Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	england_n	king_n	lord_n	4,602	5	4.1139	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A32757	Innocence vindicated by a brief and impartial narrative of the proceedings of the Court of Sessions in Bristol against Ichabod Chauncy, physitian in that city, to his conviction on the statute of the 35th Eliz. on the 9th of April, and to his abjuration of all the Kings dominions for ever, Aug. 15, 1684 : together with some passages subsequent thereunto / published by the said I. Chavncy.	Chauncy, Ichabod, d. 1691.; England and Wales. Court of Quarter Sessions of the Peace (Bristol)	1684 (1684)	Wing C3743; ESTC R22817	12,930	20

about the same thing and was as Zealous for Sir Robert Atkins as any of them this is notoriously known and he confessed it before he departed the Room I Nominated him for one because I thought it hard and unreasonable that he should be a means to bring so many scores if not Hundreds in trouble meerly for his own Advantage in a matter wherein he was equally concerned with them and knew them all innocent upon this he was greatly displeased with me as supposing this Discovery might threaten his place at that Juncture of time though I told the Justices that I knew of no unlawful Act committed by the said Club neither did charge him with any Howbeit ever since this he entertained an implacable Prejudice against me and threatned to divers that he would speedily either cast me in a Goal or make me fly the Country This I suppose he will not deny In pursuance whereof though I stood indicted two years before on the same 35th of Eliz. by him yet the very next Quarter-Sessions prefers two more heavy indictments against me at one and the same time either of them enough to ruine me The one upon the Statute of Eliz. 23. for twenty pound a Month for eleven Months The other on the 35th Eliz. on which last for want of any later Crime he chargeth me for one Committed above four years before the Indictment And having got the Bills found by the Grand Jury so earnestly was he bent upon their Prosecution that he exacts of me Recognizances more than double to what was required of others in the like Case viz. 200 l. to each of mine whereas another indicted on the 35th of Eliz. was bound but in 80 l. But because my chief concern lies with this last Indictment which threatens my Estate Liberty and Life 't is most reasonable I should be most concerned about the Management thereof against me But 't is not fit for me to judge as being too partial in my own Cause I had rather therefore that those whose part it is would undertake it on my behalf But before any true Judgment can pass for or against me 't is needful the Indictment should be produced which runs after this manner Comitat. Civit Bristol THE Jurors for Our Lord the King do upon their Oath present That one Ichabod Chauncy late of the City of Bristol in the County of the said City Physitian Who on the third Day of August in the Thirty first Year of the Raign of Our Soveraegn Lord Charles the Second by the Grace of God of England Scotland France and Ireland King c. Being of the Age of Sixteen Years and upwards did Obstinately willingly and without any Reasonable Cause refuse accedere Anglice to Repair to any Church Chappel or usual Place of Common-Prayers to hear Divine Service now Established by the Laws and Statutes of this Realm of England And as before from the foresaid third Day of August in the Thirty first Year aforesaid Obstinately Voluntarily and without any Reasonable Cause Abstained from Hearing Divine Service in any Church Chappel or Vsual Place of Common-Prayer unto the fourteenth Day of September in the Year before-mentioned viz. by the Space of one Month and more thence next following And the aforesaid Jurors upon their Oaths aforesaid do further say that the aforesaid Ichabod Chauncy the same fourteenth Day of September in the One and Thirtieth Year aforesaid in the Precincts of the Castle within the said City and County of Bristol in a certain House was there of himself present at an Vnlawful Assembly Conventicle or Convention under Colour and Pretence of the Exercise of Religion against the Form of the Statute in such Case made and Provided And also against the Peace of Our Soveraign Lord the King c. Whether this Indictment be faulty or not in point of Law 't is not proper for me who am the Party concerned and no Lawyer to determine but I 'll tell the Reader that the day before my Tryal 't was the judgment of a cunning Lawyer that pleaded earnestly against me upon it the next day the first letters of whose name is Mr. J. H. that 't was so illegal and faulty that 't was not worth a F and that they could not touch an hair of my head by it and that 't was not worth a Fee to be quit of such an Indictment thus he expressed himself That which to me seems hard in the management thereof is First That notwithstanding 't was by my Councel pleaded that Justices in Sessions had no Power or Authority to inquire into and judge upon Crimes relating to that Statute which Plea was according to the Sentiments of many if not most of the ablest Lawyers in England yea and of one of the Learned Counsel which pleaded against me who but the Sessions before did with great strength of Law and Reason plead against the Jurisdiction of that Court to try a Gentleman in the very same Circumstances and that Mr. Vincent either was actually or like to be discharged by Writ of Error upon the Plea viz. That he was Tryed Coram non Judice i. e. by Justices of the Peace in Sessions that yet they would proceed to assume that Power to themselves though to make me the first example which hath been in England upon this Statute for many years and when my Counsel told them of how ill consequence it might be for them to proceed in case upon a review it should prove that they had not Authority so to do this they were told was to Hector the Court. Secondly That notwithstanding the Statute urged by my Counsel of Eliz. 31. chap. 5. Paragr 5. where 't is expresly said That no Indictment shall lye upon any Penal Statute beyond two years but if it be laid for a Crime beyond it shall be void and of none effect any Statute to the contrary notwithstanding And my Indictment appears to be laid for Crimes more then four years backwards before the Indictment yet must it be allowed for Legal Thirdly That whereas the Indictment chargeth me that obstinately and willingly I refused to come to some Church or Chappel to hear Divine Service wherein doubtless the Stress of the Act lyes for a bare abstinence for four weeks another Law punishes but at four shillings and being at a Conventicle at five shillings or ten at the most but these punishes these two put together with Imprisonment loss of the whole Estate and perpetual Banishment or Death therefore doubtless lyes the chief of the Crime upon obstinate refusing to come to Church this my Counsel told them necessarily supposed some legal Premonition viz. either by the Ordinary or Parson of the Parish c. but no such thing was attempted to be proved against me and yet I must be found guilty of the whole Indictment Fourthly They did moreover admit of so light a proof of the Conventicle which was one Essential Branch of the indictment in this weighty case as would