken out of George Kelly's Pocket, May 19, 1722, when he was apprehended.

And the said Paper was read.

And John Collet and Mathew Andrews were sworn, and examined, to prove Letters to have been taken up by George Kelly, and by the said Andrews by his Order, at Burton's Coffee-house, and elsewhere, which were directed to the said Andrews and to Baker.

And William Wood, Coachman to the Bishop of Rochester, was sworn, and examined touching several Entries made by him in a Book he had kept for that Purpose, of the Times the Bishop went to London, or to Bromley; and touching his Knowledge of George Kelly, alias Johnson; as also to the Time of the Death of the Bishop's Lady; and as to what Company were used to resort to Bromley, before or after her Decease; and to his Knowledge of Captain Halstead.

And the Bishop of Rochester desiring of the House, That he might have Copies of the Three decyphered Letters; the First, directed to Chivers, dated "April 20th, 1722," subscribed "T. Jones;" the Second, to Musgrave, dated "April 20, 1722," under Cover "To Mr. Gordon the Son, Banker at Boulogne," subscribed "T. Illington;" the Third, to Mr. Jackson, under the Cover of "Mr. Gordon le Fils, Banquier, à Boulogne sur Mer," dated "April 20th, 1722," subscribed "R—;" in order to see if they were truly decyphered:"

The Counsel were ordered to withdraw; and the Bishop was taken from the Bar.

Then it was Ordered, That the Bishop of Rochester have Copies of the Three decyphered Letters, with the Decyphering interlined, to be delivered to him forthwith; and that the said Copies be made by One of the Clerks of this House, in the Presence of the Solicitor for the Bill, and under the Inspection of One of the Decypherers.

Then the Counsel and Bishop were called in again; and acquainted therewith.

And Jane Barnes was sworn, and examined, as to the Time of George Kelly alias Johnson's coming to lodge at her House; and his Departure, or Absence, from thence; and as to the said George Kelly's bringing a Dog, called Harlequin, to her House, as from France, for the Bishop of Rochester; and the said Dog's having a Leg broke in his Passage.

And Dorothy Hay and John Malore were sworn, and examined, to prove that Geo Kelly, alias Johnson, did not lie at Mrs. Barnes's the 12th and 13th of April, 1722.

John Flower and George Martin, Two Chairmen, were severally sworn, and examined touching their having carried the said George Kelly, alias Johnson, to the Bishop of Rochester's, at the Deanery in Wesminster.

And Francis Vanlear, a Porter, was sworn, and examined touching his having carried Messages and Letters from Geo. Kelly, alias Johnson, to the Bishop of Rochester.

Margaret Kilburne was examined, upon Oath, touching the Time when George Kelly, alias Johnson, came to lodge at her House; and what Messages were sent from the Bishop of Rochester and others; and what Persons resorted to him there.

Then the Counsel for the Bill offered in Evidence Two Letters; One, directed "To the Bishop of Rochester," dated "January 14th, 172½," subscribed M. Ormond;" the other dated "At Roucn, January 15th, 1722," Subscription torn off; which were severally proved, by Charles Delafay Esquire and Randall a Messenger, to have been seized in the Bishop of Rochester's Bedchamber, or Closet, the 24th of August last.

And the Bishop owned the Letter directed to him, subscribed "M. Ormond," to have been so taken.

And the said Letters were read.

And Two Letters; the One, directed "To—," dated "Greenwich, Wednesday, 4 a Clock," subscribed C. Halstead;" the other, "To Lord —," dated Greenwich, Wednesday, 4 a'Clock," subscribed "C. Halsted," being offered in Evidence by the Counsel for the Bill:

They were admitted by the Bishop to be taken in his Lodgings.

And the same were read.

John Leadwell, of Greenwich, Coachman, was sworn, and examined, to prove his bringing Captain Halstead to the Bishop of Rochester's Lodgings, in March last was Twelvemonth.

Then the Counsel for the Bill offered in Evidence a Letter, superscribed "To Mr. Du Bors," dated "December 16:" And the same was proved, by Mr. Delafaye, to have been taken in the Bishop's Bedchamber, or in a Closet adjoining, in the Deanery at Westminster; and then marked by the Bishop himself, and the said Charles Delafaye, and the Messenger.

And also a Letter of the Bishop of Rochester's, seized 26 February, 1722/23, dated "Monday Night," which was proved, by the same Witness, to have been seized upon One of the Bishop's Servants at The Tower.

And the Bishop, at the Bar, owned the said last Letter to be his Hand-writing.

Then the Counsel for the Bill observing to the House, "That the Impressions on the Seals of the said Two Letters appeared as made with the same Seal:"

The said Seals were compared.

And Charles Christian and John Rolles, Engravers, were sworn, and examined thereunto.

And the said Letters were read.

Then a Copy of the Record of the Attainder of Christopher Layer was offered.

And the same, being proved by Nicholas Paxton to be a true Copy, was read.

And the Counsel for the Bill declaring, "That they had gone through their Evidence:"

And the Bishop, to whose Election it was left, choosing not to begin his Defence at this Time:

The Counsel were ordered to withdraw; and the Bishop to be taken from the Bar.

Ordered, That this House will, To-morrow, proceed further on the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester."

Bishop of Rochester remanded:

Ordered, That the Bishop of Rochester be remanded to The Tower of London; and be brought Tomorrow, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon.

Witnesses to attend again.

Ordered, That the several Persons who were ordered to attend, or to be brought to this House, this Day, to be examined, as Witnesses upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester," do attend, and be brought to this House, To-morrow, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Jovis, nonum diem instantis Maii, hora nona Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Jovis, 9^o Maii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Georgius Princeps Walliæ.

PRAYERS.

Gayer versus E. of Anglesey & al.

This Day the Answer of the Right Honourable Arthur Earl of Anglesey, One of the Respondents to the Petition and Appeal of Robert Gayer Esquire and Robert Gayer Junior Esquire, was brought in.

Macartney & al. versus Arundell & al.:

Whereas To-morrow is appointed, for hearing the Cause wherein James Macartney Senior Esquire and others are Appellants, and Richard Arundell, alias Bellings, Esquire, and others, are Respondents; et è contra:

Causes put off.

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause, by Counsel, at the Bar, on Wednesday the Fifteenth Day of this Instant May; and that the other Causes be removed in Course.

Ivie versus Gilbert.

The House being moved, on the Behalf of John Ivie Esquire, Appellant in a Cause depending in this House, to which John Gilbert Senior Esquire and John Gilbert Junior his Son an Infant, by the said John Gilbert Senior his Father and Guardian, and Damel Pomeroy, are Respondents: "That a Day may be appointed, for hearing thereof:"

It is Ordered, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That this House will hear the said Cause, by Counsel, at the Bar, on Thursday the Three and Twentieth Day of this Instant May, at Eleven a Clock.

Missing's Exchange of Lands, Bill.

The Lord Delawar reported from the Lords Committees to whom the Bill, intituled, "An Act for confirming Articles of Agreement, between the principal Officers of the Ordnance, and Thomas Missing Esquire, for the Exchange of some Lands at Portsmouth, for the Service of His Majesty," was committed: "That the Committee had gone through the said Bill; and directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment."

Linlithgow Duty on Beer, Bill.

The Lord Delawar also reported from the Lords Committees to whom the Bill, intituled, "An Act for laying a Duty of Two Pennies Scots, or One-Sixth Part of a Penny Sterling, upon every Scots Pint of Ale and Beer brewed and sold within the Town of Linlithgow, and Liberties thereof, in the County of West Lothian, for paying the Debts of the said Town, and for other Purposes therein mentioned," was committed: "That the Committee had gone through the said Bill; and directed him to report the same to the House, without any Amendment."

Bishop of Rochester's Bill:

This Day being appointed, to hear Counsel further upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester:"

The Counsel were called in.

The Bishop at the Bill.

And the Bishop was brought to the Bar, by the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod.

And his Lordship's Counsel being acquainted, "That they should now proceed in making his Defence:"

They desired, "That the Counsel for the Bill might first apply the Evidence they had produced in a particular Manner; or at least, if that should not be thought proper, that then the House would declare, in case the Counsel for the Bill should in their Reply make any particular Application of their Evidence, to enforce it further than they had yet done, that then they might be heard a Second Time, by Way of Rejoinder."

Which being objected to by the Counsel for the Bill; they having in general opened the Application of the Evidence they had offered:

The Bishop requested, "That the Sense of the House might be known, as to the Desire abovementioned."

Whereupon the Counsel and his Lordship were directed to withdraw.

And, after Debate in relation to his said Request, it was agreed, to call in the Counsel and the Bishop; and that his Counsel should be directed now to proceed in making his Defence.

And they being again called in:

Sir Constantine Phipps and Mr. Wynne were heard, in Behalf of the Bishop of Rochester.

And then offered in Evidence a Paper, given in by Philip Neyno, at One of his Examinations before some of the Lords of the Council.

Another Paper of Notes, taken by Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, of what Neyno declared in the Presence of some Lords of the Council.

Another Paper, intituled, "Examination of Philip Neyno," dated "13th September, 1722."

And another Paper, found in Neyno's Pocket after he was drowned, dated "28th September, 1722."

And the said several Papers were read.

Then Edmund Bingley was sworn, and examined, touching the Character and Reputation of the said Philip Neyno; and as to several Conversations between him and the said Neyno, relating to the Conspiracy; and the Discovery thereof by the said Neyno to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Then Skeene, John Stewart, and George Gordon, were severally sworn, and examined, touching their Acquaintance with the said Philip Neyno; and what Discourses they respectively had with him, relating to the Conspiracy, or the Discovery thereof.

And Corbet Kynaston Esquire was sworn, and examined, as to his Knowledge of John Stewart; and what he had heard the said Stewart say, concerning what had passed between Neyno, Bingley, and himself, in relation to the Conspiracy.

Counsel were ordered to withdraw; and the Bishop was taken from the Bar.

Ordered, That this House will proceed further on the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester," Tomorrow, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon.

Bishop of Rochester remanded:

Ordered, That the Bishop of Rochester be remanded to The Tower of London, and be brought to this House To-morrow, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon.

Witnesses to attend again.

Ordered, That the several Persons who were ordered to attend, or to be brought to the House, this Day, to be examined, as Witnesses upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester," do attend, and be brought to this House, To-morrow, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Veneris, decimum diem instantis Maii, hora nona Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

DIE Veneris, 10^o Maii.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Georgius Princeps Walliæ.

PRAYERS.

Missing's Exchange of Lands, Bill.

Hodie 3^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, An Act for confirming Articles of Agreement, between the principal Officers of the Ordnance and Thomas Missing Esquire, for Exchange of some Lands at Portsmouth, for the Service of His Majesty."

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

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

Linlithgow Duty on Beer. Bill.

Hodie 3^a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for laying a Duty of Two Pennies Scots, or One Sixth Part of a Penny Sterling, upon every Scots Pint of Ale and Beer brewed and sold within the Town of Linlithgow, and Liberties thereof, in the County of West Lothian, for paying the Debts of the said Town; 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. that the Lords have agreed to the Two preceding Bills.

And Messages were severally sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Lightboun and Mr. Edwards:

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

Bishop of Rochester's Bill:

The Order of the Day being read, for hearing Counsel and Witnesses further upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester," before the Second Reading thereof:

The Bishop at the Bar:

The Counsel were called in; and the Bishop of Rochester was brought to the Bar, by the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, and directed to proceed in the Bishop's Defence.

Erasmus Lewis Esquire was examined upon Oath; and declaring, "That he was employed in the Secretary's Office; and knew one Brocket, who was there likewise employed:"

And being asked, "What he knew concerning the Skill of the said Brocket, in counterfeiting Hands?"

The Counsel and Bishop were ordered to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

The House took into Consideration, "Whether the said Question was proper to be answered by a Person who has been employed in the Secretary's Office."

And, after Debate,

It was Resolved, That this House does not think it proper to suffer Erasmus Lewis Esquire to be examined touching any Transaction any Way relating to the Government, which came to his Knowledge by reason of his being employed in the Secretary's Office.

The Counsel and Bishop were called in again, and acquainted with the said Resolution.

And the said Erasmus Lewis, being further examined, withdrew.

After which, Mr. Johnson and Mr. Atkins were severally examined, touching the counterfeiting of Seals.

And the former, being shewed the Seals on both Letters found in the Bishop's Custody, was inquired of, Whether the Impressions were made by the same Seal?" and farther, "Whether, if the Impression of a Seal was taken in Wax, and then broken, it were possible afterwards to take, from that Impression, an entire Impression, which should exactly resemble that Impression before it was broke?"

The Counsel for the Bishop then called Mr. Rollis, who was formerly produced by the Counsel for the Bill.

And several Impressions of a Seal or Seals were put into his Hand, to try his Skill.

But a Doubt arising, as to the Method of putting this Matter to a proper Trial;

The Counsel and Bishop were directed to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

Motion concerning the Method of taking Impressions of a Seal:

A Motion was made, "That this House doth not think it just, that the Witness produced at the Bar should be examined upon any Impressions, but such as shall be made, and in such Manner as shall be directed, by the House."

And a Question being stated thereupon:

After Debate;

The previous Question was put, "Whether that Question shall be now put?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

Protest against putting the Question.

"Dissentient.

"Scarsdale.
Strafford.
Brooke.
Poulett.
Craven.
Uxbridge.
Salisbury.
Litchfield.
Anglesey.
Bruce.
Gower.
Cardigan.
Aylesford.
Montjoy.
Compton.
Trevor.
Foley.
Pomfret.
Hay.
Ashburnham.
Cowper.
Bathurst.
Denbigh.
Willoughby de Broke.
Fran.
Cestriens.
Exeter.
Northampton.
Dartmouth.
Bingley."

Then the main Question was put, "That this House doth not think it just, that the Witness produced at the Bar should be examined upon any Impressions, but such as shall be made, and in such Manner as shall be directed, by the House?"

It was Resolved in the Affirmative.

Protest against the main Question:

"Dissentient.

"Scarsdale.
Strafford.
Craven.
Cowper.
Pomfret.
Bathurst.
Brooke.
Ashburnham.
Denbigh.
Foley.
Fran.
Cestriens.
Compton.
Trevor.
Willoughby de Broke.
Exeter.
Montjoy.
Dartmouth.
Northampton.
Aylesford.
Gower.
Poulett.
Bingley.
Hay.
Uxbridge."

The Counsel and Bishop were called in again, and acquainted with the said Resolution.

And the Counsel against the Bill desiring to know in what Manner the House will direct the Examination to be made:

The Counsel and Bishop were directed to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

It is Ordered, That Two of the Clerks do forthwith withdraw; and that a Person, to be appointed by the Bishop, do, in their Presence, from One or more Seal or Seals, such as he shall think fit, take Impressions in Wax, of One or more Sorts, to be provided by the Clerks; that the Impressions be numbered; and that the Clerks write down in Paper, from what Seal, and in what Manner, every Impression was taken, and deliver such Paper in at the Table, sealed up; making Oath that the same is true; and that the Seal, or Seals, from which such Impressions shall be made, shall be detained by One of the Clerks, till called for by the House; and that the Clerks, and the Person so to be appointed by the Prisoner, be sworn to Secrecy, and not to disclose to any Person whatsoever any Thing which shall pass in that Transaction, till after the Paper so delivered in shall be opened.

And the Bishop and Counsel were called in again, and acquainted therewith.

And the Bishop being directed to appoint a Person to take the said Impressions; he named Mr. Gardiner, who, with Mr. John Wheake and Mr. Charles Reynell, Two of the Clerks of this House, were sworn to Secrecy, as directed:

And withdrew accordingly.

Next, the Counsel for the Bishop produced a Certificate, said to be signed by a Public Notary, of an Oath mentioned to be made by Mr. Birmagen, a Surgeon at Paris, relating to the Dog Harlequin, dated 3d May, 1723; and a Paper, which was proved to be a true Translation thereof.

Which Translation was read.

Then Thomas Grant, a Servant of the Bishop's, was sworn, and examined, as to his Lordship's being at Bromley, from a certain Time in April, to a certain Time in May; and whether any and what Persons had Access to the Bishop during that Time; and touching a Letter sealed up and delivered to him by the Bishop in The Tower: And having been asked some Questions in relation to the sealing of it, and to whom it was to be delivered; he desired (though much pressed) to be excused answering; but at last, the Bishop directing him to answer, said, "He believed it was to Mr. Morice."

Next, Joseph Beauchamp, another of the Bishop's Servants, was sworn, and examined to the same Matter.

And the Two Clerks, being returned, delivered in the Impressions, and also the Papers, sealed up, with the Numbers referring to the said Impressions enclosed; which, according to the Order of the House, were taken.

And Mr. Rollis was called in; and the said Impressions were put into his Hands, to make the best Judgement thereupon he could.

Then Samuel Stean, Susan Harvey, Sarah Jones, and Thomas Franden, Servants to the Bishop of Rochester, were severally sworn, and examined, touching the Times when the Bishop was in Town, or in the Country; or of his Lady's Sickness and Death; and his Illness of the Gout; and what Persons had visited or resorted to his Lordship the last Summer, before he was taken into Custody.

And the Counsel for the Bishop offering to read the Deposition of John Lawson, out of the Appendix to the printed Report of the Committee of Commons:

And the same being objected to by the Counsel for the Bill, as foreign to the Matter laid before the House:

But being insisted on by the Bishop and his Counsel:

They were ordered to withdraw.

And being withdrawn:

After Debate;

It was agreed, that the Counsel and Bishop be called in again; and acquainted, "That they were not to read the said Deposition."

And the Counsel and Bishop were called in again, and acquainted therewith.

Then, Thomas Franden was called in, and examined as to Discourse between him and John Lawson, at Bromley; or any Offers made him by the said Lawson, relating to his giving Evidence concerning the Bishop of Rochester.

John Lawson was sworn, and examined to the same Matter; and also as to Discourse between him and William Wood, the Bishop's Coachman, concerning the Times of the Bishop's going between London and Bromley.

Then Elizabeth Higgison and Elizabeth English, Servants of the Bishop, were severally sworn, and examined as to their Knowledge of George Kelly; and whether he, or what other Persons, resorted to the Bishop, at the Deanery in Westm'r.

Maurice Brown and William Pickering were severally sworn, and examined as to the Hand-writing of Geo. Kelly.

Then the Counsel for the Bishop produced the Translation of an Affidavit made by Gordon, at Boulogne, concerning the Packet of Letters said to have been directed to him at Boulogne, by the Name of "Monsieur Gordon le Fils, Banquier a Boulogne sur Mer," and signed "Ja. Johnson;" denying the Receipt thereof, or that he had any Acquaintance with George Kelly or James Talbot, as was alledged.

And George Schutz was sworn, and examined, to prove the Translation offered, to be a true Translation of the said Affidavit.

And the said Translation was read.

Then Edward Crofton was sworn, and examined, to prove that James Talbot was in London the 29th of April 1722, and long before.

Margaret Kilburne and Anne Ellis were severally sworn, and examined, as to George Kelly's being in Town in the Month of April 1722, and afterwards.

After which, the Bishop mentioned certain Avocations which took up his Time; and offered to bring Proof thereof, if the House should think it proper.

But the same not being thought material; his Lordship called Mr. Pope, to give an Account how he employed his Time; and where he used constantly to find his Lordship when he visited him; and in regard of the great Intimacy there was between them, "Whether he suspected the Bishop was engaged in such Matters as were laid to his Charge?"

And he was examined upon Oath.

Then Mr. Rollis the Engraver was called in; and acquainted the House, "That he had viewed the Impressions of Seals before delivered to him in the House, and conceived they were taken from Two cast Seals from One Original."

And the Papers, delivered in sealed up, being opened and read; it appeared that he had formed a right Judgement thereon.

Then the Counsel were ordered to withdraw; and the Bishop was taken from the Bar.

Ordered, That this House will proceed further on the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester," Tomorrow, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon.

Bishop of Rochester remanded:

Ordered, That the Bishop be remanded to The Tower of London, and be brought to this House Tomorrow, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon.

Witnesses to attend.

Ordered, That the several Persons who were ordered to attend, or to be brought to this House, this Day, to be examined as Witnesses upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to inflict Pains and Penalties on Francis Lord Bishop of Rochester," do attend, and be brought to this House, To-morrow, at Ten a Clock in the Forenoon.

Adjourn.

Dominus Cancellarius declaravit præsens Parliamentum continuandum esse usque ad et in diem Sabbati, undecimum diem instantis Maii, hora decima Auroræ, Dominis sic decernentibus.

Footnotes