Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	judge_n	king_n	law_n	5,155	5	5.2571	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49982	An account at large of the Right Honourable the Earl of Danby's arguments at the Court of King's-bench at Westminster, upon his Lordship's motion for bail, the 27th day of May, term. pasch, 1682 together with the judges answers and the Earl's replyes, as they were then truly taken.	Leeds, Thomas Osborne, Duke of, 1631-1712.; England and Wales. Court of King's Bench.	1682 (1682)	Wing L918; ESTC R863	28,531	31

his Lordship's being Bailed His Lordship did thereupon say that this also was particular in his Case and he did believe there was scarce a Precedent in the World of the King's Prisoner and at the King's Suit not being Bailed when there hath been the King's Consent to it unless where the Prisoner hath not been able to find sufficient Security for his Appearance to abide his Trial. For that the two only Justifiable Grounds for the Continuance of Restraint by the Law are either for keeping the Party from being able to doe any harm by his being at Liberty of which the King is the best Judge or for securing the Party to abide the Judgement of the Law in which the Court ought to have good satisfaction and so they might have sufficiently in his Case He said that the Precedent would be no less strange and new against the King than against himself if they should not permit him to be Bailed under such Circumstances For he had heard that the Law did admit of no Absurdity Now he did desire to know how any thing could in reason be more absurd on behalf of the King than if the King's Prisoner and at the King's Suit should be kept in Prison by any of the King's Courts against the King's Will Or how said he can any thing be more dangerous to the Subject or be a plainer failure of Justice whatever may be pretended to the contrary than to say that there can be any such restraint of English liberty as cannot obtain so much as Bail but by the leave of the House of Lords When that House can neither meet but when the King pleases nor can never sit longer than he pleases So that to say a Man shall be a close Prisoner I mean by that a Prisoner without Bail for Bail it self is Imprisonment in the Eye of the Law till he shall be discharged by the House of Lords is to say that a man shall be a Prisoner during the King's pleasure which was the Great Grievance complained of when the Petition of Right was granted and that was thought to have fully and for ever Redressed that Grievance But if after so many heats and disputes which our Ancestors have had with the Crown about their Liberties this Doctrine should now be admitted for Law We would seem to endeavour as much as in us lies to bring it to this Conclusion and be our own Felo's De se That the King shall have a way found out by our selves and without his seeking how he may Imprison any Man or number of Men when he pleases in a Parliamentary way and by Dissolving that Parliament he may keep them as long as he pleases in a Prison without remedy But that he shall neither have power to Relieve us himself by his own Authority nor by his Courts of Justice So as in short by this Doctrine The King should only have power to hurt his Subjects as much and as long as he pleases but should not be able to doe them any Right if he would and then we shall have Magna Charta and the Petition of Right Reverss'd instead of receiving that benefit by them which the Kings of England have been so Gracious as to give us and all the Learned Writers upon those happy Laws of Liberty have told us we are secure under at all times and against all Accidents whatever He then begg'd leave to observe to his Lordship what he found in my Lord Chief Justice Coke's Comments upon Magna Charta who said that the words Nulli Vendemus Nulli Negabimus aut Differemus Justitiam vel Rectum are spoken in the Person of the King who in Judgment of Law is always present and repeating the said words in all his Courts of Justice And therefore says he every Subject in the Realm may at all times have remedy by the course of the Law and may have Justice done Freely fully and Speedily without delay for that Delay is a Sort of Denial The said Lord Coke observes further that those words of Magna Charta are fully Expounded by latter Statutes viz. 20 E. 3. c. which do direct that there shall be no delay nor hindrance of speedy Justice to any man neither by any Seal nor by any Order nor any Writ whatsoever neither from the King nor from any other nor by any other Cause Now whatever may be said out of other Considerations he said no Man can deny but that there is great delay of Justice to say no worse of it to any Man who through no neglect of his own can neither get Trial nor Bail in above three years although his Crimes were never so great And he said he durst be confident that the Makers of Magna Charta did believe they had secured all English Men from ever being under the possibility of such a Danger and that he made no question at all but that by Law we are so He said that the said Lord Coke does say in his Comment upon the 15 th W. 1 o. where he speakes of what things are Baileable and what are not and names Treason amongst the things not Baileable that is says he such offences shall not be Replevied by the Sheriff but all or any of these he saith may be Bailed in the King 's Bench. And he said he had also some of the present Judges opinions to shew in this point which he desired to Reade out of a Copy of the Lords Journal viz. 23d Decem. 1678 the Question being put whether the Lord Treasurer should withdraw 't was carried in the Negative and on the 27th of the said December the Question being put whether the Earl of Danby Lord High Treasurer who stands Impeached by the House of Commons should be Committed It was Resolved in the Negative And it was the same day proposed to the Judges whether the Judges can Bail any Person in Case of Misprission of Treason wherein the King's life is concern'd To which Sir William Scroggs Lord Chief Justice of the King 's Bench Sir Francis North Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common-Pleas Justice Windham Justice Jones and other of the Judges then present gave severally their Opinions that the Court of King's Bench may take Bail for High-Treason of any kind if they see cause He cited the Lord Coke also in his Comment on the 24 th W. 2 o. where he says that it is a Rule in Law Quod Curia Regis non debet Deficere Conquerentibus in Justitia Exhibenda And the reason of this is that a failure of Justice may be prevented which he frequently says is Abhorred by the Law So as it appears that The Law Abhors all failure of Justice and he said that if such failure do appear in his Case or any Man 's else no Order can license such Failure nor no Court can Justify the not giving Relief against it and he said he should either make such failure appear or his Lordship meaning the Lord Chief Justice would

be able to tell him where he might repair for Justice which both Magna Charta and the Petition of Right are understood to have provided at all times for the Subjects Liberty But if his Lordship could not inform him where he might appeal forthwith for his Liberty in that Case he said that for that reason alone were there no other he ought of right to be admitted to Bail by that Court till he could be brought before such a Judicature as had power to discharge him He observed also that the Lord Coke in a Chapter on the King 's Bench did say that that Court might Bail for any Offence whatsoever and that in the said Chapter it was particularly observed that there had been such care taken by the Law to avoid failure of Justice even in small matters in comparison of Liberty that he gives there an Example concerning a Clerk or Officer of that Court For he takes notice of what things and against whom that Court hath power to hold Plea by Bill And amongst those he names against any Officer or Clerk of that Court and gives the reason because if they should be Sued in any other Court they would have the Privilege of that Court which might be the cause of a failure of Justice and from this his Lordship said it did appear that the Law intended that there should be no failure of Justice by the privilege of any Court how great soever it was for that as was said before the Law did abhor all failure of Justice And he said if such care had been taken against a failure in such small matters and not in what concern our Liberties all English men ought Justly to break out into the like Exclamations as the same Lord Coke and many others did in their Speeches in Parliament and in their Pleadings 3º 5º Car. upon the Arguments of the Grand Habeas Corpus at that time where the Lord Coke breaks forth into this Expression Shall I have an Estate of Inheritance for life or for years in my Land And shall I be Tenant at Will for my liberty Shall I have property in my Goods by the Laws And not liberty in my Person And thereupon he tells us That Perspicuè vera non sunt probanda As taking from granted that our liberties were not to be doubted where our properties were so secured And the King says he had distributed his Judicial power to Courts and to his Ministers of Justice Who are to see right done And he said the Lord Cook gave the Reasons of those Laws which are against undue Imprisonments and that one of those is for the indefiniteness of time which he says may be perpetual during Life and that his words are That it is unreasonable to think that a Man has a Remedy for his Horse or Cattle if detained and none for his Body Indefinitely Imprisoned For that a Prison without any prefixed time is a kind of Hell And here his Lordship said that he hoped the Court would either allow him Bail or tell him a prefixed time when he should be Tryed or Discharged he did then also Quote the Case of the Duke of Suffolk 28 H. 6 and the opinions of Prescot and Fortescue who were eminent Judges who said that he ought not to be Committed though for Treason without Especial Cause of the Treason shewed which had not been in his Case He further said That many other Principal Gentlemen of that Parliament had spoke most sensibly on the same Subject of Liberty and amongst the rest Sir Robert Philips had said To have our Liberties which are the Souls of our Lives taken from us and to be pent up in Goals without Remedy by Law and this to be so adjudged for so that Court had then thought sit to deny Bail for Reasons which were at that time also best known to themselves he cries out Oh improvident Ancestors Oh unwise Fore-Fathers to be so curious in providing for the quiet possession of our Lands and to neglect our Persons and Bedies And to let them lie in Prisons And without Remedy durante bene placito If this be Law what do we talk of our Liberties This says he is Summa Totalis of all Miseries He said also That Mr. Selden did in the same Parliament argue at a Conference with the Lords That in all Cases where any Right or Liberty belongs to the Subject by any Positive Law written or unwritten if there were not also a Remedy by Law for enjoying or regaining of this Right of Liberty when it is violated or taken from him the Positive Law were most vain and to no purpose and it were to no purpose for any Man to have any Right in Land Liberty or other Inheritance if there were not a known Remedy by which in some Court of ORDINART JVSTICE he might recover it and in this Case of Right of Liberty of Person if there were not a Remedy in the Law for regaining it when it is restrain'd it were to no purpose to speak of Laws Here de desired leave to shew his Lordship what Sir Nicholas Hide when sitting as Lord Chief Justice in that Court did say on this occasion viz. That the Kings pleasure is his Law should take place and be Executed and for that do we sit here and whether the Commitment be by the King or others This Court is the place where the King doth sit in Person to do Right if Injury be done and if it appear that any Man hath Wrong done to him by his Imprisonment We have Power to Deliver or Discharge him And he further said That the same Lord Justice Doderidg Jones and Whitlock Answering the Prisoners Council at that time did say the Attorney General had told them That the King had done it and that they the Judges do ever trust him in great Matters and here he took occasion to say That he hoped that the Kings Consent to his Bail and his Declaration of his Innocency would be now as much trusted in this Court He Cited also the Arguments of Mr. Calthorpe for Sir John Corbet on the same occasion who sayed That admit the Commitment were lawful yet when a Man hath continued in Prison a reasonable time he ought to be brought to Answer and not to be continued still in Prison for that it appears by the Books of our Laws that Liberty is a thing so favour'd by the Law that the Law will not suffer the continuance of any Man in Prison longer then of necessity it must He Cited also Mr. Hackwell who said upon the same occasion That the Law admits not the Power of Deteyning in Prison at pleasure when the Imprisonment is but Pro Custodia for a Man by long Imprisonment might otherways be Punished before his Offence and he mention'd an Expression of his That long Imprisonment was vita pejor morte He mention'd how the Commons at the end of the Parliament 3 Car. did desire That the Judges might declare

And he said That the House of Commons desiring that such a Power might have been Enacted into a Law though themselves would have been the first who would have repented such a Law did sufficiently denote That the Commons did not think the Order would be binding in Law after their Dissolution for otherwise what need was there of a Law if the Order was in force after Dissolution without a Law Upon the whole he said He thought the Distemper of that time had given more weight to the Order then any thing else and some of their Lordships on that Bench did know both in what an heat it had been made and how it had been since blown upon by the Lords themselves who he was confident would no more endure to have it Construed in that Sence which now seems to be put upon it of Subjecting Men to be under INDEFINITE IMPRISONMENT then they will endure themselves to be every Day put in the Stocks As he had said thus much to the Order it self so he said He hoped to make appear That the Courts Bailing of him would not at all Intrench upon the Order nor meddle with the Jurisdiction of the Lords nor their Proceedings in any kind For that he took it for granted That what is done by that Court and the Courts of Chancery and Exchequer on Appeals and Writs of Error was understood not to meddle at all with the Jurisdiction nor Proceedings of the Lords in those Cases and that this was just the same all being alike Subject to the final Determination of the Lords whenever they pleased to call the Appeal Writ of Error or Impeachment before them and without any prejudice to their Lordships Proceedings by any of those Acts done by that or the other Courts in the Interval of Parliaments Besides he said It had been usual to Bail in that Court to the Justice Seat in Eyre and yet that that Court could not proceed further He Instanced also That Courts allowing of the Pardons of Peers when pleaded there and yet that they had no power to proceed to the Tryal of a Peer And so he said There were divers other Instances of that Courts proceeding to such and such degrees of Exercising their power to avoid delays c. where the Court had no Jurisdiction to determine the matter Precedents he said were not to be expected which were exactly fitted to his Case because he durst be bold to say there never was such a Case before when well considered in all its Circumstances nor he hoped never would be again But he said That therefore both the Kings Power and the Peoples Liberties would be the more concern'd in what Resolution should be given by the Court in this Case of his He said There were Precedents of Discharging of Men Impeach'd in Parliament upon the Kings Writ to that Court Commanding the Proceedings to cease and they have been Discharg'd accordingly by that Court without any other Reason given in the Writ but because the King held the Parties to be Innocent and free from the Crimes Charg'd against them As in the Cases of Melton Arch-Bishop of York and Gravesend Bishop of London 7 E. 3. He mentioned also Hugh Spencer and Sir Thomas Barkley's being Mainprized to Parliament and yet that the latter was upon suspition for the Murder of a King viz. Edward the Second He said Inferior Courts had Bailed to Parliament about the Popes Bull c. Reg. Writs 274. He said A single Judg viz. Sir Robert Atkins had lately Bayled one for Treason and another for Murder and that he did himself hear his Justification of both allow'd as to the Legal part before the King and Council He said That Kings had formerly abolish't Accusations of Treason and Instanced a Case of Talbot against Ormond in the time of H. 6. And to shew how powerful the bare intention of Kings to Pardon had been heretofore he Instanced the Case of a man Indicted of Felony who without any Council shew'd forth a Charter of Pardon to the Court which was discordant to the Indictment and also to his name and yet because the Court perceived that it was the King's Intention he should be pardoned he was Remanded to get a better Pardon 26 Ass p. 46. And he did thereupon say That he hoped the Kings Intention of Pardon as to him had been sufficiently declared to the whole Kingdom And in short he said that if the matter was proper for the Jurisdiction of that Court before it was in Parliament it 's having been there did not take away the Jurisdiction from a Competent Court when the Extraordinary Jurisdiction fails which was not to be supposed could lay all other Jurisdictions asleep when itself was not in being and especially when that Competent Court should do nothing in Contradiction to the Proceedings of the Extraordinary Court as he hoped he had made appear that that Court would not do by the Bayling of him Whereas on the contrary he said it was most evident that Justice did fail in the highest concern which is that of Mens Liberties unless he could be inform'd when and where he might certainly be either Tryed or discharged for that as he had said before it was agreed both by the Council for the King and the Council for the Prisoners in the Arguments on the Grand Habeas Corpus that INDEFINITE IMPRISONMENT was held to be PERPETVAL IMPRISONMENT which the Law did admit in no Case where the Imprisonment was only AD CVSTODIAM And although his had been intended but AD CUSTODIAM yet it could not be denyed but it had already been ad Gravem paenam and without any perticular Cause yet shew'd for which he ought not to be Bayled by Law He then said that Littleton had declared in his Arguments 5 Car. That if Treason in General should be held to be a sufficient Returne yet that the Kings-Bench might Bayle And the said Littleton and the Kings Attorny in their Arguments one for the King and the other for Mr. Selden did agree that where the Party could not avoid the Judgment of the Law nor that there was no Danger by his being at liberty He ought to be Bayled after long Imprisonment and at that time six Months was taken to be long Imprisonment He said he had read a passage in the Lord Cokes Institutes where he spoke of such Imprisonments as he compared to the Imprisonment of St. Paul by the Centurion who first put him in Chains and then enquired who he was and what he had done He said he would not compare his case to that but that there was so much of resemblance in it that he had been in Chains or what was there meant by Chains which was a Prison for above three years on a pretence of Treason without being told to that day what kind of Treason he had committed which had been done in no bodies Case but his and by so much the greater was his hardship He had also both been

answered And if it might not seem too great a vanity to say although the true reason do's take away the vanity of it because it would not be for his but for their own sakes as what may happen to be their own Cases he said he doth believe he could have the Major part of the House of Lords to be his Bayl in this Case and some of those very Lords who were for the making of this Order although not in that sense which would seem to be put upon it In so much that there would be no more to fear in the Granting him Bayl than he hoped there was either Reason or Justice to deny it And he doubted not but he was there before very just Judges who would duly consider what he had said The Lord Chief Justice then speaking did say That the Earl of Danby had seemed to reflect upon the Court as if they had denied him Justice in not hearing his Counsel Then the Earl of Danby desired leave to interrupt his Lordship saying That his Lordship had mistaken him for that he had said no such thing of that Court nor did he mean it of that Court but said it was very well known that his Counsel had been forbid to plead for him in another place which was then acknowledged by Justice Jones to be very true The Lord Chief Justice then proceeded and said That for his Lordship's saying they needed not to fear because he did believe the Greatest part of the Lords would be his Bayl That it was not the fear of another Court that had any kind of influence upon them or that they should do such things as they feared to be called to an account for but that they were to govern themselves by the doing of Justice That they had heard his Lordship with a great deal of patience and that he had said many material things and with much acuteness and that they were not sensless of the hardship of his Lordships Case and of the greatness of his sufferings That they were likewise sensible of the Kings desires that his Lordship should have no longer Imprisonment than the Law requires and he confessed that the King had done as much as lay in his power That it was not denied because that Court could not Bayl for Treason for that they had a power to Bayl in all Cases whatsoever if the Court saw cause Neither would the Indictment which was found against him about Sir Edmond-Bury Godfrey have hindred nor was it the Order of the House of Lords which hindred them But that they were to act there according to Law and he prayed his Lordship to consider that they could not relieve him according to Law That he did agree to some things mentioned by his Lordship and that it was a very hard Case he should lye so long in Prison but here was the misery they could only compassionate him for that his Lordship was imprisoned by an higher Hand and where they had no power to intermeddle He instanced in Indictments for Treasons and several other great Crimes in which they could Bayl men but in this Case the Supream Jurisdiction of the Nation had laid their hands upon it which was attended by the House of Commons with an Impeachment Whether their Lordships had cause or not cause to commit his Lordship they could not Inspect But that they ought to believe that his Lordship was justly Committed and that their Lordships in their mature Deliberation would do nothing unjustly He said That they had a Jurisdiction over all the Courts in the Kingdom that only excepted and as it would be very Incongruous for an Inferiour Court to Bayl whom they had Committed or to call their Processes in question so would it be in like manner for them to do in this Case because the Lords exceed their Jurisdiction and were above them He said also That the Opinion of all the Judges in England had been taken therein and had delivered their Opinions that he could not be Bayled and that the truth was his Lordship was imprisoned by too high a Court for them to Bayl him But that his Lordship was not Indefinitely Imprisoned as he had alledged for whenever his Majesty is pleased to call a Parliament his Lordship would have remedy That the King has power to do it when he pleases and for his Peoples good no doubt he will when he sees fit But that at some time the Circumstances of State differ from other times and that it may not for some space of time be thought convenient and though this may prove mischeivous to a single Person or to two or three Persons yet such things must be endured for the good of the Publique He said also That if that Court should commit a man for High Treason and the King should Adjourn them from time to time that man could not be Bailed untill they sat again So that he must confess as his Lordship had said that as this Case did happen he was under a Temporary Indefinite Imprisonment He concluded which telling his Lordship That he must be contended to wait the Kings pleasure when he would call a Parliament That for his part he was before of Opinion that they could not Bayl his Lordship and he was so still The Earl of Danby to all this answered that he must confess his Ears did tingle to hear his Lordship say That the King had done 〈◊〉 much as lay in his power when his Majesty is bound both by his Coronation Oath and by the Laws to see right done at all times to his Subjects and he desired to know whether this was not the Kings Court and whether he had not deputed a Power to them to see right done to all accordingly He said also that he was now under greater amazement than before since his Lordship had both granted That this Court could Bayl any Treason and that the Order of the House of Lords did not hinder it which till now he confest he had taken to be the only obstruction to his Liberty That he had hoped he had satisfied his Lordship that although he was Imprisoned by an higher hand yet that the Bayling of him did not intermeddle with the Jurisdiction of that higher Judicature and he had yet heard nothing to shew him that it did That for what his Lordship had said of the Opinion of all the Judges in England being taken in his Case he must needs inform his Lordship that That was a mistake for that the Opinion of the Judges had never been asked in his particular Case saving once upon his Petitioning the King for Liberty to go to his Countrey House at Wimbledon with a Guard or otherwise as his Majesty should think fit which Petition was referred by his Majesty to the Judges and they according to their wanted prudence and caution did only Report that they thought his Majesty could not Legally grant the Petitioners request That whereas his Lordship said That he was not Indefinitely