Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	according_a	judge_n	law_n	2,498	5	5.0932	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B20656	A second account in short, of the substance of the proceeding in the court of Kingstone upon Thames, upon the matter between R. Mayo the priest, plaintiffe, and E. Burrough defendant, the 25. of the seventh moneth 1658.	Cooke, Edward, fl. 1658-1670.	1658 (1658)	Wing C6005; Interim Tract Supplement Guide 855.f.3[42]; ESTC R229342	9,318	9

THE Cause why this is first Printed before it come to your hands is because I would not give cause of Suspition that I seek any thing in secret or under-hand of you But would have all things come to Light and publick view for I love the Light and the Truth to be justified thereby or to suffer for the Testimony thereof A second Account in short of the substance of the proceeding in the Court of Kingstone upon Thames upon the matter between R. Mayo the Priest Plantiffe and E. Burrough Defendent the 25. of the seventh Moneth 1658. ●irst THe Judgement of the Court was earnestly craved and desired by R. Mayo and his Councellors against E B. upon a verdict on record in the Court formerly given by an injust jury as my former account of the former proceeding declareth And E. B. was called ● answer for himselfe and shew what reason he could that Judgement ●ould not be given against him who did appear and answer in the ●ar of the Lord saying that he was come before their judgement seat ●ith great boldnesse because he had the Lord on his side and Truth ●n his side and the witnesse of God in all Consciencies on his side to ●●stifie him that he had done R. Mayo no wrong but had spoken the ●ruth of him And for this cause judgement ought to be arrested and ●ot given against him because said he the Law condemnes no man ●or speaking the Truth and he had spoken nothing but the Truth con●erning R. Mayo as he was alwayes ready to prove that R Mayo had ●eld forth damnable Doctrine and Error and this was sufficient reason ●hat judgement ought to be arrested and not given nor he condemned ●or speaking the Truth And he referred himselfe to the Court and ●o the witnesse of God in them all whether they would condemn ●im or justify him but and if they did passe judgement upon him it ●as onely for speaking the Truth and not for any wrong done by him ●nd it should lye upon themselves and be their burden though he ●ight unjustly suffer in this life by unjust judgement yet theirs would ●e the judgement and the suffering in the life to come when God did ●●●eward every man according to his work and he would leave it upon ●hem and to this purpose he spoke unto them Then R. Mayos Coun●ellors and the Court pleaded that there was a verdict by jury against ●im and that the Court was to go upon the verdict which appeared ●pon record against the defendant to which E. B. replyed it was true ●n unjust verdict they had against him but what then he would ●pply himselfe and his cause to the Judge in the sight of the Lord if ●ossibly he might be convinced of the unrighteousnesse of the verdict ●nd might not he then justly mitigate in the judgement and deferre it ●nd deny the verdict and he did appeal to their Consciencies that it was an unjust verdict for the jury had brought the matter to a wrong ●ssue and had not determined and judged according to the Truth and ●nnocency of the matter nor brougth it to a Lawful issue but had damnified him falsely before they found any matter of fact against him or the Tru●h of the matter was not searched into nor the Doctrine ●as not tryed nor determined of by the jury which he had charged and ●roved in Court against R. Mayo which Doctrine was damnable and error but of the Doctrine the Jury had not judged whether it was sound and true or damnable and error which the true issue of the matter stood upon but the Jury had unjustly damnified him for speaking maliciously as they said before any matter of fact truly found and made appear according to equity and that was injust and therefore again judgement ought to be arrested upon that reason because they had not truly tryed the matter whether R. Mayos sayings charged and proved against him were damnable Doctrine and Error or whether they were not so which was the true cause to be tryed but they had condemned him for speaking such words not trying and determining whether the words were true or false words and till that was tryed and his words proved false words he could be no Transgressor this was the substance and intent of his words then R. Mayos Councel again replyed that he might then blame the Jury but according to the verdict upon record against the defendent the Court was to proceed then the Recorder of the Court said reasonably to this purpose that the Jury was Judges of matter of fact and he was judge in matter of Law and if any thing could be objected or error discovered in the businesse as in matter of Law by what appeared upon record to that he would harken for R. Mayo had in his Replication laid in that E B. spoke the words charged against him without any such cause by him in his plea alledged c. Whereupon T. Moor gave divers Arguments as in matter of Law and also produced the judgement of one Judge and three Lawers in writing under their hands shewing divers sound reasons wherefore judgement ought to be arrested in this cause shewing clearly according to Law that the words charged against E. B. to wit saying R. Mayo held forth damnable Doctrine and Error which is reckoned his offence and wherefore the Jury gave verdict against him and the Priest and his Councellors begged judgement are not actionable in Law instancing out of Cookes Institutes particular causes of the like nature which could not bear an action and much as to that purpose was spoken and shewed under the four mens hands as afore said which were just exceptions in point of Law against the verdict upon record wherefore judgement ought to be arrested and not passed in this cause against the defendant but to all what was shewed and spoken to that purpose R. Mayos Councels replyed the time was now past to aledge these things for the Jury had given their verdict upon oath against the defendant wch was upon record and thereupon waved all the reasons that could be given though never so sound and begged the judgement of the Court as afore said against him but then E. B. returned to the naked Truth and came again to the simplicity and innocency of the matter and waved all the multitude of Arguments that could be spoken about points and formalities of the Law pleading that whereas the Court had given him liberty according to his right and birth right priviledge that he might plead his own cause and he instanced the time of his alledgement wherein he did say peradventure he might not plead his cause in the formalities and punctilios in the course of Law yet he could plead the justness and simplicity of the Truth in the matter and the Court then had said that would serve and be sufficient and said E. B. the Court having thus spoken formerly must I now be condemned for the want of a