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	justice_n	law_n	3,065	5	4.7299	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A54244	Truth rescued from imposture, or, A brief reply to a meer rapsodie of lies, folly, and slander but a pretended answer to the tryal of W. Penn and W. Meade &c. writ and subscribed S.S. / by a profest enemy to oppression, W.P.	Penn, William, 1644-1718.; Rudyard, Thomas, d. 1692. An appendix, wherein the fourth section of S.S. his pamphlet ... examined.	1670 (1670)	Wing P1392; ESTC R36662	46,879	75

And Reason will with ease reconcile wherefore the Law has not prescribed nor directed a Punishment for Jurors who give a Verdict according to their Consciences though contrary to the sence of a Court or Bench of Iustices in Causes where the King is Party as for Fellony Trespass c. viz. As our English Government is now stablished Potestas Regia est facere justitiam It's regal power to do Iustice And therefore all Indictments are prosecuted in the name of the King although the Fellony Trespass c. was committed upon the People who really received the Tort and Wrong yet because the King has undertaken for the Safety Defence and Protection of his Subjects the Trespass c. is said to be done to him Yet Experience and Reason tells us that the People of England are not therefore the less interested in nor will be the less careful of the Security of their Persons and Estates but do and will use their uttermost endeavour to defend the first from Violence preserve the second from Ruin So 1st the Boni Legales Homines or Jurors impannelled to do Iustice upon such Fellons c. being Free-born English-men and as neerly interested and concerned in the Punishment of publick Offendors as any who are said to Prosecute And 2dly The Law presuming they would be no more Treacherous to their own Peace and Safety then the King faithful to preserve them thought good to lay no other Obligation or Engagement upon Jurors in such Cases but the consideration of their own Weal Peace and Safety which many hundred years has by experience been found sufficient Till Justices on the Benches and Seats of Judicature turned Informers and Prosecutors and instead of not knowing persons in Judgment appeared contrary to their Oaths as Counsel for the King and Prosecutors and Executioners upon the Prisoners This I shall take the Liberty to Remark upon S.S. the Writer of that Scandalous Libel that however he would recommend himself to the King and Country as a Man of Reputation and Truth or at least to the deserving the estimation of Learning and Ingenuity this Work of his has given them an opertunity to take other measures of his Deserts who has in this one Section of his Libel not only manifested meer Falshood in his Charge but also Ignorance in his Proofs First His Falshood appears in calumniating the Jurors with meer Untruths and that by his own shewing Secondly His Ignorance in that he has not in the least colourably justified his Assertions or those Practices of his Patrons whom he appears for against the Jurors Yea I may say that his Folly has so accompanied his Knavery that he needs no other Character then his own Work in Print And whether he has Reason to assume that Title he takes to himself in the Front of his Piece viz. To be a Friend to Justice and Courts of Justice I submit to those of the Long-Robe he allarums to look to themselves and to the juditious Reader that will weigh his Discouse For my own part I am not in the least jealous that he is any such Person But if this Author would favour us with the knowledge of his name then Justice and its Courts might express their Gratitude for his seasonable Vindication of them and the Mayor Recorder's c. Candor and Integrity in their juditial Proceedings at the Old-Baily against the Jury and Prisoners Less then this I could not say by reason of those false Aspertions that this Libeller has cast upon my Friends the Jurors to enlarge I shall forbear inasmuch as the Author has closed his Discourse with pretence to leave the important affair to the Judges determination whose Judgments I desire may and I hope will be measured by the streight Metwand of the fundamental Laws of England and not by the crooked Line of Discretion for say the wisest of Men and noblest of Princes Qui derelinqunt legem laudant improbos at qui observant legem miscent praelia cum illis I had no other end in this short Discouse but to vindicate Truth and Justice from Falshood and Violence so my earnest Zeal is that the first may ever stand over the heads of their Opposers and Oppressors Newgate Prison in London the 12th Moneth 1670. T. Rudyard Postscript TO Answer the Libellers Challenge and defend the Author of the Tryal c. in reference to S.S.S. it may not be impertinently observ'd that if he will please to enquire of one John Barnes of Hornsey whether the late Mayor was not a Commissioner for setling the late Powers Militia and so brisk and sharp a Reflecter upon those that went under the notion of Cavaliers above the rest of the Committee as to incur the rebuke of his Brother-Commissioners we hear that he may receive very ample satisfaction if it may be any to be found in a mistake of what he so confidently ventur'd to assert Nor is it less worthy of notice that upon enquiry made of Dr Whitchcock he could not but acknowledge that S. Sterling was so far from deserting the University for want of conformity to the Scotish Covenant that it never was tender'd to any of that Colledge Which is not remarkt out of Prejudice to the Mayor but love to the Truth and a desire to manifest his libellous Apollogist who rather then his defensive Flatteries should fail his Diana or his injust Slanders miss us resolves to break through all the bonds of Truth Law and Religion Not that we would render it so criminal to serve the Nation under both Govenments as having served both to persecute either But we will end the whole with this solemn Declaro ' and protest First That we are Free-born English-men and esteem our selves undoubted Heirs of our Countries Liberties not to be dis-inherited upon any religious Difference it being no Clause or Proviso in our first Civil Constitution or Fore-fathers last Will and Testament Secondly That we have been deprived of our dear Liberty and Property and that meerly for Worshipping the God that made Us against all Law Reason and Scripture particularly at the Old-Bailey Thirdly That notwithstanding such daily provocations we do as heartily forgive as we are maliciously persecuted bearing no ill-will to the persons of any The Title and Tenure of our holy Gospel being Glory to God on High on Earth Peace and Good-will towards all men And we could desire of God if it might please him to open their Eyes and affect their Hearts with a right sence of things that they might understand how much more it would be their true Interest to rebuke Vice then punish Opinion and that in themselves first So would Oppression cease the Spring-Tides of Intemperance fall Mercy Truth Justice and Peace flow over all the Banks of Animosity Self-interest Revenge to the once more refreshing of our Weary Dry and Parched Country with the pleasant Streams of thorow Reformation From Newgate Prison in London the first Moneth 1671. W. Penn. THE END Courteous Reader THou art desired to place the numerous Errors of this Discourse to the account of difficulty in Printing any thing that comes not out with an IMPRIMATUR in the front of it But as we can't fly to the Hills to hide us so will it be esteem'd civility in thee to excuse the Authors from the Mistakes be they Points Letters Syllables or whole Words A short Collection follows Page Line Errors Corrected 3 17 Gilt Guilt   18 srcipta scripta   19 become becomes 4 4 imply imploy 5 last doubted thought 12 last Christ God 16 1 ginious genius 19 15 conformed conform 27 17 maind man'd 39 23 Goaled Goalers 40 5 Mead Mead's 41 7 they we   17 or for 43 2 so to   14 commanded they commanded 44 12 it was the they were 50 3 out-stript out stript   7 Friend Friends 52 10 impudent imprudent 53 20 the their 54 last that that it 59 11 This Thus   25 cient ancient   28 it appears he pretends 60 28 Auguments Arguments   33 Proceedings Proceedings as appears th●s Page 1. Page 1. Page 1. Page 1. Page 2. Page 2. Page 5. Pas. 5. Ja. 25 F. 3 4. 28 E. 3.3 37 E. 3.8 42 E. 3.3 11 Dec. 1670. Lib. asserted pag. 60 61. Cook 4 Institu Epilogue Wagstaffs Case 17. Ca 2. C● 2. Inst 28. 2 Institut 48. Stat. 25. E. 1. cap. 2. Cook 2 Instit prefact Co 2 Inst 161. Lib. 1. cap. 29. Cook 1 Inst 78. 2 Inst 56. and 526. Co. 2 Inst 11. Votes Par. Ang. 11. Dec. 1667. Title Abusions of the Common Law cap. 5. sect 1. Vide Poltons statutes Title Attaint 1 Inst sect 103 Co. 2 In. 375. Stat. 28 E. 1. Vide Cook 2 Inst 178 179. Co. 2 Just

changing of but one piece of forreign Gold for its equal weight of our own And as in those times there was two great a watch over such men in Employment to inrich themselves at the cost of the Publick so must I say that his whole Employment at Sea since the Kings return was not above sixteen Moneths and for his other Offices they admitted not of Perquisits and I challenge the whole World to lay the just ignominy of but one Bribe to his charge though to speak modestly a thousand Families owe their advancement to his favour But of how ill report and consequence it is that men devoted in life and estate to the service of the Publick should meet with so ill entertainment from the hands of such Privateers that never knew what it was to be of publick importance may deserve the notice of all true Patriots But perhaps the Libeller thought that I ought as well to Inherit my Fathers Miscarriages if any a● his Estate which is contrary to Gods Practice that imputes not the Fathers Iniquity to the Son but that may be one reason why it is his he shews a Mind not a little Anger-bit who is not contented with the Living but besieges the Tomb of the Dead for farther satisfaction Yet after all his Impudent Folly and Slander he concludes with Taceo caetera de mortuis nil nisi bonum but as he would make one believe he could say worse so he would have us to think he had said nothing who not only vented his worst Abuses but what are in themselves most wretchedly false And as his Saying He should speak well of the Dead when he had said so ill is a Contradiction so his pretence of not saying more is not less injurious for his silence has wrong'd us more then his Discourse Since to Brow-beat the Dead and Tryumph over their Graves s●ows a greater want of Humanity then I was wiling to think the debauchery of our Age had reduc'd any man to but the pregnant Instances of S. S ' s Accomplishments have better inform'd me And whosoever he is I wish him repentance of these Impieties and sincerely declare my hearty forgiveness of all his aggravating Injuries Part IV. The Grand Case in Controversie about the Power of Juries clearly Stated and rationally Resolv'd AS a deserted Path over-grown by Time makes men to question if it had ever been a Way So the neglected case of Juries Power over-run by the Inchroachments of the Bench make many doubt if ever they had any I shall therefore endeavour to State and Vindicate the power of Juries from the Assault of Innovation and re-instate them of that Authority and Priviledge they are intituled to and defended in and by the Fundamental Laws of England 1st Per Judicium parum As explained by the universal concurrance of Laws and Lawyers we are to understand A Jury of our Equals 2d That no man shall be Taken or Imprisoned or be Disseized of his Free-hold Liberties Free-Customs or be Out-lawed or Exiled or any other way destroyed nor we shall not pass upon him nor condemn him but by the Lawful Judgment of his Peers Or by the Law of the Land 3 Hen. 9.29 This is the antient Law of the Land Confirmed by thirty two Parliaments acknowledged by all Lawyers nay confest and quoted by the man in hand pag. 3. 3d The Question will be this Whether from this Clause and what is recorded as Explenatory and Confirmatory of it there be sufficient to prove That Juries are Judges of Law and Fact First In order to the clear stating and full resolving of the Question I shall explain briefly and rescue the latter part of this Law-text from the wretched construction of S.S. which is this OR is either Disjunctive or Copulative if Disjunctive then it must imply some other Judges besides the Jury If Copulative Or for And it still implies another Jurisdiction besides that of the Peers or Jury his consequence is that Per Legem Terrae or the Law of the Land in that place cannot as this Novice insinuates be understood to be the Tryal of the Jury but to be the tryal both of Judge and Jury according to that Maxim Ex facto jus oritur I must confess my self to be a Novice to this preposterous way of Paraphrazing out of pure reputation Why if Or be disjunctive it must imply some other Judges I cannot see and wonder at the mans impertenency if what 's so natural to him were to be wondred at for though Expressions or the manner of Phraizing things may be disjunctive yet that does no way follow that the matters included in them should be so disjunctive of each other as to imply a thing not con-natural For instance If I should say by way of promise to a man Do me such a service and I will give thee an hundred Shillings or five pounds Does Or imply another sum or that such a Child is one thousand ninety and five Dayes Or three Years old Does Or suppose a Different Age In short Per Legem Terrae or by the Law of the Land cannot be understood Exclusive of a Judgment by Peers it being but a more ample and comprehensive way of phraizing the peoples right and priviledge of tryal by Juries If Or be considered Copulatively He thinks it will fetch in the Justices as Co-Judges with Juries but that conclusion is wrong for as such copulation disowns an exclusion of judgment by Peers and makes it part of the Law of the Land so let me tell him that what is conceiv'd to be additional as by the Law of the Land cannot so easily be understood of Justices as of the whole legal form method of tryal in the case mentioned with the whole rights and priviledges of Juries and Prisoners That this is not mine own sence but the Laws if his so much honored Lord Cook be to be credited let him turn to fol. 50. of the 2d part of his Institutes where he will find this Doctrine Tryals by the Law of the Land are by due course and process of the Law and they are by Indictment and Presentment of good and lawful Men And what is this but Per Juditium parum or Iudgment by Iuries But of this more in the Appendix Next That as Iuries are Iudges of Law and Fact as hath been unhappily distinguisht mens interest putting that assunder that Reason and Law originally joyned tog●ther I shall proceed to evidence 1. The first Argument is drawn from the Record of their own Indictments The Indictment is found and given into the Court as Billa Vera or a true Indictment by the Grand Inquest or Iury of twelve men before the Court can take cognizance of the Cause upon this it s recommended to the Petty-Jury to judge the whole matter and to deliver in their Verdict or Opinion whether A.B. be guilty in Manner and Form If then the Indictment comprehends both Law and Fact and that the Jury is to give

or his Feet trod upon Besides It does not appear that the House was seized pursuant to any Tryal Conviction or Judgment by the Laws of England and that such seizure is not according to the sence of them appears by the Statute of the 17th of Charles the first Cap. 10. where it is expresly said That neither his Majesty nor his Council have or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power or Authority by English Bill Petition Articles Libel or any other arbitrary way whatsoever to examine or draw into question determine or dispose of the Lands Tenements Hereditaments Goods and Chattels of any Subjects of this Kingdom but that the same ought to be tryed and determined in the Courts of Justice and by the ordinary Course of Law Nota 12. page 2● The Jury in Mr Pen's opinion and Bushels both are perjured men for that at last they brought in a Verdict contradictory to this Answ Those that have read the Tryal will apprehend his meaning for upon their bringing me in not guilty of an unlawfull Meeting but guilty onely of speaking in the pl●ce called Grace-Church-Street and the Court menacing them much and saying They would have a Verdict meaning Guilty I said the consent of Twelve men is a Verdict in Law and if they bring in another Verdict contrary to this they are Perjured Men. But what then Therefore when they brought me in Not Guilty had they perjudred themselves Nothing less I am ashamed to read so ridiculous a Non Sequitur in Print If I understand what Contraries mean the opposit to Not Guilty must be Guilty But that they gave no such Verdict absolutely is manifest from the Courts not receiving it for above all things they waited and prest hard for it Therefore to be guilty of Speaking in Grace-Church-Street and not at an Vnlawful Assembly is a not being guilty in Law and consequently their Verdict no Contradiction Nota 13. pag. 26. At this time some of the Jury complained to the Court that the four men viz. Bushel Hammond and the other two would starve them and that they had brought Strong-water-Bottles in their Pockets designedly Answ 'T is not the Quakers Light but S.S. his Darkness that is the Father of Lyes and Miserable will be the End of such as make them their Refuge For First There was no such Complaint made Secondly Nor was there any just Occasion for one And Lastly Methinks this Libeller might remember that if he thought me condemnable for not giving the Justices more Titles and Additions then their own Names and that of Aldermen he upon greater cause deserves a Check that cannot afford those able and honest Citizens more then half their Names and scarcely that too Nota 14. pag. 26. The Court having regard to the Health of the Jury adjourned till seven next morning although it was Sunday which otherwise they would not have done Answ It was and is a real Question Whether the health of the Jury or condemnation of the Prisoners was most in their eye but no matter which I shall briefly insist upon their adjournment to that Day I suppose it is not unknown to those that know Law that Dies Dominicus non est in lege dies or That the Lords Day is not a Day in Law That is There ought not to be Assizes Sessions or Termes held on that Day because it is a time the Law takes no cognizance of nor has any relation to thus Cook in his first Instit Sect. 201. fol. 155. where he excludes that day from the number of those he calls Dies Juridici or Dayes in Law The consequence of which must needs be this That their whole procedure at that Session becomes question'd and void in Law But to justifie those Transactions they got a Commission after Sessions anti-dated from the time of that Adjournment I shall not much reflect upon the Passage it carries it s own Comment with it But methinks more Skill in Law or Moderation to the Prisoners and Jury might have prevented such an extrajudicial procedure Nota 15. pag. 28. This is the fourth time the Jury brought in this insignificant Verdict viz. That they find Penn guilty of speaking in Grace-Church-Street and how this answers the Question viz. What say you Is W. Penn guilty of the matter whereof he stands indicted in Manner and Form or not guilty Let the World judge whether that be a Verdict or not They thus often abusing the Court made the displeasure of the Court against them and surely not without cause Answ This Nota is upon the Juries continuance of their Verdict of only bringing me in Guilty of spe●king in Grace-Church-Street delivered First day Morning But how reasonable will be the matter of our inquiery and answer If S.S. will have the Jury only Judge of Fact which the Recorder expresly aff●rmed on the Bench using words to this purpose We will have you to know that you shall not be Judges of what the Law says c. Why are they here condemned for undertaking no farther The ●rought in the Fact but that the Court thought incomprehensive of the Indictment which being complicated of Law and Fact were to answer the Question in Manner and Form And if this doth not inthrone them Judges how far the Fact reaches th● Law and whether by Law A.B. is guilty or not guilty I must confess my self mistaken and I am sure to have company enough of all men of sence and Sobriety So that what the Jury is deny'd elsewhere is given here and S.S. equally angry for their being and not being sole Judges Nota 16. pag. 28. William Penn made such a Noise in the Court that the Court could not hear the Jury nor the Jury the Court. Answ If to speak to be heard be Noise I was guilty of his Observation but I need the less to vindicate my self who have so many living Witnesses of Credit to do it for me If they would not hear me they ought not to have condemned me but if they could condemn me they in Conscience ought not to over-rule but hear me But would any know the Noise I made read my words and 't will be found S.S. has only Nois'd a Fiction Upon their menacing of the Jury I thus spoke It is intollerable that my Jury should be thus menaced Is this according to the Fundamental Laws thus far S.S. Are not they my proper Judges by the Great Charter of England What hope is there of ever having Justice done when Juries are cheek t and their Verdicts rejected I am concerned to speak and grieved to see such arbitrary Proceedings Did not the Lievtenant of the Tower render One of them worse then a Fellon and do you not plainly seem to condemn such for factious Fellows who answer not your Ends Vnhappy are those Juries who are threatned to be fin●d and starved and ruined if they give not in Verdicts contrary to their Consciences This was the Noise charged upon me and for this Fetters

had been more knowing and so more proper per Judges who might give a better and more equal Determination of such Facts which for decision came before them then a Jury of twelve men could or would do Surely the Law would then have left all Controversies to their sole Arbitrary Determination and never have required and commanded Tryals by Jurors which are not only chargeable to the Iury-men Free-holders of this Nation by reason of their Attendance and Expence at Assizes and Sessions but also dangerous and hazardous to perform and do their Duty there But according to that Maxime Lex intendit vicinum vicini facta scire The Law presumes that each man best knows his Neighbours Actions Therefore the most proper Judge whether to condemn his Neighbour as guilty or to acquit him as innocent So we must either lose our Reason or conclude it Illegal and Irrational that Justices whom the Law quo ad hoc concludes Ignorant should judge or condemn Jurors for Ignorance whom the Law quo ad hoc concludes more knowing then themselves 5. Fifthly the fifth Reason and Argument to evince the Illegality of such Arbitrary Proceedings may be drawn from that Maxime of Law more then once used by the learned Cook viz. Lex est tutissima Cassis The Law is the surest Sactuary that a man can take and the strongest Fortress to protect the Weakest Yea saith that Author Sub clipeo Legis nemo decip●tur It fails none that put their trust in it We have no reason to believe that that Author put an Encomium upon the Laws of England we mean the Fundamental Laws the Charters of Liberties of which he then treated beyond their real Worth and Value But must rather conclude that such Arbitrary Proccedings which leave the Freemen of England void of Defence and Remediless of Relief are not according to the Rules and M●xims of Law but clearly otherwise And th●t the Fining and Imprisoning of Jurors are such may further app●ar in these Particulars First In that the Jurors are condemned without a Tryal whether they have done their Duty or not that is whether they have found with or against their Evidence c. 2. Secondly In that the Iudgement against them be it Vitious or Erroneous either in respect of the irregularity of the Proceedings or nullity of the Fact charged upon them cannot be examin'd or revers'd by Writ of Error 3. Thirdly In that no such Superiour Court can receive or hear their Appeal as upon Indictments and all other Proceedings by due course of Law they might Manifesting that such Arbitrary Proceedings against Jurors are far more severe and hard then any Convictions of Traitors Thieves and Murderers who are apprehended Flagranti Delicto and tryed by due Course of Law And since they are so unreasonable that they allow not a Iury of twelve Boni Legales Homines Good and Lawfull Men neither liberty of defence before Iudgment nor an after Tryal or Examination of the Fact for which they were condemned we must necessarily conclude them Illegal and Irrational so null and void according to that known Maxime Cessante ratione Legis cessat ipsa Lex And leave them to that just Censure of the Parliament of the Commons of England THAT THEY WERE INNOVATIONS IN THE TRYALS OF MEN FOR THEIR LIVES AND LIBERTIES S.S. his 2d 3d and 4th Remarks Examined Saith S.S. If it be objected That in the present Case being an Indictment for a Trespass an Attaint doth lie and therefore ought to be punished in Attaint Which he thus himself answers Brook Title Attaint 130. saith Et sic admittitur quod si le Roy fuit merement Party Attaint negist Where the King is sole Party Attaint doth not lie In our present Case the King is sole party and therefore by the old Law no Attaint doth lie In the answering of his own Objection the Author has taken up no less then four or ●●ve Pages of his Discourse and the whole of his second third and fourth Remarks in quoting nine or ten Book-Cases and Statutes to prove his Assertion that no Attaint lies where the King is Party Ending his Libel thus From these four Remarks I conclude Nothing but leave the Determination of this important Affair to the honorable Sages of our Law and Pray that in this and in all other Businesses of Concernment that God the Great Iudge of Heaven and Earth would guide and direct them Answ 1st The Righteous God whom this Libeller imprecates has declared That the Prayers of the Wicked are an Abomination to him Prov. 15.9 and 28.9 2d The Frivolousness and Impertinentness of this Ribaldry to the Controversie in hand will appear to the meanest Capacity that will take the pains to compare it to the Libellers own Text viz. The fining of that Jury that gave two Contrary Verdicts Justified 3d The King being Party so no attaint lies the matter of these three last Remarks is so far from being an Objection to be offered by the Friends of those oppressed Iurors that they not only grant to him that no attaint lies against such Iurors but that it is horrid Injustice and Oppression to punish them by that or any other way which we shall clear briefly in these Particulars 1. First It might suffice any rational man That Iurors betwixt the King and Prisoners ought not thus by Arbitrary Fines or other Means to have punishment inflicted upon them in as much as the Ancient Common Law of England is so far from directing of Pai●es that it declares That all Restraints of Jurors are Abusions of the Law Which we have from Andrew Horn a learned Writer of the Law in the time of Ed. 1. who amongst the great abuses of the Common Law for some of which King Alfred executed several of his corrupt Judges sets down this viz. It is Abuse to compel Jurors to say that which they know not by distress of Fine and Imprisonment after their Verdict And that this is the Statute Law to this day may appear 2d In that the Grand Councels of England in Parliament have no less then Twenty several times given their Judgments about the false or vitious Verdicts of Jurors Enacting twenty one Statutes for the correcting and punishing of such Defaults And doubtless they having been so often near the Point had the Law of England and Right and Liberty of its People admitted of such Punishments as the Adversaries of both at this day put in practice they would have let us understood it and not suffer the Law so many Ages to be Vagum incognitum But those Councels making no such Breach upon our Fundamental Laws Rights and Liberties and this our present Parliament by their Resolves confirming the same we may and must aver the contrary procedures Innovations so illegal and opressive But to conclude 3d Lex semper intendit quod convenit Rationi The Law says Cook alwayes intends that which is agreeable to Reason