House of Lords Journal Volume 39
February 1791 11-20

Sponsor

History of Parliament Trust

Publication

Year published

1767-1830

Pages

46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51

Annotate

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

Citation Show another format:

'House of Lords Journal Volume 39: February 1791 11-20', Journal of the House of Lords volume 39: 1790-1793 (1767-1830), pp. 46-51. URL: http://british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=116891 Date accessed: 17 September 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

February 1791 11-20

DIE Lunæ, 14o Februarii 1791.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Epus. Bath. & Wells.
Epus. Sarum.
Epus. Petriburg.
Epus. Eliens.
Epus. Roffen.
Epus. Bangor.
Epus. Glocestr.
Epus. Norvicen.
Ds. Thurlow, Cancellarius.
Dux Portland.
March. Townshend.
Comes Sandwich.
Comes Carlisle.
Comes Kellie.
Comes Glasgow.
Comes Dartmouth.
Comes Radnor.
Comes Bathurst.
Comes Uxbridge.
Comes Norwich.
Comes Grosvenor.
Viscount Stormont.
Ds. Audley.
Ds. Torphichen.
Ds. Middleton.
Ds. Sandys.
Ds. Scarsdale.
Ds. Amherst.
Ds. Loughborough.
Ds. Porchester.
Ds. Rawdon.
Ds. Grey de Wilton.
Ds. Hawkesbury.
Ds. Heathfield.
Ds. Kenyon.
Ds. Fife.
Ds. Verulam.
Ds. Mulgrave.

PRAYERS.

Lords take the Oaths.

This Day George Bishop of Norwich took the Oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration; and also took and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.

This Day Alexander Earl of Norwich, and John Bishop of Peterborough, took the Oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration; and also took and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes.

Gibson and Johnson against Minet and Fector, in Error:

The Order of the Day being read, for the further Consideration of the Writ of Error, wherein Thomas Gibson and Joseph Johnson are Plaintiffs, and Hughes Minet and James Peter Fector Defendants:

Motion to reverse Judgment negatived:

Proposed, "To reverse the Judgment of the Court of King's Bench."

Which being objected to;

After Debate,

The Question was put thereupon?

It was resolved in the Negative.

Then the following Order and Judgment was made:

Whereas, by virtue of His Majesty's Writ of Error, returnable into the House of Lords in Parliament assembled, a Record of the Court of King's Bench was brought into this House the 26th of January 1790, wherein Thomas Gibson and Joseph Johnson are Plaintiffs, and Hughes Minet and James Peter Fector Defendants, in order to reverse a Judgement given in the Court of King's Bench for the said Defendants: And Counsel having been heard, as well on Friday the 23d as on Monday the 26th Days of April last, to argue the Errors assigned upon the said Writ of Error; and the Judges who were ordered to attend having been heard feriatim on Thursday the 3d Day of this Inftant February, to deliver their Opinions, with their Reasons, upon certain Points of Law to them proposed, and due Consideration and Debate had of what was offered on either Side in this Cause:

Judgement affirmed.

It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That the Judgement given in the said Court of King's Bench be and the same is hereby affirmed; and that the Record be remitted, to the End such Proceeding may be had thereupon, as if no such Writ of Error had been brought into this House.

The Tenor of which Judgement, to be affixed to the Transcript of the Record, is as follows:

On which Day, before Our said Lord the King and the Peers in the same Court of Parliament now here at Westminster, in the said County of Middlesex, assembled, come the said Thomas Gibson and Joseph Johnson in their proper Persons, as also the said Hughes Minet and James Peter Fector, by their Attorney aforesaid; whereupon all and singular the Premises having been seen, and by the said Court of Parliament here fully understood, as well the Record and Proceedings aforesaid as the several Matters aforesaid, above assigned for Error by the said Thomas Gibson and Joseph Johnson, being diligently examined, and mature Deliberation being thereupon had, it appears to the said Court of Parliament now here, that there is no Error either in the Record or Proceedings aforesaid, or in the giving of the Judgement aforesaid, and that the Record is in no wise vitious or defective: Therefore it is considered, by the same Court of Parliament aforesaid, that the Judgement aforesaid given in the Court of our said Lord the King, before the King himself, be in all Things affirmed, and in full Force and Effect, the said Causes and Matters above assigned for Error by the said Thomas Gibson and Joseph Johnson in any wise notwithstanding: And thereupon the aforesaid Record, and also the Proceedings aforesaid had in the said Court of Parliament, are sent back to the Court of Our said Lord the King, before the King himself, wheresoever he shall be in England, to the End that Execution may be done thereupon.

Sir G. Douglas and Kerr against Sibbald.

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of Sir George Douglas, of Springwood Park, Baronet, and Patrick Kerr, of Abbotrule, Esquire, Freeholders of the County of Roxburgh, complaining of Two Interlocutors of the Lords of Council and Session in Scotland, of the 18th of December 1790, and 25th of January 1791; and praying, "That the same may be reversed, or that the Appellants may have such other Relief in the Premises as to this House, in Their Lordships' great Wisdom, shall seem proper; and that William Sibbald, of Pinnacle, Esquire, may be required to answer the said Appeal:"

It is Ordered, That the said William Sibbald Esquire, may have a Copy of the said Appeal, and do put in his Answer thereunto, in Writing, on or before Monday the 14th Day of March next: And Service of this Order upon the Agent, or any of the Counsel of the said Respondent, in the Court of Session in Scotland, shall be deemed good Service.

Parslow's Divorce Bill.

The House (according to Order) was adjourned during Pleasure, and put into a Committee upon the Bill, intituled, "An Act to dissolve the Marriage of John Parslow Esquire, with Elizabeth Hall, his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other Purposes therein mentioned."

After some Time, the House was resumed:

And the Lord Sandys reported from the Committee, "That they had gone through the Bill, and made One Amendment thereto, which he was ready to report when the House will please to receive the same."

Ordered, That the said Report be received on Thursday next.

Election of Peers for Scotland, Attorney General and Lord Advocate to attend Committee.

Ordered, That His Majesty's Attorney General and the Lord Advocate for Scotland do attend the Committee for Privileges, appointed to take into Consideration the several Petitions referred to them relative to the Return of the Peers chosen for Scotland, on Friday next.

Godeffroys' and Thornton's Naturalization Bill:

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for naturalizing Peter Godeffroy, Johanna Catherine Godeffroy his Wife, and John Thornton."

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. Ord and Mr. Walker:

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

Adjourn.

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

DIE Jovis, 17o Februarii 1791.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Archiep. Ebor.
Epus. Eliens.
Epus. Bangor.
Epus. Litch. & Cov.
Epus. Asaphen.
Epus. Norvicen.
Dux Gloucester.
Ds. Thurlow, Cancellarius.
Dux Leeds.
Dux Portland.
Dux Bridgewater.
March. Townshend.
March. Abercorn.
Comes Lauderdale.
Comes Graham.
Comes Radnor.
Comes Chatham.
Comes Grosvenor.
Viscount Stormont.
Viscount Sydney.
Ds. Grenville, Unus Primariorum Secretariorum.
Ds. Teynham.
Ds. Cathcart.
Ds. Hay.
Ds. King.
Ds. Amherst.
Ds. Loughborough.
Ds. Porchester.
Ds. Rawdon.
Ds. Hawkesbury.
Ds. Heathfield.
Ds. Fife.
Ds. Mulgrave.

PRAYERS.

Parslow's Divorce Bill.

The Lord Cathcart (according to Order) reported the Amendment made by the Committee of the whole House to the Bill, intituled, "An Act to dissolve the Marriage of John Parslow Esquire, with Elizabeth Hall, his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again;" and for other Purposes therein mentioned.

And the same, being read Twice by the Clerk, was agreed to by the House.

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

Ogilvie against Wingate:

Upon reading the Petition and Appeal of James Ogilvie, Collector of His Majesty's Revenue of Excise for the County of Fife, in Scotland, complaining of Two Interlocutors of the Lords of Session in Scotland, of the 29th of June 1790, and 1st of February 1791; and praying, "That the same may be reversed, varied, or amended, or that the Appellant may have such Relief in the Premises as to this House, in Their Lordships' great Wisdom, shall seem meet: and that Thomas Wingate, of Foodie's Mill, in the County of Fife, in Scotland, may be required to answer the said Appeal:"

It is Ordered, That the said Thomas Wingate may have a Copy of the said Appeal, and do put in his Answer thereunto, in Writing, on or before Thursday the 17th Day of March next; and Service of this Order upon the said Respondent, or upon any of his Counsel or Agents in the Court of Session in Scotland, shall be deemed good Service.

Chalmer to enter into a Recognizance on said Appeal.

The House being moved, "That James Chalmer of Abingdon Street, Westminster, Gentleman, may be permitted to enter into a Recognizance for James Ogilvie, on account of his Appeal depending in this House, he living in Scotland:"

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

Morehead against Edmonstones.

Upon reading the Petition of William Morehead Esquire, Appellant in two Causes depending in this House, to which Charles Edmonstone Esquire, is Respondent, and in the other the Reverend George Edmonstone is Respondent, which stands appointed for Hearing; setting forth, "That upon the 6th Day of July last, being the Day appointed for electing a Commissioner to represent the County of Stirling in the present Parliament, both the Respondents claimed to be put upon the Roll of Freeholders, and Electors of that County, upon the Valuation of the Lands of Canglor, which had been conveyed to them by their Father Sir Archibald Edmonstone Baronet, by separate Titles: To this Claim the Petitioner who is one of the Freeholders of the County of Stirling standing on the Rolls objected: That in the Valuation Book of the County, the Lands of Canglor stand valued at £710. 8. Scots, and the Teinds thereof at £100 Scots, and although these two Cumulo's were thrown together, and divided in 1707, among the different Parcels composing the Lands of Canglor, and which Division was approved of, by the Commissioners of Supply in 1786, upon the Application of Sir Archibald Edmonstone, and that each of the different Parcels of Lands now claimed on by each of the Respondents, do with the Teinds thereof, according to the said Decreet of Approbation, stand valued at £401. 3. 5. Scots, yet that the Titles produced by each of the Claimants, gave them Right only to the Lands, but did not give them any Right whatever to the Teinds, and consequently it appears that neither of them are in Possession of the Valuation required by Law: The Freeholders, being satisfied with the Solidity of the Objection, refused to put either of the Respondents on the Roll, who thereupon complained of this Judgement of the Freeholders to the Court of Session, under the Authority of the Act of the 16th of His late Majesty, and both Parties having been heard, that Court was pleased to repel this Objection made to the Votes of each of the Respondents: That from this Interlocutor of the Court of Session, the Petitioner has entered his Appeal to their Lordships, to which both the Respondents have put in their Answers, and as their Lordships have always been in use, pursuant to the Spirit and Words of the Act of the 16th of His late Majesty, to give summary Dispatch in Questions of this Nature, the Petitioner makes this Application to their Lordships;" and prays, That the Hearing of this Cause may be appointed for Tuesday the 22d Day of this instant February, or on such other early Day, as to their Lordships may seem proper:"

And thereupon the Agent for the Petitioner was called in and heard at the Bar, and being withdrawn:

Ordered, That this House will hear the said Causes by Counsel at the Bar, on Tuesday next, as desired.

Message from H. C. for a Day for further hearing of Impeachment against Warren Hastings:

A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Mr. Burke and others, as follows;

"My Lords,

"I am directed by the Commons to acquaint Your Lordships, that the House of Commons is ready to proceed upon the Impeachment of Warren Hastings Esquire, late Governor General of Bengal, now depending before Your Lordships in Parliament, and to request that Your Lordships will appoint a convenient Day for the further Hearing of the same."

Who being withdrawn,

Answer thereto.

The Messengers were again called in, and acquainted, "That this House will send an Answer by Messengers of their own."

Martinius and Fontaine's Naturalization Bill.

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

With a Bill intituled, "An Act for naturalizing Nicholas Albert Martinius, and James La Fontaine;" to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Krhon's Naturalization Bill.

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

With a Bill, intituled, "An Act for naturalizing Jacob Krhon;" to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

Foreman's Naturalization Bill.

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

With a Bill, intituled, "An Act for naturalizing Luke Foreman Esquire;" to which they desire the Concurrence of this House.

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

Speirs against Sir A. Campbell.

Upon reading the Petition of Peter Speirs (fn. 1) Esquire, Appellant in a Cause depending in this House, to which Sir Alexander Campbell Baronet is Respondent, which stands appointed for Hearing; setting forth, "That upon the 6th Day of July last, being the Day appointed for electing a Commissioner to represent the County of Stirling in the present Parliament, the Respondent claimed to be put upon the Roll of Freeholders and Electors of the said County, as apparent Heir of the late Sir James Campbell his Father: That the Petioner stated to the Freeholders present at the said Meeting, that the said Sir Alexander Campbell could not be enrolled as a Freeholder of the said County of Stirling, as apparent Heir of his Father, because his Father the late Sir James Campbell had in his Lifetime conveyed away his whole Estate in Stirlingshire, to certain Persons whom the Petitioner named, and who are in Virtue of such Conveyance insest in the said Estate, and were now actually in Possession thereof, and in Support of this Objection the Petitioner produced and exhibited to the Meeting, an Extract or Office Copy of the Conveyance by Sir James Campbell, of his said Estates, and of the Instrument of Sasine taken thereupon: That upon hearing this Objection, the Freeholders refused to enrol the said Sir Alexander Campbell, who afterwards, in Virtue of the Statute of the 16th of His late Majesty, complained in the Court of Session of this Judgement of the Freeholders, and that Court, after hearing both Parties, were pleased by the Majority of one Vote, to reverse the Sentence of the Freeholders, and to order the said Sir Alexander Campbell to be enrolled as a Freeholder of the County of Stirling: That from this Interlocutor of the Court of Session, the Petitioner has entered his Appeal to Their Lordships, to which the Respondent has put in his Answer, and as Their Lordships have always been in use, pursuant to the Words and Spirit of the Act of the 16th of His late Majesty, to give summary Dispatch to Questions of this Nature, the Petitioner makes this Application to Their Lordships;" and humbly prays, "That the Hearing of this Cause may be appointed for Thursday the 24th Day of this instant February, or on such other early Day, as to Their Lordships may seem proper:"

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause by Counsel at the Bar, on Thursday the 24th Day of this instant February, as desired.

Election of Peers for Scotland, Petitions for certain Instruments to be produced.

Upon reading the Petition of William Duke of Queensberry, and John James Earl of Abercorn; setting forth, "That the Petitioners having presented their several Petitions to Their Lordships, stating that on the 24th of July last, being the Day appointed for the Election of the sixteen Peers of Scotland, they being Peers of Scotland, and not personally present at the said Meeting, did, according to the Provisions of the Statutes in that Behalf made, send a List signed by each of them, containing the List of the Peers for whom they severally gave their Votes, together with the proper Certificates and Documents of their having severally qualified and taken the Oaths required by Law, and complaining that the Deputies officiating for the Lord Clerk Registrar at the said Election, had not counted their Votes in casting up the Votes given at the said Election, and that by reason thereof an undue Return had been made by the said Deputies, to the Prejudice of the Petitioners; That the Petitioners' said several Petitions were, upon the 23d Day of December last, referred to a Committee of Privileges, with Liberty to be heard by Counsel if they think fit: That the above mentioned Certificates and Documents of the Petitioners having qualified according to Law, and the Lists severally given in for them of the Peers for whom they severally gave their Votes at the said Election, were, with other Documents respecting the said Election, deposited according to Custom, by the returning Officer, in the Public Register House at Edinburgh, and it is not in the Petitioners' Power to procure them exhibited to this House, without an Order from Their Lordships; The Petitioners therefore make this application to Their Lordships;" and pray, "That Their Lordships will be pleased to order that the Lord Clerk Registrar of Scotland, and Alexander Robertson, and William Robertson, Esquires, his Deputies, and Keepers of the Records, or one or other of them do transmit to the Clerk of Parliament the Documents and Certificates of the Petitioners having severally qualified and taken the Oaths according to Law, to enable them as Peers of Scotland to vote at the foresaid Election of Peers, and the respective Lists signed by each of the Petitioners, of the Peers for whom they severally gave or offered their Votes at the foresaid Election upon the 24th of July last, or that one or other of the said Lord Clerk Registrar, Alexander Robertson, or William Robertson, do bring up and produce the aforesaid Instruments, Certificates, Lists and Writings, at Their Lordships' Bar, or that Their Lordships will make such other Order or Orders in the Premises, as in their great Wisdom may seem meet:"

It is Ordered, That the said Petition do lie on the Table.

Upon reading the Petition of John Earl of Galloway, John Earl of Stair, James Lord Somerville, and Francis Lord Napier; setting forth, "That the Petitioners having severally presented Petitions to Their Lordships, stating, that, at the last Election of the Peers of Scotland, they ought to have been returned in the Number of the sixteen Peers of Scotland, duly elected to sit and vote in the House of Peers in the present Parliament of Great Britain, the Consideration of which Petitions Their Lordships were pleased to refer to the Consideration of the Committee of Privileges; That the Petitioners have among other Things stated and alledged, that the Dukedom of Rothsay does not give a Right to vote at the Election of the Peers of Scotland, and that if it did, the Proxy of the Duke of Rothsay is irregular, informal, and therefore void: That Lord Kinnaird, who voted at the said Election, and held the Proxies of the Earl of Dysart and Lord Cranstoun, did not qualify as by Law required: That the Certificate of the Qualification of the Earl of Dysart is irregular, informal, defaced, and therefore void: That the Petitioners are to submit to Their Lordships, that the said several Instruments were informal, defaced, defective, and therefore void, and ought not to have been received as Evidence at the foresaid Election, but as these Objections arise from the Tenor, Informality, and defaced State of these Instruments, the Petitioners are advised that it is necessary, for the Satisfaction of Their Lordships, to have the original Instruments themselves produced: That the said original Instruments were, with other Documents respecting the late Election of the Peers of Scotland, deposited according to the Custom, by the returning Officers, in the public Register House at Edinburgh, and it is not in the Petitioners' Power to procure them exhibited to this House, without an Order from Their Lordships;" and therefore praying, "That Their Lordships will be pleased to order that the Lord Clerk Registrar of Scotland, and Alexander Robertson, and William Robertson, Esquires, his Deputies, and Keepers of the Records, or one or other of them, do transmit to the Clerk of Parliament the Certificate of the Qualifications and Proxies of the Duke of Rothsay, the Earl of Dysart, and Lord Cranstoun, produced at the last Election of the Peers of Scotland, on the 24th Day of July 1790, together with all the Oaths sworn and signed by the several Peers of Scotland present at the aforesaid Election, and also all the Oaths in the keeping of of them, or any of them, sworn and signed by the Peers of Scotland at the Election of all or any of the Peers of Scotland since the Union of the two Kingdoms, and also the Minutes of the Parliament of Scotland, from 1693, down to the date of the Union, or that one or other of the said Lord Clerk Registrar, Alexander Robertson, or William Robertson, do bring up and produce the aforesaid Instruments and Writings at Their Lordships' Bar, or that Their Lordships will make such other Order or Orders in the Premises, as in their great Wisdom may seem meet:"

It is Ordered, That the said Petition do lie on the Table.

Impeachment of W. Hastings, Committee to examine Precedents relative to State of.

Ordered, That all the Lords who have been present this Session be appointed a Committee to examine Precedents relative to the State of the Impeachment against Warren Hastings Esquire, brought up from the Commons and proceeded upon in the last Parliament, and to report the same to the House.

Adjourn.

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

DIE Veneris, 18o Februarii 1791.

Domini tam Spirituales quam Temporales præsentes fuerunt:

Epus. Bath. & Wells.
Epus. Norvicen.
Ds. Thurlow, Cancellarius.
Dux Leeds.
Dux Portland.
Dux Bridgewater.
March. Bath.
March. Abercorn.
Comes Sandwich.
Comes Doncaster.
Comes Moray.
Comes Kellie.
Comes Lauderdale.
Comes Breadalbane.
Comes Glasgow.
Comes Dartmouth.
Comes Graham.
Comes Fitzwilliam.
Comes Hardwicke.
Comes Radnor.
Comes Bathurst.
Comes Ailesbury.
Comes Uxbridge.
Comes Norwich.
Viscount Stormont.
Viscount Sydney.
Ds. Grenville, Unus Primariorum Secretariorum.
Ds. Teynham.
Ds. Cathcart.
Ds. Torphichen.
Ds. Hay.
Ds. King.
Ds. Sandys.
Ds. Boston.
Ds. Ducie.
Ds. Amherst.
Ds. Harrowby.
Ds. Loughborough.
Ds. Southampton.
Ds. Porchester.
Ds. Rawdon.
Ds. Hawkesbury.
Ds. Heathfield.
Ds. Fife.
Ds. Mulgrave.
Ds. Harewood.

PRAYERS.

Parslow's Divorce Bill:

Hodie 3a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act to dissolve the Marriage of John Parslow Esquire with Elizabeth Hall his now Wife, and to enable him to marry again, and for other Purposes therein mentioned."

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

It was resolved in the Affirmative.

Message to H. C. with it.

A Message was sent to the House of Commons, by Mr. Eames and Mr. Spranger:

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

Martinius' and La Fontaine's Naturalization Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for naturalizing Nicholas Albert Martinius, and James La Fontaine."

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

D. Leeds.
D. Portland.
D. Bridgewater.
M. Bath.
M. Abercorn.
E. Sandwich.
E. Doncaster.
E. Moray.
E. Kellie.
E. Lauderdale.
E. Breadalbane.
E. Glasgow.
E. Dartmouth.
E. Graham.
E. Fitzwilliam.
E. Hardwicke.
E. Radnor.
E. Bathurst.
E. Ailesbury.
E. Uxbridge.
E. Norwich.
V. Stormont.
V. Sydney.
L. Bp. Bath. & Wells.
L. Bp. Norvicen.
L. Grenville.
L. Teynham.
L. Cathcart.
L. Torphichen.
L. Hay.
L. King.
L. Sandys.
L. Boston.
L. Ducie.
L. Amherst.
L. Harrowby.
L. Loughborough.
L. Southampton.
L. Porchester.
L. Rawdon.
L. Hawkesbury.
L. Heathfield.
L. Fife.
L. Mulgrave.
L. Harewood.

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

Krhon's Naturalization Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for naturalizing Jacob Krhon."

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

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

Foreman's Naturalization Bill.

Hodie 2a vice lecta est Billa, intituled, "An Act for naturalizing Luke Foreman Esquire."

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

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

Petition of Prisoners in Kingston-upon-Hull Gaol, praying Relief.

Upon reading the Petition of the Prisoners confined for Debt in His Majesty's Gaol, in and for the Town and County of the Town of Kingston-upon-Hull, complaining of their Distress, and praying Relief:

It is Ordered, That the said Petition do lie on the Table.

Lord Harewood introduced:

Edwin Lascelles, being by Letters Patent bearing Date the 9th Day of July, in the Thirtieth Year of His present Majesty, created Baron Harewood, in the County of York, was (in his Robes) introduced between the Lord Ducie and the Lord Mulgrave (also in their Robes), the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod and Garter King at Arms preceding: His Lordship, on his Knee, presented his Patent to the Lord Chancellor at the Woolsack, who delivered it to the Clerk, and the same was read at the Table:

His Writ of Summons was also read as follows; (videlicet)

"George the Third, by the Grace of God, of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, and so forth: To Our right-trusty and well-beloved Edwin Lascelles of Harewood in Our County of York, Chevalier, Greeting: Whereas by the Advice and Assent of Our Council, for certain arduous and urgent Affairs, concerning Us, the State and Defence of Our Kingdom of Great Britain, and the Church, We have ordered a certain Parliament to be holden at Our City of Westminster on the Tenth Day of August next ensuing, and there to treat and have Conference with the Prelates, Great Men, and Peers of Our Realm; We, strictly enjoining, command you, upon the Faith and Allegiance by which you are bound to Us, that the Weightiness of the said Affairs and imminent Perils considered, (waiving all Excuses,) you be at the said Day and Place personally present with Us, and with the said Prelates, Great Men, and Peers, to treat and give your Counsel upon the Affairs aforesaid, and this, as you regard Us and Our Honour, and the Safety and Defence of the said Kingdom and Church, and the Dispatch of the said Affairs, in no wise do you omit.

"Witness Ourself at Westminster, the Ninth Day of July, in the Thirtieth Year of Our Reign.

"Yorke."

Then His Lordship took the Oaths, and made and subscribed the Declaration, and also took and subscribed the Oath of Abjuration, pursuant to the Statutes; and was afterwards placed on the lower End of the Barons' Bench.

Pedigree delivered.

Garter King at Arms delivered in at the Table His Lordship's Pedigree, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Morehead against Edmonstone.

A Petition of Charles Edmonstone Esquire and George Edmonstone Esquire, Respondents in two Causes depending in this House, to which William Morehead Esquire is Appellant, was presented and read: setting forth, "That the Petitioners having claimed to be enrolled Freeholders of the County of Stirling, at the Meeting for Election held on the 6th of July last, the Appellant stated three Objections to their Claims, which a Majority of the Freeholders allowed of; that the Petitioners having severally complained to the Court of Session, two of the Objections were over-ruled by the unanimous Opinion of the Judges, and to avoid a Decision upon the Third, the Appellant immediately appealed to Their Lordships; that the Appeals were entered on the 20th of December last, and upon the Respondents' Answers were lately set down for hearing in Course; that a Petition on the Part of the Appellant was Yesterday presented to Their Lordships in the Absence of the Petitioners' Agent, (who had Notice of such an Intention but not of the particular Day) praying that these Causes might be heard on an early Bye-Day, and Their Lordships were pleased to order them to be heard on Tuesday next: That the Petitioners have not the least Intention to delay the hearing unnecessarily; on the contrary, they are desirous that the Causes should be heard, but it is impossible to be ready so early as Tuesday next, the necessary Papers not being yet come to Hand from Scotland, though expected every Hour, and the Petitioners' Case shall forthwith be prepared;" and therefore praying, That the Hearing of the said Causes may be put off to Tuesday the 1st Day of March next, or to such other Day as Their Lordships think most proper."

And thereupon the Agents on both Sides were called in and heard at the Bar; and being withdrawn:

Ordered, That the Hearing of the said Causes be put off to Saturday the 26th Day of this instant February.

Spiers against Sir A. Campbell.

Ordered, That the Hearing of the Cause wherein Peter Spiers Esquire is Appellant, and Sir Alexander Campbell Baronet is Respondent, which stands appointed for Thursday next, be put off to Saturday the 26th Day of this instant February.

Impeachment of Warren Hastings Committee to examine Precedents relative to State of, to meet.

Ordered, That the Committee appointed to examine Precedents relative to the State of the Impeachment against Warren Hastings Esquire, do meet on Monday next, and that the Clerks do attend the said Committee and search for Precedents.

Graham against Erskine.

A Petition of James Erskine Esquire, Respondent in a Cause depending in this House, to which Robert Graham Esquire is Appellant, which stands appointed for Hearing, was presented and read; setting forth, "That at a Meeting of the Freeholders of the County of Stirling, held on the 6th Day of July last, for electing a Member to serve in Parliament, the Petitioner claimed to be enrolled a Freeholder, producing his Title, but the Majority of the Freeholders rejected his Claim upon a Motion of the Appellant: That the Petitioner having complained to the Court of Session in Terms of the Statute, the Judges unanimously found that the Freeholders had done wrong, granted Warrant to enrol the Petitioner, and awarded to him his full Costs: From this Decree the Appellant has thought proper to appeal to Their Lordships: As it has been usual in Cases of this Nature to appoint them to be heard on early Bye-Days," the Petitioner humbly prays, "That Their Lordships will be pleased to appoint this Cause to be heard on Thursday the 3d Day of March next, or on such other early Day as Their Lordships may judge proper."

And thereupon the Agents on both Sides were called in, and heard at the Bar; and being withdrawn:

Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause, by Counsel at the Bar, on Saturday the 26th Day of this Instant February.

Erskine against Haldane.

A Petition of George Haldane Esquire, Respondent in a Cause depending in this House, to which James Francis Erskine Esquire is Appellant, which stands appointed for Hearing, was presented and read; setting forth, "That at the Meeting of the Freeholders of the County of Stirling, held upon the 6th of July last, for the Election of a Member to serve in Parliament, the Petitioner, a Freeholder, moved that the Name of the Appellant should be struck out of the Roll, in respect of his being divested of the Estate for which he had been enrolled, but the Motion was overruled by a Majority, whereupon the Petitioner entered his Complaint to the Court of Session in Terms of the Statute: That the Judges of the Court of Session unanimously decreed that the Freeholders had done wrong, and therefore granted Warrant to strike the Appellant's Name out of the Roll, from which Decree he has appealed to Their Lordships: That as it has been customary to hear Cases of this Nature on early ByeDays," the Petitioner humbly prays Their Lordships, That this Cause may be heard on Tuesday the 1st Day of March next, or on such other early Day as Their Lordships may think proper."

And thereupon the Agents on both Sides were called in, and heard at the Bar; and being withdrawn:

Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause, by Counsel at the Bar, on Saturday the 5th Day of March next.

Belsches against Buchanan.

The House being moved, "That a Day may be appointed for hearing the Cause wherein Robert Belsches Esquire is Appellant, and Walter Buchanan Esquire is Respondent, ex-parte; the Respondent not having put in his Answer thereto, though peremptorily ordered so to do:"

It is Ordered, That this House will hear the said Cause ex-parte, by Counsel at the Bar, on the first vacant Day for Causes after those already appointed, unless the Respondent puts in his Answer thereto in the mean Time.

Martin against Tait, et. al.

The House being informed, "That James Tait, Clerk, of Canongate, and Others, Respondents to the Appeal of John Martin, of Lyon's Inn, Gentleman, had not put in their Answer to the said Appeal, though duly served with the Order of this House for that Purpose:"

And thereupon an Affidavit of John Martin, Gentleman, of the due Service of the said Order, being read:

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

Adjourn.

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

Footnotes

1 Sic.