Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	king_n	parliament_n	petition_n	2,565	5	9.5981	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25924	Articles of accusation exhibited by the Commons House of Parliament now assembled against St. John Bramston, Knight, Sr. Robert Berkley, Knight justices of His Majesites bench, Sr. Francis Crawley, Knight, one of the justices of the Common-pleas, Sr. Humphrey Davenport, Knight, Sr. Richard Weston, Knight, and Sr. Thomas Trevor, Knight, barons of His Majesties Exchequer.		1641 (1641)	Wing A3833; ESTC R38534	30,976	35

sufficient baile And he the said Sir Robert Berkley being one of the Justices of the Court of the Kings Bench denyed to grant his Majesties writs of Habtas Corpus to very many others his Majesties subiects and when he had granted the said writs of Habeas Corpus to very many others his Majesties subjects and on the returne no cause appeared or such onely as was clearly baileable by Law yet hee remanded them where they remained prisoners very long which said deferring to grant the said writs of Habeas Corpus and refusals and delayes to discharge prisoners or suffer them to be bailed contained in this Article are destructive to the fundamentall Lawes of this Realme and contrary to former resolutions in Parliament and to the petition of Right which said resolutions and petition of Right were well knowne to him the said Sir Rebert Berkley and were resolved on and enacted when he was the Kings Serjeant at Law and Attendant in the Lords House in Parliament 11. That whereas there was a cause depending in the Court Christian at Norwich between Samuel Booty Clerke and _____ Collard for two shillings in the pound for tythes for rents houses in Norwich and the said Collard moved by his Councell in the Court of Kings Bench for a prohibition to stay proceedings in the Court Christian at Norwich and delivered into the said Court of Kings Bench his suggestions that the said cause in the said Court Christian was onely for tythes for rents of houses in Norwich which was determinable by the Common Law onely yet he the said Sir Robert Berkley being one of the Justices of the said Court of Kings Bench and sitting in the said Court deferring to grant a prohibition to the said Court Christian in the said cause although the Councel did move in the said Court many severall times and severall termes for a prohibition And he the said Sir Robert Berkley deferred to grant his Majesties writ of prohibition to severall other Courts on the motions of divers others of his Majesties subjects where the same by the Lawes of this Realme ought to have been granted contrary to the Lawes of this Realme and his owne knowledge All which words opinions and actions were so spoken and done by him the said Sir Robert Berkley traiterously and wickedly to alienate the hearts of his Majesties liege people from his Majesty to set a division betwixt them and to subvert the fundamentall Lawes and established government of his Majesties Realme of England For which they doe impeach him the said Sir Rebert Berkley one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench of high treason against our Soveraigne Lord the King his Crowne and dignity and of the misdemeanors above mentioned And the said Commons by protestation saving to themselves onely the liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Robert Berkley and also of replying to the answer that he the said Sir Robert Berkley shall make to the said Articles or any of them or of offering proofe of the premises or any other impeachments or accusations that shall be exhibited by them as the Case shall according to the course of Parliaments require doe pray that the said Sir Robert Berkley one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench may be put to answer to all and every the premisses and that such proceedings examinations trialls judgements and executions may be upon every of them had used as is agreeable to Law Justice Articles of the House of Commons in the name of themselves and of all the Commons of England against Sir Iohn Bramston Knight Lord chiefe Iustice of the Court of Kings Bench impeaching him as followeth 1. THAT the said Sir Iohn Bramston then being Lord Chiefe Justice of the Court of Kings Bench and having taken an oath for the due administration of Justice to his Majesties Liege people according to the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme did on or about the last of November 1635. subscribe his name to an opinion in haec verba I am of opinion that as where the benefit doth more peculicaly redound to the good of the Ports or Maritime parts as in case of Pyracy or Depredations upon the Seas there the charge hath beene and may be lawfully imposed upon them according to presidents of former times so where the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger of which his Majesty is the onely Judge there the charge of the defence ought to be borne by all the Realme in generall this I hold agreeable both to Law and Reason 2. That he the said Sir Iohn Bramston then being Lord chiefe Justice of the Court of Kings Bench about the Month of February 1635. did subscribe an extrajudiciall opinion in answer to questions in a letter from his Majesty which letter questions and answers follow in haec verba Charles R. When the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger whether may not the King by writ under the great Seale of England command all the Subjects of this Kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Ships with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as he shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the Kingdome from such danger and perill and by Law compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse And whether in such case is not the King the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same is to be prevented and avoided C. R. May it please your most excellent Majestie Wee have according to your Majesties command severally every man by himselfe and all of us together taken into serious consideration the Case Question assigned by your Majestie and inclosed in your Royall Letter And wee are of opinion that when the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger your Majesty may by writ under the great Sealt of England command all the Subjects of this your Kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Shippes with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as your Majestie shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the Kingdome from such danger and perill And that by Law your Majesty may compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse And wee are also of opinion that in such case your Majestie is the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same is to be prevented and avoided Iohn Brampflan Iohn Finch Humphtey Davenport Iohn Denham Richard Hutton William Iones George Crooke Thomas Trevor George Vernon Robert Derkley Francis Crewley Richard Weston Which said opinions contained in the first and second Articles are destructive to the fundamentall Lawes of this Realme the subjects right of property and contrary to former resolutions in Parliament and to the petition of

Right 3. That he the said Sir Iohn Brampston then Lord chiefe Justice of the Court of Kings Bench about Trinity Tearme 1637. refused to baile or discharge Alexander Iennings prisoner in the Fleet brought by habeas Corpus to the barre before him the return of this Commitment being two severall warrants from the Lords of the Councell dated the fifth of November 1635. the first expressing no cause the other for not paying Messengers fees and untill hee should bring certificate that hee had paid his Assesment for ship-money in the County of Bucks And the said Sir Iohn Brampston the first warrant being onely read then said The cause of his Commitment did not appeare and that it was not fit for every Goaler to be made acquainted by the Lords of the Councell why they committed and therefore remitted him And in Michaelmas Tearme after the said Iennings being brought by another habeas Corpus as aforesaid and the same returned yet hee the said Sir Iohn Brampston refused to discharge or baile him but remitted him And in Easter Tearme next after severall rules for his Majesties Councell to shew cause why he the said Iennings should not bee bailed a fourth rule was made for the said Iennings to let his Majesties Atturney have notice which notice was given accordingly yet he remitted him And the said Iennings by another habeas Corpus brought to the Barre as aforesaid in Trinity Tearme after and the same returne with the addition of a new Commitment of the fourth of May 1638. suggested that he the said Iennings had used divers scandalous words in derogation and disparagement of his Majesties government After severall rules in the end of the said Trinity Tearme he againe remitted him to prison And he the said Sir Iohn Brampston about the 9. of July after at his chamber in Serjeants Inne being desired by Master Me●wtis one of the Clerkes of the Councell-boord to discharge the said Iennings for that he the said Iennings had entred into a bond of one-thousand pounds to appeare before the Lords of the Councell the next Michaelmas Tearme after and to attend de die in diem yet the said Sir Iohn Brampston refused to discharge the said Iennings untill hee entred into Recognizance to appeare the next Tearme and in the meane time to bee of his good behaviour And the said Iennings was continued on his said Recognizance till Easter Tearme after And the said Sir Iohn Brampston did on the fifth of June 1640. deferre to grant his Majesties writ of habeas Corpus for Samuel Danvers and William Pargiter Esquites prisoner● in the Gate house and in the Eleet and when hee had granted the said Writ the said eight of June after the returne being the order of the Councell Table not expressing any cause he the said Sir Iohn Bramston deferred to baile the said Pargiter And the eighteenth of Iune after made a rule for a new returne to be received which was returned the five and twentieth of the said June in haec verba Whereas his Majesty finding that his Subjects of Scotland have in rebellious and hostile manner assembled themselves together and intend not only to shake off their obedience unto his Majesty but also as enemies to ●avade and infest this his Kingdome of England to the danger of his Royall Person c. For prevention whereof his Majesty hath by the advice of his Councell-board given speciall commandement to all the Lord Lieutenants of all the Counties of his Realm with expedition to array and arme a certain number of able men in each County to be prepared ready to be condacted to such places as should be appointed for their Randezvouz in their severall and respective Counties there to be conducted and drawne together into a body for this service And whereas his Majestie according to the Lawes and Statutes of this realme and the constant custome of his Predecessours Kings and Queenes of this Realme hath power for the defence of this kingdome and resisting the force of the Enemies thereof to grant forth Commissions under his great Seale to such fit persons as hee shall make choice of to array and arme the Subjects of this kingdome and to compell those who are of able boly and of able estates to arme themselves and such as should not bee able of bodies but of abilitie in estate to assesse them according to their estates to contribute towards the charge of arraying and arming others being able of body and not able in estate to arme themselves And such persons as should be contrariant to commit to prison there to remaine untill the King should take further order therein And whereas the Earle of Exeter by vertue of his Majesties Commission to him directed for the arraying and arming of a certaine number of persons in the Countie of Northampton hath assest William Pargiter being a man unfit of body for that service but being of estate and abilitie fit to contribute amongst others to pay the sum of five shillings toward the arraying and arming of others of able bodies and wanting abilitie to array and arme themselves And whereas wee have received information from the said Earle that the said William Pargiter hath not only in a wilfull and disobedient manner refused to pay the said money assessed upon him towards so important a service to the disturbance and hinderance of the necessary defence of this kingdome but also by his ill example hath mis-led many others and as we have just cause to beleeve hath practised to seduce others from that ready obedience which they owe and would otherwise have yeelded to his Majesties just command for the publick defence of his person and kingdome which we purpose with all convenient speed to enquire further of and examine These are therefore to will and require you to take into your custodie the person of the said Willam Pargiter and him safely to keepe prisoner till further order from this Board or untill by due course of Lawe he shall bee delivered And the like return was then made in all things mutatis mutandis concerning the said Danvers for not paying a sum of money assessed upon him Yet hee the said Sir Iohn Bramston deferred to bail the said Danvers and Pargiter but remitted the said Danvers to the Fleet where hee remained till the 12. of July 1640. and the said Pargiter to the Gate-house where he remained till the ninth of November last although the said Ienings Danvers and Pargiter upon all and every the said returns ought to have been discharged or bailed by Law and the Councell of the said Ienings Danvers and Pargiter offered in Court very sufficient baile And he the said Sir Iohn Brampston being chiefe Justice of the Court of Kings Bench denyed to grant his Majesties Writ of Habeas Corpus to very many others his Majesties subiects and when hee had granted the said writs of Habeas Corpus to very many others his Majesties subjects and on the returne no cause appeared or

such cause onely as was clearly baileable by Law yet hee remanded them where they remained prisoners very long which said deferring to grant the said writs of Habeas Corpus and refusals and delayes to discharge prisoners or suffer them to be bailed contained in in this Article are destructive to the fundamentall Lawes of this Realme and contrary to former resolutions in Parliament and to the petition of Right which said resolutions and petition of Right were well knowne to him the sud Sir Iohn Brampston 4. That whereas there was a cause depending in the Court Christian at Norwich between Samul Booly Clerk and _____ Collard for two shillings in the pound for tythes for rents of houses in Norwich the said Collard moved by his Councell in the Court of Kings Bench for a prohibition to stay proceedings in the Court Christian at Norwich and delivered into the said Court of Kings Bench his suggestions that the said cause in the said Court Christian was for tythes for rents of houses in Norwich which was determinable by the Common Law only yet he the said Sir Iohn Brampston being chiefe Justice of the said Court of Kings Bench and sitting in the said Court deferred to grant a prohibition to the said Court Christian in the said cause although the Counsell did move in the said Court severall times and several termes for a Prohibitions And he the said Sir Iohn Bramston deferred to grant his Majesties writs of prohibition to severall other Courts on the motions of divers others of his Majesties subjects where the same by Laws of this Realme ought to have been granted contrary to the Lawes of this Realme and his owne knowledge And the said Commons by protestation saving to themselves onely the liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Iohn Brampston and also of replying to the answer that he the said Sir Iohn Brampston shall make unto the said Articles or any of them or of offering proofe of the premisses or any of their impeachments or accusations that shall bee exhibited by them as the Case shall according to the course of Parliaments require doe pray that the said Sir Iohn Brampston Lord chiefe Justice of the Court of Kings Bench may bee put to answer to all and every the premisses and that such proceedings examinations trials and judgements may be upon every of them had and used as is agreeable to Law and Justice Articles of the House of Commons in the name of themselves and of all the Commons of England against Sir Francis-Crawley Knight one of the Iustices of his Majesties Court of Common-pleas impeaching him as followeth 1. THAT he about the moneth of November Anno Dom. 1635. then being one of the Justices of the Court of Common-pleas and having taken an oath for the due administration of Justice to his Majesties liege people according to the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme subscribed an opinion in haec verba I am of opinion that as where the benefit doth more peculiarly redound to the good of the Ports or Maritime patts as in case of Piracie or Depredations upon the Seas there the charge hath been and may bee lawfully imposed upon them according to presidents of former times so where the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger of which his Majesty is the onely Judge there the charge of the defence ought to bee borne by all the Realme in generall This I hold agreeable both to Law and Reason 2. That he in or about the Month of February Ann. Dom. 1636. then being one of the Justices of the said Court of Common-pleas subscribed an extrajudiciall opinion in answer to questions in a letter from his Majesty in haec verba Charles R. When the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger whether may not the King by writ under the great Seale of England command all the Subjects of this Kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Ships with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as he shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the Kingdome from such danger and perill And by Law compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse and whether in such case is not the King the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same is to be prevented and avoyded C.R. May it please your most excellent Majesty We have according to your Majesties command severally every man by himselfe and all of as together taken into serious consideration the Case and Question signed by your Majesty and inclosed in your Royall Letter And we are of opinion that when the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger your Majesty may by writ under the great Seale of England command all the subjects of this your Kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Ships with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as your Majesty shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the Kingdome from such danger and perill And that by Law your Majesty may compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse And we are also of opinion that in such case your Majesty is the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same us to be prevented and avoyded Iohn Bramston Iohn Finch Humphrey Davenport Iohn Denham Richard Hutton William Jones George Crooke Thomas Trevor George Vernon Robert Barkley Francis Crawley Richard Westone 3. That hee then being one of the Justices of the said Court of Common pleas delivered an opinion in the Exchequer Chamber against Iohn Hampden Esquire in case of Ship-money that he the said Iohn Hampden upon the matter substance of the case was chargeable with the money then in question a copy of which proceedings and judgement the Commons of this present Parliament have already delivered to your Lordshis 4. That he then being one of the Justices of the said Court of Common-pleas declared and published in the Exchequer Chamber and Westminster Circuit where he went Judge That the Kings Right to Ship-money was so inherent a Right in the Crown as an Act of Parliament could not take it away And with divers malicious speeches enveighed against threatned and discountenanced such as refused to pay Ship money All which opinions and judgements contained in the first second and third Articles are destructive to the fundamentall Lawes of this Realme the Subjects right of property and contrary to former resolutions in Parliament and to the petition of Right which said resolutions and petitions of Right were well knowne to him And the said Commons by protestation saving to themselves onely the Liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Francis Crawley also of replying to the answer

And wee are of opinion that when the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole Kingdome in danger your Majesty may by writ under the great Seale of England command all the Subjects of this your Kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Shippes with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as your Majestie shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the Kingdome from such danger and perill And that by Law your Majesty may compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse And wee are also of opinion that in such case your Majestie is the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same is to be prevented and avoided Iohn Brampston Iohn Finch Humphrey Davenport Iohn Denham Richard Hutton William Iones George Crooke Thomas Trevor George Vernon Robert Derkley Frantis Crawley Richard Weston That whereas an action of Battery was brought by one Richard Legge against Robert Hoblins to which the said Hoblins pleaded Justification de son assault de mesme and the said cause came to triall at the Assizes holden for the County of Gloucester in Summer 1636. before the said Sir Humphrey Davenport then one of the Justices of Assize and Nisiprius for that County At the said triall the said Robert Hoblins did begin to make proofe of his said Justification and produced one Robert Tily a witnesse in the cause who proved upon oath that the said Richard Legge did make the first assault upon the said Robert Hoblins and that the occasion thereof was that the said Richard Legge and others came upon the Lands then in possession of the said Hoblins and did take and drive away eighteen Cowes of the said Hoblins pretending they had a warrant from the Sheriffe to distreine the same for fourty shillings assessed upon the said Hoblins for Ship-money And when the said Hoblins being present endevoured to hinder the said Legge and others from taking away his said Cattell the said Legge strooke the said Hobilins with a staffe who after defended himselfe That upon the opening of the matter the said Sir Humphrey Davenport would not suffer the said Hoblins to produce any more witnesses on his behalfe though the sayd Hoblins desired that other of his witnesses then present and sworne might bee heard nor his Councell to speak for him but being informed that the said Hoblins when Ship-money was demanded of him answered that hee would not pay the same because it was not granted by Parliament the said Sir Humphrey Davenport did then openly in the hearing of a great number of his Majesties liege people then assembled and attending the Court in great passion reprove the said Hollins and told him that the King was not to call a Parliament to give him satisfaction and did then and there also falsly and of purpose to prevent his Majesties loving subjects from the due and ordinary course of Law and contrary to his oath and the Lawes of the Realine publish declare and affirme that it was adjudged by all the Judges of England that Ship-money was due to the King and directed the Jury sworne in that cause to finde a verdict for the said Richard Legge And the said Jury did accordingly and gave him twenty pound dammages And the said Humphrey Daverport did then also without any cause imprison the said Robert Hoblins and bound him to the good behaviour That whereas in the month of April Decimo sexto Caroli the Officers of the Custome-house having seized a Shippe of one Samuel Warner laden with Tobacco being the goods of the said Warner the Bulk of the said Ship not being broken and no information exhibited for the King according to the course of the Exchequer for any duty the Barons were moved that the said Ship might bee restored to the Proprietors giving security to pay such duties as did belong to the King But upon the allegation of the Kings Atturney that there needed no information because there was no penalty the said Sir Humphrey Davenport being then Lord chiefe Baron of his Majesties Court of Exchequer together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court did contrary to his Oath and contrary to the Lawes of this Realme deny the restitution of the said Shippe unlesse all the duties demanded by the Farmours of the Custome-house were first paid Hereupon the said Warner brought an action of Trover in the Office of Pleas in the Exchequer against the said Officers that seized his Shippe and Goods Whereupon the Kings Atturney generall exhibited an information by English Bill in the Exchequer Chamber against the said Warner setting forth that Customes and Subsidie upon Merchandize were a great part of the Kings revenne and payable to him And that the said Ship was seized for non-payment of the foresayd duties notwithstanding the said Warner then Proprietor prosecuted the Officers upon a suit at Law and prayes that he may answer the said information before any further proceedings bee had at Law Thereupon the said Sir Humphrey Davenport together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court of Exchequer ordered that the Proprietor moving for the delivery of the said goods should first answer to the Information after which the said Warner demurred to the said Information in regard no title for any certaine duty was set forth by the Information which demurrer yet remaines not over-ruled but the said Sir Humphrey Davenport with the said other Barons without over-ruling the demurter ordered because Warner had put in a demurrer and not answered to the said Information that he should not proceede upon the action of Trover The proprietor being thus prevented of his remedy by Action at Law sued forth a Replevin and upon pre●ence of viewing the said goods caused them to bee brought forth of a Cellar hired by a Deputy to the Farmours to that use and being brought forth they were taken by the Sheriffs of London by vertue of the said Replevin and upon oath made of the manner of the taking as aforesaid before the Barons and upon view of the President inrolls the case the said Sir Hemphrey Davenport with the said other Barons adjudged that the said goods were not Replevisable and granted an Injunction to maintaine possession of them as they were before And the said house of Commons by protestation saving to themselves only the liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir H. Davenport also of replying to the answer that he the said Sr Humphrey Davenport shal make unto the said Articles or any of them or of offering proofe of the premisses or any of their impeachments or accusations that shall bee exhibited by them as the Case shall according to the course of Parliaments require doe pray that the said Sir Hamphrey Davenport Lord chiefe Baron of his Majesties Court of Exchequer may bee put to answer to all and every the premisses and that such

proceedings examinations trials and judgements may be upon every of them had and used as is agreeable to Law and Justice Articles of the House of Commons in the name of themselves and of all the Commons of England against Sir Thomas Trevor Knight one of the Barons of his Majesties court of Exchequer impeaching him as followeth 1. THat in or about November 4. Car. divers goods and merchandizes whereof Iohn Rolls George Moore and other Merchants of London were Proprietors being seised and conveyed into certaine Store-houses at the Custome-house by Sir Iohn Worstenham Abraham Dawes and others the Farmors and Officers of the Customes and by them there detained because the said Proprietors refused to pay the Subsidie of Tonnage and Poundage pretended to be due and demanded by the said Farmours and Officers on his Majesties behalfe for the said Merchandizes whereas no such subsidy or duty of Tonnage or Poandage was due or payable for the same no Subsidy of Tonnage and Poundage having beene granted by Parliament to his Majesty The said Iohn Rolls and other the Proprietors of the said goods having by reason of such unlawfull seisure and detainer as aforesaid sued forth one or more writ or writs of Replevin directed to the Sheriffes of London being the proper remedy provided by the Law to regaine the possession of goods taken and with-held from the owners contrary to Law the said Sir Thomas Trevor Knight then and yet one of the Barons of his Majesties said Court of Exchequer together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court upon information to them given that the said Proprietors or some of them had sued forth and did prosecute such writ or writs of Replevin for the delivery of the said goods did order an Injunction under Seale of the said Court to issue forth directed to the Sheriffes of London commanding them thereby not to execute the said writ or writs of Replevin or any like writ thereafter to be sued forth by any person or persons for the delivery of any goods in the like nature detained And did declare and order publiquely in the said Court of Exchequer that the said goods by Law were not Replevisable alleaging for cause that the said goods were in the Kings owne possession whereas the same did not judicially appeare to them and they did well know that the said goods were at that time in the possession of the Farmours and Lessees of the said Customes and no lawfull cause to them appearing or suggested of the taking and detaining of the said goods which Injunction and Declaration so granted and made were and are against the Lawes of the Realme and in subversion of the common right and remedy of the Subject for regaining the possession of his goods being taken and with-holden from him without lawfull cause That the Sheriffes of London for the time being served with the said Injunction did forbeare to execute the said writ or writs of Replevin By meanes whereof the said good continued so detained as aforesaid contrary to Law from the said moneth of November untill the moneth of June next following That the said Thomas Trevor and other the Barons aforesaid knowing the said goods to be unlawfully seized and detained for the pretended duties and Subsidie of Tonnage and Poundage whereas no such were payble by Law did from time to time delay the respective Proprietors from having restitution of their said goods being often in Court moved therein with intention thereby to force the said Proprietors by wanting their goods and the use thereof to pay all such summes as the said Officers of the Customes pretended to be due to his Majesty That to the end aforesaid the said Sir Thomas Trevor and the said other Barons refused to accept of any security to be given by the said Proprietors upon restitution had of their goods for payment of all such duties as should to made appeare to be made payable to his Majesty in such manner as the said Barons should direct That the said Sir Thomas Trevor and other the Barons aforesaid knowing that the said summes demanded on his Majesties behalfe by the said officers of the Customes not to be due by Law did refuse to order restitution of any part of those goods so detained as aforesaid to the Proprietors thereof unlesse the said Proprietors would deposite all such summes of money as the said Officers respectively demanded of them for pretended duties to his Majesty and the said Proprietors refufing to deposite the said summes demanded the said Sir Thomas Trevor and other the Barons aforesaid did order the said Officers to detaine double the value of the summes by them demanded for pretended duties to his Majesty and to restore the residue The said Sir Thomas Trevor and other the said Barons then knowing that the pretended summes demanded by the said Officers were not by Law due or payable to his Majesty 2. That in or about January 4. Car. the said Officers having seised severall Merchandize of the goods of Richard Chambers Merchant upon the pretences aforesaid did detaine the same and the said Chambers prosecuting by plaint to have his said goods replevied tho said Sir Thomas Trevor together with the said other Barons did in like manner in the said Court of Exchequer declare the said Chambers his goods not to be replevisable and enjoyned the Sheriffes of London to proceed no further therein no cause to them appearing of such seisure or detainer And the said Sir Thomas Trevor and other the Barons of the said Court refused to order the delivery of the said Chambers his goods upon good security offered by him to pay all such summes as should be made appeare to be due and for which the said goods were pretended to be detained and the said Barons being often moved in Court therein did refuse to order restitution of any part of the said Chambers goods untill the 23. of November 5. Carol and then ordered that the said Officers should detaine in their hands double the value of the summes by them demanded and restitution of the residue to be made to the said Chambers no cause of detaining any part of the said goods to them in any wise appearing 3. That whereas in the moneth of October in the fourth yeere of his said Majesties reigne the Farmers and Officers of the Custome-house having seised great quantities of Currants being the goods of Samuel Vassall merchant and having conveyed them into certaine store houses at the Custome house and detained them because the said Samuel Vassall refased to pay an imposition of five shillings six pence upon every hundred weight of the said currants pretended to be due and demanded by the said Farmours and Officers on his Majesties behalfe for the said currants whereas no such imposition was due or payable for the same but the said imposition was and is against the Lawes of this Realme And whereas also in Michaelmas Terme in the said fourth yeere of his Majesties raigne his