Majestie and issued out Commissions to entitle his Majestie to these Lands as derived from the Earl Marshals and his Ladies Ancestours which M. Alexander had discovered And having found one Territory thereof but not the tenth part thereof afterwards procured more Letters for to passe the same to others at a small Rent under a hundred pounds per annum which was no lesse in value then between three and four thousand pounds per an Which M. Alexander perceiving informed the Earl Marshal thereof and of the true state of things Whereupon his Lorship finding himself thus injured and abused by the Earl of Strafford did labour his Majestie that he might go on with his Suit for those Lands and did proceed so far as that many of the terre Tenants the ancient Natives who had been in possession by intrusions by them and their Ancestours for many Generations some hundreds of yeers Master Alexander had so satisfied them in the weaknesse of their Titles that without more ado the chiefest of them began to surrender and did surrender their estates into his Majesties hands with intent that they should be granted to the said Earl Marshal and his Heirs according to the Tenour of his Majesties Letters in that behalf and were resolved to stand to the said Earl Marshals courtesie for new Grants to hold of him and his Heirs Which thing when the said Earl of Strafford perceived and that the Earl Marshal having gotten this footing the said Lord Deputies project therein concerning himself to get those Lands would be at an end and so he was not onely like to have too powerfull a Neighbour but his actions must thereupon be sifted and discovered in that wherein he had broken both trust and all bonds of friendship with the Earl Marshal now he the said Lord Deputy saw he had no other way to acquit himself but either to gain Master Alexander unto his party or by crushing him altogether that so he might be quitted of him he therefore attempted first by all expressions of favour towards him to win him and at all places and in all cases where he might shew him countenance he did it for a time till he perceived that nothing could take him from his duty or to violate the trust the Earl Marshal had put in him but found that Master Alexander the rather proceeded with the more zeal and earnestnesse in that businesse then before and by this opportunity was able to have done the said Lord Marshals businesse without him when he thought t was high time to turn about and that speedily or it had been too late for all the possessours of those Lands were resolved to have made the like surrenders of their estates as their neighbours had done before into his Majesties hands c. Whereupon spirits were raised up to fined out other particular interests and claims of private men which were set on foot against the said ancient possessours and albeit without colour or shadow of Title yet it was enough to embroyl the businesse and for to hinder the Earl Marshals smoother proceedings and now a Bill was first brought against these Gentlemen for no other cause but for making these Surrenders of their estates into the Kings hands And because it was pretended to be done in prejudice of those claimers that had no colour of right yet for this and no other thing were they grievously fined and censured in the Castle-Chamber there for thus giving away their own Lands unto the King and the Court of Wards and all Courts there were now filled with Suits against the Occupants and their estates and possessions ordered from them and they outed of their Interests which they and their Ancestours had enjoyed for some hundreds of yeers before and in this time they could get no Lawyer to plead or speak for them but Master Alexander for which cause the said Lord Deputy had wrought all the Judges some few excepted that were just men to disfavour him and fix whatsoever upon him to disgrace him when he came in their way also whomsoever he was that would complain against him had the said Lord Deputies ears open and his creatures too more ready to receive then any of them could possibly be for to petition against him And thus Master Alexander had almost enough to do to make his own Defence against such clamours and false things which were thus received against him whereof he still cleared and freed himself but without any recompence of his losses and damages thereby sustained and without all repair for the base scandals were thereby put upon him whereupon he perceiving himself thus resolved and destined unto ruine by some one means or other were it right or wrong and having understood out of his Lordships the said Lord Deputies secret Closet that he had assuredly purposed and determined to ruine him therefore foreseeing the danger M. Alexander prepared the best he could for to prevent it and now by the opposition that was between them by which means those that were in like manner oppressed did still repair unto Master Alexander for advice and counsel he understood the most of his wicked actions and observing his ways against others and that there was no fence for him to save himself whom he purposed for no destroy therefore Master Alexander came for England and yet without his Passe which was the thing he stormed at having before this time made an Act of Common-Councell which he declared should in all tings be as binding as a Statute-Law That no Subject of Ireland should come for England or go elsewhere beyond the Seas without his special License which when any endeavoured to obtain at his hands against whom he had any thing to say he must be sure to ask and go without howsoever if he had no fair pretence yet then it must be delayed at the least so long untill some way or other was found out to obstruct his passage and so enthrall and trouble the Passenger as ruine was the end at last against whomsoever his displeasure and indignation did arise And if it did so fall out at any time that any man had obtained his Majesties Letters to him requiring his permission to let him come for England he would notwithstanding hinder him if he were such a one as he had no minde to let depart or whom he feared might tell tales at Court therefore Master Alexander procured the Warrant following for his repair into England and made use of it for his coming away accordingly To the Lord Deputy of Ireland RIght Trustie and Right Welbeloved Cousin and Counsellour We greet you well Whereas Our Right Trustie and Our Right Welbeloved Cousin and Counselour Thomas Earl of Arundel and Surrey Earl Marshal of England hath especiall occasion for the service and employment of Our Subject Jerome Alexander who is now residing in that Our Kingdom and hath therefore desired Us that he may have Our especial License for his repair hither into Our Realm of England
hath delivered me out of the hands of the Egyptians and out of the hands of Pharaoh Exod. 18.10 11. for thus I know Psal 9.16 17 18. Rev. 15.3 Psal 31.26 1 Pet. 2.12 Tit. 2.8 the Lord is greater than all Gods for in the thing wherein they have dealt proudly he was above them and the needy shall not alwayes be forgotten the expectation of the poore shall not perish for ever in which assurance I shall still labour and by a good conversation strive to shame the Gain-sayer that he that is of the contrary part may so be ashamed in the latter end as having nbo evill thing upon just cause to say against me These are the mites I tender to your Corban the Turtles I have to offer at your Altar and having no better to bring I hope my good meaning shall supply the rest and if I have dwelt too long upon this Subject excuse me it being an errour of affection that in my own cause may thus haply mislead my Judgement and it being in my first entrance upon such a taske it is no wonder if you shall finde me to deserve your reprehension he may mar many an Instrument at the first that learnes Musick but S. Austin saith Non est multiloquium quando necessaria c. But the Judgement is and my self Yours JEROME ALEXANDER ERRATA PAge 3. line 49. read Interrogatories p. 7. l. 37. add they p. 8. l. 2. omit be ibid. l. 27. read excessive ibid. l. 47. read adversary p. 20. l. 20. read at ibid. l. 34. add as p. 13. l. 49. read Interrogatories p. 23. l. 2. read to ibid. l. 37. read that p. 25. in the Affidavit read is p. 28. l. 7. for his read this p. 28. l. 43. for 100. l. read 130. l. p 32. l. 4. for an read and ibid. p. 24. for into read unto ibid. l. 42. for me read one p. 33. l. 42. for than read that p. 35. l. 40. omit the p. 39. l. 39. for in read into p. 38. should be p. 40. l. 26. for the word for read from p. 41. add one in the title of certificate p. 50. l. 37. for agust read against p. 53. l. 1. add him p. 59. l. 7. for with read to p. 66. l. 42. for recount read account p. 71. l. 12. for these words an Act of Common Councell read an Act at Councell Table p. 82. l. 35. for they read the p. 83. l. 26. for all his witnesses read all the depositions of his witnesses p. 84. l. 25. for into what sad a condition read into what a sad condition p. 87. l. 26. omit to p. 100. l. 33. for us read as p. 109. l. 1. the first word read endeavoured p. 115. in the last line but one for both read but. Errata in the Epistle FOr oblation p. 2. l. 37. read obligation p. 3. l. 27. for wherein read whereon p. 11. l. 34. for receive read review p. 20. l. 37. for brarded read braided The Case of Jerome Alexander Esquire concerning a Sentence given against him in the Court of Star-Chamber the seventeenth day of November in the second yeer of the Reign of our Sovereign Lord King Charles Which said Sentence followeth in these words In Camera Stell coram Concil ibid. Decimo septimo die Novem. An. 2 Car. R. Domino Custod magni Sigilli Angliae Domino MANDEVILE Praesid Comite Bridgewater ROBERTO NANTON Mil. JOHANNE COKE Mil. uno Secretar Regis Archiepiscopo Cant. Episcopo London Capt. Baro Scācii HARVEY Justic de Comuni Banco THis day came to be heard by speciall Order of this honourable Court of the 10 of this instant November a very foul Offence Practice and Misdemeanour of one Jerome Alexander an Utter-Barrester at the Law Plaintiff in this honourable Court against John Yates and others late Defendants which Cause was heard in open Court on the 25 of October last At the hearing of which Cause the main wherewith the said Yates stood charged was The threatning and terrifying of Witnesses which the said Alexander was to produce at a former Triall of Nisi Prius in the Countie of Norfolk between the said Yates then Complainant and the said Alexander then Defendant for proof of which Offence and Misdemeanour against the said John Yates the said late Plaintiff Alexander produced onely two Witnesses namely Robert Warren Clerk and John Warren his brother whose Depositions were openly read in Court and the Deposition of the said Robert Warren was positive and direct of his own knowledge and the Deposition of the said John Warren was upon hearsay Yet the said Alexander for his own advantage had blotted out and defaced the copie of the Deposition of the said John Warren taken in Court unto the 39 Interrogatory on the said Alexanders part in these two words viz. that and did and delivered the same copie of the said John Warrens Deposition to the said 39 Interrogatory with the words that and did so blotted out and defaced as aforesaid to his Attorney in this honourable Court to be read in Court upon the hearing of the said Cause against the said John Yates which was read accordingly and by that means the said Deposition of the said John Warren was made positive and absolute as of his own knowledge and thereupon this honourable Court and all the honourable Presence here sitting were much abused and misled to give their Judgements and Opinions to sentence and condemn the said John Yates for that Offence of threatning and terrifying of Witnesses and for the same to fine him the said Yates to pay to his Majesties use 100 Marks and to be committed to the prison of the Fleet and the Warden of the Fleet had thereupon taken him into his custodie accordingly But upon the rising of the Court that day the Sollicitour of the said Defendant Yates shewed to the Right honourable the Lord Keeper the Paper-copie of the said John Warrens Deposition which the said Defendant had out of this Court wherein the said words that and did were fair written and stood in the said Deposition to the said 39 Interrogatory without blotting defacing or interlineation whereby it plainly appeared to his Lordship the said Deposition to be but upon hearsay His Lordship thereupon acquainted all the honourable Presence therewith in the inner-chamger and with all their Lordships consents respited the entrie of the same Sentence and ordered that the originall Deposition should be brought into the Court the next sitting-day to be perused seen and viewed by all their Lordships and thereupon to give their Order and Sentence and in the mean time the said Yates was set at liberty and discharged of his imprisonment Whereupon the Paper-copie of the said John Warrens Deposition being obtained by Master Jones being Attorney for the said Alexander in that Cause from his the said Alexanders Clerk that carried his Books was forthwith shewed by the said Master Jones to the Right honourable the Lord Keeper and other the Lords
feed to speak a word and whatsoever Master Alexander pressed in his own defence was misinterpreted and an ill sense endeavoured to have been put upon it and upon whatsoever he spake for maintenance of the Cause and clearing of his Innocency The next Exception taken by Master Alexander to the Dismission is this That 136 l. costs was taxed against him to be paid unto the said Yates upon that dismission by the said Lord Coventry whereas no costs were awarded against him by the Order of the Court and whereas by the course of the Court he rather was to have had costs then to have paid any costs For which observe the Bill of Costs it self and first its title The Bill of Costs of John Yates John Lawrence Allan Lampkin and William Wacy Defendants sustained by them through the wrongfull and unjust Vexation of Jerome Alexander Complainant in preferring a malitious and scandalous Bill of Complaint against them for supposed Perjury Subornation of Perjury Imbracing of Jurours and threatning and terrifying of Witnesses whereof the said Defendants stand absolutely dismissed by Order of this most honourable Court upon a publike Hearing viz. Termino Pasche anno 19 Jacobi Regis  l. s. d. IMprimis for the charges of the said four Defendants in coming up this Term out of the furthest part of Norfolk to appear upon Processe of Subpena served on them 06 00 00 For recording their appearances in Court 00 08 00 For the copie of the Complainants Bill of Complaint 02 15 00 To learned Counsel to peruse the same and to draw the Defandants Answers thereunto 02 00 00 For ingrossing the same Answers 00 13 04 For the Attorneys Fees 00 06 08 For the Fees of the four Defendants examined upon the Complainants Interrogatories 00 18 08 For their charges in attendance there this Term and their return home 10 00 00 Termino Trinitatis anno praedicto The Attorneys Fee 00 03 04 Termino Michaelis anno praedicto For the charges of one of the Defendants in coming up this Term being served to rejoyn 01 10 00 For the Attorneys Fee 00 03 04 For the copie of the Complainants Replication 00 03 00 To learned Counsel to peruse the same and to draw the Defendants Rejoynder 01 00 00 For ingrossing the same Rejoynder 00 05 00 For the copies of the four Defendants Examinations upon the Complainants Interrogatories and of the same Interrogatories 06 00 00 For the half Fee of the Commission 00 05 06 To learned Counsel to peruse all the Books and to frame Interrogatories for examination of the Defendants Witnesses thereupon 02 00 00 For engrossing the same Interrogatories 01 00 00 For the said Defendants charges in attendance here this Term and his return home 04 00 00 For the charges of the said Defendants and their Commissioners and many Witnesses spent at the execution of this Commission 06 13 04 For two Subpenas ad testificand in Court 00 05 00 To the Clerk that took and engrossed the Depositions of the Defendants Witnesses 02 00 00 Termino Hillarii anno praed For the charges of one of these Defendants in coming up again this Term to joyn in Commission with the Plaintiff which was renewed at his instance 01 10 00 For the Attorneys Fee 00 03 04 For new ingrossing the Defendants Interrogatories to be enclosed in the renewed Commission 01 00 00 For a Subpena ad testificand 00 02 06 For the copie of an Affidavit made by the Plaintiff for renewing of the Commission and changing of the place 00 02 00 For the charges of the said Defendant in his attendance here this Term and his return home 04 00 00 For the charges of the said Defendants and their Commissioners spent at the execution of the Commission 05 00 00 To the Clerk that took and engrossed the Depositions of the Defendants Witnesses 01 00 00 Termino Pasche anno 20 Jacobi Regis For the charges of one of the Defendants coming up this Term to attend the Plaintiffs Prosecution and to take out the copies of the Witnesses Depositions 01 10 00 For the Attomeys Fee 00 03 04 For the charge of one Witnesse Examination in Court this Term on the Defendants behalf being out of Norfolk his attendance here and return home 03 00 00 To learned counsel to draw Interrogatories to examine the same Witnesse upon 01 00 00 For engrossing the same Interrogatories 00 05 00 For Fees of the said Witnesse his Examination 00 02 04 For the copies of all the Depositions of the Witnesses taken in Court and by Commission and of the Plaintiffs Interrogatories 20 18 00 To severall learned counsel to peruse all the Books and to confer of Breviats against the hearing of the cause 06 00 00 For writing of severall Breviats 04 00 00 For the charges of the said Defendants in attendance this Term and return home 04 10 00 The Attorneys Fees of these five Terms Termino Trinitat anno praedicto 00 16 08 The Attorneys Fees of these five Terms Termino Michael anno praedicto 00 16 08 The Attorneys Fees of these five Terms Termino Hillarii anno praedicto 00 16 08 The Attorneys Fees of these five Terms Termino Pascbe anno 21 Jacobi R. 00 16 08 The Attorneys Fees of these five Terms Termino Trinitat codem an 00 16 08 Termino Mich. anno praed For the charges of one of the Defendants in coming up this Term to attend the hearing of the cause being served with Processe to hear Judgement 01 10 00 For the Attorneys Fee 00 03 04 To several learned counsel to attend the hearing at the Bar on the day appointed for hearing 04 00 00 For the charges of the said Defendants attendance here and his return home 05 00 00 The Attorneys Fees of these Terms Termino Hillarii anno praedicto 00 10 00 The Attorneys Fees of these Terms Termino Pasche anno 22 Jacobi R. 00 10 00 The Attorneys Fees of these Terms Termino Trinitat anno praedicto 00 10 00 For the copie of an Order moved by the Plaintiff 00 02 00 To learned counsel to move the Court for dissolving of an Injunction obtained by the Plaintiff for stay of proceedings at the common Law 01 00 00 For the entry and copie of that Order 00 03 00 Termino Michael anno praed For the charges of one of the Defendants in coming up again this Term to attend the hearing of the cause the same being specially set for the hearing 01 10 00 For the Attorneys Fee 00 03 04 To several learned counsel to attend the hearing at the Bar on the day appointed 04 00 00 For the said Defendants charges in attendance here this Term and return home 05 00 00 The Attorneys Fees of these Terms Termino Hillarii anno praedicto 00 10 00 The Attorneys Fees of these Terms Termino Pasche anno 1 Car. R. 00 10 00 The Attorneys Fees of these Terms Termino Trinitat anno praedicto 00 10 00 Termino Mich.
misfeazances ex post facto become void as by interlineation addition rasure or drawing a pen thorow the midst of a word by these ways such Deeds are all become void but no other punishment inflicted by the Law for these transgressions but with the losse of the fruit and benefit of such Deeds which is punishment sufficient of it self and for to adde another affliction were against a Rule of Law viz. to punish a man double for one and the same offence as in Matthewson and Lideats Case in the Lord Cooks fifth Reports fol. 25. Whelpdales Case in the fifth Reports and Pigots Case in the eleventh Reports fol. 27. where there are any other yeer-Books put for confirmation of this truth and to prove the Law to be thus in his Case And the Court of Star-Chamber have accustomedly followed and imitated the Rule of the common-Law in like cases and against whom Bills have been preferred there for like offences the parties complained against have been dismissed though the offences proved as in the Cases before cited of Allen and others So that in this case the Peitioners Dismission and losse of that Testimony had been the usuall punishment but the losse of the fruit and benefit of his Suit had been too much but to be censured for this as an offence in him without proof of guilt is without President or Example 4. HIs Lordship thereupon acquainted the honourable Presence therewith in the iuner-Chamber and with all their Lordships consents respited the Entry of the said Sentence and ordered that the originall Deposition should be brought into the Court the next sitting-day to be perused seen and viewed by all their Lordships and thereupon to give their Order and Sentence and in the mean time the said yates was set at liberty and discharged of his Imprisonment Presently whereupon the Paper-copie of the said Warrens Deposition being obtained by Master Jones being Attorney for the said Alexander in that Cause from his the said Alexanders Clerk that carried his Books was forthwith shewed by the said Master Jones to the Right honourable the Lord Keeper and the other Lords then present wherein the said two words the and did were defaced and blotted out of the said John Warrens Deposition to the 39 Interrogatory which had been openly read in Court and misled the Court to sentence as aforesaid and by that means the Deposition was made positive and absolute as of his ownknowledge whereas by by the said Defendants copie of the said Deposition first shewed to his Lordship with the words that and did fair written therein was upon hear say fol. 3. This part of the Sentence being but a repetition of much of this matter alleadged in it before hath received an Answer onely my Lord Keeper Coventry his forwardnesse to charge Master Alexander and to discharge Yates is observable and that albeit Yates were sentenced by Order of Court and in custodie yet out of Court he caused him presently to be discharged upon this bare Allegation without ever calling or hearing Master Attorney-Generall or any the Kings Councell or Master Alexanders counsel what could be said more for the King to maintain the Sentence And you shall not afterwards finde thorowout the whole carriage of the businesse that the Lord Coventry did ever so much as move any thing for the King or against Yates but presently dismissed him and the other Defendants with 100 l. costs and with such a manifestation of their clearnesse as if they had been the most innocent men alive when the contrary cleerly appeareth in the Books as before and so the Register of the Court in drawing up the Order of Dismission clears the Defendants and asperseth Master Alexander what he can And Master Jones Master Alexanders own Attorney labours what possible he can to lay this as a fault upon Master Alexander but did never any thing of his Duty for the King or for his Client all the Officers of the Court drawing in a line together and making way to destroy Master Alexander by the Sentence to follow which they were resolved upon from the first as these things do manifest and make it to appear And by this the misleading in the Case doth appear to be on that side when thus against all right and rule and all ordinary and common respect whatsoever much more to have been used towards a man of the same Profession whose credit his Lordship therefore should have the rather endeavoured to have preserved then in the very Bud of his coming forth into the world to have nipt him off and crusht him to pieces preferring the condition of a company of poor and base Mechanicall wretches not worthy his knowledge before Master Alexander with whose Breeding he was well acquainted to have had the same foundation and beginning as himself and with as good hopes to have attained the end of his Profession as any other of his time had not he determined that expectation by this his unjust proceeding against him 5. SHortly afterwards viz. before two of the clock that afternoon the said Alexander came to Grays Inne to the said Master Jones his chamber there and then and there in the presence and hearing of Master Hooker one other of the Attorneys of this honourable Court in great perplexity as it then seemed fell into sime passions saying what an unfortunate man am I what will become of me an then being demanded by Master Hooker and Master Jones Of whom he had or received his copies of the said Depositions whereof that was one answered He could not tell whether he received it from the Examiner or from Henry Nevile Master Jones his Clerk with many bitter and heavie imprecations and oaths vowing and protesting he knew not of the blotting out of the those words or altering the copie and the copies were as he first received them Whereupon the said Alexander Master Jones and Master Hookr went all together unto the Examiners Studie of this Court to see the Record of the Originall Deposition of the said John Warrne to the said 39 Interrogatory on his part which being shewed unto them by the Examiner the Record was fair and plain with the words that and did therein written with the hand writing of Master Gay the Examiner who died in August last Hereupon the said Alexander used the like speeches as before he had done in Master Jones his Studie and so departed Fol. 3. Be pleased to observe that all this interlocutory-Discourse is but a bare repetition of this Conference without proof or confession and therefore unwarrantably entred into the Sentence and against all the rules of proceeding in any Courts of Justice whatsoever Howsoever it shews thus much in the first place that when such things as these were suffered to be stufft into the Sentence and to passe for currant tending to the utter ruine of a man Who could withstand distruction being in the hands of such adversaries and who will not conclude of the injustice that was
And though it be commonly presumed a man will be for the most part at his own house which is his Castle for to manage his estate and to provide for his family there is no such intendment or necessity of a mans being at his chamber in another place remote from his dwelling-house as this was neer 100 miles distant and therefore the leaving of this Order in a case so penall at his chamber here in London where he was tied to no constant residence but might stay and be gone again at his pleasure without precise proof of his being there and personall notice before the hearing was no such service of that Order as did warrant that Court to proceed to Judgment against him in his absence and without defence Again observe albeit in the Setence it be expressed that a copie of this Order was left with Master Alexanders Boy or Clerk at his chamber at Lincolns-Inne yet the Affidavit of Bagshaw says not so for he swears onely He gave it to a young man or youth of whom he enquired if he were not Master Alexanders Clerk or man and where his Master was who then confessed that Master Alexander was his Master but that his said Master was not within neither could he tell where he was But his saying so doth not make him so if in truth he were not so and all this doth not prove him to be so So t is clear Bagshawe knew him not to be Master Alexanders Clerk or man and Master Alexander had more chamber-fellows that had Clerks and men then in Town to whom it was certainly delivered by some willing mistake to make thus much of it in colour for the hearing And what Nevile delivered who was this Bagshaws setter was still but to this mistaken Clerk or man and therefore no whit to have been regarded for such a service Nor was it Bagshaws belief of notice nor Neviles charge to that Clerk or man to deliver the said copie of the said Order to Master Alexander that therefore concluded He had notice or that it was delivered unto him accordingly as it was not And if it had been Master Alexanders Clerk or man Nevile knew him and his name for Master Jones saith He attended with the Books at the hearing of the cause against Yates and that he took the said Deposition of John Warrens for him and shewed it to the Lord Keeper Coventry Other Clerk or man Master Alexander had not and if it had been he Nevile would have caused him to have been named for he had a Christian-name and Sir-name but was not then in Town as Master Alexander believeth So it is likely they set up a man of straw and killed him when they had done either feigned the being of some such man or Clerk there that was not or delivered the same to some man or Clerk that was no man or Clerk of Master Alexanders and by a willing mistake made this use of it to condemn him in his absence Howsoever it was no good service in it self for the reasons aforesaid and the Court was abused by inserting in the Sentence either what Nevile voluntarily affirmed clean from the matter and that Bagshaw should depose that the copie of the said Order was left with Master Alexanders Clerk or man which he did not swear at all And of necessity must Master Alexander make default at the hearing when he was so long before gone out of Town and had no manner of notice nor could have notice possibly of the said intended hearing And for his withdrawing himself you have heard the occasion and when and therefore no ways worthy of blame or that any use ought to have been made of it to his so great disadvantage 12. WHereupon was read again in open Court the said Alexanders Affidavit and the said Certificate of the said Lord Chief Justice and Master Justice Dodderidge Upon the reading whereof and opening of all the parts and points thereof by Sir John Finch Knight and Sir Heneage Finch Knight Recorder of London both of counsel with the said Henry Nevile who was present in Court himself to stand to justice it plainly appeared to this most honourable Court as well by divers apparent contrarieties between the said Alexanders Affidavit before mentioned and his Examination taken upon his Oath before the Judges as by divers other pregnant reasons and circumstances conducing to prove him guilty of this great offence Fol. 5. in the Sentence Master Alexander doth appeal herein to all practisers in these Courts if in their whole times of their practice they have never known any man to be fined upon such Generalls which imply no certainty of any thing For to say it was so because it is related that it was so in the Sentence without shewing wherein or how I believe is a President without Example to convict any man of such a crime But that this is a false Allegation as you have heard the full effect of Master Alexanders Affidavit recited almost Verbatim in the Sentence before so now be pleased to read the same Certificate which followeth in haec verba In Camera Stell 7 die Novembris anno 1626. secundo Caroli Regis The Certificate of Sir Randal Crew Knight Lord chief Justice of his Majesties Bench and Sir John Dodderidge Knight of the Justices of his Majesties said Bench between Jerome Alexander and Henry Nevile ACcording to an Order of this honourable Court of the 27 of October last we have examined the parties concerning the blotting out of two words in the Deposition of one John Warren viz. that and did being for the advantage of the Plaintiff Alexander And we have likewise examined Master Hooker one of the Attorneys of this Court Gay the Examiner that took the Examination and Wright the Clerk that wrote them being both dead Nevile denieth the altering of Warrens Deposition and saith He never saw it from the time it was first taken out till it was read in Court He denieth that either he or any other to his knowledge did alter the same and that he never examined the copie with the Original neither did the Plaintiff ever leave the same with Nevile to be examined He denieth the having of any Reward for Examination thereof for he was never required to examine the same Alexander denieth expresly the alteration of Warrens Deposition or that it was done by him or by any other by his procurement He saith He went to Master Hudson to peruse his Depositions being of Counsel with him And that the Deposition of John Warren when Master Hudson perused the same was without any blotting or alteration and that the two words that and did were then fair in the same copie not scored nor blotted And Master Hudson told him upon perusall of the same That it was but upon hearsay and made not for him Whereupon this Examinate told him That divers were present at an Arbitrement intended when it was spoken precisely by Robert Warren and not by
publikely or privately nor to have born any Office What course could he have then taken for a living dig he could not and to beg he was ashamed and what other way had been left him whereby to have maintained himself and family And this this worthy Gentleman would have done to have satisfied his Spleenatick humour Yet like the son of such a father he gives this reason for it In regard saith he of his constant persisting in foul practice having thereby done prejudice to some of the Nobility and severall of the Clergie in that Kingdom You well know who was the father of such untruths from the beginning And Master Alexander is certainly perswaded that it was the invention of his own brain for wrong he never did to any man in that or this Kingdom nor in all the world that he is conscious of unto himself nor did any man there that was not of his Confederacy ever complain of the least ill measure or miscarriage done him by Master Alexander And those Complaints wherein he had a hand albeit they had the said Lord Deputies best countenance and assistance and what he and all the enemies which he had could invent and put upon him yet did Master Alexander clear himself of whatsoever Accusation and left the shame to rest upon them all to whom it justly appertained But peradventure Master Fitz-Gerald will answer this in the language that he informed it in and whatsoever his ill meaning was in the matter will take the words in their proper sense and so t is true Master Alexander by his Practice had done some of the Nobility and some of the Clergie prejudice Sure it was his Profession to do so when he overthrew them in their unjust Suits wherein he was of Counsel against them yet did them no wrong therein nor injury unlesse in Master Fitz-Geralds esteem it was not fair for any man of Law to have opened his mouth against a Lord or Prelate of those times And for the Clergie Master Alexander can but wonder that the should make use of their names in so false a thing as this when t is well known Master Alexander had no such ill opinion amongst the Clergie And that you may perceive that Master Fitz-Gerald circumvented the Lord Primate of Ireland in gaining this Letter from him under such Generals to do Master Alexander a mischief the Information being sent over to Master Alexander out of England by his friends at Court to let him know how his Majestie was thus again possessed and incensed against him he went therewith unto the Lord Primate and shewed his Lordship the same informed him that his name was made use of as one that sent over this Complaint against him which he utterly disclaimed and to go Master Alexander right therein gave him the Certificate under his hand which followeth in these words AT and upon the humble request of Jerome Alexander of Dublin practiser in the Laws informing me that he is credibly given to understand by Letters out of England that his Majestie should be informed by Letters from me hence against him whereby to alien and withdraw his Majesties favour from him in some thing now intended by his Majesty unto him Therefore to satisfie his desires herein and all other whomsoever I do declare hereby That for my part as I never had cause of any Complaint against him now since his residence in this Kingdom have never heard that he demeaned himself here otherwise then orderly and well so I professe that I never wrote any Letters unto his Majestie or any person whatsoever against him either into England or elsewhere but do wish him much good and would rather do him a pleasure then otherways if it should lie in my way Given at my house at Dublin this ninth of November Anno Dom. 1633. Ja. Armachanus Which being sent over for England and shewed unto his Majestie begat a little better opinion in him of Master Alexander then before Yet whensoever his Majestie was sollicited for a Pardon in his behalf the Lord Coventry still was advised with herein as it was his place who so incensed his Majestie still again and again against Master Alexander as for a long time he stopt and kept the current of his Majesties mercy from him All which he did fearing Master Alexanders return and that he would complain of the injustice done him which you may perceive he was no ways able to answer in this matter the same so grosly appearing out of the proceedings that there needed no proof but the Records of his own actions to manifest the same And now after this Master Alexanders father in law Master John Havers and his uncle Captain Edward Havers being well satisfied by Counsel of the iniquity of the Sentence and by Master Noy for one amongst the rest out of their meer goodnesse could hold no longer but were resolved That if the Lord Coventry should interpose in the matter any longer against Master Alexander they would complain of him unto his Majestie yet first they attempted again to obtain his Majesties favour for a Pardon which with much ado his Majestie granted and for which Master Alexander doth own very much to the Right Honourable the Earl of Pembroke who being well informed in the businesse and finding with what a high hand he was opposed by the Lord Keeper for his own ends would not be denied of his Majestie therein by which means it was obtained Yet when it came to be drawn up the Lord Coventry came to the King again and would have perswaded his Majestie against it but finding him and resolved to have it done when he perceived it must passe yet then with his importunities he prevailed to have the Condition inserted in it howsoever That Master Alexander should not use his Profession here in England and after all this yet stopt it at the Seal for some time notwithstanding till Master Noy being then this Majesties Attorney-Generall came to him of purpose and told him reasons why it were better for him to passe it so then to endure a Complaint and thereupon he sealed it much against his will which followeth in these words CHARLES By the grace of God King of England Scotland France and Ireland Defender of the Faith c. To all whom these Presents shall come Greeting Whereas in Our Court before Our Councell in Our Star-Chamber the seventeenth day of November in the second yeer of Our Reign in a Cause then there late depending between Jerome Alexander Utter-Barrester at the Law Plaintiff against John Yates and others Defendants by Judgement of the same Court the said Jerome Alexander was censured for a foul misdemeanour and offence by him committed in defacing and blotting out of certain words out of the copie of certain Depositions taken in the said Cause for his own advantage and ends against the said John Yates whereby Our said Court was misled in their judgements in the censuring and condemning of the said Yates
bred Which when your petitioner understood and not before he was enforced then to leave his Countrey his Wife Children Friends and Profession too which he had acquired with the expence of his whole Patrimony and the whole Study of his life then before Nor had your petitioner being thus exiled setled himself for any long time but the malice of his adversaries so vehemently pursued after him That the said Fine was begged of His Majesty and passed under the Great Seal to hinder any possible Installments or Composition for the same but what they Grantee thereof pleased And further to forestall your petitioner by any addresses to be made to His Sacred Majesty for pardon of the residue of the said Censure it being the onely way then left unto your petitioner till this happy opportunity to gain your petitioner so much as a Being in the World His Majesty being so strongely informed by the late Lord Coventry Lord-Keeper and others against your petitioner for this onely Cause inforced to be so Capitall That your petitioner was not a man worthy or fit for His Majesties Mercy yet your petitioners Friends out of meer Charity and Commiseration of your petitioners deplorable Estate discharged the said Fine of 500 l. to the Grantee and the said 50 l. to the said Nevill and the said 130 l. to the said Yates and yet your petitioner for this fifteen yeers now last past or thereabouts hath thus been debarred the use of his Calling and Profession in this His Majesties Realm And now humbly beseecheth this Honourable Assembly to take the same Sentence into consideration and to review and reverse the same and to proceed therein for your Petitioners relief as in your Wisdoms shall be thought fit with order and direction to all Officers and others whom it may concern to have Searches and Copies of all such Records and Writings as concern these proceedings And he shall pray c. Which being so preferred it was by their Lordships Order of the 12. of May 1641. And of severall other Orders made by their Lordships referred to the Lords Committees appointed for the Star-Chamber to be heard as the same Order and the rest ready to be produced will make appear Die Mercurii 12. Maii. 1641. IT is this Day Ordered by the Lords Spirituall and Temporall in the High Court of Parliament Assembled That the Petition and Cause of Jerome Alexander Esquire shall by vertue of this Order be referred to the Lords Committees appointed for the Star-Chamber whose Lordships are to meet and consider of the said Petition on Munday the 17. of this insTant May by two of the Clock in the Afternoon in the Painted Chamber And all Parties formerly appointed to attend the said Cause are then to appear before their Lordships Joh. Brown Cler. Parliamentorum Then that it may appear with what earnestnesse Master Alexander pressed the hearing of this Cause and to make all prepration for it having formerly lost all his Papers and Copies of Bills Answers Depositions and proceedings in that businesse By the favour of the Honourable Lords he also gained the ensuing Order and by that had the favour to procure the same with more speed But for all that the said pleadings and proceedings cost him much money IErome Alexander hath Petitioned the HOuse to review and reverse a Sentence given against him in the Court of Star-Chamber in Michaelmas Terme in the second yeer of the King all his Witnesses concerning that businesse are casually lost Prayes the Order of the House to all Officers whom it may concern to make searches and to take Copies of all Records and Writings in their severall Offices such as he shall think sit And that for the reason aforesaid That he may have liberty to write them himself without paying any Fees And that Master Henry Jones one of the Atturneys of the Star-Chamber be required to bring into Court the Paper Copy of one John Warrens Deposition taken in a Cause there wherein the said Alexander was Plantiff against one John Yates and others Defendants which is remaining in his hands and to deposite the same in the hands of the Clerk of the Parliament to be ready at the hearing for upon that Paper Copy the Sentence is grounded And that the said Alexanders Counsell may have a sight of it the better to prepare for the hearing All which being read and considered of by the Right Honourable the Lords Committees for the Star-chamber their Lorships do appreve thereof and Order accordingly Veneris 5. Martii 1640. Joh. Brown Cler. Parl. But the great and publique Affairs of the Kingdom encreasing and growing every day more and more albeit Master Alexander did labour all the wayes and friends he had for to have gotten his said Cause to have been heard yet could not procure it So that after almost a yeers attendance about it with no effect he was enforced to forbear the further solicitation of it for a time and made his repair over unto his Estate and Family in Ireland from which he had been absent above four yeers and a half before constrained by the Earl of Strafford as aforesaid where he had not continued above five weeks space or little more but thta horrid Rebellion there brake forth Master Alexander being then in the County of Meath not aboe 24. Miles distant from the City of Dublin or thereabouts and within the Pale little sulspecting any such danger and whereas the Tragedy should have been acted at Dublin the 23. of October 1641. Which blessed be that good God which so miraculously prevented it upon the 24. day of October 1641. There was an attempt made upon Master Alexander to have surprised him his wife and family which had assuredly been his destruction and was the immediate finger of God that preserved them And albeit he escaped with his wife and family the most of them with their persons yet did the said Rebels both there and in other places of that Kingdom then instantly seize upon a personall Estate of his in Goods Chattels and Cattells to the value of 6000 l. or thereabouts and possessed themselves of a reall Estate of his in Lands which yeelded him above 1000 l. per anaum all which they shared and devided amongst them and do possesse to this day Thus then you may perceive into what sad a condition and distresse Master Alexander was brought again upon a sudden being dispoiled of his whole Estate and Fortune and by reason of the troubles both here and there out of all hope or expectation any way to acquire any livelyhood and subsistance for himself his wife children and family yet in this great straight chose rather to come for England then to remain there where he perceived he could neither do good for himself or the Countrey and being come over that good God who hath hitherto never forsaken him in his greatest troubles did so move the hearts of his friends and acquaintance that they gave present supply unto his
particulars following 4. By the Lord Keeper Coventry his readinesse to embrace the least hint and occasion offered to charge M. Alexander with this Accusation whereof it hath appeared unto you herein before that he was innocent 5. That upon the first Motion though out of Court his Lordship instantly released Yates who stood fined in Court and was then in custody upon a Censure appearing to have been justly given against him 6. That the said Lord Keeper being the supreme Judge of that Court and in order unto his place directing all Causes in the manner of their proceeding unto Judgment his Lordship gave Rules and Orders in this matter against all the Rules and Orders of that Court. 7. Thus hee irregularly admitted of an Oath in this Cause for to confront an Oath contrary to all practise and the duty of a good Judge for that where an Oath is once received and upon Record in a Court of Justice an other Oath in the Negative hath never been admitted point-blank in opposition to the former The onely Remedy in such Cases being by Bill or Information that all parties concerned may interplead the matter in difference and thereupon right and justice to bee done where the fault is found 8. That where the Accusation hath been once answered upon Oath in the particulers of the Charge it is against the ordinary rules of all Courts of Justice for to re-examine that party again upon those very things to which he hath precisely answered yet did the said Lord Keeper Coventry you see enforce Master Alexander twice to answer that thing over again upon his Oath which he had punctually answered once before nay once publiquely in Court interrogated by himself and after that again by examination of the Judges by him principally directed which was onely done to have drawn from him some guilt if possible whereby to have ruined and undoned him 9. It hath been never seen in any Court of Justice that the party complayning hath been bound up in the matter complained of by the Oath of any Defendant without his own consent yet in this Case Nevill being legally charged with committing of the said offence was received by the said Lord Keeper Coventry for to purge himself upon his Oath without any consent had or sought for of Master Alexander and in an extrajudiciall way also and made use of it afterwards as a testimony upon which to ground the Sentence having nothing more to support it withall 10. In all Bills and Informations exhibited in that Court the Cause being so penall to the party complained against the matter ought to have been set down truely and as precisely as in an Indictment that so the party accused might have certainty to what to answer for if one offence bee charged and another proved in such case there is no ground for to warrant a Sentence nor hath it been seen that any man in any Court whatsoever hath been concluded by generals nor by offences proved which are heterogenia and not of the matter in question for so to judge is to judge parte inandita ultera for if this should be admitted no man possibly could be safe if to be judged for that which he hath been never received to answer yet the said Lord Keeper Coventry admitted of both these proceedings to condemn Master Alexander For first hee received the said _____ Cooke to depose matter in Court against Master Alexander diverse and from the things in question and caused that to bee inserted in the Sentence as convincing testimony which you see is a thing false in it self now it comes to be defended He admitted of divers generals also not proved nor before alleadged to be inserted in the said Sentence as matter of testimony to support it which were farre otherwise in truth and deed then they stand therein urged and pressed and which are so many of them as that in effect the whole Sentence is founded upon nothing else most illegally and unwarrantably 11. Whereas no man after his Answer in Court but is lawfully served with an Order or Processe to joyne issue in the matter controverted or depending and after issue joyned is called by Processe or Order for to appear at a certain day and time to hear judgement pronounced and to make his just defence that so innocence may not suffer if possibly to bee prevented but in this Case of Master Alexanders the said Lord Keeper Coventry proceeds to judgements without doing of either of these and yet to give some colour for this wrong doing and to make quick work of it hee overshadows it with another thing an errour of as high a nature and receives that for a service of Master Alexander to hear judgement which hath appeared to have been no service at all and that in seven dayes time from the day that the Judges certificate was first produced and read in Court and then Resolved upon the first to draw this matter unto a formall hearing it is concluded to be proceeded in is debated and Sentenced and M. Alexander destroyed without defence and what needed all this post-hast if not to have made it onely the advantage of destroying him in his absence In which way they were sure to bring about their ends 12. That upon the matter he directs in the Sentence the Governours of Lincolns-Inne whereof Master Alexander was a Member to expell him the Society fearing lest he should not be otherwise made miserable enough and that they might without that hint or direction by the way have forborn to have proceeded against him with a like severity but by this Weathercock you may see where the Winde blew and that malice when it rageth is without bounds or restraint and now with holy Job Chap. 19.7 I might cry out of wrong but I was not heard I cried out aloud but there was no judgement 13. That the said Lord Keeper Coventry after the question was once stirred never so much as once endeavoured afterwards to support the Sentence given against Yates though upon so good proof appearing in the Books the said Deposition of John Warren being set aside but absolutely dismissed Yates without more ado contrary to the duty of his Place and Office whereby it is further manifest it was not for his love and zeal unto justice but revenge that he herein more aymed at was the cause that he persecuted M. Alexander with so much extremity 14. That he was not ignorant that the crime objected was in it self petty and without consideration in case it had been the Act of M. Alexander as you finde him cleered of it in that which hath gone before and therefore it further sheweth the inveteracy of his rancor and for what cause he was so violent in the persecution of M. Alexander thus unjusty unto Sentence 15. That the said Lord Keeper Coventry was resolved you may see by the excessivenesse and immoderation of the Fine and other things required to be performed by the Sentence to make it
then present wherein the said two words that and did were defaced and blotted out of the said John Warrens Deposition to the 39 Interrogatory which had been openly read in Court and misled the Court to sentence as aforesaid and by that means his Deposition was made positive and absolute as of his own knowledge whereas by the said Defendants copie of the said Deposition first shewed to his Lordship with the words that and did fair written therein was upon hearsay Shortly afterwards viz. before two of the clock that afternoon the said Master Alexander came to Grayes-Inne to the said Master Jones his chamber there and then and there in presence and hearing of Master Hooker one other of the Attorneys of this honourable Court in great perplexity as it then seemed fell into some passions saying What an infortunate man am I What will become of me And then being demanded by Master Hooker and Master Jones Of whom he had or received his copies of the said Depositions whereof that was one answered He could not tell whether he had received it from the Examiner or from Henry Nevile Master Jones his Clerk with many bitter and heavie imprecations and oaths vowing and protesting He knew not of the blotting out of those words or altering the copie and that the copies were as he first received them Whereupon the said Alexander Master Jones and Master Hooker went all together into the Examiners Studie of this Court to see the Record of the originall Deposition of the said John Warren to the said 39 Interrogatory on his part which being shewed unto him by the Examiner the Record was fair and plain with the words that and did therein written with the hand-writing of Master Gay the Examiner who died in August last Hereupon the said Master Alexander used the like speeches as before he had done in Master Jones his Studie and so departed Yet afterwards the said Alexander desirous and plotting how to excuse himself of defacing and blotting out of the said two words that and did out of the copie of the said Deposition and to lay and fix it upon the said Henry Nevile one of Master Jones his Clerks on the morrow after being the 26 day of October last came into the Star-Chamber-Office in Grayes-Inne and before Matthew Goade Esquire Deputie-Clerk of this Court being sworn upon the holy Euangelists did make a voluntary Oath and Affidavit That he having retained Master Jones for his Attorney and Henry Nevile his Clerk to take care and sollicite his said Suit and the Cause coming to publication the said Nevil undertook to procure for him the said Alexander the copies of the said Depositions taken in that Cause and for that purpose received not onely the Fees and Duties for such copies as he procured for him the said Alexander but likewise had extraordinary reward and satisfaction for his pains therein and that the said Nevile went with him the said Alexander to the Examiners Office of the Court and there procured other copies of Depositions belonging to this Cause which were delivered to the said Alexander in the presence of the said Nevile amongst which was contained the Deposition of the said John Warren That done he repaired with the said Books to Master Hudson being of his counsel to be advised and to peruse the same Depositions All which Depositions being perused accordingly as well of the said John Warren as the rest and his said Counsel conceiving the said John Warrens to the 39 Interrogatory to be something doubtfull he made a mark in the Margent thereof and wished the said Alexander for his better satisfaction to go and get the same examined in the office to see if the same Deposition were truely copied and that accordingly the said Alexander repaired therewith to the said Nevile and informed him what his Counsell had directed for examining the copie and the said Nevile took the said Deposition of the said Alexander and carried it to the Examiners Office but the Examiner not being within the said Alexander did leave the said copie of the said Deposition with the said Nevile to be examined promising him satisfaction and content for his pains and shortly after the said Alexander called to the said Nevile for the same who told him That he had examined the said Warrens Deposition in that point with the Originall and that he had then made it to agree with the Record and so delivered the same back again to the said Alexander with the two words that and did rased in the said Warrens Deposition as it now was in the said copie and after that the said Alexander gave him satisfaction for his pains and search And the said Alexander deposed and protested upon his Salvation That the said severall words that and did were in the said Warrens Deposition fair written when he delivered the same to the said Nevile and that the said words were rased and blotted out as they then were when he received the same back again from the said Nevile shewing the same to the said Master Alexander and said That he had made it to agree with the Record And the said Alexander protested and affirmed That the same was not altered or blotted out either by him or any other to his knowledge other then by the said Nevile as aforesaid And the said Alexander deposed That the said Nevile was trusted with the charge and care of the said Cause and having taken upon him to draw the Bill and part of the Interrogatory and took upon him the solliciting and managing of the said Cause and over and besides what he had received he moved the said Alexander to promise him further satisfaction after the hearing of the Cause At which next sitting being the 27 of October last according to the said Order was brought into this honourable Court the Record of the originall Deposition of the said John Warren taken upon the said 39 Interrogatory and was seen read and perused by this honourable Court wherein the said two words that and did were fair written without any blotting defacing or interlineation and thereupon the said Master Jones made humble suit to this honourable Court that he might be sworn in open Court for the clearing of himself of any manner of suspicion or the least touch that might have been imputed unto him thereabouts who was sworn accordingly and upon his Oath delivered That to his uttermost knowledge he never saw the said Paper-copie of the said John Warrens Deposition before it was put into his hands to be read at the hearing of the Cause the last Sitting before Whereupon all the honourable Presence openly pronounced the said Master Jones to be innocent and clear from the least suspicion of being privie or consenting to the said blotting or defacing of the said copie And the said Henry Nevile being then likewise present humbly petitioned this honourable Court that he himself and the said Alexander also might be both sworn upon their corporall Oaths in open
Court and examined upon Interrogatories or otherwise touching the defacing and blotting out of the said words that and did and also that the said Master Hooker might be likewise sworn to declare upon his oath what he could say for discovery of the truth touching the matter aforesaid all which were sworn in open Court accordingly Whereupon and upon publike reading of the said Alexanders Affidavit in open Court wherein and some Demands then made by the Court to the said Alexander there plainly appeared a repugnancie to truth wherein he had catched himself and discovered his guiltinesse of the said Offence The Court was pleased to required the Lord chief Justice of the Kings Bench and Master Justice Dodderidge both present in Court to take the Examination of the said Alexander Nevile and Master Hooker touching the premises who took great pains therein accordingly and by the earnest sollicitation of the said Nevile on the seventh day of this instant November returned into this honourable Court their certificate of all their proceedings therein which said certificate was openly read in Court upon the tenth day of this instant November upon the reading whereof and opening the points of the same certificate by Sir John Finch Knight of counsell with the said Nevile the Court was inclineable to be of opinion that the said Alexander himself was the man that did blot out and deface the said two words that and did out of the said John Warrens Deposition for his own advantage against the said late Defendant Yates but for that the said Alexander was neither himself in this honourable Court in person neither had any counsel to speak for him the Court therefore did forbear to give any finall Sentence or Decree therein that day but gave the said Alexander time untill the next sitting-day to shew cause if any he had by his counsel or otherwise why the Court should not proceed to sentence against him for that Misdemeanour or in default thereof the Court intended to proceed to sentence the next sitting-day at which time the said Alexander was ordered to be present at the Bar in person Now this day was read in open Court an Affidavit of Charles Bagshaw Gentleman That he had done his best endeavour to serve the said Jerome Alexander with the said Order and to give him notice thereof for which purpose he had sought him at his chamber at Lincolns-Inne and given unto his boy or Clerk whom he found in his said chamber a true copie of the said Order and the said Nevile himself offering to be deposed That he did at the late Lord chief Justices give the said Alexander himself warning to attend the Court at his perill All which notwithstanding the said Alexander made default and had withdrawn himself as was now informed in this honourable Court. Whereupon was read again in open Court the said Alexanders Affidavit and the said Certificate of the said Lord chief Justice and Master Justice Dodderidge Upon the reading whereof and opening of all the parts and points thereof by Sir John Finch Knight and Sir Heneage Finch Knight Recordeer of London both of counsel with the said Henry Nevile who was present in Court himself to stand to Justice it plainly appeared to this most honourable Court aswell by divers apparant contrarieties between the said Alexanders Affidavit aforementioned and his Examination taken upon his Oath before the said Judges as by divers other pregnant reasons and circumstances conducing to prove him guilty of this great offence and also by the testimony of _____ Cook Gentleman sworn in open Court who upon his corporall Oath deposed That the said Alexander had formerly been taken very foul in his own cause in the same kinde or worse at a Tryall in the countie of Norfolk at an Assizes holden at thetford before the said Master Justice Dodderidge who bound him to the good behaviour for his offence then committed And for that also the said Alexander was fled and durst not abide Judgement as the said Nevile did who prosecuted him for that offence this honourable Court was clear of opinion that the said Alexander himself was guilty of that foul Misdemeanour and Offence of defacing and blotting out of the said two words that and did out of the copie of the said John Warrens Deposition for his own advantage and ends against the said Yates whereby this honourable Court was misled in their judgements in censuring and condemning the said Yates as afore is declared And have therefore Ordered Adjudged and Decreed the said Jerome Alexander for his said foul Offence and Misdemeanour well worthy of sharp and severe Punishment for the same and that he shall be utterly disabled to practice as a Counsellour at Law publikely at the Bar or privately in his chamber holding him not worthy to be of the Society of Lincolns-Inne whereof he was a member have therefore left him to the consideration of the Governours of that House and to pay a Fine of 500l. to His Majesties use be committo the Prison of the Fleet and before his enlargement out of prison shall publikely at the Bar of thisCourt in humble and submissive manner acknowledge his great offence against God and this honourable Court and shall shew himself very penitent and sorrowfull for the same And this honourable Court pronouncing the said Nevile to be clear and free from committing or being privie to the committing of the said Offence of blotting out the words of the copie aforesaid and gravely considering the great trouble losse damage and danger which the said Nevile hath been put unto for clearing of his credit and reputation in his service to the Court in defence of his own innocencie in this cause and in prosecuting and bringing to censure the said Alexander for the same his great Offence and Misdemeanour Have therefore further Ordered Adjudged and Decreed That the said Jerome Alexander shall satisfie and pay to the said Henry Nevile for and towards his losse and damage in that behalf the Sum of 50l. of lawfull money of England Jo. Arthur Dep. Jurat 5 die Maii 1642. Ro. Riche Thomas Talbot of London Gent. doth depose That this Writing is a true copie of the Record of the Sentence therein mentioned being examined by the Record by me the said Thomas Tallbot EXCEPTIONS taken by the said Jerome Alexander Esq unto the Dismission Decree and Proceeding of the Court of Star-Chamber against him touching the said pretended blotting out of these two words that and did in the Paper-copie of one John Warrens Deposition taken in the Cause wherein he was Plaintiff in the said Court against John Yates and others Defendants In anno secundo Caroli Regis First against the Dismission 1 THat it was given against him notwithstanding good cause and proof appearing within the Books to have sentenced the Defendant Yates for that offence of terrifying of Witnesses and tampering with them albeit John Warrens Deposition to the nine and thirtieth Article had been
wholly set aside and albeit John Warren in his Deposition to other Articles proves in effect the said Yates guilty of the said offence 2 That albeit Yates upon the said Hearing was once fined for the said Offence yet he was afterwards dismissed when sufficient matter thus appeared against him 3 That the Dismission was given and costs awarded against him when he had proved some part of his complaint against some other of the Defendants besides Yates who dying before the hearing thereof escaped a censure for which cause the act of God onely intervening he ought to have had his costs and not paid costs 4 That this Dismission was given when it appeared to the Court by so much of the causes as was already heard that he had probabilem causam litigandi and therefore if he should have had no costs ought by the course of the Court to have paid no costs 5 That 130l. Costs was taxed by the late Lord Coventry then Lord Keeper against him whenas by the Bill of costs it doth appear that they are very immoderate and extreme 1 First by the sum and totall thereof summoned up in the foot of the said Bill of costs there appears to be 36l. 10s. or thereabouts cast into the totall of the said Bill more then re vera the same do amount unto by the particulars of the said Bill which must of necessity be done to give colour to tax and allow the more costs against the Petitioner 2 That there is 76l. 10.4 set down for the Defendants travelling charges and sometimes 8l. and 12l. and more in a Term when in all that time after the appearance and answers put in their cause was commonly followed by their Agent and Attorney who have their Fees allowed them in the Bill of costs besides 3 That in the Bill of costs 40l. and more is set down at least for counsel-Fees in nine Terms and sometimes 12l. in a Term when by the ordinary Rules of the Court the Defendants should have had allowed but one counsel in every of these nine Terms and but 10s. a Fee in every Term for what is given more is of the clients own superfluity and not to have been charged upon him So there is 116l. 10s. and more set down for travelling charges and counsel-Fees Secondly against the Sentence That it is illegal and without foundation for the matter and manner of the said Sentence besides That the Paper-copie of that Deposition in which the words are supposed to be blotted he could never see to this day to be satisfied that it was so it being taken from his servant in his absence nor had he perused it of neer three yeers before that time but were with his Sollicitour attending for a hearing First for the matter of it It is alleadged in the Sentence to be done by him for his own advantage which is not so 1 Because it appears he had no need to help the testimony of that Witnesse by so indirect a course because it appears clearly in the Books that there is sufficient testimony besides for the proof of that Charge 2 It cannot be presumed that he who had probabilem causam litigandi and therefore by the course of that Court was to have paid costs albeit the Defendant had not been fined would commit a Misdemeanour which would not redound any thing to his benefit 3 It cannot be presumed that he would have done that act which must of necessity have been controlled by the Defendants copie then present in Court and by the Record it self 4 It cannot be presumed any such act would have been done so grosly a mark of eminence being made in the Margent which would have made the thing the more remarkable Secondly 1 Paper-copies of Depositions and Records are not credited till be justified for true copies upon Oath which he never did do as appears by the Sentence 2 The common-Law and that Court of Star-chamber imitating the Law in that have never punished offences of this nature with more then the losse of the fruit of that thing intended in it 3 If Offences of this nature begin but by the tender of them to be read it cannot be applied to him as an Offence for Nevile his Sollicitour in the cause had the Books and managing of the cause at the hearing and delivered them to Master Jones his Master and Atturney in the cause to read Thirdly In all causes criminall if the supposed Delinquent deny the fact there ought to be no proceeding without Bill or Information Answer and Examination of Witnesses so that the party may make his Defence in this case He did upon his Oath deny the fact objected yet the Court proceeded without Information Bill Answer or Examination of Witnesses whereby he lost the be benefit of making his just Defence Fourthly against the ground of the Sentence viz. the proof of the fact objected 1 First he did upon his Oath deny the fact and there is no proof at all either by confession deposition or otherwise to convince him 2 That testimonie which is produced is then such upon whom the crime must have fallen in case he were not guilty so that testimony onely tended to purge such as deposed it Nevil himself 3 That M. Alexander against all ordinary proceedings of Justice after he had purged himself upon his Oath was again enforced to be sworn and reexamined upon his Oath to have accused himself and this his reexamination pressed against him in the Sentence against the truth thereof 4 Matters extrajudicial and diverse from the thing in question is received and deposed against him and inverted in the Sentence contrary to all ordinary Rules of proceeding and to the truth it self Fifthly against the sentence it self 1 It is given against him without any legal notice and in his absence necessitated upon reall occasions whereby he was disabled to make his Defence 2 It was interlaced with divers scandalous and impertinent suggestions thereby to render him causlesly odious and with some untrue surmises viz. of proof of the crime and of contradiction in his Examinations neither of which are so 3 In case the Proceedings had been legal and the Fact had been proved yet the Sentence is excessive 1 Excissive in respect he had suffered before viz. the reversall of a Sentence pronounced for him and taxing of 130 l. costs to the Defendant 2 Excessive in it self disabling him to use his profession either publikely at the Bar or privately in his chamber 3 Fining him 500 l. to His Majestie 4 In adjudging him to Imprisonment till he should make a publike Submission in Court and confesse himself guilty of the Offence whereof he was innocent 5 In inviting his expulsion out of the Society of Lincolns-Inne whereof he was a Member which thereupon was done and his chamber seized and taken from him for no other cause 6 In giving 50 l. damages to Nevile who was the wrong-doer and guilty of the said Offence Sixthly against the Proceedings
after the Sentence 1 That the Fine was passed under the Great Seal to one Master Humfrey Fulwood then Master Secretary Cokes servant and the greatest part of it paid without such Instalment as is usually allowed of course in such cases 2 That by means of the late Lord Coventry then Lord Keeper of the Great Seal of England his great advesary and of the late Earl of Strafford as ill affected to him His Majesties Grace and Favour for pardon being then all the means left to give him being in the world was continually interrupted and kept from him that by many yeers sollicitation of hisfriends in his absence in Ireland and of many noble Personages at Court it could not be obtained And when at length his father in law with much ado prevailed with His Majestie for it yet the said Lord Coventry so prevailed with His Majestie that he caused a Condition to be inserted in it That he should not have liberty to use his Profession here in this Kingdom to put him out of all hopes of returning well knowing that he was resolved to question his injustice whereof there needed little other proof then the very Sentence it self Then to make good these Exceptions I shall take the Sentence asunder and in Parts and so proceed to shew the apparant Injustice done to Master Alexander by it and the Errours and Irregularity thereof 1. THis day came to be heard by special Order of this honourable Court of the 10 of this instant November a very foul Offence Practice and Misdemeanour of the Jerome Alexander an Utter-Barrester at the Law and late Plaintiff in this honourable Court against John Yates and others late Defendants which Cause was heard in open Court on the 25 of October last At the hearing of which Cause the main wherewith the said Yates stood charged was The threatning and terrifying of Witnesses which the said Alexander was to produce ac a former Triall of Nisi Prius in the Countie of Norfolk between him the said Yates then Plaintiff and the said Alexander then Defendant Sentence fol. 1 In this first observe The Sentence is given so soon as 't is begun and before any matter shown to prove the Fact Master Alexander is pronounced guilty of a foul Offence Practice and Misdemeanour according to that Rule of Matchiavil who adviseth to cast dirt enough in the face and some will stick to scandalize with many Reproaches and the party though never so innocent shall not go away without some stain in his Reputation Nor was the said Yates his threatning and terrifying of Witnesses therein mentioned the main wherewith the said Yates stood charged in that Suit wherein Master Alexander was Plaintiff against the said Yates and others Defendants as the said Sentence unjustly recites but the said Yates in that Suit was likewise charged with Subnornation of Perjury and Imbracery as well with that Charge and which stands proved against him in that Suit To make this appear you shall understand that in Easter-Term 19 Jacobi Master Alexander preferred his Bill of Complaint in that Court of Star-Chamber against Owen Godfrey Esquire for Perjury John Yates for subornation of Perjury and for embracing of Jurors and for tampering with and terrifying of Witnesses and against Allan Lampkin William Wacy and John Lawrence Jurors by Yates embraced The Bill sets forth that About the the 30 of April anno 14 Jacobi Master Alexanders father then deceased did together with one Edward Olifer and for his onely Debt cause three Writings to be made purporting Writings obligatory with penalties of 10 l. apiece mentioned to be conditioned for the payment of 5 l. apiece to the said John Yates at three severall days which being written subscribed and sealed by the said Olifer and Master Alexanders father were delivered into the hands of one Christopher Kirby with him to remain as Escrolls with this intent That if the said Yates should deliver up into the hands of the said Kirby one Obligation of the penalty of 40 l. conditioned for the payment of 24 l. wherein the said Olifer stood bound unto the said Yates to be cancelled that then the said Christoper Kirby should deliver the said three Writings into the hands of the said Yates as the Acts and Deeds of the said Olifer and of Master Alexanders father or otherwise not And further set forth that the said Yates did never deliver up the said Bond of 40 l. into the said Kirby's hands to be cancelled but refused so to do and therefore the said three Writings remained as Escrolls and void That shortly after the said Kirby died and after his decease and after such time as the money was to have been paid if the said Writings had taken effect the said Yates by some sinister means gains the said three Writings into his hands and putteth the same in suit against Master Alexanders father as if they had been his Deeds who pleaed this especial matter and concluded non sunt facta Whereupon issue was joyned but before the Triall Master Alexanders father died and made his said son his sole Executor who proved the Will and after Yates commenced Suit against him as Executor to his father upon the said three Writings to which Master Alexander pleaded the same plea as his father had done before And issue being joyned the said Yates had three severall times taken out the Record of Nisi prius and warned Master Alexander to a Triall which he attended to his extreme charge but still Yates durst not trie it Then Master Alexander took forth the Record to trie it by Proviso when the said Yates had secretly taken the same Record out also And now assuring himself that Master Alexander would be secure first before the said Assizes the said Yates the more for to colour over the matter laboured to have the differences put to arbitration which being condescended unto the Arbitratours met and heard the differences but did make no end and presently afterwards Yates endeavoured to have stollen a Triall of the said Cause before Master Alexander and his Witnesses should have come to Town where the Assizes were kept and the said Yates accordingly procured the same Cause to be called upon within an hour or two after Master Alexander came to the Town altogether unexpected to Master Alexander and the Cause so coming to a Triall and the Issue being Whether the said three Writings were delivered as the Deeds of the said Olifer and Master Alexanders father absolutely or as Escrolls Master Alexander produced five severall Witnesses those whose names were subscribed as Witnesses to the said Writings as others also present at the making and delivery of them to Kirby and one of them being a reverend Preacher and the maker of the Writings and the rest Gentlemen of good rank and quality all which proved fully and clearly that the same three Writings were delivered as Escrolls in such manner as Master Alexander had pleaded Against which Yates did produce the said Owen
delivery of the said Bonds or Writtings this Depondent saw not at that time but nnely a Repetition of what was done before in manner as aforesaid And this Deponent saith That after such Repetition was made the said Defendant Owen Godfrey did at the request of the said Christopher Kirby set his hand to the said Writings and when he had done the said Christopher did then set his name unto them and took them presently and locked them up in his Desk which stood neer the lower end of the Table in the said Parlour And more he cannot to his now-remembrance certainly depose the said Interrogatories saving that he saith That the said Owen Godfrey was not in the Celler of the said house where the said Writings were sealed and delivered at the time of the sealing and delivery of the same but was said to be then in the Parlour of the said house which is three rooms distant from the said Celler And saith That the said Christopher Kirby did keep the said three Writings in his hands after the said 30 day of April in the said 14 yeer of His Majesties Reign untill the time of his death and he died on the 25 day of March in the yeer of our Lord God 1617. And saith That before the said Kirby's death all the days of payment limited in the Conditions of the said Writings were past And this Deponent saith That the cause which moved the said Christopher Kirby to detain and keep the said Writings from the said Defendant Yates was for that the said Yates refused to deliver in the old Bond of the said Edward Olifers to be cancelled as this Deponent verily believeth and this Deponent is rather induced to believe the same for that the said Christopher Kirby using many times to ride to Walsingham-Market and Burnham-Market where he may times met with the said Yates did at his coming home tell this Deponent and others That he had made the said Yates and others acquainted with his the said Kirby's having the said three Writings obligatory aforementioned and had offered to deliver them unto him so he would deliver him up the said old Bond of Edward Olifers to be cancelled but he said That the said Yates did always refuse to deliver up the said old Bond and therefore he said That he the said Yates should never have the said three Writings or to that effect And besides this Deponent being in company with the said Defendant Yates after the death of the said Kirby and after the said Yates had got the Writings into his hands and put them in Suit this Depondent told him that sure it was his the said Yates his fault that the moneys payable upon the said Writings were not paid unto him at the times limited in the Conditions of them for that the said Yates had refused to deliver up the said old Bond of 40 l. and the said Yates then affirmed to him this Deponent that indeed he had refused to deliver up the said old Bond for that the said Kirby had not followed such directions as he gave him in taking security for his money due upon the said Bond of 40 l. or words to that effect And this Deponent well remembreth that he this Deponent was called by summons with other Witnesses on the Complainants behalf to be at three severall Assizes two at Norwich and one at Thetford in the Countie of Norfolk to have testified in the Complainants behalf concerning the said Writings which tended to the Complainants said great trouble and expences And saith That he this Deponent was produced and sworn as a Witnesse in the foresaid Cause between the said Defendant Yates and the now-Complainant at the last Assizes holden at Thetford in and for the Countie of Norfolk And saith That he this Deponent was served with Processe to be at the said Assizes and to testifie on the part of the now-Complainant and there testified the truth of his knowledge and remembrance giving such evidence or to the same effect as is mentioned and set down in this Deponents Answer and Deposition to the fifth sixth and seventh Interrogatory And saith That the said Owen Godfrey was at the said last Assizes holden at Thetford produced as a Witnesse against the now-Complainant by the said Defendant John Yates in the said Cause concerning the said three Writings and the evidence which he then and there gave to the said Jury upon his Corporall-Oath concerning the said Cause was That the said Olifer and the now-Complainants father did seal and deliver the said three Writings as their Deeds absolutely to the use of the said John Yates without any Condition at all c And saith That some time before the said last Assizes holden at Thetford the now-Complainant spake unto this Deponent and told him That he had brought down the Triall between Yates and him by Proviso and would be no longer dallied with by the said Yates and withall the said Complainant delivered him this Deponent a Subpena to be at the said Assizes the said Complainant told him this Deponent that the matter between him and the said Yates was put to the Arbitrement of John Marcoll and John Coot and therefore prayed him this Deponent to be at Walsingham on the Saturday immediately before the said Assizes where the said Arbitratours had a Meeting whereat this Deponent was present but no end could be there made And he saith that at the said Meeting the now-Complainant demanded of the said John Yates Why he being the Complainant did not bring down the said Triall but put him the said Complainant to bring it down by Proviso And the said Yates his Answer thereunto as this Deponent now remembreth was to this effect Because he the said Yates would not be so troublesome to the Countrey for that Thetford was a place where people could get no good diet nor lodging or to that effect And saith That on Munday being the first day of the said Assizes between twelve and one of the clock the same day he this Deponent and the now-Complainant came thither the Complainant not thinking but that he might have had the Cause called upon when he would in regard he had brought it down by Proviso but when he came he was told that the same Cause had been called upon to be tried the first or second Cause the said Yates having secretly brought the same down also without the now-Complainants privity But the Complainant was then told that a friend of his had caused the said Cause to be put off till the afternoon the same day in regard the said now-Complainant was not come with his Witnesses when the same was first called on and so the same Cause was called on again in the afternoon the same day and then it was tried before the now-Complainant was full ready with his Witnesses John Grout Gent. li. A. Fol. 106. to the 5 6 7 8 and 37 Interrogatories John Allen Gent. li. A. fol. 65. to the 33 34 35
and 36 Interrogatories Matthew Lancaster Esq li. C. fol. 1. to the 12 13 and 26 Interrogatories Edward Olifer li. A. fol. 1. to the 5 6 7 and 8 Interrogatories These four Witnesses do prove the same things with the former Deponent Master Robert Warren Clerk by whch the Perjury of Master Owen Godfrey rests cleerly proved without exception and the carriage of Yates to have circumvented Master Alexander in that Triall and to have condemned him in his absence without defence doth manifestly appear also And the Perjury being so cleerly proved the Subornation of Yates is an infallible Consequent thereof But to make it a little more cleer Thus much is deposed by John Allen Gent li. A. fol. 65. to the 36 Interrogatory To which this Deponent saith That it hath been generally held and reported in and about the countrey where the now-Complainant and the said Defendant Yates lived that the said Defendant Owen Godfrey was made and wrought by some of the said Yates his friends to go to the last Assizes at Thetford to testifie for the said Yates against the now-Complainant William Page li. C. fol. 32. to the 48 Interrogatory To which the Deponent saith That at the request of John Yates he went unto Master Owen Godfrey and requested him to be at the Assizes to deliver his Testimony between the said Complainant and Jerome Alexander the Defendant telling him That if the said Master Godfrey did not come Yates could not have his cause tried The said Master Godfrey answered this Deponent upon his speech with him That he could not come and that he could do the said Yates no good in the said triall because it was so long since the said Bonds were delivered that he did not remember how they were delivered And yet afterwards he was procured to come and to depose falsly which must be by some stronger perswasion and means used by Yates then before All which being added to the grosse perjury of the said Master Godfrey left not Yates excusable of the Subornation of that Perjury which tended to his onely advantage Then there was this Testimony to prove the Imbracery John Chapman li. C. fol. 35. to the 54 and 56 Interrogatories Saith That upon some speech with Allan Lampkin one of the Jurours concerning the said Triall the said Lampkin said to him that the said Yates should lose much money if the Triall passed not with him which shewed how he stood affected to Yates his part and was a giving of his Verdict before hand Richard Brampton li. A. fol. 54. to the 19 Interrogatory Saith That on the Saturday next before the Assizes being the Assizes in which the said cause was tried one Allan Lampkin who was one of the Jury summoned to appear at the said Assizes for triall of the Issue then to be tried between the now-Complainant then Defendant and the now-Defendant Yates then Complainant came to the Deponent who was likewise returned of the said Jury and did ask when he meant to go to the said Assizes and this Deponent answered him That he meant to go next morning saying That if he were there any time before noon it would be time enough Whereto the said Lampkin replied That he would ride away to Thetford that night and wished this Deponent to ride with him saying That the said Yates had brought down the Writ of Nisi Prius as well as the said Alexander and that he would have the matter tried at the first sitting if he could in the morning if he could and withall intreating this Deponent that he would say nothing thereof to the said Alexander for that Yates would not that he should know thereof by any means To 22 saith That after the Evidence given to the Jury at the said Assizes at Thetford between the now-Complainant and the now-Defendant Yates the said Allan Lampkin being one of the said Jury did so soon as the Jury were gone together to consider of their Evidence use these speeches viz. Masters we must finde for the Complainant meaning the now-Defendant Yates who was Plaintiff in the said Action and therefore do what you will I believe none but Master Godfreys Testimony and here will I lie if ye finde not for Yates And thus Wacy and Lawrance his companions out of spleen to the sai Complainant would be of the same mindes and these drew the rest of the Jury to give a Verdict in that cause for Yates against the truth Others also testifie the same carriage by these Jurours Upon all which matter it doth appear that Yates his terrifying of Witnesses were not the main charges of the Bill as the Sentence relates And by this also it doth appear that Master Alexander had fully proved the Perjury Subornation and Imbracery But Master Owen Godfrey the Perjurour died before the hearing of the cause and therefore the suborner Yates could not be fined for the Subornation yet by this it doth appear that the said Complainant had more then probabilem causam litigandi and therefore ought to have paid no costs c. 2. FOr proof of which Offence and Misdemeanour against the said John Yates the said late Plaintiff Alexander produced onely two Witnesses namely Robert Warren Clerk and John Warren his brother whose Depositions were openly read in Court and the Deposition of the said Robert Warren was positive and direct of his own knowledge and the Deposition of the said John Warren was upon hearsay Yet the said Alexander for his own advantage had blotted out and defaced the copie of the Deposition of the said John Warren taken in Court to the 39 Interrogatory on the said Alexanders part in these two words viz. that and did and delivered the same copie of the said John Warrens Deposition to the said 39 Interrogatory with the words that and did so blotted out and defaced as aforesaid to his Attorney in this honourable Court to be read in Court upon the hearing of the said Cause against the said John Yates which was read accordingly and by that means the Deposition of the said John Warren was made positive and absolute as of his own knowledge and thereupon this honourable Court and all the honourable Presence here sitting were much abused and misled in their judgements and opinions to sentence and condemn the said John Yates for that offence of threatning and terrifying of Witnesses and for the same to fine him the said Yates to pay to His Majesties use one hundred Marks and to be committed to the prison of the Fleet and the Warden of the Fleet had there taken him into his Custody accordingly Sentence fol. 1 2. Whereas t is alleaged that onely two Witnesses were produced at the hearing those mentioned in the Sentence to prove the said Yates guilty of that offence of terrifying of Witnesses it followed upon this that Master Alexanders Counsel to whom the managing of the Cause at the hearing was left and as is usuall in like cases they began to prove that Charge
against Yates the first and they called for the Testimony of those two Witnesses onely to be read which being done the L. Coventry would hear no more proof to that point nor other charge of the Bill to be proved and so presently moved the Lords to go on to the Censure of Yates undervaluing the cause as petty and almost not worthy consideration which shewed his preparation and thereupon Yates was fined in a hundred Marks onely whereas if his Lordships patience would have heard the cause full out this very charge would otherwise have been punctually proved if the Deposition of John Warren had been set aside As first hear the Deposition of Robert Warren Clerk to this Charge Robert Warren li. A. fol 23. to the 17 Interrogatory Who deposeth That on the Saturday next before the Assizes ' at Thetford the Deponent being at Walsingham where the said Cause should have been ended by Arbitration and having there before the Arbitratours given his testimony by speech as this Deponent hath related in his Answer to the 5 6 and 7 Interrogatories the said Defendant Yates came towards him this Deponent and with menacing words to this or the like effect said That if this Deponent should swear so much at the said Assizes he would have him and his Oath known or else it should cost him a sum of money 40 l. or 100 l. c. John Coot li. B. fol. 2. to the 32 Interrogatory Saith That Master Warren in the Interrogatory named at the aforesaid meeting of the said Arbitratours did protest upon his faith and credit to the said Arbitratours That the said three Writings in the said Bill of Complaint specified were delivered at Christopher Kirbys house at Fakenham in the Celler there upon the day of the date of the said Writings in manner and form as formerly alleadged c. That thereupon he did hear the said Yates say unto the said Master Warren That if he should say so much upon his Oath then he would make him and his Oath known c. Which is a direct Proof with Master Robert Warrens Testimony to convince the said Yates guilty of that Charge of terrifying the said Master Alexanders Witnesses So that it is observable that Master Alexander needed not to have helped John Warrens Deposition for proof of this Charge there being two Witnesses besides him expresse in the Point for What need a rich man be a thief And you may observe that two Witnesses was conceived sufficient by the Court for to convince the said Yates guilty of the said offence as is proved by the very Sentence it self and the Court would hear no more which was Master Alexanders unhappinesse in this particular Nay if John Warrens Depositions had been made use of wherein he stood clear and without exception it had further proved the same Charge against Yates and for this observe what he hath deposed Lib. A. fol. 122. to the 46 Interrogatory Who deposeth That he being in the Faulcon-yard an Inne in little Walsingham and seeing the Defendant Yates there went to him to speak with him about fourty shillings that was remaining due from this Deponent unto the said Yates of a debt of 14 l. or thereabouts for which the said Yates had had a Judgement against this Deponent and all thereof satisfied but the said 40 s. for the payment whereof this Deponent entreated the said Yates to spare him this Deponent for some short time and then the said Yates did request and importune him this Deponent to perswade his this Deponents brother Robert Warren to be sparing in giving his evidence against the said Yates at the Assizes then following in the Cause between him the said Yates and the said Complainant And if this Deponent would so do the said Yates promised him this Deponent that he would deal well with him for the aforesaid Debt due unto him and would do this Deponent a greater courtesie And this Deponent saith That since that time the said Yates meeting with him this Deponent in Walsingham-Market told him That he had been untowardly paid the debt which this Deponent owed him And said withall That he did hear that this Deponent should have gone to London the Term before to have been a Witnesse against him the said Yates in the Cause between him and the Complainant but if this Deponent had gone he saith he would presently have remembred him this Deponent therein This Deponent thinketh his meaning was He would have renewed his Execution against him this Deponent And this Deponent further saith That one Luke Banks Clerk understanding that he this Deponent should have gone for London the last Term to have been a Witnesse for the Complainant did wish him this Deponent not to stir his foot thereabouts alleadging many dangers might ensue upon it Whereupon this Deponent did not go to London that Term to be a Witnesse for the Complainant although he this Deponent was lawfully called by the Complainant thereunto Whereby it further appears That albeit the said John Warrens testimony to the 39 Article had not been made use of at the hearing yet to this 46 Article he testifies as much as proved Yates guilty of terrifying and tampering with Witnesses to conceal the truth And so three Witnesses clearly concurring in the point of this Charge against Yates without all exception which the said Lord Coventry ex Officio and according to the duty of his place ought to have caused the Kings Coucell to have perused and looked into the proceedings to see if there had been matter and proof sufficient within the Books to have continued the Fine set upon Yates for the King notwithstanding any other miscarriage in the businesse whatsoever if there had been any Which he was so far from looking after as it was his onely strife and labour which way and how to fasten this miscarriage of Neviles upon Master Alexander and thought upon nothing else which endeavours to ruine him had another Rise if it were pertinent to this purpose to be here inserted And from all this that hath been said it will not be denied but that if Yates had been dismissed as he ought not to have been without censure yet then Master Alexander was to have paid no costs This then is the first Complaint of Master Alexander against the Dismission of Yates That Yates was dismissed against pregnant proof and such as satisfied the Court of Yates his guiltinesse of terrifying of Master Alexanders Witnesses if it might have been received and was desired and pressed by Master Alexander to have been taken into consideration after this question did arise which the Lord Coventry slightly passed over without regard and so awed Master Alexander and his counsel that they perceiving what he went about and the Officers of the Court labouring by all means possible to take off the offence from one of their Members the said Nevile and it being the Court whereunto his counsell applied themselves for practice not one of them would be
anno praed Forthe Charges of one of the Defendants in coming up to Reading-Term to attend the hearing of the cause there 02 00 00 For the Attorneys Fees 00 03 04 To several learned counsel to attend the hearing at the Bar this Term 04 00 00 For the said Defendants charges in attendance at Reading-Term and return home 03 10 00 The Attorneys Fees of these Terms Termino Hillarii anno praedicto 00 10 00 The Attorneys Fees of these Terms Termino Pasche anno 2 Car. R. 00 10 00 The Attorneys Fees of these Terms Termino Trinitat anno praedicto 00 10 00 Termino Michaelis anno praedicto For the charges of two of the Defendants in coming up this Term to attend the hearing of the cause 03 00 00 For the Attorneys Fees 00 03 04 To several learned counsel to attend the hearing at the Bar two severall days this Term 12 00 00 For the entry and copie of the Order of Dismission 00 10 00 For the Fees of the four Defendants Dismissions 00 08 00 For the charges of the said two Defendants in their attendance here this Term and their return home 01 00 00 For drawing this bill of costs 00 03 04 For the Attorneys Fee for the same 00 03 04 For the Warrant and Subpena for costs 00 04 06 Sum. total 198 19 06 Taxat ad 130 00 00 Hamo Claxton Tho Coventry Cust Thomas Talbot of London Gent. doth depose That this writing is a true copie of the originall Bill of Costs remaining upon Record with Master Claxton and examined by the Record by me the said Thomas Talbot Jurat 5 die Maii 1642. Ro. Riche To this Bill of Costs Master Alexander hath these just Exceptions First he leaveth it to judgement if the Defendants Attorney in that Suit who drew it up and presented it did give a clear and fair title to this Bill of costs or not for by the Testimony and Evidence aforesaid it appears that the Complaint was neither wrongfull unjust vexatious malicious or slanderous the Perjury Subornation imbracery and threatning and terrifying of Witnesses being so fully and clearly proved as before Secondly it appeareth that in the Bill of costs he setteth down in the foot the totall thereof to amount unto 191 l. 19 s. 6 d. whereas re vera and in truth the sum is but 162 l. 17 s. 6 d. being rightly cast so that he sets down 36 l. 2 s. more in his totall then is contained in his particulars And this I may be bold to say was not well done nor according to his duty for by this means the greater costs were allowed unto the Defendants Nor is this all the injury done to Master Alexander by this Bill of costs for there are many unwarrantable particulars therein also inserted no ways to have been demanded or allowed for there is set down of this for the Defendants very travelling-charges and expences 76 l. 13 s. 4 d. and of his 3 l. 6 l. 11 l. and 16 l. set down spent in a Term when after the first Temr of their appearance and putting in of their Answers in Court their defence was made by a Sollicitour who at most had not above 10 s. a Term for his pains Besides they were Yeomen and not of any quality that they should be so lavish in their expences Nor is this all for in this Bill of costs there is also set down for counsel-Fees and their Clerks Fees 46 l. 3 s. 4 d. or thereabouts and 4 l. 5 l. 12 l. set down for counsel-Fees in a Term when nothing is said to be done but perusing of Books and attending at the Bar whereas according to the nsuall course of all Courts the Client Plaintiff or Defendant recovering or being dismissed upon his Bill of costs is but to insert and ought not o be allowed more than 10 s. for a Counsellours Fee and but for one counsel in a Term if he retains more or rewards them better it is of his own superfluity and for his own dispatch and all this 130 l. was demanded upon the matter but for nine Terms proceedings For though it be true that the Cause depended 24 Terms yet in 15 of those Terms nothing was done wherein counsel was used as it doth appear by the Bill of costs it self The Attorneys of this Court when they did enter into their Offices did take a solemn Oath to behave themselves justly towards His Majestie and all His loving subjects and that it was one part of their duties in their places to have drawn up Bills of costs for their Clients after Sentences and Dismissions wherein they ought not to have exceeded their bounds and moderation without the subjecting themselves to the danger of censure so when these Ministers of the Court did transgresse and go beyond their rules and limits it was no warrant to the said Lord Keeper in whom the oversight and controll thereof did onely lie thereupon to do injury to any other Through nescience it could not be cannot be presumed done by negligence especially being at the first entrance into his place for some other reason then it was which I must leave you to imagine Moreover it was the course of that Court in all cases that where the Defendants or any of them were proved guilty of the crimes and offences charged in the Bill albeit in respect of some intervenient acts it so fell out as that they could not be sentenced the same not being an act of the Complainants own wrong in such causes albeit the Defendants were freed from censure yet did they usually pay the Plaintiffs their costs as in the case of one Tunstall and of one Allen in that Court a citizen of London who had a Bond from the friends of one of his Apprentices in 40 l. conditioned for his said Apprentices truth and faithfull carriage of himself in his Masters service and this 40 l. was placed in the Bond in figures And the Apprentice imbezzelling more from his Master then the Penalty would satisfie he added a cypher and made it 400 l. and upon that brought his Action for which a Bill of Forgery was preferred against him in the Star-chamber and upon a solemn debate and hearing of the cause albeit it was adjudged to be no forgery but did onely make void the Obligation and so left him remedilesse to recover any thing upon than Bond and therefore the cause dismissed yet the truth and allegation of the Plaintiffs Bill apearing to be proved to the Court he was adjudged to pay the Plaintiff his costs And so in many other cases of like nature it hath been done in that Court And whether Master Alexanders case be not much better proved against the Defendants in his Suit of crimes censurable the act of God onely preventing the punishment of the Perjurour and thereupon the Suborner onely cleared of that charge and the other charges of the Bill against the other Defendants confessed in the Sentence to be proved
by single Testimony And it appearing that there was sufficient matter in the Books fully to have convicted the Defendants guilty of the crimes laid unto their charge and was not Master Alexanders fault that they were not heard Thus far he leaveth it to be rightly considered how he was dealt withall in this Dismission with costs Besides as the case stood he conceiveth the matter extraordinary it was not in the power of the said Lord Coventry as upon ordinary dismissions and matters of form to have taxed any costs without an especial Order af the Court for which he had none And when you shall peruse the Order of Dismission which followeth and which was all the Ground and Warrant for taxing of this Bill of Costs if you shall be but pleased to remember what hath been proved before you will understand it to be the forerunner of the resolved ruine intended towards Master Alexander in that matter stufft with apparant untruths and making way for that which after followed The Order followeth In Camera Stell coram Concil lbid vicesimo quinto die Octobris anno secundo Caroli Regis THis day came to be heard the matter of Complaint here exhibited by Jerome Alexander Esq Plaintiff against John Yates John Lawrence Allan Lampkin and William Wacy Defendants for supposed Perjury Subornation of Perjury Inbracery of Jurours and threatning and terrifying of Witnesses which by the Plaintiffs Bill was laid to the charge of the said Yates onely Upon the opening whereof by the Plaintiffs Counsel at the Bar and reading the proofs on his part there appeared no sufficient matter at all to convince the said Defendants Lawrence Lampkin and Wacy or any of them of the said supposed offences or misdemeanours wherewith they every or any of them stood charged by the Plaintiffs Bill and therefore the Court hath absolutely dismissed and discharged them and every of them of and from any further attendance about the same Cause hereafter But as touching the said John Yates for the said offences of threatning of Witnesses there were read for proof thereof two Witnesses viz. Robert Warren Clerk and John Warren on the Plaintiffs part in the Deposition of which said John Warren taken in Court ot the nine and thirtieth Interrogatory as the Plaintiffs copie thereof read in Courts was the words that and did were blotted out and defaced and by that means the said Deposition was positive and absolute as upon the Deponents own knowledge whereas the said words that and did being not blotted out is but upon hearsay Which blotting out and defacing of the said words that and did in two severall places of the said John Warrens Deposition to the said 39 Interrogatory much misled the judgement and censure of his Honourable Court who condemned the said John Yates for that offence and adjudged him to pay one hundred Marks Fine to His Majesties use and to be committed to the prison of the Fleet. But in the Defendants copie of the said John Warrens Deposition to the 39 Interrogatory the said words that and did were fair written without any blotting defacing or interlining Which said Deposition of the said John Warren to the said 39 Interrogatory being shewed to this Honourable Court upon the rising thereof it pleased the same Court to take it into consideration and ordered that the originall Deposition of the said John Warren to the said 39 Interrogatory on the Plaintiffs part should be brought into this Court the next sitting-day to be seen and viewed by their Lordships and if the said words that and did were in the said originall Deposition fair written without blotting defacing or interlineation then this honourable Court would be pleased to dismisse the said Defendant yates and to discharge him likewise of any further attendance about the same Cause hereafter in the mean time the Court discharged the said John Yates out of the Custody of the Warden of the Fleet for and upon that Sentence at which next sitting-day viz. the 27 day of this instant October the original Deposition of the said John Warren taken on the Plaintiffs behalf upon the said 39 Interrogatory was brought into this Honourable Court accordingly and the same being seen perused and viewed by this Honourable court the sever all words that and did plainly appeared in the said originall Deposition to be fair written by the Examiner himself without any blotting defacing or interlining and so the said Deposition was upon hearsay and not of the Deponent John Warrens own knowledge This Honourable Court therefore conceiving they had no sufficient ground for the former Sentence have thereupon ordered adjudged and decreed That the said former Sentence against the said John Yates shall not be entred but that he shall likewise be absolutely dismissed and discharged of and from any further attendance about the same Cause hereafter Jo. Arthur Dep. Thomas Talbot of London Gent. doth depose That this a true copie of the Order above mentioned being examined by the Record by me the said Thomas Talbot Jurat 5 die Maii 1642. Ro. Riche From all that hath gone before judge how and by whom that Hononrable Presence were then misled to sentence the said Yates as that Dismission mentioneth or rather if they were not more misled by the said Lord Keeper Coventry to dismisse the said Yates and clear him from a Sentence under which he was restrained upon such a bare supposition of an offence supposed done by M. Alexander nothing to the purpose never intending or minding the busines of his Master the Kings Majesty by all clear means to have supported and maintained the Sentence as he ought and whose duty it was to have given all encouragement to such as nothing for their own advantage but for the love of justice and good of the Common-wealth so spent themselves and their fortunes to bring Delinquents unto condigne punishment for examples sake that others might not dare so for to offend But he thought a worm soon crushed under foot and Master Alexander being then but new entred into the world and daring to question such a man as Master Godfrey son and heir to Richard Godfrey that famous Lawyer in his time of Lincolns-Inne but a Popish Recusant and his son being allied and befriended in that Countrey where your Petitioner dwelt to all the great ones it is no hard matter for any man to believe and for that reason to conceive that Master Alexander could not want adversaries Besides it was a fault in those times to be too forward though in zeal to justice and for the good of the Common-wealth if such a man were toucht upon and when such as Master Alexander that would not comply with the times t was high time to take occasion to rid them out of the way But observe this untruth alleadged in the Order To begin withall it saith The words that and did were blotted out in two places of the copie of the said John Warrens Deposition which they alleadge not in
done him The truth is Master Alexander went then to Jones his Studie in Grays-Inne being his Attorney thinking to have had the Sentence drawn up against Yates not suspecting any such action to have fallen out in the interim after the hearing of the Cause where he found these two Attorneys Jones and Hooker together consulting as it doth seem by the sequel of their actions how they might fasten this miscarriage upon Master Alexander and Master Alexander desiring to have the Sentence drawn up against Yates they told him It could not be and then expressed the Reason which as it was sudden and unexpected so it could not but drive him into wonder and admiration which rather expressed his innocence then any ways declared his guilt to which purpose they endeavour to wrest it And the Books and Breviats having lien above three yeers before ready and prepared for the hearing unseen by Master Alexander to that time for nevile his Sollicitour had them in his custodie a long time together before the hearing and managed them in Court and whether the Charge be true or false Master Alexander must onely take it upon their credit for he was never admitted to see the Book in which this Charge is mentioned to be done to this hour albeit he hath diversly endeavoured for to attain that favour and justice Nor maketh it for their purpose if his Answers were doubtfull to their Question of whom he had the Books for the memory is not always so trusty and ready that upon such a sudden surprisall it can resolve the Demand it must be a work of Recollection that pofitively determines of things so long before-hand acted Nor was it materiall from thomsoever the Books were received and in that time of necessity they must passe many times from hand to hand to make such preparation out of them as were fit to be made use of by Counsel and other2ise at the hearing all which was done immediately after publication above three yeers then before But the matter was Who committed that offence which Jones and Hooker were thus conspiring together how to fix upon Master Alexander and therefore laboured to entrap and entangle him in his talk which no fair practiser I had almost said No honest man would have endeavoured against his Client nor no Attorney that had respected his credit where his credit was no more concerned in it then Master Hookers Then as for their going all together into the Examiners Studie to view the Record if it were so shews that all parties were doubtfull how the Deposition stood What inference can be then drawn from thence by any in different judgement in the least therfore to suspect Master Alexander guilty of this Accusation but serves to excuse him rather that thus laboured to be truely informed the first how it should come about and that Master Alexanders first vows and imprecations as they are pleased to call them passing in their discourse together when they thus lay in wait to have intangled him in that conference if to be so as they alleadged which was never confessed or proved by them and that matter which Master Alexander hath at severall times declared upon his Oath for his own acquittall are not so contradictory diverse or usefull to their cause that any thing can be drawn from thence to make good the charge against him And when that Point shall come to be cleared which is further contained in the Sentence concerning it and which Master Hooker hath deposed Master Alexander shall give it a satisfactory answer The Spirits of the men too may be observed in this their Relation towards Master Alexander how far they are transported even with contempt to his person and quality standing in an equall degree with them every way both in Birth and Fortune that hath no so much addition given him by them as is due to a Gentleman whiles themselves are carried thorow with additions that become men of rank and estimation 6. YEt afterwards the said Alexander desirous and plotting how to excuse himself of defacing and blotting out of the said two words that and did out of the copie of the said Deposition and to lay and fix it upon the said Henry Nevile one of Master Jones his Clerks on the morrow after being the 26 day of October last came into the Star-Chamber-Office in Grays Inne and before Matthew Goad Esquire Deputy-Clerk of this Court being sworn upon the holy Euangelist did make a voluntary Oath and Affidavit That he having retained Master Jones for his Attorney and Henry Nevile to take care and sollicite his said Suit and the Cause coming to publication the said Nevile undertook to procure for him the said Alexander the copies of the said Depositions taken in that Cause and for that purpose not onely receivedy the Fees and Duties for such copies as he had procured for him the said Alexander but likewise had extraordinary reward and satisfaction for his pains therein and that he said Nevile went with him the said Alexander to the Examiner Office of this Court and there procured other copies of Depositions belonging to this Cause which were delivered to the said Alexander in the presence of the said Nevile amongst which was contained the Deposition of the said John Warren That done he repaired with the said Books to Master Hudson being of his Counsel to be advised and to peruse the same Depositions All which Depositions being perused accordingly aswell of the said John Warrne as to the rest and his said Counsel concerning the said John Warrens Deposition to the 39 Interrogatory to be something doubtfull he made a mark in the margin thereof and wished the said Alexander for his better satisfaction to go and get the same examined in the Office to see if the same Deposition were truely copied And that accordingly the said Alexander repaired therewith to the said Nevile and informed him what his Counsel had directed for examining the copie and the said Nevile took the said Deposition of the said Alexander and carried it to the said Examiners Office but the Examiner not being within the said Alexander did leave the said copie of the said Deposition with the said Nevile to be examined promising him satisfaction and content for his pains And shortly after the said Alexander called unto the said Nevile for the same who told him that he had examined the said Warrens Deposition in that point with the original and that he had then made it to agree with the Record and so delivered the same back again to the said Alexander with the two words that and did rased out in the said John Warrens Deposition as now it was in the said copie and after that the said Alexander protested upon his salvation That the said sever all words that and did were in the said Warrens Deposition fair written when he delivered the same into Neviles hand and that the said words were rased and blotted as they then were when he received the
same back again from the said Nevile the said Nevile shewing the same to the said Alexander and said That he had made it to agree with the Record And the said Alexander protested and affirmed That the same was not blotted out eithere by him or any other to his knowledge other then by the said Nevile as aforesaid And the said Alexander deposed that the said Nevile was entrusted with the care and charge of the said Cause and having taken upon him to draw the Bill and part of the Interrogatories and took upon him the managing and solliciting of the said Cause and over and besides what he had received he moved the said Alexander to promise him further satisfaction after the hearing of the Cause See the Sentence fol. 3. This being but the Recitall of Master Alexanders Affidavit first made for clearing of himself in nothing being yet alleadged thus far on in the said Sentence for to impeach it in any thing I shall say nothing thereof more till I shall finde it questioned and then will justifie it for the very truth against all opposition to the contrary whatsoever 7. AT which next Sitting being the 27 of October last according to the said Order was brought into this honourable Court the Record of the Original Deposition of the said John Warren taken upon the said 39 Interrogatory and was seen read and perused by this Honourable Court wherein the said two words that and did were fair written without any blotting defacing or interlineation and thereupon the said Master Jones made humble Suit to this Honourable Court that he might be sworn in open Court for clearing of himself of any manner of suspition or the least touch that might have been imputed unto him thereabouts who was sworn accodingly and upon his Oath delivered That to his utter most knowledge he never saw the Paper-copie of the said John Warrens Deposition before it was put into his hands to read at the hearing of the Cause the last Sitting before Whereupon all the honourable Presence openly pronounced the said Master Jones to be innocent and clear from the least suspition of being privy or consenting to the said blotting or defacing of the said copie Fol. 4 in the Sentence There hath been something said before concerning Master Jones his carriage in the particular of his thus offering himself into purgation being no ways accused But I see such wise men as himself may sometime over-act their own parts for if this be true that he hath sworn he hath shewn a great deal of remisse carriage in the managing of his Place and Office at least that would refer the care thereof onely to his Clerks and receive his Fees and do nothing for them But if it had been materiall I could have put him in minde that he had all the Books by him in his Studie one whole long Vacation which promise to have perused them and did affirm to Master Alexander he had so done and then declared his opinion of the proofs and some of the copies of the Depositions taken by Commission in the Countrey were copied in his own Office and his hand to the Examination But to let that passe as impertinent I hope he hath now recollected himself better in this time that he hath been an Oxford with his Majestie as Master Alexander is informed But to examine his carriage towards his Master the King and towards his Client Master Alexander in this particular in that time be pleased to cast an eye upon the Oath which the Attorneys of that Court whiles it was in being did take at their entring into their Offices and surely himself amongst the rest took it for me YOu shall swear well and truely according the best of your discretion to execute and perform the Office and place of an Attorney in his Majesties most honourable Court of Star-Chamber whereunto you are now admitted and shall bear and behave your self justly towards His Majestie and all His Highnesse loving subjects and suitours in the said Court. So help you God It was further also contained amongst the Rules and Orders of that Court concerning the Duties to have been performed by the severall Officers in their severall Places and amongst the rest That the Attorneys of that Court were to look that their Clients causes were duely prosecuted to the hearing without advantage and that if they should be pressed by any Rules or Orders which might prejudice their Clients in their causes they were to inform counsel to move the Court therein they were also to write the copies of all Bills Answers and of all Pleadings and Examinations taken in the Countrey by Commission for their Clients To prefer their Clients causes to hearing To read all Acts Evidences and Depositions before the Lords To urge for their Clients and after hearing To draw up Bills of Costs for his Lordship the Lord Chancellour or Lord Keepers Taxations and present them And whether Master Jones or Master Hooker have performed their Duties herein required either towards His Majestie or ther Court or Master Alexander by this prospective you may perceive them though at this great distance It is agreed he read this Deposition at the hearing for so it was his duty to do and had he then behaved himself justly towards His Majestie the Court and his Client when he perceived the said Deposition to be marked in the margin and so blotted in these words that and did if they were so as of necessity he must do if his eyes were matches had he then informed the Court thereof as it was his duty to have done and the proper time the most that could have followed upon it had been but the setting aside of that Deposition as uselesse and then Master Alexander could not have been denied to have made use of his other testimony to have more fully proved that Charge and by consequence the Sentence against Yates had been continued Master Alexander had not been destroyed nor had any prejudice happened to any man in the businesse Or if when after this accident had fallen out meerly through Master Jones his voluntary omission and the neglect of his duty if there were no more in the businesse then so and that Yates was censured yet then it had been a part of his duty in that case also further to have enquired into the main body of the Cause aswell to have maintained the said Censure against the said Yates for His Majesties benefit and the common good and justice of the Kingdom as for the clearing of his Client But he was you see so far from doing this as nothing appears in him to be done afterwards but a meer joyning together with Master Hooker and Master Alexanders adversaries to lay and charge this offence upon Master Alexander to undo him An Attorney worthy to be registred unto posterity for an example of fidelity in that wherein he was entrusted And were no Master Alexanders Witnesses now dead after this long time of that action
he could have proved thus much more to have added to Master Jones his everlasting memory of his service in this particular to his Client that Immediately upon the first Rise of this question he was pleased to make this Protestation That he would spend all his Terms gains but that he would fix the fault and blotting out of those words upon Master Alexander and judge if his proceedings afterwards did not make him as good as his word for which Master Alexander hath cause to thank him for his zeal that he would help him unto Justice were it right or wrong We have a Rule in Law That in matters of contract between man and man committed to writing clausulae inconsuetae semper inducunt suspitionem to adde unusuall and unaccustomed Clauses do beget suspition and it hath been found by experience in common practice That as the devil when he intends to play a master-piece of deceit will then transform himself into an Angel of light so he that is about to cozen most will use the most goodly and specious pretences of all the rest but By their works ye shall know them We use to say also That Generalls conclude nothing How then is it possible to pronounce a man innocent and clear from the least suspition of being privie or consenting unto a thing wherein he hath acted or was his duty to act before all parties therein concerned were heard for to object and this upon no other thing then the Oath of the party himself If Master Alexander had had the same justice at the same time in the same Court in the same Cause for whom there was a great deal of more reason he ought to have been cleared also upon the same ground They were the voluntary Oaths of both of them which equally lay before them in judgement for the clearing of themselves And Master Alexander hath cause to wish he had trebled so much as Master Jones his Terms gains did amount unto if so he could have possibly found out any way to have put himself into the same Scale with Master Jones for the clearing of himself 8. ANd the said Henry Nevile being then likewise present humbly petitioned this Honourable Court that he himself and the said Alexander also might be both sworn upon their corporall-oaths in open Court and examined upon Interrogatories or otherwise touching the defacing and blotting out of the said words that and did and also that the said Master Hooker be likewise sworn to declare upon his Oath what he could say for discovery of the truth touching the matter aforesaid All which were sworn in open Court accordingly Whereupon and upon ublike reading of the said Alexanders Affidavit in open Court wherein and some demands then made by the Court to the said Alexander there plainly appeared a repugnancy to truth wherein he had catched himself and discovered his guiltinesse of the said offence Fol. 4 in the Sentence Is it not something strange that albeit Master Alexander was a castaway and not worthy of like consideration with these men yet that the Master and the man should not have the same measure of justice and that which belong both to one thing were not put both in one Case that Nevile too was not presently upon his Oath also declared to be innocent and free from the least suspition of the blotting out of these two words that and did out of the said Paper-copie of the said John Warrens Deposition And surely there was great reason for the Court to have done so for the said Nevile at that time also if this matter alleadged in the Sentence had been true that such a plain repugnancie to truth had then appeared to the Court wherein Master Alexander had catched himself and discovered his guiltinesse of the said offence for this had made an end of all further question about the businesse the Court might then have dealt with Master Alexander as they pleased without more ado But how comes it about that the particulars wherein this guiltinesse so appeared to the Court at that time were not registred for posterity nor do now appear to make this Allegation good The truth is it is but a meer Fiction some more of Matchivails dirt cast in Master Alexanders face to make him seem a little fouler in the eyes of his beholders for had it been so as 't is set forth in the Sentence no reasonable man can think that Master Alexander could have escaped the judgement of the Court upon that instant without more ado and frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest per pautiora Surely the Lord Keeper Coventry who at that time questioned and sifted Master Alexander in Court as Bran with all possible endeavour to have gained this onely confession from him would have taken the advantage thereof if it had been so which had been instar mille testium to have convinced him and was the thing which was afterwards onely desired to have been drawn from Master Alexander by the further Examination of him before the Judges that very day directed and ordered by the Court for to be done Surely the Officers and Ministers of the Court now banded together against Master Alexander would have accounted it a happinesse of his pen to have catched it the first before it had half fallen out of his mouth and it would assuredly have been inserted in the Sentence with a vengeance to him that no publike Proclamation could have so openly divulged it to the world But that this is in the Sentence also it is no wonder when the whole is but a Recollection of Suppositions inserted in it without ground or warrant And the truth is the matter was made cock-sure in those times what by the power of the said Lord Coventry and Archbishop of Canterbury and other Master Alexanders like potent enemies that this matter should never have been stirred again untill the day of the generall Resurrection as shall more fully appear by that which followeth 9. THe Court was pleased to require the Lord Chief Justice of the Kings Bench and Master Justice Dodderidge both present in Court to take the Examination of the said Alexander Nevile and Master Hooker touching the premises who took great pains herein accordingly and at the earnest sollicitation of the said Nevile on the 7 day of this instant November returned into this honourable Court their Certificate of all their proceedings therein which said Certificate was openly read in Court upon the 10 day of this instant November Upon the reading whereof and opening of the points of the same Certificate by Sir John Finch Knight of counsel with the said Nevile the Court was inclineable to be of opinion that the said Alexander himself was the man that did blot out and deface the said two words that and did out of the said John Warrens Deposition for his own advantage against the said late Defendant Yates Fol. 4. in the Sentence To what purpose had all these further Examinations
been to finde out that thing which in the Sentence is alleadged to have been publikely confessed by Master Alexander in Court before But there was more in it then so they might not relie upon this reed and therefore proceeded further to muster up and gather together what they were able to make some colour at least for a Sentence for they saw all this would not do nor serve the turn there was yet but an inclination to think Master Alexander guilty of doing this thing albeit as much now had been done and that which was done had been canvased as thorowly as was possible in Court to gain a belief and opinion of his guiltinesse But to proceed 10. BUt for that the said Alexander was neither himself in this Honourable Court in person neither had any counsel to speak for him the Court therefore did forbear to give any finall Sentence or Decree therein that day but gave the said Alexander time untill the next Sitting-day to shew cause fi any he had by his counsel or otherwise why the Court should not proceed to Sentence against him for that misdemeanour or in default thereof the Court intended to sentence the next sitting-day at which time the said Alexander was ordered to be present at the Bar in person Fol. 5. in the Sentence Surely no Justicers will give a judgement against any man before they be resolved And all this while appears that some of those Judges were not satisfied that Master Alexander was guilty of any such wrong doing as was laid unto his charge and therefore gave this further time which otherwise they would not have done By this also you may pereceive into what a sad condition and strait Master Alexander was driven that having the supreme Judge and Officers of the Court for his adversaries he could procure no counsel that durst to speak or move in his cause though never so just so were men over-awed or related one unto another in those days that Justice had not his current and free passage especially in that Court and that man must be sacrificed unto ruine upon whom the indignation and displeasure of any such as Master Alexanders adversaries fell And when he that would not comply with the times ti being in any way that might hinder their designes it was cause enough to destroy him And what could Master Alexander now expect but destruction when that thing whatsoever he spake for the justifying of himself had a contrary sense and interpretation put upon it and was inverted to his prejudice Counsel none would nay durst not as they told me once to speak in it for when at first they did a little offer some things cooly and faintly in Master Alexanders behalf and put for triall how it would be relished and received they found it passed by in silence if materiall or themselves dis-regarded for the motion And what wise man will engage himself in such a quarrell where whosoever speeds he is sure to get blowes for his recompence Howsoever it was fairly offered had it been accordingly pursued that Master Alexander should at least have notice of their intentions that they were resolved to proceed to sentence him and that he should be present at the Bar in person to hear his condemnation But now it was well understood by Nevile that Master Alexander was before this time gone out of Town into the Countrey neer an hundred miles from London to search for Letters which he had formerly received of his about the businesse in which he hoped to finde his acknowledgement of doing this thing in manner as Master Alexander had alleadged for which reason all their Forces are set on work for to procure this Sentence in his absence and to raise that as one argument of guilt which was intended to have made his more clear Defence and this he taketh God to witnesse was the originall cause of his leaving the Town after that he had once cleared himself again before the Judges thinking it impossible in his own understanding and so conceived by others of better judgement then his that any such thing as a Sentence could have been once thought upon to have been given against him as his case stood 11. NOw this day was read in open Court an Affidavit of Charles Bagshaw Gent. that he had done his best endeavour to serve the said Jerome Alexander with the said Order and to give him notice thereof for which purpose he had sought him at his Chamber at Lincolns Inne and given unto his Boy or Clerk whom he found in the said Chamber a true copie of the said Order And the said Nevile himself offering to be deposed That he did at the late Lord Chief Justices give the said Alexander himself warning to attend the Court at his peril All which notwithstanding the said Alexander made default and had withdrawn himself as was now informed to this honourable Court Fol. 5. in the Sentence In this it is observable as a Ground That in all Courts of Justice whatsoever the Rule is That no man ought to be condemned or to have judgement given against him for any matter depending in any Court of Judicature but the Order or Processe of that Court is first to issue to give him timely notice of the resolution of the Judges of those Courts to proceed to Judgement at some certain time prefixed that so no man may be overtaken uprovided or without making his just Defence except such party as after notice shall wilfully absent or not provide by counsel or otherwise for to justifie himself in his proceedings and without this many an innocent man would be undone And in case where neither the partie by himself or by his Counsel shall appear to defend himself after such notice and that the warning doth sufficiently appear unto that Court to have been given him according to direction that there be no delay in justice the Court will proceed to judgement without him yet with such caution as if possible they will not do him injustice for his contumacy therein nor will wrong their consciences in the Judgement but will try out the truth howsoever by all means for whatsoever lies before them and therefore in such cases of absence they hear all such Answers Depositions of Witnesses and other matters of Record lying before them to be read which before that time the party hath made for his Defence or that he hath alleadged for maintenance of any Charge in such an Action or Proceeding and will in such case be much more wary and circumspect to promote the truth of whatsoever side it is appearing within the Books then if such party had been present for Judges sit not to side and make parties or to take opportunities to revenge themselves but for to do justice and judgement truely and impartially for justice sake without the respect of persons But then see if Master Alexander have received this measure of justice in this matter concerning him An Order of notice for
a hearing hath been made and that was well but that this was shewn to Master Alexander or that Master Alexander had notice of this Order doth in no sort appear Nor had he any notice thereof for first Bagshaws Oath reacheth no further then unto an Endeavour of service he swears nothing positively to satisfie the Court that it weas done And for what Nevile offered for notice as it is far from truth so also it is so far out of the way of a legal notice as it appears both to be false in it self appearing out of the very Sentence and in no sort to have been credited or believed in case it had been true for this Reason Because it was not delivered upon Oath for a Record against which Master Alexander might have taken his remedy for the falsity of it being untrue But that it is grosly false be pleased to observe Nevile offereth to depose What That he did at the then late Lord Chief Justices give the Petitioner himself wearning to attend the Court at his peril First this must of necessity be in time whiles the Judges were upon their Examinations of the businesse and before they made their return into Court and that was long before this Order was made for this appears to be made at a time afterwards when the said Judges Certificate was returned and had been debated in Court and for that Master Alexander then had not appeared by himself or counsel to make any Defence as the Sentence it self sheweth and therefore at the meeting before the Judges at the late Lord chief Justices Chamber Nevile had no reason nor colour to give any such warning to appear upon an Order that was not then conceived nor was there then any cause appearing for the making of any such Order nor for some time afterwards was it made as is remembred before Besides there was little reason for to credit his Report in his own Cause that stood a visible Delinquent unto the Court and nothing to purge himself thereof but his own Oath admitted against all the Rules of justice and ordinary proceedings in Courts of justice whatsoever So that Master Alexander is condemned without Defence And for Bagshaws Affidvait that it was little to the purpose be pleased to cast your eye upon it as it consisteth in all the parts thereof together In Camera Stell decimo quarto die Novembris Anno secundo Car. Regis CHarles Bagshaw of Barnards-Inne London Gent. aged about thirty seven yeers sworn saith That where by an Order of this honourable Court of the 10 of this instant November day is given to Jerome Alexander Esquire till the next Sitting-day to shew cause by his counsel or otherwise why the Court should not proceed to sentence against him and that he the said Alexander should be present at the Bar in person Now this Examinate saith That on the thirteenth day of this instant November this Examinate did repair to the Chamber of the said Master Alexander in Lincolns-Inne and there knocked at the door but no answer being made this Examinate walked a little aside Within a short space the door was opened and a young man or youth coming out and looking about as it seemed to see who it was that knocked Which this Examinate seeing did ask the young man or youth if he were not Master Alexanders Clerk or man and where his Master was who then confessed that the said Master Alexander was his Master but that his said Master was not within neither could he tell where his Master was And then Henry Nevile Clerk to Master Jones one of the Attorneys of this Court came into the Chamber and asked the said Alexanders Clerk for his Master who returning the like answer as he had done to this Examinate Whereupon the said Henry Nevile delivered a copie of the said Order to the said Master Alexanders man willing him to give his Master present knowledge thereof which he said he would do assoon as he did see him And this Examinate is perswaded that the said Alexander hath had knowledge of the said Order his man faithfully promising to deliver it so soon as he could Both this Examinate and the said Henry Nevile charged him so to do and telling him how much it concerned his Master to take notice thereof Jo. Arthur Dep. Ep. per Aylewry Thomas Talbot of London Gent. doth depose That this writing is a true copie of the Affidavit therein mentioned examined by the original Record by me the said Thomas Talbot Jurat 5 die Maii 1642. Ro. Riche This Affdavit how cunningly soever penned by Master Nevile and that he hath carried himself in it yet is no good service of the said Order as hath been observed before for Nevile well knew Master Alexander was at this time and above a week before out of Town when he went with Bagshaw to make this service upon the said Order to Lincolns-Inne And in all cases of this nature where a like Order or Processe is served to cause any to appear to hear Judgement it ought to be first made clear unto the Court that the party to be served if possible hath had personall notice before they proceed to sentence it being so penall as aforesaid And if it be not a personall service made yet then that there be such a service made appearing unto the Court as by infallible consequence the party must have had knowledge of it in convenient time to prepare himself for his Defence for in matters of giving judgement it is not as in other ordinary Cases of serving Processe to answer Bills or interlocutory-Orders where if by a mistake or pressing the service beyond the truth the party fall into a contempt of this he may purge himself upon his Oath upon Interrogatories according to the usuall course and so be set Rectus in Curia again and have repair made him without detriment to his Cause But where Judgements or Sentences are to be given either in the Courts of common-Law or Equity or Star-Chamber there if for want of notice or that upon a false service of Processe presented to the Court the Court proceed to give judgement against the party there is no such Remedy to be had nothing but a Writ of Errour or Bill of review or reversall of such Judgement or Sentence can restore the the party again to what he hath thus lost or shall suffer by it and such Judgement or Sentence may possibly in such cases be so legally founded that they cannot be avoided by any such way neither and yet such parties may possibly have had such matter of fact to have shewn for themselves upon those hearings if they had been heard as would have acquitted them The service of this Order by Bagshawe you see what it is His repair to Master Alexanders Chamber unto Lincolns-Inne where Master Alexander was not and who will be deposed that he was gone out of Town about his occasions aforesaid above a week before in the Countrey
Alexander stands the more clear in his Oath being made with this caution and he who doth a thing by another seemeth to do it by himself and in common parliance men do use to say I have done such a thing or such a thing for you when he hath onely caused and procured it to have been done for him by another assuming the act as his that hath been done by his procurement And so Master Nevil did say He had made it to agree with the Record although he speaketh this falsly to make Master Alexander the rather believe it and therefore it was more safe for Master Alexander to depose the manner how that he delivered the copie to him fair and received it with those alterations and that either Nevil did it himself or caused it to be done which in effect was one and the same thing and thus not possible for Master Alexander to know who actually did it There is this also more remarkable in Master Hookers Examinations upon his Oath and in his Relation of the Conference which passed between him Master Jones and Master Alexander in Master Jones his Studie For in court when he was demanded his knowledge of what passed in that Discourse not being upon his oath he answered and so t is alleadged in the Sentence that he should relate That Master Alexander should then say That the Paper-copie of John Warrens Depositionwas as he first received it But in his Examinations upon Oath before the Judges he leaves out this word first and says that Master Alexander answered his question That the said copie was as he received it which makes a very main and great difference for this word first being added as they had studied it made much for their purpose that is to say If it were so as when Master Alexander first received it then how could Nevil blot out those words afterwards especially if Master Alexander received it from the Examiner to which sense they would presse the meaning of the words and then there must be a meer repugnancie to truth in such case and an impossibility in that and so at first blush to a cursary understanding of the words Nevile must of force be clear of the Accusation and Master Alexander catched as they are elsewhere pleased to call it in this matter But you see God will have truth come to light in despight of the adversary and therefore Master Hooker when he onely says without Oath then he speaks one thing but when he is examined upon his Oath before the Judges then he says another thing And the words spoken by Master Alexander being no other but That the copie of the said Deposition was as he received it agrees in terms with Master Alexanders Affidavit in all things which is That it was as he received it the second time from Nevil after that it was left with him to be examined by the Record and that he delivered it back again to Master Alexander and said That he had examined it and made it to agree with the Record And thus Master Hookers testimony makes nothing against Master Alexanders testimony at all And observe further that even Master Hooker himself is enforced to flee unto that common Rule of second thoughts to be more sage and certain and that there is a difference between words spoken at randome and in ordinary discourse and afterwards premised and delivered in a solemn Oath And observe further that in the beginning of the Sentence pronounced against Master Alexander it is related as if deposed by Master Hooker That upon that Conference Master Alexander should affirm this thing with many and heavie imprecations and oaths vowing and protesting He knew not of the blotting out of those two words that and did in the said Deposition Which is inserted of purpose to make Master Alexander seem little conscientious of what he swore judicially that valued oaths and imprecations nothing in his ordinary discourse But of this Master Hooker likewise says nothing in his Examinations upon Oath before the Judges dealing in it indeed very clearly for there was no such matter And yet this also shews that Master Hooker was not so constant to his relations but that he knew a difference what it was to say and what to swear And Master Alexander doth appeal to all men that have known his conversation both before and since if ever he were addicted to that abominable vice of taking the blessed Name of God in vain But see what the devil can do when he wants truth for his accusations and observe unto what shifts and subterfuges men are brought when they do clothe injustice with a seeming-holinesse And after all this consider yet this further that if Master Hooker had not been Yates his Attorney in that Cause and had not preferred such an unwarrantable Bill of Costs against Master Alexander as he did and had not joyned with Master Jones with his utmost endeavours to have fixed the offence upon Master Alexander as he did and that he had not been a Witnesse for Nevile free from all exceptions as he was not and had sworn something to the purpose for the clearing of Nevile as he did not yet then he had been but singularis Testis to whom nullafides in the Cause whereupon to have grounded a Sentence against Master Alexander in that matter T is true when many vehement and strong presumptions are coupled together sometimes a single and clear testimony beyond all exception rarely in matters Civil and betwixt party nd party relief hath been thereupon afforded unto the oppressed but in matters Criminall where the life many times and that which is always as dear and neer unto a good Christian His good Name hath been questioned and in danger from the mouth of two or three Witnesses at the least according to our Saviours Precept in that case the Judgement hath onely been established And before I end this part of the Sentence let me observe unto you one thing more That these good Judges who took these Examinations one of them yet living Sir Randal Crewe Knight then Lord Chief Justice of England a man famous for his piety and justice and that in those times chose rather to be discharged of his place then to serve curns against his conscience and Master Justice Dodderidge known to be a learned and just man yet these two that made the Certificate would neither of them be drawn into Court to give a Sentence or an opinion against Master Alexander therein which they well understood must have been done against their consciences and against the truth 13. ANd also by the testimony of Cook Gent. sworn in open Court who upon his corporall Oath deposed that the said Alexander had formerly been taken very foul in his own Cause in the same kinde or worse at a Triall in the County of Norfolk at an Assizes holden at Thetford before the said Justice Dodderidge who bound him to his good behaviour for the offence he then committed
Fol. 6 in the Sentence It is an old Proverb Admit one errour and a thousand will follow If one sheep breaks over the hedge all the flock will after You have heard with what untruths this Sentence thus far hath been stufft out withall before to make out something of nothing if it had been possible to make this Sentence seem foul and Master Alexander seem odious to all that shall know nothing more but the reading of it and so shall it appear to be as unjust in that which follows But what this Cook should be that hath no Christian-name I am not able to imagine Sure he is filius nullius filius populi or of some spurious Brood that hath nothing but a blank left for his Sirname and his Christian-name set at the later end He cannot be a Cook by Profession sure and a Gentleman although by the slovenlinesse of his carriage in this action he shews himself no better So that what this Cook is it is yet to be understood but be he what he will or what he was that made such an Oath I must tell this Gentleman he hath much forgotten himself and hath much more wronged his conscience as much as they who did him the discourtesie to bring him into the open Court to make such an Oath so directly contrary to the truth and took from him the honour to have it made a Record for otherwhere it is not found registred in that Court but in the Record of this Sentence And because it is not said wherein Master Alexander was found thus very foul in his own Cause c. and that it was in some such thing for which he was bound to his good behaviour by Master Justice Dodderidge then Judge of the Assize be pleased to peruse the Certificates following and then judge of the truth of this Deposition I Have searched the Book of the Clerk of Assizes for the County of Norfolk from the tenth yeer of King James untill the third yeer of King Charles and do not finde in all that time that Jerome Alexander was bound to his good behaviour 23 February 1641. Jasper Waterhouse Deputat Cler. Assiaz ibid. Thomas Talbot of London Gent. doth depose That this Writing is a true Certificate of the matter therein mentioned received from the hands of the said Master Waterhouse my self first making search with him in the Books therein mentioned Jurat 5 die Maii 1642. Ro. Riche And lest it should be thought that this Gentleman Master Cook was but a little mistaken and that it was at some Sessions of the Peace in the said County where Master Alexander was so bound unto his good behaviour give leave therefore to satisfie him and the world in that also by this other Certificate of the Clerk of the Peace in that County as it followeth 4 dir Martii 1640. UPon search of all the Sessions-Books from primo Jacobi till tertio Caroli I do not finde in all that time that Jermoe Alexander Esq was ever bound either to the Peace or good Behaviour And this I shall be ready to approve by the said Records whensoever it shall be required Edmund Anguishe Cler. pacis Com. Norf. And that it may appear there are no more or other Affidavits made in that Cause upon Record in the Court of Star-Chamber then what hath formerly been herein remembred be pleased to cast your eye upon this other Certificate following which will satisfie that for truth In Camera Stell decimo septimo die Apriliis Anno decimo septimo Caroli Regis IN the Cause wherein Jerome Alexander Esq was Plaintiff in this honourable Court against John Yates and others Defendants I finde that in Michaelmas Term secundo Caroli Regis there were but two Affidavits made in the said Cause the one by the said Master Alexander bearing date the 26 of October and the other made by one Charles Bagshaw of Bernards-Inne London Gent. bearing date the 14 day of November Ex. per Aylwry Thomas Talbot of London Gent. doth depose That this Writing is the same Certificate which was delivered to me by Master Aylwry Officer whose name is thereunder subscribed Jurat 5 die Maii 1642. Ro. Riche And thus you have an Accusation without a Witnesse and a Witnesse without a name and both without truth But by this time Master Alexander doubteth not but the Reader is satisfied of this Gentleman Master Cook his grosse mistake not to call it otherwise And Master Alexander in this case doth also appeal to all men if it were possible for the most innocent man alive being thus dealt withall or howsoever to be free from destruction when the Pale of the Law was thus broken down and all things admitted to enter without form or truth to confound him that was but ooked upon with an evil eye as averse unto those times and suspected might prove hurtfull to their designes and when that power of dispensing the Laws for protecting the innocent was put into the hands of those which wrested it to their own ends for the very oppression of the subject but Master Cook hath done herein as Nebuchad-nezzar told his dream He tells his wise-men that he had a dream but never tells them what it was But some will say There was not so much smoke but sure there was some fire and therefore though this Master Cook hath missed the Cushion yet there lies some Pad hid in the Straw which if it could be discovered and found out would happily make out something which Master Cook drives at Therefore Master Alexander hath made a strict scrutiny into himself if possible to finde out this man and his meaning and saith That he cannot remember what this Cook should be or what this matter should mean if not this About the seventeenth yeer of King James his Reign there was then one Thomas Cook a young man who by one Master Thomas Clowdsley sometimes an Attorney in the Court of Common-Pleas his father in law was put unto Ryce Gwin Esquire after Serjeant at Law dwelling in the same Town with Master Alexander in Norfolk to be one of his Clerks with whom this Master Cook continued for some time And so it fell out that in this time of their neighbouring together Master Serjeant Gwin conceived some causlesse displeasure against Master Alexander and waited but the opportunity to be revenged Master Alexander in this time had purchased from a kinsman of his one Master Thomas Plandon as much land as came to 600 l. or thereabouts for which he had given severall Bonds for the payment of the money in time But Master Plandon afterwards being desirous to travell beyond the Seas intreated ready money and compounded to rebate for the time to be supplied with the main Sum presently Whereupon they concluded and Master Alexander paid him the money But because the Bonds were not in Master Plandons hands for the present he gave Master Alexander a particular Acquittance for the same debt at first and not long after
search and look over And before that Nevil did understand that Master Alexander was gone out of Town he stirred very little in the businesse but afterwards he procures the Certificate from the Judges to be returned which bears date the 7 of Novemb. 2 Car. then the 10 of November following he procures it to be read and debated in Court and the 17 of November following he procures the Cause to be heard So that in seven days time before it was possible for Master Alexander to ride down to his house in the Countrey being 100 miles from London and return again he had procured the Sentence to be given in his absence without any defence And what justice there was in this Proceeding let any man judge Thus all things you see are done sutable to one another And that it may appear to be no fiction for the Cause of Master Alexanders journey then made into the Countrey be pleased to observe a Letter of Nevils written to him concerning this businesse which he found at that time amongst his papers To his assured good friend Master Jerome Alexander at Walsingham give these M. ALEXANDER I Never heard from you by Letter since you went down untill about a fortnight since I received one by the Foot-Poste by whom I did return you Answer and did expect to have heard from you this last week but it seems it was not come to your hands when you writ this last and since that time we have had no seal nor shall have any till Friday next Master Gay is not in Town but so soon as he comes up I will take a course with him that shall be fit Concerning Grout you shall receive your Subpena's so soon as I can get them sealed and hear of a fit Messenger And so with remembrance of my love I rest September 13. 1623. Your assured friend ever to command Hen. Nevil Which Letter you may perceive was the Answer of a former Letter written by Master Alexander unto Nevil Wherein be pleased for to observe That Nevil answers a part of Master Alexanders said letter concerning Master Gay which was the Examiner of the Court named in the Sentence that took those Depositions And the truth is that Master Alexander having left this Deposition with nevil to be examined with the Record when he left the Town He promised to do it and to write Master Alexander word thereof into the Countrey Which he having for some time neglected to do Master Alexander wrote unto him to put him in minde thereof and desiring to be satisfied how it stood with the Record In Answer whereof he writes that Master Gay is not in Town but so soon as he comes up I will take a course with which was To examine the Deposition with the Record for at this time Master Alexander had nothing more to do with Master Gay publication being past and the copie of the Books taken out in the later end of Trinity-Term before And when Master Alexander afterwards came to London Master Nevil then delivers him the copie of the Deposition and says he had made it to agree with the Record in manner and form as hath been formerly informed and from that time untill secundo Caroli that the Cause was heard the Books were laid up and never looked upon by Master Alexander which was for above three yeers space And this is the very truth concerning this particular And truely you may perceive by that which hath gone before that albeit Master Alexander did not go away for any such reason that he had to fear the justnesse of his Cause yet if he had been tzed as Laban did Jacob to have fled away secretly Gen. 31.27 he might well have answered with Jacob to Laban he had just cause to be afraid Truth it self may sometimes seek corners not as fearing her cause but as suspecting her Judge and therefore flight is not always an argument of guilt but there onely where the person declines his Triall altogether for after defence made by any person to any Accusation in any Court of Justice and that an Issue is joyned upon the proceedings and the matter made ripe for hearing now that the Court is thus possessed of the Cause and have an ordinary way for to bring such a matter unto judgement the parties absence cannot be said to be a fleeing from justice for now the Law will proceed notwithstanding and subject both his person and estate unto such a Sentence if there shall be found cause to order any thing against him this being presupposed That if possible he may have notice of the day of hearing to make his just Defence that so he may not be surprised and overtaken unawares Nor did the said Nevil prosecute Master Alexander for this offence but was prosecuted by him foroffending as he did as the proceedings manifest unlesse that his surprising him thus in his absence and without defence may be called a prosecution which was a persecution rather 15. THis honourable court was clear of opinion that the said Alexander himself was guilty of that foul misdemeanour and offence of defacing and blotting out of the said two words that and did out of the copie of John Warrens Deposition for his own advantage and ends against the said Yates whereby this honourable Court was misled in their judgement in censuring and condemning the said Yates as afore is declared Fol. 6 in the Sentence It should seem their judgements which upon the first debate of the Judges Certificate were but inclineable to be of opinion that Master Alexander should have blotted out those two words in the Paper-copie of the said John Warrens Deposition were now brought about without any other Reasons given the before to be absolutely resolved therein A good fore-man of a Jury we say is able to do very much with his fellows But if the Court were so resolved you may well perceive how some of them were misled therein and how it was brought about that they became to be so mistaken And if the Court had been thus misled in their judgements in censuring and condemning the said Yates they were not long out of the way an hours time was the most of their abberration by their own acknowledgement for in such a space they dissolved all again that they had done before and for so little a time of restraint they rewarded Yates very well For besides that upon no terms the Lord Keeper Coventry would hear of any thing that might make out to continue the Censure against him Notwithstanding if the said John Warrens Deposition to that 39 Interrogatory had been set aside yet the Court absolutely dismissed him with 130 l. costs that ought to have given Master Alexander twice as much with 1000 l. damages that he had sustained by his means in the prosecution of that Suit against him at that time if to have done justly 16. ANd have therefore Ordered Adjudged and Decreed the said Jerome Alexander for his said foul offence and
misdemeanour well worthy of sharp and severe punishment for the same and that he shall be utterly disabled to practice as a Counsellour at Law publikely at the Bar or privately in his chamber holding him not worthy to be of the Society of Lincolns-Inne whereof he was a Member have therefore left him to the consideration of the Governours of that House and to pay a Fine of 500 l. to his Majesties use be committed to the prison of the Fleet and before his enlargement out of prison shall publikely at the Bar of this Court in humble and submissive manner acknowledge his great offence against God and to this honourable Court and shall shew himself very pentient and sorrowfull for the same And this honourable Court pronouncing the said Nevil to be clear and free from committing of the said offence of blotting out the words of the copie aforesaid and gravely considering the great trouble losse damage and danger which the said Nevil hath been put unto for the clearing of his reputation in his service to the Court in defence of his own innocency in this Cause and in prosecuting and bringing to censure the said Alexander for the same his great offence and misdemeanour have therefore further Ordered Adjudged and Decreed that the said Jerome Alexander shall satisfie and pay to the said henry Nevil for and towards his losse and damage in that behalf the Sum of fifty pounds of lawfull money of England Jo. Arthur Dep. In this catastrophe and Close of all you may behold a Tragedy acted to the life a poor Gentleman so destroyed as is without all president or example wherein contrary to the greatCharter he hath suffered without mercy or moderation his Estate his Profession his good Name his Wife and Children and all hopes and comforts taken from him but his life at one blowe and that in all outward appearance made so miserable as it had been btter for him that that had been taken from him also for then his sorrows and miseries had been at an end But being thus bereaved of all Society and means of subsistence for the future it must needs subject him unto the contempt and scorn of all his friends and others whatsoever and drive him into despair of ever looking up into the world again And no sooner was this Sentence past but presently aterwards upon that Item thereof made in the said Sentence to theGovernours of Lincolns-Inne they taking all for granted and for truth that was contained therein without ever fearching into the cause thereof further or hearing of Master Alexander in any thing what he could say for himself made the Order following Lincolns-Inne Ad Consilium ibid. tent vicesimo primo die Novem. anno regis Caroli secundo At the Conncel it is ordered That Jerome Alexander one of the utter-Barresters of this House shall from henceforth stand expulsed this Society for sundry foul misdemeanours and crimes by him committed of which he hath been publikely detected and convinced And the chief Butler of this House is to cause his Studie-door to be nailed up or otherwise to be kept fast and likewise his Goods in his Chamber to be seized and kept safe untill the House be saisfied all Duties and Forfeitures any ways owing or due by him for Commons Pensions Vacations Chappel Cellar or otherwise Edward Byshe Custos nigri Libri Thomas talbot of London Gent. doth depose that this Writing is a true copie of the Order made in Lincolus-Inne against Mastere Alexander being examined by the Book of Orders of that time by me the said Thomas Talbot Jurat 5 die Maii 1642. Ro. Riche Which without delary was put in execution and his Chamber taken from him albeit at that time he was indebted nothing unto the House for any Duties or Forfeitures Commons Pensions Vacations Chappel Cellar or otherwise Now here it was not an open enemy that did me this dishonour for then I could have born it neither was it mine adversaries that did herein magnifie themselves against me but they were my companions my guides and mine own familiar friends that took counsel together and walked in the house of God as frinds Psal 55.13 14 15. Yet that God that always takes care of his and never fails to protect the innocent so provided for him in this extremity that within a short time afterwards he gave him such an unexpected being as he must needs confesse he had perished if he had not been undone which no sooner was understood by his adversaries but they began to pursue him again afresh and making use of this Censure do labour with it to crush him in the shell that so he might not rise up in judgement against them for this injustice untill the later day and in the next place this Fine of 500 l. must be begged of the King as by the letters Patents thereof granted unto Mastere Fulwood then Secretary Cooks servant doth appear CHARLES by the grace of God King of England Scotland France and Ireland Defender of the Faith c. To the Treasurer Chancellour under Treasurer Chamberlains and Barons of the Exchequer of Us our Heirs and Successours now being and that hereafter shall be and to all other the Officers and Ministers of Us Our Heirs and Successours of the said Court of Exchequer and of the Receipt there now being and that hereafter shall be and to all other to whom these presents shall come greeting Where as in Our Court before Us and Our Councel in the Star-Chamber in a Cause there late depending by judgement of the same Court Jerome Alexander Gentleman was amongst other things censured to pay unto Us a Fine of five hundred pounds assessed upon him by the same Court for certain offences misdemeanours and contempts by him done and committed which Fine hath been estreated into Our Exchequer And being informed by the humble Petition of Humfrey Fulwood Gent. that the said Jerome Alexander immediately thereupon made away all his estate and fled into the parts beyong the Seas where he ever since hath and still doth remain and that Our Officers having by all means possible endeavoured the recovering of the same could never finde any estate and since have returned the same Nichelled into the Exchequer as by the Record of that Court will appear and that since the Nichelling of the said Fine he also to whom We had granted the recovering of all Nichelled Fines hath spent six yeers thereabouts and hitherto hath recovered no part thereof So that We without some extraordinary means and endeavours to be used are likely to lose all In consideration whereof and that the said Humfrey Fulwood well hopeth by his industry pains and charges to recover the same or the greatest part thereof he hth humbly besought Us to be graciously pleased to grant unto him the benefit of the said Fine he paying into Our Exchequer the full fifth part of that he shall recover Know ye that We in consideration of the premises and of one hundred
pounds paid to Our use in the Receipt of Our Exchequer by the said Humfrey Fulwood wherof We do acquit release and discharge the said Humfrey Fulwood his Heirs Executours and Administratours and every of them by these Presents of Our especial grace certain knowledge and meer motion have given and granted and by these Presents for Us Our Heirs and Successours do give and grant unto the said Humfrey Fulwood his Executours Administratours and Assignes the said Sum of five hundred pounds and all the benefit and profit of extents and seisures for the same Sum of money or any part thereof or toward the levying or satusfying of any of them to be had or made and also all Our Right Title and Interest of in and to the same and every part and parcell thereof To have hold and enjoy the said Sum of five hundred pounds and all Our Right and Interest of in and to the same and every part and parcell thereof to the said Humfrey Fulwood his Executours Administratours and Assignes to his and their own proper use freely as of Our gift without account or other thing therefore to Us Our Heirs and Successours to be rendred made paid or done other then as before is expressed and to the end the said Humfrey Fulwood his Executours Administratours and Assignes may have and receive the full benefit of this Our Grant according to our intent and meaning in these Presents expressed Our Will and Pleasure is and We do by these presents for Us our Heirs and Successours give and grant unto the said Humfrey Fulwood his Executours Administratours and Assignes and unto every of theem full power and athority either in his or their own names or in the names of Us Our Heirs and Successours to sue for recover and have Execution of and for the said Fine and Sum of money to Us as aforesaid due and payable or any part thereof as well by suit as by extent and seisure in the name of Us Our Heirs or Successours or any other lawfull ways and means whatsoever And the same being recovered levied or received to have take and enjoy the same to his and their use for ever as aforesaid And Our further Will and Pleasure is and We do hereby for Us Our Heirs and Successours straightly charge and command the Treasurer Chancellour under-Treasurer and barons of the said Exchequer and other the Officers and Ministers of Us Our Heirs and Successours of the same Court and of the Receipt of the Exchequer aforesaid for the time to whom it respectively appertaineth or shall hereafter appertain and also Our Attorney Generall for the time being by vertue hereof from time to time to grant and cause to be made forth of our said Court of Exchequer such and so many Commissions and othere Processe as shall be expedient and required by the said Humfry Fulwood his Executeurs Administratous or Assignes for the obtaining leavying and recovering of the said Sum of five hundred pounds or any part thereof And these presents or the Inrolment thereof shall be unto the said Treasuer Chancellour under-Treasurer Barons and other the Officers and Ministers of the said Exchequer for the time being a suffieient Warrant and Discharge in that behalf And Our further Will and Pleasure is and We do by these Presents for Us Our heirs and Successours grant That it shall and may be lawfull to and for the siad Humfrey Fulwood his Heirs Executours Administratours and Assignes to acquit release and discharge the said Jerome Alexander his Executours and Administratours of the said Sum of five hundred pounds and every part and parcell thereof by writing under his or their hand and seal and such Release Acquittance or other Discharge shall be from time to time a sufficient and lawfull Bar Exoneration and Discharge to be pleaded against Us Our Heirs and Successours as strong and effectual in the law to all intents constructions and purposes as if the same were done by Us Our Heirs and Successours And for the further Indempnity of the said jerome Alexander or any other that shall satisfie the said Sum of five hundred pounds upon acknowledgement thereof or satisfaction therefore by the said Humfrey Fulwood you Our said Treasurer Chancellour under-Treasurer Barons and other Our officers as aforesaid whom it may concern shall strick or cause to be stricken in the Exchequer one or more Tally or Tallyes purporting the payment of the said Sum of five hundred pounds as amply as if the same had been pasd into the Receipt of the Exchequer to the use of Us our Heirs and Successours And these Presents or the Inrolment thereof shall be a sufficient Warrant in the behalf Although expresse mention of the certainty of the premises or any of them or of any other Gift or Grant by Us or by any of Our progenitours or Predecessours to the said Humfrey Fulwood heretofore made in these Presents is not made or any Statute Act Ordinance Provision proclamation or Restraint to the contrary thereof heretofore had made ordained or provided or any other thing cause or matter whatsoever in any wise notwithstanding In Witnesse whereof We have caused these Our Letters to be made Patents Witnesse Our Self at Westminster the eighth day of March in the ninth yeer of Our Reign Wolsley Per Breve de privato Sigillo Thus you see how malice still pursued Master Alexander at the heels in all the latitude and extent thereof Yet did that good God who first took him into his protection now raise him up friends again in his greatest troubles and extremities And when now he was ready to be utterly undone and swallowed up of his adversaries his Father in Law Master John Havors of Shelfanger in Norfolk to whom he owes all the observation and duty of a son and what shall ever rest in him to expresse his thankfulnesse who beofre this time was disswaded against him from doing any thing for him by means of his adversaries who daily did instill into his ears rumours of ill behaviour and of such things as might settle him in an ill opinion and belief of his conversation thus at length perceiving that it was purposely done that they might onely gain the better opportunity to destroy him he now better looking into the businesse then before which God onely moved his heart unto found out that it was a meer practice from the beginning utterly to undo him without cause and therefore of his own goodnesse presently did compound with the said Fulwood for discharging and releasing the said Fine and paid him and took his Acquittance and had the said Letters Patents delivered to him and paid and satisfied the said Yates and took his Acquittance for the said 130 l. costs and all other demands and in like manner compounded with that unjust and evil man Henry Nevil for the 50 l. given him in the said Sentence for betraying his Client and took his Release also thinking now that he had removed all impediments whatsoever
and therefore it was then Ordered Adjudged and Decreed by Our said Court That the said Jerome Alexander for his said foul offence and misdemeanour was well worthy of sharp and severe punishment for the same and that he should be utterly disabled to practise as a Counsellour at Law publikely at the Bar or privately in his Chamber and to pay a Fine of five hundred pounds to Our use be committed to the prison of the Fleet and before his enlargement out of prison should publikely at the Bar of Our said Court in humble and submissive manner acknowledge his great offence against God and Our said Court and should shew himself very penitent and sorrowfull for the same and was further Ordered to pay and satisfie to one Henry Nevil a Clerk of the said Court for and towards his losse and damages sustained in that Cause the sum of fifty pounds of lawful money of England as by the said Order and Decree remaining of Record in Our said Court more at large appeareth And whereas Our welbeloved Subject John Havers Gent. father in law of the said Jerome Alexander by his humble Petition to Us exhibited hath shewed unto Us that his said son in law being no ways able to satisfie the said Fine was enforced to absent himself out of this Our Kingdom into Our Realm of Ireland where he hath ever since continued and that out of his commiseration of the distressed estate of his said son in law his wife and children being desirous to put him in a way to support his own charge hath satisfied the said Fine of five hundred pounds and also the said fifty pounds to the said Henry Nevil and for that also the said Jerome Alexander hath ever since carried himself well and uprightly in Ireland hath therefore humbly besought Us that We would be graciously pleased to grant unto his said son in law Jerome Alexander Our gracious Pardon for the remainder of the said Sentence being onely Imprisonment in the Fleet during Our Pleasure submission to Our said Court and disabling him to use his Practice And whereas We by Our Letters Patents under Our Great Seal of England bearing date at Westminster the eight and twentieth day of March last past before the date of these Presents as well for and in consideration of one hundred pounds paid into the Receipt of Our Exchequer to Our use by Humfrey Fulwood Gent. as for other causes and considerations in the said Letters Patents mentioned and expressed did give and grant unto the said Humfrey Fulwood the said Fine or Sum of five hundred pounds and all the benefit and profit of extent or seisures for the same Fine or Sum of money or any part thereof or towards the levying or satisfying of any of them to be had or made and all Our Right Title and Interest of in and to the same and every part and parcell thereof To have hold and enjoy the said Sum of five hundred pounds and all Our Right and Interest of in and to the same and every part parcell thereof to the said Humfrey Fulwood his Executours Administratours and Assignes to his and their own proper use freely as of Our Gift without recount or other thing therefore to Us Our Heirs or Successours to be rendred paid made or done other then as in the said Letters Patents is expressed as by the same Our Letters Patents amongst other Powers Authorities and other things therein contained more at large appeareth Since the granting of which Letter Patents to the said Humfrey Fulwood the Petitioner John Havers as we are informed on the behalf of his said son in law Jerome Alexander hath fully satisfied and paid unto the said Humfrey Fulwood the said Sum of five hundred pounds or otherwise compounded with him the said Humfrey Fulwood for the same as by an Acquittance under the hand and seal of the said Humfrey Fulwood bearing date the seventh day of April in the ninth yeer of Our Reign testifying the same more at large appeareth And that he hath also satisfied and paid unto the said Henry Nevil the said fifty pounds before mentioned to be awarded unto him the said Henry Nevil by the Sentence of Our said Court for his damages as aforesaid or hath otherwise compounded for the same as by an Acquittance also under the hand of the said Henry Nevil dated the three and twentieth day of May in the sixth yeer of Our Reign more plainly doth appear Know ye therefore that We being moved with pity and at the humble Suit of Our said welbeloved Subject John Havers of Our especial Grace certain knowledge and meer mercy have pardoned remissed discharged and released and by these Presents for Us Our Heirs and Successours do pardon remit discharge and release unto the said Jerome Alexander by what Name or Names Sirname or Sirnames or addition of Name or Sirname Mystery or Mysteries Place or Places whatsoever he be called or known or late was called or know all and singular Pains of Imprisonment and Submission whatsoever to be made to Our said Court of Star-Chamber by him the said Jerome Alexander for the said trespasse and offence and all other corporall punishments whatsoever in or by the foresaid Order Judgement or Decree imposed ordered adjudged or decreed against him and all further Execution that We have or may have against the said Jerome Alexander by occasion of the said Sentence Willing and Commanding by these Presents all and every Our Judges Justices Sheriffs Offices and Ministers whatsoever that the said Jerome Alexander for the premises before by these Presents mentioned to be pardoned remissed discharged and released or any of them be not at any time or times hereafter in any wise sued molested vexed attached arrested imprisoned troubled or disquieted but that he be from all imprisonment for the same and submission whatsoever to be made to Our said Court for any the matters offences or causes aforesaid for ever hereafter absolutely acquitted released and wholly discharged by these Presents And if for the matters afore by these Presents pardoned discharged and released or either of them the said Jerome Alexander is or at any time hereafter shall be imprisoned arrested or disquieted That then upon shewing of these Our Letters Patents or the Inrolment thereof he be forthwith freed discharged and set at liberty without any further or other Warrant from Us Our Heirs or Successours to be had procured or obtained in that behalf And these Our Letters Patents or the Inrolment or Exemplication thereof shall be unto all men whom it shall or may concern a sufficient Warrant and Discharge for the same Provided neverthelesse and upon this Condition That the said Jerome Alexander shall not at any time or times hereafter practise as a Counsellour at Law within this Our Kingdom of England either publikely at the Bar or privately in his Chamber but shall stand and be utterly disabled from the same according to the Tenour of the said Decree and Sentence
and some others of His Majesties privy Counsell of that Kingdom whom his Lordship had interessed therein together with him self which was in the nature of an Injunction commanding your Petitioner not to proceed in his said Tryall and to refer th hearing of the businesse to certain Referrees intimate friends of the said Fearnsleys who were thereby appointed to hear and end the same and this was done before your Petitioner was ever called to make answer to the said Petition or that he was ever heard to say what he could object against it And albeit your Petitioner did afterwards Petition his Lordship and Counsell shewing the false suggestions of the said Petition and desiring to be left unto the Law yet could not your Petitioner obtain a dismission thereof but the said difference was notwithstanding continued referred to the said Referrees who conceived an order which your Petitioner durst not to gainsay all of them being persons before whom your Petitioner daily appeared in his Clients Causes which was That your Petitioner should accept of 40 l. at certain times in the said order mentioned when your Petitioner had spent above 40 l. in the prosecution of the suite besides his other dammages and losses to amounting above a 1000 l. more And whereas your Petitioner was Lessee for yeers of certain Lands and Tenements lying in the Town of Kilmainham neer Kels in the County of Meath within His Majesties said Realm of Ireland the Parson of the said Parish of Kels pretending that the greatest part of the said Town of Kilmainham did lye within the Limits and Precincts of the said Town of Kels made claim to the Tithes thereof Whereof neither he nor any his Predecessors Parsons of Kels within the memory of man had ever received any Tithes there nor had he any colour to demand the same but presuming to finde all favour against your Petitioner did therefore Petition the said Earl and Councell for recovery thereof to whose Petition your Petitioner was ordered to make answer and did so do and in his answer and otherwise it was informed to the said Earl and Counsell That the same was matter of Inheritance tryable by course of Common-Law Whither he craved to be dismissed and also craved in ayd of his Lessour to be made Party with him at least to the said suite that so his Inheritance might not be bound without his own defence but this was not admitted but the same Parson of Kells permitted still to go on and proceed in the said suite against your Petitioner onely to Issue and Examination of Witnesses by which means your Petitioner lost much time from his Calling and other Imployments and was enforced to expend great sums of money for his defence to his further trouble and vexation and dammage of 500 l. more That the Right Honourable the Earl Marshall of England on or about four yeers since procured His Majesties Letters and Licence for your Petitioners repair hither about his Lordships occasions which your petitioner caused to be delivered to one of the said Earl of Straffords Secretaries in Ireland his Lodship being then busie and not to be spoken with when your petitioner took the opportunity of a ship being then ready to set sail for England it being in the dead time of Winter and no other shipping expected to go from thence of a long time afterwards whereat the said Earl was mightily moved and enraged and threatned your petitioner and by his Lordships Letters then and otherwise since hath enformed His Majesty and others against your petitioner of foul crimes and misdemeanors whereof your petitioner is innocent and guiltlesse and for which your petitioner was committed to the prison of the Fleet and lay there restrained for a long time And thus the said Earl of Strafford hath drawn not onely His Majesties ill opinion and disaffection towards your petitioner but also the distast and ill conceit of many Noblemen and others who before time imployed your petitioner in their businesse and from whom your petitioner before then had countenance and good respect And by this means also your petitioner for this four yeers almost last past hath been kept from the use of his Calling and Profession and from the comfort of his Wife Children Fortune and Estate and spent great sums of money for the support of himself to his further dammage of 5000 l. more That in your Petitioners absence in England the Lady Anne Crosby Widow your Petitioners neer Kinswoman was stirred up to Petition against your Petitioners wife in Ireland to the said Earl of Strafford upon an Obligation of 2400 l. specialty conditioned for payment of 1200 l. with interest which was not then due nor untill a yeer after demand at which time also one Arthur Hill Esquire was also by recognizance and other good securities to pay then presently unto your Petitioners said wife for the use of your Petitioner 4540 l. Ster and more which your Petitioner had appointed to pay to others in Redemption of his Estate then in Morgage for so much money then to be also paid but upon the said Ladies petition without every making your Petitioner a Party and before that your said Petitioners wife was served to make any answer to the said Petition his Lordship made an Order upon the said Ladies Petition that your petitioners wife should answer the premisses and that in the interim the said Arthur Hill should stay and retain in his hands of your petitioners money 1200 l. whereawith to pay the said Lady and afterwards the said Lady the second time petitioned the said Earl to have the said 1200 l. out of the said Master Hills hands and to have your petitioners wife restrained from coming over hither to your petitioner And then albeit your petitioners wife answered the said Ladies petition and did thereby shew good cause why the said Lady ought not to demand the money and prayed to be left to the Law yet the said Lady so far prevailed therein that she gained the said money with interest and dammages for the time she caused it to be deposited in the said Master Hills hands against all Law or Equity and had not some other provision been made for payment of the Morgage money your petitioners Estate had been under a Forfeiture and in great danger to be lost All which extrajudiciall proceedings and grievous oppressions done unto your petitioner by the said Earl of Strafford to your petitioners utter overthrow and undoing and against the common and ordinary Rules of Iustice in His Majesties Realms of England and Ireland he humbly beseecheth this Honourable Assembly to take into consideration and do therein for your petitioners relief as in your great Wisedoms shall be thought fit And that because your petitioners Witnesses are many and some Noblemen and of great quality the most of them in Ireland whose charges your petitioner is not able to bear to bring personally before your Lordships hither to be examined in the premisses Therefore
to grant unto your petitioner that a Commission may Issue forth to such fit Commissioners to be named by your Lordships for taking and returning of their Examinations as in your great Wisdoms shall be thought fit and that such as are now in Town may be directed to be presently examined and that your petitioner may have your Lordships Order and Direction for fearches withall Secretaries and other Officers whom it may concern for Authentique Copies of such Records and Writings as any wayes do concern the premisses And further to grant your petitioner that priviledge That he may freely go and come about his businesse without the molestation and trouble of any And your Petitioner shall pray But the said Earl being executed for Treason ended Master Alexanders Complaint and so left him and all others that had petitioned against him without remedy or relief And least Master Alexander also might be thought to have let this matter of his Sentence rest without question or desire therein for to be purged there being an opportunity now given by the sitting of this Parliament to redresse such Injuries he no sooner came home and returned out of his Travels but he likewise presented his petition to the Honourable Lords in Parliament for the review and reversall of this so unjust and erroneous Sentence the Tenour whereof followeth To the Right Honourable the Lords Spirituall and Temporall in the upper House of Parliament Assembled The Humble Petition of Jerome Alexander HUmbly shewing That in Michaelmas Terme in the second yeer of His Majesties Reign your petitioner brought a Cause to hearing wherein he was Plaintiff against one John Yates and others Defendants in His Majesties Court of Star-Chamber for Perjury and subordination of Perjury Imbracery terrifying of Witnesses and other like foul offences and misdemeanors in the said Bill of Complaint appearing At which hearing the Deposition of one John Warren taken in the Proceed of that Suite was read against the aid Yates to convince him of the terrifying of Witnesses onely and upon reading of another Deposition of one Robert Warren Clerk to that point the Court was satisfied of the guilt of the said Yates of that offence and thereupon pronounced a sentence against him for the same And as to the other charges of the said Bill nothing was read or enforced for the Perjuror being dead before the hearing though the Perjury and Subordination were fully proved within the Books yet for that Cause did not your Suppliants Counsell presse any Testimony to enforce that accusation of Subordination against the said Yates which was indeed the main thing whereof your petitioner complained in his Bill And your petitioner saith That a sentence being pronounced against the said Yates as aforesaid and the Court then proceeding to other businesse your petitioner departed and afterwards when the Lords were risen whilest yet they were in the inner Star-Chamber the then Lord Coventry Lord-Keeper was enformed That in the Paper Copy of the said John Warrens Deposition the word viz. that and did were stricken out with a Pen in the said Copy and not read in the said Deposition at that hearing which as it was informed altered the sence of the Deposition and made it to be positive and direct which otherwise was doubtfull and uncertain And then that the said Yates stood convicted but upon one single Testimony whereupon the said Yates was instantly discharged and dismissed with an 130 l. costs adwarded against your petitioner or thereabouts This Oblituration of the said words was observed at the hearing of the Cause in the hands of one Henry Nevill your petitioners Solicitour in that Court when he read the Deposition but then was not informed to the Court which had been the proper time but was omitted of purpose as your petitioner conceiveth That afterwards your petitioner might not enforce any other Testimony or matter which he then might and could have done sufficient to have convicted the said Yates guilty of the said offence and for to have cleered your petitioner from that accusation as that a businesse might be made of it to ruine and undo your petitioner as the sequell proved And it being observed that the Lord Coventrey late Lord-Keeper then appeared therein against your petitioner he could not afterwards procure his Counsell further to presse any thing against the said Yates to maintain that Charge and continue the Sentence against him pronounced or that might clear your petitioner from the said offence and accusation And the same being called into question and examination albeit your petitioner did thereof sufficiently purge himself upon his Oath and otherwise and did truely lay the fault where the blame ought to lie upon the said Henry Nevill who was the doer of the Fact and albeit nothing was or oculd be proved or made to appear against your petitioner to the contrary of that he made to appear for clearing of himself yet the said Nevill being a Member of that Court and therefore favoured all that might be possible the matter was so carried that in your petitioners absence out of Town about his necessary affairs the same was made the onely proof of his guiltinesse which being endeavoured to be fortified with severall meer Inferences and Suppositions and mistaken Observations from your petitioners countenance and supposed personall behaviour in the carriage of himself pressed beyond all indifferent interpretation and the truth it self and upon some other extrajudiciall matter enforced also against your petitioner without any ground and against the Forms and Rules of the ordinary proceedings of that Court a conclusion was drawn from these false premisses to charge your petitioner with that offence and thus your petitioner was fined to his Matie in 500 l. and 50 l. was adwarded against your petitioner to the said Nevill for dammages and your petitioner was further adjudged never to use again his Profession and Practice of an Utter-Barrister at Law eitehr publikely at the Bar or privately in his Chamber and to remain committed to the prison of the Fleet And before your petitioners enlargement it was further adjudged That your petitioner must at the Bar of the said Court in humble and submissive manner acknowledge the same to be his offence whereof he was innocent against God and the Court and to shew himself very penitent and sorrowfull for the same and withall was left and declared to the Society of Lincolns-Inne whereof he was a Member as unworthy to live in the Society who thereupon was expelled the house his Chamber seized and disposed of And thus in an instant of time your petitioner was made more miserable then if he had never been born And all this done with so high a hand that by this means your petitioner might be utterly deprived of all support and disabled ever to look up into the World again either to seek for help or relief againsT this extremity or to maintain himself and Family by any course of life to which he had been
make him odious not onely to his friends and acquaintance but to all good men that should come but to hear of him then Canis ad vemisum this old censure is again revived to blanch him now in the opinion of those with whom he had to do both in publike businesses and concerning his own particular and if possible thus to bury him alive Sir John Clotworthy Knight a Member of the Honourable House of Commons is without cause incensed a gainst Mr. Alexander and labours his ruine by all the wayes and means he can and now at a publike meeting of the Committee for Irish Affairs in London whereof Mr. Alexander is a Member the said Sir John Clotworthy speaking contemptuously and disgracefully of Mr. Alexander unto many others of the Members of the Committee uttered these words and speeches to them of him saying That Mr. Alexander was a perjured person and that he had been fined for Perjury and Forgery in the Star-Chamber further saying That he was unworthy to sit amongst them and wondered that they would so much as admit him into their Company whereupon at the next meeting of the said Committee at Grocers Hall the 18 of November 1643. the said Committee enformed Mr. Alexander thereof and entreated him that he would forbear sitting amongst them untill he should have purged himself of the said Accusations and withall sent unto Sir John Clotworthy that he would be pleased to produce the said Sentence by which the truth of his Allegations might appear or otherwise they should have no reason to out Master Alexander of the imployment amongst them and thereupon the said Committee conceived this Order following Die Sabbati 18. November 1643. At the Committee of Adventurers of the House of Commons and Adventurers chosen in London for the Affairs of Ireland FOrasmuch as Sir John Clotworthy Knight a Member of the House of Commons and one of the Members of this Committee hath accused Mr. Jerome Alexander one other of the Members of the said Committee to severall persos of the said Committee yester day at a meeting at Goldsmiths Hall to be a Perjured person for which and for Forgery he hath been fined in the Star-Chamber and therefore a thing dishonourable to this Committee to have him any longer to continue amongst us all this matter against him being but yet alleaged we have not thought fit so far to proceed against him herein untill we shall be further satisfied of the truth hereof It is therefore Ordered That Sir David Watkins and such others of the Committee us he shall think fit be desired to entreat Sir John Clotworthy that he will be pleased to produce unto this Committee such Records or proof of these things against Master Alexander as may satisfie this Committee of the truth of these Allegations and then we shall proceed to do therein as shall be fit And because these are matters trenching so deeply upon the said Master Alexander as we conceive his very being depends upon it we shall forbear to declare any opinion in the matter but do entreat him in the interim to forbear sitting with us of Whoe credit and reputation we shall be very tender for the good service he hath done at this Committe Richard Deacon Clerk to the said Committee Thus you may perceive how violently he was prosecuted but the said Order being accordingly delivered unto Sir Iohn Clothworthy the Committee for Irish Affairs at Westminster whereof Sir Iohn Clothworthy is one appointed a meeting for those Irish businesses at Goldsmiths Hall whether some of the said Committee of Citizens Adventurers in London for Lands in Ireland of Grocers Hall went directed purposely to hear and see what Sir Iohn Clotworthy could produce for making of that Charge good against Master Alexander where the Copy of the said Sentence was then read in their presence and the Fait of the said pardon so procured by his Father in law as aforesaid which when those of the said Committee of Crocers Hall had heard and well understood they declared their opinions That there was nothing in that Sentence which did make good any such charges against Master Alexander as he had spoken of him yet was it then pressed That they would have joyned to have voted out Mr. Alexander from sitting any longer at Grocers Hall as a Member of that Committee which they refused to do and afterwards at another meeting of the said Committee of Grocers Hall they made the Order following Die Martis 28. November 1643. At the Committee of Adventurers of the House of Commons and Adventurers chosen in London for the Affairs of Ireland VVHereas by the Order of the 18. of November instant for the Reasons therein alledged we entreated Master Alexander being one of our Members to forbear sitting with us being then accused by Sir John Clotworthy Knight to be a Perjured person and that he had been fined for Perjury and Forgery in the Star-Chamber And whereas the said Sir Iohn was by us enterated to produce such Records and proofs of these things as might satisfie this Committee of the truth of these Charges against him but instead of such proof and Records the said Sir Iohn and other sitting at Goldsmiths Hall as a Committee of the House of Commons for Irish Affairs where some of us were then present as private men did cause the Copy of a Sentence given against Master Alexander in His Majesties Court of Star-Chamber in Michaelmas Terme in the second yeer of His Majesties Reign for to be produced and read with the Copy of a pardon of some part of the Sentence procured by Master Alexander Father in law in his absence in Ireland which Were then moved to satisfie the truth of the former Charges and further pressed as a Crime for which he was unworthy to be of the said Committee and pressed us to have joyned with them to have voted him out for sitting any longer amongst us but having heard the said Sentence read we finde no such thing as Forgery or Perjury in the businesse if the Sentence were just but is for the supposed defacing and blotting out of two words that and did out of Paper Copy of a Deposition used against one Yates at a hearing wherein Master Alexander was Plaintiff against the said Yates in that Court And albeit we will not take upon us for to judge the said Sentence yet we conceive it founded upon very weak grounds there being neither Bill Information or ore tenus for the manner of the proceeding nor proof against Master Alexander to convince him of the Fact for which he is sentenced and his Oath three severall times sworn for his purgation in the very sentence appearing and many other miscarriages in the Sentence by him alledged which we leave to be judged in his proper place But for this cause and fora much as we do conceive it not to be in our power that one Member should vote out another being first established by the same Election
like Goods and Provisions they shall hereafter find in the hands of any other person or persons formerly provided for Ireland and not yet sent And to send for and examine all persons therein concerned and to take care and provide for shipping them away presently and to make return of their doings to this Committee from time to time upon occasion that so they may receive further Order and direction in the premisses as shall be fit And it is further Ordered and the said Committee are desired to hold such intelligence and correspondence with the Commissioners and Treasurers in the Low-Countreys employed about the Collections of Benevolences for the poor Protestants of Ireland as formerly they have done and to inform this Committee of their proceedings from time to time that such Order may bee given them for disposing of those provisions as shall be fit Ex. Gualter Frost Secretary to the same Committee By force of which Orders the said Committee at Grocers Hall sent for such persons as had these Goods and provisions in their hands acquainted them with these Orders and desired their conformity in the delivery of the said Arms and Goods who taking time to consider thereof thereupon as it should seeme acquainted the Committee for Irish affairs at Westminster therewithall whereupon the Order were conceived which follow Committee for the affairs of Ireland Die Veneris viz. 10. May 1644. IT is thought fit and Ordered by this Committee that Sir David Watkins Knight be desired to be present at this Committee on Wednesday next in the afternoon in the Exchequer Chamber at Westminster to shew by what Order and Authority the Committee of Citizens Adventurers for Lands in Ireland have by their Orders and directions by him subscribed required the Store-keepers belonging to this Committee to detain and otherwise to dispose of the Victuall Cloathes Arms Ammunition Artillery and other Provisions which have been committed to their Custody for the service of Ireland Joh. Goodwin Committee for the affairs of Ireland Die Veneris 10. May 1644. THis Committee being now informed that M. William Dobbins Ralph Hardwick and others trusted imployed by this Committee for keeping the stores of victualls clothes arms ammunition artillery and materials for the train of Artillery provided by them for the service of Ireland been required by Order of a Committee of Citizens Adventurers for lands in Ireland signed by Sir David Watkins not to dispose of or deliver any of the before-mentioned particulars in their respective charges without further Order from them and that the said Committee of Citizens Adventurers as have by other their Orders required Officers of their own to demand and receive those goods and provisions out of the hands of the persons trusted with the custody of them by this Committee It is now thought fit and Ordered by this Committee that the said Master Dobbins Master William Gilbert George Wood Ralph Hardwick and all others who have in their charge and custody any Victuall Cloaths Armes Ammunition Artillery or materialls for the Train of Artillery for the service of Ireland or any other goods or commodities whatsoever by the Order or within the Accompt of this Committee be hereby required and enjoyned respectively to detain and keep all such goods and other provisions in their safe and sure custodies as they will anser the contrary at their perills and that they carefully preserve them from losse and dammage and not to deliver them unto any person or persons whatsoever until this Committee shall give further Order for the disposall of them Jo. Goodwyn And Master Alexander being not particularly named in the last preceding Orders afterwards the Orders following were thereupon conceived Committee for the Affaires of Ireland Die Mercurii viz. 15. May 1644. THis Committee having by their Order of the tenth of this instant May desired Sir David Watkins Knight to be present at this Committee this day in the Exchequer Chamber to there shew by what Order and Authority the Committee of Citizens Adventurers for lands in Irelands have by their Orders and directions by him subscribed required the store-keepers belonging to this Committee to detain and otherwise to dispose of the Victuall Cloaths Armes Ammunition Artillery and other provisions which have been committed to their custody for the service of Ireland forasmuch as Sir David Watkins hath not appeared here this day according to the said Order which this Committee conceive to be a cotempt towards them who are Authorized by the Houses of Parliament to send for parties and to exercise other powers conducing to the service of Ireland as in other Cases other Committees are And for that Master Jerome Alexander as one of that Committee of Citizens Adventurers for lands in Ireland hath since the Order above said sent unto Sir David Watkins required of some of the store-keepers belonging to this Committee the delivery unto him of fundry particulars in their charges and within the care of this Committee It is now Ordered by this Committee that the said Sir David Watkins and Master Alexander be hereby required to appear personally at this Committee on Saturday next in the afternon in the Exchequer Chamber in Westminster to Answer such questions as shall be demanded of them whereof they are not to fail Jo. Goodwyn Committe for the Affaires of Ireland Die Veneris viz. 7. Julii 1644. THis Committee taking notice of a Warrant dated the fifth of this instant June signed by Sir David Watkins Knight by order of a Committee at Turners Hall by vertue of an order of the Committee of both Kingdomes to them directed whereby Ralph Hardwick who hath for a long time by the Command of this Committee kept the stores of divers provisions made for Ireland but not thought fit as yet to be sent thither requiring him to deliver all such Goods and Provisions as are in his custody unto Francis Smith and William Jennings or to appear before the said Committee at Turners Hall to shew cause of his refusall so to do This Committee as they have formerly so now againe have thought fit to require the said Ralph Hardwick not to deliver those goods and provisions to any person whatsoever without their speciall Order and direction And Sir David Watkins Master Alexander and such others as were present at the Committee at Turners Hall when the above mentioned warrant was Voted and signed be required to appear personally at this Committee on Tuesday next in the afternon in the Exchequer Chamber at Westminster to shew by what Order and Authority they have required those goods and provisions and to give Anser to some further Questions that shall be demanded of them concerning the same whereof they are not to fail Jo. Godwayn And now the Committee at Grocers Hall finding the going on of the businesse thus opposed acquainted the Honourable Committee therewithall not adventuring to proceed further without their direction who were resolved to acquaint the Honourable House of Commons therwith as appeareth by