Welsh Journals

the ore and that Lady Pryse 'came and took the bag away'. It was then ordered that Simon and Edward Pryse should appear before the House to answer for the offence.! Two days later Sir Carbury Pryse complained in the House of Commons of a breach of privilege committed against him by John Knowles, John Price, Rees Vaughan and Thomas Lewis, in that they had entered upon his mines in Cardigan- shire. The House resolved 'that entering upon the Mines is a breach and that the four men be sent for in custody of the Serjeant at Arms. On the 9 December the matter was adjourned until the following Friday, and finally on 29 December the House being informed that the matter was composed and that Sir Carbury Pryse was willing that the accused be discharged out of custody without being brought to the Bar, this was agreed to on condition that they paid their fees.2 In the meantime the Earl of Suffolk and his friends were pressing their charges against the Pryses. On 19 November Simon and Edward Pryse were in the custody of the Black Rod, but having also come to London to testify before the Committee of Elections of the House of Commons in the matter of John Vaughan v. Carbury Pryse3 the Lords agreed to defer their hearing awhile. A week later Sir John Brattle, Mr. Bolles, and Mr. Robinson, 'Assay Master', were ordered to attend to be sworn as witnesses on the 27th when a further postponement of the hearing until i December was agreed upon. After even another delay on the i ith, on the 20 December the House of Lords, on a motion, ordered them to be discharged, 'there being an agreement made to try the title at law'. 4 The trial which resulted was that between the society of Mines Royal and Sir Carbury Pryse. The case was first opened at the Bar of the Court of Exchequer by the Attorney General, Sir George Corby, on 26 June 1691, and although after a lengthy hearing the jury had found for the defendant, the King's patentees successfully applied to the Court four days later for a retrial. Upon the motion of Counsel for their Majesties, after hearing the Attorney General, the Solicitor General and the ten counsel who represented the parties (there were five on either side), the Court of Exchequer on i July 1691 ordered a second hearing during the following Michaelmas Term upon payment of good costs by the parties concerned. It was also decreed that in the meantime their Majesties' representatives were to be allowed to take ten ton of ore from the mine at Esgair Hir where they thought fit. In case the verdict should pass to the defen- dants they were to be paid £ 6 a ton for the ore, without prejudice to the title of either side to make assays according to the formal orders of the Court. Furthermore no other ore was to be moved by the defendants without the permission of the Court but that account of it be kept. Counsel for their Majesties should name some impartial person to see the ore, and also propose ways for making assays to the satisfaction of the Court. Some 1 Journals of the House of Lords, Vol. XIV, pp. 557 and 559. Rep. Hist. MSS. Comnt., 13th App., V, p. 184. 2 Journals of the House of Lords, Vol. X, pp. 451, 502, and 514. 3 Cf. N.L.W. Journal, Vol. VIII, No. 2 (1953), p. 181. 4 Journals of the House of Lords, Vol. XIV, pp. 565, 568, 585, and 599.