Contents 257 Not Cont. 34 The Question was put, whether this House will agree to the Amendments made by the Committee in leaving out thele Words, 6th Skin, 35th and 36th Lines (made and enter'd into or)? It was refolved in the Negative: Diffentient', Becaufe this Claufe, without this Amendment, hath a Retrospect. Normanby, Rochefter, SomerJet, Granville, Clifforde, T. Jermyn, Die Jovis 3° Martii, 1697. Hodie za vice le&ta eft Billa, entitled, An Act for dif folving the Marriage between Charles Earl of Macclef field and Anne his Wife, and to illegitimate the Children of the faid Anne; The Queftion was put, whether this Bill fhall pafs?? It was refolved in the Affirmative. Diffentient' Because, we conceive, this is the first Bill of this Nature that hath paffed, where there was not a Divorce firft>> obtained in the Spiritual Court, which we look upon as an ill Precedent, and may be of dangerous Confequence in the future. Die Mercurii 15o Junii, 1698. A Conference was had with the Commons on the Sub ject-Matter of the Lords Meffage of the Eighth Inftant, declaring they will proceed to the Trial of Goudet and others at the Bar of the House; and Report being made of what was offered by the Commons, The Question was put, whether this Houfe fhall infift upon their Declaration above-mentioned ? · It was refolved in the Affirmative. Diffentient' 1. Because the Managers of the House of Commons may have Occafion, in Trials upon Impeachment, to have recourfe to Papers, Books, and Records, which they cannot fo conveniently make ufe of in a Croud. zdly, It feems as reasonable, that fome Provifion fhould fhould be made for their Convenience, and to protect them from the Croud at the Bar of this House, as in Weftminfier-Hall, the Judicature of this Houfe receiving no. Alteration by the Place to which they adjourn; nor could the Lords think fo, when even upon the Defire of the Commons themfelves in the Earl of Stafford's Cafe, being offered all imaginable Convenience at the Bar of this House, and finding themselves freightened thereby, the Lords appointed the Trial to be in Weftminster-Hall, on that Confideration, as we conceive. 3dly, The nobleft Part of their Lordships Judicature may not only hereby be loft, but what has been hitherto thought one of the greatest Securities against Attempts upon the Conftitution, by fuch a Difcouragement of the Commons from bringing up Impeachments to the Bar of this Houfe, will be very much weakened. Devonshire, Stamford, Haverfham. Die Veneris 1° Julii, 1698. After hearing Council for and against the Bill, entitled, An Act for raifing a Sum, not exceeding Two Millions,upon a Fund for Payment of Annuities after the Rate of eight Pounds per Centum, per Annum, and for settling the Trade to the Eaft-Indies. Contents 472 18365 Not Cont 282 48 And Debate thereupon, the Queftion was put, whether this Bill fhall be read a fecond Time? It was refolved in the Affirmative. ft, Becaufe this Bill puts an unreasonable Hardship upon the prefent Eaft India Company, fince it plainly appeared at the Bar of this Houfe, that a Security, of which (we conceive) there was no Reafon to doubt, had been offered by the faid Company for raifing the whole two Millions for the publick Service, whereas the Bill invefting the new Subfcribers with the Trade upon the Subfcription of one Million only, does not, as we conceive, give fo much as a Probability of raifing more; and it may be reafonably enough doubted, whether the feparate Trade allowed in this Bill, concurrent with a Joint-stock, may not prove fo inconfiftent as to difcourage the Subfcription from ever coming near to the faid Million.. adly, zdly, Because the Bill puts a Period to the Charter of the Eaft-India Company, and gives the whole Trade thither to other Perfons, without fo much as fuggefting that the faid Charter, or the Trade carried on by Virtue of it, hath been prejudicial to the King or Kingdom, though the faid Company have an exprefs Clause in their Charter, that it fhall not be determined without three Years Warning, even if it fhould appear not profitable to the King or this Realm; and the Bill granting likewise a Supply of Two Millions, in which the Commons pretended the House of Lords ought not to make any Alteration; we are of Opinion their Lordships are thereby likewife deprived of the Freedom of their Vote in the Matter of the Eaft-India Trade, to which it cannot be denied but they have an equal Right with the Commons, and yet by its being joined to a Bill of Supply, this Houfe muft either be the Occafion of difappointing fo large and neceffary a Grant for the publick Service, or be put upon the inreasonable Hardship of confenting to a Matter which, tho' it seems, never fo unjust, it is fruitlefs for them to examine, if their Amendments are not to be admitted, because offered to a Money-Bill, which we humble conceive to be a manifeft Violation of the Rights of this House, and tending to an Alteration of the Conftitution of the Government. Die Jovis 27. Aprilis, 1969. Hodie 3a vice leta eft Billa,entitled, An Act for granting to his Majesty the Sum of one Million, eighty-fourThousand and fifteen Pounds, one Shilling and eleven Pence three Farthings for difbanding the Army, providing for the Navy, and for other neceffary Occafions. The Question was put, whether this Bill fhall pass? Diffentient' Because Because of the Clause at the latter End of the Bill, which conftitutes Commiffioners for enquiring into, and taking an Account of all fuch Eftates real and perfonal, within the Kingdom of Ireland, as have been forfeited for High-Treafon by any Perfons whatsoever during the late Rebellion within that Kingdom; which, we con-ceive, was a Matter foreign to this Bill, and more proper for a Bill by itself, and that the tacking of a Clause of that Nature is contrary to the ancient Method of Pro-ceedings in Parliament, and on that Account, as we ap-prehend, may be of ill Confequence to the Freedom of Debate in either Houfe, and highly prejudicial to the Privileges of the Peers and the Prerogative of the Crown. Anglefey, Raby, Rochefter; Jo. Oxon', Haversham, Cholmondeley, Suffolke, Warrington, Jeffreys. Die Martis 23° Januarii, 1699. After hearing Council at the Bar to argue the Errors affigned upon the Writ of Error depending in this House, wherein Robert Williamfon is Plaintiff, and his Majesty, by his Attorney-General, Defendant, And Debate thereupon, this Queftion was put, whether the Judgment of Reverfal fhall be reverfed ? It was refolved in the Affirmative. Leave being asked and given for any Lord to Diffent, thefe Lords, whofe Names are hereunto fubfcribed, do diffent, for the Reafons following: For that, we conceive, it did not appear, that ever any fuch Judgment was given by the Exchequer before the annexing the Court of Augmentations to the Exchequer. For that fince the diffolving and annexing of the faid Court of Augmentations, there hath no fuch Judgment been given, unless in fuch Cafes which were in the Cognizance of the Court of Augmentations before it was dis-folved. That the Judgments in the Cafe of Sir Henry Neville and Sir Thomas Wroth, and others of the like Nature cited, feems to be by virtue of the Powers of the Court of Augmentations being annexed to the Court of Exchequer. That those Courts were duly annexed, appears by the Preamble of the Statute 1 Eliz. cap. 4. by the Lord Chief Juftice Bromley's Cafe, and by the Cafe of the Earl of Devonshire in Coke's Reports, and for that the Court of First-Fruits and Tenths was diffolved and annexed in like manner to the Exchequer, as the Court of Augmentations was; which Powers, by that Annexation, fubfift in that Court to this Day. Lonsdale, C. P. S. Stamford, Sarum, Rivers, Haversham, Bergevenny, W. Wigorn', Audley. Die Jovis 80 Februarii, 1699. of After reading the Order of the nine and twentieth January laft, for refuming the adjourned Debate concerning the Settlement of the Scotch Colony at Darien, And long Debate thereupon, This Question was propofed, That the Settlement of the Scotch Colony at Darien is inconfiftent with the Good of the Plantation-Trade of this Kingdom. Conts. 32 Diffentient' Then the previous Queftion was put,. whether this Queftion fhall be now Because, as we conceive, there has not been made appear, in this Debate, any Ground fufficient to determine a Point of fo great Importance, and yet it has been refuled to allow Time for due Information in a Matter of Trade, which is very obfcure, and of the highest Confequence to the Quiet and Welfare of both Nations in this Conjuncture. Normanby, Nottingham. Weymouth, Die Veneris 8° Martii, 1690.. After long Debate upon the Evidence for and against the Bill to diffolve the Duke of Norfolk's Marriage with the Lady Mary Mordaunt, and to enable him to marry again, and the Subject-matter of the Bill, Contents 47 Diffentient The Question was put, whether the faid |