4 of November then there is an Alias habeas bears Teste after that and the tenour thereof is a command to the Warden of the Fleet quod habeas corpus Walteri Earl coram nobis ad subjiciendum recipiendum ea quae curia nostra de eo c. ordin conting And the Warden of the Fleet he certifies as your Lordship have heard May it please your Lordship I desire as before was desired for the other Gentlemen that Sir Walter Earl may be also bailed if there be no other cause of his imprisonment for if there were a cause certified and that cause were not sufficient to detain him still in prison your Lordship would bail him and if a man should be in worse case when there is no cause certified at all that was very hard The writ is that he should bring the prisoner coram nobis before the King the end of that is ad subjiciendum recipiendum now I conceive that though there be a signification of the Kings pleasure to have this Gentleman imprisoned yet when the King grants this writ to bring the prisoner hither ad subjictendum recipiendum his pleasure likewise is to have the prisoner let go if by Law he be not chargeable or otherwise to detain him still in prison if the case so require it I will put your Lordship in mind of a case and it was Pasch. 9. Ed. 3. M. 3. I will cite by the placita because my Book is not paged as other Books are it is in the case of a Cessavit In that case there were two things considerable the one that there was a signification of the Kings pleasure past and that determined with him the other that though there was a signification of the Kings pleasure before which was yet there comes after that a writ and that was another signification of the Kings pleasure that the prisoner should be brought hither ad subjiciendum to submit himself to punishment if he have deserved it or ad recipiendum to receive his enlargement and be delivered if there be no cause of his imprisonmet And if upon an Habeas corpus a cause of commitment be certified that cause is to be tried here before your Lordship But if no cause be shewn then the proceedings must be ut curia nostra ad mar contigerit the Court must do that which stands with Law and Justice and that is to deliver him My Lord I shall be bold to move one word more touching this return I conceive that every Officer to a Court of Justice must make his return of his own act or of the act of another and not what he is certified of by another But in this case the Warden of the Fleet doth not certifie himself of himself that this Gentleman was commanded to him by the King but that he was certified by the Lords of the Councill that it was the Kings pleasure that he should detain him But in our case the Warden of the Fleet must certifie the immediate cause and not the cause of the cause as it doth by this return Detentus est sub custodia mea per speciale mandatum Domini Regis mihi significatum per Warrantum duorum de Privato Concilio that is not the use in Law but he ought to return the primary cause and not the subsequent cause as in 32 Edw. 3. return Rex vicecom 87. in a writ De homine replegiando against an Abbot the Sheriffe returns that he hath sent to the Bayliffe of the Abbot and he answered him that the party was the Abbots villain and so he cannot deliver him that is held an insufficient return and a new Alias was granted but if the Sheriffe had returned that the Abbot did certifie him so it had been good but he must not return what is certified him by another In one of the presidents that hath been noted as that of Parker 22 Hen. 8. there the Guardian of the prison certifies that Parker detentus est sub custodia mea per mandatum Domini Regis mihi nunciatum per Robertum Pecke now our case is by the Nunciation of many but in Law majus minus non variant in spetione the certification of one and of many is of the same effect although in morall understanding there may be a difference Trin. 2. Ed. 3. Rot. 46. in this Court in 21 Ed. 3. in the printed Book there is a piece of it The Abbot of Burey brings a prohibition out of this Court the Bishop of Norwich pleadeth in Barre of that Quod mihi testificatū quod continetur in Archivis that he is excommunicated there were two exceptions taken to this case in this president and they are both in one case the first was that no case appeareth why he was excommunicated there may be causes why he should be excommunicated and then he should be barred and there may be causes why the excommunication should not barre him for it may be the excomunication was for bringing the action which was the Kings writ and therefore because there was no cause of the excommunication returned it was ruled that it was not good The other reason is that upon the Roll which is mihi testificatum Now every man when he will make a certificate to the Court Proprium factum suum non alterius significare debet he must inform the Court of the immediate act done and not that such things are told him or that such things are signified unto him but that was not done in this case and therefore it was held insufficient and so in this case of ours I conceive the return is insufficient in the form there is another cause my Lord for which I conceive this return is not good But first I will be bold to inform your Lordship touching the Statute of Magna Charta 29. Nullus liber homo capiatur vel imprisonetur c. neo super eum mittimus nisi per legale judicium parium suorum vel per legem terrae That in this Statute these words in Carcerem are omitted out of the printed Books for it should be nec eum in Carcerem mittimus For these words per legem terrae what Lex terrae should be I will not take upon me to expound otherwise then I finde them to be expounded by Acts of Parliament and this is that they are understood to be the processe of the Law sometimes by writ sometimes by attachment of the person but whether speciale mandatum Domini Regis be intended by that or no I leave it to your Lordships exposition upon two petitions of the Commons and answer of the King in 36 Ed. 3. no 9. and no 20. In the first of them the Commons complain that the great Charter the Charter of the Forrest and other Statutes were broken and they desire that for the good of himself and of his people they might be kept and put in execution and that they might not be infringed by making an
and not by way of information out of another mans mouth may not be good as appeareth by the severall books of our law 23 Ed. 3. Rex vic 181. upon a Homine replegiando against the Abbot of C. the Sheriffe returneth that he had sent to the Bailiffe of the Abbot that answered him that he was the villain of the Abbot by which he might not make deliverance and a Sicut alias was awarded for this return was insufficient insomuch that he had returned the answer of the Bailiffe of the Abbot where he ought to have returned the answer of the Abbot himself out of his own mouth Trin. 22. Ed. 2. Rot. 46. parent vill Burg. Evesque de Norwich repl 68. Nat. Br. Case 34. Fitz. Nat. Br. 65. 34. Ed. 3. Excom 29. the case appeareth to be such in a trespasse the defendant pleadeth the plaintiffe is excommunicate and sheweth forth the letter of the Bishop of Lincoln witnessing that for divers contumacies c. and because he had certified no excommunic done by himself but by another the letter of excommunication was annulled for the Bishop ought to have certified his own act and not the act of another Hillarii 22 Hen. 8. Rot. 37. it appeareth by the return of an Habeas corpus that Iohn Parker was committed to prison for security of the peace and for suspicion of felony as per mandatum Domini Regis nunciatum per Robertum Peck de Cliffords Inne and upon his return Iohn Parker was bailed for the return Commiss fuit per speciale mandatum domini Regis nunciatum per Robertum Peck was not good insomuch that it was not a direct return that he was committed per mandatum Domini Regis And for the first point I conclude that this return is insufficient in form insomuch that it doth not make a precise and direct return that he was committed and detained by the speciall command of the King but onely as he was signified by the warrant of the Lords of the Councell which will not serve the turn and upon the book of 9 Hen. 6.44 the return of the cause of a mans imprisonment ought to be precise and direct upon the Habeas corpus insomuch as thereby to be able to judge of the cause whether it be sufficient or not for there may not any doubt be taken to the return be it true or false but the Court is to accept the same as true and if it be false the party must take his remedy by action upon the case And as concerning the matter of the return it will rest upon these parts First whether the return be that he is detained in prison by speciall commandment of our Lord the King be good or not without shewing the nature of the commandment or the cause whereupon the commitment is grounded in the return The second is whether the time of the first commitment by the commandment of the King not appearing to the Court is sufficient to detain him in prison Thirdly whether the imprisonment of the subjects without cause shewed but onely by the commandment of the King be warantable by the laws and statutes of this Realm As unto the first part I find by the books of our law that commandments of the King are of severall natures by some of which the imprisonment of a mans body is utterly unlawfull and by others of them although the imprisonment may be lawfull yet the continuance of him without bail or mainprise will be utterly unlawfull There is a verball command of the King which is by word of mouth of the Kings onely and such commandment by the King by the books of our law will not be sufficient either to imprison a man or to continue him in prison 16.6 Monstrans de faict si upon an action of trespasse brought for cutting of trees the defendant pleadeth that the place where he cut them is parcell of the Manor of D. whereof the King is seised in fee and the King commanded him to cut the trees and the opinion of the Court there is that the plea in barre was ill because he did not shew any speciall commandment of the King and there it is agreed by the whole Court that if the King commandeth one to arrest another and the party commanded did arrest the other an action of trespasse or false imprisonment is maintainable against the party that arrested him although it were done in the presence of the King 39 H. 6.17 where one justifieth the seisure of the goods of a person that is outlawed by the commandment of the King such a party being no Officer may not in an action brought against him have any aid of the King for such a commandment given to one that is not an Officer will not any wayes avail him that is to justifie himself by the return of that commandment 37 Hen. 6.10 If the king give me a thing and I take the same by his commandment by word of mouth it is not justified by law nothing may passe without matter of Record 10 Hen. 7.7 17.18 it is agreed that Justices may command one to arrest another that is in their view or presence but not one that is out of their view or presence And Keble 10 Hen. 7.13 said that where one is arrested by a parroll command in their view or presence it is fitting that a record may be made of it insomuch that without such a record there can hardly be a justification in another Term. Secondly there is a commandment of the King by his Commission which according unto Calvins case in the seventh Report it is called by him breve mandatum non remediabile and by virtue of such a commandment the King may neither seise the goods of his subject nor imprison his body as it is resolved in 42 Ass. pl. 5. where it is agreed by all the justices that a Commission to take a mans goods or imprison his body without indictment or suit of the party or other due processe is against the Law Thirdly there is a commandment of the King which is grounded upon a suggestion made to the King or to his Councell and if a man be committed to prison by such a suggestion by commandment of the King it is unlawfull and not warranted by the Law of the Realm The 25 of Edward the third cap. 4. de Provisoribus whereas it is contained in the great Charter of the Franchises of England that none shall be imprisoned or arrested of his Free-hold or of his Franchises nor of his free customes but by the Law of the land It is awarded consented and established that from henceforth none shall be taken by petition or suggestion made to our Soveraign Lord the King or to his Councell untill it be by indictment or presentment of his good and lawfull neighbours where such deeds are done in due manner or by processe made by writ originall at the common law nor of his free-hold unlesse he be duely brought
to be set at liberty upon Baile and are in the nature of Objections out of Record I shall deliver them summarily to your Lordships with all faith as also the true Copies of them Out of which it shall appear cleerly to your Lordships that of those of the first kind there are no lesse then twelve most full and directly in the point to prove that persons so committed are to be delivered upon baile and among those of the other kind there is not so much as one that proves at all any thing to the contrary I shall first my Lords go through them of the first kind and so observe them to your Lordships that such scruples as have been made upon them by some that have excepted against them shall be cleered also according as I shall open them severally The first of this first kind is of Edw. 3. time It is in Pasche 18. E. 3. Rot. 33. Rex The case was thus King E. 3. had committed by Writ that under his Great Seal as most of the Kings Commands in that time were one Iohn de Bidleston a Clergie-man to the prison of the Tower without any cause shewed of the commitment The Lieutenant of the Tower is commanded to bring him into the Kings Bench where he is committed to the Marshall But the Court asked of the Lieutenant if there were any cause to keep this Bidleston in prison besides that commitment of the King He answered No. Whereupon as the Roll saith Quia videtur Curiae breve predictum that is the Kings Command sufficientem non esse causam predictum Johannem de Bidleston in prisona Marr. Regis hic detinend idem Johannes dimittitur per manucaptionem Will. de Wakefield and some others Where the Judgement of the Court is fully declared in the very point The second of this first kind of Presidents of Record is in the time of H. the 8. One Iohn Parker was committed to the Sheriffs of London pro securitate pacis at the Suit of one Brinton ac pro suspicione fellonie committed by him at Cowall in Glocestershire ac per mandatum Dni Regis he is committed to the Marshall of the Kings Bench postea isto eodem Termino traditur in Ballium There were other causes of the commitment but plainly one was a Command of the King signified to the Sheriff of London of which they took notice But some have interpreted this as if the commitment here had been for suspicion of fellony by command of the King in which case it is agreed of all hands that the Prisoner is bailable But no man can think so of this President that observes the Contents and understands the Grammar of it wherein most plainly ac per mandatum Regis hath no reference to any other cause whatsoever but is a single cause enumerated in the Return by it self as the Record cleerly shewes It is in the 22. H. 8. Rot. 37. The third is of the same time It is 35. H. 8. Rot. 33. Iohn Bincks case He was committed by the Lords of the Councell pro suspicione fellonie ac pro aliis causis illos moventibus Qui committitur Marescallo c. et immediate ex gratia curiae special traditur in ballium They commit him for suspicion of fellony and other causes them thereunto moving wherein there might be matter of State or whatsoever else can be supposed and plainly the cause of the commitment is not expressed yet the Court bailed him without having regard to those other unknown causes that moved the Lords of the Councell But it is indeed somewhat different from either of those other two that precede and from the other nine that follow For it is agreed That if a cause be expressed in the return insomuch as the Court can know why he is committed that then he may be bailed but not if they know not the cause Now when a man is committed for a cause expressed pro aliis causis Dominos de Concilio moventibus certainly the Court can no more know in such a case what the cause is then in any other The fourth of these is in the time of Queen Mary It is Pasche 2. and 3. Phil. and Mar. Rot. 58. Overtons case Richard Overton was returned upon a habeas Corpus directed to the Sheriffs of London to have been committed to them and detained per mandatum prenobilium virorum honorabilis Concilii Dominorum Regis Reginae Qui committitur Marescallo c. immediate traditur in ballium In answer to this President or by way of objection against the force of it hath been said that this Overton stood at that time indicted of Treason It is true he was so indeed but that appeares in another Roll that hath no reference to the Return as the Return hath no reference to that Roll. Yet they that object this against the force of this President say That because he was indicted of Treason therefore though he was committed by the command of the Lords of the Councell without cause shewed yet he was bailable for the Treason and upon that was here bailed Then which Objection nothing can be or is more contrarie to Law or common Reason It is most contrarie to Law for that cleerly every Return is to be adjudged by the Court out of the body of the Writ it self not by any other collaterall or forrain Record whatsoever Therefore the matter of Indictment here cannot in Law be cause of the bailing of the Prisoner And it is so adverse to all common Reason that if the objection be admitted it must of necessity follow that whosoever shall be committed by the King or the Privie Councell without cause shewed and be not indicted of Treason or some other offence may not be inlarged by reason of the supposition of matter of State But that whosoever is so committed and withall stands so indicted though in another Record may be inlarged whatsoever the matter of State be for which he was committed The absurdity of which assertion needs not a word for further confutation as if any of the Gent. in the last Judgement ought to have been the sooner delivered if he had been also indicted of Treason Certainly if so Traitours and Fellons had the highest priviledges of personall Liberty and that above all other Subjects of the Kingdome The first of this first kind is of Queen Marie's time also It is Pasche 4. 5. P. M. Rot. 45. the Case of Edward Newport He was brought into the Kings Bench by habeas Corpus out of the Tower of London cum causa viz. Quod commissus fuit per mandatum Conciliorum Dominae Reginae Qui committitur Marr. c. et immediate traditur in ballium To this the like kind of answer hath been made as in that other Case of Overton next before cited They say that in another Roll of another Terme of the same year it appears he was in question for suspicion of Coyning And it
speciali Nos volentes eisdem C. D. E. graciam in hac parte facere specialem tibi praecipimus quod si praedict C. D. E. occasione praedict non alia in Prisona praedict detineantur pro transgressionibus illis secundum legem consuetudinem Regni nostri Angliae replegiabiles existunt c. tunc impos C. D. E. Ã Prisona praedict si ea occasione non alia detineantur in eadem interim deliberari facias per manucapt supradict habeas ibi tunc coram praefat Iusticiar nomina manncapt illorum hoc breve And the exposition of this speciale mandatum domini Regis mentioned in the writ is expounded to be breue domini Regis and thereupon is this writ directed unto the Sheriffe for the delivery of them And so for the branch of the first part I conclude that the speciall command of the King without shewing the nature of the commandment of the Kings is too generall and therefore insufficient for he ought to have returned the nature of the commandment of the King whereby the Court might have adjudged upon it whether it were such a commandment that the imprisonment of Sir Iohn Corbet be lawfull or not and whether it were such a commandment of the King that although the imprisonment were lawfull at the first yet he might be bailed by Law And as for the generall return of speciale mandatum domini Regis without shewing the cause of the imprisonment either speciall or generall I hold that for that cause also the return is insufficient First in regard of the Habeas corpus which is the commandment of the King onely made the 15 of November According to the Teste of the writ commanding the keeper of the Gatehouse to have the body of Sir Iohn Corbet una cum causa detensionis ad subjiciendum recipiendum ea quae curia nostra de eo ad tunc ibid. ordinar contingat So as the commandment of the writ being to shew the cause of his detaining in prison the keeper of the gatehouse doth not give a full answer unto the writ unlesse the cause of the detainment in prison be returned and the Court doth not know how to giue their judgement upon him either for his imprisonment or for his discharge according to the purport of the writ when there is not a cause returned and forasmuch as upon an excommengement certified it hath been adjudged oftentimes that Certificates were insufficient where the cause of the commitment hath not been certified that the Court might adjudge whether the Ecclesiasticall Judges who pronounced the excommunication had power over the original cause according to the book of 14 Hen. 4.14.8 Rep. 68. Trollops case 20 Ed. 3. Excommengement 9. So upon an Habeas corpus in this Court where a man hath been committed by the Chancellour of England by the Councell of England Marches of Wales Warden of the Stanneries High Commission Admiralty Dutchy Court of request Commission of Sewers or Bankrupts it hath severall times been adjudged that the return was insufficient where the particular cause of imprisonment hath not been shewen to the intent that it might appear that those that committed him had jurisdiction over the cause otherwise he ought to be discharged by the Law and I spare to recite particular causes in every kind of these because there are so many presidents of them in severall ages of every King of this Realm and it is an infallible maxime of the Law That as the Court of the Kings Bench and Judges ought not to deny an Habeas corpus unto any prisoner that shall demand the same by whomsoever he be committed so ought the cause of his imprisonment to be shewn upon the return so that the Court may adjudge of the cause whether the cause of the imprisonment be lawfull or not and because I will not trouble the Court with so many presidents but such as shall suit with the cause in question I will onely produce and vouch such presidents whereas the party was committed either by the commandment of the King or otherwise by the commandment of the Privy Councell which Stampford fol. 72. tearmeth the mouth of the King such acts as are done by the Privy Councell being as Acts done by the King himself And in all these causes you shall find that there is a cause returned as well as a speciale mandatum domini Regis c. or mandatum Privati Concilii domini Regis whereby the Court may adjudge of the cause and bail them if they shall see cause In the eighth of Henry the seventh upon return of an Habeas corpus awarded for the body of one Roger Sherry it appeareth that he was committed by the Mayor of Windsor for suspicion of felony and ad sectam ipsius Regis pro quibusdam feloniis transgressionibus ac per mandatum domini Regis 21 Hen. the seventh upon the return of an Habeas corpus sent for the body of Hugh Pain it appeared that he was committed to prison per mandatum dominorum Privati Concilii domini Regis pro suspicione feloniae Primo Henrici Octavi Rot. 9. upon the return of an Habeas corpus sent for the body of one Thomas Harrison and others it appears that they were committed to the Earl of Shrewsbury being Marshall of the houshould Per mandatum Domini Regis pro suspicione feloniae pro homicidio facto super Mare 3 4 Philip. Mariae upon a return of an Habeas corpus sent for the body of one Peter Man it appeareth that he was committed pro suspicione feloniae ac per mandatum Domini Regis Reginae 4 5 Philippi Mariae upon the return of an Habeas corpus sent for the body of one Thomas Newport it appeared that he was committed to the Tower pro suspicione contrafact monetae per privatum Concilium domini Regis Reginae 33 Elizabethae upon the return of an Habeas corpus for the body of one Lawrence Brown it appeareth that he was committed per mandatum Privati Concilii dominae Reginae pro diversis causis ipsam Reginam tangen ac etiam pro suspicione proditionis So as by all these presidents it appeareth where the return is either Per mandatum domini Regis or Per mandatum dominorum Privati Concilii domini Regis there is also a cause over and besides the mandatum returned as unto that which may be objected that per mandatum domini Regis or Privati Concilii domini Regis is a good return of his imprisonment I answer First that there is a cause for it is not to be presumed that the King or Councell would commit one to prison without some offence and therefore this mandatum being occasioned by the offence or fault the offence or fault must be the cause and not the command of the King or Councell which is occasioned by the cause Secondly it apeares that the jurisdiction of
touching the resolution of the house of Commons To the second of these 12. which is Parkers Case in the 22. H. 8. Rot. 37. his Objections were two First that it is true that he was returned to be committed Per mandatum domini Regis but it appeared that this command was certified to the Shreiffs of London by one Robert Peck gentleman and that in regard that the command came no otherwise the return was held insufficient and that therefore he was bailed Secondly that it appears also in the Record that he was committed pro suspicione felloniae ac per mandatum domini Regis so that in regard that the command that in the expression of the causes of his commitment suspicion of fellony preceeds the command of the King therefore it must be intended that the Court tooke the Cause why the King committed him to be of less moment then fellony and therefore bailed him For he Objected that even the house of Commons themselves in some Arguments used by them touching the interpretation of the statute of Westminster the first cap. 15. about this point had affirmed that in enumeration of particulars those of greatest nature were first mentioned and that it was supposed that such as followed were usually of less nature or moment But the reply was to the first Objection that the addition of the certefying of the Kings command by Robert Peck altered not the Case First because the Sheriffs in their Return took notice of the command as what they were assured of and then howsoever it came to them it was of equal force as if it had been mentioned without reference to Peck Secondly as divers Patents pass the great Seal by writ of privy Seal and are subscribed Per breve de privato sigillo so diverse per ipsum Regem are so subscribed and oftentimes in the Roll of former times to the words per ipsum Regem are added nunciante A. B. So that the Kings command generally and the Kings command related or certified by such a man is to this purpose of like nature Thirdly in the late great Case of Habeas Corpus where the Return of the commitment was Per speciale mandatum Domini Regis mihi significatum per Dominos de privato Confilio the Court of Kings-Bench did agree that it was the same and of like force as if mihi significatum c. had not followed and that those words were void According whereunto here also Per mandatum Dom. Regis nunciatum per Robert Peck had been wholly omitted and void likewise And in truth in that late Case this Case of Parker was cited both at the Barr and Bench and at the Bench it was interpreted by the Judges no otherwise then if it had been onely per mandatum Domini Regis in place of it but the Objection there was made of another kinde as was delivered in the first Argument made out of presidents in the behalf of the house of Commons Therefore to the second Objection touching the course of Enumeration of the Causes in the Return it was said that howsoever in some Acts of Parliament and else where in the solemn expressions used in the Law things of greater nature preceded and the less follow yet in this Case the contrary was most plain for in the Return it appears that there were three Causes for detaining the Prisoners Surety of the peace Suspicion of Pellony and the Kings command and Surety of the peace is first mentioned which is plainly less then Fellony And therefore it is plain if any force of Argument be taken from this enumeration that the contrary to that which M r. Attorney inferred is to be concluded that is that as Fellony is a greater Cause then Surety of the peace so the matter whereupon the Kings command was grounded was greater then Fellony But in truth this kinde of Argument holds neither way here and whatsoever the Cause were why the King committed him it was impossible for the Court to know it and it also might be of very high moment in matter of state and yet of farr less nature then Fellony All which shews that this president hath his full force also according as it was first used in Argument by the house of Commons To the third of these which is Binckes Case in the 35. H. 8. Rot. 33. the Objection was that there was a Cause expressed pro suspicione felloniae and though pro aliis causis illos moventibus were added in the Return yet because in the course of enumeration the general name of aliis comming after particulars includes things of less nature then the particuler doth therefore in this Case suspition of fellony being the first the other Causes afterwards generally mentioned must be intended of less nature for which the Prisoner was bailable because he was bailable for the greater which was suspition of fellony Hereunto it was replyed that the Argument of enumeration in these Cases is of no moment as is next before shewed and that although it were of any moment yet any Case though less then fellony might be of very great consequence in matter of state which is pretended usually upon general Returns of command without cause shewed and it is most plain that the Court could not possible know the reasons why the Prisoner here was committed and yet they bailed him without looking further after any unknown thing under that title of Matter of state which might as well have been in this Case as in any other whatsoever To the 4. of these which is Overton's Case in 2. 3. Phet M. Rot. 58. and to the 5. which is Newports Case P. M. 4. 5. Rot. 45. onely these Objections were said over again by Mr. Attorney which are mentioned in the Argument made out of presidents in behalf of the house of Commons at the first conference and in the same Argument are fully and clearly satisfied as they were in like manner now again To the 6. of these which was Lawrence his Case M. 9. Eliz. Rot. 35. and the 7. which is Constables P. 9. Eliz. Rot. 68. the same Objections onely were likewise said over again by Mr. Attorney that are mentioned and clearly and fully answered in the Argument made at the first conference out of presidents in behalf of the house of Commons the force of the Objection being onely that it appeared in the Margent of the Roll that the word Pardon was written but it is plain that the word there hath no reference at all to the reason why they were bailed nor could it have reference to the Cause why they were committed in regard the Cause why they were committed is utterly unknown and was not shewed To the 8. of these Presidents which was Brownings Case P. 20. Eliz. Rot. 72. It was said M r. Attorney that he was bailed by a letter from the Lords of the Councel directed to the Judges of the Court but being asked for that letter or any Testimony of it
of explanation we shall provide onely that the cause ought to be expressed upon the return of the Habeas Corpus then out of the words of the Statute it will necessarily be inferred that before the return of the Habeas Corpus the cause need not to be expressed because the Statute hath appointed the time of the expression of the cause And it will be construed that if the makers of the Statutes had intended that the cause should have been soener shewen they would have provided for it by the Act and then the Act which we term an Act of explanation will be an Act of the abridging of Magna Charta and the rest of the Statutes Or if this Act do not make the commitment without expressing the cause to be Lawfull yet it will clearly amount to a tolleration of the commitment without expressing the cause untill the Habeas Corpus or to a general or perpetual dispensation beginning with and continuing as long as the Law it self And in my understanding the words in this intended Law that no Freeman can be committed without cause can no wayes advantage us or satisfie this Objection for till the return of the Habeas Corpus he that commits is Judge of the cause or at least hath a license by this Law till that time to conceal the cause and the Goaler is not subject to any action for the detaining of the Prisoner upon such command for if the Prisoner demanded the cause of his inprisonment of the Goaler It will be a safe answer for him to say that he detains the Prisoner by Warrant and that it belongs not unto him to desire those which commit the Prisoner to shew the cause untill he returns the Habeas Corpus and if the Prisoner be a Suitor to know the cause from those that committed him it will be a sufficient answer for them to say they will express the cause at the Return of the Habeas Corpus In this cause there will be a wrong because the commitment is without cause expressed and one that suffers that wrong viz. the party imprisoned and yet no such wrong doer but may excuse if not justifie himself by this Law In making of Laws we must consider the inconveniences which may ensue and provide for the prevention of them lex caveat de futuris I have taken into my thoughts some inconveniences which I shall expose to your considerations not imagining that they can happen in the time of our gracious Soveraign but in an Act of Parliament we must provide for the prevention of all inconveniences in future times 1. If a man be in danger to be imprisoned in the beginning of a long vacation for refusing to pay some small summe of money and knows that by this Act he can have no inlargement till the Return of the Habeas Corpus in the Term and that the charge of his being in Prison and of his inlargement by Habeas Corpus will amount to more then the summe he will depart with money to prevent his imprisonment or to redeem himself thence because he cannot say any man doth him wrong untill the Return of the Habeas Corpus the Law resolves a man will pay a Fine rather then be imprisoned for the Judgement which is given when one is fined is Ideo Capiatur and the highest execution for dept is a Capias ad satisfaciendum the Law presuming any man will depart with his money to gain his Liberty and if the Prisoner procure an Habeas Corpus and be brought into the Kings-bench by virtue of it yet the cause need not to be then expressed The provision of this Law being that if no cause be then expressed he shall be bayled and no cause being shewen upon the Return of the Habeas Corpus yet may be pretended that at the time of his Commitment there were strong presumptions of some great offence But upon examination they are cleared or it may be said that the offence was of that nature that the time of his imprisonment before the Return was a sufficient punishment and we may be frequently imprisoned in this manner and never understand the cause and have often such punishment and have no means to justifie our selves and for all these proceedings this Law will be the justification or colour 2. If by this Act there be a Tolleration of imprisonment without shewing cause untill the Return of the Habeas Corpus yet it is possible to accompany that imprisonment with such circumstances of close restraint and others which I forbear to express as may make imprisonment for that short time as great a punishment as a perpetual imprisonment in our ordinary manner 3. The party may be imprisoned a long time before he shall come to be delivered by this Law The place of his imprisonment may be in the furthest parts of this Kingdom The Judges always makes the Return of the Habeas Corpus answerable to the distance of the Prison from Westminster The Goaler may neglect the Return of the first Process and then the party must procure an alias and the Goaler may be then in some other imployment for the King and excuse the not returning of the body upon that Process and this may make the imprisonment for a year and in the end no cause being returned the party may be discharged but in the mean time he shall have imprisonment he shall never know the cause he shall have no remedy for it nor be able to question any for injustice which have not a justification or excuse by this Law 4. The party may be imprisoned during his life and yet there shall be no cause ever shewn I will instance in the manner a man may be committed to the furthest part of the Kingdom Westward he obtains an Habeas Corpus Before the Goaler receives the Habeas Corpus or before the returns it the Prisoner by Warrant is removed from that Prison to another it may be the furthest Northern part of the Realm the first Goaler returns the special Matter which will be sufficient to free himself and in like manner the Prisoner may be translated from one Prison to another and his whole life shall be a preregrination or wayfairing from one Goal to another and he shall never know the cause nor be able to complain of any who cannot defend their actions by this Bill 5. If the Prisoner be brought into the Court by Habeas Corpus and no cause expressed and thereupon he be enlarged he may be partly committed again and then his enlargement shall onely make way for his commitment and this may continue during his life and he shall never know the cause and this not remedied but rather permitted by this Act. And there are also considerable in this Matter the expence of the party in Prison His Fees to the Goaler his costs in obtaining and prosecuting an Habeas Corpus and his charges in removing himself attended with such as have the charge of his conduct and
so glorious within the outward poverty will bring contempt upon them especially amongst those who measure men by the ounce and weigh them by the pound which indeed is the greatest part of men Mr. Pym I cannot but testifie how being in Germany I was exceedingly scandalized to see the poor stipendarie Ministers of the Reformed Churches there dispised and neglected by reason of their poverty being otherwayes very grave and learned men I am afraid this is a part of the burthen of Germany which ought to be a warning to us I have heard many Objections and difficulties even to impossibilities against this Bill to him that is unwilling to go there is even a Bear or Lion in the way First let us make our selves willing then will the way be easie and safe enough I have observed that we are alwayes very eager and fierce against Papistry against scandalous Ministers and against things which are not so much in our power I should be glad to see that we did delight as well in rewarding as in punishing and in undertaking matters within our own reach as this is absolutely within our power Our own duties are next us other mens further of I do not speak this that I do mislike the destroying or pulling down of that which is ill but then let us be as earnest to plant and build up that which is good in the room of it for why should we be desolate The best and the greatest way to dispell darkness and the deeds thereof is to let in light we say that day breaks but no man can ever hear the noise of it God comes in the still voice let us quickly mend our Candlesticks and we cannot want lights I am afraid this backwardness of ours will give the adversary occasion to say that we chuse our Religion because it is the cheaper of the two that we would willingly serve God with somewhat that cost us naught Believe it M r. Pym he that thinks to save any thing by his Religion but his Soul will be a terrible looser in the end we sow so sparingly and that is the reason we reap so sparingly and have no more fruit Me thinks whosoever hates Papistry should by the same rule hate covetousness for that 's Idolatry too I never liked hot professions and cold actions such a heat is rather the heat of a distemper and disease then of life and saving health For scandalous Ministers there is no man shall be more foreward to have them sincerely punnished then I will be when Salt hath lost its savour fit it is to be cast on the unsavory place the dunghill But Sr. let us deal with them as God hath dealt with us God before he made man he made the World a handsome place for him to dwell in so let us provide them convenient livings and then punish them on Gods name but till then scandalous livings cannot but have scandalous Ministers It shall ever be a rule to me that where the Church and Common-wealth are both of one Religion it is comely and decent that the outward splendor of the Church should hold a proportion and participate with the prosperity of the temporal State for why should we dwell in houses of Cedar and suffer God to dwell in Tin It was a Glorious and Religious work of King Iames and I speak it to his unspeakable Honour and to the praise of that Nation who though that Countrey be not so rich as ours yet are they Richer in their affections to Religion within the space of one year he caused to be planted Churches through all Scotland the Highlands and the Boarders worth 30. l. a year a piece with a house and some gleab belonging to them which 30. l. a year considering the cheapness of the Countrey and the modest fashion of Ministers living there is worth double as much as any where within a 100. miles of London the printed Act and Commission whereby it may be executed I have here in my hand delivered unto me by a Noble Gentleman of that Nation and a worthy Member of this House Sir Francis Stuart To conclude although Christianity and Religion be established generally throughout this Kingdom yet untill it be planted more particularly I shall scarce think this a Christian Common-wealth seeing it hath been moved and stirred in Parliament it will lye heavy upon Parliaments untill it be effected Let us do something for God here of our own and no doubt God will bless our proceedings in this place the better for ever hereafter And for my own part I will never give over solliciting this cause as long as Parliaments and I shall live together CHARLES REX To our trusty and well-beloved the Lords Spiritual and Temporal of the Higher House of PARLIAMENT WE being desirous of nothing more then the advancement of the good peace and prosperity of our people have given leave to free debates of highest points of our Prerogative Royal which in times of our Predecessors Kings and Queens of this Realm were ever restrained as Matters they would not have disputed and in other things we have been willing fairly to condiscend to the desires of our loving Subjects as might fully satisfie all moderate mindes and free them from all just fears and jealousies with those Messages which heretofore we have sent to the Commons House will well demonstrate to the World and yet we finde it still insisted on that in no case whatsoever should it never so nearly concern Matters of State and government we nor our privy Councel have power to commit any man without the cause shewed whereas it often happens that should the cause be shewed the service thereby would be destroyed and defeated and the cause alleadged must be such as may be determined by our Judges of our Courts at Westminster in a Legal and Ordinary way of Justice whereas the cause may be such whereof the Judges have no capacity of Judicature or rules of Law to direct or guide their Judgements in cases of that transcendent nature which hapning so often the very intermitting of the constant rules of government for many ages within this Kingdom practised would soon dissolve the very frame and foundation of our Monarchy wherefore as to our Commons we have made propositions which might equally preserve the just Liberty of the Subject So my Lords we have thought good to let you know that without overthrow of our Soveraignty we cannot suffer this power to be impeached But notwithstanding to clear our conscience and just intentions this we publish that it is not in our hearts nor ever will we extend our royal power lent unto us from God beyond the just rule of moderation in any thing which shall be contrary to our Laws and Customes where the safety of our people shall be our onely aim And we do hereby declare our royal pleasure and resolution to be which God willing we shall ever constantly continue and maintain that neither we nor our privy Councel
afterwards be attainted yet the King shall not have them untill he have satisfied that for which they were distreined And if in these Cases where the owners of the goods are such capitall offendours the King cannot have them much lesse shall he have them when the owner is innocent and no offendour Nay I may well say that almost every leaf and page of all the volumes of our Common Law prove this right of propriety this distinction of meum and tuum aswell between King and Subject as one Subject and another and therefore my Conclusion follows that if the Prerogative extend not neither to Lands nor to Goods then à fortiori not to the Person which is more worth then either lands or goods as I said And yet I agree that by the very law of Nature service of the Person of the Subject is due to his Soveraigne but this must be in such things which are not against the law of Nature but to have the body imprisoned without any cause declared and so to become in bondage I am sure is contrary unto and against the law of Nature and therefore not to be inforced by the Soveraigne upon his Subjects 3. My next reason is drawn ab inutili incommodo For the Statute de frangentibus prisonam made 1 E. 2. is quod nullus qui prisonam fregerit subeat judicium vitae vel membrorum pro fractione prisonae tantum nisi causa pro qua captus imprisonetur tale Iudicium requirat Whence this Conclusion is clearly gathered That if a man be committed to prison without declaring what cause and then if either Malefactour do break the prison or the Gaoler suffer him to escape albeit the prisoner so escaping had committed Crimen laesae majestatis yet neither the Gaoler nor any other that procured his escape by the Law suffer any corporall punishment for setting him at large which if admitted might prove in consequence a matter of great danger to the Common-wealth 4. My next reason is drawn ab Regis honore from that great honour the Law doth attribute unto soveraigne Majesty and therefore the Rule of Law is that Solum Rex hoc non potest facere quod non potest juste agere And therefore if a Subject hath the donation and the King the presentation to a Church whereunto the King presents without the Subjects nomination here the quare impedit lies against the Incumbent and the King is in Law no disturber And Hussey chief Justice in 1 H. 7. fol. 4. saith that Sir Iohn Markham told King Edw. 4. he could not arrest a man either for treason or fellony as a Subject might because that if the King did wrong the party could not have his Action against him What is the reason that an Action of false imprisonment lies against the Sheriff if he doth not return the Kings Writ by which he hath taken the body of the Subject but this because the Writ doth breviter enarrare causam captionis which if it doth not it shall abate and is void in Law and being returned the party when he appears may know what to answer and the Court upon what to judge And if the Kings Writ under his great Seal cannot imprison the Subject unlesse it contains the cause shall then the Kings warrant otherwise doe it without containing the cause that his Judges upon return thereof may likewise judge of the same either to remain or judge the partie imprisoned I should argue this point more closely upon the statute of Magnae Charta 29. quod nullus liber homo imprisonetur the statute of West 1. cap. 15. for letting persons to bail and the Judgements lately given in the Kings Bench but the later of these statutes referring having been by that honourable Gent. to whom the Professours of the Law both in this and all succeding ages are and will be much bound already expounded unto us and that also fortified by those many contemporary Expositions and Judgements by him learnedly cited and there being many learned Lawyers here whose time I will not waste who were present and some of them perhaps of councell in the late Cause adjudged in the Kings Bench where you to whose person I now speak do well know I was absent being then of councel in a cause in another Court and my practice being in the Country farre remote from the treasure of Antiquity and Records conducing to the clearing of this point Therefore the narrowness of my understanding commends unto me sober ignorance rather then presumptuous knowledge and also commands me no further to trouble your Patience But I will conclude with that which I find reported of Sir Iohn Davis who was the Kings Serjeant and so by the duty of his place would no doubt maintain to his uttermost the Prerogatives of the King his royall Master and yet it was by him thus said in those Reports of his upon the case of Tavistry Customs That the Kings of England alwayes have had a Monarchy Royall and not a Monarchy Seignorall where under the first saith he the Subjects are Free-men and have propriety in their goods and free-hold and inheritance in their Lands but under the later they are as Villains and Slaves and have proprietie in nothing And therefore saith he when a Royall Monarch makes a new Conquest yet if he receives any of his Nations ancient Inhabitants into his protection they and their heirs after them shall enjoy their Lands and Liberties according to the Law And there he voucheth this President and Judgement following given before William the Conquerour himself viz. That one Sherborn at the time of the Conquest being owner of a Castle and lands in Norfolk the Conquerour gave the same to one Warren a Norman and Sherborn dying the Heir clayming the same by descent according to the Law it was before the Conquerour himself adjudged for the Heir and that the gift thereof by the Conquerour was void If then it were thus in the Conquerour's time by his own sentence and judgement and hath so continued in all the successions of our Kings ever since what doubt need we have but that his most excellent Majestie upon our humble petition prostrated at his feet which as was well said is the best passage to his heart will vouchsafe unto us our ancient Liberties and Birthrights with a through reformation of this and other just grievances And so I humbly crave pardon of this honourable House that I have made a short Lesson long Sir Benjamin Ruddier's Speech March 22. 1627. Mr. Speaker OF the mischiefs that have lately fallen upon us by the late distractions here is every man sensible and that may ensue the like which God forbid we may easily see and too late repent The eyes of Christendome are upon us and as we speed here so go the Fortunes of our selves our Friends and of our Religion That the Dangers were not reall but pretended we all heartily wish but feel the contrary
of Justice And thereupon the Statutes cannot be intended to restrain all commitments unlesse a cause be expressed for that it would be very inconvenient and dangerous to the State to publish the cause at the very first Answer Hereupon it was replied by the House of Commons that all danger and inconvenience may be avoided by declaring a generall Cause as for treason suspicion of treason misprision of treason or fellony without specifying the particular which can give no greater light to a Confederate then will be conjectured by his very apprehension upon the imprisonment if nothing at all were expressed It was further alledged that there was a kind of contradiction in the position of the Commons when they say the partie committed without a cause shewed ought to be delivered or bailed Bailing being a kind of imprisonment Delivery a totall freeing To this it was answered that it hath alwayes been the discretion of the Judges to give so much respect to a Commitment by the Command of the King or the Privie Councell which are ever intended to be done on just weightie Causes that they will not presently set him free but baile him to answer what shall be objected against him on his Majesties behalf But if any other inferiour Officer commit a man without a cause shewed they do instantly deliver him as having no cause to expect their pleasure So the Delivery is applyed to an imprisonment by the command of some mean minister of Justice Bailing when it is done by the Command of the King or his Councell It was said by M r Attorney That Bailing was a grace and favour of a Court of Justice and that they may refuse to do it This was agreed to be true in divers cases as where the case doth appeare to be for fellony or other crimes expressed for that there is another way to discharge them in some convenient time by their triall yet in some of these cases the constant practise hath been anciently modernly to baile them But where no cause of the imprisonment is returned but the Command of the King there is no way to deliver such persons by triall or otherwise but that of the habeas Corpus and if they should be then remanded they may be perpetually imprisoned without any remedy at all and consequently a man that had committed no offence be in worse case then a great Offender for the latter should have an ordinarie triall to discharge him the other should never be delivered It was further said that though the Statute of Westm. 1. cap. 15. as a Statute by way of provision did extend only to the Sheriff yet the recitall of that Statute touching the 4 cases wherein a man was not replevisable at the Common Law namely those that were committed for the death of a man by the command of the King or the Justices or for the Forrest did declare that the Justices could not baile such a one and that Replevisable and Bailable were Synonyma and all one and that Stamford a Judge of great authority doth expound it accordingly and that neither the Statute nor he sayes replevisable by the Sheriff but generally without restraint and that if the Chief Justice commits a man he is not to be enlarged by another Court as appeareth in the Register To this it was answered First that the recitall and body of the Statute relates only to the Sheriff as appeareth by the very words Secondly that replevisable is not restrained to the Sheriffs for that the words import no more that a man committed by the Chief Justice is bailable by the Court of Kings Bench. Thirdly that Stamford meaneth all of the Sheriff or at least he hath not sufficiently expressed that he intended the Justices Fourthly It was denyed that Replevisable and Bailable were the same for they differ in respect of the place where they are used Baile being in the Kings Court of Record Replevisable before the Sheriff and they are of severall natures Replevisable being a letting at large upon Sureties Bailing being when one Traditur in ballium and the Baile are his Gaolers and may imprison him and shall suffer bodie for bodie which is not true of replevying by sureties And Baile differeth from Mainprize in this that Mainprize is an undertaking in a summe certain Bailing is to answer the condemnation in Civil causes and in Criminall body for body The reasons and authorities used in the first Conference were then renewed and no exception taken to any save in 22. H. 6. it doth not appear that the Command of the King was by his mouth which must be intended or by his Councell which is all one as is observed by Stamford for the words are these That a man is not replevisable by the Sheriff who is committed by the Writ or Commandment of the King 21. E. 1. rot 2. dorso was cited by the Kings Counsell But it was answered that it concerned the Sheriff of Leicester only and not the power of the Judges 33. H. 6. the Kings Attorney confesseth was nothing to the purpose and yet that Book hath been usually cited by those that maintain the contrary to the Declaration of the House of Commons And therefore such sudden opinion as hath been given thereupon is not to be regarded the foundation failing And where it was said that the French of 36. E 3. Rot. Parliament 9. which can receive no answer did not warrant what was inferred thence but that these words Sans disturbance mettre ou arrest faire et le contre par special commandment ou en autre maniere must be understood that the Statutes should be put in execution without putting disturbance or making arrest to the contrarie by speciall command or in other manner The Commons did utterly deny the interpretation given by the Kings Counsell and to justifie their own did appeal to all men that understood French and upon the 7 Statutes did conclude That their Declaration remained in undoubted truth not controlled by any thing said to the contrary The true Copies of the Records not printed which were used on either side of that part of the debate INter Recorda domini Regis Caroli in Thesauro Recepto Scacarii sui sub custodia domini Thesaurarii et Camerarii ibidem remanentia viz. placita coram ipso Domino Rege Concilio suo ad Parliament suum post Pascham apud London in Mâ—nerio Archipiscopi Ebor Anno Regni Domini Regis Edw. vicessimo primo inter alia sie continetur ut sequitur Rot. secundo in Dorso Vic. Leic. sci Stephanus Rubaz Vic. Leic. War coram ipso Domino Rege ejus concilio arianatus ad Levem positus de hoc quod cum Io. Botetourte Edel Hatche W. Hemelin nuper in ballium ipsius vicecom per Dominum Regem fuissent assignati and Goalas Domini Regis celiberandum eidem vic quendam W. de Petling per quendam Appellatorem ante adventum eorundam Justic. ibidem
also to the Nobles and their honourable Progenies to the Bishops and Clergie and their successours to all persons of what condition or sex or age soever to all Judges Officers c. whose attendance are necessary c. without exception of any person Fifth generall reason The fifth is drawn from the indefinitnesse of time the pretended power being limited to no time may be perpetuall during life Sixth generall reason The sixth à damno dedecore from the losse and dishonour of the English Nation in 2 respects First for their valour and prowesse so famous through the whole world Secondly for their industry for who indeavours to apply himself in any profession either of warre liberall science or merchandise c. if he be but Tennant at will of his Liberty And no Tennant at will will support or improve any thing because he hath no certain estate And thus it should be both dedecus and damnum to the English Nation and it should be no honour to the King to be King of slaves Seventh generall reason The seventh is drawn ab utili inutili for that it appeareth by the statute of 36. E. 3. That the execution of the statute of Magna Charta 5. E. 3.25 E. 3. are adjudged in Parliament to be for the profit of the King and of his people Rot. Parl. 36. E. 3. num 9. 20. And therefore this pretended power being against the profit of the King and of his people can be no more part of this prerogative Eighth generall reason The eighth generall reason is drawn à tuto for it is safe for the King to expresse the cause of the commitment 1. E. 2. de frang prison stat unt pasche 18. E. 3. rot 33. coram Rege Bildestons case rot Parl. 28 H. 6. nu 16. Acts Apost cap. 25. v. the last and dangerous for him to omit it for if any be committed without expressing the cause though he escape albeit the truth be it were for treason or felony yet the escape is neither felony nor treason But if the cause be expressed to be for suspition of treason or felony then the escape albeit he be innocent is treason or felony Ninth generall reason The ninth generall reason is drawn from the authorities 16. H. 6. tit Monstrans defaits 182. by the whole Court the King in his presence cannot command one to be arrested but an action of false imprisonment lieth against him that arresteth 22. H. 6.46 Newton 1. H. 7.4 the opinion of Markham Chief Justice to E 4. and the reason because the party hath no remedy Fortescue cap. 18. proprio ore nullus Regum usus est c. to commit any man c. 4. Eliz. Plowd Com. 236. the common Common Law hath so admeasured the Kings prerogative as he cannot prejudice any man in his inheritance and the greatest inheritance a man hath is the Liberty of his person for all other are necessary to it Major haereditas venit unicuique nostrum à jure legibus quam à parentibus 25. E. 1. ca. 2. Confirm Cart. all judgements given against Magna Charta are void Objections Upon Conference with the Lords the objections were made by the Kings Attorney First object That these resolutions of the House were incompatible with a Monarchy that must govern by the state Bracton Answ. Whereunto it was answered that nihiltam proprium est imperii quam legibus vivere And again Attribuat Rex legi quodlex attribuat c. viz. dominationem imperium quia sine lege non potest esse Rex It can be no more prejudice to the King by reason of matter of state for if it be for suspition of treason misprision of treason or felony it may be by generall words expressed viz. pro suspitione proditionis 2 object To blind those that are committed one cause must be pretended and another intended especially when it toucheth matter of state Answ. Whereunto it was answered that all dissimulation especially in the course of Justice was to be avoided and soundnesse of truth to take place and therefore David that was both a King and a Prophet prayed to Almighty God against dissimulation in these words Lord send me a sound heart in thy statutes that I be not ashamed where sound in the originall signifieth upright without dissimulation and shame followeth dissimulation when the truth is known Third object If a Rebell be attainted in Ireland and his children for safety and for matter of state be kept in the Tower what shall be returned upon the Habeas Corpus Whereunto It was answered First that their imprisonment might be justified if they could not find good sureties for their good behaviour Secondly It was charity to find them meat drink and apparell that by the Attainder of their father had nothing Fourth object Though his Majesty expresseth no cause yet it must be intended that there was a just cause Answ. De non apparentibus de non existentibus eadem ratio Fifth object First The King in stead of gold or silver may make money currant of any base metall Secondly He may make warres at his pleasure Thirdly He may pardon whom he will Fourthly He may make denizens as many as he will and these were said to be greater priviledges then this in question Answ. To the first it is denyed that the King may make money currant of base metal but it ought to be gold or silver Secondly It was answered admitting the King might do it his losse and charge was more then of his Subjects both in the case of money and in the case of warre The pardon was private out of grace and no man had dammage or loss by it so of the making of denizens the King was only the looser viz. to have single custome where he had double Thirdly it was a non sequitur The King may do these things ergo he may imprison at will Your Lordships are advised by them that cannot be daunted by fear nor misled by affection reward or hope of preferment that is of the dead By ancient and many Acts of Parliament in the point besides Magna Charta which hath been 30 times confirmed and commanded to be put in execution wherein the Kings of England have thirty times given their Royall assent Secondly Judiciall Presidents per vividas rationes manifest and apparant reasons we in the house of Commons have upon great studie and serious consideration made a grand manifesto unanimously nullo contradicente concerning this great Liberty of the subject and have vindicated and recovered the body of this fundamentall Liberty both of your Lordships of our selves from shadowes which some time of the day are long sometimes short and sometimes long again and therefore no Judges are to be led by them Your Lordships are involved in the same danger and therefore ex congruo condigno we desire a conference to the end your Lordships might make the like declaration as we
have done Commune periculum commune requirit Auxilium and thereupon take such further course as may secure your Lordships and us and all your and our posterities in enjoying of our ancient undoubted and fundamentall Liberties The Argument of Sergeant Bramston upon the Habeas corpus MAy it please your Lordship to hear the return read or shall I open it Chief Iustice Hide Let it be read M r. Keeling read the return being the same as that of Sir Thomas Darnell May it please your Lordship I shall humbly move upon this return in the behalf of Sir Iohn Henningham with whom I am of Councell it is his petition that he may be bailed from his imprisonment it was but in vain for me to move that to a Court of Law which by Law cannot be granted and therefore in that regard that upon his return it will be questioned whether as this return is made the Gent. may be bailed or not I shall humbly offer up to your Lordship the case and some reasons out of mine understanding arising out of the return it self to satisfie your Lordship that these Prisoners may and as their case is ought to be bailed by your Lordship The exception that I take to this return is as well to the matter and substance of the return as to the manner and legall form thereof the exceptions that I take to the matter is in severall respects That the return is too generall there is no sufficient cause shewn in speciall or in generall of the commitment of this Gentleman and as it is insufficient for the cause so also in the time of the first imprisonment for howsoever here doth appear a time upon the second warrant from the Lords of the Councell to detain him still in prison yet by the return no time can appear when he was first imprisoned though it be necessary it should be shewen and if that time appear not there is no cause your Lordship should remand him and consequently he is to be delivered Touching the matter of the return which is the cause of his imprisonment It is expressed to be Per speciale mandatum domini Regis This is too generall and uncertain for that it is not manifest what kind of command this was Touching the Legall form of the return it is not as it ought to be fully and positively the return of the Keeper himself onely but it comes with a significavit or prout that he was committed Per speciale mandatum domini Regis as appeareth by warrant from the Lords of the Councell not of the King himself and that is not good in legall form For the matter and substance of the return it is not good because there ought to be a cause of that imprisonment This writ is the means and the onely means that the subject hath in this and such like case to obtain his liberty there are other writs by which men are delivered from restraint as that de homine replegiando but extends not to this cause for it is particularly excepted in the body of the writ de manucaptione de cantione admittenda but they lie in other cases but the writ of Habeas corpus is the onely means the subject hath to obtain his liberty and the end of this writ is to return the cause of the imprisonment that it may be examined in this Court whether the parties ought to be discharged or not but that cannot be done upon this return for the cause of the imprisonment of this Gentleman at first is so farre from appearing particularly by it that their is no cause at all expressed in it This writ requires that the cause of the imprisonment should be returned if the cause be not specially certified by it yet should it at the last be shewn in generall that it may appear to the Judges of the Court and it must be expressed so farre as that it may appear to be none of those causes for which by the Law of the Kingdome the subject ought not to be imprisoned and it ought to be expressed that it was by presentment or indictment and not upon petition or suggestion made to the King and Lords which is against the statute made in the 25 Ed. 3. c. 4. 42 E. 3. c. 3. By the Statute 25 Ed. 3. cap. 4. It is ordained and established that no man from henceforth shall be taken by petition or suggestion made to the King or his Councell but by indictment or course of Law and acordingly it was enacted 42 E. 3. c. 3. the title of which statute is None shall be put to answer an accusation made to the King without presentment Then my Lord it being so although the cause should not need to be expressed in such manner as that it may appear to be none of these causes mentioned in the statute or else the Subject by this return loseth the benefit and advantage of these Laws which be their birth-right and inheritance but in this return there is no cause at all appearing of the first commitment and therefore it is plain that there is no cause for your Lordship to remand him but there is no cause you should deliver him since the writ is to bring the body and the cause of the imprisonment before your Lordship But it may be objected that this writ of Habeas Corpus doth not demand the cause of the first commitment but of the detaining onely and so the writ is satisfied by the return for though it shew no cause of the first commitment but of detaining onely yet it declareth a cause why the Gentleman is detained in prison this is no answer nor can give any satisfaction for the reason why the cause is to be returned is for the Subjects liberty that if it shall appear a good and sufficient cause to your Lordship then to be remanded if your Lordship think and finde it insufficient he is to be enlarged This is the end of this writ and this cannot appear to your Lordship unlesse the time of the first commitment be expressed in the return I know that in some cases the time is not materiall as when the cause of the commitment is and that so especially returned as that the time is not materiall it is enough to shew the cause without the time as after a conviction or triall had by Law But when it is in this manner that the time is the matter it self for intend what cause you will of the commitment yea though for the highest cause of treason there is no doubt but that upon the return thereof the time of it must appear for it being before triall and conviction had by Law it is but an accusation and he that is onely accused and the accusation ought by Law to be let to bail But I beseech your Lordship to observe the consequence of this Cause If the Law be that upon this return this Gentleman should be remanded I will not dispute whether or no a man may
there wants legall form for the writ of Habeas Corpus is the commandment of the King to the Keeper of the prisons and thereupon they are to make return both of the body and of the cause of the commitment and that cause is to appear of them who are the immediate Officers And if he doth it by signification from another that return is defective in Law and therefore this return cannot be good for it must be from the Officer himself and if the cause returned by him be good it bindes the prisoners The warrant of the Lords was but a direction for him he might have made his return to have been expresly by the Kings commandment there was a warrant for it I shall not need to put your cases of it for it is not enough that he returns that he was certified that the commitment was by the Kings command but he must of himself return this fact as it was done And now my Lord I shall offer to your Lordship presidents of divers kindes upon commitments by the Lords of the Privy Councel upon commitments by the speciall command of the King and upon commitments both by the King the Lords together And howsoever I conceive which I submit to your Lordship that our case will not stand upon presidents but upon the fundamentall Laws and Statutes of this Realm and though the presidents look the one way or the other they are to be brought back unto the Laws by which the Kingdome is governed In the first of Henry the eighth Rot. Parl. one Harison was committed to the Marshalsey by the command of the King and being removed by Habeas Corpus into the Court the cause returned was that he was committed per mandatum Domini Regis and he was bailed In the fortieth of Elizabeth Thomas Wendon was committed to the Gatehouse by the commandment of the Queen and Lords of the Councell and being removed by an Habeas Corpus upon the generall return and he was bailed In 8 Iacobi one Caesar was committed by the Kings commandment and this being returned upon his Habeas Corpus upon the examination of this case it doth appear that it was over ruled that the return should be amended or else the prisoner should be delivered The presidents concerning the commitment by the Lords of the Councell are in effect the same with these where the commitment is by the reason why the cause of the commitment should not be shewn holds in both cases and that is the necessity of suit and therefore Master Stamford makes the command of the King and that of the Lords of the Privy Councell to be both as one and to this purpose if they speak he speaks and if he speaks they speak The presidents that we can shew you how the Subject hath been delivered upon commitment by the Lords of the Councell as in the time of Henry the eight as in the times of Queen Elizabeth Queen Mary are infinite as in the ninth of Elizabeth Thomas Lawrence was committed to the Towre by the Lords of the Councell and bailed upon an Habeas Corpus In the 43 of Elizabeth Calvins case In the third of Elizabeth Vernons case These were committed for high treason and yet bailed for in all these cases there must be a conviction in due time or a deliverance by Law There be divers other presidents that might be shewn to your Lordship In 12 Iacobi Mâ—les Renards In 12 Iacobi Rot. 155. Richard Beckwiths case In 4 Iacobi Sir Thomas Monson was committed for treason to the Towre of London and afterwards was brought hither and bailed and since our case stands upon this return and yet there is no sufficient cause in Law expressed in the return of the detaining this Gentleman and since these presidents do warrant our proceedings my humble suit unto this Court is that the Gentleman Sir Iohn Henningham who hath petitioned his Majesty that he may have the benefit of the Law and his Majesty hath signified it it is his pleasure that justice according to the Law should be administred at all times in generall to all his Subjects and particularly to these Gentlemen which is their birth-right My humble suit to your Lordship is that these Gentlemen may have the benefit of that Law and be delivered from their imprisonment The Argument of Master Noye upon the Habeas corpus May it please your Lordship I am of Councell with Sir Walter Earl one of the prisoners at the Barre the return of this writ is as those that have been before they are much of one tenour and as you have heard the tenour of that so this Gentleman coming hither by an Habeas Corpus I will by your Lordships favour read the writ Carolus Dei Gratia Iohanni Lylo Milit Guardian Prison nostrae de le Fleet Salut Praecipimus tibi quod corpus Walteri Earl Milit in prison nostra sub custodia tua detent ut dicit una cum causa detentionis suae quocunque nomine praedict Walter censeat in eadem Habeas Corpus ad subjiciendum recipiendum ea quae curia nostra de eo ad tunc ibidem ordin conting in hac parte haec nallatenus omit periculo incumbent habeas tibi hoc breve Test Hyde apud Westminster quarto die Novembris Anno 8. Executio istius brevis patet in quadam schedula huic brevi annexat Respons Johan Liloe Guardian Prison de le Fleet. Ego Iohannes Lyloe Mil Guardian Prison domini Regis de le Fleet Serenissimo Domino Regi apud Westminster 8. Post receptionem hujus brevis quod in hac schedula est mentionat ' Certifico quod Walter Earl miles in eodem brevium nominat detentus est in prisona de le Fleet sub custodia mea praedict per speciale mandatum domini Regis mihi significatum per VVarrantum duorum aliorum de Privato Concilio per Honorabilissimi dicti Domini Regis cujus quidem tenor sequitur in haec verba Whereas Sir Walter Earl Knight was heretofore committed to your custody these are to will and require you still to detain him letting you know that both his first commitment and this direction for the continuance of him in prison were and are by his Majesties speciall commandment from White Hall 7 Novembris 1627. Thomas Coventree C. S. Henry Manchester Thomas Suffolk Bridgewater Kellie R. Duneln ' Thomas Edmunds Iohn Cook Marlborough Pembrook Salisbury Totnes Grandisson Guliel Bath and Wells Robert Nanton Richard Weston Humphrey Mayes To the Guardian of the Fleet or his Deputy Et haec est causa detentionis praedict Walteri Earl sub custodia mea in Prison praedict Attamen corpus ejusdem Walteri coram Domino Rege ad diem locum praedictum post receptionem brevis praedict pa rat habeo prout istud breve in se exiget requiret Respon Johan Liloe milit Guardian Prison de le Fleet. My Lord the first Habeas corpus bears date the
the Privy Councell is a limited jurisdiction for they have no power in all causes their power being restrained in certain causes by severall Acts of Parliament as it appeareth by the statute of 20 Edward the third c. 11. 25 Ed. the third c. 1. stat 4. the private petition in Parliament permitted in the 1 of R. 2. where the Commons petition that the Privie Councell might not make any Ordinance against the Common Law Customes or Statutes of the Realm the fourth of Henry the fourth ca. 3. 13 Hen. the fourth 7. 31 Henry the sixth and their jurisdictions being a limited jurisdiction the cause and grounds of their commmitment ought to appear whereby it may appear if the Lords of the Councell did commit him for such a cause as was within their jurisdiction for if they did command me to be committed to prison for a cause whereof they had not jurisdiction the Court ought to discharge me of this imprisonment and howsoever the King is Vicarius Dei in terra yet Bracton cap. 8. fol. 107. saith quod nihil aliud potest Rex in terris cum sit Minister Dei Vicarius quam solum quod de jure potest nec obstat quod dicitur quod Principi placet legis habet vigorem quia sequitur in fine legis cum lege Regia quae de ejus imperio lata est id est non quicquid de voluntate Regis temere praesumptum est sed animo condendi Iura sed quod consilio Magistratuum suorum Rege author praestant habita super hoc deliberatione tract rect fuer definit Potestat itaque sua juris est non injuriae The which being so then also it ought to appear upon what cause the King committeth one to prison whereby the Judges which are indifferent between the King and his Subjects may judge whether his commitment be against the Laws and Statutes of this Realm or not Thirdly it is to be observed that the Kings command by his Writ of Habeas corpus is since the commandment of the King for his commitment and this being the latter commandment ought to be obeyed wherefore that commanding a return of the body cum causa detentionis there must be a return of some other cause then Per mandatum domini Regis the same commandment being before the return of the Writ Pasch. 9. E. 3. pl. 30. fol. 56. upon a Writ of Cessavit brought in the County of Northumberland the Defendants plead That by reason the Country being destroyed by Warres with the Scots King Edward the second gave command that no Writ of Cessavit should be brought during the Warres with Scotland and that the King had sent his Writ to surcease the Plea and he averreth that the Warres with Scotland did continue Hearle that giveth the Rule saith That we have command by the King that now is to hold this Plea wherefore we will not surcease for any writ of the King that is dead and so upon all these reasons and presidents formerly alledged I conclude that the return that Sir Iohn Corbet was committed and detained in prison Per speciale mandatum domini Regis without shewing the nature of the commandment by which the Court may judge whether the commandment be of such a nature as he ought to be detained in prison and that without shewing the cause upon which the commandment of the King is grounded is not good As unto the second part which is Whether the time of the commitment by the return of the Writ not appearing unto the Court the Court ought to detain him in prison or no I conceive that he ought not to be continued in prison admitting that the first commitment by the command of the King were lawfull yet when he hath continued in prison by such reasonable time as may be thought fit for that offence for which he is committed he ought to be brought to answer and not to continue still in prison without being brought to answer For it appears by the Books of our Laws that liberty is a thing so favoured by the Law that the Law will not suffer the continuance of a man in prison for any longer time then of necessity it must and therefore the Law will neither suffer the party Sheriffs or judges to continue a man in prison by their power and their pleasure but doth speed the delivery of a man out of prison with as reasonable expedition as may be And upon this reason it is resolved in 1 2 El. Dyer 175. 8 Ed. 4.13 That howsoever the Law alloweth that there may be no term between the rest of an originall Writ and the return of the same where there is onely a summons and no imprisonment of the body yet it will not allow that there shall be a term between the rest of a Writ of Capias and the return of the same where the body of a man is to be imprisoned insomuch that it will give no way that the party shall have no power to continue the body of a man imprisoned any longer time then needs must 39 E. 3.7 10 H. 7.11 6 E. 4.69 11 E. 4.9 48 E. 3.1 17 E. 3.1 2 Hen. 7. Kellawaies Reports do all agree that if a Capias shall be awarded against a man for the apprehending of his body and the Sheriffe will return the Capias that is awarded against the party a non est inventus or that languidus est in prisona yet the Law will allow the party against whom it is awarded for the avoiding of his corporall pennance and dures of imprisonment to appear gratis and for to answer For the Law will not allow the Sheriffe by his false return to keep one in prison longer then needs must 38 Ass. pl. 22. Brooks imprisonment 100. saith That it was determined in Parliament that a man is not to be detained in prison after he hath made tender of his fine for his imprisonment therefore I desire your Lordship that Sir Iohn Corbet may not be kept longer in durance but be discharged according to the Law The substance of the Objections made by Mr. Attorney General before a Committee of both Houses to the Argument that was made by the House of Commons at the first conference with the Lords out of Presidents of Record and Resolutions of Iudges in former times touching the Liberty of the person of every Freeman and the Answers and Replies then presently made by the House of Commons to these Objections AFter the first conference which was desired by the Lords and had by a Committee of both houses in the painted Chamber touching the Reasons Laws Acts of Parliament and Presidents concerning the Liberty of the person of every Freeman M r Attorney General being heard before the Committee of both houses as it was assented by the house of Commons that he might be before they went up to the conference after some preamble made wherein he declined the answering all Reasons of Law
and Acts of Parliament came onely to the Presidents used in the Argument before delivered and so endeavoured to weaken the strength of them that had been brought in behalf of the subjects to shew that some other were directly contrary to the Law comprehended in the Resolutions of the house of Commons touching the bailing of Prisoners returned upon the writ of Habeas Corpus to be committed by the special command of the King or the Councel without any cause shewed for which by Law they ought to be committed And the course which was taken it pleased the Committee of both houses to allow of was that M r. Attorney should make his Objections to every particuler President and that the Gentlemen appointed and trusted herein by the house of Commons by several Replies should satisfie the Lords touching the Objections made by him against or upon every particuler as the order of the Presidents should lead them he began with the first 12. Presidents that were used by the house of Commons at the conference delivered by them to prove that Prisoners returned to stand so Committed were delivered upon bail by the Court of Kings Bench The first was that of Bildstones case in the 18. Edw. 3. Rot. 33. Rex To this he Objected First that in the return of him into the Court it did not appear that this Bildstone was committed by the Kings command and Secondly that in the Record it did appear also that he had been committed for suspicion of counterfaiting the great Seal and so by consequence was bailable by the Law in regard there appeared a Cause why he was committed in which case it was granted by him as indeed it was plain and agreed of all hands that the Prisoner is bailable though committed by Command of the King and he said that this part of the Record by which it appeared he had been committed for suspicion of treason was not observed to the Lords in the Argument before used and he said also to the Lords that there were three several kinds of Records by which the full truth of every award or bailing upon a Habeas Corpus is known First the remembrance Roll wherein the award is given Secondly the file of the writt and the return and Thirdly the Scruect or Scruet finium wherein the baile is entered and that onely the remembrance Roll of this Case was to be found and that if the other two of it were extant he doubted not but that it would appear also that upon the return it self the Cause of the Commitment had been expressed and so he concluded that this proved not for the house of Commons touching the Matter of bail where a Prisoner was committed by the Kings special command without Cause shewed To this Objection the reply was First that it was plain that Bildstone was committed by the Kings express Command For so the very words of the Writt are to the Constable of the Tower quod eum tenendum Custodiae facias c. then which nothing can more fully express a Commitment by the Kings command Secondly how ever it be true that in the latter part of the Record it doth appear that Bildstone had been Committed for suspicion of Treason yet if the times of the proceeding expressed in the Record were observed it would be plain that the Objection was of no force for this one ground both in this Case and all the rest is infallible and never to be doubted of in the Law Nota. That Justices of every Court adjudge of the force and strength of a return out of the body of it self onely and as therein it appears Now in Easter term in the 18. Edward 3. he was returned and brought before them as Committed onely by the Writt wherein noe Cause is expressed and the Leivetenant the Constable of the Tower that brought him into the Court saies that he had no other warrant to detain him Nisi breve predictum wherein there was no mention of any Cause the Court thereupon adjudged that breve predictum for that speciall command was not sufficient causa to detain him in prison and thereupon he is by judgment of the Court in Easter term let to Mainprize But that part of the Record wherein it appears that he had indeed been committed for suspicion of Treason is of Trinity term following when the King after the letting of him to Mainprize sent to the Judges that they should discharge his Mainprize because no man prosecuted him And at that time it appears but not before that he had been in for suspicion of Treason so that he was returned to stand committed by the Kings special command onely without Cause shewed in Easter term And then by judgment of the Court let to Mainprize which to this purpose is but the same with bail though otherwise it differ And in the term following upon another occasion the Court knew that he had been committed for suspicion of Treason which hath no relation at all to the letting of him to Mainprize nor to the judgement of the Court then given when they did not nor could possible know any Cause for which the King had committed him And it was said in behalf of the house of Commons that they had not indeed in the Argument expresly used this latter part of Bildstones Case because it being onely of Trinity term following could not concern the reason of an Award given by the Court in Easter term next before yet notwithstanding that they had most faithfully at the time of their Argument delivered into the Lords as indeed they had a perfect coppy at large of the whole Record of this Case as they had done also of all other presidents whatsoever cited by them in so much as in truth there was not one president of Record of either side the coppy whereof they had not delivered in likewise nor did Mr. Attorney mention any one besides those that were so delivered in by them And as touching those 3. kinds of Records the remembrance Roll the return and file of the Writt and the Scruets it was answered by the gentlemen imployed by the house of Commons that it was true that the Scruect and return of this Case of Bildstone was not to be found but that did not lessen the weight of the president because always in the Award or Judgment drawn up in the remembrance Roll the Cause whatsoever it be when any is shewed upon the return is always expressed as it appears clearly by the constant Entries of the Kings-Bench Court so that if any Cause had appeared plainly in that part of the Roll which belongs to Easter term wherein the Judgment was given but the return of the commitment by the Kings command without Cause shewed and the Judgment of the Court that the Prisoner was to be let to Mainprize appears therein onely and so notwithstanding any Objection made by Mr. Attorney the Cause was maintained to be a clear proof among many others
predictae doth not always imply or remaunding upon judgment or debate And this answer was given to this of Cesars Case that is the sixt of this Number The seventh is the Case of Iames Demetrius It was 12 Iacobi Rot. 153. Mr Attorney objected that this Demetrius and divers others being Brewers were committed per consilium Domini Regis to the Marshal-sea of the houshould and that upon the commitment so generally returned they were remaunded and that the Entry was immediate remittitur prefato Marescallo hospitii predicti where he observed that immediate shews that the Judges of that time were so resolved of this Question that they remaunded them partly as men that well knew what the Law was herein Here unto the Gentlemen of the House of Commons gave these answers First that the Remittitur in this Case is but as the other in Cesars and so proves nothing against them Secondly that immediate being added to it shews plainly that it was done without debate or any argument or consideration had of it which makes the authority of the presidents to be of no force in point of Law for Judgments and Awards given upon delibration onely and debate are Proofs and Arguments of weight and not any sudden Act of the Court without debate or deliberation And the Entry of immediate being proposed to Mr. Keeling it was confirmed by him that by that Entry it appears by this course that the remaunding of him was the self same day he was brought which as it was said by the Gentlemen of the House of Commons might be at the riseing of the Court or upon advisement and the like And this answer was given to this president of the Brewers The last of the 8. which Mr. Attorney objected is Saltonstals Case in the 13. Iacobi Regis He was committed per mandatum Dominorum Regis de privato Consilio and being returned by the Warden of the Fleet to be so remittitur prisonae predictae and in the 13. Iac in the same year remittitur generally in the Roll and these two make but one Case and are as one president To this the Gentlemen of the House of Commons answered that it is true the Rolls have such Entries of remittitur in them generally but that proves nothing upon the reason before used by them in Cesars Case But also Saltonstall was committed for another cause besides per mandatum Dominorum Consilii for a contempt against an order in Chauncery and that was in the return also And besides the Court as it appears in the Record gave several days to the Warden of the Fleet to mend his return which they would not have done if they had conceived it sufficient because that which is sufficient needs no amendment To this M r. Attorney replyed that they gave him a day to amend his return in respect of that part thereof that concerned the order in Chancery and not in respect of that which was per mandat Concilij But the gentlemen of the house of Commons answered That it appears not any where nor indeed is it likely at all nor can be so reasonably understood because if the other return per mandatum Concilij had been sufficient by it self it appears fully that the Court conceived the return to be insufficient And so the gentlemen of the Commons house concluded that they had a great number of presidents besides the Acts of Parliament and reasons of Common Law agreeable to their resolution and that there was not one president at all that made against them but indeed that almost all that were brought as well against them as for them if rightly understood made fully to the maintenance of their resolution and that there was not one example or president of a Remittitur in any kinde upon this point before that of Cesars Case which is before cleared with the rest and is but of late time and of no moment against the resolution of the house of Commons And thus for so much as concerned the presidents of Record the first day of the conference desired by the Lords ended The next day they desired another conference which the house of Commons at which it pleased the Committee of both houses to hear M r Attorney again to make what Objection he would against other parts of the Arguments formerly delivered by the house of Commons He then Objected against the Acts of Parliament and against the reasons of Law and his Objections to these parts were answered as appears in the answers by order given into the house of Commons by the gentlemen that made them He Objected also upon the second day against that second kinde of presidents which are resolutions of Judges in former times and not of Records and brought also some other Testimonies of opinions of Judges in former times touching this point First for that resolution of all the Judges in England in 34. of Queen Eliz. mentioned and read in the Arguments made at the first conference he said That it was directly against the resolution of the House of Commons and observed the words of it to be in one place that Persons so committed by the King or the Councel may not be delivered by any of the Courts c. and in another that if the Cause were expressed either in generality or speciality it was sufficient and he said that the expressing of a cause in generality was to shew the Kings or Councels Command And to this purpose he read the whole words of that resolution of the Judges Then he Objected also that in a report of one Ruswells Case in the Kings-bench in the 13. Iac. he found that the opinion of some Judges of that Court S r. Edward Coke being then Chief Justice and one of them was that a Prisoner committed per mandatum Domini Regis or privati Consilii without cause shewed and so returned could not be bayled because it might be matter of State or Arcanum Imperii for which he stood committed And to this also he added an opinion that he found in a Journal of the House of Commons of the 13. Iac. wherein S r. Edward Coke speaking to a Bill preferred for the explanation of Magna Charta touching imprisonment said in the House That a Prisoner so committed could not be enlarged by the Law because it might be Matter of State for which he was committed And among these Objections of other nature also he spake of the confidence that was shewed in behalf of the House of Commons he said that it was not confidence could add any thing to the determination of the question but if it could that he had as much reason for the other side against the resolution of the House grounding himself upon the force of his Objections which as he conceived had so weakned the Argument of the Commons House that notwithstanding any thing yet Objected they were upon clear reason confident of the truth of their first resolution grounded upon so just
examination and deliberation taken by them And it was observed to the Lords also that their confidence herein was of another nature and far greater weight then any confidence that could be expressed by M r. Attorney or whomsoever else being of his Majesties Councel learned To which purpose the Lords were desired to take into their Memory the difference between the present quality of the Gentlemen that spake in behalf of the House of Commons and of the Kings learned Councel in their speaking there howsoever accidentally they were both men of the same profession For the Kings Councel spake as Councel perpetually retained by Fee and if they made glosses and and what advantagious Interpretations soever for their own part they did but what belonged to their place and quality as M r. Attorney had done But the Gentlemen that spake in behalf of the House of Commons came there bound on the one side by the trust reposed in them by their Countrey that sent them and on the other bound also by an Oath taken by every of them before they sit in the House to maintain and defend the rights and prerogatives of the Crown So that even in the point of confidence alone that of them that spake as retained Councel by perpetual Fee and might by their place being permitted to speak say what they would and that of them that spake as bound to nothing but truth but by such a trust and such an Oath were no way to be so compared or Counterpoised as if the one of them were of no more weight then the other And then the Objections before mentioned were also answered For that of the resolution of all the Judges of England in 34. Eliz. It was shewed plainly it agreed with the resolution of the House of Commons For although indeed it might have been expressed with more perspicuity yet the words of it as they are sufficiently shew that the meaning of it is no otherwise To that purpose besides the words of the whole frame of this resolution of the Judges as it is in the Coppy transcribed out of the Lord Chief Justice Andersons book written in his own hand which book was there offered to be shewed also in behalf of the House of Commons It was observed that the Records of the first part of it shew plainly that all the Judges of England then resolved that the Prisoners spoken of in the first part of their resolution were onely Prisoners committed with cause shewed for they onely said they might not be delivered by any of the Courts without due Trial by Law and Judgement of acquital had which shews plainly that they meant that by trial and acquital they might be delivered but it is clear that no trial or acquital can be had where is not some cause laid to their charge for which they ought to stand committed Therefore in that part of the resolution such Prisoners are onely meant as are committed without cause shewed which also the Judges in that resolution expresly thought necessary as appears in the second part of the resolution wherein they have these words If upon Return of the Habeas Corpus the cause of their commitment be certified to the Judges as it ought to be c. by which words they shew plainly that every return of a commitment is insufficient that hath not a cause shewed of it And to that which M r. Attorney said as if the cause were sufficiently expressed in generality if the Kings Command or the Councels were expressed in it and as if that were meant in the resolution for a sufficient general cause it was answered That it was never heard of in Law that the power or Person that committed the Prisoner was understood for the Causa captionis or Causa detentionis but onely the reason why that Power or Person committed the Prisoner as also in common speech if a man ask why and for what cause a man stands committed the answer is not that such a one committed him but his offence or some other cause is understood in the question and is to be shewed in the Answer But to say that such an one committed the Prisoner is an answer to the question who committed him and not why or for what cause he stands committed Then for that of the Coppy of the Report of 13. Iac. shewed forth by Mr. Attorney it was answered That the Report it self which had been before seen and perused among many other things at a Committee made by the House was of sleight or no Authority for that it was taken by one that was at that time a young Student onely and was a Reporter in the Kings-bench and there was not any other Report to be found that agreed with it Secondly although the Reports of young Students when they take the words of Judges as they fall from their mouth at the Bench and in the Person and form as they are spoken may be of good credit Yet in this Case there was not one word so reported but in truth there being three Cases a time in the Kings-bench one Ruswell and one Allen and one Saltonstall every of which had something of like nature in it the Student having been present in the Court made up the form of one Report or Case out of all those three in his own words and so put it into his book so that there is not a word in the Report but is framed according to the Students fancie as it is written and nothing is expressed in it as it came from the mouth of the Judges otherwise then his fancie directed him Thirdly there are in the Report plain falshoods of Matter of Fact which are to be attributed either to the Judges or to the Reporter It is most likely by all reason that they proceeded from the Reporters fault but however those Matters of falshood shew sufficiently that the credit of the rest is of slight value for the purpose It is said in the Report that Harecourt being committed by the Councel was bayled in 40. Eliz. upon a privy Seal or a Letter where as there was no such thing in truth And it is said there that no such kinde of Letters are filed there in any case whatsoever That resolution of the Judges in 34. is miscited there and in 36. of Queen Eliz. and it is said there that by that resolution a Prisoner returned to be committed by the command of the Councel might not at all be delivered by the Court whereas no such thing is comprehended in in that resolution But that which is of most moment is that howsoever the truth of the report were yet the opinion of the Judges being sudden without any debate had of the case is of sleight moment For in difficult points especially the gravest and most learned men living may on the sudden let fall and that without disparragement to them such opinions as they may well and ought to change upon further enquiry and examination and full debate had
and free Customes of the Realm from your Majestie or your privy Councel And where also by the Statute called the great Charter of the Liberties of England It is declared and enacted That no Freeman may be taken nor imprisoned nor be disseised of his Freehold nor Liberties nor his free Customes nor be outlawed or exiled or in any manner destroyed but by the Lawfull judgement of his Peers or by the Law of the Land And in the 28. year of the Raign of King Edw. 3. it was declared and enacted by Authority of Parliament that no man of what Estate or condition he be shall put out of his Land or Tenement nor taken nor imprisoned nor disinherited nor put to death without being brought to answer by due process of Law Nevertheless against the Tenour of the said Statutes and other the good Laws and Statutes of your Realm to that end provided divers of your Subjects have of late been imprisoned without any cause shewed and when for their deliverance they were brought before your Justices by your Majesties Writ of Habeas Corpus there to undergo and receive as the Court should order and the Keepers commanded to certefie the causes of their detainer no cause was certified but that they were detained by your Majesties special command signified by the Lords of your privy Councel and yet were returned back to several Prisons without being charged with any thing the which they might make answer to and to Law And whereas of late great Companies of Souldiers and Marriners have been dispersed into divers Countreys of the Realm and the Inhabitants against their wills have been compelled to receive them into their houses and there to suffer them to sojourn against the Laws and Customes of this Realm and to the great grievance and vexation of the people And whereas also by Authority of Parliament in the 25. E. 3. it is declared and enacted that no man shall be fore-judged of Life or Limb against the form of the great Charter and the Law of the Land and by the said great Charter and other the Laws and Statutes of this your Realm no man ought to be adjudged to death but by the Laws established in this your Realm Nevertheless of late times divers Commissions under your Majesties great Seal have issued forth by which certain Persons have been assigned and appointed Commissioners with power and Authority to proceed within the Land according to the Justice of Martial Law against such Souldiers or Marriners or other dissolute Persons joyning with them as should commit any Murther Robbery Fellony Mutiny or other outrage or misdemeanour whatsoever and by such summary course and order as is agreeable to Martial Law and is used in Armies in time of War to proceed to the trial and condemnation of such offenders and them to cause to be executed and put to death according to the Law Martial By pretext whereof some of your Majesties Subjects have been by some of the said Commissioners put to death when and where if by the Laws and Statutes of the Land they had deserved death by the same Laws and Statutes also they might and by none other ought to have been adjudged and executed And also sundry grievous offenders by colour thereof claiming and exemption have escaped the punishment due to them by the Laws and Statutes of this your Realm By reason whereof divers of your Officers and Ministers of Justice have unjustly refused or forbore to proceed against such offenders according to the same Laws and Statutes upon pretence that the said offenders were punishable onely by Martial Law and by Authority of such Commissions as aforesaid which Commissions and all other of like nature are directly contrary to the said Laws and Statutes of this your Realm They do therefore humbly pray your most Excellent Majesty that no man hereafter be compelled to make or yield any Guift Loan Benevolence Tax or such like charge without common consent by Act of Parliament And that none be called to make answer or to take such an Oath or to give attendance or to be confined or otherwise molested or disquieted concerning the same or for refusal thereof And that no Freeman may man such manner as is before mentioned be imprisoned or detained And that your Majesty would be pleased to remove the said Souldiers and Marriners and that your people may not be so burthened in time to come And that the aforesaid Commissions for proceeding by Martial Law may be revoked annulled and that hereafter no Commissions of like nature may issue forth to any Person or Persons whatsoever to be executed as aforesaid least by colour of them any your Majesties Subjects be destroyed and put to death contrarie to the Laws and Franchises of the Land All which they most humbly pray of your most Excellent Majestie as their Rights and Liberties according to the Laws and Statutes of this Realm And that your Majestie would also vouchsafe to declare that the Awards doings and proceedings to the prejudice of your people in any the premises shall not be drawn hereafter into consequence or example And that your Majestie would be pleased gratiously for the further comfort and safety of your people to declare your Royal will and pleasure that in the things aforesaid all your Officers and Ministers shall serve you according to the Laws and Statutes of this Realm as they tender the Honour of your Majestie and the prosperity of this Kingdom S r. BENJAMIN RUDDIERDS Speech Mr. Pym I Did not think to have spoken again to this Bill because I was willing to believe that the forwardness of this Committee would have prevented me but now I hold my self bound to speak and to speak in earnest In the first year of the King and the second convention I first moved for the increase and inlarging of poor Ministers liings I shewed how necessarie it was that it had been neglected this was also commended to the House by his Majestie there were as now many accusations on foot against scandalous Ministers I was bolde to tell the House that there were scandalous livings which were much the cause of the other livings of 5. Marks of 5. l. a year that men of worth and of parts would not be musled up to such pittances that there were some places in England which were scarce in Christendom where God was little better known then amongst the Indians I exampled it in the utmost skirts of the North where the prayers of the common people are more like Spells and Charms then devotions the same blindeness and ignorance is in divers parts of Wales which many of that Countrey doth both know and lament I declared also that to plant good Ministers was the strongest and surest means to establish true Religion that it would prevail more against Papistry then the making of new Laws or executing of old that it would counterwork Court Conivence and Luke-warm accommodation that though the calling of Ministers be never
happy conclusion and to the King's honour and our own safety Great and weighty things wound deep Cast your eyes which way you please and you shall see violations on all sides look at the liberty of the subject look on the priviledge of this House let any say if ever he saw the like violation by inferiour Ministers that over-do their command nay they say if all the Parliament were in you this would we do and justifie If we suffer the liberty of this House to wither out of fear or complement we give a wound to the happiness of this Kingdom Here the course of justice was interrupted and order in the Exchequer was made for stay of the goods since here is a seizure upon the approach of Parliament of goods amounting to 5000. l. for a pretended duty of 200 l. In the sight of King Iames by reason of the sickness that then was the Parliament was prorogued and then there was some boldness to take this Tonnage and Poundage for there was no right to demaund it Let us proceed with affection of duty to make up breaches let a Committee consider of these proceedings Mr. Littleton HEre Mr. Littleton made a short speech to second him and all to the same purpose but for brevity sake I omit it M. Littleton we have had good admonitions and have followed them we have moderation preached unto us in Parliament and we follow I would others did the like out of Parliament Let the parties be sent for that violated the liberties of the Parliament and have their doom This Speech was occasioned by Setretary Cook who in his Speech desired moderation might be used Sir Iohn Elliot I See by this Relation what cause we have to be tender of the liberty of the Kingdom and this House and yet withall to return that moderation as to give satisfaction to the world that our hearts are fixed to serve his Majesty and to free us from ofter of jealousie 3 Things are involved in this complaint First the Right of particular Gentlemen Secondly the Right of the Subject Thirdly the Right and priviledge of this House Let the Committee consider of the 2 former but for the violation of the liberty of this House let us not do less than our fathers Was ever the information of a Member committed to a Committee Let us send for the parties Is there here a bare denial of the restistution of the goods was it not also said that if all the Parliament were contained in him they would do as they did Let them be sent for It was ordered that the Officers of the Custome-house should be sent for Mr. Selden REported from the Committee concerning the printing of the Petition of Right that there were printed 1500 without any addition at all which were published in the time of the last Parliament but since the Parliament other Copies have been printed and these supprest and made waste paper which the Printer did as he said by command from Mr. Attorny which he received from his Majesty and the Printer further said that the Attorney was with the Lord Privy Seal at White-Hall and there delivered unto the Printer sundry papers with diverse hands to them and on the backside was endorsed thus We will command you that these copies be printed Friday 23. HIs Majesty sent the House a Message to this effect That he willed them to cease from the former debate of Tonnage and Poundage till the next day in the after-noone and that he would speak with them the next day in the after-noone at White-Hall in the Banqueting-house Saturday 24. THe King made a Speech to that purpose Munday 26. MR. Walter did inform the House that diverse ships were laden with corn for Spain whereupon a Committee was appointed to inquire of the trading into Spain and to other enemies transporting corn and other Munition thither it is also ordered that some of the prime Councel should presently move the King about stay of the ships MR. Secretay Cook then moved that the Bill of Tonnage and Poundage might be read and after some debate it was diverted and they fell upon points of Religion the which Mr. Rowse did first mention See his former Speech at large Sir Francis Beamor IF Religion be not a Rule to all our actions what pollicy can we have If God fight not our battailes the help of man is in vain In our defect the cause thereof is our defect in religion and the sin is Idolatry and Popery Papists encrease now more than ever they did neither do they want their Priests and Masses nay his Majesties name is used to stop proceedings against Papists and that since the Parliament contrary to his Majesties goodness and publick profession and contrary to his many proclamations and many instructions to the Judges and whatsoever is done in the country is undone above Mr. Kirton IF ever now it is time to speak We see what men are raised to preferment if we look not to it I shall more fear it than the Spanish Armado or the loss of the Sound Mountague was here questioned We see the King to all our comforts is right it comes not from him but some that are too near him are too busie in this The ambition of the Clergy brought these stories We see pulpits are full of them we see some that wear white and black 't is more than Mountague let us bend our wits to reforme them Mr. Sherland WE have a Religion that is worth the loving with all our hearts it was setled by the bloud of Martyrs and kept by miracles To have our noses wiped of this would grieve any heart more to see our Religion go away and designes made of it and Arminianism still to encrease as it doth If do admi I do perswade my self the greater part of the Clergy Nobility and Gentry are firm but it is the desire of some to labour to bring in a new faction of their own and so to drop into the ears of his Majesty that those that oppose them oppose his Majesty and so they put him upon designes that stand not with publick liberty that he commands what he lists with Lives Goods and Religion and doth as he pleaseth and so they involve all true hearted English-men and Christians under the name of Puritans and so make their quarrel to be his Majesties which is treason of the highest quality Tuesday 27. A Petition was exhibited concerning one Lewis that said about the 25 of December The Devill take the Parliament which was avowed by 2 witnesses It was resolved to be an offence to the Parliament and it was ordered he should be sent for SIr Nathaniel Rich tendered a Petition touching the Fast which was agreed to be preferred to the King It was ordered that a conference should be desired with the Lords about this Petition who were desired to joyn with the lower House which was done accordingly THe King sent a Message by Secretary Cooke to this effect
Moseley covenanteth that his man Brograve should have 80 pounds and then he should have an Injunction but the Chancellor having Intimation thereof prevented the same yet after by Covenant Moseley procured his man 50 pounds That this was an ordinarie course cited many particulars that Moseley would in his private Chamber adde to Orders or detract from them or that was for the King or against the King as men would come off to him This is referred to a Committee to be examined Mr. Selden REported from the examination of Allen for so much as concerneth the Priviledge of this House by the first and third Article against him This justified by a Letter written by Allen to Mr. Barton the Puritan faction denied supply like Water-men provoked to War rowed another way for his Author of this he produceth a book set forth by King Iames in the 19 year of his Reign pag. 13. to shew how the Puritan faction be clear by mentioning the particular Members of the Commons House and pag. 5. in the same pag. all which they cloke with Religion and when he had boldly insisted on these he said I pray note it It is not this Parliament I speak of it was another Sir Robert Phillips THat he may be sent to the Tower and that he may stand in some publick place with a Paper declaring the cause or such other punishment as the House shall think fit Mr. Pym THat other matter of greater importance being under examination he may for the present rest in custodie and I doubt not but there is matter sufficient to inflict further punishment Ordered that Allen shall first answer his contempt at the Committee for Religion on Munday next Mr. Shervile THat the Committee for Pardons is sine die therefore he moveth for another day whereupon there is order to meet this afternoon Mr. Selden reported the draught of Mr. Mountagues interlined Pardon concerning the Additions more than an ordinarie Coronation Pardon except sundrie causes depending in the three Courts in Westminster-hall and the High Commission Court For Manwering all offences for time past and for time to come Sir Iohn Stanhope MOveth That one Lynne a Member of this House and Secretary to the Bishop of Winchester may look on the Pardon and be injoyned to declare whether he know the hand or no. Mr. Lynne declareth the interlined particulars to be part his Lords hand and part his own hand by his Lords command yet some of the interlined particulars he knew not the hand Sir Nathaniel Ritch thanked this Gentleman for dealing clearly with the House and saith for his encouragement he deserveth thanks from the whole House Sir Iohn Elliot moveth That a select Committee may extract a charge against the Bishop of Winchester that we may have judgement against him Sir Daniel Norton THat a Doctor of Divinitie in the Bishop of Winchesters Diocess a very grave Divine Doctor Moor the Bishop of Winchester said to him he had heard him often preach against Poperie before the Kings Majestie which was very pleasing to the King but now he must not The Doctor answers he must if it comes in his way said the Bishop you must not and further your Tables in the Quier stand as in an ale-house The Doctor replied they stood according to Law sayes the the Bishop there be Articles to controove said the Doctor the Register found it contrary saying Your Tables at Winchester stood as Altars Sir Robert Phillips THus you see how truth in the discoverie doth grow upon us And now you see how the introducing Ceremonies at Durham doth arise and now you see the greatest aspersion laid on his Majestie that ever I heard of and now I am confident the Bishop of Durham procured the Kings hand to the Pardons Chancellor of the Dutchie THis trencheth high to the person of the King and I am glad to hear it and shall be more glad to see it proved Sir Thomas Heale SAith he heard these words from Doctor Moores own mouth and asking if he would prove this in Parliament he said he would maintain it with his life Mr. Valentine SAith That this Bishop hath a Chaplain in Grantham that preached they were all damned that refused the Loan and that he hath made a great combustion in placing the Communion Table there The Speakers Letter is to go for Doctor Moore Munday 9. A Petition in complaint of the Post-Masters Patent of London which is referred to a Committee Mr. Speaker delivered from Mr. Attorney a Warrant in writing of his proceedings in Cosens business Mr. Iohn Elliot reported from the Committee for examination of the Merchants business that the Committee finding Sheriff Acton in prevarications and contradictions in his examinations which is conceived to be a contempt of this House desires he may be sent for to answer his contempt Mr. Godwin saith the Sheriff acknowledgeth his error and humbly desireth so much favour that he may once again be called before the Committee and if then he give not full contentment by his answer he will refer himself to the wisdome and justice of the House Mr. Walter secondeth this Motion so did Alderman Molson Secretarie Cook Chancellor of the Dutchie c. but his abuse being declared to be so great and so gross and that he had so many times given him to recollect himself and that he being so great an Officer of so great a Citie had had all the favour that he might be and yet rejected the same and carried himself in a very scornfull manner wherefore it is Ordered that he shall be sent for to the House as a Delinquent to Morrow morning Iones the Printer and his Councel are called in to argue the business of Mr. Mountagues Episcopal Confirmation First Quere Whether the exceptions be legal Secondly whether the Confirmation be good The last is the point now in hand to which the House enjoyned the Councel to speak The Councel proposed a Third Quere What will be the fruit or effect of it if in Law the Confirmation prove void In this the Councel said it will not extend to make him a Bishop upon the point of Election but upon the point of Confirmation onely which maketh him punishable if he execute any thing concerning the Bishoprick Sir Hen. Martin saith The exception making void the Confirmation doth in Law work also upon the Election Doctor Steward saith The point of setting to of the Advocates hand is but matter of Form in the Court no matter of Law Sir Henry Martin saith he will endeavour himself to give the House as full satisfaction and he will speak without relation to the Kings Right and Laws of the Realm The Proclamation by the Common Law should not be at Bow Church but at the Cathedral Church of the Diocess where the Bishop is to be elected and the Dean and Charter of that Diocess is to except and not every one that will The Argument is endless and to alter a course so long settled