Middle Temple Library's collection of legal notes from Sir Vicary Gibbs: A blog post by intern Florent Etheve.
I have spent the last few months transcribing and cataloguing volumes 1 through 4 of MS45, a collection of legal notes from Sir Vicary Gibbs (1751-1820). Gibbs began his legal career as a special pleader, was Called to the Bar in 1783, and became King’s Counsel in 1794. His career would also involve the role of Chief Justice of Chester (1804), Solicitor General (1805), Attorney General (1806), and puisne judge (1812) until his death in 1820.
Where exactly MS45 fits in Sir Vicary Gibbs’ career is unclear. The cases in volumes 1 to 4 cover cases from 1778 to 1780, aligning with his time as a special pleader. However many of the cases in Gibbs’ notes align with those found in the Nominate Reports, in particular the Right Hon. Sylvester Douglas’ (1723-1743) Report of Cases Argued and Determined In the Court of the King’s Bench in the Nineteenth, Twentieth, and Twenty-First Years of the Reign of King George III. It is therefore possible that Gibbs was drawing on this report or another similar source, rendering a specific date for the notes difficult to ascertain with much specificity.
The uncertainty of the place of these notes within Gibbs’ career extends beyond their date. The exact purpose of the notes is also unclear, in particular due to the lack of context regarding Gibbs’ concurrent career. The most likely use was as a source for Gibbs’ legal education that he could refer to for precedent and legal insight. This would have been more common at this time, with the system of legal education much less centralized than today.
Interestingly, the majority of these cases revolve around financial law- debts, bankruptcies, inheritances, and insurances make up the majority of the collection, although whether this was due to Gibbs’ own interest in the area, the available cases at the time, or happenstance in what documents entered into the archival record. This is particularly unclear on account of Gibbs’ notes being bound together and indexed at a later point than when they were first written, with the handwriting of the Table of Contents differing from that of the notes.
In addition, these notes also include multiple criminal cases, a notable departure from Sylvester Douglas’ focus on civil cases. This makes these notes a valuable source on criminal law in the late 18th century, especially useful when considering the many shifts in the legal and political landscape of England at the time.
One particularly intriguing case found in Gibbs’ notes is Rex v. Austin & Leonard, a case from Michealmas of 1780 which involves Jan Walraad van Welderen (1725-1807), the Dutch Ambassador to the United Kingdom. The case centers around an incident where one of Van Welderen’s servants was arrested. Despite not disclosing his employment with the ambassador to the arresting sherrif’s officer, this led to a breach of ambassadorial privilege, specifically under the 1708 Diplomatic Privileges Act. The Act clearly stated that ambassadorial privilege extended to the ambassador’s servants, offering them protection from arrest. As a result, Austin and Leonard were ordered by the court to go to Count Van Welderen’s residence with an apology for the breach. The sherrif’s officer was fined £30, equivalent to about £4,500 today, and the other defendant, a tradesman, was imprisoned for three months. Gibbs’ notes on the text read as follows:
Rex v Austin & Leonard (Michaelmas 1780)
Information against the Plaintiff in the Cause & the Officer executing an arrest upon a servant of the Count de Welderen Ambassador from Holland. They suffered judgement by default & now, being brought up for judgement they made affidavit – The Plaintiff that he did not know to whom the house belonged or that Count Welderen was an ambassador. The Officer that he knew neither defendant nor House nor anything about it ‘till he was carried there by the Plaintiffs and that as soon as he was informed of it by the Count’s Secretary he departed.
The Court ordered them both to be carried forth a Paper on their Breasts to the Count de Welderen tomorrow & the Plaintiff to be imprisoned three months; the Officer to pay £30.
There is also additional marginal commentary noted down by Gibbs.
Judgement for violating the privilege of an ambassador by arresting his servant.
1 – Rex v Austin & Leonard, folio 6-7
The specific reasons the servant was arrested are unclear, as are their reasons for not mentioning who their employer was. One possibility is that the servant spoke only Dutch, which may have prevented them from communicating the legal implications of their arrest to the authorities. However, details about the case are sparse, leaving the rest to speculation.
The case is notable not only for its legal implications but also for its timing. It occurred just before the outbreak of the Fourth Anglo-Dutch War, when tensions between the United Kingdom and the Dutch Republic were escalating. By December 1780, the UK had effectively declared war on the Dutch by recalling its ambassador, signalling the start of hostilities. The breach of ambassadorial privilege in Rex v. Austin parallels these rising tensions, highlighting the delicate balance of diplomatic relations even as Britain prepared for war.
This is highlighted in the case, with the question of the influence of these tensions on the events leading to the arrest. The officer’s actions may reflect the increasingly strained relations between England and Holland, or perhaps solely highlight the difficulties of language barriers.
Beyond the diplomatic and legal aspects, the case also offers insights into the class dynamics of the period. Servants were a significant part of the workforce in 18th-century Europe, often occupying lower social strata, regardless of their employer’s status. The arresting officer, likely from a working-class background, was subjected to a substantial financial penalty. This fine could have been a significant burden, highlighting the economic stakes of these cases.
Unfortunately, many details of the case remain unclear. The identity of the plaintiff (Austin or Leonard), who served a three-month sentence, is never revealed in Gibbs’ notes. Similarly, the exact position of the servant in the household remains unclear, leaving gaps in our understanding of their social role. The fact that Gibbs (or his note-taker) chose to focus solely on Count Van Welderen further limits our insight into the individuals involved in the case.
Despite these gaps, Rex v. Austin & Leonard provides a fascinating snapshot of 18th-century law at the intersection of diplomacy, class, and legal procedure. The case underscores the enduring importance of ambassadorial privileges, even as tensions between European powers were on the rise. However, it is also one of the last cases before the end of a period of relatively stable diplomatic procedures, with British-Dutch relations not being fully restored for another 25 years—by which point both nations would find themselves in a very different place in the geopolitical landscape.
“1708: 7 Anne c.12: Diplomatic Privileges Act.” The Statutes Project, April 24, 2017. https://statutes.org.uk/site/the-statutes/eighteenth-century/1708-7-anne-c-12-diplomatic-privileges-act/.
“Adams Papers Digital Edition.” Adams Papers Digital Edition - Massachusetts Historical Society. Accessed April 14, 2025. https://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/view-index/consolidated/W/9300769.
Baris, Paul. “Jan Walraad Graaf Van Welderen (1725-1807)" Stamboom Baris " Genealogie Online.” Genealogie Online. Accessed April 14, 2025. https://www.genealogieonline.nl/stamboom-baris/I76263.php.
De Bruin, Renger. ‘An Elite within Dutch Nobility. The Teutonic Order Bailiwick of Utrecht, 1640-1840’ Cahiers de la Mediterranee 104, 2022: 161-176, https://doi.org/10.4000/cdlm.15756.
Gibbs, Sir Vicary. MS45, Middle Temple Library, London.
Glenbervie, SD, Roscoe, H, Frere, W & Great Britain. Court of King’s Bench. Reports of cases argued and determined in the Court of King’s Bench, in the nineteenth, twentieth and twenty-first [to twenty-second, twenty-third, twenty-fourth, and twenty-fifth] years of the reign of George III. London: Reed and Hunter, 1813.
'House of Lords Journal Volume 27: December 1748', in Journal of the House of Lords Volume 27, 1746-1752(London, 1767-1830), British History Online, accessed April 14, 2025, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/lords-jrnl/vol27/pp251-257.
“J.W. (GRAAF) van Welderen.” DBNL. Accessed April 4, 2025. https://www.dbnl.org/auteurs/auteur.php?id=weld010. Scott, H. M. “Sir Joseph Yorke, Dutch Politics and the Origins of the Fourth Anglo-Dutch War.” The Historical Journal 31, no. 3 (1988): 571–89. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0018246X00023499.
kianamaiart
theartofmadeline
ellievsbear
origamiaround
blakekathryn