the prisoner was not committed by the immediate command of the King but by the command of the Lord Chamberlaine and thence as it was said they made this rule but this kind of interpretation is the first that ever was supposed that Judges should take notice of the truth or falshood of the return otherwise then the body of the returne could informe them And the rule it selfe speakes plainly of them sufficiencie onely and not of the truth or falshood of it Emersons Case The seventh of these is the case of Iames Desmaistres Edward Emerson and some others that were brewers and were committed to the Marshalsea of the Houshold per mandat Dom. Regis and so returned upon habeas corpus and it is true that the roll shewes that they were remanded but the remanding was onely upon advisement and indeed the grave and upright Judges of the time were so carefull least upon the entry of the remanding any such mistake might be as might perhaps mislead posterity in so great a point that they would expresly have this word immediate added to the Remittitur that so all men that should meet with the roll might see that it was done for the present onely and not upon any debate of the question And besides that there is no quousque to it which is usually added when the highest award upon debate or resolution of this kind is given by them 12. Iam Sir Samuel Saltonstalls Case The eighth of these is the Case of Saltonstall it is Hill 12. Iac. Sir Samuel Saltonstall was committed to the Fleet per mandatum Dom. Regis and besides by the Court of Chauncery for disobeying an order of that Court and is returned upon his habeas corpus to be therefore detained And it is true that a Remittitur is entred in the roll but it is onely a remittitur prisoner prodict ' without quousque secundum legem de liberatus fuerit and in truth it appeares on the Record that the Court gave the Warden of the Fleet three severall dayes at severall times to amend his returne and in the interim remittitur persone pred' Certainly if the Court had thought that the returne had beene good they would not have given so many severall dayes to have amended it for if that Mandatum Dom. Regis had beene sufficient in the Case why need it to have been amended 13. Iac. Sir Samuel Saltonstalls Case The ninth and last of these is Tr. 13. Iac. Rot. 71. The Case of the same Sir Samuel Saltonstall he is returned by the Warden of the Fleet and in the Case before and generally remittitur is in the roll which proves nothing at all that therefore the Court thought he might not by law be inlarged and besides in both cases hee stood committed also for disobeying an order in the Chauncery These are all that have beene pretended to the contrary in this great point and upon the view of them thus opened to our Lordships it is plaine that there is not one not so much as one at all that proveth any such thing as that persons committed by the command of the King or the Lords of the Counsell without cause shewed might not be enlarged but indeed the most of them expresly prove rather the contrary Now my Lords having thus gone through the Presidents of Record that concerne the point of either side before I come to the other kind of Presidents which are the solemne resolutions of Judges in former times I shall as I am commanded also by the House of Commons represent unto your Lordships somewhat else they have thought very considerable with which they met whilst they were in a most carefull enquiry of whatsoever concerned them in this great question It is my Lords a draught of an entry of a judgement in that great case lately adjudged in the Court of Kings Bench when divers Gentlemen imprisoned per speciale mandatū Dom. Regis were by the award and order of the Court after solemne debate sent back to prison because it was expresly said they could not in Justice deliver them though they prayed to be bayled The case is famous and well knowne to your Lordships therfore I need not further to mention it as yet indeed there is no judgement entred upon the Roll but there is room enough for any kind of judgement to be entred But my Lords there is a forme of a judgement a most unusuall one such a one as never was in any such case before for indeed there was never before any Case so adjudged and thus drawne upon by a chiefe Clerk of that Court by direction of M. Attorney generall as the House was informed by the Clerk in which the reason of the judgement and remanding of those Gent. is expressed in such sort as if it should be declared upon Record for ever that the Lawes were that no man could ever be inlarged from imprisonment that stood committed by such an absolute command The draught is onely in Sir John Heninghams Case being one of the Gent. that was remanded and it was made for a form for all the rest The words of it are after the usuall entry of a Curia advisare vult for a time That visis retur predict nec non diversis antiquis recordis in Curia hic remaveum consimiles casus continentibus maturaque deliberatione inde prius habita eo quod milla specialis causa captionis sive detentionis pred Iohanis ex primitur sed generalitur quod detentus est in prisona pred' per speciale mandatum Dom. Regis ideo pred' Iohanes remittitur prefat custodi Marr. Hospitii pred' Salvo custodiend quousque c. that is quousque legem deliberatus fuerit And if that Court that is the highest for ordinary Justice cannot deliver him secundem legem What law is there I beseech you my Lords that can be sought for in any other inferiour Court to deliver him Now my Lords because this draught if it were entred in the Roll as it was prepared for no other purpose would be as great a declaration contrary to the many Acts of Parliament already cited contrary to all Presidents of former times and to all reason of Law to the utter subversion of the highest liberty and right belonging to every free man of this Kingdome and for that especially also it supposes that divers ancient Records had been looked into by the Court in like cases by which Records their judgements were directed whereas in truth there is not any one Record at all extant that with any colour not so much indeed as with any colour warrants the judgement therefore the House of Commons thought fit also that I should with the rest that hath beene said shew this draught also to your Lordships I come now to the other kind of Presidents that is solemne resolutions of Iudges which being not of Record remaine onely in authentique copies but of this kinde there is but one in this case that is
is there any difference made betweene such cōmitments by the Lords of the Counsel that are incorporated with him The second kind of Presidents of Record are such as have beene pretended to prove the law to bee contrary and that persons so committed ought not to be set at libertie upon bayle and are in the nature of Objections out of Record I shall deliver them summarily to your Lordships with all faith and also true Copies of them out of which it shall appeare cleerely to your Lordships that of those of the first kind there are no lesse then 12. most full and directly in the point to prove that persons so committed are to be delivered upon bayle and amongst those of the other kind there is not so much as one not one that proves at all any thing to the contrary I shall first my Lords goe through them of the first kind and so observe them to your Lordships that such scruples as have beene made upon them by some that have excepted against them shall bee cleered also according as I shall open them severally Pasc 18. Ed. 3. Bildestons Case The first of the first kind is of Ed. 3. time it is in Pasche 18. Ed 3. Rot. 33. The Case was thus King Ed. 3. had committed by Writ and that under his great Seale as most of the Kings commands in those times were one Iohn de Bildeston a Clergie man to the prison to the Tower without any cause shewed of the commitment The Lievtenant of the Tower is commanded to bring him to the Kings Bench where he is commited to the Marshall but the Court askes of the Lievtenant if there were any cause to keep this Bildeston in prison besides that commitment of the King he answered no whereupon the Roll sayes Quia videtur cur bre praed sufficient non esse causam praed Iohan de Bildeston in prisona Dom Regis hic detinend ' idem Iohannes admittitur per manucaptionem Willielmi de Wakefield and some others where the Judgement of the point is fully declared in the very point 22. H. 8. Parkers Case The second in the first kind of Presidents of Record is in the time of H. 8. one Iohn Parkers Case who was committed to the Sherife of London pro securitate pacis at the suite of one Brinton ac pro suspitione feloniae committed by him in Glocestershire ac per mandatū Dom. Rs. he is committed to the Marshall of the Kings Bench postea isto eodem termino traditur in Ball ' here were other causes of the commitment but plainly one was by the command of the King signified to the Sherife of London of which they tooke notice but some have interpreted this as if the commitment had beene for suspition of felonie by the command of the King in which case it is agreeable of all hands that the Prisoner is bayleable but no man can thinke so of this president that observes the context and understands the Grammar of it wherein most plainly ac per mandatū Dom. Regis hath no reference to any other cause whatsoever but is as a single Cause enumerated in the returne by it selfe as the Record cleerely sheweth it is in 22. H. 8. Rot. 37. 35. H. 8. Bincks Case The third is of the same Kings time it is 35. H. 8. Rot. 33. Iohn Bincks Case he was committed by the Lords of the Counsell pro suspitioniae feloniae ac pro aliis causis illos moventibus qui committitur Mariscallo immediate ex gratia curiae speciali traditur in Ball ' They committed him for suspition of felonie and other causes them thereunto moving wherein there might be matter of State or whatsoever else can be supposed and plainly the cause of their commitment is not expressed yet the Court bayled him without having regard to these unknowne causes that moved the Lords of the Counsell But it is indeed some difference from either of those other 2. that precede and from the other 9. also that follow for it is agreed that if a cause be expressed in the returne insomuch that the Court can know why he is committed that then he may be bayled but not if they know not the cause now a man is committed for a cause expressed pro aliis causis Dominos de Consilio moventibus certainly the Court can no more know in such a case what the cause is then any other 2. 3. P Mar. Overtons Case The fourth of these is in the time of Queene Mary it is Pasche 2. 3. P. Mar. Rot. 58. Overtons Case Richard Overton was returned upon a Habeas Corpus directed to the Sherifes of London to have beene committed to them and deteyned per mandatum pranobilium Dominorum honorabilis consilij Dominorum Regis Reginae Qui committitur Marr. immediate traditur in Ball ' In answer to this President or by way of objection to the force of it It hath beene said that this Overton at this time stood indicted of high treason It is true he was so indicted but that appeares in another Roll that hath no reference to the returne as the returne hath no reference to that Roll yet they that object this against the force of this President say that because he was Indicted of Treason therefore though he were committed by the Command of the Lords of the Counsell without cause shewed yet he was bayleable for the Treason and upon that was here bayled Then which objection nothing is more contrary either to law or common reason It is most contrary to law for that cleerely every returne is to be adjudged by the Court out of the body of it selfe and not by any other collaterall or forraigne Record whatsoever Therefore the matter of Indictment here cannot in law be cause of bayling of the Prisoner And so it is averse to all common reason that if the objection be admitted it must of necessitie follow that whosoever shall be committed by the King or the Privie Counsell without cause shewed and bee not indicted of Treason or some other offence may not be inlarged for by reason of supposition of matter of State But that whosoever is so committed and withall stands so indicted though in another Record may bee inlarged whatsoever the matter of State be for which he was committed The absurditie of which assertion needs not a word for further confutation as if any of the Gent. in the last judgement ought to have beene the sooner delivered if hee had beene also Indited of Treason if so Traitours and Fellons have the highest priviledge in personall libertie and that above all other Subjects of the Kingdome 4. 5. Phil. Mar. Newports Case The fifth of this kind is of Queene Maries time also it is Pasch 4. 5. P. Mar. Rot. 45. the Case of Edward Newport hee was brought into the Kings Bench by Habeas Corpus out of the Tower of London Cum causa vizt
committed one cause must be pretended and another intended especially when it toucheth matter of State Rns Whereunto it was answered that all dissimulation especially in a cause of Justice was to be avoided and soundnesse of truth to take place And therefore David that was both a King and a Prophet prayed unto Almighty God against dissimulation in these words Lord send me a sound heart in thy Statutes that I be not ashamed where found in the originall signifieth upright without dissimulation and shame followes dissimulation when the truth is knowne The third objection 3 If a Rebell be attainted in Ireland and his children for safety and matter of State be kept in the Tower what shall be returned upon the habeat corpus Rns Whereunto it was answered that their imprisonment might be justified if they could not find good sureties for their good behaviour 2. It was charity to finde them meat drink and cloath that by the Attainder of their Father had nothing The fourth objection 4 Though his Majestie expresseth no cause yet it must be intended there was a just cause Rns Bracton Fleta Answere De non apparentibus non existentibus eadem ratio The fifth objection 25. Ed. 3. cap. 13 Stat. 4. H. 7. 6. 5 The King in stead of gold or silver may make money currant of any base mettall 2. He may make warres at his pleasure 3. Hee may pardon whom he will 4. Hee may make Denizens as many as he will and these were said to be greater prerogatives then these in question Rns Answer to the first It was denied that the King might make money Currant of base money but it ought to be of gold or silver 2. It was answered admitting that the King might do it his losse and charge was more then of his Subjects both in the Case of money and in the Case of warre the pardon was private out of grace and no man had danger or losse by it and so the making of Denizens the King was onely the looser vizt where hee had double Customes to have single 3. It was a non sequitur the King may doe these things ergo hee may imprison at will Your Lordships are now advised by those that cannot be daunted for feare nor misled by affected reward or hope of preferment that is of the dead 1 By ancient and many Acts of Parliament in the point besides Magna Charta which hath beene 30 times confirmed and commanded to be put in execution whereto the Kings of England have 30 times given their royall assent 2 Judiciall Presidents of grave and reverend Judges in terminis terminantibus that long since are departed this world 3 And lastly per vividas rationes manifest and apparent reasons Wee of the House of Commons have upon great Studie and serious consideration made a great manifesto unanimously nullo contradicente concerning this great liberty of the Subject and have vindicated and recovered the body of this fundamentall liberty both of your Lordships and of our selves from shadowes which sometimes of the day are long sometimes short and sometimes long againe And therefore no Judges are to be led by them your Lordships are involved in the same danger and therefore ex congruo condigno Wee desired a conference to the end your Lordships may make the like declaration as we have done Commune periculum requireth commune auxilium and thereupon take such further course as may secure both your Lordships and us and all your and our posterities in enjoying our ancient undoubted and fundamentall liberties FINIS The substance of the obiections made by M. Attorney Generall before a Committee of both Houses to the Argument that was made by the House of Commons at the first conference with the Lords out of Presidents of Record and resolutions of the ludges in former times touching the liberty of the person of every Freeman and the answers and replies then presently made by the House of Commons to those objections M. Attorneyes objections AFter the first conference which was desired by the Lords and had by a Committee of both Houses in the painted Chamber touching the reasons lawes acts of Parliament and Presidents concerning the liberty of the person of every Freeman M. Attorney Generall being heard before a Committee of both Houses as it was assented by the House of Commons that hee might be before they went up to the conference after some preamble made wherein hee declared the answering of all reasons of Law and Acts of Parliament came onely to the Presidents used in the Arguments before delivered and so endevoured to weaken the strength of them that had bin brought on the behalfe of the Subject to shew that some were directly contrary to the Law comprehended in the resolutions of the House of Commons touching the bayling of prisoners returned upon the Writ of Habeas Corpus to be committed by the speciall command of the King or of the Counsell without any cause shewed for which they ought by Law to be committed And the course that was taken which it pleased the Committee of both Houses to allow of was that M. Attorney should make his objections to every particular President and that the Gent. appointed and trusted by the House of Commons by severall replies should satisfie the Lords touching the severall objections made by him against or upon every particular as the order of the Presidents should lead them He began with the first 12 Presidents that were used by the House of Commons at the conference desired by them to prove that prisoners returned to stand so committed were delivered by bayle by the Court of Kings Bench. Objection al Bildestons Case cite devant fo 35. 55. The first was that of Bildestons Case in 18 Ed. 3. Rot. 33. To this he objected 1. That in thereturne of him into the Court it did not appeare that this Bildeston was committed by the Kings Command And secondly that in the Record it did appeare also that he had beene committed for suspition of counterfetting of the great Seal and so by consequence was bayleable in the Law in regard there appeared a cause why hee was committed in which case it was granted by him as indeed it is plaine and agreed of all hands that the prisoner is bayleable though committed by the Command of the King And he said that this part of Record by which it appeared hee had beene committed for this suspition of treason was not observed to the Lords in their Argument before used And he shewed also to the Lords that there were three severall kinds of Records by which the full truth of every award or bayling upon a habeat corpus is knowne First by the remembrance roll wherein the award is given Secondly the file of the Writ and the returne Thirdly The Scruet Roll or Scruet Finn ' wherein the Bayle is entred and that onely the remembrance roll of this case was to be found and that if the
c. had not followed and that these words were void according whereunto here also per mandat Dom. Regis nunciat per Robertū Pecke had bin wholly omitted and void likewise in truth in that late Case this case of Parker was cited both at the Bar and at the Bench and at the Bench it was interpreted by the Judges no otherwise then if it had beene only per mandatum Dom. Regis in this place of it But the objection there was made of another kind as was delivered in the first Argument made out of Presidents in behalfe of the house of Commons Then for the second objection touching the course of enumeration of the causes in the returne it was said that however in some acts of Parliament and else-where in the solemne expression used in the Law things of greater nature precede and the lesse follow Yet in this case the contrary was most plaine for in the return there appeares that there were three causes of deteyning the prisoner surety of the peace suspition of felonie and the Kings command and suretie of the peace is first mentioned which is plainly lesse then felonie therefore it is as plaine that if any force of Argument be here to be taken from this enumeration the contrary to that which Master Attorney inferred is to be concluded that is that as felonie is a greater cause then Suretie of the Peace so the matter whereupon the Kings command was grounded was greater then the felonie But in truth this kind of Argument holds neither way here And whatsoever the cause were why the King committed him it was impossible for the Court to know it And might also have been of very high moment in matter of State and yet of farre lesse nature then felonie all which shewes that this President hath its full force also according as it was first used in Argument by the house of Commons 35. H. 8. Bincks case cite ante 36. 56 objections hors de ceo To the third of these which is Bincks Case in 35. H. 8. Rot. 35. the Objection was that there was cause expressed pro suspitione feloniae and though pro alijs causis illos moventibus were added in the returne yet because in the course of enumeration the generall name of alia comming after particulars includes things of lesse nature then the particular doth therefore in the Case suspition of felonie being the first the other causes generally mentioned must be intended of lesse nature for which the prisoner was bay leable for the greater which was suspition of felonie Rns al dit obiection Hereunto it was replied that the Argument of enumeration on in these cases is of no moment and is next before shewed and that although it were of any moment yet the aliae causae though lesse then felonie might be of very great consequence in matter of State which is pretended usually upon generall returnes of command without cause shewed And it is most plaine that the Court could not possibly know the reasons why the prisoner here was committed and yet they bay led him without looking further after any unknowne thing under that tytle of matter of State which might as well have been in this Case as in any other whatsoever 2. 3. P. M. Overtons case Et 4. et 5. P. M. Newports case cite ante fo 36. et 37. Et les objections la rnde le Record de ceux vide ante fo 37. et 38. To the fourth of these which is Overtons Case en Pas 2. 3. P. et Mar. rot 58. and to the fifth which is Newports Case Pas 4. 5. P. Mar. rot 45. onely these observations were said over againe by Master Attorney which were moved in the Argument made out of the Presidents in the behalfe of the house of Commons at the first conference and in the same Argument were fully and cleerely satisfied as they were now againe in like manner 9. El. Lawrences case et eodem Anno Constables case cite devant fo 38. et 56. To the sixth which is Lawrences Case in 9. El. rot 35. and to the seventh which is Constables Case Pas 9. El. Rot. 68. the same objections were likewise said over againe by Master Attorney that are moved and clearly and fully answered in the Argument made at the last Conference out of Presidents in the behalfe of the house of Commons The force of the Objection being only that it appeared in the margin of the Roll that the word Pardon was written but it is plaine that the word there hath no reference at all to the reason why they are bayled nor could have reference to the cause why they were committed is utterly unknowne and was not shewed 20. El. Brownings case cite devant fo 38. et 56. To the eighth which is Brownings Case in Pas 20. El. Rot. 72. it was said by Master Attomey that he was bayled by a Letter from the Lords of the Counsell directed to the Judges of the Court but being asked for that Letter or any testimony of it he could produce none at all but said he thought the testimony of it was burnt amongst many other things of the Counsell table at the burning of the Banquetting house 40. El. Harecourts case cite devant fo 39. To the ninth being Harecourts Case Pas 40. El ' Rot. 620. the selfe-same objection was made by him but no warrant was shewed to maintaine his objection 43. El. cite devant fo 39. Catesbies case Object a ceo To the tenth which is Catesbies Case in vacatione Hill 43. El. he said that it was by direction of a Privie Seale from the Queene and to that purpose he shewed the Privie Seale of 43. El. which is at Charge among the transcript of the Records concerning bayles taken in Cases when the King or the Lords of the Counsell assented Rns a ceo But it was replied that the Privie Scale was made only for some particular Gentleman mentioned in it and none other as indeed appeares in it And then he said that it was likely that Catesby here had a privie Seale in this behalfe because those other had so which was all the force of his objection 12. Iac. Backwiths case cite devant fo 39. 58. Objection a ceo To the 11 which is Beckwiths Case in Hill 12. Iac. Rot. 183. He said the Lords of the Counsell sent a letter to the Court of Kings Bench to bayle him and indeed hee produced a letter which could not by any meanes be found when the Arguments were made at the first conference And this Letter and a Copie of an obscure report made by a young Student that was brought to another purpose as is hereafter shewed were the onely things written of any kinde that M. Attorney produced besides the particular shewed by the House of Commons at the first conference Rns al objections To this it was replied that the letter was of no moment being onely a direction to the chiefe
belonged unto them but the Gent. that spake in behalfe of the House of Commons came there bound on the one side by the trust reposed in them by their Country that sent them and on the other side by an oath taken by every of them before hee sit in the House to maintaine and defend the rights and prerogatives of the Crown for even in the point of Confidence alone those of them that speake as retained Counsell by perpetuall Fee and those that by their place being admitted to speake are bound to utter nothing but truth both by such a trust and such an oath were no way to be so compared or counterpoised as if the one were of no more waight then the other Resolution de 34. El. explaine expound For that of the resolution of all the Judges in England in 34. El. It was shewed that plainly it agreed with the resolution of the House of Commons for although indeed it might have beene expressed with more perspicuity yet the words of it as they are sufficiently shew that to them To that purpose besides the words of the whole frame of this resolution of the Judges as it is in the Copie transcribed out of the Lord chiefe Justice Andersons Book written with his owne hand which book was here offered to be shewed in the behalfe of the House of Commons it was observed that the words of the first part of it shew plainly that all the Judges of England then resolved that the prisoners spoken of in that first part of their resolution were onely prisoners committed with cause shewed for they onely say they might not be delâ—vered by any of the Courts without due triall by law and judgement of the acquittall they must be delivered but it is cleare that no triall or acquittall can be had where there is not some cause laid to their charge for which they ought to stand committed Therefore in that part of the resolution such prisoners are onely meant as are committed with cause shewed as which also the Judges expresly in that resolution expresly thought necessary as appeares in the second part of their resolution wherein they have these words If upon the returne of their Habeas Corpus the cause of their commitment be certified to the Judges as it ought to be c. By which words they shew plainly that every returne of a commitment is insufficient that hath not a cause shewed of it And to that which M. Attorney said as if the Cause were sufficiently expressed in generality if the Kings command or the Counsels were expressed in it as if that were meant in the resolution for a sufficient generall cause It was answered that it was never heard of in Law that the power or person that committed the prisoner was understood for the causa captionis or causa detentionis but onely the reason why that power or person committed the prisoner as also in common speech if any man aske why or for what cause a man stands committed the answere is not that such a one committed him but his offence or some other cause is understood in the question and is to be shewed in the Answer but to say that such a one committed the prisoner is an answer onely to the question who committed him and not why or for what canse hee stands so committed That for that of the Copie of the report in 13 Iac. shewed forth by M. Attorney it was answered by the Gent. of the House of Commons that the report it selfe which had beene before seene and perused among many other things at a Committee made by the House was of sleight or no authority for that it was taken by one who was at that time a young Student and as a reporter in the Kings Bench and there was not any other report to be found to agree with it Secondly although the reports of young Students when they take the words of Judges as they fall from their mouthes at the Bench and in the same person and forme as they have spoken may be of good credit yet in this Case there was not one word so reported but in truth there being three cases of a time in the Kings Bench one Rosewells Case Allens and one Saltonstalls case every of which had something of like nature in it the Student having beene present in the Court made up the frame of one report or case out of all three in his owne words and so put it into his Book so that there is not a word in the report but it is framed according to the Students fancie as it is written and nothing is expressed in it as it came from the mouth of the Judges otherwise then as his fancy directed him Thirdly there are in the report plaine falshoods of matter of fact which are to be attributed either to the Judges or to the reporter It is most likely by all reason that they proceeded from the reporters faults and howsoever these matters of falshood shew sufficiently that the credit of the rest is of light value It it said in the report that Harecourt being committed by the Counsell was bayled in 40. El. upon a Privie Seale or a Letter whereas in truth there is no such thing And it is said here that kind of Letters are filed in the Crowne Office whereas in truth there was any such kind of Letters filed there in any case whatsoever that resolution of the Judges in 34. El. is mis-cited there and made in 36. El. And it is said there that by that resolution a Prisoner returned to be committed by the Command of the King might not at all be delivered by the Court whereas no such thing is comprehended in that resolution But that which is of most moment is that howsoever the truth of the report were yet the opinion of the Judges being sudden and without any debate had of the Case is of light moment for in difficult points especially the most grave and learned men living may on the sudden let fall and that without any disparagement to them such opinions as they may will and ought to change upon further inquirie examination and full debate had before them and mature deliberation taken by them Now plainly in that of 13. Jac. there is not so much as a pretence of any debate at the Barre or Bench. All that is reported to have beene is reported as spoken of the sudden And can any man take such a sudden opinion to be of value against such debates and mature deliberations since had of the point And indeed this great point and all circumstances belonging to it hath within this halfe yeare beene so fully examined and searched into that it may well be affirmed that the most learned man whosoever that hath now considered of it hath within that time or might have learned more reason of satisfaction in it then ever before he met with Therefore the sudden opinion of the Judges to the contrary is of no value here which also is to be said by that opinion obliviously delivered in the Commons house in 18. Iac. as Master Attorney objected out of the Journall of the House But besides neither was the truth of that report of that opinion of the Journall any way acknowledged for it was said on the behalfe of the house of Commons that their Journals were for matters of Orders and resolutions of the House of such Authority as that they were as their Records But for any particular mans opinion noted in any of them it was so farre from being of any authority there with them that in truth no particular opinion is at all to be entred in them and that their Clerke offends whenever bee doth to the contrary And to conclude no such opinion whatsoever can be sufficient to weaken the cleare Law comprehended in these resolutions of the House of Commons grounded upon so many Acts of Parliament so much reason of the Common law and so many Presidents of Record and the resolution of all the Judges of England and against which not one Law written or unwritten not one President not one reason hath beene brought that make any thing to the contrary And thus to this purpose ended the next day of the Conference desired by the Lords and had by a Committee of both Houses FINIS