Statute Law Repeals - Law Commission - Ministry of Justice

GROUP 12 - NORTHUMBERLAND
Newcastle-upon-Tyne court of conscience
5.43 In 1688 a sizeable proportion of the population of Newcastle-upon-Tyne were
poor artificers and labourers who found it extremely difficult and costly to recover
small debts owed to them. Proceedings had to be issued in London, and whilst
they were away, responsibility for maintenance of their families fell on the city
corporation. The solution was to create (on the London model) a local court with
limited jurisdiction for recovery of small debts.
5.44 The Erecting Newcastle-upon-Tyne Court of Conscience Act 1688 29 authorised
the establishment of a court of requests or conscience for poor people living in
the county and city of Newcastle, to comprise some 13 commissioners
(nominated by the city corporation) supported by a beadle and registrar. The
court was tasked with determining debt and damages actions of up to £2 in value.
Claimants could require a debtor to be summoned before the court and where the
defendant failed to appear or to show just cause he or she could have their goods
levied for distress by default. The court was not able, however, to countenance
actions relating to occupation of land or to probate or matrimonial or
ecclesiastical matters. In order to simplify the process, judgments were not
capable of appeal or higher review. Court fees were prescribed in the legislation.
5.45 Records for the Newcastle court of conscience still exist for the years 1697
through to 1847, at which point jurisdiction would have passed to the new county
courts (which superseded it). The city guildhall, where the court sat, had been
constructed by 1658: the building survives today as a tourist information centre.
The 1688 Act is now obsolete.
Northumberland gaol and courts of justice
5.46 In 1809 the county assizes for Northumberland were held in the moot hall within
Newcastle’s castle garth. The hall, the grand jury room and the holding gaol were
all in a bad state of repair, and they required replacing. The King, who owned the
land and buildings in right of his crown, had signified his willingness to transfer
his interest to the county justices to facilitate reconstruction.
29 1 Will. & Mar. c.17 (1688) (note the italicised arabic chapter number for this private Act).
The Act did not have a short title: the title used here is derived from the Chronological
Table of Private and Personal Acts 1539-1997 published by TSO.
159