Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	daughter_n	king_n	wife_n	4,569	5	6.4342	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26140	A defence of the late Lord Russel's innocency by way of answer or confutation of a libellous pamphlet intituled, An antidote against poyson : with two letters of the author of this book, upon the subject of His Lordship's tryal : together with an argument in the great case concerning elections of members to Parliament, between Sr. Samuel Barnardiston bar. plaintiff, and Sr. Will. Soames, sheriff of Suffolk, defend., in the Court of Kings-Bench, in an action upon the case, and afterwards by error sued in the Exchequer-chamber / by Sir Robert Atkyns, Knight of the Honourable Order of the Bath ...	Atkyns, Robert, Sir, 1621-1709.	1689 (1689)	Wing A4136; ESTC R4958	24,651	29

present at my Lord's Tryal must needs be surpriz'd to find the Truth of the Case so untruly and unfaithfully set down in my Lord's Speech But whoever will take the pains to read the Tryals publish'd by Authority which no man will suspect of Partiality towards the Person Tryed will receive abundant Satisfaction in the Truth of what was said by the Lord Russel and discover the shameless Impudence of this Malicious Author The Indictment as we find it printed at large in the Tryal fol. 29. charges the Prisoner that he intending to disturb the Peace of the Kingdom and to move War and Rebellion against the King and to subvert the Government and to depose or put down and deprive the King from His Title and Kingly Name of the Imperial Crown of His Kingdom of England and so bring and put the King to Death and Destruction 2. Nov. 34. Car. 2. and at other times Maliciously and Traiterously with divers others did Conspire Compass Imagine and Intend 1. To deprive the King of His Title and Government 2. And to kill the King and to subvert the Government 3. And to move Insurrection and Rebellion against the King. And to fulfil and perfect these Treasons and Traiterous Compassings and Imaginations The said William Russel did meet together with divers other Traytors and Consult Agree and Conclude 1. To move and stir up Insurrection and Rebellion And 2. To Seize and Destroy the King's Guards The Operative and Emphatical words of this Indictment are the Intending Conspiring and Concluding The things Intended and Conspired were 1. To move and stir up War and Rebellion against the King. 2. To Depose the King. 3. To Kill the King. And in order to the Accomplishing of these horrid Crimes The things Concluded on were 1. To move and stir up Insurrection and Rebellion 2. To seize and destroy the Guards This is the very sum and true Method of the Indictment if it be truly printed in the Tryals Note Here is no open Act or Deed charg'd to be done by the Lord Russel unless his meeting together with others be meant to be an open Act or Deed but then again that Act of Meeting terminates meerly in Consulting Agreeing and Concluding They met only to Consult Agree and Conclude but they acted nothing in pursuance of that Consulting Agreeing and Concluding for any thing that appears in the Indictment so that the Meeting properly hath not the nature of an Acting or Action or of a thing done but the Effect of the Indictment is that the Lord Russel and others did Consult Agree and Conclude to do something but the Indictment stops there and goes no further for it sets not forth any thing done at all so that here is no Overt Act or Deed and therefore the Indictment is void for there is no Act charg'd but Meeting and that was meerly in order to Consult and Agree and they did agree upon a thing to be done but it is not said they did it or did any thing towards it I repeat this the oftner that it may be the better understood and minded being very material read the Indictment The Indictment is grounded upon the Statute of 25 E. 3. cap. 2. the old Statute of Treasons So the Attorney General declares himself fol. 49. of the Tryal Now let us see how far this Charge in the Indictment will make my Lord guilty of any Treason within that Statute The Body of that Statute of 25 E. 3. of Treasons is printed together with 〈…〉 see the Tryal fol. 50. so that it need not be repeated here though● there are some other Clauses in that Statute not printed in the Tryal The occasion of making that Statute appears to be the variety of Opinions that then were what should be accounted Treason and what not which was very mischievous to the Subjects and gave too great a Liberty to the Judges of the Ordinary Courts To Cure this mighty Mischief and to prevent that Arbitrary Power of Judges this excellent Statute makes a Declaration what shall be adjudged Treason by the Ordinary Courts of Justice not but that there might be like Cases or other Facts amounting to Treason besides those there Enumerated but those other Facts or Treasons must not be adjudg'd by those Ordinary standing Courts such as the Goal-Delivery of Newgate and the Court of the King's-Bench at Westminster itself are but in such Cases those Courts must forbear proceeding and the Case must be reserv'd for the Determination of the King and Parliament see that Statute in the printed Statutes at large So that the Court of Goal-Delivery at Newgate must Judge only and proceed upon no other Treasons but what are there Enumerated and Specified Now the Treasons in that Statute Enumerated and Specified for the word Specified is the very word used by that Statute are these 1. Compassing or imagining the Death of the King. Queen Prince 2. Violating or Carnally knowing the Queen King's Eldest Daughter Unmarried Prince's Wife 3. Levying War against the King not a Compassing or Imagining to levy War but an Actual levying War. It must be a War begun and several other sorts of Treasons are there Specified not to our Purpose to be recited The Statute further requires that the Person Indicted be Proveably attainted of some one of these Teasons by Overt Deed that is some open manifest Act or Deed done which must of necessity also be expresly set down in the Indictment and fully and clearly proved at the Tryal by two Witnesses See Sir Coke's third Institutes in his Chapter of High-Treason fol. 12. in his Exposition of the words of that Statute Per Overt fait and there fol. 5. upon the words Fait Compasser he tells you the Nature of that Open Deed that the Statute intends It must be a Deed and not meer Words it must be a Deed tending to the Execution of the Treason imagined That Deed must be an open Deed that is it must be fully proved and made open and manifest at the Tryal by clear proof So that if the Indictment fail of setting forth one of those Treasons that are there enumerated it is not a good Indictment upon that Statute If it do set forth one of those Treasons yet if it do not set forth some open Deed done by the Party indicted that is such a Deed as does properly and naturally tend to the execution of that sort of Treason set forth in that Indictment In such case also the Indictment is not good If both these viz. the Treason intended and a proper suitable open deed be well set forth in the Indictment which make a good Indictment yet if that very sort of Treason intended and that open Deed or Fact so set forth in the Indictment be not also fully clearly and manifestly proved upon the Tryal against the Prisoner he ought to be acquitted It will not suffice either to prove it by one Witness or to prove any other sort of Treason not charg'd in the