No Freeman shall be taken imprisoned put off his freehold liberties free customes c. other then by the lawfull judgement of his Peeres as by the law of the land This great assurance in the 38. Chap. of the same statute was granted for the King and his successors to all his people and was confirmed in thirty Parliaments as I said before Cooke 8. the Princes Case by the statute of 5. Edw. 3. cap. 9. 25. Edw. 3. Cap. 4. 28. Edw. â— cap. â— 42. Edw. 3. cap. 1 â— The great Charter is againe confirmed and not onely so but proceedings contrary to the same before the King or his Counsell are declared voyde The King is to observe and mantayne the law the Iudge by his Oath 18. Edward â— is bound to doe right betweene the King and his people and that right strengthens the Kings prerogative presidents or practise contrary to so many statutes are of no use in many ages past encroachments were made upon these just liberties which were alwayes removed by Parliaments Yet I must confesse that of all antiquity some pleas have beene held in the Kings Royall house as in the Court held by the Marshall of the Kings houshold for things arising within the Verge Fleta lib. 2. cap. 2. but when that Court exceeds its due bounds declaratory statutes were alwayes made to meete them as mischiefes in the common-wealth when they medled with land or the like as appeares by the statute of Articule super Chartam 28. Edw. 1. 15. R. 2. cap. 12. all these statutes My Lords and many more to this purpose are undenyably of force in this kingdome and none of them can be with impunitie said to be obsolete or antiquated My Lords they raise another doubt viz that as the King may grant cognizance of pleas to Corporations or the like and therefore to the Councell-table if this neede an answer I will answer it thus that a grant of cognizance never was neyther can it be otherwise then to proceede per legem terrae or per judicium parium in the same manner as Courts doe proceede at Common-law and not upon paper petitions or summary hearings such cognizance was never granted the King is at losse by such proceedings he looseth fines upon originals he looseth amerciaments and fines incident to every judgement at Common-law as I said before I he subject undergoeth an inconvenience First the law will decline writs originall will by disuse be forgotten Clerks who should draw them discouraged to learne legall proceedings out of doores being the foundation of the law and in stead of regular and orderly proceeding rudenesse and barbarisme introduced the subject will loose the benefit of his attaynte and writ of error by which the law might relieve him against false verdicts or erroneous judgments he will loose the benefit of his warranty which might repaire a purchaser in case his acquired purchase were not good Whereas if a Iudge or Iuror doe wrong the remedy is at hand but against the Lord Deputy and Councell who will seeke for it therefore the countenance of this Iudicature in Common-pleas is against the Kings prerogative and the peoples just rights both which the Iudges ought to maintaine and likewise against the intent of your Lordships order My Lords as in England the said severall statutes were made to prevent the inconveniences aforesaid one good statute was made in Ireland 28. Henr. 6. cap. 2. Irish statut fol. 15. which directs matters of Interest to be determined in the Common-pleas matters of the Crowne in the Kings-bench matters of equity in the Chancery This law if there were no more regulates the proceedings in this kingdome The Iudges insist upon the words in the end of that statute viz. Saving the Kings prerogative My Lords this was stood upon at the late great tryall in England and easily answered for by the Common-law the King may by his prerogative sue in any of the foure Courts for his particular interest although it be contrary to the nature of that Court for he may sue à Quare impedit in the Kings Bench the like yet so as the said suite be bounded by the rules of law I will demaund a question whether the King may bring à Quare impedit in paper at the Councell-board the Kings now Atturney I am confident will answer me he cannot The word salvo or saving is in construction of law of a thing in esse or existente and no creative word 26. Ass pla 66. and cannot in the Kings Case be construed to overthrow the law nor many expresse and positive acts of Parliament My Lords in all humblenesse and dutie I will and must acknowledge his Majesties Sacred and lawfull prerogative whereof the King himselfe is the best expositor in his answer to the Petition of right Poltons stat fol. 1433. he declares that his prerogative is to defend the peoples libertie and the peoples libertie strenghtens the Kings prerogative the answer was a Kingly answer and More â—ajorum this is conformable to the great Charter and to all the statutes before recited The government of England being the best in the world was not onely Royall but also politicke some other princes like Cain Nemrod Esau and the like hunters of men subverted lawes The Kings of England maintayned them and did never assume the power to change or alter the lawes as appeares by Fortescue that grave and learned Lord Chancellor in King Henry the sixts time de laudibus legum Angliae cap. 9. fol. 25. and in the same Booke cap. 36. fol. 84. nor to take his peoples goods nor to lay taxe nor tallage upon them other then by their free consent in Parliament this appeares by the Booke Cases in 1â— Henr. 4. fol. 14. 15. 16. the great case of the Awlnage of London and in the Case of toll-travers and toll-through 14. Henr. 4. 9 37. Henr. 6. 27. 8. Henr. 6. 19 all agreeing nor to alter the nature of land as by converting land at Common-law to Gavelkind or Borrough English or e conuerso as to the estate otherwise as to the person of the King Ple. Com. the Lord Barclyes Case fol. 246. 247. Yet it is most true that the law of the land gives the King many naturall and great prerogatives farre beyond all other men as may appeare in the said Case fol. 243. but not to doe wrong to any subject Com. 246. The person of the King is too sacred to doe a wrong in the intention of Law if any wrongs bee done his ministerâ— are Authors and not the King And the Kings just prerogatives by the Kings Royall assent in Parliament were bounded limited and qualified by severall Acts of Parliament as if Tenant in cap. did alien at Common-law without licence this was a forfeyture of his estate Plo Com. case of mines fol. 332. the statutes of 2. Edw. 3. cap 14. makes this only finable the statute of Magna Charta cap. 21.
manifest that by their Oathes they are bound to interprete the lawes truely betweene the King and his people and betweene partie and partie and if in any Case granted it cannot be denyed when the Common-wealth desires a Declaration of the law in certaine points wherein they conceive their just liberties to have beene invaded least under colour of prerogative which the Parliament holds to be sacred some ministers may presume as of late they have endevored to destroy the peoples just liberties In the ordinarie Courts of Iustice the Iudges upon Oath are bound to afford the subject Iustice against the King and all others and are appointed by his Majesty for that purpose all writs are in his Majesties name in the Kings bench the pleas are styled Coram Rege Letters-patents and writs originall are Teste me ipso the King is therefore present in Parliament being the highest tribunall where in truely he sits in the exaltation of Royaltie and greatnesse Therefore the Commands of all his ordinary Courts are the commands of the King much more Commands in Parliament where his presence is more apparant and essentiall then in all other Courts of this kingdome It appeares copiously by the great Charter and by constant practise of all Parliaments since that time that all Courts and Iudges were regulated by Parliaments as for the Kings prerogative or revenue the Iudges cannot bee ignorant but the Parliament is and ever hath beene the best mantayner of his just prerogatives the best overseer of his revenue which if it fall short they onely are able and willing to supply It is true that the abuses of former times might be reformed for the future by Bils to bee past as statutes Yet that is away about and we may not loose the possession of our lawes and just liberties nor by new statutes admitt impunitie or give countenance to past offences statutes of this kind sufficient were already enacted and passed in former ages The declaration of a knowne law and the manifestation of wholesome statutes already established well may helpe the Common-wealth for the present but cannot in any probabilitie fall out hereafter to be prejudiciall to the state or Commonwealth and there is no president or example of any such prejudice It is confessed that most of the matters contayned in the Questions are alreadie voted for grievances in both houses and that very justly but how the law is therein remaynes yet to be declared as to this present Parliament which I hope in due time shall bee declared according to law and justice as in many Parliaments before the same or the like hath beene often done Where they doe againe insist upon the want of president and withall that in the preamble to the Questions the protestation cleares the law This word President strikes close unto us I have answered it before by presidents yet some more presidents I will offer as often as they speake the word president 7. 8. Elizabeth Dy. fol. 241. b. placit. 49. The Kings Atturney demanded the opinion of the Iudges 9. Elizab. Dy. 261. placit. 28 Casus Hiber where the Iudges of England signed their opinions to questions propounded by the Iudges of Ireland 11. Eliz. Dy. fol. 282. b plac 26. Casus Hiber 19. 20. Elizab. Dy. 360. The Case of arraignement of a Peere the like 13. CÃ roli by all the Iudges of England the Earle of Ormonds Case and yet in none of these Cases the matter was depending before them Notwithstanding the protestation may cleare the law yet in all precedent ages lawes cleare in themselves for their greater honor and countenance they have beene declared and enacted in Parliament The Law declared by Magna Charta was cleare before yet it was enacted 9. Henr. 3. and in thirty Parliaments since Cooke 8. 19. b. Primes Case the statute of praerog Regis And the statute of 25. Edw. 3. of treasons is declarative and so are many other statutes Adam eate the forbidden fruite Cain killed his brother God demaunded whether this was done yet he could not be ignorant of the fact The first article in the Civill and Canon law Courts is whether there is such a law all this is done for illustrations sake My Lords The ground of the Questions and the preamble to the writing styled an Answer kept me so long that I feare much to have trespassed upon your patience and yet the importance of the cause urgeth me to importune your Lordships favour a little further This Question is short and yet comprehensive that we are a free people is confessed to my hands to that part of the answer I doe not except the second part of the Question is whether wee are to be governed by the lawes of England and statutes of force in Ireland onely First though I need not prove it yet it is cleare we ought to bee so governed Matth. Paris historia maiori fol 121. Sir Iohn Davis discovery of Ireland fol. 100. King Henry the second held a Parliament at Lismore in Ireland in which Parliament Leges consuetudines Angliae fuerunt gratanter acceptae by the representative body of this whole Nation Magna Charta and other beneficiall statutes of England are here in the red Booke of the Exchequer in and since King Iohns time and so is Gervasius Tilberiensis of the Course and Officers of the Exchequer in the white booke of the Exchequer of Ireland leges consuetudines Angliae received in Ireland by Parliament otherwise this appeares 9. Iohn pat membr. 2. 1. Henr. 3. pat memb. 13. 10. Hen. 3. pat membr. 4. 12. Henr. 3. claus. membr. 8. by which words and by the constant practise of all ages since this kingdome was governed and ought to be so by the law of England as the law of the land which law as it was alwayes here received consists of three parts First the Common-law Secondly the generall customes of England Thirdly statutes here received The Common-law that is cleared already Customes as Tenant by the Curtesie Inne-keepers to be responsible for things within their houses or the like when we speake of a Custome in the law it must be intended a generall Custome over the Realme and no particular Custome And this appeares by the yeare bookes of 37. Henr. 6. fol. 5. 21. Henr. 7. 17. 18. Particular customes as Gavelkiâ—d Boreugh English-tenant right or the like are not to be intended when wee speake generally of Custome and these Customes are warranted by the Common-law of England being not contrary to the same but praeter legem so there may bee and are particular customes here praeter legem and yet not contrary to law as in many Corporations and Countries so the wives third of goods is good in England by the custome of many counties and places F. N. B. 122. 7. Edward 4. 21. 40. Edw. 3. 38. 17. Edw 2. f. detinue 58. Therefore it is not contrary to law that such a
answer is insufficient as in the case of a new invention of manufactory or the like in such cases a Patent may be good they say for certaine yeares whereas the yeares ought to be competent ten thousand years are certaine but not competent and they who offend are to give damage in an ordinary Court of Iustice to the Patentee unto which they adde or otherwise Oh this arbitrary word the like arbitrary advice of others I feare hath occasioned this Question Where Monopolies were clearly voyde punishments were inflicted upon The honest man and the Monopolist escaped they answer nothing to the losse of goods heavy fines mutillation of members the before recited statutes direct cleare answers to these particulars My Lords the statute of Magna Charta cap. 30. quod omnes Mercatores tam indigenae quam alienigenae have free passage sine omnibus malis tolnetis consuetudinibus ex Anglia in Anglia nisiantea publicè prohibiti fuerunt the subsequent statutes declaring many oppressions and grievances occasioned by restraints in trade and Commerce made trade free for victuall and merchandises and in them Nisi c. is omitted as the statute of 9. Edw. 3. c. 1. 25. Edw. 3. cap. 2. 2. Rich. 2. cap. 1. 11. Rich. 2. cap. 7. 16. Rich. 2. cap. 1. these statutes give double damage to the party and the offender to be imprisoned The statute of 21. Iacob c. 3. in England against Monopolies in the exception of new inventions limits the time to a reasonable number of yeares viz. fourteene yeares or under whether the heavie punishments aforesaid can be in this case especially the private interest of a subject being therein onely or mainly concerned Magna Charta cap. 29. gives me a cleere answer and satisfactory Nullus liber homo capiatur imprisonetur disseifietur vel aliquo modo destruatur c. nisi per judicium parium legem terrae if this be law or a lawfull statute as no doubt it is the question is soone answered My Lords by this time you know how the Innocent was actually punished in these cases Now it is time and not improper to shew how the Nocent ought to be punished who tooke unlawfull Monopolies seised the subjects goods by violence imprisoned fined mutilated and destroyed the Kings people and caused all the evils that depended therevpon For that my Lords it is not within my charge yet I hope it shall not remaine unrepresented by the house of Commons nor unremembred by your Lordships in due time To this the Iudges answered nothing but with a reference to their answer to the third whereas in truth this comprehends two matters besides of great weight and consideration first whereas the third question concerneth the decision at Counsell-board of matters of interest onely This question is of matters of punishment in an extrajudiciall way secondly this question demands knowledge of the punishment due to such as vote for such extrajudiciall punishments to these mayne matters there is no answer at all My Lords the statutes and authorities before mentioned upon the third and fourth questions against the determination at Councell-board or before the chiefe Governor in matters of interest do cleare this businesse as to the punishments depending upon those interests although not è converso And as for such as voted and acted therein if they besworne Iudges of the law the before recited Oath of 18. Edw. 3. declares enough His Majesty at his Coronation is bound by Oath to execute justice to his people according to the lawes this great trust the King commits to his Iudges who take a great Oath to discharge this trust if they fayle therein Sir VVilliam Thorp in Edward the 3. time for breaking this oath in poore things was indicted thus Quia praedictus VVillielmus Thorp habuit Sacramentum Domini Regis erga populum suum ad custodiendum illud fregit malitiosè falsé rebellitèr quantum in ipso fuit this extends to a Iudge onely who tooke that Oath habuit leges terrae ad custodiendum The trust betweene the King and his people is threefold First as betweene Soveraigne and Subject Secondly as betweene a Father and his Children under Pater Patriae Thirdly as betweene Husband and Wife this trust is comprehensive of the whole body politicke And for any Magistrate or private person to advise or contrive the breach of this trust in any part is of all things in this world the most dangerous vae homini illi First I doe conceive that an act of state or Proclamation cannot alter the Common-law nor restrayne the old nor introduce a new law and that the same hath no power or force to bind the goods lands possessions or inheritance of the subject but that the infringing thereof is onely a contempt which may bee punished in the person of the delinquent where the Proclamation is consonant and agreeable to the lawes and statutes of the kingdome or for the publicke good and not against law and not otherwise punishable I do conceive that a Proclamation is a branch of the Kings prerogative and that the same is usefull and necessary in some cases where it is not against the law wherein the publicke weale is interested or concerned but that any clause therein contayning forfeyture of the goods lands or inheritance of the subjects is meerely voyde for otherwise this inconvenience will ensue That Proclamations or acts of state may bee made in all cases and in all matters to bind the libertie goods and lands of the subjects and then the Courts of Iustice that have flourished for so many ages may be shut up for want of use of the law or execution thereof and there is no case where an offence is committed against law but the law will find out away to punish the delinquent The King by his proclamation may inhibit his subject that he shall not goe beyond Sea out of this Realme without his licence and this without any writt or other Commandement to his subject for perchance the King may not finde his subject or know where he is And if the subject will goe out of the Kings Realmes contrary to this proclamation this is a contempt and he shall be fined to the King for the same as saith Fitz-Herbert that such a proclamation can prohibit the Kings subjects to repayre into England for England is our Mother and though the Sea divide us that Sea is the Kings and therefore it is not pars extra in this sense It seemes by the Lord Chauncellor Egertons argument upon the case of post nati that a proclamation cannot binde the goods lands or inheritance of the subjects A provision was made in haec verba Promissum est coram Domino Rege Archiepiscopus Comitibus Baronibus quod nulla assis ultimae praesentationis de caetero capiatur de Ecclesiasticis praebendatis nec de praebendis but I doe not finde any forfeyture
to receive no reward Sixtly to take no Fee of any other then the King Seventhly to commit such as breake the peace in the face of Iustice Eightly not to mantayne any suite Ninthly not to deny Iustice notwithstanding the Kings Letters or Commandements and in that Case to certifie the King of the truth Tenthly by reasonable wages to procure the profits of the Crowne Eleventhly if he be found in default in any the matters aforesaid to bee in the Kings mercie body Lands and goods The second reason principally moveth from the following particulars In the Kings Bench the Major-part of the Iudges denyed his Majesties writ of prohibition to the late Court called the high Commission in a cause meerely temporall The foure Courts of Iustice durst not proceede in any cause depending before the chiefe Governor or at the Counsell-board upon paper petitions or rather voyde petitions these paper-petitions being the oblique lines aforesaid grave Iudges of the law were commonly assistants and more commonly referrees in the proceedings upon these paper-petitions in what causes in all causes proper for the Cognizance of the Common-law and determinable by writs of right and petitions of right and so to the most inferior action the like of the Courts of equitie whether this be lawfully to serve the King and his people or whether the King was at losse by the non-prosecuting of the causes aforesaid in their proper orbes by originall writs which might afford the King a lawfull revenue and likewise by the losse of fines and amerciaments naturall to actions at the Common-law or whether the losse aforesaid was made knowne to his Majestie or who consented to the Kings damage therein or whether this be a denyall of justice to deferre it upon paper Orders or Commaunds be conformable to that Oath I will pretermit yet your Lordships may even in this mist discerne a cleere ground for the second question The motive which in part stirred the third and fourth questions was the infinity of Civill causes of all natures without exception of persons without limitation of time proceeded in ordered decreed and determined upon paper-petitions at Counsell-board by the chiefe Governor alone The Commons of this kingdome observing the Iudges of the law who were Counsellors of estate to have agreed and signed unto such Orders the Iudges of the foure Courts and Iustices of Assize in all the partes of the kingdome to bee referrees upon such proceedings wherby these new devises were become so notorious that as all men heavily groaned under them so no man could bee ignorant of them By the colour of Proclamations more more frequent and of the Orders and Acts of state at Counsell-board which were in a manner infinite and other proceedings mentioned in these questions these effects were produced First imprisonment close imprisonment of such numbers that a great defeate in a battle could hardly fill more gaoles and prisons then by these meanes were surcharged in Ireland Secondly by seizures made by crewes of Catchpoles and Caterpillers his Majesties Leige people lost their goods as if lost in a battaile nay worse without hope of ransome Thirdly possessions were altered and that so often and so many that more possessions were lost by these courses in a few yeares then in all the Courts of Iustice in Ireland in an age or two The fourth effect was this after liberty was taken away propertie altered and possession lost by the wayes aforesaid that was not sufficient the subject must be pillored papered stigmatized and the image of God so defaced with indignities that his life became a continuing death the worse of punishments in these feates were advising and concurring some grave and learned Iudges of the Land who were Counsellors of estate as by their signatures may appeare The house of Commons finding as yet no warrant of president nor countenance of example in the law of England to beare up the courses aforesaid have drawne the said Questions from the effects aforesaid My Lords the liberty estate in lands or goods the person of the subject nay his honor and spirit being invaded altered and debased in manner aforesaid there remayned yet one thing his Life See how this is brought into play nothing must escape were not the Gates of Ianus shut up was not the Kings peace universall in his three kingdomes when a Peere of this Realme a Counsellor of the Kings a great Officer of state was sentenced to be shot to death in a Court Marshall what the cause was what defence was permitted what time given and what losse sustayned I submit to your Lordships as therein most neerely concerned were not others actually executed by Marshall law at such time as the Kings Iustice in his Courts of law was not to be avoyded by any person whatsoever This was in part the ground of the eight question This question is plaine a late introduced practise here contrary to former use and no appearing president to warrant such prosecution for a voluntary Oath and the great benefit and quiet accrewed to his Majesties people by arbiterments conceived by consent of parties hath in part occasioned this question Heretofore this Confession was not required for the Iustnesse of the Iudgements was then able enough to beare them up and if the judgement in some Case had beene otherwise what force can the confession of a delinquent add to a Iudiciall act this is part of the reason for this question A complaint exhibited in the house of Commons touching the denyall of the Copy of a Record which the complaynant undertooke to Iustifie in part raised this question In King Iames his time by an order conceived in the Court of Exchequer upon great debate and warranted by ancient presidents the respite of homage was reduced to a certaintie viz. two shillings sixe pence sterling For a Mannor yearly and so for Townes and other portions of Land this course was alwayes held untill now of late the respite is arbitrarily raysed as appeares by the second remembrances certificate viz. I finde that anciently before the beginning of King Iames his raigne every Mannor payed three shillings foure pence Irish per annum every Towne-land twentie pence Irish per à nnum as a fine for respite of homage but cannot finde any order or warrant for it untill the fifth yeare of the said Kings raigne and there in Easter Terme 1607. I finde an order entred directing what homage every man should pay a Copy whereof you have already from mee the preamble of which orders sheweth that that matter had beene long depending in the Court undecided which induceth me to beleeve that there was no former president or order in it About three yeares after the freeholders of the Countie of Antrim as it should seeme finding this rate to be too heavy for them they petitioned to the Lord Chichester then Lord Deputy for reliefe therein I finde his Lordships opinion to the
Let us therefore examine the course alleadged here in both those points and if it be found to faile in eyther of them it is to be rejected As to the first I cannot find or read any president of it untill of late and the usage of it for a few yeares cannot make it to be cursus Curiae which ought to bee a custome used time beyond the memory of man As to the second it is confessed by the Iudges that they know no law to warrant this course let us see then whether it be against law or standeth with the law and I conceive it is against law for divers reasons First by the Common-law if a judgement be given against a man after a verdict of twelve men which is the chiefe and cleare proofe which the law looketh upon or upon a demurrer after solemne argument he shall in the one case have an attainte against the Iury in the other a writ of error to reverse the judgement but in this case by the confession of the justnesse of the sentence all the meanes to reverse the sentence is taken away and therefore contrary to law and reason Whereas by the Common-law fines ought to bee moderate secundum quantitatem delicti in reformationem non in destructionem of late times the fines have beene so high in destruction of the party in the Castle-chamber as his whole family and himselfe if hee did pay the fine should bee driven to begge and without performance of the sentence hee could not be admitted to reverse the sentence in respect of all which howbeit in his conscience he is not guiltie yet to gaine his libertie and save part of his estate hee is necessitated to acknowledge the justnesse of the sentence so that the confession is extorted from him and consequently is against law Third reason if the fine were secundum quantitatem delicti as it ought to be without danger of destruction the reducement of the fine had not been so necessarie and therefore no just ground for this confession Lastly the confession of the party after sentence doth rather blemish the sentence then any way cleare it for the confession comming after the sentence which ought to be just in it selfe can adde nothing to it but draw suspition upon it and in that respect a confession is strayned the racke used by the course of the Civill law in criminall causes to cleare the conscience of the Iudge to proceede to sentence is intollerable in our Common-law And therefore this course being an innovation against law without any reasonable ground the said Iudges ought in their said answer to declare so much to the end a course might bee taken for abolishing the same This answer I will not now draw into question I could wish the rest were answered no worse What power have the Barons of the Court of Exchequer to rayse the respite of homage arbitrarily c. Vnto this they answer that untill the Kings Tenant by knights service in capite hath done his homage the ancient course of the Exchequer hath beene and still is to issue processe to distrayne the tenants ad faciendum homagium or ad faciendum finem pro homagio suo respectuando upon which processe the Sheriffe returnes issues and if the tenant doe not appeare and compound with the King to give a fine for respite of homage then the issues are forfeyted to the King But if the Kings tenant will appeare the Court of the Exchequer doth agree with him to respite his homage for a small fine They say further that it resteth in the discretion of the Court by the rule of the Common-law to lay downe a fine for respite of homage according to the yearely value of the said lands which I conceive to be very unreasonable and inconvenient that it should lye in the power of any to assesse a fine for respite of homage such as to him shall be thought meete in discretion for if so hee may raise the fine to such a summe as may exceed the very value of the lands Neyther hath the same beene the ancient course for it appeares by severall ancient Records and by an Order of the Court of Exchequer made Termino pascae 1607. that there should be payed for respiting of homage for every Towneship xx d. Irish and for every Mannor xxxx d. Irish and that such as hold severall houses acres or parcels of land which are not Mannors nor Towneship shall pay for everie hundred and twentie Acres of Land Meadow and pasture or of any of them xx d. Irish and no more and according to that rate and proportion if a greater or lesser number of Acres and for every house without ground iiij d. Irish and of Cottages or Farme houses which bee upon the Lands no fine to bee payed for them solely alone And I conceive where a man holdeth severall parcels of land of the King by severall homages that in such case he is to pay but for one respite of homage onely and no more for that a man is to doe homage but once and consequently to pay for one respite of homage onely The late course in the Exchequer here hath been contrary whereas in their answer they goe in the Exchequer according to the statute of primo Iacobi cap. 26. in England under their favour they goe cleare contrary for that statute was made in confirmation and pursuance of former Orders in the Exchequer Whereas the Barons here goe directly contrary to the ancient course and Order of the Exchequer in this kingdome more of this in my reason or ground for this question So I conclude their answer to this is short My Lords the question contaynes two points First whether the subject of this kingdome is censurable for to repayre into England to appeale to his Majesty for redresse of injuries or for his lawfull occasions Secondly why what condition of persons and by what law The first part of the Iudges their answer is positive and full viz. They know no law or statute for such censure nor I neyther and could wish they had stayed there In the second part of their answer they come with an if viz. unlesse they be prohibited by his Majesties writ proclamation or command and make mention of the statute of 5. Rich. 2. cap. 2. in England and 25. Henr. 6. cap. 2. in Ireland I will onely speake to the second part of this answer My Lords the house of Commons in the discussion of this point tooke two things into consideration First what the Common-law was in such cases Secondly what alteration was made of the Common-law by the statute of 5. Rich. 2. cap. 2. in England and 25. Henr. 6. cap. 2. in Ireland as to the subjects of Ireland As for the first the Register hath a writ framed in the point viz. the writ De securitate in venienda quod se non divertat ad partes extras
sine licentia Domini Regis Fitz. Natur. br fol. 85 the words of this writ cleares the Common-law in the point it begins with a datum est nobis intelligi c. The King being informed that such person or persons in particular doe intend to goe whether ad partes exteras viz. foraigne Countries to what purpose to prosecute matters to the prejudice of the King his Crowne the King in such a case by his writ warrant or Command under the great Seale privie Seale privy Signet or by proclamation may command any subject not to depart the kingdome without the Kings licence this writ is worthy to be observed for the causes aforesaid therein expressed the writ extendeth only to particular person or persons not to all the subjects of the kingdome no man can affirme that England is pars extera as to us Ireland is annexed to the Crowne of England and governed by the lawes of England our question set forth the cause viz. to appeale to the King for Iustice or to goe to England for other lawfull causes whereas the said writ intends practises with foraigne Princes to the prejudice of the King and his Crowne At the Common-law if a subject in contempt of this Command went ad partes exteras his Lands and goods ought to be seized 2. 3. Philip Mary Dy. 128. b. and yet if the subject went to the parts beyond the Seas before any such speciall inhibition this was not punishable before the statute of 5. Rich. 2. cap. 2. as appeares 12. 13. Elizab. Dy. 296. a. So that before the inhibition the law was indifferent now the question is at Common-law whether the subject of Ireland having no Office can be hindered to appeale or goe to the King for Iustice The King is the fountaine of Iustice and as his power is great to command so the Scepter of his Iustice is as great nay the Scepter hath the priority if any be for at his Coronation his Scepter is on his right side his Sword on his left side to his Iustice he is sworne therefore if any writ Commandement or proclamation bee obtayned from him or published contrary to his Iustice it is not the act of the King but the act of him that misinformed him then will I adde the other words of the question viz. or other his lawfull occasions as I said before in the case of a writ of error in the Kings Bench of England or in the Parliament of England which are remedies given by the law therefore the Common-law doth not hinder any man to prosecute those remedies which are given to everie subject by the same A scire facias may be brought by the King in England to repeale a patent under the great Seale of Ireland of lands in Ireland 20. Henr. 6. fol. a. An exchange of lands in England for lands in Ireland is a good exchange in law 8. ass placit. 27. 10. Edw. 3. fol. 42. tempor Edw. 1. Fitz voucher 239. What law therefore can prohibit any subject for to attend this scire facias in England or to make use of his freehold got by exchange The law being thus then it was considered what alteration was wrought by one branch of the statute of 5 Rich. 2. cap. 2. by which the passage is stopped out of the kingdome Lords notable Marchants and the Kings souldiers excepted I conceive this statute doth not include Ireland I never heard any Irishman questioned upon this statute for going into England nor any Englishman for comming into Ireland untill the late proclamation by the statute 34. Edw. 3. c. 18. in England all persons which have their heritage or possessions in Ireland may come with their beasts corne c. to and fro paying the Kings dues The statute of 5. Rich. 2. did never intend by implication to avoyde the said expresse statute of Edw. 3. betweene the Kings two kingdomes being governed by one law in effect the same people the words of the statute of 5. Rich. 2. are observable the principall scope of it is against the exportation of Bullion in the later part there is a clause for licences to be had in particular Portes by which I conceive that the Customers of those Portes may grant a let passe in such Cases It is therefore to be considered whether that branch of the said statute of 5. Rich. 2. was received in Ireland I thinke it is cleare it was not for by the statute 10. Henr. 7. cap. 22. in Ireland all the generall statutes of England were received in Ireland with this qualification viz. such as were for the Common and publicke weale c. And surely it cannot be for the weale of this kingdome that the subjects here be stayed from obtayning of Iustice or following other lawfull causes in England The statute of 25. Henr. 6. cap. 2. in Ireland excuseth absentes by the Kings command and imposeth no other penaltie so that upon the whole matter this question is not answered For so much as they doe answer of this question the answer is good for there is no doubt to be made but Deaneries are some donative some elective and some may be presentative according to the respective foundations I will only speake of a Deane de facto if a Deane bee made a Bishop and hath a dispensation Decanatus dignitatem in commenda in the retinere the confirmation of such a Deane is good in law This was the case of Evans and Acough in the Kings Bench in England Ter. 3. Caroli where Doctor Thornbow Deane of Yorke was made Bishop of Limmericke with a dispensation to hold in the retinere after his patent and before consecration it was adjudged his confirmation was good and yet if a Deane be made a Bishop in any part of the world this is a Cession Co. 5. 102. a. VVindsors case Davis Rep. 42. 43. c. The Deane of Fernes his case 18. Elizab. Dy. 346. the confirmation of a meere Laicus being Deane is good though he be after deprived 10. Eliz. Dy. 273. 12. 13. Elizab. Dy. 293. although the Deane be after deprived by sentence declaratorie yet his precedent confirmations are good So I conceive that a Deane who hath stallum in Choro vocem in Capitulo during all the time of his life and never questioned and usually confirmed all Leases without interruption is good And to question all such acts 40. 50. 100. yeares after is without president especially in Ireland untill of late yeares and in this kingdome few or no foundations of Bishopricks or Deaneries can bee found upon any Record therefore I conceive the Iudges ought to answer this part of the question My Lords I know you cannot forget the grounds I layd before for this question nor the time nor the occasion of the issuing of Quo warrantoes nor what was done thereupon in the Court of Exchequer Now remayneth to consider of the answer