of England without any election by or Commission from the people with the true grounds thereof 2ly That the judicial power Judicature and Jugdements in Parliament belong wholly and soly to the King and House of Lords not to the Commons House and that in all criminal civil or ecclesiastical causes whatsoever proper for Parliaments to decide both in the Cases of Commoners and Clergy men as well as Peers who are onely triable both in and out of Parliaments by their Peers here plentifully evinced In debating these two points I have briefly proved the Antiquity of our Lords and Nobles sitting â—oting in all Parliamentary Great Councils both under our British Saxon Danish Norman and English Kings before any Knights Citizens or Burgesses were admitted into our Councils or Parliaments which having more particularly demonstrated by undeniable presidents in my Historical Collection of all the antient Great Councils and Parliaments of England in my Antiquity triumphing over Novelty p. 9 10.55 to 85. and in my 1 2 3. parts of an Historical Seasonable Vindication and Collection of the fundamental Rights Privileges Laws c. of all English Freemen printed 1655. 1656. 1657. wherein all the Great Councils and Parliamentary assemblies from Brute to William the Conquerer are Chronologically collected and epitomized I shall referr the Reader thereunto for full satisfaction of the Antiquity of our Parliamentary Councils and the Lords constant sitting voting judging in them 2ly Because many of our late Historians Antiquaries Lawyers and others derive our Parliament as now constituted and the calling of Knights Citizens and Burgesses to them from the Parliamentary Council held at Salisbury in the 16. year of King Henry the 1. or at least from King Henry the 2. his reign which the forged Imposture stiled Modus tenendi Parliamentum and Sir Edward Cook seduced by it would advance as high as Edward the Confessor as if there had been Knights Citizens and Burgesses usually summoned to all Parliaments in his reign and ever since I have herein given you an account out of our antientest and best Historians of all the Parliaments and Proceedings in them both under King Henry the 1. 2. and most others under their immediate Successors infallibly proving there were no Knights Citizens and Burgesses in the Parliaments held under either of them and that their first summons to Parliaments for ought appears was but in 49 H. 3. not before since which they have been usually summoned but yet in a various manner 3ly I have evidenced by many memorable Histories Presidents Records in all ages the most whereof were never mentioned by any who have formerly written of Parliaments that the Judicature in our Parliaments resides solely in the King and House Lords not only in all Criminal cases of Lords Peers Commons and in all Civil and ecclesiastical businesses Appeals and Writs of Error there descided but likewise in all cases of Elections breach or allowance of privilege of Parliament and misdemeanours relating to the House of Commons themselves their Speakers Members and menial Servants To which I shall only add That the late King in his printed Answer to the 19. Propositions of both Houses June 1642. thus declares That the LORDS being trusted with a Iudicatory power are an excellent Screen and Bank between the Prince and People to assist each against any incroachments of the other and by just judgements to preserve that Law which ought to be the Rule betwéen every one of the thrée 4ly I have herein for the benefit of all Students Professors of the Law and others who take all Sir Edward Cooks Opinions Records for undoubted Oracles without examination and swallow down all his mistakes discovered many of his gross Errors oversights misrecitals and pervertings of Records in matters relating to our Parliaments evidenced his much magnified Modus tenendi Parliamentum to be a meer late Imposture full of mistakes concerning the Antiquity and Judicature of the Commons House and refuted Sir Edward Cooks mistaken Law as in other points so in this That the Kings general writ of summons to any Knight or Esquire to the House of Lords by the name of Knight or Esquire without any special clause of creating him a Baron or Lord in the Writ doth neither ennoble himself nor his heirs nor make them Lords and Barons though they sit in the Lords House as he asserts it doth unless they held by Barony of the King before and were Barons by their Tenure the general writs of summons stiling them only Knights and Esquires as before not Lords or Barons and having no clause in them that will amount to the creation of a Lord much less of a Baron which Title or word Baron is not mentioned in the Writ nor doth it affix their Lordship or Barony to any particular place as all Writs and Patents that create men Lords or Barons use to do For the further clearing of this point you may observe that the writs of summons in the Clause Rolls do sometimes stile the persons summoned Barons thus all or most of the writs of summons from 25. E. 3. to 1 E. 4. are directed Willielmo Baroni de Graystocke Chivaler Radulpho Johanni Radulpho Baroni de Graystocke Sometimes the writs stile them Lords as Johanni Talbot Domino de Furnival in 4 H. 5 c. In Ann 25 27 28 29 31 33 38 H. 6. and 2 E. 4. the writs are Henrico Peircy DOMINO de Poymiger DOMINO de Poynings DOMINO de FERRARIIS de Groby Thomae DOMINO de Roos Richardo Woodvil Militi DOMINO de Rivers Roberto Hungerford Mil DOMINO de Mollings Willielmo Beuchamp DOMINO de Sto Amando Jacobo de Fynes DOMINO de Say et Seal Edwardo Gray Mil. DOMINO de Groby H. DOMINO de Poynings Johanni Sturton Mil. DOMINO de Sturton Johanni DOMINO de Clinton Edoardo Nevil DOMINO de Burgaveny Willielmo Bourchier Mil. DOMINO de Fitzwarren Henrico Bromflet DOMINO de VESSEY Thomae Grey DOMINO de Richmond Tho. Percie Mil. DOMINO de Egremont Ricardo Wells DOMINO de Willoughby Mil Richardo Fynes DOMINO de Dacre Though in most antient and later writs the word Dominus is omitted and the name of the Barony only used Somtimes there is a special clause of Creation in the writ it self as in Clause 27 H. 6. m. 26. dorso Henrico Bromfleet Mil creaâ—ing him the heirs males of his body lawfully begotten Barons of Vessey These writs which thus stile thâ— Barons Lords create them such by special clauses as patents doe will make those Knights and Esquires Lords or Barons who were none before but a General writ which terms them only Knights or Esquires and gives them neither the Title of Lords or Barons nor creates them such cannot make themselves or their posterity Lords or Barons unless they held by Barony and then they are Barons only by Tenure not Writ This is clear as I conceive by the
be both Judge and Party it behoveth of Right that the King should have COMPANIONS for to hear and determine IN PARLIAMENTS all Writs and Plaints of the Wrongs of the King of the Queen and of their Children and of those especially who otherwise could not have common right concerning their wrongs These Companions are now called Counts after the Latine word Comites For the good Estate of the Realm King Alfred assembled the COUNTS or Earls and ordained by a Perpetual Law that twice a year or oftner they should assemble at London in Parliament to consult of the Government of the people of God c. By which Estate or Parliament many Laws and Ordinances were made which be there recites Bracton l. 1. c. 8. l. 2. c. 16. l. 3. c. 9. in Henry the 3d. his reign and Fleta l. 2. c. 2. p. 66. write thus in Edw. the first his reign in the same words Habet enim Rex cuâ—iaÌ„ suam in concilio suo in Parliamentis suis PRAESENTIBUS Praelatis COMITIBUS BARONIBUS PROCERIBUS aliis viris peritis ubi terminatae sunt dubitationes judiciorum novis injuriis emersis nova constituuntur remedia And l. 17. c. 17. he writes thus Rex in populo regendo superiores habet Videlicet Legem per quam est Rex Curiam suam to wit of Parliament videlicet COMITES BARONES Comites enim à Comitia dicuntur qui cum viderint Regem sine froeno Froenum sibi apponere TENENTVR ne clament subditi Domine Jesu Christe in Chamo froeno maxillas eorum constringe Sir Tho. Smith in his Commonwealth of England l. 2. c. 1. John Vowel and Ralph Holinshed vol. 1. c. 6. p. 173. Mr. Cambden in his Britannia p. 177. John Minshaw in his Dictionary Cowel in his Interpreter Title Parliament Powel in his Attorneys Accademy and others unanimously conclude That the Parliament consisteth of the KING the LORDS SPiRITUAL and TEMPORAL and the Commons which STATES represent the body of all England which make but one Assembly or Court called the Parliament and is of all other the Highest and greatest Authority and hath the most high and absolute power of the Realm And that no Parliament is or can be holden without the King and Lords Mr. Crompton in his Jurisdiction of Courts affirms particularly of the High Court of Parliament f. 1. c. This Court is the highest Court of England in which the King himself sits in person and comes there at the beginning and end of the Parliament and at any other time when he pleaseth ordering the Parliament To this Court come all the Lords of Parliament as well Spiritual as temporal and are severally summoned by the Kings writ at a certain day and place assigned The Chancellor of England and other great Officers or Judges are there likewise present together with the Knights Citizens and Burgesses who all ought to be personally present or else to be amerced and otherwise punished if they come not being summoned unles good cause be shewed or in case they depart without the Houses or Kings special license after their appearance before the Sessions ended And he resolves That the King Lords and Commons doe all joyntly make up the Parliament and that no Law nor Act of Parliament can be made to bind the subject without all their concurrent assents Sir Edward Cook not only in his Epistle before his ninth Report and Institutes on Littleton p. 109 110. But likewise in his 4. Institutes published by Order of the Commons themselves this present Parliament c. 1. p. 1 2. c. writes thus of the high and Honourable Court of Parliament This Court consisteth OF THE KINGS MAJESTIE sitting there as in his royal politick capacity and of the three Estates of the Realm viz. Of the Lords Spiritual Archbishops and Bishops being in number 24. who sit there in respect of their Counties or Baronies parcel of their Bishopricks which they hold also in their politick capacity and every one of these when the Parliament is to be holden ought ex debito Justitiae to have a writ of summons The LORDS TEMPORAL Dukes Marquesses Earls Viscounts and Barons who sit there by reason of their dignities which they hold by descent or creation And likewise EVERY ONE OF THESE being of full age OUGHT TO HAVE a writ of summons EX DEBITO JUSTITIAE The third Estate are the Commons of the Realm whereof there be Knights of Shires or Counties Citizens of Cities and Burgesses of Boroughs All which are respectively elected by the Shires or Counties Cities and Boroughs by force of the Kings writ ex debito Justitiae and none of them ought to be omitted and these represent all the Commons of the whole Realm and trusted for them and are in number at this time 403. He adds And it is observed that when there is best appearance there is the best successe in Parliament At the Parliament holden in the 7. year of H. 5. holden before the Duke of Bedford Guardian of England of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal there appeared but 30. in all at which Parliament there was but one Act of Parliament passed and that of no great weight In An. 50 E. 3. all the Lords appeared in person and not one by Proxy at which Parliament as appeareth by the Parliament Roll so many excellent things were sped and done that it was called Bonum Parliamentum And the King and these three estates are the great Corporation or body of the kingdom and doe sit in two Houses and of this Court of Parliament the King is Caput Principium Finis The Parl. cannot begin but by the Royal presence of the King either in person or representation by a Gardian of England or Commissioners both of them appointed under the great Seal of England c. And 42 E. 3. Rot. Parl. num 7. It is declared by the Lords and Commons in full Parliament upon demand made of them on the behalf of the King That they could not assent to any thing in Parliament that tended to the disinherison of the King and his Crown whereunto they were sworn And p. 35. he hath this special observation That it is observed by antient Parliament men out of Records that Parliaments have not succeeded well in five cases First when the King hath been in difference with his Lords with his Commons Secondly When any of the great Lords were at variance between themselves Thirdly When there was no good correspondence between the Lords and Commons Fourthly When there was no unity between the Commons themselves in all which our present Parliament is now most unhappy and so like to miscarry and succeed very ill Fifthly When there was no preparation for the Parliament before it began every of which he manifests by particular instances From all these and sundry other Authorities it is most evident and transparent That both the King himself and Lords ought of
vestrum consilium impâ—nsurus Scientes quod si per VESTRAM ABSENTIAM CONTIGERIT dicta negotia quid absit ulterius retardari dissimulare non poterimus quin AD VOS EXINDE SICUT CONVENIT GRAVITER CAPIAMUS Teste Rege apud Ebor. 11 Die Decembris Eodem modo mandatum est 17 aliis Episcopis 13 Abbatibus 40 Magnatibus aliis And in another writ of Summons the same year to the same Archbishop of Canterbury there is this Clause inserted against making any Proxie Scientes pro certò quod nisi evidens et manifesta necessitas id exposcat non intendimus Procuratores seu Excusatores pro vobis admittere ea vice propter arduitatem negotiorum praedictorum Which Clause amongst other reasons was then inserted because the Clergy in a Parliament held at Eltham some two years before refused to grant this King an aid for the defence of Ireland by reason of the Archbishops absence from it adjourning their answer to this aid till they all and the Archbâ—shop assâ—mbled together in a future Convocation to be summoned by the Kings writ as the Claus Rol. An. 4 E. 3. m. 3. dorso recordâ— Thus the Bishops and Clergy refused to grant an aid to King Henry the 3. Anno 1232. and likewise another aid to the Pope Anno 1244. because many of the Bishops and Abbots who were summoned to the Parl. then held were not present Adding Tangunt ista Archiepiscopos necnon universos Angliae Praelatos cum ergo Archiepiscopi Episcopi alii Ecclesiarum Praelati sint Absentes in eorum praejuditiis respondere nec possumus nec debemus Ouia â—id â—cere praesumeâ—emus in prejuditium omnium Absentium fieret Praelatorum All excellenâ— Presidents both for the Lords and Commons in all succeeding ages not to vote or act any thing or grant any aids or Subsidies upon any occasion menace or intreaty whiles their Members who ought to be personally present are absent much more when forcibly secured or secluded by internal confederacy or external armed violence or the whole House of Peers sequestred or suppresâ—ed by factious seditious Levellers who now design their total and final extirpation out of their future New-modelled Parliaments Having thus impregnably evinced the Lords undoubted right to sit and vote in Parliament though they be not elective by the peoples voices as Knights and Burgesses are I shall next discover unto our illiterate Ignoramusses who oppose their right the justice good grounds and reasons of our Ancestors why they instituted the Lords to sit and vote in Parliament by right of their very Nobility and Peerage which will abundantly satisfie rational men and much confirm their right First the Nobles and Great Officers in all Kingdoms and in our Kingdom too in respect of their education birth experience imployments in military State-affairs have always been generally reputed the wisest most experienced Common wealths men best able to advise Counsel the King and kingdom in all matters of Government Peace or War as our Historians Antiquaries Polâ—tians Records acknowledge and attest whence they were antiently stiled Aeldermen Wisemen Magnates Optimates Sapientes Sapientissimi et Clarissimi viri Conspicui Clarique Viri Primates Nobiles c. in our Historians and Records our Parliaments in that respect being frequently stiled in antient times Concilium SAPIENTUM upon which Grounds our Kings Lords and Commons too when ever they recommended Councellors of State to the King in Parliament made choice of Lords and other Peers for for their Privy Councellors as most wise able discreet Therefore it was thought fit just and equal the King should ever summon them to the Parliament by his Writ without any election of the people for their own inherent wisdom excellency valour learning worth the Original cause of advancing enobling them at first as is expressed in their Patents and evident by these Scripture Texts Esth 1.13 14. Isay 19.11 12 13. Jer. 5.5 c. 10.7 c. 51.57 Dan. 2.48 c. 6.1 2 3. Gen. 41.39.40 Psal 105.21 22. compared together This ground of calling the Nobles to the Parliament is intimated in the very words of the summons Et ibidem VOBISCUM Colloquium habere tractare de arduis urgentibus Regni Ecclesiae Anglicanae negotiis VESTRUMQUE CONSILIUM IMPENSURI c. Et hoc nullatenus omittatis which clause recited in the Commons writs of election likewise implies them to be men of most wisdom and experience able to counsel and advise the King in all hit weighty arduous affairs both of the Kingdom and Church whence by Hereditary antient right they are THE KINGS GREAT COUNCEL and so acknowledged by the Commons themselves this last Parliament I could give many instances wherein the Commons in Parliament have extraordinarily applauded the Lords and Peers for their great wisdom and specially desired their wholsom Counsel as persons of greater wisdom and experience than themselves but for brevity sake I shall cite only these ensuing Records In the Parliament of 21 Edw 3. rot Parl. n. 4 5. Wil. de Thorp in the presence of the King Prelates Earls Barons and Commons declared that the Parliament was called for two causes The first concerning the wars which the King had undertaken by the consent of the Lords and Commons against his Enemies of France The second how the Peace of England may be kept Whereupon the King would the Commons should consult together and that within four days they should give answer to the King and his Counsel what they think therein On the fourth day the Commons declare That they are not able to counsel any thing touching the point of War wherefore they desire in that behalf to be excused And that the King will thereof advise with his Nobles and Council and what shall be so amongst them determined they the Commons will thereto assent confirm and establish By which it is evident the Commons then reputed the Nobles more wise and able to advise the King in matters of war than themselves who confessed their inability therein and therefore submitted to assent to whatever the Nobles and Councel should therein advise Him 28 Edw. 3. n. 55 58. The Commons submit the whole businesse of the Treaty of peace with France to the order of the King and of his Nobles And 36 Edw. 3. n. 6. The LORDS only advise the king touching Truce or War with Scotland In the first Parliament of 15 Edw. 3. n. 11. the Commons having delivered in divers Articles concerning the redress of grievances and publike affairs to the King prayed that unto the Wednesday ensuing their Articles may be committed to the Bishops Barons other wise men there named by them to be amended which the king grauted whereas the Lords exhibited their Articles apart to the king and the Bishops their Articles apart in this Parliament and protested that they ought not to answer but in open Parliament by and with their
Earl of Ireland Mâ—chael de la Poole Earl of Suffolk Robert Tresylam Chief Justice Nicholas Bramber Knight and other of their adherents of High Treason against the King and his Realm The Articles they exhibited against them were 36 in number at large recorded in Henry de Knyghton de Eventibus Angliae l. 5. col 2713. to 2727. with the whole proceedings thereupon for which many were attainted condemned executed BY JUDGEMENT OF THE LORDS notwithstanding the Kings intercession for some of them to the LORDS they are likewise mentioned in the printed Statutes at large of 11 R. 2. c. 1 3 4. in Walsingham Hist Angliae p. 359 to 367. and other vulgar Historians I shall therefore for brevity refer you to them Exactum est juramentum a rege ad standum REGULATIONI PROCERUM et non solum a rege sed a cunctis regni incolis idem juramentum est expetitum In the Parliament of 14 R. 2. n. 14. The King and Lords without the Commons declared That in the 7 year of this King the Earldom of Richmond with the appartenances WERE ADJUDGED BY THE KING AND LORDS to be forfeited to the King by reason of the adherence of John Duke of Britain then Earl of Richmond to the French against his allegiance to the King and his father king Edward the 3. which judgement was not then enrolled in the Rolls of Parliament for certain causes known to the King and LORDS but was now inrolled and the lands granted to the Earl of Westmerland which King Henry the 4th would not revoke upon the Commons Petition to restore them to the Duke 1 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 78. In the Parliament of 17 R. 2. n. 11 Richard Earl of Arundel in the presence of the KING and LORDS accused the Duke of Lancastre of 5 particular misdemeanors In which when the King had justified him it was awarded by the King BY THE ASSENTS OF ALL THE LORDS that the Earl should in full Parliament make a formal submission to the Duke and crave pardon for his false accusation In the Parliament of 21 R. 2. rot Parl. n. 12. to 17. the Commons impeached Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury of high Treason for procuring the Duke of Glocester and others there named to accroach to themselves regal power and execute the Commission of 10 R. 2. when he was Chancellor praying that he might be kept under safe custody with a protestation of making for her accusations during the Parliament against him and others After which they prayed the King to give judgement against the Archbishop according to his desert who submitted himself to the Kings mercy Whereupon the KING LORDS and Sir Thomas Piercy the general Proctor for the Bishops in this case adjudged the fact of the Archbishop to be Treason and himself a Traytor and that thereupon he should be banished his temporalties seised and all his lands in proper possession or use together with his goods forfeited to the King and presenting the day and place of his departure into exile After this in the same Parliament of 21 R. 2. the Lords Appellant therein named accused the Duke of Glocester the Earls of Arundel and Warwick and others of High Treason for procuring the Commission in 10 R. 2. for raising forces and coming to the Kings person armed For accroching to themselves royal power and adjudging some to death and executing them as Traytors in the Parliament of 11 R. 2. For intending to surrender up their Homage and allegeance to the King and then to depose him and saying they had good cause to depose him c. Hereupon the Earl of Arundel being brought in custody to the Parliament before the Lords by the Kings command and assent of the Lords had his charge read and declared before him by the Duke of Lancaster Steward of England to which he pleaded his pardon which plea being disallowed because his pardon was revoked by this Parliament and he relying on it without any other plea the Lords appellants prayed judgement against him as convict of the Treasons aforesaid Whereupon the Duke of Lancaster by assent of the KING Bishops Earles and LORDS adjudged him convict of the Articles aforesaid and thereby a Traytor to the King and Realm and that he should be therefore hanged drawn and quartered and forfeit all his Lands in fee or fee-tayl which he had in the 10. year of this King with all his goods and chattels But for that he was come of Noble bloud the King pardoned his execution of hanging drawing and quartering and granted that he should be beheaded which was accordingly executed the same day on Tower hill by the Marshal of England The 28. of September the Earl of Warwick was brought ao his Trial in the same manner as the Earl of Arundel who confessed all the Articles submitted to the Kings grace and had the same judgement pronounced against him in the same manner as the Earl of Arundel But the King at the Lords Appellants and others requests pardoned his execution granted him his life and banished him into the Isle of Man The Duke of Norfolk by assent and Act of Parliament was tried in a Court Martial by the King Lords and some Knights for words spoken against the King and judgement was there given that he should be banished into Hungary and his lands forfeited to the King Within one year after such is the vicissitude of all worldly honour and power in the Parliament of 1 H. 4. Plac. Coron n. 1. to 11. at the prayer of the Commons the great Lords Appellants Edward Duke of Albemarl Tho. Duke of Surry John Duke of Exeter John Marquess Dorset John Earl of Salisbury and Thomas Earl of Glocester were all questioned and brought to their several answers before the King and Lords for their Acts and proceedings in the Parliament of 21 R. 2. the records whereof being read before them in Parliament they made their several answers and excuses thereunto whereupon the King and Lords after consultation thereupon ADJUDGED that the said Dukes Marques and Earls should lose their several Titles and Dignities of Dukes Marquess and Earls with all the honor thereunto belonging and that they should forfeit all the Lands and goods which they or any of them had given them at the death of the Duke of Glocester or since and that if they or any of them should adhere to the quarrel or person of King Richard lately deposed that then the same should be Treason The which Judgement was pronounced against them by William Thurning Chief Justice of the Kings Bench in Parliament by the Kings command but in the Parliament of 2 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 33. upon the Petition of the Lords and Commons to the King the Earls of Rutland and Somerset were pardoned and restored by the King in Parliament In the Parliament of 2 H. 4. n. 14. the Bishop of Norwich was accused by Sir Thomas Erpingham the Kings
inform us In the Parliament of 2. Caroli the Duke of Buckingham impeached the Earl of Bristol and the Earl of Bristol impeached this Duke before the Lords in sundry Articles for divers misdemeanours touching the Spanish match King Prince to seduce him in his religion praying judgment of the Lords thereupon against each other In the Parliament of 3. Caroli the Duke of Buckingham was accused and Impeached by the Commons before the Lords for sundry high Misdemeanors and the Parliament thereupon dissolved to prevent his censure In this very Parliament of King Charls now sitting Thomas Earl of Strafford was accused and impeached by the House of Commons of High Treason and other misdemeanors comprised in sundry Articles which they transmitted â—o the House of Lords desiring that he might be put to answer them and such proceedings examination trial and judgement thereupon had and given against him by the Lords as is agreeable to Law and Justice Hereupon he was openly tried in Westminster Hall before the House of Lords there sitting as his Judges where the House of Commons prosecuted and gave in Evidence against him sundry dayes and in conclusion demanded the Lords to give Iudgement against him in the Iudicial way After which they proceeded against him by way of Bill not to decline their Lordships Iustice in a Iudicial way but to husband time by preventing some doubts and as the speediest and soonest way Upon the passing of which Bill he was beheaded and executed as a Traytor On the 26 of February 1640. William Laud Archbishop of Canterbury was accused and impeached of High Treason by the House of Commons of 14. Articles then transmitted by them to the House of Lord The first whereof was this That he had trayterously endeavoured to subvert the fundamental Laws and Government of the Realm and instead thereof to introduce an Arbitrary and Tyrannical Government against Law And the last of them this That he had laboured to subvert the rights of Parliament and the ancient Course of Parliamentary proceeding which the New-modellers of our Parliaments more guilty hereof by many degrees than he may do well to consider Upon which they prayed from the Lords such proceedings examination trial and Iudgement against him as is agreeable to Law and Justice Upon these Articles he was brought to a publike Trial in the Lords House the 12. of March 1643. and after 17. whole dayes spent in his meer Trial and proof of the Charge against him and his defence thereto morning and evening and several other dayes spent in the hearing of him and his Council and the Commons Reply touching his Charge and the matters of Law whether the Charge prâ— against him amounted to High Treason the Lords upon most mature deliberation voted him Guilty of all the Articles and matters of fact charged against him and also of High Treason and thereupon passed an Ordinance for his Attainder by vertue whereof he was beheaded as a Traytor on Tower-Hill January 10. 1644. To these I might add the seveeal Articles of Impeachment transmitted by the House of Commons this Parliament to the Lords against Matthew Wren Bishop of Norwich the 20. of July 1641. against William Pierce Bishop of Bath and Wells and against the Bishops of Winchester Coventry and Litchfield Glocester Chichester Exeter St. Asaph Hereford Ely Bangor Bristol Rochester Peterborough and Landaffe August 4. 1641. requiring such proceedings from the Lords against them as to Law and Justice shall appertain All which are a superabundant impregnable Evidence of the Lords inherent Judicial power and right of Judicature in our English Parliaments even by the Commons House own Impeachments and acknowledgements against the Levellers pretences to the contrary By all these forecited presidents it is most apparent 1. That the King and Lords in our Parliaments in all ages both before and since the Commons admission to sit and vote in Parliaments have been the sole Judges of Ecclesiastical Peers and Lords in all criminal cases without the Commons 2ly That the Lords and Peers of the Realm except only in case of appealâ— both in and out of Parliament are triable only by their Peers And therefore the Trial condemnation and execution of any of them by Marshal Law or now misnamed High Courts of Justice by Commoners and others who are not their Peers is most illegal unjust and nought else but murther as the Parliaments of 1 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 45. of 1 E. 4. rot Parl. n. 18. resolve and as it was adjudged in the case of Thomas Earl of Lancaster Paâ—ch 39 E. 3. Coram Rege Rot. 92. Wiâ— Cooks 3. Institutes p. 52 53. Secondly The next and main question now conâ—roverted will be Whether the King House of Peers have any lawfull or sole power of Judicature in and over the persons of the Commons of England as well as over Peers in criminal causes misdemeanours offences or breaches of their Parliamentary privileges so farr as to fine imprison censure judge or condemn them in any kind without the House of Commons concurrent vote or judicature This the ignorant sottish Levellers Sectaries seduced by their blind guides John Lilburn and Overton peremptorily deny the contrary whereof I shall here infallibly make good to their perpetual shame and refutation by unanswerable Reasons and presidents in all ages 1. I have already manifested That the Parliament being the supremest Court of Judicature in the Realm must consequently have a lawfull Jurisdiction over all persons and members of the Realm whether Spiritual or Temporal Lords or Commons in all criminal and civil Causes proper for Parliaments to judge or punish That this power of judicature was originally and primitively vested in the King and Lords alone before there were any Knights Citizens Burgesses or Commons summoned to our Parliaments as is evident by the antient writers Glanvil Bracton Fleta Horn the Parliament of Clarindon Anno. 1164. and other forecited authorities and never transferred by them to the House of Commons upon or after their admission into our Parliaments but remaining intirely in the King and Lords as at first as the whole House of Commons acknowledge upon record 1 H. 4. rot parl n. 79. Therefore they may lawfully exercise this their judicial power and jurisdiction over the Commoners of England in all such causes now and hereafter and that of right as this record resolves they may do in positive terms 2ly Our Histories Law-books and Records agree that in ancient times our Earls who were called Comites or Counts from the word County had the chief Government and Rule of most of the Counties of this Realm under our King and that they and the Barons were the proper Judges of the Common people both in criminal and civil Causes in the Tourns County-Courts even by vertue of their Dignities and Offices as our Sheriffs are now in which Courts they did instruct the people in the Laws of the Land and administer Justice
to them in all ordinary Civil and criminal causes For prooâ— whereof you may peruse at leisure M. Seldens Titles of Honour Part 2. c 5. Sect. 5. Sir Edw. Cooks Institutes on Magna Charta c. 35. His 4. Institutes c. 53. the Laws of King Edgar and Edward there cited Spelmanni Glossarium Tit. Comites Mr. Lambards Archaion f. 135. Horns Mirrour of Justices c. 1. Sect. 2 3. If then they were Judges of the Commons and people in every County by reason of their Honours Dignities even in antientest times in ordinary Causes there is great right and reason too they should be their Judges also in all their extraordinary causes as well criminal as civil even in Parliament 3ly The Lords Peers and great Officers of State in respect of their education learning experience in all proceedings of Justice and Law are more able fit to be Iudges of Commons in Parliament than ordinary Citizens and Burgesses especially if chosen out of the Cities and Boroughs themselves for which they serve as antiently they were and still ought to be by the Statutes of 1 H. 5. c. 1. 32 H. 6. c. 15. and by the very purports of the writs for their election at this very day de qualibet Civitate Com. praedict DVOS CIVES de quolibet Burgo DUOS BVRGENSES who have better knowledg skill in Merchandise and their several Trades than in matters of Judicature or Law Therefore the Right of Judicature was thought meet even after the Commons admission to our Parliaments to be still lodged and vested in the House of Peers as before who are the ablest and fittest of the two rather than in the Commons House 4ly Since the division of the Houses one from another if ever they sate together which cannot be proved the House of Peers are dis-ingaged and indifferent parties between the King and Commons and so fittest of all to he Judges between them as the Mirrour of Justices c. 1. resolves so it hath been stil furnished with the ablest Temporal and Spiritual persons for their Assistants in judgement and advice to wit with all the Judges of the Realm Barons of the Exchequer of the Coyâ— the Kings learned Counsel the Masters of the Chancery who are Civilians or Lawyers the Master of the Rolls the Principal Secretaries of State with other eminent persons for parts and learning and the Procuratores Gleri all which are called by Writ to assist and give their attendance in the upper House of Parliament where they have no voices but are to give their counsel and advice only to the Lords when they require their assistance especially in cases of Law and Judicature For proof whereof you may consult the Statutes of 31 H. 8. c. 10. The Register of Writs f. 261. Fitz. Nat. Brev. f. 229. a. b. M. Seldens Titles of Honor part 2. c. 5. Sir Edw. Cooks 4 Instit p. 4 5 6 44 45 46. and the Parliament Rolls and Authorities there cited by them seconded by our present experience Now the House of Peers being thus assisted with the advice of all the Judges of England the Kings learned Counsel and others ablest to advise them in all Criminal Civil or Ecclesiastical matters cases that come before them were in this regard thought fittest by our Ancestors and the Commons themselves who have no such assistants to have the principal and sole power of Judicature in all civil and criminal causes as well of Commoners as Peers that are proper for the Parliaments Judicature by way of censure or redress 5ly There can be no judgement given in any of the Kings Courts in Criminal causes but where the King is personally or representatively present sitting upon the Tribunal and where the proceedings are Coram Rege And therefore in the end of most antient Parliament Rolls we find the Title of Placita Coronae CORAM DOMINO REGE IN PARLIAMENTO SUO c. as in 4 E. 3. 21 R. 2. 1 H. 4. and other Parliaments Now as the Kings person is represented Judgements given Justice executed in all Criminal and Civil cases in the Kings Bench Eyres Goal Deliveries Oyers and Terminers and all his other Courts by his Judges and Justices in his absence So is it represented in our Parl. in the Lords house by his Commissioners and the Lords and Judgements given Justice executed by them in al criminal civil causes and no ways by the Commons who neither sit nor judge in the House of Peers Therefore the House of Peers only noâ— the Commons are the true and proper judicatoâ—y where the King the supream judge fits usually in Person and alwayes in representation in his absence 6ly There can be no legal trial or Judgement given in Parliament in Criminal causes or others without examination of witnesses upon Oath as in all other Courts of justice But the House of Peers alone have power to give and examine witnesses upon Oath and the whole House of Commons no such power but to take Informations without Oath which neither they nor their Committees can administer unless by special Order and Commission from the King or Lords Therefore the power of judicature in Parliament even in Commoners cases is inherent only in the House of Peers and not in the Commons House 7ly It is a rule both of Law and justice that no man can be an informer prosecutor and judge too of the persons prosecuted informed against it being contrary to all grounds of justice therefore he ought to complain and petition to others for Justice But the Commons in all ancient Parliaments and in this present have been informers and prosecutors in nature of a Grand Inquest to which some compare them being summoned from all parts of the kingdom to present publike Grievances and Delinquents to the King and Peers for their redress and thereupon have alwayes petitioned complained to the King and Lords for Iustice against all other Delinquents and offenders in Parliament not judged them themselves witness their many impeachments accusations complaints sent up and prosecuted by them in former Parliaments and this to the Lords not only against Peers but Commoners of which there are hundreds of presidents this very Parliament Therefore the House of Lords hath the proper right of judicatory vested in them even in Cases of Commoners not the Commons who are rather Informers Prosecutors and Grand Jury men to inform impeach than Judges to hear censure determine and give judgement as is resolved in 1 H. 4. n. 79. 8ly Those who are proper Judges in any Court of Justice whiles the cause is judging sit in their Robes and that covered on the Bench not stand bare at the bar sweat and examine the witnesses in the cause not produce them or manage the evidence and when the cause is fully heard argue and debate the businesse between themselves and then give the definitive sentence But in all cases that are to be tried and judged in Parl. the
ever violated in oppugning all arbitrary tyrannical Proceedings Taxes Oppressions Encroachments ill Counsellors and bad Instruments both of Kings and Popes themselves in inflicting exemplary punishments upon all Traytors Enemies to the publike both in our Parliaments and the Field too when there was occasion the principal whereof I have here presented to your view in a Chronical method will be a great accession to your Honour the best vindication of your antient undoubted Parliamentary Jurisdiction Right Power Judicature against all Opposites till the accomplishment whereof I shall humbly recommend this enlarged Plea in your Honors defence to your Noble Patronage who can pitch upon no better nor readier means to support your declining Honor and Authority or to re-indear your selves in the Peoples affections than in these distracted dangerous stormy times to ingage all your interest power activity speedily to settle secure Gods Glory Truth Worship the publike Laws Peace Liberty Safety of the Kingdom against all open Opposers and secret Underminers of them to unburthen the people of their long-continued heavy Taxes the Souldiers insolencies free-quarters to redress all pressing grievances all oppressing arbitrary Committees proceedings contrary to the rules of Law and Iustice to right all grieved Petitioners especially such who have waited at least seven years space at your doors for reparations to relieve poor starved Ireland raise up the almost lost honor power freedom reputation of Parliaments by acting honourably heroically like your selves without any fear favour hatred or self-ends by confining your selves with the Commons House to the antient bounds rules of Parliamentary Jurisdiction proceedings and by endeavouring to excel all others as farr in Iustice Goodness and publike resolutions as you do in Greatness and Authority Which that you may effectually perform as it is the principal scope of this Plea for your Lordships which whether you stand fall or by way of Remitter recover your antient rights again after a violent discontinuance of them for a season will remain as a lasting Monument to all Posterity of your undubitable just Right to sit and judge in all English Parliaments So it shall be the constant prayer of Your Lordships devoted Servant WILLIAM PRYNNE From my Study in Lincolns Inne 7. Junii 1647. To the Ingenuous READER THis Plea for the LORDS and House of PEERS was first suddenly compiled and published by me in the year 1647 when Lilburn Overton with their Iesuitical and Anabaptistical levelling Confederates endeavoured by sundry seditious Pamphlets libels Petitions then printed dispersed in the City Army Country to extirpate the Lords and House of Peers together with the King and Monarchy by engaging the vulgar Rabble Souldiers and Commons to suppresse pull down or cast off their superiour just antient legal authority over them not only against the expresse Laws of God and the Realm their own Oaths of Supremacy Allegiance Protestation Covenant but the very Law of Nature it self universally received amongst all Nations whatsoever Haec enim lex Naturae apud omnes Gentes recepta est quam nullum tempus delebit UT SUPERIORES INFERIORIBUS IMPERENT Which Law these unnatural Bedlams would now quite obliterate endeavouring to set up that Aâ—axy disorder in Government which Solomon and God himself by him so much complain of Eccles 10.5 6 7. There is AN EVIL I have seen under the Sun as AN ERROR that proceedeth from the Ruler Folly or persons of mean fortune parts birth is set in high dignity and the rich set in low place I have seen Servants upon Horses and Princes walking as Servants upon the earth Which disorder he thus censures Prov. 19.10 Delight is not seemlâ— for a fool much lesse for a Servant to have rule over Princes The sad effects whereof he thus relates Prov. 30.21 22. For three things the Earth is disquieted and for a fourth which it cannot bear the 〈◊〉 and chief whereof is this For a Servant when he reigneth To which David subjoyns another ill consequence Psal 12.8 The ungodly walk on every side when the vilest of the Sons of men are exalted which the Chaldâ— paraphrase thus glosseth In circuitu improbi ambulant tanquam sanguisugae qui sugunt sanguinem filiorum hominum the peasantry when exalted above the antient Nobility and Gentry being usually both intollerably proud insolent cruel bloâ—dy according to the old observation of Claudians and others Asperius humili nihil est cum surgit in altum Cuncta ferit dum cuncta timet desaevit in omnes Vt se posse putent nec bellua tetrior ulla Quam servi rabies in libera collâ— furentis Agnoscit gemitus et paenae parcere nescit This was experimentally verified not only in Wil. Langhamp heretofore and other particular persons advanced from low degree to places of greatest honour but in the popular insurrections of John Cade Jack Straw Wat Tyler and others who intended to murther the King destroy the Nobles Judges Prelates Lawyers and chief Gent. they could meet with than to seise upon their lands estates and make themselves Kings Lords in their steads and share the Kingdom Government between them and by the Anabaptists proceedings of like Nature at Munster and other places in Germany whom the present Levellers of this sect would doubtlesse imitate could they get but sufficient power into their hands My absence in the Country whiles this Plea was printing caused many material mistakes of words and one grosse mutilated transposition in Cheddars case in its first Edition p. 48 52. which I could not correct most of the Books being dispersed before I could get an Errata printed and the small time I had to compile it necessitated me to omit many material Records Presidents Histories pertinent to this Argument Whereupon to right my self with the Lords whose cause I pleaded and the Readers I soon after resolved to publish a corrected much inlarged Impression thereof but other publike Imployments and publications retarding it and the whole House of Lords some few Months after being forcibly suppressed my self with sundry other Members of the Comunions House secured secluded and after that dispersed and sent close prisoners by Mr. Bradshaws illegal Warrants unto several remote Castles without any hearing or cause expressed or recompence for the Injuries damages thereby sustained this much augmented Plea hath lyen dormant ever since and had never been awaked to walk abroad in publike had not the late loud unexpected Votes at Westm of a NEW KING AND HOUSE OF LORDS under the Name Notion of ANOTHER HOUSE passed by some who had lately c suppressed decryed engaged against them both as uselesse dangerous oppressive burthensom tyrannical c. revived and raised it out of the Grave of Oblivion The Subject matters principally debated and vindicated in it are only two First That all the Dukes Marquesses Earls Viscounts Barons Lords of England have an undoubted antient just Right Privilege to sit vote in all Parliaments
and authentique custom when there was no reason or necessity to do it they were compelled to desist from their enterprise which they laboured with much endeavour to accomplish whereupon by Gods disposing providence they suddenly gave their sentence for Ralph Bishop of Rochester to be Archbishop requiring the Kings assent thereunto who altering his mind concerning promoting the Abbot willingly gave his assent to Ralph to whom all the Monks Elders and People of Canterbury gave their ready assents Whereupon two Messengers were sent to Rome to Pope Paschal for his Pall with Letters from the King and Bishops of England and Covent of Canterbury wherein they recite his Election to this See adding Huic electioni affuerant Episcopi Abbates et Principes Regni magna populi multitudo to wit of Canterbury not elected Knights Citizens or Burgesses consentiente Domino nostro Rege et eandem electionem laudante suaque auctoritate corroborante The Pope hereupon with much difficulty at the earnest intreaty of one Anselm Nephew to the deceased Anselm sent a Pall to Ralph by him together with an angry harsh Letter to the King and Bishops the same year Whereupon Eodem anno Henricus Rex jussiâ— omnes Episcopos et Principes totius regni ad Curiam suam sub uno venire Unde rumor per totam terram dispersus est Pontificem Cantuariorum Generale Concilium praesâ—nte Legato Domini Papae celebraturum nova quaedam tantoque Conventui digna pro correctione Christianae Religionis in omni ordine promulgaturum Itaque ut Rex jusserat 16 Kal. Octobris Conveutus omnium apud Westmonasterium in palatio Regis factus est quod de Concilii celebratione et Christianitatis emendatione rumor disperserat nihil fuisse quae confluxerat multitudo tandem advertit Only the Popes Letter to the King and Bishops recorded in Eadmerus was there read Wherein Pope Paschal setting forth his pretended universal Authority over all Kingdoms and Churches derived from St. Peter that no great businesses should be done concerning the Church without him or his Legates privitie and advice taxeth the King and English Bishops for electing and translating Bishops holding Synods Councils and medling with the affairs of Bishops without his privity for not permitting any Legats freely to pass into or return from England without the Kings special license for hindring Appeals to Rome and not duly collecting and paying his Peterpence admonishing them to reform all these their Exorbitances and concluding with this menace Si verò adhuc in vestra decernitis obstinatia permanere nos Evangelicum dictum et Apostolicum exemplum pedum in vos pulverem excutiemus tanquam ab Ecclesia Catholica resilientes divino judicio trademus The King hereupon advising with his Bishops and Nobles what answer he should return to the Pope concerning those things and certain others which did very much offend his mind Cono his Legat having suspended and Excommunicated the Bishops of Normandy eo quod Conciliis generalibus tertio vocati interesse noluerunt Placuit in Communi ut Rex suos Nuncios mitteret per quos quae vellet securius Papa mandaret and withall sent that resolute Letter by them to the Pope here cited p. 108 109. An. 1116. When the forecited Parliamentary Council at Salisbury was held Anselm returning from Rome came to the King into Normandy with Letters from the Pope appointing him his Legate and Vice-pope in England Quod regno Angliae brevi innotuit Admirati ergo Episcopi Abbates et Nobiles quique Londoniae aduniti sunt super his quibusaam aliis praesente Regina communi Consilio tractatur Quid multa PLACUIT OMNIBUS Archiepiscopum Cantuar. quem maxime res haec respiciebat Regem adire exposita ei antiqua regni consuetudine SIMUL AC LIBERTATE si consuleret Romam ire ET HAEC NOVA ANNIHILARI amplectitur ille consilium repairs thereupon to the King informing him of this their resolution with whom he found Anselm waiting for a passage into England to exercise his Legatine authority Sed Rex antiquis Angliae consuetudinibus praejudicium inferri non sustinens illum ab ingressu Angliae detinebat Itaque omnis de hujusce potestatis Legati exors effectus a Normanda est in suos regressus In the year 1121. K. Henry the 1. Consilio Radulphi Cant. Pontificis et Principum Regni quos omnes in Epiphania Domini sub uno Londoniae congregavit decrevit sibi in uxorem Atheleiden filiam Godfredi Ducis Lotharingiae After which she arriving in England Conventu Episcoporum Principum et Procerum Regni qui pro occursu Reginae factus fuerat the difference between Archbishop Ralph and Thurstan about his subjection to him was moved Pope Calixâ—us who ordained him commanding the King and Archbishop to permit him to enjoy his Bishoprick aut Rex anathemate Radulphus suspensione Pontificalis Officii plecteretur Hereupon the privileges of the Church of Canterbury recorded in Eadmerus were recited quam dignè Deo haec Apostolica disponerentur intellectum est ab omnibus Tamen ne praemissae intentio poenae Regem vel Pontificem aliquatenus conturbaret EX COMMUNI CONCILIO permissus est idem Thurstinus Angliam redire Eboracum Regia via veniâ—e Quod factum est ea dispositione ut nullatenus extra parochiam Eboracensem divinum officium celebraret donec Ecclesiae Cantuariensi de injuria quam ei intulerat abjurata cordis sui obstinatione satisfaceret About the year 1122. Pope Calixtus having by force deprived Pope Gregory sent one Peter to be Legate over all Britain Ireland and the Orcades as well as France who sent some Abbots and others before him to give notice of his coming the whole land being astonished at the expectation of his coming the King sent the Bishop of St. Davies and another Clerk to him into France where he stayed to signifie his pleasure and command that they should bring him into England to him The King by prudent counsel enjoyned them That after his entrance into England they should so order his journey that he should not enter into any Church or Monastery for hospitality or lodging and that no necessaries should be administred to him from others but only at his own expence Being brought to the King and worthily received he related the cause of his coming The King pretending an expedition against the Welsh answered Se tanto negotio operam tunc quidem dare non posse cum Legationis illius stabilem auctoritatem non nisi per conniventiam Episcoporum Abbatum et Procerum et totius regni conventum roborari posse constaret â—uper haec â—ibi patrias consuetudines ab Apostolica sede concessas nequaquam se aequanimiter amissurum fore testabatur in quibus haec de maximis una erat quae Regnum Angliae liberum ab omni Legati ditione constituerat donec ipse vitae
House nor any Speaker of their Houâ—e that we find in History or Record till 51 E. 3. Therefore doubtlesse they had no judicial power or jurisdiction 4ly When they became a House and had a Speaker they could neither chuse their Speaker in any Parliament without a command to and license first granted them by the King Lord Chancellor or the person implyed by the King to shew the causes of summoning the Parliament who gave them a command to elect their Speaker and then to present him to the King and Lords for their approbation of him at the time prescribed them who had then power to allow or disallow their Speaker and to order them to elect another then or afterwards incase of unfitness sickness imprisonment or any other just ground or excuse as our Parl. Rolls and others attest If then the Commons can neither elect their own Speakers nor approve nor remove them but by the Kings and Lords approbation who may discharge them upon just grounds and order rhem to elect others in their places and that against their wills as in the case of Thorpe hereafter cited Then certainly the judicature in all other cases as well as this of their very Speakers and Members too resided still in the King and Lords and was not communicated to the Commons House 5ly The Commons House inability to administer an Oath to any person in any case which the Lords alone have power to doe in Parliament 6ly Their Petitions Articles of complaint and Impeachments in all Parliaments delivered and sent up to the Lords against Delinquents in Criminal causes as well of Commons as Peers Clergy men as secular persons and their praying the Lord to judge and give sentence against them 7ly Their prosecuting and giving in evidence against all sorts of Deliquents at the Lords Bar as accusers 8ly Their standing always in such cases and that bare headed in the Lords House as Prosecutors Informers Grand-Jurymen whiles the Lords alone fit and that covered and only give pronounce the iudgement and that in the Comons absence for the most part not presence 9ly Their having no voice or share at all in the hearing examining debating reversing erronious Judgements in other Courts upon Writs of Error brought in Parliament but the Lords alone 10ly The Kings Judges not sitting amongst them but only in the House of Peers to authorize and assist them in their judgements are all infallible arguments and clear irrefragable demonstrations that the Judicatory or judicial power of Parliaments was never communicated to the Commons House upon their first admittance into Parliament nor since but remained intirely fully in the King and Lords alone as it did before That this is so in truth I have the express acknowledgement and confession of the whole House of Commons themselves long since in the Parliament of 1 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 79. remaining on record to all Posterity with the Kings and Lords concurrent resolution both from the time of the Commons first admission and for all succeeding ages The Commons in this Parliament November 3. made their Protestation in the same manner they had done in the beginning of the Parliament and more over shewed to the King Come les Ioggementz du Parlement apperteignent soulement au Roy et Seignieur et nient as Communes c. That the Judgements of Parliament appertained only to the King and to the Lords and not unto the Commons And thereupon they praâ—ed the King out of his special grace to shew unto them the said Iudgements and the cause of them that so no Record migâ—t be made in Pâ—rliamenâ— against the said Commons which are or shall be parties to any judgement given or hereafter to be given in Parliament without that privity Whereunto the Archbishop of Canterbury gave them this answer by the Kings commandment That the Commons themselves are Petitioners and demanders Et que le Roy et les seigniours de tout temps ont eues et averont de droit les juggement in Parliament en manere come mesmes les Communes sont monstrez and that the King and Lords from all times have had for times past and shall have for time to come of right the Iudgements in Parliament in manner as the Commons themselves have shewed Saving that in Statutes to be made â—or in Grants and Subsidies or in such things as are to be doâ—e for the common profit of the REALM the KING will have especially their advice and assent By this memorable Record in Parliament it is apparent by the Commons own confession First That the Judgments in Parliament even in cases of Commoners themselves and Members of the Commons House as well as Peers appertain only to the King and to the Lords in the Affirmative Secondly That they appertain not to the Commons in the Negative Thirdly A Confession both of the Commons King and Lords That they have from all times in all ages before that Parliament appertained to the King and Lords and that of right not by usurpation or connivence Fourthly An express order and resolution that the King and Lord shall alwayes kéep and hold this their Right of Iudicature in all times to come without admitting the Commons to share therein upon this their Petition as not fit to be granted them Fifthly That if the Commons should be admitted at any time to be parties or privies to the Judgements in Parliaments as they then desired it would be meerly out of the Kings special Grace Sixthly That the special reasons ends of the Kings summoning the Commons to Parliaments at the first and ever since were only these especially 1. to have their advice in Statutes to be made 2. in Grants or Subsidies 3. in such things as are to be done for the common profit of the Realm not to give them the least share right or interest in the Judicature or Judgements of Parliament as it is the supremest Court of Justice The Judicial Power and the Judgements in Parliament being never transferred in part or whole by the King and Lords to the Commons House but intirely reserved to themselves as before their admission inâ—o our Parliaments as I have proved it follows inevitably from thence 1. That all Judgements given by the Commons House alone or by any of their Committees of Sequestrations Examinations plundered Ministers c. without the Lords are meerly void and null in Law being Coram non judice and may be justly questioned and vacated by the Lords upon appeal or complaint as Nullities 2. That the House of Commons have no more right or power to judge or vote down the Lords House or question or null their Judgements upon appeals to the Commons from them as Lilburn and Overton pretend they may than the Grand or Petty Jury have to Vote down the Judges and Justices of Assize or Sessions from the Bench or to reverse or repeal their Judgements and Orders Or the Common Council of London to
of Attainders in cases of high Treason did not institute them Judges of these persons nor give them any share in the judicial right and power of Parliaments 1. Because most of these persons thus attainted by Bill were Queens Dukes Earls Lords Barons and Peers of the Realm who were triable to be judged only by their Peers none else by the Common Law of England Magna Charta c. 29. and sundry other Acts not by the Commons who are not their Peers 2ly Because most of these parties thus attainted by those Bills were first attainted tried judged condemned in Parliament by the Lords alone as their proper Judges upon the complaints or impeachments of the Lords Appellants or of the Commons themselves or else before some other Judges upon indictments and legal tryals and those Acts did only confirm and ratifie their precedent attainders recited in them 3ly Because in many of these Acts the Commons did only petition that their Attainders might be ratified by Bill and the King and Lords assents thereto which was done at their request as Petioners not Judges 4ly Because their Judgements and Attainders passed formerly by the Lords and Judges were good in Law though thus ratified afterwards by Bill for the greater terror certainty and satisfaction and these Bills did pass no new Judgements and Attainders upon the parties but only ratifie the old and in cases where there was no precedent Attainder they attaint them only by vertue of their Legislative power without any indictment tryal or hearing of the parties themselves as Judges of them some of them being dead when attainted taking all the charges in the Bills pro confesso and notoriously true and proved such by some other precedent legal convictions and evidences 2ly There is a formal proper Judgement given in our Parliaments both in criminal and civil causes upon complaints Articles Petitions Impeachments Inditements Informations Writs Appeals Reports References and that either against or concerning Peers themselves or against or concerning Commoners and other Laicks or Clergy-men And in all such cases proceedings the King and Lords alone have a proper judiciary power or right of Judicature without the Commons vested in and executed by them which I shall abundantly evidence and make good by sundry memorable Presidents out of our Histories and Records in all ages not vulgarly known and for the most part never yet remembred by any who have wriâ—ten of our Parliaments and the proceedings in them whose Treatises are very slight unsatisfactory and in many things of this nature erronious I shall begin first with presidents concerning Ecclesiastical Temporal Lords alone proceeded against impeached judged censured in our Parliaments for sundry criminal causes Offences Treasons wherin the House of Commons can challenge no share or voice in the Judicature especially in the case of Temporal Lords who are such in their own right and sit in Parliament ratione Nobilitatis but the Lords alone and that by the express Letter and Resolution of the Great Chariers of King John and of King Henry 3. and Ed. 1. c. 14.29.15 E. 3. c. 2 3 4. and roâ— Parl. n. 6.8.11 R. 2. rot Parl. n. 6 7.5 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 12.28 H. 6. ror Parl. n. 51 52 53. 20 H. 6. c. 9.26 H. 8. c. 13.28 H. 8. c. 7.18.31 H. 8. c. 12.32 H. 8. c. 4.33 H. 8. c. 12 20 23.35 H. 8. c. 2.1 Ed. 6. cap. 12. 1 Mar. c. 6.1 2 Phil. Mar. c. 3.4 5 Phil. Mar. c. 4.1 Eliz. c. 1.5.5 Eliz. c. 11.13 Eliz. c. 1.14 Eliz. c. 1 2 3. 18 El. c. 1.23 El. c. 1 2.27 El. c. 2.3 E. 3.19 Fit Corone 16â— 1 H. 4.1.10 E. 4.6 Brooke Trial 142. Stamford l. 3. c. 1. f. 152.33 H. 8. Brookâ— Trial 142.34 H. 8. Bro Corone 172.13 H. 8.11 Br. Treasons 29.38 H. 8. Br. Treasons 2.33 Dyer 99.107.208.360 Cook 6 Rep. f. 52.9 Rep. f. 30.87 and Cooks 2 Instit f. 28 29 48 49 50. and his 3 Instit c. 1. 2. p. 27 28 29.30 31. All which declare enact resolve That the Peers of this Realm shall not be tried or proceeded against but only by the lawfull judgement and verdict of their Peers The Lords and Barons of Parliaments trial by Peers alone of their own rank being so essential that they cannot waive nor put themselves upon the trial of the Country by 12. ordinary Freeholders as was resolved in the Lord Dacres case Pa. 26 H. 8. Cooks 3 Institutes f. 30. much less then can they waive their Peerage it self and sit as Commoners in the Commons house as I have formerly proved The first president I meet with in our Histories of this nature is in the reign of Cassibelan the British King who having repulsed Julius Caesar upon his first landing in this Island and forced him to return into France Edictum fecit ut omnes Proceres Britanniae convenirent to the City of â—roynovant now London where Evelin nephew to Androgens Duke of Troynovant slaying Heralgas nephew to Cassibelan upon a sudden quarrel as they were playing together Cassibelan thereupon commanded Evelin to be brought before him talem sententiam quam Proceres regni judicarent subire which Androgeus opposing â—aying sese suam Curiam habere in illa diffiniri debere quicquid aliquis in homines suos clamaret thereupon Cassibelan threatned to waste his Country with fire and sword if he refused to deliver up his Nephew to justice to undergo the sentencâ— quam Proceres dictarent which he accordingly executed for refusing to put his Nephew upon the Trial and Judgement of the Nobles for this murder The next president I find is that of Wilfrid Archbishop of York who for refusing to divide his Bishoprick into two Bishopricks more and for endeavouring to perswade Queen Emburga to become a Nun and desert her husband Egfrid King of Northumberland was through that Queens malice and prosecution in two several Parliamentary Councils Anno 678. 692. twice deprived of his Archbishoprick and banished the Realm by King Egfrid Theodor Archbishop of Canterbury and the rest oâ— the Bishops and Nobles of the Realm assembled in these Councils and at last restored to his Archbishoprick again in another Council An. 705. by King Osred his will and consent About the year of our Lord 924. Elfred a Nobleman who opposed Aethelstans title and election to the Crown though in vain intended to seise upon him at Winchester and put out his eyes but his Treason being discovered he was apprehended and sent to Rome to purge himself thereof by Oath where he abjuring the fact before the Altar of St. Peter in the presence of Pope John the 10th fell down suddenly to the ground as dead and being thereupon carried away thence to the English School he there expired within 3 dayes after The Pope acquainting the King therewith and craving his advice what to do with him and whether he should have Christian burial the King thereupon
spiritual Cour◠for a temporal cause belonging to the Crown and Common Law which was adjudged by the Lords upon examination to be untrue To passe by the accusation of Sir Philip Courtney of divers hainous matters oppressions dissensions before the King and Lords in the Parliament of 16 R. 2. n. 6.13 14. of which more anon In the Parliament of 17 R. 2. n. 20 21. John Duke of Lancastre Steward and Thomas Duke of Gloucester Constable of England complained to the King that Sir Thomas Talbot Knight with other his adherents conspired the deaths of the said Dukes in divers parts of Cheshire as the same was confessed and well known and prayed That the Parliament might judge of the fault Whereupon the King and the Lords in Parliament without the Commons adjudged the said fact to be open and High Treason And thereupon they awarded two Writs to the Sherifs of Yorks and of Derby to take the body of the said Sir Thomas retornable in the Kings Bench in the month of Easter next ensuing And open Proclamation was made in Westminster Hall That upon the Sherifs retorn and at the next coming in of the said Sir Thomas he should be convicted of Treason and incurr the loss and pain of the same and that all such who should receive him after the Proclamation should receive the like losse and pain In the Parliament of 20 R. 2. n. 15 16 23. Sir Thomas Haxey Clark was by the King Lords in Parl. adjudged to die as a Traytor and to forfeit all his Lands Goods Chattels Offices and Livings for exhibiting to the House of Commons a scandalous Bill against the King and his Court for moderating the outragious expences of his Court by Bishops and Ladies c. Upon the Bishops intercession the King spared his life and delivered him into the custody of the Archbishop to remain as his Prisoner In the Parliament of 21 R. 2. n. 19 20. Pl. Parl. n. 2. to 15. The Lords Appellants appealed Sir Tho Mortimer Knight of High Treason for raising war against the King accroaching royal power and purposing to surrender his homage and allegiance and depose the King Who flying into the parts of Ireland thereupon the Lords in Parliament assigned him a certain day to come and render himself to the Law or else to be adjudged and proceeded against as a Traytor and Proclamation thereof was made accordingly in England and Ireland to render himself within 3 months And that after that time all his Abettors and Aiders should be reputed for and forfeit as Traytors He not coming at the day The Duke of Lancaster Steward of England by assent of the Lords in Parliament adjudged him a Traytor and that he should forfeit all his Lands in fee and see tayl together with all his Goods and Chattels The like Judgement in like manner was in the same Parliament given against Sir John Cobham Knight for the like Treason Placit Coronaen 16. On the 22 day of March 22 R. 2. n. 27. The King by assent of the Lords adjudged Sir Robert Plesington Knight then dead a Traytor for levying war against him with the Duke of Glocester at Harrengary for which he should lose all his Lands in fee or fee tayl and all his goods And n. 28. Henry Bowht Clerk for being of Counsel with the Duke of Hereford in his device was adjudged by the King and Lords to die and forfeit as a Traytor after which his life was pardoned and he banished In the Parliament of 1 H. 4. n. 79. As the Commons acknowledged that the Iudgements in Parliament had always of right belonged to the King and Lords and not unto the Commons So therein the King and Lords alone without the Commons gave Judgement in sundry cases as Judges in Parliament 1. In Sir Thomas Haxey his case who in his own name presented a Petition in this Parliament a nostre tresedoute seigniour le ROY a LES SEIGNIORS DU PARLIAMENT shewing that in the last Parliament of 21 R. 2. that he delivered a Bill to the Commons of the said Parliament for the honour and profit of the said King and of all the Realm for which Bill at the will of the King he was by the King and Lords adjudged a Traytor and to forfeit all that he had praying that the record of the said Judgement with the dependants thereupon might be vacated and nulled by them in this present Parliament as erronious and that he might be restored to all his degrees farms estate goods chattels ferms pensions lands tenements rents offices advow sons and possessions whatsoever and their appurt and enjoy them to him and his heirs notwithstanding the said Iudgement or any grant made of them by the King The Commons House exhibited a Petition likewise on his behalf to the like effect adding that this judgement given against him for delivering this Bill to the Commons in Parliament was eneontre droit et la course quel avoit estre use devant in Parlement en anientesment des Customs de◠le◠Communes Upon which Petitions Nostre Seignior le ROY de Induis assent des touz les Seigniors esperituelz et temporelz ad ordinez et adjudges que le dit juggement renus vers le dit Thomas in Parlement soit de tout casses revorses repellez et adnullez et tenus pur nul force n'effect et que le dit Thomas soit restitut a ses nom et fame c. nient obstant mesme le juggement 2ly In the case of Judge Rickhill 1 H· 4. n. 92. On the 18 of November the Commons prayed the King that Sir William Rickhill late Just of the Common Bench arrested for a Confession he had taken of the Duke of Gloucester at Calice might be brought to answer for it devant les Seigniors du Parlement whereupon he was brought into Parliament before the Kings presence and all the Lords spiritual and temporal and Commons assembled in Parliament where Sir Walter Clapton Chief Justice of the Kings Bench by the kings command examined the said Sir William how and by what warrant he went to Calice to the said Duke of Glocester and upon what message Who answered that king Richard sent him a special Writ into Kent there recited verbatim commanding him by the faith and allegiance whereby he was obliged to him and under pain of forfeiting all he had to goe unto Caleys And that at Dover he received a Commission from the said king by the hand of the Earl Marshal to confer with the Duke of Glocester and to hear whatsoever he would say or declare unto him and to certifie the king thereof in proper person wherever he should be fully and distinctly under his Seal Whereupon he went thither and took the said Dukes Examination in writing according to the purport of the said Commission a Copy whereof the Duke himself received c Upon the hearing of his answer and defence
but by Bill The 8th President that may be objected is this Adam de Arleton or Tarlton Bishop of Hereford in a Parliament held at London Anno 1322. was apprehended by the Kings Officers and brought to the Bar to be arraigned for Treason and Rebellion in aiding the Mortimers and others in their wars with men and arms where having nothing to say for himself in defence of the crimes objected and standing mute for a space at last he flatly told the King That he was a Minister and Member of the Church of Christ and a consecrated Bishop though unworthy therefore I neither can nor ought to answer to such high matters without the consent of my Lord Archbishop of Canterbury my direct Judge next after the Pope and of the other Fathers the Bishops my PEERS At which saying the Archbishops and Bishops there present rose up and interceded to the King for their Colleague and when the King would not be intreated they all challenged the Bishop as a Member of the Church exempt from the Kings Justice and all secular judicature The King forced thereunto by their claimors delivered him to the Archbishops custody to answer elsewhere for these crimes Within few days after being apprehended again and brought to answer before the Kings royal Tribunal in the Kings Bench at Westminster for his Treasons the Archbishops of Canterbury York and Dublin hearing of Tarltons arraignment came with their Crosier staves carried before them accompanied with 10 Bishops more and a great company of men entred into the Court and by open violence rescued and took away the Bishop from the Bar before any answer made to his charge chasing away the Kings Officers and proclaiming openly That no man should lay violent hands on this Trayterly Bishop upon pain of excommunication and so departed The King exceedingly incensed at this High affront to Justice and himself commanded an Inquest to be impanelled and a lawfull inquiry to be made of the Treasons committed by the Bishop in his absence being thus rescued from Justice The Jury without fear of the King or any hatred of the Bishop found the Bishop guilty of all the Articles of Treason and Rebellion whereof he was indicted Whereupon the King banished the Bishop seised all his temporalties lands and goods But yet notwithstanding the Bishop by consent of all the Prelates was by strong hand kept in the Archbishops custody till he had reconciled him to the King After which by way of revenge he was a principal instrument of the Kings deposing and murther which having effected in the Parliament of 1 E. 3. 6. this Bishop petitions that the Indictment and Iudgement against him and the proceedings therein might be brought into Parliament and there nulled as erronious which was done accordingly Et quia recitatis et examinatis coram nobis et consilio nosâ—ro recordo et processu praedictis Et etiam coram Praelatis Comitibus Baronibus Magnatibus tota communitate regni nostri praesenti Parliamento nostro praesentibus compertum fuit quod in eisdem recordo et processu errores manifesti intervenerunt per assensum totius Parliamenti adnullatur and so he had restitution I answer that as this rescue of proceeding and judgement against this trayterous Bishop were singular So is this repeal and reversal of it as erronious before and by all the Commons and whole Parliament as well as King Prelates and Nobles and that no doubt at the special instance of this and all the other Bishops highly concerned in this cause Wherefore this one Swallow makes no Summer and proves no judicial authority joyntly with the King and Lords since they never joyned with them before nor since in reversing of any such error upon Judgement in the Kings Bench but only where an erronious Attainder by Bill in one Parliament was reversed by Bill in another The 9th is the Clause of King Edward the thirds Letter to the Pope in the 4th year of his reign already answered p. 274. The 10th is Sir John at Lees case 42 E. 3. n. 20. said to be ADJVDGED by the Lords and COMMONS I answer this Case is somewhat mâ—staken For the Record only mentions That the 21 day of May the King gave thanks to the Lords and Commons for their coming and aid granted on which day all the Lords and sundry of the Commons dined with the King After which dinner Sir Iohn at Lee was brought before the King LORDS COMMONS next aforesaid who dined with the King to answer certain objections made against him by William Latymer about the wardship of Robert Latymer that Sir John being of power had sent for him to London where by duresse of Imprisonment he inforced the said William to surrender his estate unto him which done some other Articles were objected against the said Sir John of which for that he could not sufficiently purge himself HE was committed to the Tower of London there to remain til he had made fine and ransom at the Kings pleasure and command given to the Constable of the Tower to keep him accordingly And then the said Lords and Commons departed After which he was brought before the Kings Councel at Westminster which COUNCEL ORDERED the said ward to be reseised into the Kings hands So as this record proves not that this judgment was given in the Parliament house nor that the Lords and Commons adjudged Sir Iohn but rather the King and his Councel in the presence of the Lords and Commons after the Parliament ended The 11 12 13. Are the cases of the Lord Latymer Lord Nevil and Richard Lyons forecited Here p. 283 284 350. which are nothing to purpose the Lords alone giving judgement in them without the Commons who did only impeach them and the King removing the Lord Latymer from his Council at their further request So that these 3. cases refute their opinions who object them The 14. is the Case of Weston and Gomines 1 R. 2. n. 38 39. In which the Lords alone gave the Judgement as I have proved p. 332 333 Therefore pointblank against the Objectors The 15. president is that of Iohn Kirby and Iohn Algar two Citizens of London in the Parliament of 3 R. 2. n. 18. who conceiving malice against John Imperial an Ambassador sent hither from the State of Genoa who had procured a Monopoly to furnish England with all such wares as come from the Levant keeping his staple at Southampton killed him in London upon a sudden quarrel picked with him for which they being committed this being a new and difficult case and the Judges being in doubt whether it were Treason or no it was thereupon propounded in Parliament according to the Statute of 25 E. 3. c. 2. like that of 25 E. 3. Parl. 2. of those who are born beyond the Seas 14 E. 3. c. 5. 13 E. 1. c. 24.32 E. 1. rot 17. 22. Claus 46 H. 3. n. 3. Claus 14
E. 2. dors 17. 17 E. 3. n. 24.21 E. 3. n. 60.40 E. 3. n. 14 15.14 E. 3. n. 30 31.1 R. 2. n. 95.1 E. 3. f. 6 7.39 E. 3.21 a. 40 E. 3.34 b. Cook 8 Rep. f. 158.3 Instit p. 6 7.4 Instit p. 67 c. 2 Instit p. 408. West 2. c 24. and Bracton l. 2. c. 16 l. 3. c. 9. Fletae l. 2. c. 6. resolving that all difficult causes are to be declared to and determined in and by Parliaments This case being examined and debated by and between the Lords and Commons was afterwards there declared bâ—fore the King and determined and agreed That this fact and murder is Treason and a crime against the Kings Majesty in which case no privilege of Clergy ought to be allowed to any man Whereupon 7 R. 2. rot 8. Kirby and Algar were attainted of High Treason in the Kings Bench and executed as Traitors Walsingham writes this Parliament was held at Northampton against the consent of most of the Realm but especially against the will of the Londoners that so revenge might be taken upon Kirkeby for this murder they fearing that if the Parliament were held at London the Londoners would not suffer him to be executed without some danger to those who condemned him whereupon he was condemned drawn and executed at Northampton To this I answer first That Kirby and Algar were not impeached arraigned tried or condemned in Parliament for this Treason but in the Kings Bench for if they had the Lords only had judged and given sentence against rhem as in all the premised cases 2ly Their case being new was thought fit to be propounded to the Commons by the Kings direction as well as to the Lords who upon debate agreed it to be Treason 3ly When it had been debated it was declared and finally resolved and agreed before the King in full Parliament and that by Bill and the Legislative not Judicial power as Mr. Sâ— John informs us Therefore it makes nothing for the Commons right and power of Judicature which after all these presidents all the Commons in the Parliament of 1 H. 4. n. 79. confess to have been alwayes of right in the King and Lords and not in them which sways away all the forecited presidents at once as impertinent and misapplied For the presidents of 21 R. 2. n. 29. 2 H. 5. n. 13 28 H. 6 n. 19. misrecited by Sir E. Cook 4 Instit p. 23. 3 Inst p. 22. they are already answered p. 296 297 299 344. And for those of Sir Giles Mompesson Sir Iohn Michel Viscount St. Alban and the Earl of Middlesex himself confesseth and I have here cleared p. 303 304. that the notable Iudgements against them were given by the Lords at the prosecution of the Commons who were only their prosecutors not Iudges These are all the Presidents I finde that are objected to give the Commons a share with the King and Lords in the Judicature in our Parliaments which evince it not but clearly disprove it The 2. sort of Presidents insisted on by Sir Ed. Cook are to prove a Judicial Authority in the House of Commons alone without the Lords in cases of their own Members and Servants in matters of elections breach of Privilege or misdemeanors in the Commons house for which they have imprisoned and sometimes fined Serjeants Baylifs Sherifs committed their own Members adjudged their elections void suspended excluded ejected them the house The 1. ease is that of Muncton 2 Aprilis 1 Mariae committed by the Commons to the Tower for striking William Iohnson a Burgess The 2. of Thomas Lucy 8 Eliz. removed out of the House for giving 4 l. to the Mayor of Westbury to be chosen a Burgess and the Maior fined and imprisoned The 3 of Arthur Hall 23. Eliz. who for discovering and publishing the Conferences of the House and writing a Book to the dishonour of the house was committed to prison These matters were examined and adjudged in the House of Commons Secundum legâ—m Consuetudinem Parliamenti and he thereupon committed to the Tower for 6. Moneths fined 500 marks and expelled the House And in that Parliament 18 Martii a fine was assesâ—ed by the House on every Member that was absent without leave To these alleged by Sir Edw. Cooke I shall superadd the ensuing Sir Robert Brandling was committed to the Tower 27 Eliz. for striking Witheâ—ington a Burgess 3 Jacobi one was fined for causing a Members Servant to be arrested though he claimed his privilege 12 Jacobi Locke and More were ordered by the Commons to ride both on one horse with their faces to the horses tail for arresting a Servant of Mr. Whitlocks then a Member against his privilege which was accordingly executed In 2 Caroli Sir George Hastings being elected knight for Leicestershire and he then being arrested his witnesses had their charges given them against the Sherif and he fined In the Parliament of 3. Caroli Sir Thomas Savils case 29. April 1628. Thomson Sherif and Henloe Alderman of York for abuses in the election were ordered to be committed to the Serjeant of the House during the pleasure of the Commons House to acknowledge their offences at the Barr on their knees and pay all due fees and to make a submission in York In 3. Caroli Mr. John Baber was suspended the house about billetting Souldiers In 3. Car. the Commons house committed Mr. Laughton and Mr. Trelawny to the Tower during pleasure and Sir William Wray and Mr. Edward Trelawny to the Serjeant at Arms and ordered them to make a submission acknowledgement of their offences in the House at the Bar and in the County at the Assises they kneeling at the Barr all the while the Speaker pronounced the Judgement against them for writing menacing Letters to Sir John Elliot and Mr. Coriton and to others of the County of Cornwall disturbing their election and contemning the warrant of the House when sent for In this Parliament of 17 Caroli now sitting the Commons house turned out sundry Members who were Projectors and voted out many others for Delinquency ordering New elections in their places without the King or Lord. I answer 1. That all these objected presidents are of very puny date within time of memory therefore unable to create a Law or custom of Parliament or any right of sole Judicature in the Commons House 2ly They were all made by the Commons themselves unfit Judges in their own cases much less over one another being all of equal Authority and so unable to seclude imprison or fine one another no more than one Judge or Justice to fine imprison or uncommission another since Par in parem non habet imperium 3ly They are all against Law because coram non Judice the Commons House having no right or power of Judicature much less of sole Judicature in our Parliaments but only the King and Lords as I have formerly proved by reasons and presidents in all ages 4ly These
4. n. 19 20 21. upon these and other Petitions of forcible disseisins and for imprisoning the Abbot of Meniham in Devonshire THE KING LORDS adjudged that this Sir Philip Courtney should be bound to his good behaviour and committed to the Tower for his contempt From which records it is evident First that Members of the Commons house may be complained and petitioned against for misdemeanors and put to answer before the King and Lords in Parliament and there fined and judged not before the Commons house and that this was the antient way of proceeding Secondly that the Commons cannot suspend or discharge any of their fellow-Commoners or Knights from sitting in Parliament but only the King and Lords in full Parliament in whom the power of Judicature rests much less then can they expell or eject any of their Members by their own authority without the King and Lords concurrent consents No more than one Justice of peace Committee-man or Militia-man can un-Justice or â—move another since Par in parem non habet Imperium neither in civil military ecclesiastical nor domestical affaiâ— Thirdly that the power of restoring readmitting aâ—ended Member of the Commons house belongs not to the Commons themselves but to the King and Lords to whom the Commons in this case addressed themselves by petition for Courtneys readmission after his submission of the complaints against him to the arbitrement of those Members to whom the King and Lords referred the same In the Parliament of 17 Rich. 2. num 23. It was accorded and resolved by the King and Lords at the Complaint petition request of the Commons that Roger Swinerton who was endited of the death of one of their companions Iohn de Ipstones Knight of the said Parliament for the County of Stafford slain in coming towards the said Parliament by the said Roger should not be delivered out of prison wherein he was detained for this cause by bail mainprise or any other manner until he had made answer thereunto and should be delivered by the Law The Commons alone by their own power having no authority to make such an order even for the murther of one of their own Members without the King and Lords who made this ordinance at their request I find this objected against King Richard the 2. in the Parliament of 1 H. 4. n. 37. That he frequently sent his Mandates to Sherifs to return certain persons named only by himself and not freely chosen by the people to be knights of Shires thereby to effect his own ends and oppress the people with Subsidies But yet I find not in all his reign any one Knight thus unduly returned questioned by the Commons or suspended the House much less ejected by them or by the King and Lords upon the Commons complaint thereof unto them A clear evidence they had then no such power to eject their Members for being unduly elected returned as how they use In the Parliament of 20 R. 2. n. 14 15 16 17. The King being highly offended with the Commons for receiving Haxyes Bill said that the Commons thereby had committed an offence against him his dignity and liberty the which he willed THE LORDS to declare the next day to the Commons Who thereupon delivering up the Bill came fort with before the King shewing themselves very sorrowfull declaring to him that they meant no harm and submitting themselves to the King herein most humbly craved his pardon Whereupon the Chancellor by the Kings commandment declared That the King held them excused and the King by mouth declared how many wayes they were bound unto him Lo here the whole House of Commons submit themselves to the King in the House of Lords as Judges of them and their misdemeanors in Parliament and crave pardon for offending him In the Parliament of 2 H. 4. n. 45 46. The Commons house petitioning the King that the Act for his moderation of the Statute against Provisions might be examined for as much as the time was recorded otherwise than was agreed by them The King granted thereunto by protestation that the same should be no example where after Examination by the Bishops and Lords they affirmed the same to be duly entred which the King also remembred Whereupon the COMMONS the same day for this their misinformation came into the Lords House and knéeling before the King beseeched the King to pardon them if happily they through ignorance had or should offend him which the King granted Here the Bishops and Lords are Judges of the Commons misinformation misentry of an Act and the King of their Offence against him in Parliament by this misinformation which he pardons them upon their humble submission and no doubt might have punished them for it by the Lords assent and advice had he pleased So farr are they from being Judges in Parliament that themselves may there be judged if they therein offend as all their Speakers usual protestations and petitions to the King when presented evidence That the Commons may have liberty of speech and that if any Members in the House of Commons in communication and reasoning should speak more largely than of duty they ought to doe that all such offences may be pardoned which the King may punish if there be cause unâ—eâ—â—â— he pardon it of record upon the Speakers Protestation before hand Sir Edward Cook himself as well as the Parliament Rolls and experience informs us of these particulars touching the Speakers of the Commons House in Parliament their chiefest Member 1. That though the Commons are to chuse their own Speaker and that by the kings special command and license to them in every Parliament since they had one not with due â— who likewise prescribes them the time when to present him yet the use is as in the Conge de eslâ—yer of a Bishop that the king doth name a discreet and learned man to them whom the Commons do eâ—ect pro formâ— only because he cannot be appointed for them without their election being their mouth and â—usted by them 2ly That after the Commons choice the King may refuse him 3ly That after he is chosen he must be presented to the king by the Commons in the Lordâ— House for his approbation and confirmation in that plaâ—s the Commons sending up some of their Members to acquaint the Lords Spiritual and Temporal that according to the Kings command they had chosen such a one their Speaker and are ready to present him at the â—me appointed 4ly That where he is thus presented he is in disable himself for so weighty a service and to make sutâ— to the King to be discharged and a more sufficient man chosen in his place To which I shall adde that upon this excuse the king may discharge him if he please and command the Commons to elect another as King Henry the â— did discharge Sir John Popham when presented Speaker to him by the Commons in the Parliament
of 26 H. 6. n. â— upon his excuse Whereupon William Tresham was elected in his place presented to and approved by the King n. 7. 5ly That when he is elected and approved yet in case of sickness and infirmity he may be removed and another chosen and presented in his place and that upon the Commons special Petition to the king in his behalf out of his meer Grace to discharge him and accept of another Thus in the Parliament of 1 H. 4. n. 62 63 64. Sir John Cheyney Knight after his election and approbation was discharged and Sir John Dorew Knight elected presented and admitmitted by the Kings license to be Speaker in his room So in the Parliament of 1 H. 5. n. n. 7 9 10.11 Will. Sturton Esquire after he was chosen and allowed Speaker was removed for grievous sickness and John Doreward chosen in his place At the Parliament holden 15 H. 6. n. 10 27. Sir John Tirril knight was chosen and allowed yet removed for grievous sickness and William Beerell chosen in his place and that by the Kings special license and approbation to whom all those new Speakers were again presented by the Commons for his royal assent thereto 6ly That if he be altered by his Majesty by assent of the Council Lords as the entry is in the Parliament Rolls then he maketh a protestation or Petition to the king which consisteth of three parts 1. That the Commons in this Parliament may have freedom of speech as of right and custom they have used and all their antient and just Privileges and Liberties allowed them which the King usually granted with this caution That he hoped or doubted not That the Members would not speak any unfitting words or abuse this freedom and privilege for abuse whereof some have been committed Prisoners to the Tower by our Kings and Queens command 2ly That if he shall commit any Error in any thing he shall deliver in the name of the Commons no fault may be imputed to the Commons and that he may resort again to them for declaration of his good intent and that his Error may be pardoned 3ly That as often as necessity for his Majesties service and the good of the Common-wealth shall require he may by direction of the House of Commons have access to his Majesty If then the King hath the sole power and jurisdiction thus to nominate approve confirm disallow refuse discharge and remove the very Speakers of the Commons House themselves and not the Commons but by and with his special license grace and royal assent yea to grant them freedom of speech and their usual Privileges and liberties every Parliament upon their Petition and to pardon theirs and their Speakers Errors and that sitting in the Lords House with their assents then doubtlesse the king and Lords alone are the sole Judges of the Speakers and all other Members of the Commons House and have the sole power to judge of their undue elections retorns misdemeanors breaches of Privileges and all other matters concerning their Membership not the Commons And if they can neither constitute elect nor remove their own Speaker for sickness or any other cause without the kings privity and consent declared in the House of Lords much lesse can they suspend seclude or eject any Member out of the House when chosen and returned by the Freeholders Citizens or Burgesses as their Attorny or Trustee in equal power with themselves without the Kings or Lords consents for any pretext of unfitness or undue election And if the king as Sir Edward Cook grants and these presidents prove may discharge the Speaker from his Office for grievous sickness and inability to discharge it I mak no question but he may likewise upon the like Petition of the Commons or Speaker discharge him of his attendance in the House or any other Member for the self same reason and grant a Writ to elect another able and fitting person in his place according to the opinion of 38 H. 8. Brooks Parliament 7. and Crompton in his Jurisdiction of Courts f. 16. approved by the whole House of Commons and accordingly practised in 38 H. 8. against Sir Edward Cooks bare opinion without reason to the contrary In the Parliament holden at Westminster 5 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 38. Thomas Thorp his Case Item because that the Writ of Summons of Parliament returned by the Sherif of Roteland was not sufficiently nor duly returned as the Commons conceived the said Commons prayed our Lord the King and the Lords in Parliament that this matter might be duly examined in Parliament and that in case therâ— shall be default found in this matter that such a punishment might be inflicted which might become exemplary to others to offend again in the like manner Whereupon 〈◊〉 said Lord the King in full Parliament commanded the Lords in Parliament to examine the said matter and to do therein as to them should seem best in their discretions And thereupon the said Lords caused to come before them in Parliament as well the said Sherifs at William Oneby who was returned by the said Sherif for one of the Knights of the said County and Thomas Thorp who was elected in full Countie to be one of the Knights of the said Shire for the said Parliament and not returned by the said Sherif And the said parties being duly examined and their reasons well considered in the said Parliament it was agreed by the said Lords that because the said Sherif had not made a sufficienâ— return of the said Writ that he shall amend the said return and that he shall return the said Thomas for one of the said Knights as he was elected in the said County for the Parliament and moreover that the said Sherif for this default shall be discharged of his Office any committed Prisoner to the Fleeâ— and that he should make sins and ransome at the Kings pleasures â—oâ— here the Lords in Parliament at the Commons request and by the Kings command examine and give judgement in case of an undue election and retorn even without the Commons In this same Parliament Richard Cheddar Esquire a menial servant and attendant on Sir Thomas Brook chosen one of the Knights to serve in Parliament for the County of Somerset was horribly beaten wounded blemished and maimed by one John Savage Whereupon the Commons complained thereof to the King and Lords petitioning them for redress both in his particular case for the present and all others of that nature for the future that they might make fine at the Kings 〈◊〉 and render double damages to the party maimed whether Members of theirs Servants Whereupon it was ordained and established by the King and Lords that for as 〈…〉 deed was done within the time of the said Parliament that Proclamation be made where it was done that the said John appear and yield himself in the Kings Bench within a quarter of a year after the Proclamation
but are enforced to petition the King and Lords for his enlargement 3ly The Lords in the kings name command the Commons to chuse and present another Speaker in his room and that with all speed which they accordingly did and then present him to the King and Lords for their approbation who allowed of their choice In the Parliament of 38 H. 6. n. 35. There were divers Knights of Counties Citizens and Burgesses named returned and accepted some of them without any due or free election some of them without any election at all against the course of the Kings Lawes and the Liberties of the Commons of the Realm by vertue of the Kings Letters without any other election and by the means and labours of divers seditious and evil disposed persons only to destroy certain of the great faithfull Lords and Nobles and other faithfull liege people of the Realm out of hatred malice greedy and unsatiable covetousness to gain their Lands Inheritances Possessions Offices and goods as the Statute of 39 H. 6. c. 1. relates The Commons were so farr from having power to exclude or confirm their elections themselves that they petitioned the King by advise and assent of the Lords That all such Knights Citizens and Burgesses as were thus returned to this Parliament by vertue of the Kings Letters without any other election should be good and that no Sherif for returning them might incurr the pain therefore provided by the Statute of 23 H. 6. c. 15. Which the King and Lords assented to at their request In the Parliament of 39 H. 6. n. 9. Walter Clerk one of the Burgesses of Parliament for Chippenham was arrested and imprisoned in the Fleet for divers debts due to the King and others upon a Capias Vilagatum whereupon the Commons complained thereof to the King and Lords by Petition and desired his release and rendred them an Act of Parliament ready drawn for that purpose to which Petition and Bill of theirs the King by the assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal assented And thereupon he was freed Not by the Commons power order or judgement but by the Kings and Lords advice and assents William Hyde a Burgess of Chippenham in Wiltshire being taken in Execution upon a Capias ad satisfaciendum and imprisoned in the kings Bench during the Parliament contrary to his privilege the Commons thereupon by a Petition praved the King that by advice and assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal he might be delivered for the present by a Writ of privilege out of the Chancery which the King by the advice and assent of the Lords granted saving the right of his Prosecutors to have execution upon him again after the Parliament ended 14 E. 4. n. 55. In the Parliament of 17 E. 4. n. 36. John at-Will a Burgess for Exeter was condemned in the Exchequer upon 8. several Informations during the Parliament at the prosecution of Iohn Taylor of the same Town upon complaint thereof by the Commons to the King and Lords in Parliament by Petition the King by advice and assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal ordered that he should have as many Supersedeas against the said Judgements and Informations as he pleased until his coming home from the Parliament In these last recited cases the Commons had no power at all to deliver or enlarge their own Members when imprisoned as of late years they have practised but always petitioned to the King and Lords for their release and relief who thereupon released and relieved them against the breaches of their privileges when they saw good cause Which cases I have examined by and transcribed out of the Parliament Rolls themselves in the Tower and not taken upon trust or the Abridgements of them which leave out the main ingredients the Commons Petitions to and advice and assent of the King and Lords expressed in the Rolls at large Richard Strode Gentleman one of the Burgesses of Parliament for the Burge of Plympton in Devonshire in the Parliament of 4 H. 8. for agreeing with the Commons house in putting out Bills against certain abuses of the Tinners being a Tinner himself by the malice of John Furse Tinner Under-Steward of the Stannâ—ries and his misinformation that the said Richard Strâ—de at the last Parliament heldâ—n at Westminster would have avoided and utterly destroyed all Liberties Privileges and Franchises concerning the Scanneâ—ies was upon 4. Bills thereof made by the said Furse presented and found guilty of the premises in 4. several Stannery Courts and condemned to forfeit 40 l. on every Bill to the King upon an Act and Ordinance made by the Tinners to which he was never warned nor called to make answer contrary to all Laws right reason and good conscience And one John Aguiâ—â—iam begging 20 l. of the said forfeiture from the King caused the said Richard to be taken and imprisoned in Lidford Castle in a dungeon and deep pit under ground where he was fed only with bread and water to the peril of his life and was to have irons laid upon him Upon which he petitioned the Parliament for remedy and that it might be ordained and enacted by the King the Lords Spiritual and Temporal that the condemnations against him for the said 160 l. in the Stanneries and every parcel thereof and judgements and executions had or to be had for the premises might be utterly void and of none effect against him which was done for him accordingly And moreover it was enacted That all sutes accusations condemnations executions fines amerciameuts punishments corrections grants charges and impositions put or had or hereafter to be put or had upon the said Richard to every other person or persons that were in this Parliament or that of any Parliament hereafter shall be for any Bill speaking reasoning or declaring of any matter or matters concerning the Parliament to be communed or treated of be utterly void and of none effect And that any person vexed or troubled or otherwise charged for any causes as aforesaid shall have an action of the case against every person or persons so vexing or troubling him contrary to this Ordinance and recover treble damages and costs And that no protection Essoign or wager of Law shall in the said action in any wise be admiâ—red nor received as you may read in the Statutes at large 4 H. 8. ch 8. intituled an act concerning Richard Strode The Commons themselves being unable to releive him in this high breach of privilege but by a petition to the King and Lords and a special Act of Parliament made for him In the Parliament of 34 H. 8. there fell out this famous case thus at large recorded by Holinshed and Crompton out of him In the Lent season whilst the Parliament yet continued one George Ferrers Gentleman servant to the king being elected a Burgess for the Town of Plimmouth in the County of Devon in going to the Parliament House was arrested in
Premises THe Principal scope of the Precedent Plea for the Lords and House of Peers being only to justifie and ratifie their ancient just Right to sit and vote in all English Parliaments and Great Councils or State and their Judicial Authority in them without the Commons especially in Criminal Causes then only controverted contradicted by Lilbourne Overton their Disciples I reputed it both useful and necessary to superadde thereto some memorable Presidents in former ages which no Vulgar writers of our English Parliaments have remembred of the Kings and Lords Proceedings Judicature in Parliament in Civil and Ecclesiastical Causes of publick and private concernment as no way heterogeneal but homogeneal to my Theam to make this Plea more compleat and communicate some more knowledge of Parliamentary Affairs and Proceedings both to the Ignorant and Learned in this declining age wherein learning and learned men of publick spirits in all Professions are so much decayed and little Visible Probability left of any speedy reparations of this inestimable losse for want of publick encouragement I shall proceed herein only in a Chronological Method as I have done for the most part in the premises beginning with the ancientest president I meet with of this kind and so descending to succeeding ages About the year of Christ 536 Our famous Brittish victorious King Arthur by his Letters and Messengers summoned all the Kings Prelates Dukes and Nobles subject to him to meet at the City of Caerleon on the feast of Pentecost then to be new crowned and settle the peace and affairs of his Realmes whereupon there assembled at that time and place thirteen Kings three Archbishops and many Princes Dukes Consuls Earls and LORDS whose names are registred in Geoffry Monmouth whiles they were thus convened there arrived twelve men with letters from Lucius Tiberius procurator of the Roman Republick demanding in high language The Tribute of Brittain which the Senate command King Arthur to pay with the arrears injuriously detained because Julius Caesar had reserved it upon his conquest of Brittain and hee with other Romane Emperours had long received it summoning him likewise to appear at Rome in August the year following to satisfie the Senate for the injuries done them and submit to the sentence their Justice should pronounce or else denouncing war against him This Letter being publickly read before all the Kings Princes Dukes and Nobles present the King consulted with them craving their unanimous advise and sense concerning this business affirming That this Tribute was exacted ex irrationabili causa against all reason for he demanded it to be payd as due because it was paid to Julius Caesar and his successors who invited by the devisions of the old Brittains arrived with an Army in Brittain and By force and violence subjected the Country to their power shaken with domestick commotions Now because they obtained it in this manner vectigal ex eo injuste receperunt therefore they unjustly received tribute out of it Nihil enim quod vi violentia acquiritur juste ab â—llo possidetur qui violentiam intulit irrationabilem ergo causam praeâ—endit qua nos jure sibi tribitarios arbitratur For nothing which is acquired by force and violence is justly possessed by any man who hath offered the violence Therefore hee pretends An irrationable cause whereby hee reputes us to be Tributaries to him c. The whole Council upon debate fully assented to this opinion and promised the King their assistance against the Romans in this cause Whereupâ—n King Arthur returned this answer That he would by no mâ—ans render them tribute neither would he submit himself to their judgement concerning it nor repare to Rome c. An expresse resolution That Conquest by warr force and violence is no good just nor lawful but an unlawful and unjust Title to any Tributes or Possessions which these who now pretend they are Conquerors and us a meer conquered Nation and therefore they may impose what Taxes Excises Tributes Laws Executions they please upon us when as they were only raysed waged commissioned to defend preserve our Laws Liberties King Parliament and Kingdomes not to conquer or enslave them may do well to consider In the year of our Lord 799. King Kenulfus upon the petition and complaint of Athelardus Arch-Bishop of Canterbury consentientibus EPISCOPIS ET PRINCIPIBUS MEIS assembled in a Parliamentary Council restored four parcels of Lands to Christ-Church in Canterbury which King Offa heretofore had taken from this Church and conferred on his Officers Kenulfus King of Mercia calling a Provincial Council held at Cloveshe Anno Dom. 800. wherein all the Bishops Dukes Abbots and Nobles of every order were assembled complaint was made therein that after the death of Arch-Bishop Cuthhert Verheb and Osbert led by a malignant spirit stole away the evidences and writings of the Monastery of Cotham and all the Lands thereunto belonging given by King Athelbald to our Saviours Church in Canterbury and brought them to Kenulfus King of the West-Saxons who thereupon converted the said Monastery and Lands to his own use After which â—regwin and Jambert Arch-Bishops of Canterbury complained of this injurie done to the Church in sundry Councils both to King Kenulfus and Offa King of Mercia who took from Kenulfus the Monastery of Cotham with many other Lands and Towns and subjected them to the Realme of Mercia At last Kenulfus induced by late repentance restored the evidences and writings of the said Monastery together with a great summe of mony to the said Church to prevent the danger of an excommunication but King Offa as hee received the said Monastery without writings so hee retained them during his life and left them to descend to his heirs without any evidence after his death whereupon Athelardus the Arch-Bishop and other wise men of Christ-Church brought these Evidences and Writing touching Gotham into this Council of Clovesho where when they had been publickly read OMNIUM VOCE DECRETUM EST that it was just the Metropoliticall Church should bee restored to the said Monastery of which shee had been unjustly spoiled for so long a time Athelardus receiving also in this Council the dignities and possessions which King Offa had taken from Jamberâ— annuente ipso Rege as Gervasius records In a Council held at Clovesho Anno 813. Upon complaint of the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury the Arch-Bishoprick of Litchfield was dissolved and the Bishopricks annexed to it by King Offa taken from the See of Canterbury restored and reunited thereunto by the consent of King Kenulfus his Bishops Dukes and Nobles who writ a Letter to Pope Leo for that purpose unanimo consilio totius sanctae Synodi And in this Council also other lands were restored to the Bishop of Worcester and other controversies between Bishops concerning their Lands and Limits decided In another Council at Clovesho Anno 821. Wherein King Kenulfus Wulfred Arch-Bishop of Canterbury with the rest of the Bishops Abbots
Judg. 17.2 3 4. Exod. 22.1 to 16. Levit. 6.4 5. ch 24.17 to 22. ch 25.27 28. Judg. 11.12 13. 1 Sam. 12.3 4. 2 Sam. 9.7 ch 12.5 6. ch 19.9 to 43. 1 Sam. 7.13 14. 2 King 14.22 Ezra 1.7 8 9 10 11. ch 6.5 which warrant the judgement and restitution they then awarded together with this memorable Act of resumption of the Crown Lands Rents and Revenewes alienated and given away by King Stephen to many Lords and Soldiers to maintain his usurped Title to be just King Henry the 2d Anno 1155. Praecepit eacum omni integritate infra tempus certum a quibuscunque deteâ—toribus resignari in jus statumque pristinum revocari Quidam vero indies carâ—as quas a Rege Stephano vel extorserant vel obsequiis emerant quâ—bus tuti forent protulerunt pleading them in barre against the Kings resumption Quâ—bus fuit a Rege responsum and let those who have purchased or gotten any of the Crown Lands Rents Revenewes by gift or otherwise now remember it Quod carâ—ae Inbasoris praejudicium legitimo Principi minime facere deberent Primo ergo indignati deinde territi consternati aegre quidem sed integre Usurpata vel diu tanquam solido â—ure detenta omnia resignarunt their Charters being all adjudged voyd eisdemque instrumentis minime tuti esse potuerunt as Nubrigensis and Brompton inform us The great and long suit between William de Stutevill and William de Moubray which had continued many years in the Kings Courts concerning the Barony of Moubray was ended in a Parliamentary Council by a final award there made between them that William de Stutevil should release all his right and claim to the Barrony to William de Moubray hee giving him nine Knights fees and twelve pounds Annual Rent for this release cumque super hoc diu certatum esset tandem Anno 1200. the 2d of King Johns Reign concilio Regni et voluntate Regis pax finalis concordia facta est inter praedictos as Roger de Houeden relates who records the agreement at large King Henry the 3d. Anno 1236. in a Parliamentary Council held at York Consilio sultus Magnatum Regni ended the controversie between himself and Alexander King of Scots touching the Lands King John had granted him by his Charter in Northumberland ratified by the subscriptions and assents of his Nobles Earles and Barons Anno 1237. Rex scripsit omnibus Magnatibus suis to appear before him and the Popes Legat at York de arduis negociis regnum contingentibus tractaturis where the difference between King Henry the 3d. and the King of Scots summoned to be present at this Parliament touching his Lands in England were finally determined and a firme peace made between them the King of Scots being to receive three hundred pound lands a year in England sine castri constructione homagiumque Regi Angliae faceret faedus inter eos amicitiae sanciretur hoc se fideliter facturum Regi Angliae conservaturum juraret After this Anno 1244. King Henry summoning all the Bishops Abbots and lay Barons to present all their military Services to him marched with a great army to New-Castle against the Scots who had fortified two Castles harboured rebels against the King and made a peace with France against their former Covenant and League VVhere to avoid the effusion of Christian blood which will cry to God for vengeance congregata Vniversitate Angliae Nobilium apud memoratum castrum tractatum est diligenter super tam arduo negotio Concilio habito circa Assumptionem beatae Maria dligentissimâ— Wherein the NOBLES made an agreement between the Kings of England and Scotland Alexander King of Scots by his special Charter recorded in Matthew Paris promising and swearing for him and his Heirs to King Henry and his Heirs quod in perpetuum bonam fidem eis servabimus pariter amorem c. Most of the Prelates Earles and Barons of Scotland sealing the charter with their Seals and swearing to observe it inviolably as well as their King In the Parliaments of 18 20 21 31 33. Ed. 1. There were many Pleas and Actions for Lands Rents and civil things as well as criminal held before the King in Parliament and adjudged resolved in these Parliaments by assent of the King and advice of the Lords the Kings Judges and Council learned in the Laws there being a large Parchment Volume of them in the Tower of London where all may peruse them some of them being also entred on the dorse of the Clause Rolls of these years Pasche 21. E. 1. Banco Regis Northumberland Rot. 34. John le Machon a Merchant lent a great summe of mony to Alexander King of Scots who dying his Son and Successour refused upon petition to pay it Whereupon hee appealed to the King of England for right propter suum supremum Dominium Scotiae Thereupon the Sheriffs of Northumberland by the Kings command accompanied with four men of that County went into Scotland to the Scots King and there personally summoned him to appear in England before the King of England to answerr this Debt After which all parties making default at the day the Merchant was amerced The King of Scots afterward appeared before the King but at the first time refused to answer at last hee desired respite to bee given him that he might advise about it with his Council of Scotland promising to appear at the next Parliament and then to give his answer And in Placit coram Rege Trin. 21. E. 1. Scotia there is an Appeal to the King of England between subjects of Scotland in a civil cause tanquam superiori regni Scotiae Domino And Clauso 29. E. 1. dorso 10. there is a letter of all the Nobles in Parliament to the Pope de Jure Regis in regne Scotia forecited p. 127 128. and Claus 10. E. 3. dorso 9. The King of Scots is stiled Vassallus Domini Regis Anglia It appears by Claus 5. E. 2. M. 30. that in a Parliament held at Stanford 3. E. 2. a business touching Merchandize and a Robbery on the Sea was heard and decided before the King and Lords in Parliament between the Earle of Holland who sent over a Proctor about it and others Claus 8. E. 2. m. 15. The Petition of David Earle of Ascelos in Scotland by the Kings command was read in full Parliament before the Prelates Earles and Barones that hee might be restored to his inheritance in Scotland to which it was answered by all their Assents that his inheritance was forfeited by his Ancestors for offences by them committed c. but yet the King would give him some other Lands for it In Claus 12. E. 2. it appears that the Popes Legate came into the Parliament and petitioned the King and Lords for a Legacy given by the Bishop of Durham Patriark of Jerusalem lately dead for which the King by assent of the
possessions and hereditaments with their appurtenances which come to the hands of the said King Richard by forfeiture by force of an Act made in a Parlement holden at Westminster the 21. year of his reign except the said Commons beseeching our said Liege Lord to have and take all only the issues and revenues of all the said Castles Manors Lordships Honors lands tenements rents services and of other the premises aforesaid with their appurtenances except afore except from the said fourth day of the said moneth of March and not afore Saving to every of the liegemen and subjects of our said Soveraign and liege Lord King Edward the fourth such lawfull title and right as he or any other to his use had in any of the premises the said third day of March other than he had either of the grant of the said Henry late Earl of Derby called King Henry the fourth the said Henry his son or the said Henry late called King Henry the sixth or by authority of any pretenced Parlement holden in any of their dayes And that it be ordained declared and stablished by the assent advice and authority aforesaid That all Statutes Acts and Ordinances heretofore made in and for the hurt destruction and avoyding of the said right and title of the said King Richard or of his heirs to ask claim or have the Crown Royal power estate dignity preheminence governance exercise possessions and Lordship abovesaid be voyd and be taken holden â—nd reputed voyd and for nought adnulled repealed revoked and of no force value or effect And furthermore consideration and respect had to the horrible detestable cruel and inhuman tyranny by the said Henry late Earl of Derby against his faith and ligeance done and committed to the said King Richard his rightwise true and natural Liege and Soveraign Lord the unright wise and unlawfull usurpation and intrusion of the same Henry upon the said Crown of Englond and Lordship of Irelond the great intollerable hurt prejudice and derogation that thereby followed to the said Edmund Mortymer Earl of March next heir of blood of the said King Richard time of his death and to the heirs of the said Edmund and the great and excessive damage that by the said usurpations and the continuance thereof hath grown to the said Realm of Englond and to the politique and peaceable governance thereof by inward wars moved and grounded by occasion of the said Vsurpation It be therefore Ordeined declared and stablished by the advice assent and authority aforesaid for the more stablishing of the assured and undoubted inward rest and tranquility of the said Realm of Englond And for the avoyding of the said usurpation and intrusion very cause and ground of the tribulation persecution and adversity thereof that the said Henry late Earl of Derby the heirs of his body coming be from henceforth unabled and taken and holden from henceforth unable and unworthy the premises considered to have joy occupy hold or inherit any estate dignity preheminence enheritaments or possessions within the Realm of Englond Wales or Irelond aforesaid or in Caleys or the Marches thereof And sith that the Crown Royal estate dignity and Lordship above rehearsed of right appertained to the said Noble Prince Richard Duke of York And that the said Usurper late called King Henry the sixth that understanding to the intent that in his opinion he might the more surely stand and continue in his usurpation and intrusion of and in the same Crown Royal estate dignities and Lordship evermore intended and laboured continually by subtile imaginations frauds deceipts and exorbitant means to the extreme and final destruction of the same noble Prince Richard and his issue And for the execution of this malicious and damnable purpose therein in a preâ—ence Parliament by him and his usurped authority holden at Coventree the 38 year of his usurped Reign without cause lawfull or reasonable declared and judged the same noble Prince Richard and the Noble Lords his Sons that is to wit Edward then Earl of March and now the King our Soveraign Lord abovesaid and Edmund Earl of Ruthland to be his Rebels and Enemies them and all their issue dis-inheriting of all name state title and preheminence tenements possessions and enheritaments for evermore cruelly wickedly and unjustly and agenst all humanity right and reason whereby the said noble Prince Richard and his sons above named were compelled by the dread of death to absent them for a time out of this Realm of Englond the natural land of their birth unto their intollerable hurt prejudice heavinesse and discomfort And where after these the said noble Prince Richard Duke of York using the benefice of the Law of Nature and sufficiently accompanied for his defence and recovery of his right to the said Crown of the said Realm came thereunto not then having any Lord therein above him but God And in the time of a Parliament holden by the said Henry late called King Henry the sixth the sixth day of October the 39 year of his said usurped reign intended to use his right and to enter into the exercise of the royal powers dignitees and Lordships abovesaid as it was lawfull and according to Law reason and justice him so to doe and thereupon shewed opened declared and proved his right and title to the said Crown to fore the Lords Spiritual and temporal and Commons being in the same Parlitment by antient matters of sufficient and notable Record undefaisible whereunto it could not be answered or replyed by any matter that of right ought to have deferred him then from the possession thereof yet nevertheless for the tender zeal love and affection that the same Duke bare of Godly and blessed vertues and natural disposition to the restfull governance and pollicy of the same Realm and the Common wele thereof which he loved all his life desired and preferred afore all other things earthly though all the seid Lords spiritual and temporal after long and mature deliberation by them had by good advice upon the said right and title and the authorities and Records proving the same the answers thereunto gives and the replâ—cations to the same made knew the same right and title true by them and the seid Commons so declared accepted and admitted in the same Parliament Iâ— liked him at the grete instance desire and request of the seid Lords solemnply and many times unto him made to assent and grant unto a convention concord and agreement between the seid Henry late called King Henry the sixth on that opâ—party and him on that other upon the seid right and title by the same late called King by the advice and assent of the seid Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons being in the seid Parliament auctorized in the same comprehending among other that the seid Vsurper late called King Henry the sixt understanding certainly the seid title of the said Richard Duke of York just lawfull true and sufficient by the
A Plea for the LORDS AND HOUSE of PEERS OR A full necessary seasonable enlarged Vindication of the just antient hereditary Right of the Earls Lords Peers and Barons of this Realm to sit vote judge in all the PARLIAMENTS of ENGLAND Wherein their Right of Session and Sole Power of Judicature without the Commons House in Criminal Civil Ecclesiastical causes as well of Commons as Peers Yea in cases of Elections Breach of Privilege misdemeanors of the Commons themselves are irrefragably evidenced by solid reasons punctual Authorities memorable Presidents out of Histories and Records in all ages most of them not extant in any Writers of our Parliaments Whose Errors are here rectified the Seditious Anti-Parliamentary Pamphlets Libels of Lilbourn Overton and other Levellers against the Lords House and Right of judging Commoners fully refuted and larger Discoveries made of the Proceedings Iudgements of the Lords in Parliament in Criminal Civil causes Elections Breaches of Privilege of their Gallantry in gaining maintaining preserving the Great Charters Laws Liberties Properties of the Nation and oppugning all Regal Papal Vsurpations Exactions Oppressions illegal Ayds Taxes required or imposed and of the Commons first summons to and just Power in Parliaments than in any former Publications whatsoever By William Prynne Esquire a Bencher of Lincolnes Inne Prov. 22.28 Remove not the antient Land-mark which thy Fathers have set LONDON Printed for Henry Brome at the sign of the Gun in Ivie Lane and Edward Thomas at the Adam and Eve in Little Britain 1659. To all the truly Honourable Heroick Lords and Peers of the Realm of England who are real Patriots of Religion their Countries Fundamental Liberties Properties Great Charters Laws against all arbitrary Tyranny Encroachments illegal unnecessary Taxes and Oppressions Right Honourable THough true Nobility alwayes founded in vertue and real piety needs no other tutelar Deity or Apologie but it self amongst those ingenious Spirits who are able to discern or estimate its worth yet the iniquity of our degenerated Age and the frenzie of the intoxicated ignorant vulgar is such that it now requires the assistance of the ablest Advocates to plead its cause and vindicate the just Rights Privileges of the House of Peers against the licentious Quills Tongues of lawlesse sordid Sectaries and Mechanick Levellers who having got the Sword and reines into their hands plant all their batteries and force against them crying out like those Babylonian Levellers of old against the House of Lords Rase it Rase it even to the foundation thereof and lay it for ever â—ver with the very dust beholding all true Honor worth and Nobleness shining forth in your Honors heroick Spirits with a malignant aspect because they despair of ever enjoying the least spark therof in themselves and prosecuting you with a deadly hatred because better greater than ever they have hopes to be unless they can through Treachery and violence make themselves the onely Grandees by debasing your highest Dignity to the lowest Peasantry and making the meanest Commoners your Compears This dangerous seditious Design hath ingaged me the unablest of many out of my great affection to Royalty and real Nobility and a deep sence of the present kid tottering condition of our Kingdom Parliament the very pillars and foundations whereof are now not only shaken but almost quite subverted voluntarily without any Fee at all to become your Honors Advocate to plead your Cause and vindicate your undoubted hereditary right of sitting voting judging in our Parliaments of which they strenuously endeavour to plunder both your Lordships and your posterities and to publish these subitane Collections to the world now enlarged with many pertinent Additions to still the madness of the seduced vulgar whom Ignoramus Lilburn Overton Walwin and their Confederates have laboured to mutinie against your Parliamentary Jurisdiction treading upon Princes as upon mortar and as the Potter treadeth the clay in their illiterate seditious Pamphlets whose Arguments Pretences Presidents Objections Allegations I have here refuted by Scripture Histories Antiquities and Parliament-Rolls the ignorance whereof joyned with their malice is the principal occasion of their error in this kind And truly were all our Parliament Rolls Pleas Iournals faithfully transcribed and published in print to the eyes of the world as most of our Statutes are by authority of both Houses of Parliament a work as worthy their undertaking and as beneficial for the publike as any I can recommend unto their care it would not only preserve them from imbezelling and the hazards of fire and warr to which they are now subject but likewise eternally silence refute the Sectaries Levellers ignorant false Allegations against your Honors Parliamentary Jurisdiction and Judicatur resolve clear all or most doubts that can arise concerning the tower jurisdiction privileges of both or either Houses keep both of them within their due bounds the exceeding whereof is dangerous grievous to the people except in cases of absolute real present urgent not pretended necessity for the saving of a Kingdom whiles that necessity continues and no longer chalk oâ—â— the â—miâ—ent regular way of proceeding in all kinds of Parliamentary affairs whatsoever whether of warr or peace Trade or Government Privileges or Taxes and in all civil or criminal causes and all matters whatsoever concerning King or Subject Natives or Foreiners over-rule reconcile most of the present differences between the King and Parliament House and House Members and Members clear many doubts rectifie some gross mistakes in our printed Statutes Law-Books and ordinary Historians add much light lustre ornament to our English Annals the Common Statute Laws and make all Lawyers all Members of both Houses far more able than now they are to manage and carry on all businesses in Parliament when they shall upon every occasion almost have former presidents ready at hand to direct them there being now very few Members in either House Lords Lawyers or others well read or versed in antient Parliament Rollâ— Pleas Iournals or Histories relating to them the ignorance whereof is a great Remora to their proceedings yea oft times a cause of dangerous incroachments of new Iurisdictions over the Subjects persons estates not usual in former Parliaments of some great mistakes and deviations from the antient methodical Rules and Tracts of parliament now almost quite forgotten and laid aside by new unexperienced ignorant Parliament Members who think they may do what they please to the publike prejudice injury of posterity and subversion of our Fundamental Laws Rights Liberties in the highest degree by new erected arbitrary Committees exercising an absolute tyrannical power over the Persons Liberties Estates Freeholds both of Lords themselves and all English Freemen Your Lordships helping hand to the speedy furthering of such a necessary publike work and your industrious magnanimous unanimous imitation of the memorable heroick presidents of your Noble progenitors in gaining regaining enlarging confirming perpetuating to posterity the successive Grand Charters of our Liberties when
Peers made this memorable Petition and Remonstrance of their Privileges to the King The humble Remonstrance and Petition of the Peers MAy it please your Majestie we the Peers of this Realm now assembled in Parliament finding the Earl of Arundel absent from his place amongst us his presence was therefore called for But thereupon a message was delivered us from your Majestie by the Lord Keeper That the Earl of Arundel was restrained for a misdemeanor which was personal to your Majesty and lay in the proper knowledge of your Majesty and had no relation to matter of Parliament This Message occasioned us to inquire into the Acts of our Ancestors and what in like cases they had done that so we might not erre in a dutifull respect to your Majesty and yet preserve our right and privileges of Parliament And after diligent search made both of all Stories Statutes and Records that might inform us in this case we find iâ— to be an undoubted Right and constant Privilege of Parliament That no Lord of Parliament sitting in Parliament or within the usual time of Privilege of Parliament is to be imprisoned or restrained without sentence or order of the House unlesse it be â—or Treason or Felony or for refusing to give surety for the Peace And to satisfie our selves the better we have heard all that could be aleged by your Majesties learned Counsel at Law that might any way infringe or weaken this claim of the Peers and to all that can be shewed or alleged so full satisfaction hath been given as that all the Peers in Parliament upon the question made of this Privilege have una voce consented that this is the undoubted right of the Peers and hath been inviolably enjoyed by them Wherefore we your Majesties loyal Subjects and humble Servants the whole body of the Peers in Parliament assembled most humbly beseech your Majesty that the Earl of Arundel a Member of this Body may presently be admitted by your gracious favour to come sit and serve your Majesty and the Commonwealth in the great affairs of this Parliament And we shall pray c. Upon which Remonstrance and Petition the King refusing to inlarge him thereupon the Lords to maintain their Privilege adjourned themselves on the 25 and 26 of May without doing any thing and upon the Kings refusal to release him they adjourned from May 26 till June 2. refusing to sit and so the Parliament dissolved in discontent his imprisonment in this case being a breach of privilege contrary to Magna Charta In this very Parliament the Lord Digby Earl of Bristol being omitted out of the summons of Parliament upon complaint to the Lords House was by order admitted to set therein as his Birthright from which he might not be debarred for want of Summons which ought to have been sent unto him ex debito Iustitiae as Sir Edward Cook in his 4 Institutes p. 1. The Act for ttriennial Parliaments and King John great Charter resolve And not long after the beginning of this Parliament upon the Kings accusation and impeachment of the Lord Kimbolton and the five Members of the Commons House both Houses adjourned and sate not as Houses till they had received satisfaction and restitution of those Members as the Journals of both Houses manifest it being an high breach of their Privileges contrary to the Great Charter If then the Kings bare not summoning of some Pears to Parliament who ought to sit there by their right of Perage or impeaching or imprisoning any Peer unjustly to disable them to sit personally in Parl. be a breach of Privilege of the fundamental Laws of the Realm and Magna Charta it self confirmed in above 40 successive Parliaments then the Lords right to sit vote and judge in Parliament is as firm and indisputable as Magna Charta can make it and consented to confirmed by all the Commons people and Parliaments of England that ever consented to Magna Charta though they be not eligible every Parliament by the Freeholders people as Knights and Burgesses ought to be and to deny this birthright and privilege of theits is to deny Magna Charta it self and this present Parliaments Declarations proceedings in the case of the Lord Kimbolton a Member of the House of Peers Fifthly The Treatise intituled The manner of holding Parliaments in England in Edward the Confessors time befose the Conquest rehearsed afterwards before William the Conquerour by the discreet men of the Kingdom and by himself approved and used in his time and in the times of his successors Kings of England if the Title be true and the Treatise so antient as Sir Edward Cook others now take it to be When as its mention of the Bishop of Carlisles usual place in Parliaments which Bishoprick was not founded till the year of our Lord 1132. or 1134. as Matthew Paris Matthew Westminster Roger Hoveden Godwin and others attest in the later end of Henry the first his reign Its menâ—ion of the Mayors of London other Cities and writs usually directed to them to elect two Citizens to serve in Parliament whereas London it self had no Mayor before the year 1208. being the 9. year of King John nor other Cities Mayors til divers years after nor can any Writs for electing Knights of Shires Citizens or Burgesses to serve in Parliament which it oft times writes of be produced before 49 H. 3. nor any Writs to levy their expences or wages for their Service in Parliaments which it recites be produced before the reign of King Edward the 1. Nor was the name of Parliament which it mentions and writes of so much as used by any Author before the later end of King Henry the 3. his reign after whose reign this Modus was certainly compiled towards the end of K. Richard the 2. or after as other passages in it evidence beyond all contradiction This magnified Treatise be it genuine or spurious determines thus of the Kings and Lords rights to be personally present in all Parliaments The King is bound by all means possible to be present at the Parliament unless he be detained or let there from by bodily sickness and then he may keep his Chamber yet so that he lye not without the Manour or Town where the Parliament is held and then he ought to send for twelve persons of the greatest and best of them that are summoned to the Parliament that is two Bishops two EARLS two BARONS two Knights of the Shire two Burgesses and two Citizens to look upon his person to testifie and witness his estate and in their presence he ought to make a Commission and give Authority to the Archbishop of the Place the Steward of England and Chief Justice that they joyntly and severally should begin the Parliament and continue the same in his name express mention being made in that Commission of the cause of his absence thence which ought to suffice and admonish the OTHER NOBLES
Barons being no such Knights Citizens or Burgesses as the writ enjoyns them to elect and return 3. By all the Statutes for electing Knights Citizens and Burgesses recorded in Rastall Tit. Parliament the Lords being not within their words or intention 4. By the Great Charter of King John and express Statutes of 5 R. 2. Stat. 2. c. 4.31 H. 8. c. 10. Rot. Par. n. 10. which disable them to sit amongst the Commons but only in the Lords house among their Peers 5. By the very words of the Patents of their Creation which authorize and prescribe all Dukes Earls Viconts Barons in direct terms Quod in omnibus tenerentur tractentur et reputentur ut Duces Comites Barones quod haeredes sui masculi et eorum quilibet habeat teneat possideat sedem locum et vocem in Parliamentis publilicis Comitiis et Consiliis nostris Haeredum et Successorum nostrorum infra Regnum nostrum Angliae inter alios Duces Comites et Barones not amongst the Knights Citizens and Burgesses ut Duces Comites et Barones Parliamentorum Publicorum Comitiorum et Consiliorum not as Knights Citizens or Burgesses 6. By Sir Edward Cooks 4 Institutes p. 46 47. and Mr. Seldens Titles of Honour p. 736 737. who resolve That a Baron or Lord of Parliament is not eligible to be a Knight Citizen or Burgess of the House of Commons as was resolved in the case of Thomas Camoyes who was not only a Baronet but also a Baron and Lord of Parliament The Lord Camoyes being elected by the Freeholders of the County of Surrey for one of the Knights of the Shire to serve in Parliament for them Anno 7 R. 2. thereupon the King by advice of Council declared his election to be null and void in Law and commanded a new election of some other fit person to be made in his place by this memorable Writ extant on record Rex Vicecomiti Surriae salutem Quia ut accepimus tu Thomam Camoyes Chivaler qui Baronettus est sicut quamplures antecessorum suorum extiterunt ad essendum unum Militum venientium ad proximum Parliamentum nostrum pro Communitate Comitatus praedicti de assensu ejusdem Comitatus eligisti Nos advertentes quod hujusmodi Baronetti ante haec tempora in Milites Comitatus ratione alicujus Parliamenti elegi minime consueverunt ipsum de officio Militis ad dictum Parliamentum pro communitate Comitatus praedicti venturi exonerari volumus Et ideo tibi praecipimus quod quendam aâ—ium Misi em idoneum et discretum gladio cinctum in loco ipsius Thomae elegi et eum ad diem et locum Parliamenti praedicti venire facias cum plena et sufficienti potestate ad consentiendum hiis quae in Parliamento praedicto sicut juxta renorem prioris Brevis nostri tibi pro electione hujusmodi militum directi et nomen ejus Nobis Sciri facias Teste Rege apud Westmonasterium octavo die Octobris 7ly Both Houses of Parliament in their Remonstrance of Nov. 2. 1642. declare and publish in print to all the World This to be so clear and fundamental a privilege of Parliament That no Member of either House of Parliament is to be taken away or detained from the service of the House whereof he is a Member until such time as that House hath satisfaction concerning the cause and the cause be heard in Parliament first and dismissed from it That the whole freedom of Parlament dependeth upon it For who seeth not that by this means under false pretences of crimes and accusations such or so many Members of both or either Houses of Parliament may be taken out of it at any time by any persons to serve a turn and to make a MAJOR PART of whom they will at pleasure So as the freedom of Parliament dependeth in a great part on this privilege yea without it the whole Body of the Parliament will be destroyed by depriving it of its Members by degrees some at one time and others at another time as both Houses further remonstrate in their Declaration of October 23. 1642. Which as it infallibly demonstrates that the Lords House or Members cannot be taken away or taken from them against their wils without the destruction subversion of the whole Parliament of which they are chief Members the Judicial power of Parliaments residing principally in that House if not wholly So it likewise clearly resolves that no Peer or Member of the Lords House can be elected a Member of the Commons house For if the election of the Freeholders Citizens or Burgesses of any County City or Borough of a Duke Earl Lord or Baron of the Realm to be a Knight Citizen or Burgess in Parliament should be valid in Law to make them legal actual Members of the Commons house it would then lie in their powers to un-Peer un-Lord and degrade any Nobleman yea all the Earls Peers Lords Barons of the Realm and their Posterity at their pleasures to reduce them and the whole House of Peers into the Commons inferiour house and so quite dissolve the Lords House in high affront dishonor of the Lords and their House and of the Kings Soveraign royal Authority the fountain of all Honor and that without any legal trial or Judgment by their Peers or just cause of degradation on their parts against the express words and meaning of Magna Charta c. 29. And if any Lords upon such Elections should so far degenerate debase or degrade themselves as to accept thereof and ignobly sit and vote as Members of the Commons House both they and their posteritieâ— for such an ignoble act meritoriously deserved to be for ever degraded from their Nobility and secluded from all future sitting in the Lords House as Peers becoming thereby the very shame scorn scandal of Nobility fit only to be ranked with the basest Peasants to whom these Levellers would now equallize them Yea it would be now no less than wilfull perjury in any Freeholders Citizens Burgesses to elect them Knights or Burgesses and in themselves to accept of such Elections when chosen and in the whole House of Peers and Commons too once to permit allow approve or connive at such elections after their late Protestation Vow and Solemn League and Covenant to maintain to their power the Rights Privileges of Parliament and both Houses of Parliament whereof this is an unquestionable Right and Privilege That no Member of the Lords House should be elected a Knight Citizen Burgess or brought down from thence to sit only as a Commoner in the Commons House so long as he continues a Peer or Member of the Lords House a distinct House from and superior to the Commons House in all ages as its Title of the Lower House and their standing alwayes bare before the Lords with other evidences demonstrate nor any Knight Citizen or Burgess a true real Member of the House of Peers
praesenti supersit His horumque similibus regali facundia editis praefaâ—us Petrus assensum praebere utile judicavit annuit Quapropter larga regis munificentia magnifice honoratus nullo modo se quicquam antiquae dignitatis derogaturum immo ut dignitatis ipsius gloria undecunque augmentaretur spoâ—pondit plena fide elaboraturum Pax itaque firma inter eos firmata est qui Legati officio fungi in tota Britannia venerat immunis ab omni officio tali cum ingenti pompa via qua venerat extra Angliam a Rege missus est At Canterbury he perused the antient privileges granted to the Prelates by the See of Rome touching their superiority over York Quibus ille perspectis atque perpensis testatus etiam ipse est Ecclesiam Cantuariensem grave nimis immoderatum praejudicium esse perpessam quatenus hoc velocius corrigeretur â—e modis omnibus opem adhibiturum pollicitus est Post haec Angliam egreditur By all these Parliamentary Councils and Proceedings in them and the Kings answer to this Legate it is most apparent from the testimony of Eadmorus present at most of them and then antient Hiâ—orians 1. That they all consisted during all the reign of King Henry the 1. of the King Bishops Abbots Earls Lords and Barons without any Knights Citizens Burgesses or Commons elected by the people 2ly That not only the legislative but judicial power or judicature of Parliament in all civil ecclesiastical and criminal causes debated or judged in them resided wholly in the King Prelates Earls Barons and Nobles which they joyntly and severally exercised by mutual consent as there was occasion 3ly That our Kings Prelates Nobles were then all very vigilant and zealous in opposing the Popes usurpations upon the antient Liberties Privileges Customs of the king kingdom and Church of England 4ly That those Antiquaries and others are much mistaken who affirm the Commons were called to the Parliament of 16 H. 1. as well as the Peers and Nobles and that since that time the authority of this Court hath stood setled and the COMMONALTY had their voice therein which the said H. 1. GRANTED TO THEM in love to the English Nation being a natural Englishman himself when as the Normans were upon terms of revolt from him to his Brother Robert Duke of Normandie it being clear by these Histories and all the Parliamentary Councils under King Henry the 1. and under Hen. the 2. King Ric. the 1. King John and Henry the 3. forecited and here ensuing that there were no Knights Citizens Burgesses or Commons elected by the people summoned to our Parliaments in their reigns succeeding Henry the 1. therefore not in his 5ly That the Opinion of Mr. Cambden Judge Dodridge Jo. Holland Sir Ro. Cotton Mr. Selden and others is true that the first Writ of Summons of any Knights Citizens Burgesses or Commons to Parliament now extant is no antienter than 49 H. 3. dors 10.11 That King Henry the 3. after the ending of the Barons wars appointed and ordained That all those Earls and Barons of the Realm to whom the King himself should vouchsafe to send his Writ of Summons should come to his Parliament and none else but such as should be chosen by the voice of the Burgesses and Freemen by other Writs of the king directed to them And that this being begun about the end of Hen. the 3. was perfected and continued by Edward the 1. and his Successors Which Holinshed Speed do likewise intimate in general terms So that upon due consideration of all Histories Records and judicious Antiquaries it is most apparent that the Commons had no place nor votes by election in our Parliaments in Hen. 1. his reign noâ— before the latter end of King H. 3. and Ed. 1. who perfected what his Father newly before him began in summoning them to Parliaments This being an irrefragable truth as I conceive the next thing to be considered of is this whether the Commons when thus called and admitted by H. 3. and E. 1. into our Parliaments had any share right or interest in the judicature of Parliaments then granted to them either as severed from or joyntly with the King and Lords And if any share or right at all therein at what time and in what cases was it granted or indulged to them With submission to better judgements I am clear of opinion that the King and Lords when they first called the Knights Citizens and Burgesses to Parliament never admitted them to any share or copartnership with them in the antient ordinary Judicial power of Parl. in civil or criminal causes brought before them by Writ Impeachment Petition or Articles of complaint as they were the supreme judicature and Court of Justice but reserved the judicial power and right of giving and pronouncing all Judgements in Parliament in such cases and ways of proceeding wholly to themselves admitting them only to share with them in their consultative Legislative and Tax imposing power as the Common Council of the Realm thereby in cases of Attainder by Act Bill or Ordinance a part of the Legislative not ordinary judicial authority of Parliament allowed them a voice and partnership with themselves and a share in reversing such Aâ—tainders by Act Bill or Ordinance by another Bill or Sentence but in no cases else except such alone wherein the King or Lords should voluntarily at their own pleasures not of meer right requite their concurrence with them The Arguments reasons inducing me to this opinion and irrefragably evincing it are these 1. The Form of the Writs for electing Knights Citizens Burgesses of Parliament with the retorns and Indentures annexed to them which are only ad faciendum consentiendum his quae tunc ibidem de Communi Concilio dicti regni contigerint ordinari Which gives them no judicial power in civil or criminal causes there adjudged as the Writs to the Lords doe give to them by these clauses Ibidem cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus regni colloquium habere tractatum vobiscum c. colloquium habere tractare Personaliter intersitis Nobiscum ac cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus super dictis negotiis tractaturi vestrumque consilium impensuri and usage custom time out of mind 2. Because when first summoned to our Parliaments they were never called nor admitted thereunto as Members of the Lords house or as persons equal to them in power nor admitted to sit in the same Chamber as Peers with them but as Members of an inferiour degree sitting in a distinct Chamber from them by themselves at first as they have done ever since which I have elsewhere proved against Sir Edward Cooks and others mistakes as Modus tenendi Parliamentum it self resolves if it be of any credit 3ly Because after their call to our Parliaments in 49 H. 3. they had scarce the Name nor Form of an House of Commons or Lower
custodia de Westmerland for their disloyalty towards him et omnia supradicta disposuit venditioni c. Tricesima prima die mensis Maii Rex Angliae celebravit secundum diem Concilii â—ui in quo ipse petiit sibi fieri judicium de Comite Iohanne fratre suo quod contra fidelitatem quam ei juraveraâ— Castella sua occupaverat et tertas suas transmarinas et cismarinas destâ—uxeraâ— et foedus cum inimico suo Rege Franciae contra eum inierat Similiter de Hugone de Nunant Coventrensi Episcopo SIBI FIERI JUDICIUM postulavit qui secreti sui conscium eum reliquerat et Regi Franciae et Comiti Johanni inimicis suis adhaeserat omne malum in perniciem regni sui machinans ET JUDICATUM EST quod Comes Johannes et Episcopus Coventrensis citarentur si intra quadraginta dies non venerint nec juri steterint JUDICAVERUNT COMITEM JOHANNEM DEMERUISSE REGNUM Episcopum Coventrensem subjacere judicio Episcoporum in eo quod ipse Episcopus eraâ— et JVDICIO LAICORVM in eo quod ipse Vicecomes Regis extiterat Secunda die mensis Aprilis Sabbato celebravit diem quarâ—um ultimum Concilii sui in quo omnes tam Cleriâ—i quam Laici qui volebant sibi conqueri de Archiepisc Eboracensi fecerunt queremonias multas de rapinis et injustis exactionibus sed Archiepiscopus Eboracensis nullum eis dedit responsum Deinde per consilium et machinaâ—ionem Cancellarii ut dicitur Girardus de Camvilla fuit retatus de receptatione praedonum qui rapuerunt bona Mercatorâ—m euntium ad nundinas de Stanford et ab eo recesserunt ad rapinam illam faciendam et de rapina illa redierunt ad eum Praeterea appellaverunt eum DE LAESIONE REGIAE MAJESTATIS in eo quod ipse ad vocationem Juâ—titiarium Regis venire noluit nec juri stare de praedicta receptatione rapâ—orum neque eoâ— ad justitiam regis producere Sed respondit Se esse hominem Comitis Johannis et velle in curia sua juristare Praeâ—erea appellaverunt eum quod ipse fuit â—n viet adjutorio cum Comite Johanne et aliis inimicis Regis ad Castella Regis de Notingham et de Tikehill capienda Girardus vero de Camvilla negavit omnia quae objiciebantur ei ab illis et illi dederunt vadium de prosequendo et Girardus dedit vadium defendendo se per unum de liberis hominibus suis A clear evidence of the form of proceedings in our Parliamentary Councils in that age against Traytors and other Offenders there impeached accused in criminal causes and of the Lords antient undisputable right to give judgment therein both in case of Peers as Earl John the Bishop of Chichester and Archbishop of York then were and in case of Commoners Girard de Camvil as I take it being then no Peer or Baron of this Realm but only a Servant to Earl John though afterwards in King Johns reign I finde him numbred amongst the Barons who were Witnesses to the homage and Oath of Allegiance made by William King of Scots to King John Earl John soon afâ—er coming to his Brother King Richard caâ—â— himself down at his feet and with many tears confessing his folly ill counsel and practices against him craved his pardon whereupon he received him into his favour and presently restored his lands which he had seised into his hands as forfeited by the Parliaments sentence denounced against him for his treason The Pope in the year 1208. having interdicted the whole Realm of England King John thereupon fearing that he would likewise excommunicate him and absolve his Nobles from their Allegiance to him to preserve his royalties sent a Company of armed Soldiers to all the Potent Nobles of the Realm and especially to those he suspected exacting Hostages from them that so if they should afterwards be absolved from their allegiance he might reduce them to due obedience Many submitted to the Kings commands and delivered some their Sons others their Nephews others their Kinsmen for hostages to the Messengers Who at last coming to William de Brause a Noble man and requiring pledges from him as they had done from others found a repulse For Matilda his wife out of a womanish procacity taking the word out of her husbands mouth answered the Messengers I will not deliver my children into the hands of your Lord King John because he most dishonourably slew his Nephew Arthur whom he ought to have honourably kept and preserved Which her Husband hearing rebuked her saying That she had spoken like one of the foolish women against our Lord the King for if I have offended him in any thing I am and will be ready to answer my Lord and that without hostages SECUNDUM JUDICIVM CVRIAE SUAE ET BARONUM PARIUM MEORUM assignato die loco The Barons in that age being to be judged and tried only by their Peers and that in the Kings Court of Parliament for any offences against the King not by the Commons or any inferiour persons In the year of Christ 1233. King Henry the 3. removing most of his English great Officers and Councellors from his Court and placing Poicâ—o â—es and Aliens in their room by whole Counsel he was wholly swâ—yed misguided especially by Peter de Rivallis qui homines Angliae naturales Nobiles totis viribus opprimebant proditores eos vocabant quos etiam de proditions apud Regem â—ccusabant â—neâ—aurorum â—eâ—iam suorum Rexeis custodias cum â—egibus patâ—ii judiciiâ— commisit Quid plura Judicia commitâ—ntur injustis leges exlegibus justicia injâ—riosis Et eum NOBILES de regno in regno de oppressionibus sibi irrogatis coram Rege causam deponerent Petro Episcopo impedience non fuit qui eis justitiam exhiberet c. Cumque his consimâ—â—ibus injuriis RICHARDUS COMES regni MARESCHALLUS viderâ—t tam NOBILES quam igâ—bbiles opâ—rimere iâ—ra regni penitus deponere zelo justitiae provocatus associatis sibi quibusdam Magnatibus ad Regem audacter accessit increpans eum audientibus multis quod per pravum Consilium advocarat extraneos Piâ—taviense no pressionem râ—gni hominum suorum de regno naturaliâ—m LEGUM PARITER AC LIBERTATUM Unde Regem humiliter â—ogabat uâ— tales excessus corrigere festinarer per quos Coronae suae regni sui subversio imminebaâ— Affirmabat insuper quod si hoc emendarc distugerer IPSE ET CAETERI DE REGNO MAGNATES tamdiu se ab ipsius consilio subtraherent quamdiu alienigenarum consortio frueretur Ad haec autem respondens Petrus Wintoniensis Episcopus dixit quod bene licuit Domino Regi extraneos quoscunque vellet vocare ad defensionem Regni sui Coronae etiam tot tales qui possent homines suos superbos rebelles ad debitum compellere famulatum
Clergy being thus put out of the Kings Protection and thereby disabled to sue or sit in Parliament were secluded the Parliament house the King holding the Parliament with the Temporal Lords and Commons alone and making valid good Acts and Ordinances therein in this case without the Clergy as Bishop Jewel M. Crompton Dr. Bilson and others affirm which Dr. Standish averred he might lawfully doe before the Kings Council and a Committee of Lords and Commons in the Parliament of 7 H. 8. Keilwayes Reports f. 184. b. Sir Edward Cooke being of the selfâ—ame opinion in his 4 Institutes p. 25. citing other Presidents of this kind to prove that Acts may be made without the Bishops as 15 E. 2. Exilium Hugonis le Dispenser 3 Rich. 2. c. 3.7 Rich. 2. c. 12.11 R. 2. n. 9 10 11. 21 R. 2. n. 9 10. 1 H. 5. c. 7.6 H. 6. n. 27. Peter de Gaverston a deâ— oiâ— lascivious person for his misdemeanours and corrupting Prince Edward with whom he was educated from his infancy in the year 1306 in a Parliament then held by King Edw. the 1. assensu Communi Procerum fuerat exilio penpetuo condemnâ—tus This King was no sooner deaâ— and the Crown descending to King Edward the 2. but he presently recalled Gaverston from his exile against the will of the Lords made him Earl of Cornwall and gave him the Isle of Man An. 1307. the very first year of his reign He being more high in the Kings favoâ—r more glorious in his apparel and insolent in his behaviour than any other thereupon Anno 1309. Regni Proceres et Nobiliores videnâ—es se contemni Petrum de Gaveâ—on cunctis anteferri accessâ—runt ad Regem humiliter rogantes ut Baronum suorum vellet consiliis tractare Regni negotia quibus a pericuâ— sibi imminentibus non solum cautior sed tâ—tior esse possit Quorum votis facie tenus Rex annuitâ— Parliamentum Londini instituâ—t fiori ad quod omnes qui interesse debebant mark it venire mandavit The Parliament there assembling Anno 1310. Decreto Parliamenti ad Baronum instantiam Petrus deâ— Gaverâ—on in Hyberniam Exilio relegatur No sooner was the Parliament ended but the King caused special writs to be written and sealed in his own presence for recalling Gaverston from his exile and restoring him to his Lands which writs he took into his own hands for a time and then sent them to the Sheriffs with special command to see them duly executed under grievous penalties In these Writs he recites that Mounsieur Piers de Gaverston Earl of Cornwal was of late exiled out of ouâ— Realm against the Laws and Vsages of the said Realm which he was bound to keep and maintain by the Oath he took at his Coronation For which cause he did out of that common right and justice which was due to all his Subjects recall and restore him without the Lords against their wills as the writs in the Clause Rolls inform us Thomas of Walsingham thus relates the manner of it and ill consequence thereof to Gaverstons ruine in these words Soluto Parliamento cunctis gaudenter ad sua disced nâ—ibus rex remansit tristis cogitans disquirens cum privato suo concilio qualiter posset ipsum ab exilio revocare Suggestumque fuit 〈◊〉 qâ—od si sororeiâ— Comitis Gloverniae qui pro â—unc 〈◊〉 jâ—venis â—oâ—i 〈◊〉 sub tuâ— Regis praeâ—aâ—o Pet◠〈…〉 coâ—ugeâ— posset ipsum intrepide revocare 〈◊〉 hiâ—s audicis cum omni festinatione missis nuneilâ—â—â—cersivit eâ—m inter ipsum sororem Comicis fecit celebrati nuptiae licet multum Gomiâ—i displicerent Eâ—iâ—de Petrus superbiens plus solito regni nobiles vilipendit subsannabat Proceres mediocresque despexir Et quia Rex permiserat sibi facultaâ—em pene facienâ—i quâ—e vellet quantum ad ea quae respiciebant personam regiam caepit sicut prius thesaurum regis colligere negotiatoribus ultra mariniâ— accommo lare non ad usus quidem regios sed suos proprios Qui in tantum expilavit regem ut non haberet unde solveret expensas solitas domus suae Regina vero tantum rebus necessariis arctabâ—tur ut regi Franciae patri suo lachrymabiliter quereretur honore debito se privatam Barones igitur considerantes quod eorum tollerantia Petro malignandi praestabat auâ—atiam domino regi denunciaverunt assensu communi ut vel dictum Petrum a sua propelleret comitiva articulosque provisos effectui manciparet vel ipsâ— certe in eum tanquam perjurum insurgerent Durus videbatur hic sermo regi quia Petro carere nescivit sed plus periculi cernebat emergere si petitionibus Proceâ—um non obâ—emperaret Petrus igitur abjurat regnum regis plus â—ermissione quam beneplacito addita a Baronibus conditions quod si de caetero posset in veniri in Anglia vel aliqua terra regi subiecta caperetur et velut hostis publicâ—s damnaretur Igitur sub praemura conditione daâ—o sibi conductu Angliae regnum Iâ—gons desernit Franciam est ingressus Quo adito Rex Francorum jussit suis ut eum caperent si quo modo possent diligenteâ— cusâ—odirent nâ— direâ— in Angliam Proceres sicut prius turbaret filtâ—m Petrus de â—is praemonitus fugit in Flandâ—iam ibi quaeâ—iturus requiem nec invenit Tandem cum suis consortibus aâ—ienigenis redivit in Angliam de amicitra confisus Comitis Gloverniae cujus sororem duxerat in uxorem Parum ante festum natalis domini regis se presentavit obâ—utibus qui prae gaudio sui adventus juramenta pacta promissa negligens tanquam coeleste munus hilariter suscepit eum secum detinuit cum familia sua tota Anno 1311. post natale rumore vulgato de Petri reversione regni Magnates plebei conturbati sunt Qui necessitate ducti elegerunt sibi Thomam de Lancastria in ducem et defensorem ut periculis consulerent malis futuris Nobiliores vero regni de communis deâ—reti sententia miserunt honorabiles domino regi nuncios exorantes ut vel dictum Petrum eis traderet vel ut ordinatum fuerat ipsum regnum evacuare juberet Rex vero sinistro ductus consilio Baronum supplicationes parvipendens ab Eboraco recessit ad Novum Castrum Magnates proinde sub omni celeritate ad Novum Castrum iter arripuere Quod cum Rex audisset quasi proscriptus aut exul fugit cum dicto Petro Tynemutham et inde Scardeburgiam ubi habebatur castrum regale ubi praecepit Castellanis ut custodiam Petri susciperent castellum victualibus instaurarent rege se alias transferente nec opem ferre valente quin caperetur reduceretur usque ad villam de Dadington Ubi Comes Warwici Guido de bello campo fecit eum decollari tanquam legum regni subversorem publicum proditorem
Communi Iudicio Which he more amply relates in his History of England p. 69. to 77. Here we have judgement of banishment given against Gaverston by the Lords in Parliament 3. several times the 1. whiles a Commoner the two later whiles an Earl as an Enemy to the Realm and publike Traytor and a Sentence of death denounced against him in case he returned which was accordingly executed on him by the common Sentence of the Lords A Convincing proof of their Jurisdiction in criminal Causes both over Commoners and Peers His second banishment by the Lords was ratified by a Bill as the Spencers was to which the Commons gave their Assent as they did to two Acts in the Parliament of 7 Edward the 2. printed in Totles Magna Charta part 2. f. 43 44. Ne quis occasionetur pro reditu as also pro morte Petri de Gaverston made by the Grant and Assent of the King Archbishops Bushops Abbots Priors Earls and Barons ET TOUTE LA COMMVNALTIE de nostre Royalm By which Bill his Lands were all forfeited and giveâ— to the King as appears by Claus 1.2 E. 2. m. 5. where Hugh de Audeley the younger and Margaret his wife petitioned A nostre Seigneur la Roy son Counscil PRELATES COUNTS BARONS de la terre The Petition was for the Earldom of Cornwall after the death of Peter de Gaverston to whom it was given in general tayl Margaret being his daughter and heir because THE GREAT CHARTER wills that after the death of a Baron his heir shall have his heritage and mariage and the Statute of Westminster 2. wills That heirs in tayl shall not be prejudiced by the deed fine or feofment of their Ancestors and the GREAT CHARTER also wills That no man shall be outed of his freehold without the award and judgement of the Law of the Land Afterwards upon debate of this Petition pro eo quod recordatum fuit by the LORDS AND COMMONS that it had been AGREED BY THEM that all things given by the King to Gaverston and Margaret should be revoked per quod in hoc Parliamento modo per praefatos Praelatos Comiteâ— Barones et totain Communitatem Regni cousideratum est that the Earldom and all the rest of his Landâ— should remain in the King that all Charters of it should be repealed all enrolments cancelled quod est adjudicatum intretur ad Scaccarium et ad utrumque Câ—riâ—m there to be inrolled also And there is a writ directd to the Treasurer and Barons and Chief Justices of both Benches to inrol it in this Roll. This judgement being by way of Bill in pursuance of the former Bill for his attainder had the Commons assent thereto as well as the Lords though the Petiâ—ion here was directed only to the King and Lords for restitution not to the Commons who could not be Gaverstons proper Judges in Parliament being a Peer but only by way of Bill of Attainder In the 15 year of King Ed. 2. the two Sir Hugh Spencers Father and Son were articled against impeached and condemned of High Treason by the Lords in Parliament and exiled by their judgement without the Prelates or Commons who only consented to the Act for their banishment after the judgement given of which at large before to which I shall here annexe the Arricles of their impeachment being very memorable Alhonnour de Dieu de sainct esglise et de nostre seignour le roy et au profite de luy et de son royalmâ— a peace de quiete maintenir en son people et pur meinteynment de lestate de la Corone luy monstrent Praelates Counâ—z et Barons et les autres Pieres de la terre common du royalme contresir Hugh le Despenser le fitz et Sir Hugh le Despenser le Pier que come le dit sire Hugh le Despenser le fitz au Parlement Deverwike fuit nosme et assentu destre en lossice du Chamberlain nostre seignor le roy de servir en cel office come afferoit An quel parlement fuit auxi assentu que certeins Prelates et â—u res Grandes du roialme demorerent pres de roy par sâ—isons de lan pur meulx counseiler nostre seignor le roy sans queux nul grosse bosoigne ne se deveroit fair le dit sir Hugh le fitz attreit a luy syr Hugh son pier que ne fuit nient assentu ne accorde en parlement a demourer ensi pres de roy enter eux deux acroachant a eux royal power sur le roy fes ministers le guyment de son royalme a dishor our du roy emblemisement de sa corone et destruction du royalme des grandes et du people et sesoient les maluesiees desâ—us escriptes en compassant deâ—â—oigner le coer nostre seignour le roy des Piers de la terre pur avoir eux soule governance de la terre En primes que sir Hugh le Dispenser le fitz feusi coruce vers le roy et sur ceo coruce fist un bille sur la quel bille il voillet auoir en aliance de sir John Gyffarde de Brymmesfeld sir Richard de Greye et dautre davoir mesne le roy par aspertee de faire sa volunte issent que en luy ne temist mye que il ne â—e euâ—t fair â—a tenure de la bille sensuit sous escript Homage serement de ligeance est pluis par reson de la corone que per reason de person le roy pluis se lie a la corone que a la person ceo piere que avant que â—estate de la corone soit descendu nul ligeance est a la person regardant Dont si le roy par case ne se meisne par reasone en droit de la corone les leiges sont lies per sâ—rement fait a la corone de remeuer le roy et le state de la corone par reason auâ—rement ne serroit le serement tenus Ore fait a demander coment lem doit amesner le roy ou par suite de ley ou par aspertee par suite de ley ne luy poet home pas redresser â—ar il navera pas juge si ceo ne soit depart le roy En quel case si la volunte le roy ne soit accordant a reason si naveroit il forsque errour maintenue confirme Dont il covient pur le serement lauuer et quant le roy ne voet chose redresser oustre que est pur le common people malueis et damageous pur la corone a judger est que la chose soit ousle par aspertee que il est lie par â—on serement de governer son people ses lieges ses liege â—ont lies de govern en eide de luy en defaut de luy Et auxint par lour covin
Lords only sit upon the Bench and that covered and in their Parliamentary Robes the badges of Judicature but the Commons stand and that bare at the Bar without any robes at all the Lords only swear examine the witnesses and judge of their testimony the Commons only produce the witnesses presse and manage the evidence and when the buâ—nesse is fully heard the Lords only debate the cause among themselves and give the final Sentence Judgement without the Commons though sometimes in their presence and that both in cases of Commoners and Peers Therefore the Lords and House of Peers are sole Judges in Parliament not the Commons 9ly The Commons themselves in all ages since admitted into our Parliaments have always presented their Petitions in Parliament to the King and Lords alone for redress of all Grievances wrongs misdemeanours abuses whatsoever publike or private criminal or civil ecclesiastical marine or military And the Lords House alone have in all antient Parlaments appointed particular persons of their House to receive al Petitions Triers of them to hear and answer them by their advice and the kings assent when necessary which Triers of Petitions had power given to call the Lord Chancellor Treasurer Chamberlain Judges kings Servants and others to this assistance prescribing where when their Petitions should be presented examined redressed at all our Parliament Rolls aâ—est and Sir Edward Cook himself relates There being few or no Petitions at all presented by any to the Commons before â—â— H. 7. c. 19. 4 H. 7. c. 6. These Petitions then presented to them and all ever since with all in this present Parliament being only to this end that they upon the examination of the truth matters complaints grievances mentioned in them might transmit and represent them in the name of the Commons House to the Lords House for to give full redress relief and judgement on them to the Petitioners not for the Commons themselves to judge finally determine them or give relief upon them without the Lords as all the transmissions of private and publike Petitions by the Commons to the Lords heretofore and in this Parliment in the cases of Dr. Layton Dr. Bastwick Mr. Burton Mr. Walker my self and of Lilburns own Petition against his censure attest Therefore the Judicature of our Parliaments must wholy rest and intirely reside in the Lords House as well in all Criminal as civil cases both of Commoners and Lords 10ly The surest badge and highest evidence of the right and exercise of Juridical and Judicial Authority in Parliament is the examination affirmation control repeal nulling adjudging and finall determining all Errors in Judgements Decrees Proceedings all Misprisions Abuses Corruptions grievances whatsoever of Judges Justices in all other Courts of Justice Civil Ecclesiastical Marine or military Now the Lords-alone in Parliament upon Wtits of Error Appeals Complaints Petitions c examine confirm repeal null redresse and finally determine all Errors misprisions in Judgements Decrees Proceedings and all Abuses Corruptions Grievances whatsoever in all other Courts of Justice whether Civil as the Kings Bench Chancery Exchequer Chamber Common Pleas Exchequer Court of Wards Courts of Requests Stanneries c. or Ecclesiastical as the High Commission Archbishops Consistories the Convocation and the Admiralty Court Marshal Council Table Star-chamber and in former Parliaments as is evident by sundry presidents in former ages and in this present Parliament of King CHARLS in the cases of Dr. Layton Dr. Bastwick Mr. Burton Lilburn himself Mr. Grafton Alderman Chambers Mr. Rolls Sir Rob Howard Alderman Langham and Limry Mr. Johns and le Gay with sundry others But more especially in cases of Writs of Error brought in Parliament by Peers or Commoners upon any Erronious judgements touching their real or personal estates lives limbs liberties persons upon Indictments or Attainders In all which writs the King and Lords only are sole judges without the Commoners and the returns of the proceedings upon such Writs are only before the Lords in the Vpper House secundum legem et consuetudinem Parliaments So Sir Edward Cook himself expresly resolves in direct terms in his 4 Institutes p. 21 22 23. And 22 E. 3.3 Fitz Error 8 Br. 3.1 H. 7.20 21 22. Br. Error 137. Old Book of Entries p. 302.16 E. 3. Fitz. Brev. 651.21 E. 3.46 Br. Error 65.29 E. 3.24.39 Ass 18.42 Ass 22.7 H. 6.28 8 H. 5. Fitz. Error 88.19 H. 6.12.35 H. 6.19.37 H. 6.16.11 H. 4.65.9 E. 4.3.2 R. 3.22.37 H. 8.14 15 25. Dyer f. 62.196 201 315 375. intimate as much This is most clear by the Writs of Error Judgements and Proceedings on them in the Parliament House before and by the Lords alone mentioned in the Parliament Rolls themselves as 14 E. 1. roâ— Parl. 1.4 E. 3. n. 13 14.21 E. 3. n. 65 66.28 E. 3. n. 8. to 14.50 E. 3. n. 38.1 R. 2. n. 28 29 105.2 R. 2. n. 31 32 33 37 38. Parl. 2. and Parl. 1. n. 21. to 27.3 R. 2. n. 19.20 21 22.6 R. 2. n. 17.7 R. 2. n. 20 21.8 R. 2. n. 13 14 15 16.13 R. 2. n. 16 17 15 R. 2. n. 22 23 24.16 R. 2. n. 17 18.17 R. 2. n. 17.19 â—8 R. 2. n. 11 12 13.20 R. 2. n. â—6 21 R. 2. n. 25 55. to 66 71.1 H. 4. n. 91 92.2 H. 4. n. 38 39 40.4 H. 4. n. 26.5 H. 4. n. 40.6 H. 4. n. 31.1 H. 5. n. 19.2 H. 5. n. 13 14.3 H. 5. n. 19. with sundry Writs of Error in succeeding Parliaments and this now sitting adjudged determined by the King and Lords alone without the privity or interposition of the Commons A truth so clear that Lilburn himself in his Argument against the Lords jurisdiction confesseth iâ— If then the Lords House be the soâ—e Judges in all Writs of Error and Appeals from all other Courts of Justice concerning the Lands Tenements Goods Estates Liberties Members Lines Attainders of all English Freeholders and Commoners whatsoever notwithstanding the Statute of Magna Charta ch 29. No Freeman shall be â—aken or imprisoned c. neither will we pass upon him nor condemn him but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers c. the grand and principal objection against the Lords Judicature in Cases of Commoners then by the self same reason they are their lawfull Judges and may regally proceed against them in all other criminal or Civil causes especially in cases of breach of their own Privileges wherein they are the sole and only Judges since no other Court can judge of nor yet punish them as Sir Ed. Cook resolves being properly triable only in Paâ—liament as contempt against all other Courts are punishable and triable by themselves alone the present cases of Lilburne and Overton Now that they are and alwayes have been so de facto unless by way of Bill of Attainder or in such extraordinary cases when their concurrence hath been desired even in criminal cases misdemeanors and offences of Commons as well as Peers I
shall prove by most clear and infallible evidences and presidents as well antient as modern Our Noble King Alfred as he ordained for the good estate of the Realm that the Earls and Noble thereof by a perpetual custom should twice every year or oftner in times of Peace assemble together in Parliament at London to govern the people of England and keep them from sinne as Andr. Horn informs us in his Mirrour of Justices c. 1. p. 10. So the same Author records c. 5. p. 296 297 c. That this royal Justiciary who took a short account each year of all his Judges proceedings in his Parliaments condemned and hanged up in one year about An. 890 as I conjecture no lesse than 44 of his Judges and Justices as Murderers for executing his Subjects and putting them to death against Law without any legal cause or sufficient evidence or tryal by a Jury of their Peers and imprisoned fined punished others of them in the self same kind as they had injuriously imprisoned fined and punished his Subjects against Law and that no doubt by the advise and assent of his Nobles in Parliament upon complaint of their injustice and corruption the proper Court for punishment of such Offenders whose names and causes recorded at large by this Author shew them to be all Commoners and no Peers of the Realm Anno 1096. William de Anco and William de Alderi were hanged for Treason against William Rufus by judgment of the Lords in a Parliament at Salisbury King Henry the 2. Anno 1166. holding a Council at Oxfâ—quidam pravi dogmatis seminatores tracti sunt IN JUDICIUM praesente Rege et Episcopis Regni quos à fide Catholica devios et in examine superatos facies cauteriata notabiles cunctis exposuit qui expulsi sunt à regno These Hereticks thus branded in the face and banished the Realm by the judgement of the King and this Council ae Nubrigensis informs us were above 30. men and women who came out of Germany into England under one Gerard their Captain stiled Publicans who went about the Country to spread their errors but at last being detected they were apprehended and cast into prison and then brought before the King and a Council of his Bishops where being convicted of Heresie they were adjudged by the K. to be publikely whipped branded in the face and then banished the Realm Hujus severitatis pius rigor non peste illa quae jam irrepserat Angliae regnum purgavit verum etiam ne ulterius irreperet incusso haereticis terrore praecavit as Nubrigensis observes In the year 1224. the 8. of King Henry the 3. his reign the King requiring a restitution and resumption of his Castles and Lords detained from him by some Nobles and others who at last for fear of the Bishops excommunication against such as detained them and disturbed the peace of the Realm and also of the Kings power and justice much against their wills reddiderunt singuli Castella et municipia et honores et custodias Regi quae ad coronam spectare videbantur Thereupon Falcatius de Breut a Norman born a Soldier under King John in the Barons wars trusting on the Kings and other great mens favors fortified the Castle of Bedford situated on another mans ground and presuming on his friends and his own military power and wealth gained in the wars he feared not violently and unjustly to take away the Freeholds lands and possessions of divers of his neighbours and more epecially he disseised 52. Freemen in the Manor of Luiton of their Freeholds and Tenements without judgement and appropriated their Common pastures to himself Whereof complaint bing afterwards made to King Henry the 3. Anno 1224. the King assigned Martin de Pateshulle Thomas de Multon Henry de Braibroc and certain other Justices to take the recognition of the parties complaining of these disseisins by an Assise of Novel disseisin and to do them Justice Who having received their recognitions according to custom the said Falcatius was condemned to pay them costs and damages for the spoils done in the said Tenements to which the Plaintifs were judicially restored Which Falcatius taking very impatiently being likewise amerced one hundred pounds to the King for every of the said Tenements for his forcible entry into them he in a great fury commanded his Garison souldiers in the Castle of Bedford to march armed to Dunstaple where the Justices Itinerant sate and gave judgement against him and to take and bind them in chains and carry them to Bedford Castle and there detain them close prisoners in the Dungeon The Justices having notice thereof fled thence with all speed some one way some another but Henry de Braibroc flying was at unwares taken by the Souldiers who used him very inhumanly then carryed him prisoner to Bedford Castle and there kept him prisoner King Henry at that time was at Northampton where he held a Parliamentary Council Cum Archiepiscopis Episcopis Comitibus Baronibus et aliis multis de regni negotiis tractaturi voluit erim Rex uti consilio MAGNATUM SUORUM de terris transmarinis quas Rex Francorum paulatim occupaverat but it hapned otherwise than he hoped For the rumor of this act of Falcatius being divulged the wife of the said Henry Braibroc came to the King at Northampton et audiente univerâ—o Concilio de viro suo cum lachrymis querulans deposuit Quod Rex factum minus indigne ferens quaesi vit Consilium a Clero simul et Populo to wit the Spiritual and Temporal Lords Clerus Regni Populus when single being frequently used for the Lords Spiritual and Temporal both in Matthew Paris Hoveden Bromton and others not for the inferiour Clergy and Commons house not then in being as some Antiquaries mistake quid sibi super tanta injuria foret agendum At omnes una voce concilium Regi dederunt quatenus sine mora et omnibus aliis praetermissis negotiis in manâ— valida et armata ad Castrum praedictum procedens tantam temeritatem studeat vindicare Cumque Domino Regi placuisset SENTENTIA ipso jubente omnes ad arma quam citius convolantes ad castellum praedictum de Bedeford tam Clorus quam Populus pervenerunt The whole Parliament marching in person to execute this their Sentence upon these transcendent military Malefactors Hereupon the King sending Messengers to the Commanders of the Castle required entrance to be given to him and commanded Henry Braibroc his Justice to be rendered But William de Brent Brother of Falcatius and the rest within it answered the Messengers that they would not render the Castle nor Justice unless they had a command from their Lord Falcatius and especially for this reason quod Regi de Homagio vel fidelitate non tenebantur astricti With which answer the King being much incensed commanded the Castle to be presently encompassed with military
the King wherein he accused Sir William Cogan knight for extorting 300 l. by menaces from the Prior of St. Iohns Sir William appearing upon Summons prayed Counsel which was denied for that it concerned Treason whereupon he pleaded Not Guilty After which the same Parliament n. 46. to 61. The Mayor Baylifs and Commonalty of Cambridge were accused before the King and Lords that in the late insurrection they confederating with other Malefactors did break open the Treasury of the University of Cambridge burn sundry Charters of the University and compel the Chancellor and Scholars under their common Seal to release to the said Mayor and Burgesses all manner of Liberties real and personal actions and also to become bound to them in great sums of money Whereupon special writs were directed to the Mayor Baylifs and Commonalty to appear in Parliament to answer the premises The Mayor and Baylifs appear in person and plead that they 〈◊〉 not privy to any such act but if any thing was done it was by compulsion by others which the Kings learned Counsel disproved whereupon they pleaded Not Guilty The Commonalty appeared by Attorney and delivered in the Release and Bond of the University complained of under their Seal which were ordered to be cancelled After which the Chancellor and Scholars of the University exhibited Articles against the Mayor and Baylifs shewing their whole carriage and discourse in this tumult Upon reading whereof it was demanded of them in the Kings behalf What they could say why their Liberties lately confirmed should not be seised into the Kings hands as forfeited They thereupon required a Copy of the Articles Councel and respite to answer To the Copy of the Bill it was answered by the Lords that seeing they had heard it read it should suffice for by Law they ought to have no Copy For Councel it was said That to such articles if any were wherein Councel was to be had they should have it otherwise not Wherfore they were then appointed to answer to no crime or offence but only to their Liberties To which they answered by their Council That this Court ought not to have any Conusance or Jurisdiction of them for certain causes then alleged But at last they were ordered to say what they could otherwise they would give Iudgement against them as those who had nothing to say Whereupon they pleaded they did nothing but by Duress and constraint of the Rebels At last after many dilatory shifts touching their Liberties they wholly submitted themselves to the Kings mercy and grace saving their answer to other matters The KING therefore by the assent of the Prelates and Lords in Parliament â—o is the Rolâ— seised their Liberties into his hands as forfeited and by assent of the Lords and Prelates in Parliament granted to the Chancellor and Scholars the Assise and correction of bread weights measures and forestallers and fines thereof within the Town and Subâ—rbs of Cambridge which the Townsmen had before The King Lords and Prelates being Judges and giving the Judgement in this case of Commoners as the record a â—ge attests Walsingham relates that in a Parliament holden at London this year about the feast of St. John upon the Petition of the knights of Shires John Straw Captain of those in the insurrection at Bury and Myldenhale tractationi et suspentioni ADJUDICATUR to wit by the King and Lords licet multi putassent eum fuisse pecunia redimendum In the 7. year of R. 2. Rege vocante congregati sunt multi de Nobilibus Regni apud Rading to restrain the seditious motions of John de Northampton late Mayor of London qui ingenia facinora nisus est de quibus et convictus est ibidem his familiar Clerk accusing him both of divers practises and designes projected by him as well to the prejudice of the King as of the whole City of London and objecting them against him When Judgement was to be given against him in the Kings presence he pleaded that such a Judgement ought not to be given against him in the absence of the Duke his Lord whereby he raised a sinister suspition as well in the people AS NOBLES against the Duke of Lancaster The Justice who was to pronounce the Judgement told him He ought to refute his charge by Duel or by the Laws of the Realm to submit himself to drawing hanging and quartering At which when he stood mute and said nothing DECRETVM EST ut perpetuo carceri tradiretur et eâ—us bona regis usibus confisâ—arentur ut Londonias non appropinquaret per centum miliaria in vita sua whereupon he was sent prisoner to Tyntagel Castle in Cornwall and his goods seised on by the Kings Officers In the Parliament of 7 R. 2. holden at Westminster the Monday next before the feast of All Saints num 17. Bryers Cressingham and Iohn Spicâ—worth Esquires were accused before the LORDS for surrendring the Castle of Drinkham in Flanders to the kings enemies for money without consent of the kings Lieutenant Spickworth proved that the same was not in his custody and thereupon he was discharged Cressingham pleaded that he yeelded the same upon necessity without money and submitted himself to the Lords order who thought this no good cause and therefore committed him to prison The same Parliament n. 24 25. Sir William de Elinsham Sir Thomas Trivet Sir Henry de Ferriers and Sir William Farnden knights and Robert Fitz-Ralph Esquire were accused before the Lords in Parliament for selling the Castle of Burburgh with all the arms ammunition and provisions therein to the French the kings enemies for sundry summs of gold received by them of the French without authority from the king or his Lieutenant who pleaded they surrendred it for salvation of themselves and their people c. After all their excuses made they were upon consideration adjudged insufficient by the Lords and the Chancellor by their order pronounced this Judgement against them That they should repay all the monies they received from the Enemy to the King be committed to prison ransomed at the Kings will and moreover that Sir Will. de Farnden being the greatest Offender should be at the Kings mercy both for body and goods to do with them as he pleaseth In this Parliament there was a Duel fought between John Walsh an English Esquire and one of Navarr who accoused him of Treason against the King and Realm effectually but yet falsly out of envy Walsh having layen with his wife whiles he was under Captain of Cherburgh as he afterwards confessed This Dueâ— was fought within the lists in the presence of the King and Nobles of the Realm where this Navarrois being vanquished by Walsh REGALI JVDICIO tractus et suspensus est quanquam Regina et plures alii pro eo preces sedulas porrexissent In the 2. of Parliament of 7 R. 2. n. 13.10 19. John Cavendish a Fishmonger of London praying Surety of the peace
against Sir Michael de la Pool Knight Lord Chancellor of England first before the Commons and afterward before the Lords which was granted Then he accused him BEFORE THE LORDS for bribery and injustice and that he entered into a bond of 10 l. to Iohn Ottard a Clerk to the said Chancellor which he was to give for his good success in the business in part of payment whereof he brought Herring and Sturgeon to Ottard and yet was delayed and could have no justice at the Chancellors hands Upon hearing the cause and examining witnesses upon Oath before THE LORDS the Chancellor was cleared The Chancellor thereupon required reparation for so great a slander the Lords being then troubled with other weighty matters let the Fishmonger to Bail and referred the matter to be ordered by the Judges who upon hearing the whole matter condemned Cavendish in three thousand marks for his slanderous complaint against the said Chancellor and adjudged him to prison till he had paid the same to the Chancellor and made fine and ransom to the King also which the Lords confirmed In the Parliament of 8 R. 2. n. 12. Walter Sybell of London was arrested and brought into the Parliament before the Lords at the sute of Robert de Veer Earl of Oxford for slandering him to the Duke of Lancaster and other Nobles for maintenance Walter denied not but that he said that certain there named recovered against him the said Walter and that by maintenance of the said Earl as he thought The Earl there present protested himself to be innocent and put himself upon the trial Walter thereupon was committed to Prison by the Lords and the next day he submitted himself and desired the Lords to be a mean for him saying he could not accuse him whereupon THE LORDS CONVICTED and FINED HIM FIVE HUNDRED MARKS TO THE SAID EARL for the which and for his fine and ransom to the King he was committed to prison BY THE LORDS A direct case in point By these two last Presidents of the Lords â—ining and imprisoning Cavendish and Syber two Commoners in Parliament for their standers and false accusacions only of two particular Peers and Members of their house it is most apparent the Lords now may most justly not only imprison but likewise fine both Lilburn and Overion for their most scandalous Libels against all the Members just Privileges Judicatory and Authority of the whole House of Peers which they have contemned vilisied oppugned and libelled against in the highest degree and most scurrillously abused reviled in sundry seditious Pamphlets to incite both the Army and whole Commonalty against them In the Parliament of 11 R. 2. the Duke of Glocester and other Lords came to London with great forces to secure themselves and remove the kings ill Counsellors and bring them to judgement whereupon the King for fear securing himself in the Tower of London and refusing to come to them at Westminster contrary to his faithfull promise the day before they sent him this threatning Message nisi venire maturaret juxta condictum quod eligerent alium sibi Regem qui vellet et deberet obtemperare consiliis Dominorum Wherewith being terrified he came unto them the next day Cui dixerunt PROCERES pro honore suo regni commodo oporterâ—â— ut Proditores susurrones adulatores et male fici detractores juratores à suo Palatio et Comitive etiam eliminarentur Whereupon they banished sundry Lords Bishops Clergy-men Knights and Ladies from the Court and imprisoned many other Knights Esquires and Lawyers to answer their offences in Parliament The first man proceeded against in Parliament was the Chief Justice Tresylian whom the Lords presently adjudged to be drawn and hanged The like Iuegement the Lords gave against Sir Nicholas Brambre Knight Sir Iohn Salisbury Sir Iames Burwâ—yes Iohn Beauchamp Iohn Blakes who were all drawn and hanged accordingly as Trayâ—ers one after another and Simon Burly beheaded after them by like judgement notwithstanding the Kings and Earl of Derbies intercessions for him to the Lords After their Execution Robert Belknapâ— John Holâ— Roger Fulthorp and William Burgh Justices were banished by the Lords sentence and their lands and chattels confiscated out of which they allowed them only a small annual pension to sustain their lives After which these Judgments against them were confirmed by Acts of Attainder as you may read in the Statutes at large of 11 R. 2. where their Crimes and Treasons are specified in Cokes 3 Institutes c. 2. p. 22 23. and in Knyghton Holinshed Fabian Speed Trussel with other Historians In the Parliament of 13 R. 2. n. 12. Upon complaint of the Bishop Dean and Chapter of Lincoln against the Mayor and Bayliffs thereof for injustice in keeping them from their rights and rents by reason of the franchises granted them which they abused Writs were sent to the Mayor and Baylifs to appear at a certain day before the Lords and to have full authority from the whole Comonalty to abide their determination therein At which day the Mayor and Bayliffs appearing in proper person for that they brought not full power with them from the said Commonalty they were anâ— goâ— by the Lords to be in contempt and so were the Mayor and Bayliffs of Cambridge for the self same cause this very Parliment n. 14. In the Parliament of 15 R. 2. n. 16. The Prior of Holland in Lancashire complained of a great riot done by Henry Treble John Greenboâ— and sundry others for entring into the Parsonage of Whitwâ—rke in Leicestershire thereupon John de Ellingham Serjeant at Armes by vertue of a Commission to him directed brought the said Treble and Greenbow the principle malefactors into the Parliament before the Lords who upon 〈◊〉 confessed the whole matter and were therefore committed to the Fleaâ— there to remain at the Kings pleasure after which they made a fine in the Chancery agreed with the Prior and found sureties for the Good behaviour whereupon they were dismissed The same Parliament n. 19. Sir Will. Bryan was by the King with the assent of the Lords committed prisoner to the lower during the Kings will and pleasure for purchasing a Bull from Rome to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to excommunicate all such who had broken up his house and taken away divers Letters Privileges and Charters which Bull was adjudged prejudicial to the King his Councâ—l and in derogation of the Law Num. 20. Thomas Harding was committed to the Fleet by the King and Lords assent there to continue during the Kings pleasure for falsly accusing Sir John and Sir Ralph Sutton as well by mouth as writing of a conspiracy whereof upon hearing they were acquitted And n. 21. John Shadwell of Baghsteed in Sussex was likewise committed to the Fleet by THE LORDS there to remain during the Kings pleasure for misinforming of the Parliament that the Archbishop of Canterbury had excommunicated him and his neighbours wrongfully in his
Sautre being condemned of Heresie in the Convocation by Archbishop Arundel and the Clergy thereupon by order and advice of the Temporal Lords without the Prelates who must not have their hands in blood though they gave the Sentence that he should be burned or the Commons there issued out a Writ to the Sherifs of London for the burning of Sautre as an Heretick accordingly burnt thereon being the first writ of this Nature issued by the Lords alone in the Kings name before the Statute of Heresie was made and passed in this Parliament In the same Parliament of 2 H. 4. n. 30. The Temporal Lords by assent of the King adjudged and declared Sir Ralph Lumly Knight and others Traytors for levying war in sundry parts to destroy the K. his people and that they should forfeit all their lands in fee goods and chattels though they were slain in the field not arraigned nor indicted by reason thereof In the Parliament of 4 H. 4. n. 19 20 21. Sir Philip Courtney being complained against and convicted of a forcible entry into Lands and for a forcible imprisonment of the Abbot of Mâ—nthaem in Devonshire and two of his Monks was upon hearing and examination adjudged by the King and Lords to be bound to his good behaviour and for his contempt committed to the Tower of London prisoner Anno 1403. Henry Percy the younger confederating with Thomas Percy Earl of Worcester to raise forces â—nd rebel against the King sent Letters to the people of every County propositum quod assumpserant non esse contra suam ligeantiam et fidelit tem quam regi fecerant nec ab aliunde exercitum congregasse nisi pro salvatione personarum suarum reipublicae meliori guvernatione Quia census et Tallagia Regi concessa pro salva regni custodia covertebantur ut dixerunt in usus indebitos et inutiliter consumebantur praeterea querebantur quod propter aemulorum dilationes pessimas rex eis insensus fuerat ut non auderent personaliter venire ad ejus praesentiaem donec Praelati regnique Barones regi supplicassent pro eisdem ut coram Rege permitterentur declarare suam innocentiam per Pares suos legaliter justificari Plures igitur visis his literis collaudabant tantum virorum solertiam extollebant fidem quam erga Rempublicam praetendebant Having raised great forces against the King by this means which the kings forces encountred at Shrewsbury in a pitched battel Henry Percy and sundry of his adherents were there slain in the field and the rest routed For which levying of war in the Parliament of of 5 H. 4. n. 15. the said Henry Percy and his Coâ—federaâ—es were declared and adjudged Traytors by the King and Lords in full Parliament and their Lands goods and chaâ—tels confiscated In the same Parliament n. 18. At the Petition of the Commons The Lords â—enâ—ed and ordered that the Kings Confessor the Abbot of Dore Mr Richard Durham and Crosby of the Chamber should be removed out of the Kings house and Court whereupon 3. of them appearing before the King and Lords in Parliament the King though he excused them yet charged them to depart from his house for that they were hated of the people In the Parliament of 13 H. 4. n. 12 13. The Lord Roos complained against Robert Thirwit one of the Justices of the Kings Bench for withholding from him and his Tenants Common of Pasture and Turbâ—ry in Warbie in Lincolnshire and lying in wait with 500 men for the Lord Roos Thirwit before the King and Lords confessed his fault and submitted himself to their Order who appointed 3. Lords to end the difference who made an award between them that Thirwit shouâ—d confess his fault to the Lord Roos crave his pardon and tender him amends In the Parliament of 5 H. 5. n. 11. Sir John Oldcastle knight being outlawed of Treason in the Kings bench and excommunicated before the Archbishop of Canterbury for Heresie was brought before THE LORDS and having heard his conviction made no answer nor excuse thereto Upon which Record and Process THE LORDS ADJUDGED that he should be taken as a Traytor to the King and Realm carried to the Tower of London from thence drawn through the City to the new Gallows in St. Gyles without Temple-barr and there hanged and burned hanging which was accordingly executed Sir Iohn Mortymer knight being committed to the Tower upon supposition of Treason done against King Henry the 5. in the 1. year of H. 6. brake out of the Tower for which breach he was indicted of Treason being afterwards apprehended he was brought into the Parliament of 2 H. 6. n. 18. and upon the same Indictment then confirmed by assent of Parliament JUDGEMENT was given against him BY THE LORDS that he should be carried to the Tower drawn through London to Tiburn there to be hanged drawn and quartered his head to be set on London-bridge and his four quarters on the four Gates of London In the Parliament of 38 H. 6. n. 20 2â— 22. Sir William Oldham knight and Thomas Vaughan Esquire were attainted of Treason by the LORDS and in the Parliaments of 1 E. 4. n. 19. to 31. 4 E. 4. n. 28. to 38. â—4 E. 4. n. 34. to 40. sundry Knights Esquires Citizens and Commoners are attainted of Treason by the Lords for levying warr and holding forts against the King then after by Bill whose names are overtedious to reherse which you may peruse at leisure in the Exact Abridgement of the Records in the Tower To omit all other presidents of this Nature in the reigns of King H. 7.8 Ed. 6. Qu. Mary and Qu. Elizabeth of Commoners censured in and by the Lords house in Criminal causes upon impeachments complaints petitions which those who please may find recorded in the Journals of the Lords house I shall recite only some few Presidents more of late and present times In the Parliaments of 18. 21 Iacobi Sir Giles Mompesson and Sir Iohn Michel upon complaints and impeachments by the Commons for promoting Monopoliâ—s Corruption and other Misdemeanors were fined imprisoned by Judgement of the Lords House and Sir Giles degraded of his knighthood In the Parliament of 3. Carolâ— the Commons impeached Roger Manwaring Dr. of Divinity for preaching and printing Seditious and dangerous Sermons and sent up this Declaration against him to the Lords June 14. 1628. For the more effectual prevention of the apparent ruine and destruction of this kingdom which must necessarily ensue if the good and fundamental Laws and customs therein established should be brought into contempt and violated and that form of government thereby altered by which it hath been so long maintained in peace and happiness And to the honour of our Soveraign Lord the King and for the preservation of his Crown and Dignity the Commons in this present Parliament assembled do by this their Bill shew and
by their Speaker acknowledge the right of judicature in the case of a Commoner to be only and wholly in the Lords even in a criminal cause and thereupon pray the Lords to give judgement against him upon their Impeachment which they did accordingly in their robes as Judges by the mouth of the Lord Keeper their Speaker In this very Parliament now sitting Decemb. 21. Jan. 14. Febr. 11. 1640. and July 6. 1641. The Commons House by their Members impeached Sir John Bramston Chief Justice of the Kings Bench Sir John Finch Chief Justice of the Common Pleas Sir Humphry Davenport Chief Baron Judge Berkly Judge Crawly Baron Weston and Baron Trever of high Treason and other misdemeanors for that they had trayterously and wickedly endeavoured to subvert the fundamental Laws and established Government of the Realm of England and instead thereof to introduce an arbitrary and tyrannical Government against Law which they had declared by trayterous words opinions and judgement in the point of SHIP MONY by their subscriptions and judgement given against them in the case of Mr. Hamden in the Exchequer Chamber Which Impeachments they transmitted to the Lords House praying THE LORDS to put them to answer the premises and upon their examinations and trial to give such judgement upon every of them as is agreeable to Law and Justice To avoid which judgement Sir John Finch fled the Realm and the rest of them made fines and compositions to the publike and were most of them removed from their Judges places After this the Lords themselves as Judges in Parliament passed several judgements and censures against Dr. John Pocklington for his Sunday no Sabbath and other Books and against Dr. Bray for licensing them In October 1643. The Lords fined and imprisoned Clement Walker Esq in the Tower for some scandalous words against the Lord Viscount Say a Member of he House of Peers After that the Lords alone without any Impeachment of the Commons on their privity imprisoned fined and censured one Morrice upon complaint of Sir Adam Littleton after a full hearing at which I was present for forging an Act of Parliament with four or five more of his confederates therein which was most clearly proved by Witnesses upon Oath whereby he would have defrauded Sir Adam of some Lands in Essex And at least one hundred more Commoners have been committed by THE LORDS this Parliament and fined by them for several offences Misdemeanors and Breaches of their Privileges as well as Lilburn and Overton yet none of them ever excepted against or demurred to their Jurisdiction nor did the Commons House ever yet except against them for these their proceedings as injurious or illegal but approved and applauded this their Justice Finally John Lilburn himself in his printed Pamphlet intituled Innocency and Truth justified p. 74 75. relates that on May 4. 1641. himself was accused of High Treason and brought before the Lords Barr for his life where one Littleton swore point-blank against him But he having Liberty given to speak for himself without any demurring to their Jurisdiction because we was a Commoner desired that his Witnesses might be heard to clear him was upon Mr. Andrews Oath acquitted at the Barr of the whole house And thereupon concludes I am resolved to speak well of those who have done me JUSTICE From all these punctual successive presidents impeachments and clear confessions of the Commons House themselves in many former and late Parliam and in this now sitting it is undeniable That the King and Lords joyntly and the Lords severally without the King have an indubitable right of Iudicature without the Commons vested in them not only over Peers themselves but likewise Commoners in all extraordinary criminal cases of Treason Felony Trespass and other Misdemeanors triable only in Parliament which hath been constantly acknowledged practised submitted to in all ages without dispute much more then have they such a just judicial rightfull power in cases of breach of their own privileges of which none are or can be Judges but themselves alone as Sir Edw. Cook resolves they being the supremest Court. And to deny them such a power is to make the Highest Court of Judicature in the Realm inferiour to the Kings Bench and all other Courts of Justice who have power to judge and try the persons causes of Commoners yea to commit and fine them for contempts and breaches of their Privileges as our Law books resolve and every mans experience can testifie The Lords right of Iudicature both over Peers and Commoners in criminal causes being thus fully evicted against the falseâ— ignorant pretences of illiterate Sectaries altogether unacquainted with our Histories and Records of Parliament which they never yet read nor understood there remains nothing but to answer some Authorities Presidents and Objections produced against it These presidents in Sir Edward Cooke Sir Robert Cotton and others are of 3 Sores 1. Such as are produced by them only to prove that the Commons have a Copartnership and joynt Authority with the King and Lords in the power and right of Judicature in our Parliaments 2ly Such as are objected to evidence they have a sole power of Judicature in themselves in some cases without the K. and Lords 3ly Such as are urged to prove they have no right of Judicature in Parliament in the cases of Commoners that are capital or criminal I shall propose and answer them all in order 1. Sir Edward Cook and Sir Robert Cotton produce these presidents to prove That the Commons have a Joint inâ—erest right and share with the King and Lords in the Iudicatory or Judicial power of Parliaments which I shall propound according to their Antiquity The 1. President alleged for it is that of Adomar Bishop of Winchester elect cited by Sir Robert Cotton in his Post-humous Discourse concerning the Power of the Peers Commons in Parliament in point of Iudicature who An. 44 H. 3. as affirms he was then exiled by the Ioint Sentence of the King Lords and COMMONS as appears by the Letter sent to Pope Alexander the 4th Si Dominus Rex et Regni Majores hoc vellent meaning Adomars revocation COMMUNITAS tamen ipsius ingressum jam nullatenus sustineret The Peers subsign this answer with their names and Peter de Moâ—tfort vice totius COMMUNITATIS as Speaker or Proctor of the Commons I answer under the favour of this renowned learned Antiquary that this president is full of gross mistakes For 1. Bishop Adomar was not banished the Realm at all either by King Lords or Commons but fled out of it voluntarily for fear to avoid the Barons who purâ—iâ—ed him with forces as Mat. Paris with others relate which the Nobles and Generality of the Barons in direct terms inform this Pope in another Letter sent together with this objected Maxime cum ipse a regno expuisus non extiterit sed sponte cesserit non ausus exhibitionem justiâ—iae quae
upon him nor condemn him but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers or by the Law of the Land Whence thus they argue The Lords in Parliament are not Commoners Peers but the Commons only therefore they cannot be judged in Parliament by the Lords but by the Commons alone and if Peers there judge Commoners it is a tyranny and usurpation even against Magna Charta it self though it be in case of privilege To take away this grand seeming Objection and give it a satisfactory answer I say First in general that there is scarce one Parliament ever since Magna Charta was first confirmed but the Lords have sentenced and given Judgement against some Commoners capitally or penally in body purse or both without the Commons and did so doubtlesse before Magna Charta was made as I have already manifested yet never did the Commons in any one of those Parliaments till this present complain of it as a violation of Magna Charta or a tyrannical usurpation as Lilburn and Overton stile it but acknowledged ir as a just right in the Lords even in 3 Caroli it self when the Petition of Right was passed in the Lords Judgement and Sentence against Dr Manwaring a Commoner impeached by the Commons in Parliament And therfore for this Ignoramus alone against the judgment of the Commons in Parl. in all ages to averr this a breach of Magna Charta for imprisoning and sining him for the highest affront and breach of privilege ever offered to any Parl. is the extremity of ignorance malice singularity Secondly I answer That the Statute of Magna Charta extendeth not to nor was ever intended of the high Court of Parliaments Judgements Proceedings but only to and of the Proceedings Judgements in the Kings great Courts of Justice at Westminster Hall the Exchequer his Privy Council and other inferior Courts held before Judges Justices of Assise and other Officers as is evident by comparing this objected Chapter with c. 11 12 13 14 18 28 30 34 37. by the Statutes of 25 E. 3. Stat. 5. c. 4. 28 E. 3. c. 3. 37 E. 3. c. 18. 38 E. 3. c. 9. 42 E. 3. c. 2. 17 R. 2. c. 6. and the Petition of Right it self 3. Caroli which so expound it there being never any complaint against the Parliament it self or House of Peers in any age for breach of Magna Charta in censuring or imprisoning Commoners till now Therefore this misapplying of this Law to the Parl. and House of Peers is a gross oversight Thirdly the very literal sence of this Law is much mistaken by the Objectors The main scope whereof is this That no man should be deprived of his Freehold Liberties Limbs life or outlawed exiled or otherwise destroyed without legal process in due form of Law in Courts of Justice not by meer force violence injustice arbitrary and tyrannical power or martial Law nor being brought to his legal trial or answer And that none should pass upon them in any trials for freehold or life but only English Freemen Now in respect of Freedom any every Freeman of England is a Peer to another Freeman quatenus such a one within this Law though of an higher degree in point of honour dignity office estate as Knights Esquires Gentlemen Yeomen Citizens Merchants these as Freemen are all Peers one to another and may pass upon each other in Juries both in civil and criminal causes and this clause No Freemâ—n shall be imprisoned c. but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers extends only to villains and those who are not Freeholders from being Iudges of Freemen and Freeholders in trials by Jury whence the Writs to the Sherifs to summon Jurors require them alwayes to return Liberos Legales homines not to exclude Lords or Peers who are Freemen in the highest degree to be Judges of Commoners who are Freemen So as the Argument from the true meaning of this Law can be but this in respect of the persons quality who are to give judgement Villains and those who are no Freemen are not to be Judges of or impannelled in Juries to condemn Freemen because they are not their Peers nor Freemen as well as they Therefore Lords who are Freemen of the highest degree may not give judgement against Commoners who are Freemen Very learned nonsence We all know that the Lord Chancellor of England Lord Keeper Lord Treasurer Master of the Court of Wards and some of the Judges of the Kings Courts in Westminster Hall in former times with the Chief Justiciar and Justices in Eyre were antiently and of late too as the Earl of Holland and others Peers of the Realm not Commoners and that all the Peers of the Realm are in Commissions of Oyer and Terminer and of the Peace yet did we never hear of any Commoner demurring or pleading thus to any of their Jurisdictions in Chancery Kings Bench the Exchequer Chamber Eyres Assises or Sessions Sir I am a Commoner and you are a Peer of the Realm but no Commoner as I am besides you sit here only in the Kings right doing all in his name and representing his person who is not my Peer but Sovereign Therefore you ought not to judge my cause condemn my person nor give any sentence for or against me it being contrary to Magna Charta which enacts That no freeman should be judged or passed upon or condemned but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers Certainly no person was ever yet so mad or sottish to make such a Plea before Ignoramus Lilburn And if Lords Peers may judge the persons causes of Commoners in the Chancery Kings Bench Exchequer Court of Wards Eyres and at Assises Sessions without any violation of this clause in Magna Charta though they are exempted to be impannelled or serve in Juries in cases of Commoners as Commoners in Juries to try them much more may the House of Peers in Parliament doe it who are certainly Peers to Commoners as Freemen though Commoners be not Peers to them as Lords within the meaning of Magna Charta chap. 29. Fourthly If the Lords in Parliament cannot meddle with or give judgement in Commoners causes without breach of this clause in Magna Charta then why did Lilburn himself sue and petition to the Lords as the only competent Judges to reverse his sentence in Star Chamber and give him damages because it was against this very Chapter of Magna Charta If Lords cannot give judgement in the case of Commoners as now he holds without express violation of this Law then himself in petitioning the Lords to relieve him against the Star-Chamber sentence because contrary to this very Law and Chapter of Magna Charta was a great a violator of it as his Star-Chamber censurers and his sentence in Star-chamber remains still unreversed because the Lords examining reversing of it they being no Commoners as he is but Peers was Coram non judice and meerly void by the Statute of 25 E.
3. Stat. 5. c. 4. because contrary to Magna Charta it self as he now expounds it Let him therefore unriddle assoyl this his own Dilemma or for ever hold his tongue and pen from publishing such absurdities to seduce poor people as he hath done to exasperate them to clamour against the Lords for being more favourable in their censure of him than his transcendent Libels and contempts against them deserved Fifthly This Statute is in the disjunctive by the Lawfull Judgement of his Peers OR BY THE LAW OF THE LAND which this Ignoramus observes not Now by the Law of the Land every inferiour Court of Justice may fine and imprison men for contempts or misdemeanors against them and their authority therefore the Lords in Parliament being the highest Tribunal may much more do it and have ever done it even by this express clause of Magna Charta and the Law and Custom of Parliament as well as they may give judgements in writs of Error against or for Commons without the Commons consent as himself doth grant yea and by the Kings concurrent assent declare what is Treason and what not within the Statute of 25 E. 3. c. 20. in the cases of Commoners as well as Lords without the Commons as they did in the forecited cases of William de Weston and Lord of Gomines 1 R. 2. n. 38 39 40. Of William Thorp 25 E. 3. n. 10. Of Thomas Haxey 20 R. 2. n. 15 16.23 Of Sir Thomas Talbot 13 R. 2. n. 20 21. Of Sir Robert Plesington and Henry Bowhert 22 R. 2. Plac. Coronae in Parliamento n. 27 28. Of John Hall 1 H. 4. Plac. Coronae in Parl. n. 11. to 17. Of Sir Ralph Lumley and others 4 H. 4. n. 15. 19 20 21. Of Sir John Oldcastle 5 H. 5. n. 11. and of Sir John Mortymer 2 H. 6. n. 18. as the Commons and Judges in all those Parliaments agreed without contradiction against the erronious opinion of Sir Edward Cooke to the contrary in his 3. Institutes p. 22. Sixthly It is granted by Lilburn that by this express Law No Freeman of England ought to be judged or censured but only by his Peers and that Commoners are no Peers to Nobles nor Noblemen Peers to Commoners Then by what Law or reason dared he to publish to the world That the House of Commons are the Supreme Power within this Realm and THAT BY RIGHT THEY ARE THE LORDS JUDGES certainly this is a Note beyond Ela a direct contradiction to Magna Charta in this very clause wherein he placeth his strength and subverts his very ground-work against the Lords Jurisdiction in their censure of him For if the House of Commons be by right the Lords Iudges then by Magna Charta c. 29. they are and ought to be their Peers and if the Commons be the Lords Peers then the Lords must be the Commons Peers too and if so then they may lawfully be his Judges even by Magna Charta because here he grants them to be no other than his Peers Lo the head of this great Goliah of the Philistin Levellers cut off with his own sword and Magna Charta for ever vindicated from his ignorant and sottish contradictory Glosses on it Now to convict him of his Errour in affirming the House of Commons to be by right the Lords Judges I might inform him as I have formerly proved at large that Magna Charta it self c. 14. 29. and Sir Edward Cook his chief Author in his commentary on them are express against him that in the Parliament of 15 E. 3. ch 2. in print it was enacted That whereas before this time the Peers of the Land have been arrested and imprisoned and their Temporalties Lands and Tenements Goods and Chattels seised into the Kings hands and some put to death without Iudgement of their Péers that no Peer of the Land Officer or other by reason of his office nor of things touching his office nor by other cause shall be brought in judgement to lose his Temporalties Lands Tenements Goods Chattels nor to be arrested or imprisoned outlawed exiled nor forejudged nor put to answer nor to be judged but by award of the said Péers in Parliament which privilege of theirs was both enjoyed and claimed in Parliament 4 E. 3. n. 14 15 E. 3. n. 6 8 44 49 51. 17 E. 3. n. 22. 18 E. 3. n. 7. to 16. 10 R. 2. n. 7 8. 11 R. 2. n. 7 c. and sundry other Parliament Rolls See Cook 4. Instit p. 15. 17 E. 3. 19. Cromptons Jurisdiction of Courts f. 4. 12 13. Stamford f. 151 152. This Paradox therefore of his is against all Statutes Law-Books Presidents whatsoever and Magna Charta it self And as false an assertion as that the Subjects are the Judges of their Soveraign the Servants of their Masters the children of their Parents the Wiâ—es of their Husbands the Soldiers of their General and the feet and lower members of the Head The second only Objection more of moment is this If the House of Peers may without the Commons fine and imprison Commoners then if their fine and imprisonment be unjust and illegal they shall be remediless there being no superior Court to appeal unto which will be an intollerable slavery and grievance not to be indured among free-born people I answer first That no injustice shall or ought to be presumed in the highest Court of Justice till it be apparently manifested Secondly If any such censure be given the party as in Chancery upon just grounds shewed may Petition the House of Peers for a review and new hearing of the cause which they in justice neither will nor can deny and if they do then the party grieved may petition the house of Commons to intercede in his behalf to the Peers for a rehearing but for them to discharge free any Commoner judicially censured by the Lords I have hitherto met with no president in former Parliaments nor power in the house of Commons to doe it who cannot reverse Erronious judgements in any inferiour Courts by writ of Error but the Lords alone much less then the judgements of the Higher House of Peers which is paramount them Thirdly I conceive the House of Peers being the Superior Authority and only Judicatory in Parliament may relieve or release any Commoners unjustly imprisoned or censured by the Commons house or any of their Committees and ought in justice to doe it or else there will be the same mischief or a greater in admitting the house of Commons to be Judges of Commoners if there be no appeal from them to the Lords in case their sentences be illegal or unjust Thirdly This mischief is but rare and you may object the same against a sentence given or Law made in Parliament by the King and both Houses because there is no appeal from it but only to the next or some other Parliament that shall be summoned by petition in the nature of a Writ of
Dantzick or Hamborough in France Spain Denmark or Germany within the Ward of Cheape London a suggestion never made before his time in or by any Law-Book or Record only to rob the Admiralty of its antient unquestionable right and Jurisdiction 3ly That the words of the Statute of 13 R. 2. c. 5. whereon Sir Edward Cook and other Judges ground their Prohibitions to the Admiralty That the Admirals and their deputies shall not meddle from henceforth with any thing done within the Realm of England but only of things done upon the Sea c. are clearly strained and construed by them directly against the words meaning and intent of the Law-makers and Commons Petition whereon it was made For the later clause but ONLY of things done upon the Sea is put in opposition and contradistinction to the precedent words with any thing done within the Realm of England or within the bodies of the Counties as well by land as by water as the Stat. of 15 R. 2. c. 3. 5 Eâ—l c. 5.27 Eliz. c. 11.25 E. 3. c. 2. directly interpret and explain the sense thereof And they strain and apply them to contracts made by Merchants and Mariners not within the Realm of England or bodies of the Counties thereof by land or water but beyond the seas and quite out of the Realm being no part of the Realm or within the body of any County of England or Kings Dominions Than which a greater Solecism and contradiction cannot be imagined against the scope and letter of these Statutes For by this construction they may likewise strain the very Oath of Supremacy That no foreign Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction power c. Ecclesiastical or Spiritual WITHIN THIS REALM With the Statute of 13 Eliz. ch 2. for the abolishing of the usurped Iurisdiction of the Bishop and See of Rome WITHIN THIS REALM and against raising sâ—dition bringing in Bulls Agnus Dei Crosses Pictures c. WITHIN THIS REALM and other the Dominions thereof to the punishment of all such as shall avetr that any forein Prince Person Prelate State Potentate or the Pope have or ought to have any Jurisdiction power or Authority OUT OF THIS REALM or the Dominions thereof or shall raise any sedition or vent Popes Bulls c. in any forein Kingdom or Country as France Spain Italy Poland Germany out of the Realm as if they had done it within this Realm of England 4ly That by the opinion resolution agreement of the Judges of the Kings Bench 1575. and of all the Judges of England whereof Hutton and Crook were 2. 4 Febr. 1632. Hiâ— 8. Caroli the original whereof I produced subscribed with all their hands If sute he commenced in the Court of Admiralty upon Contracts made and other things personal done beyond the Seas or upon the Sea no Prohibition is to be awarded contrary to Sir Edward Cooks opinion This being the Iudgment of all our Judges in former ages wherein no record or president could be produced of any such Prohibition from Richard the 1. till the later end of Queen Elizabeths or King James his reign The Lords upon my Argument were so fully satisfied in this point of Law that they all unanimously and immediately adjudged and ordered notwithstanding Iustice Bacons and Reeves opinions upon the late presidents to the contrary that the Rule for the Prohibition in the Kings Bench should be vacated and that the Delegates should proceed to Sentence in the cause which they did And so my Client got both Judgement and Execution soon after against these Sureties I might here very fitly inform our Levellers and their Confederates That the Lords in Parliament as they did antiently so since the Commons admission unto this Great Council have made not only some Acts for the Government of London without the Commons as in 17 R. 2. n. 25 26 27. Granted Ayds for themselves to the King and likewise for the Merchants by the Merchants consents confirmed Charters Patents in Parliament reversed attainders restored persons attainted and their heirs to Lands and bloud elected the Kings Great Officers Privy Counsellers and prescribed them Laws Rules Orders appointed a Protector during the Kings Minority limited his power and discharged him from his place without the Commons confirmed an imposition upon Cloth by the King against the Commons petition to take it off Ordered a Subsidy to be paid absolutely which the Commons granted but conditionally called receivers of Subsidies and Monies to account without the Commons and opposed the Commons encroachments upon their privileges as you may see in the Parliament Rolls of 13 E. 3. n. 5 6. Parl. 1. Parl. 2. n. 8.15 E. 3. n. 41.21 E. 3. n. 16. Par. 2 R. 2. n. 22. to 27.57 5 R. 2. n. 16. 5 H. 4. n. 51. to 58. 4 H. 6. n. 22. 6 H. 6. n. 22 23. 8 H. 6. n. 13.27 28.14 H. 6. n. 10. 31 H. 6. n. 34. In Claus 50 E. 3. m. 3. 4. De essendo in Parliamento there are writs directed to particular persons in this form Sis coram Nobis et cateris Proceribus et Magnatibus regni nostri Angliae in praesenti Parliamento without mentioning the Commons apud Westm convocato hac instante diâ— Sabbatâ— proxime post futur ad informandum Nosipsos Proceres et Magnates not the Commons super quibusdam de quibus per te volumus informari c. 4. Junii Per Concilium in Parliamento And for the Nobles of Ireland I find this Record Claus 2 E. 3. m. 17. Rex dilecto et fideli suo Johanni Darcy de Nevien Justiciario suo Hyberniae salutem Ex parte quorundam hominum de Hybernia Nobis exstitit supplicatum uâ— per statutum inde faciendum concedere volumus Quod omnes Hybernici qui voluerint legibus utantur Anglicanis ita quod necesse non habeant super hoc Cartas aliquas a Nobis imperrare Nos igitur certiorari volentes si sine aliquo praejudicio praemissis annuere valeamus vobis mandamus quod voluntatem Magnatum terrae illius not of the Commons in proximo Parliamento nostro ibidem tenendo super hoc cum diligentia praesentari facias de eo quod inde inveneritis una cum vestro consilio advisamento Nos distincte aperte cum celeritate qua potestis certificetis hoc Breve nostruÌ„ Nobis remittentes c. upon which Petition the use of the English Laws was afterwards granted as appears by Clause 5 E. 3. part 1. m. 25. But I shall close up this Plea and Supplement with a few Presidents more pertinent to demonstrate the Lords undoubted Right of Judicature Council and Advice in publike affairs both in and out of Parliament In the Parliaments of 5 E. 2. n. 31.4 E. 3. c. 14.36 E. 3. c. 10.50 E. 3. n. 181.1 R. 2. n. 35.2 R. 2. n. 5. It was enacted that a Parliament
were first made never sate in Parliament Whereas this writ hath no operation or effect to enoble him or his posterity unless and until he actually sit in Parliament for if he die before he sit or sit not at all neither he nor his issue are Noble This distinction and concession of his contradicts his former opinion That the Writ it self doth not ennoble the person and his heirs for if it did then he and they should be ennobled by it though he died before he â—aâ—e in Parliament because they are thus ennobled by Letters Patents which create them Nobles or Peers and make them actually such though they never sit in Parliament 7ly Sir Edward Cook in his 4 Institutes p. 44 45. thus resolves If the King by his Writ calleth any Knight or Esquire to be a Lord of the Parliament he cannot refuse to serve the King there in communi illo confilio for the good of his Country But if the King had called an Abbot Peer or other regular Prelate by Writ to the Parliament to the Common Council of the Realm if he held not of the King per Baroniam he might refuse to sit in Parliament because quoad secularia he was mortuus in lege and therefore not capable to have a voice or place in Parliament unless he did hold per Baroniam and were to that Common Council called by Writ which made him capable And though such a Prelate regular had been often called by Writ and had de facto had place and voice in Parliament yet if in rei veritate he hold not per Baroniam HE OUGHT TO BE DISCHARGED OF THAT SERVICE AND TO SIT NO MORE For that the Abby of Leicester was founded by Robert Fitz Robert Earl of Leicester albeit the Patronage came to the Crown by the forfeiture of Simon de Mountford Earl of Leicester yet being of a Subjects foundation it could not be holden per Baroniam therefore the Abbot had no capacity to be called to the Parliament and thereupon the King did grant Quod idem Abbas successores sui de veniendo ad Parliamentum Concilia nostra vel haeredum nostrorum quieâ—i sint exonerati in perpetuum But all these Cases abovesaid and others that might be remembred touching this point as little Rivers do flow from the fountain of Modus tenendi Parliamentum where it is said Ad Parliamentum summoneri venire debent ratione tenurae suae omnes singuli Archiepiscopi Episcopi Abbates Barones Priores alii Majores Cleri qui tenent PER COMITATUM VEL BARONIAM ratione hujusmodi tenurae nulli minores nisi eorum praesentia necessaria utilis reputetur To which purpose he likewise cites the Act of Parliament of 10 H. 2. called the Assize of Clarindon and the Great Charter of King John in the 17 year of his reign here forecited p. 21 30 31. For Modus tenendi Parliamentum here so much magnified I have already p. 20 sufficiently discovered it to be a late forgery and imposture out of the very Treatise it self by undeniable proofs which I wonder Sir Ed. Cook Mr. Agar and other pretended judicious Antiquaries observed nor being so obvious yet though it be an imposture and erronious in other things I shall grant it true in this particular here cited As to the point in controversie had Sir Ed. Cook here thus distinguished in the case of Laymen Knights Esquires as he doth in case of Abbots Priors and Religious persons that if the King had by his Writ called any Laymen Knight ot Esquire to the Lords House of Parliament by his general Writ who held of him in fee or fee tayl per Baroniam and was a Baron by tenure that this had enobled him and his posterity as Barons he could not refuse to serve the King as a Baron in this Common Councel for the good of his Country his opinion might have passed for good Law For such who had lands in fee or fee tayl of the King by an intire Barony being Barons and Peers of the Realm by their very tenures ought of right by the express words of the Statute of Clarindon the Great Charter of King John and by the Common Law and Custom of the Realm to be summoned as Barons by the Kings special writs directed to them to all Parliaments and great Councils of the Realm by vertue of their Tenures as well as Bishops Abbots Peers and other regular Prelates who held by Barony yet the writ in this case doth not make them and their heirs Barons by writ nor give them a right to sit and vote in Parliament but only declare them and their heirs to be Barons and to sit there as Barons by their Tenure not by vertue of the Writ it self But if the King by this general Writ summon any Layman Knight or Esquire to the Lords House who holds not by Barony this doth no more make him a Lord or Baron in perpetuity to him and his heirs nor no more oblige him or his heirs to sit there than Abbots but that they may refuse to serve in Parliam if he were no Peer before being not obliged by any Law to sit and serve therein as a Baron or Member of the House of Peers by the Writ alone which doth not bind an Abbot Prior or regular Prelate or ennoble him and his Successors to be Peers and Barons of the Realm though they hold only by Frankalmoign not by Barony the Tenure By Barony being that alone which obligeth both of them to sit and serve in Parliament unlesse they be created Dukes Earls Viscounts Lords Peers or Barons by Patent or else by a special Wrir wherein the estate and dignity of a Baron is both created and limited as in the Writ that created Sir Henry de Bromflet Baron of Vescey in the 27 year of King Henry the 6 where after the Nullatenus omittatiâ— this Clâ—se is inserted Volumus enim vos haeredes vestros maâ—culos de corpore vestro legitime exeuntes BARONES DE UESCY EXISTERE Teste c. If a Layman who holds not by Barony be created a Duke Earl Baron or other Peer of the Realm for life in tayl or in fee by Letters Patents or an Abbot or Prior who holds not by Barony and his Successors be created Lords of Parliament by a special Patent of the King as Richard Banham Abbot of Tavestoke and his Successors were bâ— King Hen. the 8. to whom the King granâ—ed by special words Ut eorum quilibet qui pro tempore fuerit Abbâ—s sit erit unus de Spiritualâ—bus religiosis DOMINIS PARLIAMENTI NOSTRI haeredum successorum nostrorum gaudendo honoreâ— Privilegio libertaribus ejusdem This obligeth them to appear and serve in Parliament upon every Writ of Summons and they their heirs males and Successors cannot refuse to serve or voluntarily absent themselves without cause or license under pain of being fined
and otherwise punished for their contempt because bound therto by their voluntary acceptance of such a special Patent and dignity But if they be summoned only by a general Writ against their wills being no Lords of Parl. by special Patent or Writ before this doth neither make the one nor other Barons nor ennâ—ble their heirs males or successors nor oblige them to serne nor subject them to any fine for contempt for then the King by his Writ might summon all the Knights Esquires Gentlemen and any other Commoner Freeman Lawyer Clergy man of the Realm to the Lords House as a Member at his pleasure and fine them for a contempt in not appearing and thereby increase that House in infinitum and make it a mungril House of all sorts of degrees and professions of men instead of aâ— House of Lords to its utter subversion against the fundamental constitution and privilege of that House Therefore such Writs of summons must be void and null in Law as well as the Patent to Abbot Banham as Sir Ed. Cook asserts it for that he was neither Baro nor held per Baroniam Now whereas he asserts That Knights and Esquires who hold not by Barony cannot refuse when summoned by Writ to serve the King in Parliament but yet Abbots and other regular Prelates that hold not by Barony may because they are dead in Law as to secular affairs and therefore not capable to have voice in Parliament unless they hold by Barony and were called by Writ This reason of the difference is most absurd and unreasonable For 1. They are both Subjects to the king alike and so both equally obliged to serve and counsel him in Parliament 2ly If their tenures by Barony could make them capable to have place and voice in Parliament though dead in Law quoad secularia then much more the kings and the kingdoms need of their presence counsel and advice in Parliament touching the weighty affairs concerning himself and the defence and preservation of the Realm and Church of England when specially summoned by his writ to Parliament 3ly Though they were dead in some sence only in respect of their natural capacities to the world yet in their politick capacities they were not so but secular still to sue purchase advise c. as well as Laymen in the right of their Houses 4ly Parliaments being always summoned as well to advise of Ecclesiastical things touching the Church as of temporal things concerning the Realm of England their being dead to the world quoad secularia could no more enable them to refuse to serve in Parliament then Laymen quoad Ecclesiastica negotia therein treated of which concerned the Church and Laymen according to the doctrine in Popish times might as well refuse to serve in Parliament when summoned because they were no Ecclesiastical or religious persons who were properly to consult of the affairs of the Church of England as religious persons be exempted from and refuse to serve therein because dead to the world quoad secularia negotia concerning the King and Realm of England there debated and consulted of 4ly The true and only ground then why such Abbots Priors and all other Clergy men who held not by Barony might refuse to serve in the Lords House of Parliament when summoned by Writ was this that they held not of the King by Barony and upon this ground alone the Abbot of St. James without Northampton summoned to Parliament by Writ Anno 12 Ed. 2. upon his Proctors appearance and Petitions for him in Parliament recorded at large by Mr. Selden out of the Leger-book of the Abby worthy perusal being most full in point was discharged from his attendance his name struck out of the Roll and Register of the Chancery by the Chancellor and his Council as not one of the list of those who ought to be summoned for this very reason because NON TE NET PER BARONIAM nec de Rege in capite sed tantum in puram perpetuam Eleemosynam nec ipse Abbas nec Predecessores sui unquam in Cancellaria irrotulari fuerunt except only in 49 H. 3. m. 10. Schedula voluntarie nec ad Parliamentum citati hucusque VNDE PETIT habuit remedium And upon the self same reason the Abbot of Leicester and his successors were by special Patent in 26 E. 3. de veniendo ad Parliam Consilia nostra et haeredâ—m nostrorum de caetero quieti sint et exempti in perpetuum hough this Abbots predecessors had formerly been summoned to and sate in Parliaments interpolatis vicibus but noâ— continuè because idem Abbas aliquas terras senteâ—ementa de Nobis per Baroniam seis aâ—o modo non tenet per quod ad Parliamenta seu Consilia nostra venire teneatur The King reciting this as the only ground of his exemption and thereupon Nolentes Abbatâ—m indebite sic vexari granted him and his successors this Patent of Exemption upon which his name was cancelled in the Clause Roll of 25 E. 3. part 1. m. 5. dorso and this written in the margin against it Abbas Leicestriae cancellatur quia habet cartam Regis quod non compellatur venire ad Parliamentum And that of Dors Claus 11 E. 3. par 2. m. 11. 13 E. 3. par 2. m. 28. 1. cited by Mr. Selden Sir Edw. Coke in his Margin mentioned in a Bill in Parliament Que toutes les religioses que teignont per Barony sayent tenus de venier au Parlament is also direct iâ— point That those who hold not by Barony are not bound to serve in Parl. be they Religious persons or Lay persons who are not Peers or Lords of Parliament upon general writs of summons such Summons of them being AN UNDUE VEXATION OF THEM as King Edward stiles it in his Patent unless they voluntarily appear upon such a Summons as this Patent informs us those who were summoned in 49 H. 3. all did This reason therefore exempting all Abbots Peers and religious persons from service and attendance in the Lords House in Parliaments though summoned thereto by writ must necessarily exempt all Knights and Laymen from it there being the self same ground justice equity for it in both yea the selfsame unjustice vexation mischief to both and by consequence the selfsame Law And if this be Law as these Presidents Judgements Records expresly resolve it to be beyond contradiction Then it inevitably follows that the General writ of Summons to Parliament alone doth neither create the persons summoned to it nor their heirs or successors Barons Lords or Peers of the Realm unless they hold by Barony no although they sit once or twice in Parliaments by vertue of them or interpolatis vicibus but not continue as the Abbots of Leicester did for then they could not allege or plead their not holding Lands of the King in Barony or any other tenure binding them to sit and serve in Parliament