Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	court_n	judge_n	law_n	3,228	5	4.7516	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

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

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

then people may be justified in murdering and killing for what the creature doth by the moving of the power of God God condemns him not in it but justifies him and is not ●●is ●●●nable doctrine and errour Can any man be so blinde as not to see it the Lord will judge these wicked doctrines and confound them but one named that scripture to prove his doctrine and would have vindicated that if one man murder another he did it by the power of God mentioning where Christ said to Pilate Thou could have no power against me except it were given thee from above not minding the last words He that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sinne and by this he would have proved That murder is by the power of God And it was asked further if the power of God murdered Christ Or did the Jewes murder him by the power of God but to this no answer w●● given so this is written as a further account of Richard Mayo his false d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 s that are damnable and errours in the highest degree as all spiritual 〈◊〉 may judge and how can the Court justly comdemn Ed. Burrough except t●●● will proceed wholly against reason and equity and against God and the 〈◊〉 in their own consciences for to all mens sight and knowledge that fears God Richard Mayo is guilty of holding forth damnable doctrine and error and if they condemn Ed. Burrough in an hundred pounds for so affirming and nothing 〈◊〉 they have against him then the Lord shall condemn them and their false judgement everlastingly and all sober men shall see their folly and wickednesse and that they become also guilty of Richard Mayo's sin but concerning of them I hope better whom I verily believe may shew moderation in the ●●d and clear the innocent that God may blesse them and not act against 〈◊〉 and their own consciences which if they do so the Lord shall lay it to their charge and it shall be their burden when God ariseth to judgement One thing more at the last the Judge spake thus If Edward Burrough the Defendant would in the least confesse he was sorry and had wrongd Rich. Mayo he would perswade R. Mayo and he thought he could prevail with him to acquit and discharge the sute and clear Ed. Burrough and end the matter to which E. B. replied if his life were to be taken away for it he could not do it for to keep his conscience clear and free from offences to God is of more price with him then all outward liberty or things and asked R. Mayo if he would confesse That the light which he exhorted people to follow were the light of the Gospel it so then some mistake would be found between them and more might be said but R. Mayo would not acknowledge that So then Ed. Burrough alwayes affirmed himself clear and that R. Mayo was guilty of preaching damnable doctrine and errour And whereas it was alleadged in Court against Ed. Burrough That Rich. Mayo Plantiffe saith in his Replication That Ed. Burrough the Defendant spoke the Words thou holdect forth damnable doctrine and errour of his own wrong and malice c. without any such cause by him alleadged in his plea and as if Ed. Burrough had shewed no just cause yet wherefore he spake the words against R. Mayo Defendant To which I answer It is strange that the Court would shew such mistake or ignorance for hath nor Ed. Burrough proved lawfully and justly first that he was invited by R. Mayo three times to make what objections he could against his doctrine Secondly he heard him preach such things and affirm them under his hand vvhich are proved against him vvhich to all spirituall men are seen to be false and erronious doctrine which if people obey and believe they cannot be saved And these are sufficient reasons and causes wherefore Ed. Burrough might justly charge upon him damnable doctrine and errour So hee hath lyed to the Court in his Replication And hereby the Court and Judge may fully know that Ed. Burrough had sufficient reason to affirme against Rich. Mayo What he did he did it not without lawfull reason which reason is pure and may justifie him in what he hath done and the Court need not alleadge that against Ed. Burrough if they will but come to the truth and innocency of this cause Then in the Adjourning of the Court the Recorder of himself justly and soberly propounded the differing of judgement in the Cause and judgement is deferred for a season till after the Terme Much more might be written but this in short is true for substance and I leave it to others to give an account at large if any unjust proceedings in the Court require it but enough is done and said about this matter if it be now ended and the more that is medled in it the greater will be the shame of him that doth the wrong and Truth will bring all things to light and confound all damnable doctrine and errour and unrighteous Judgement A friend to all that fear God EDWARD COOK THE END