Selected quad for the lemma: day_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
day_n	aforesaid_a	judgement_n	party_n	9,235	5	9.6064	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A70870	A new discovery of the prelates tyranny in their late prosecutions of Mr. William Pryn, an eminent Lawyer, Dr. Iohn Bastwick, a learned physitian and Mr. Henry Burton, a reverent divine wherein the separate and joynt proceedings against them in the high commission and Star Chamber their petitions, speeches, cariages at the hearing and execution of their last sentences	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.; Bastwick, John, 1593-1654.; Burton, Henry, 1578-1648.; England and Wales. Parliament. House of Commons.	1641 (1641)	Wing P4018; ESTC R13582	25,214	51

respect of the quality of his cause the greatnesse of the persons whom it concernes the diversity of his councells opinions and the difficulty of procuring his councell to repaire to him to the Tower during the Terme to advise him he having no meanes to reward them according to their paines and for other reasons mentioned in his Affidavit is utterly disabled to performe the sayd Order to put in any answer without great prejudice both to himselfe and his cause which much concernes both the King his Crowne and dignity the Religion established and the liberties of the Subject infringed by the Prelates and their confederates He humbly therefore beseecheth your Lordships not to exact impossibilities at his hands but in this case of necessity according to many late presidents in this Honorable Court to grant him liberty to put in his answer by the sayd day under his owne hand he having beene a Barrester at law and not under his councells who refuse to doe it out of feare and cowardise being more fearfull of the Prelates then of God the King his Crowne and dignity and also for the causes hereunto annexed which he in all humility submits to your Lordships wisdomes and Iustice And the petitioner for the concession hereof shall ever pray for your Lordships c. The reasons why the petitioner Master Prynne humbly conceiveth that this honorable Court ought in point of law and Justice to admit his answer under his own hand without his councells which he cannot procure FIrst because there are many late presidents in this Court wherein divers defendants answers have been admitted without the hands of councell in cases where no councell would set their hands to them as Close and Doctor Laytons cases with many others and but one president only against it which being ancient singular upon a speciall reason in case of a Woman not of a man much lesse of a Lawyer and in a farre different case from this defendants ought not as he humbly conceaveth to overballance the presidents for him Secondly because upon an Ore-tenus and Interrogatories in this Court in many cases before his Majesty and the Lords at the councell-Table in Parliament and in the Kings-Bench upon Indictments and Informations especially for Felony or Treason the defendants are allowed freely to make their owne answers and defence without counsell if they please and in some cases are denied Counsell Thirdly because counsell who were not ab initio but came in long after causes both in this honorable Court and elsewhere are allowed and assigned not out of necessity but favour onely for the helpe and benefit of defendants not to be so strictly tied unto them but that they may have liberty to make answer without them in case where they and their councell differ in the substance of their answers or where councell advise them to their prejudice either out of feare ignorance or otherwise else it would lie in councells power both to prejudice and betray their causes and make them lyable to censure though innocent Fourthly because every answer in the eye of the law is the defendants only though signed by his councell for formes sake he onely is summoned to make answer he onely is to sweare it and he not his councell is to undergoe the hazard of it therefore he alone in point of law and Justice is onely bound of necessity to signe it not his Councell Fiftly because else there would be a fayler of Justice in many Cases through the want feare neglect ignorance diversity of opinion or treacher of councell for if one be peremptorily enjoyned to put in an answer by a day as this defendant now is and counsell neglect refuse delay or feare to doe it upon any occasion by the time which is this defendants Case he must without any default contempt or neglect in him suffer thereby as a delinquent though innocent without any legall conviction which were injury and injustice in the highest degree Sixtly because the very law of nature teacheth every Creature but man especially to defend preserve and make answer for himselfe either when the party accused cannot procure others to doe it or can doe it better then others will can or dare doe himselfe But in the present Case this defendant cannot procure his councell to make such an answer as his cause requireth which resting upon bookes matters of Divinity and on other points wherein his counsell have but little skill all which he must justify in his answer he is better able to make his answer and defence thereto then his counsell can will or dare to doe in case they were willing to undertake it which now they utterly deny and refuse onely out of feare and cowardize as aforesaid and therefore ought as he humbly conceiveth to be permitted to doe it both in point of Law and Justice Seventhly because God and Christ the supream Judges of the World and patternes of all Justice both here on Earth have and at the generall day of judgement when all men shall appeare before their dreadfull tribunalls wil allow every man to make his owne personall answer and defence without counsel or proxie much more then should every inferiour Judge and Terrene Court of Justice doe it if the party desire it and others will not dare not doe it Eightly because by the judiciall Law among the Iewes every man was to make his owne defence neither did their Law judge any man before it heard him and knew what hee did Iohn 7. 51. And by the civill Law even among the Pagan Romans it was not the manner to condemne any man before that hee who was accused had the accusers face to face and had Licence to answer for himselfe concerning the crime layd against him Acts 25. 16. If then the Lawes amongst Iewes and Pagans gave every defendant leave thus to make answer for himselfe and never condemned any as guilty for not answering by counsell as appeares by the cases of Naboth Susanna Christ and others though unjustly condemned yet not without a full hearing and witnesses first produced though false this defendant humbly conceiveth that by the Lawes and Justice of this Christian Common-Wealth and this honorable Court hee ought to have like liberty in this cause of so great consequence and that the Information against him ought not to be taken Pro confesso without hearing witnesses or defence in case he tender an answer under his owne hand onely without his counsells who refuse to advise or direct him else our Christian Lawes and Courts of Justice might seeme to be more unreasonable then the Iewes or Pagan Roman Lawes and tribunalls which God forbid any man should imagine Ninthly because S. Paul when he was slandered accused by Ananias the Iewes high-Priest with the Elders and Tertullus their Orator to be a pestilent fellow a mover of sedition among the Iewes throughout the World and a ring-leader amongst the Sect of the