Selected quad for the lemma: act_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
act_n	death_n	king_n	treason_n	2,352	5	9.2422	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A44117	The learned readings of Sir Robert Holbourne, Knight upon the statute of 25 Edw. 3. cap. 2, being the statute of treasons : to which is added cases of [brace] prerogative, treason, misprision of treason, felony, &c. / written by the Right Honourable Francis Bacon ... ; and now reprinted for publick benefit.	Holborne, Robert, Sir, d. 1647.; Bacon, Francis, 1561-1626. Cases of treason.	1681 (1681)	Wing H2373; ESTC R34943	30,681	150

THE LEARNED READINGS OF Sir Robert Holbourne Knight Attorney General to King Charles I. UPON The STATUTE of 25 Edw. 3. Cap. 2. Being the Statute of TREASONS To which is added Cases of Prerogative Treason Misprision of Treason Felony c. Written by the Right Honourable FRANCIS BACON Lord Verulam Viscount St. Alban And now Reprinted for the Publick Benefit Indici conjurationis praemia constituta Salust in Conjur Catil LONDON Printed for Sam. Heyrick at Grayes-Inn-Gate in Holborn and Matthew Gilliflower in Westminster-Hall 1681. ERRATA PAge 5. Line 4. for Dejective read Directive pag. 20. lin ult for kill read kills pag. 21. lin 12. for Case r. Care pag. 23. l. 14. for mysteries are read mistress is ibid. l. 15. for there read she p. 35. l. 19. for without read within p. 36 l. 7. for Regne read Rigne p. 37. l. 10. for Aid r. Ayel ibid. l. 18. for Heires Facus r. Haeres Factus p. 49. l. 15. for I. S. r. I. D. p. 55. l. 6. for word r. Ward ibid. l. 14. l. 15. l. 17. for Costigase read Cesty que use THE LEARNED Readings OF Robert Holbourne Esq Lecture I. BEfore the Statute Trespasses were made Felonies Felonies were made Treasons and we could not judge which were Felonies and which were Treasons but it did rest in the breast of the Judges that were in those days For the preventing of which mischief this Statute which I now Read upon was made which hath two Parts The parts of the Statute are first Declarative A Declarative part and that doth declare what shall hereafter be judged Treason And Treason also is commonly divided into two parts that is First High Treason High Treason that is against the Person of the King and that will fall out for this days Work Secondly Petty Treason Petty Treason which is in the latter part of the Statute as will appear hereafter The second part of this Statute is the Dejective part And secondly Dejective High Treason and directs the Judges how far to proceed upon a Fact that is not within the Statute High Treason is against the person of the King or against his Government viz. as against his Judges Seals and Coyns These are the Divisions that I shall make of this Law The definition of Treason It is Lesa Majest The definition of Treason which comprehends the Person of the King and his Officers of Justice For the Person of the King and the Treasons that are committed more immediately against his Person and they are Acts and Persons Persons they are of two sorts Persons against whom and the Persons by whom these Treasons are committed The Acts and they are divers As first Compassing th● Death of the King And fo● explanation of this word Compassing it is an old word signifying not a bringing t● pass only but a going about as you shall find it in Britto● and the Mir. of Just but it is since called in Latine Machinatio and a going about 1 Mar. Bro. tit Treas 24. or compassing is Treason though no effect do follow as a compassing to kill the King though he be not kild so a compassing without any other Act is Treason But there may be an Act done that doth effect the death of the King and yet no Treason if there be no compassing as in the Case of Sir Walter Terril who shooting at a Deer his Arrow glanced against a Tree and struck King William Rufus upon the breast that he died Hollingshead and this was not Treason because there was no compassing And so it is in the Case of a Physitian as if the King takes Physick and dyes of the Physick working yet if it be not notoriously gross and it doth not appear that he did any way compass the Death of the King this is not treason within this Law for in the Case of a common person if a Physitian give one Physick whereof he dyes this is not Felony in him although the Physitian had no License to practice Physick for it is his fault that he will take Physick of him and volenti non fit injuria If the Prince in person assaults a man and drives him so hard against the Wall that if he do not defend himself he will kill him and he cannot do it without danger to the Prince in that Case he ought not to defend himselfe but ought rather to dye than hazard the person of the Prince because he is Caput salus Reipub. and yet Nature doth teach a man to defend himselfe against all danger And thus much for Acts without compassing And yet some of these Acts that are without compassing are left to the Jury to judge of and some others are left to the Judges to judge of as by presumption of Law as in Murder the●● ought to be malice fore●thought and yet if an Officer in executing of his Office b● slain this is Murder by th● Law and yet in this Cas● there do not appear any malice fore-thought and so in this Case the Law makes an Evidence for the Jury and so in deeds of the like Cases The second Act is Violating and this word is derived of vi perdendo but yet it may be done without any force at all The third Act is Levying War against the King And what shall be said of Levying War that may be divers ways As if the Inhabitants of a Town will gather themselves together to pull down the Fences of a Common See Saint John's argument in Sherly of Shefield's Case in which they have no Interest or Common nor ever had this is Treason within this Law but if they had an Interest or Common there then it is no Treason but if they shall do it by Force of Arms in a War-like manner Qu. but in the first Case it is a Levying of War against this Government Another Levying of War may be against the King Nota. as if it be to the displacing of his Officers as in the Earl of Essex his Case in his coming to the City of London for to remove Officers that were about the Queen this was Treason and so it is also to the same purpose in 1 Mar. Dyer 24. and so it appears 1 Mar. Dyer 24. A man may Levy War against the King although he hath no intent to meddle with the person of the King or any way to hurt him and so you shall find also in Bro. Tit. Treason 14. Brok tit Treason 14. And if any Levy War without the King this is a Levying of War within the Law 8 Hen. 8. 8 H. 8. If two conspire to Levy War and one alone doth it this is Treason in both The fourth part is to Adhere to the King's Enemies Nota. ●nd first who shall be said ●o be Enemies within this Law ●econdly who shall be said Adhering to them that are E●emies within this Law This word Enemy cannot extend ●o Subjects for they are Rebels

there is an express proviso for him being the Companion for he is a Companion to the Queen A second Difference between our Case and the Case of the Mistress is that she is his Mistress but gratia and under the power of her Husband but in our Case the King marital hath a Superiority over his Wife as he is her Husband and so our Case is a farre stronger Case If a Child kills his Father or Mother this is Petty Treason and so it was also at the Common Law before the making of this Statute 21 E. 3.17 Bro. tit Sanctuar 2. Bro. tit Treas 6. 21 E. 3.17 Bro. Tit. Sanct. 2. and Bro. Tit. Treas 6. because there is a higher majority of Reason than that of a Servant which is the Reason of the Submission and Duty that is to the Father and Mother from the Child and where there is a majority of Reason or a parity of Reason for the one Case as there is for the other there is always the same Law But you will Object 1 2 Ph. Mar. c. 9. there is a Statute made 1 2 Phil. Mar. cap. 9. that if any shall imagine the death of the King that it shall be Treason and therefore he was not provided for before this Statute and therefore this Statute was made if it were Treason before this Statute then this Statute was made in vain and to no purpose That that Statute doth provide as well for the preservation of the Queen Answ as for the King and makes it Treason for any to compass the death of the Queen and therefore ●t cannot be concluded from ●hence that it was not Treason to compass her death before that Statute The second Reason is because that Statute doth provide for other matters as it doth there appear The next Point is the declaring of this his imagination to I. D. which is an Overt Act 1 Mar. Bro. tit treas 24. The second point for an overt Act is the declaring of his Mindand Intentions to others by such words as imply an Act to follow or by bidding a man to do what he hath intended or to do any thing that may tend to his purpose or by writing to declare his mind but if a man have a thought of Killing the King this is onely Primus motus and although he afterwards tells another that he had such a thought this is no Overt Act but i● he doth cherish this thought then it becomes his own and then he tells it to another that he hath such an intention this is an Overt Act for the words he doth speak are words executory and imply that he will do such an Act Or if A. conspire with B. to kill the King this is an Overt Act but to imagine with himself is not because it cannot come to be known words of encouragement to others is an Overt Act also For conspiring to levy War is the next and this is Treason within this Law although it be not within the words of the Statute but yet it is within the meaning and reason of the Statute for how is it possible for any to Levy War but he must conspire the death of the King Nota. or his deposing at least and the conspiring to do either of these is Treason within this Law as aforesaid and that within this word Compassing which as I said before ●s of a very large extent but I must confess the Intention is not so bad as an actual Levying of War and yet it is as bad in him that doth intend it And this Levying o● War doth mediately look a● the person of the King though not immediately and so in that respect it is Treason and so it is of deposing and so is the Statute of 1 E. 6. cap. 12. and so you shall find it in Doctor Storie 's case 13 Eliz Dyer 298. b. 1 E. 6.12 Dyer Story 's Case 13 Eliz. Dyer 298. who did conspire with a Foreign Prince to invade this Land and shewed him a means how to conquer this Kingdom and yet there was no Act done by that Prince against the Queen yet this is adjudged Treason and the reason there yielded was because this Invasion could not possibly be without great hazard and peril to the person of the Queen which is a very full Case in proving of this point 19 H. 6.47 But a conspiring to Coyn Money is not Treason within this Law because it is not against the person of the King but yet if two shall conspire to coyn Money and one doth it alone without the other yet this is Treason in both The third point is that I. S. after he became mad kills the Queen this is Treason within this Law first because a man may counterfeit himself to be mad and he may do it so cunningly as it cannot be discerned whether he be mad or no. The second Reason is in respect of the great esteem that the Law gives to the person of the King for he is the Fountain of Justice and for the proof of this point that it may be understood we ought to see what the Common Law was before the making of this Statute as to this Point and then we ought to enquire and see how the Law is altered since the making of the Statute and by this means we shall find out the Law and the reason thereof it is true that the Law without special words will not bind an Insant or a Mad-man as to the punishment of their Bodies but yet it will extend to their Lands and Estates but this our Law is no new Law but only a Declarative Law and in that Case general words will bind an Infant or a Mad-man without any special words That it was Treason at the Common Law is apparent in Britton and the Mirrour of Justice and this Statute doth not declare who shall be Traytors but what shall be Treason and therefore by this Act it is Treason in a Mad-man or whomsoever shall commit it for a Mad-man is not excepted out of this Law and to make this appear more fully you may be pleased to read the Case of Beverly See Beverleys Case Com. 124. in Com. 124. That a man that is non composmentis may commit High Treason although he cannot commit Petty Treason nor Felony Daltons Just 206. and so it is also in Dalton's Justice of Peace 206. that if a man that is non compos mentis shall kill the King this is High Treason Nay Beverley's Case goes farther and sayes That if he shall offer only to kill the King this is High Treason Nota. because the King is Caput salus Reipub. à Capite bona valetudo transit in omnes and for this Cause his person is so Sacred that none must offer the least violence to him but he is Reus criminis laesae Majestatis pereat unus ne pereant omnes The second Conclusion is That I. S. is

adjudged and declared in Parliament And all other Treasons that are not here declared ought to be Felonies at the least because Felonies were made Treasons before the Stattute and because the words of the Statute are that it ought to be Treason or Felony but if it be but once declared in Parliament unless there be a Proviso that the Judges shall not proceed upon the like Cases they may afterwards proceed by force of this Statute There are Treasons at the Common Law notwithstanding the Stat. of 1 Mar. for that did take away those Treasons and Declarations of Treasons that were made in Parliaments from the time of our Statute to 1 Mar. but doth not take away the declarative Power in our Statute mentioned nor the Common Law but they do remain still as before FINIS CASES OF TREASON CHAP. I. WHERE a man doth compass or imagine the Death of the King the King's Wife the King 's eldest Son and Heir apparent if it appear by any overt act it is Treason Where a man doth violate the King's Wife the King 's eldest Daughtter unmarried the Wife of the King 's eldest Son and Heir apparent it is Treason Where a man doth levie War against the King in the Realm it is Treason Where a man is adherent to the King's Enemies giving them aid and comfort it is Treason Where a man counterfeiteth the King's Great Seal Privy Signet Sign Manual it is Treason likewise his Money Where a man bringeth into this Realm false money counterfeited to the likeness of English with intent to merchandise or make payment thereof and knowing it to be false money it is Treason Where a man counterfeiteth any Coyn current in payment within this Realm it is Treason Where a man doth bring in any money being current within the Realm the same being false and counterfeit with intent to utter it and knowing the same to be false it is Treason Where a man doth clip waste round or file any of the King's money or any Foreign Coyn current by Proclamation for gain-sake it is Treason Where a man doth any way impair diminish falsifie skale or lighten money current by Proclamation it is Treason Where a man killeth the Chancellor the Treasurer the King's Justices in Eire the King's Justices of Assises the Justices of Oyer and Terminer being in their several Places and doing their Offices it is Treason Where a man procureth or consenteth to Treason it is Treason Where a man doth persuade or withdraw any of the Kings Subjects from his obedience or from the Religion by his Majesty established with intent to withdraw any from the Kings obedience it is Treason Where a man is absolved reconciled or withdrawn from his obedience to the King or promiseth obedience to any Foreign Power it is Treason Where any Jesuit or any other Priest ordained since the first year of the Reign of Qu. Elizabeth shall come into or remain in any part of this Realm it is Treason Where any Person being brought up in a Colledge of Jusuits or Seminaries shall not return within six months after Proclamation made and within two dayes after his return submit himself to take the Oath of Supremacy if otherwise he do return and not within six months after Proclamation made it is Treason Where a man committed for Treason doth voluntarily break Prison it is Treason Where a Jaylor doth voluntarily permit a man committed for Treason to escape it is Treason Where a man relieveth or comforteth a Traitor and knoweth of the Offence it is Treason Where a man doth affirm or maintain any Authority of Jurisdiction Spiritual or doth put in ure or execute any thing for the advancement of setting forth thereof the third time it is Treason VVhere a man refuseth to take the Oath of Supremacy being tendred by the Bishop of the Diocese if he be any Ecclesiastical Person or by Commission out of the Chancery if he be a temporal Person such Offence the second time is Treason CHAP. II. The Punishment Tryal and Proceeding in Cases of Treason IN Treason the Corporal Punishment is by drawing on an hurdle from the place of the Prison to the place of Execution by hanging and being cut down alive bowelling and quartering and in VVomen burning In Treason there ensueth a corruption of blood in the Line ascending and descending In Treason Lands and Goods are forfeited and Inheritance as well intailed as Fee-simple and the profits of Estates for Life In Treason the Escheats go to the King and not to the Lord of the Fee In Treason the Land forfeited shall be in the Kings actual possession without Office In Treason there be no Accessaries but all are Principals In Treason no Sanctuary nor benefit of Clergy or peremptory Challenge is allowed In Treason if the Party stand mute yet nevertheless Judgment and Attainder shall proceed all one as upon Verdict In Treason no Counsel is to be allowed nor Bail permitted to the Party In Treason no Witnesses shall be received upon Oath for the Parties Justification In Treason if the Fact be committed beyond the Seas yet it may be tryed in any County where the King will award his Commission In Treason if the Party be non sanae memoriae yet if he had formerly confessed it before the Kings Council and that it be certified that he was of good Memory at the time of his Examination and Confession the Court may proceed to do Judgment without calling or arraigning the Party In Treason the death of the Party before Conviction dischargeth all Proceedings and Forfeitures In Treason if the Parties be once acquitted he should not be brought in question again for the same Fact In Treason no new Case not expressed in the Statute of 25 E. 3. or made Treason by any special Statute since ought to be judged Treason without consulting with the Parliament In Treason there can be no Prosecution but at the King's suit and the Kings Pardon dischargeth In Treason the King cannot grant over to any Subject Power and Authority to pardon it In Treason a Trial of a Peer of the Kingdom is to be by special Commission before the Lord high Steward and those that pass upon him to be none but Peers The Proceeding is with great Solemnity the Lord Steward sitting under a cloth of Estate with a white rod of Justice in his hand and the Peers may conferr together but are not any ways shut up and are demanded by the Lord Steward their Voices one by one and the plurality of Voices carries it In Treason it hath been an ancient Use and Favour from the Kings of this Realm to pardon the Execution of hanging drawing and quartering and to make Warrant for their beheading The Proceeding in case of Treason with a common Subject is in the Kings Bench or by Commission of Oyer and Terminer CHAP. III. Cases of Misprision of Treason WHere a man concealeth high Treason only without any consorting or abetting it is misprision of Treason

not a Traytor within this Law for imagining the death of the Grandchild yet he is within the Care and Protection of the Law for he is not within the Words of the Law but without the Intention and Reason of the Law for the words are That if any man shall compass the death of the Kings Eldest Son that is Treason but in the French Language in which this Law was first written it is Le Regne fils heir and yet if the Eldest Son dyes the second Son is within the Law because he is then the Eldest Son and so it is of the third Son for then he is also Heir Apparent and he is within the intention and meaning of this Law And so to this purpose is the Princes Case in Report 8. where it is Princes Case 8. Report that the Second Son shall be Duke of Cornwal after the death of the Eldest and yet it is only limited to the Eldest Son A collateral Heir is also within this Statute because as he conceiveth this Statute intends to provide that the next Heir to the Crown shall be secured from danger And the Case that may be likened to this is that where a Writ of Aid may be brought by the next Heir for the Writ saith Cujus haeres ipse est F. N. B. 221 F. N. B. 221. so that it appears that it lies only for the Heir Lineal or Collateral Male or Female The Eldest Daughter is also within our Law Heires Facus is also a grand Heir within this Law but this imagining or compassing the Death of the Grandchild or of any other Heir is not Treason unless there be a sufficient Declaration of it to another for no man can judge of the thoughts for the imagination only can be no Overt Act and this Declaration of his imagination or compassing to I. D. is not a sufficient Overt Act to make him a Traytor within this Law for he told him that he had only such an imagination which is but Primus motus for he doth not say that he will do it in the Future Tense for that may be Treason for that it doth imply an Act to be done afterward but the other is onely against that is past Then for violating the Wife after she is divorc'd this is not Treason within this Law And yet the divorce is but a mensa thoro but it is such a divorce as deprives her of his Company and so she is not his Companion within this Law but yet she is his Wife and a Wife divorc't a mensa thoro shall have her divorce because that divorce doth not dissolve the Marriage but she remains his Wife still but yet if she hath any Children during that divorce they are all Bastards because she is not to keep her Husband Company A Queen Dowager is not within this Law because she is not Companion to the King that then is and is not provided for by this Law for the words of the Statute are If any shall violate the Kings Companion Lecture II. THE Second Lecture The Second Lecture according to my first Division is concerning the Government and that is First in the Seal which is Clavis Regni The Second in his Money and Coyn. The Third in his Offices For the First which are the Seals and they are first The Great Seal Secondly the Privie Seal And Thirdly the Seal of the Exchequer And of all these Seals the Common Law takes special notice as that the King may grant to one Power to make one Attorney under the Privie Seale and so is 37 H. 3.27 b. Co. 2.17 Lams Case 37 H. 3.27 Co. 2.17 Lams Case and so of the other Seals but our Law takes notice of the great Seal only as for point of Treason for the words are exclusive to all other Seals for that being the greatest excludes all other inferior Seals that are the least Now what shall be said of counterfeiting of this Great Seal and that must be by making another Seal like to this and for to Seal Patents with it for to make a Seal like the Great Seal to put this to a piece of Wax onely is no counterfeiting of the Great Seal but there ought to be a Writing annexed unto it and then it is a Counterfeiting within this Law Nota. but if the Lord Keeper doth Seal a Patent without special Authority from the King yet this is no Counterfeiting within this Law or if any one do find this Great Seal or other wayes obtain it and Seals Patents therewith this is not Counterfeiting neither within this Law for if the Seal be truly and in due manner put to a Patent and afterwards the Patentee doth raze or add to the Patent in any place this is no Counterfeiting as it is in Lakes Case Lakes Case 4 Jac. 4 Jac. and yet the razing of a Deed is the forging of a Deed. Secondly concerning counterfeiting the Kings Coyn and this ought to be intended only of the Kings own Money for that only is meant by this Law and not any Foreign Money but Foreign Money is provided for by another Law The coyning of Copper if it be made Currant is also within this Law for it is only in the power of the King to imbase Coyn as it is apparent in the Case of Money in Davices Reports Case of Money in Davices Reports for the King is Master of the Coyn but in the Mirrour of Justice it is said the King cannot alter his coyn for those things are not in this Law because they are not Currant within this Realm Foreign Money is not within this law because at the time when this Law was made all Foreign Money that was brought into this Realm was but Bullion because it was a great deal worser than that of this Nation and Foreigners afterwards did make their Coyn finer and than it was made Currant here by a Statute and so within this Law If any that have Authority and Power to Mint or Coyn and he coyn pieces that are less in weight than they ought to have been by the Authority by him given this is a counterfeiting because he hath not pursued his Authority and so is as if he had no Authority to make it of that weight which he hath made it And so is the 3 H. 7. c. 10. to counterfeit Foreign Money 3 H. 7. c. 10 and to bring it over is not a counterfeiting within this Law but if one counterfeit the Coyn of this Kingdom beyond the Sea and brings it over and Merchandizes with it 6 H. 7.13 and thereby deceive our Merchants this is a counterfeiting as in the Book aforesaid And if one counterfeit the Coyn of this Kingdom although he doth not put it to others yet this is a counterfeiting within this Law 6 H. 7.13 1 H. 31. Bro. Tit. Treas 27. Stamf. Pleas 3. D. 1 R. 3.1 Bro. Tit. Treas 27. Stam. pl. 3. D. What shall

we say to the bringing in of Money what not the bringing in of Foreign Money ought to be intended of Money that is counterfeited in another Realm and like unto ours for the words are so Money and not of Foreigners Money If two conspire to Coyn and Counterfeit and one of them doth it 19 H. 6.43 Stam. pl. 3. it is Treason in both 19 H. 6.43 Stamf. Pleas 3. a. but an intention to counterfeit is not Treason within this Law The Barons of the Exchequer are within this Law and it is agreed in Tanfields Case who was one of the Barons of the Exchequer that he was within the words of the Statute and the words of Oyer and Terminer are within this Law but all other Judges are not as the Ecclesiastical Judges are not within this Law for they hold with the Court of Rome and did derive their Authority from him in ancient Time Neither is a Constable within this Law The second Case I. S. Slits the Great Seal The second Case and closeth it to a Commission and coyns Money in the form of Shillings invertendo the Arms kills the Lord Keeper of the Great Seal in Chancery and brings in false Money like English to Merchandize knowing it to be false but doth not offer it and I. S. knowing this doth succour him The Conclusion is that I. D. is a Traytor in omnibus and I. D. also within this Law the first Act is slitting of the Seal and putting of it to the Commission and that is Treason first because that is slit whereby it is become now no Seal at all it cannot be said that this half is the Broad Seal or that the other half is the Broad Seal for they both together make but one Broad Seal and when he hath closed them together again and joyned them to a Commission he hath made the Seal a new for it was no Seal when it was slit but now it is The second Reason is in respect of the mischief that doth come by this translating of an old Seal to a new Commission for both the King and his Subjects are as much abused as if it had been counterfeited and the Reason of Laws and not Authority ought to be our Rule to go by for judicandum est legibus 40 Ass 33. Bro. Tit. Treas 17. Brit. cap. 4. fol. 10. non exemplis and so he conceiveth the Case in Bro. Tit. Treas ● to be no grand Law This was Treason also at Common Law as you shall find it exprest in Britton cap. 4. fol. 10. and in the Mirror of Justice cap. 1. sect 6. and since the Statute in the same Kings time that this Statute was made in and they who knew best the Reasons and Grounds of this Statute and the meaning thereof and were at the making thereof by all likelihood did adjudge it Treason to take an old Seal from an old Patent and to put it to a new one as in 40 Ass pl. 33. and 2 H. 4.33 and Stamford saith 40 Ass pl. 33. 2 H. 4.33 that it was so adjudged in his time In all Treasons that do concern the person of the King the judgement ought to be That he shall be hanged drawn and quartered but for other Treasons that do not immediately concern the person of the King the judgment ought to be That he shall be drawn and hanged only and not that he shall be quartered 1 H. 6.5 19 H. 6.47 6 H. 7.13 As it is in 1 H. 6.5 19 H. 6.47 The second Act is The Counterfeiting of the Kings Money and the inverting of the Arms of the King whereby the Kings Liege people and others may be deceived for that is a sufficient Alteration to make it Treason although it be such a one as cannot be discerned without special notice taken of it And this doth appear by the judgment given in the Star-Chamber for the counterfeiting of Farthings And it is Treason for any man to bear the Kings Arms as it appears in the Earl of Surreys Case The third Act is The killing of the Officers of the King as of the Lord Keeper and that is Treason within this Law for the Lord Keeper is now Chancellor although at that time when this Statute was made the Lord Chancellors Office and the Lord Keepers Office were two several and distinct Offices yet they are made now both one Office 5 Eliz. c. 18 15 E. 3. c. 2 and that is by the Statute of 5 Eliz. cap. 18. and this Statute of 15 E. 3. cap. 2. may and doth extend to that Statute of 5 Eliz. which comes after as is very fully exprest to the purpose though not to this Case in Co. 4. fol. 4. Vernon's Case the Statute of Marleborough which was made 52 H. 3. gave the word of the Tenant that held by Knight-service notwithstanding he had made a Feoffment by collusion from which time and for 200 years and more till the Statute of the 4. of H. 7. cap. 17. which gave the Ward of the Heir of Costigase the Heir of Costigase was not in Ward and yet it is held in the 27 of H. 8.9 that if Costigase after the Statute of 4 H. 7. makes a Feoffment in Fee by collusion to defraud the Lord of his Ward that this is taken within the Equity of the Statute of Marleborough and so of divers other Cases that you may see there cited in Vernon's Case above mentioned The Fourth Act is The bringing in of false Money like unto our English Money for to Merchandize withal and this is Treason for here is not only an intent but there is also an Act joyned with this intent for he brings over this Money which is the Act with an intent to Merchandize The second Conclusion is that I. D. is a Traytor within this Law and his Treason doth go or extend to all the other four Treasons that were committed by I. S. for this succouring of him after the Fact committed makes him a Traytor within this Law And at the Common Law before the making of this Statute if a man had succoured one that had committed Treason knowing him to have committed it he had been a Traytor And so if one doth now succour a Felon it is Felony in the Succourer And why should it not be so in our Case For the Reason of Law in our Case is far stronger that the Succourer of a Traytor should be a Traytor than the succouror of a Felon should be a Felon because the Offence is greater and therefore it is an aggravation of his punishment to make him that no man shall receive or succour him for we see the Law inflicts a greater punishment upon a Traytor than upon a Felon and that is to deterr men from such Acts as those are And so it appears that there is Reason why he should be a Traytor although he be not within the words of the Statute And therefore it is in the Reason of the