Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	henry_n	king_n	westminster_n	3,051	5	10.0412	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A88235	Lieu. Col. John Lilburn's plea in law, against an Act of Parliament of the 30 of January, 1651. entituled, An act for the execution of a judgment given in Parliament against Lieu. Col. John Lilburn. Contrived and penned, on purpose for him, by a true and faithful lover of the fundamental laws and liberties of the free people of England, ... all which compels and forceth the penman to be very studious of his own good and preservation, ... and therefore, for his own good and benefit, the honest readers information, and for Mr Lilburns the prisoners advantage, he presents these ensuing lines to thy view, and his, as the form of a plea; that the penman hereof, as a true well-wisher of his, and the people of England, would have him to ingross into parchment, and to have ready by him to make use of (in case his own braines cannot contrive a better) when he is called up to answer for his life before the judges of the upper-bench, or any other bar of justice whatsoever; and the said form of a plea for him thus followeth verbatim.	Lilburne, John, 1614?-1657.	1653 (1653)	Wing L2160; Thomason E703_12*; ESTC R202744	14,820	16

his Army in many of their remarkable Declarations have fully declared against the late 11 members their Accomplices Yea and forced the late Parl. to raze out of their Books and Records many wicked and unrighteous things as they judged them to be after the Parl. had solemnly past them as Votes Orders Iudgments and Acts yea and endeavoured very earnestly to hang divers of those as Traytors that had executed them as particularly Alderman Adams Langham and Bunch with the Lord Major Sr Iohn Gayer c. But the greatest grievances and mischiefs in the world are by the foresaid mischievous and unjust banishing Act established ratified and confirmed for by it a man is condemned to lose his liberty and estate and all the comforts of this life and that without any the least crime committed or accusation exhibited or legal process issued out to summon the party to make any defence in the world or ever calling or permitting him to speak one word for himself Which is an act or proceeding against the light and law of Nature Reason the Law of God against the Law of Honour Conscience and common-honesty yea a dealing worse with the party then ever the cruel Jewes did with Christ or then the bloudy Butchers Bishop Gardiner and Bonner did with the ●oasted Martyrs in Queen Mary's dayes who alwayes suffered them to have due process of law and to know and see their Accusers and to have free liberty to speak for themselves and never condemned them but for transgressing a known and declared Law in being Yea also dealing worse with the party then ever the bloudy Gunpowder Traitors were dealt with by King James who always allowed them fair trials in law from the beginning to the end at the Bar of Justice for their lives Yea it is a worse dealing with the party then ever the Parliament themselves dealt with the bloudiest and most massacring traitors that ever was in arms against them to cut their throats Yea the fore-mentioned practice of the foresaid most illegal and unrighteous Act of banishment is an Act and proceedings in the highest subversion of the fundamental law and liberty of England that can be invented or imagined and by consequence if it may without the highest offence or solicismes in Law be supposed that his Excellency the Lord Gen. Cromwel Major Gen. Harrison and the rest of the Members of the late supream Authority of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of England sitting at Westminster had any real finger in it or were Actors of it they may and ought all of them with all the rest under them that have executed any part of the foresaid unjust injurious illegal Act of Parliament be apprehended indicted and processed against at the common-law as Traytors and subverters of the fundamental lawes liberties and freedoms of the free-born people of England As that learned man in the Lawes of England Sr Edward Cook in the second third and fourth parts of his Institutes all three of which are published by two special Orders of the late House of Commons in Anno 1641. for good Law doth declare and proof was dealt with by Empson and Dudley in lesse Cases then the before recited unjust Act of banishment Which Case of Empson and Dudley was thus At the Parliament holden by King Lords and Commons in Henry the sevenths time who was a most undoubted lawful King of England and by his Marriage of his Wife the Lady Elizabeth Heir apparent to the House of York as Himself was to the House of Lancaster had united the two claims of Lancaster and York in Himself and in pitcht-battel had slain King Richard the third the Usurper and by reason of the extraordinary many troubles of His Reign and the ignorant Regal time in which he lived considered He had a thousand times more grounds to be arbytrary and discretionary in his proceedings with the people of England then the late decapitated Parliament had Yet he summoned a free Parliament who sate peaceably and quietly without the force or purgings of soldiers and after that several Juries at Assizes and Sessions by corruption and favour had refused to fi●de persons that were judicially proved guilty before them of br●ach of penal laws as in full and free Parliament by King Lords and Commons is avowedly declared An Act of Parliament recorded in the 4th part of Cooks Institutes fol. 40 41. in the 11th of Hen. 7. chap. 3 was past by King Lords and Commons in full and free parliament to enable the Justices of Assize in open Sessions to be holden before them and the Justices of peace in each country in England upon information for the King before them to be made to have full power and authority by their discretion with ●ut trials by Juries to hear and determine all offences and contempts committed against penal laws In all which arbitrary or discretion I proceedings murther treason and felony was excepted out of their cognizance or jurisdiction as also all other offences whereby any person should lose life or member or lands tenements goods or chattels to the party complaining By pretext of which statute saith the Lord Cook in his last recited foli● Empson and Dudley privie Counsellors and Justices of peace to Henry the seventh did commit upon the subject insufferable pressures and oppressions which yet at the highest was but the taking away some small part of the persons estates from them that they condemned and therfor● this statute was justly soon after the decease of Henry the seventh repealed at the next Parliament after his decease by the statute of the 1 Hen 8. chap 6. A good caveat saith he to parliaments to leave all causes to be measured by the golden and streight wet-wand of the law and not to the uncertain and crooked cord of discretion For it is not almost credible to fore-see saith he when any maxime or fundamental law of this Realm is altered as elsewhere hath been observed what dangerous inconveniences do follow which most expresly appeareth by this most unjust and strange Act of 11 H. 7. For hereby not onely Empson and Dudley themselves but such Justices of peace corrupt men as they caused to be authorised committed most grievous and heavy oppressions and exactions grinding the face of the poor subjects by penal laws be they never so obsolete or unfit for the time by information onely without any presentment or trial by Jury being the ancient birth-right of the subject but to hear and determine the same by their discretion inflicting such penalty as the statutes not repealed imposed These and other like actions and oppressions by or by the means of Empson and Dudley and their instruments brought infinite treasures to the Kings Coffers whereof the King himself in the end with great grief and compunction repented as in another place we have observed This statute of 11 H. 7. we have recited and shewed the just inconveniences therof to the end that the like should never hereafter

Lieu. Col. John Lilburn's Plea in Law Against an Act of Parliament of the 30 of January 1651. Entituled An Act for the execution of a Judgment given in Parliament against Lieu. Col. John Lilburn Contrived and penned on purpose for him by a true and faithful lover of the Fundamental Laws and Liberties of the free people of England a great deal more then of the person of Lieu. col John Lilburn though now he be a prisoner for the said Lawes and Liberties and his own innocency in Newgate All which compels and forceth the Penman to be very studious of his own good and preservation very much concerned and very much incroached upon in that harsh unjust and illegal dealing that at present is exercised upon him And therefore for his own good and benefit the honest Readers information and for Mr Lilburns the prisoners advantage he presents these ensuing lines to thy view and his as the form of a Plea that the Penman hereof as a true well-wisher of his and the people of England would have him to ingross into Parchment and to have ready by him to make use of in case his own braines cannot contrive a better when he is called up to answer for his life before the Judges of the Upper-Bench or any other Bar of Justice whatsoever and the said form of a Plea for him thus followeth verbatim The second Edition much inlarged corrected and amended July 2. 1653. JOhn Lilburn now prisoner at the Bar saith that he having heard the Charge contained in the Scire facias Indictment or Information now read unto him at the Bar For plea thereunto he saith That it appeareth by the Act of Parl of the 30 of Jan. 1651. That upon the 15. of Jan. 1651. a Judgment was given in Parl. against one Lieu. Col. Jo. Lilburn in the Act named for high crimes and misdemeanors by him committed as by the same appeares for which the fines and other punishments were promulgated against him mentioned in the said Act. But the said John Lilburn now prisoner at the Bar saith that the said J. Lilburn in the said Act named and he the now prisoner at the Bar be not one and the self-same person for that he the now prisoner at the Bar is a free-born English Gentleman and never was legally charged indicted convicted either by the Parl. or any other Court of Judicature being a Court of Record in the English Nation or Commonwealth Neither ever was there any Judgment given in Parl. against him the now prisoner at the Bar for high crimes and misdemeanors mentioned in the said Act upon the said 15 of Jan. 1651 Votes or Resolves being not in the least any judgments in law It being impossible that a Judgment in any legal Court of England should be past against a free-born English man and that man dayly forth-coming and never to hear read nor see any of the proceedings ante-ceding the said Judgment and never summoned by any legal process to any legal proceedings nor called to any legal Bar whatsoever and demanded according to Law what he could say why Judgment should not be past against him Neither ever did the pris●ner J. Lilburn now at the Bar ever in all his life-time by kneeling at the Bar of the P. of the Commonwelth of England lately sitting at Westm ever acknowledge that the said Parl. in law ever had in all their life times any the least jurisdiction in the world to sentence him or any other free-born English man of England that are none of their Members of immedi●te Officers for any crimes whatsoever as I. Lilburn the prisoner at th● Bar hath fully and undeniably proved by Law in his P●ea upon the Writ of Habeas Corpus before the late Judges of the Kings Bench viz. Judge Bacon and Judge Rolls upon the 8th of May 1648. as in that printed Law-Argument entituled The lawes funeral is fully to be read in pag. 8 9 10 11. All crimes whatsoever being for him onely and solely to be h●ard determined and judged at the Common-law and no where else For Magna Charta th● P●tition of Right and the Act that abolished the Star-Chamber expresly saith That no free-man of England shall be taken or imprisoned or be disseized of his free hold or liberties or free customes or be out-lawed or be ex●led but by a lawful Judgment of a Jury of 12 sworn men of his equals of the same neighborhood according to the Law of the Land And that none shal be taken for any crime whatsoever by any person or Court whatsoever unless it be by indictment or presentment of good and lawful people of the same neighborhood where such deeds be done in due manner or by process made by Writ original at the Common law and that none be put out of his franchise or free-hold unless he be duly brought in to answer and adjudged of the same according to the course of the Law and if any thing be done by any persons or Courts wha●soever against the tenor of the same it shall be void in Law and holden for error And the Petition of Right expresly saith No man whatsoever shall be any wayes punished especially in criminal cases but according to the Laws and Statutes already established in the Land And those also by the said Petition of Right and the Statute that abolished the Star-Chamber are precisely declared to be according to our good old native fundamental Rights Liberties This very thing or the securing therof alone being the principal and chief declared cause of all the late Parl. and present Armies wars with the late King and his son and without the inviolable preservation of these our fundamental laws and liberties it is impossible that any in the Army from the highest to the lowest in the least can acquit themselves of being justly esteemed both before God and all just men real and wilful murderers of all those persons that they have slain in the late civil wars and if so woe unto them when God makes inquisition for innocent bloud Neither indeed is he the now prisoner at the Bar guilty of any such high crimes and misdemeanors as is expressed in the said Act Neither ever was he the now prisoner at the Bar in the least duly and legally banished and fined by the said Act nor yet is a fellon nor guilty of fellony in no manner of respect as by the said Scire facias Indictment or Information now read unto him is supposed Neither can he rationally imagine that by the Parl. that is mentioned in the said Act of the 30 of Jan. 1651. for banishing one Lieu. Col. Iohn Lilburn is not in the least meant the late Parl. of the Common-wealth of England sitting at Westminster especially because it is not so exprest who had taken many Oaths and past abundance of Declarations and particularly that of the 9 of Feb. 1648. inviolably to maintain the funda●ental Lawes of the Land in reference to the peoples lives

liberties and properties with all things incident appertainining and belonging thereunto But that rather it was some ignorant sottish French Parl. sitting at Paris or elsewhere in France that understand nothing of the laws liberties and freedomes of England or that it was the Malignant Cavalier Parl. lately sitting at Oxford in the Kings Quarters there post-dating their Act and thereby endeavoring by the said Act to create such a a president as in the consequence of it would destroy all the lawes liberties and properties of the free-born people of England and thereby absolutely set up the Kings Will and Prerogative above Law the bare endeavouring of which in the Earl of Strafford hath bin long since adjudgd high Treason Or in the next place if the Authors of the said monstrous and illegal Act of banishment be neither the ignorant Parliament of Paris nor the Cavalier Parliament of Oxford then of necessity in the third place it cannot in Charity and Reason but be judged that the said Act of banishment was drawn up by Mr Scobel the Parliaments Clerk Mr Hill their Chairman and Mr Prideaux their Attorney General when they were all riding Post and so jumbled or shaken with fast riding that it was impossible for them to hold their pens to write right and true and when they had framed it then by some cunning artifice or inchantment of theirs they preferred it to the said Parl. who in charity and common Reason must needs be judged to pass it when they were three quarters asleep against some sillie natural fool called Lieu. col John Lilburn that could not be imagined ever in his life to have read any thing of Law or Reason It being impossible in the least in Reason to be conceived that the late supream Authority the Parl. of the Commonwealth of England sitting at Westminster being onely by their own Declarations but trusted to provide for the Peoples weal but not in the least for their woe would ever in their right wits or not being three quarters asleep pass such an Act of Parliament against Iohn Lilburn now prisoner at the Bar who hath much read the law and very well understands the fundamental liberties of England and hath hazardously adventured his life a thousand times for the inviolable preserving of them because such an Act of Parl. as the foresaid Act of Parl. is is in the first place An Act of Parliament against common right common equity common reason and therfore is void and null in law and ought not to be executed as appears by these following Law Authorities viz. 1 part of Dr Bonhams Case fol. 118. and the 8th of Edw. 3. fol. 3. 30. 33 E. cassavit 32. and 27 H. G. annuity 41. and 1 Eliz. Dier 113. and 1 part Cooks Institutes lib. 2. chap. 11. sect 209. fol. 140. a. 4 Edw. 4. 12. 12 Ed. 4. 18. 1 H. 7. 12. 13. Plow com fol. 369. and Judge Jenkins learned Works in the Law printed for I. Gyles 1648. but particularly by his Discourse of long Parliaments pag. 139 140 c. See also Mr W. Prins notable book of the 16 of Iune 1649. called A legal Vindication of the liberties of England against illegal taxes p. 11 12 13. c. But especially see a book entituled The legal and fundamental liberties of England revived asserted and vindicated printed and reprinted in the year 1649. pag. 54 55 56 57. yea an Act of Parl. That a man shall be Judges in his own Case is avoid Act in law as appeares in Hubberts Case fol. 120. and by the 8th Part of Cookes Reports in Dr Bonhams Case and by the present Armies own Book of Declarations pag. 35 52 54 59 60 61 63 132 141 142 143 144. Yea saith that learned Oracle of the Law of England Sr Edw. Cook in the 4th part of his Institutes fol. 330. Where Reason ceaseth there the Law ceaseth for seeing Reason is the very life and spirit of the law it self the law-giver is not to be esteemed to respect that which hath no Reason although the generality of the words at the first sight or after the letter seem otherwise And saith the said learned Author in his first part Institutes fol. 140. a. All Customs and prescriptions Acts of Parliament Lawes and Iudgments that be against Reason are void and null in themselves And saith the Armies Atturny General John Cook in the late Kings Case stated pag. 23. that by the law of England any Act or agreement against the laws of God and nature is a meer nullity for as a man hath no hand in making the laws of God and nature no more hath he power to marre or alter them and he cites the E. of Leicesters adjudged Case for a proof And in pag. the 20t h he also saith That all the Judges in England cannot make one case to be law that is not reason no more then they can prove a hair to be white that is black which if they should so declare or adjudge it is a meer nullity For law saith he must be reason adjudged And excellent to this very purpose is that ancient Law Book called the Doctor and Student who in his second Chap. pag. 4. expresly saith Against the law of Nature which he cals the law of reason prescription statute nor custome may not prevail and if any be brought in against it they be no prescriptions statutes nor customs but things void and against justice And what this law of nature or reason is he excellently sheweth in the latter end of the 4th pag. and the beginning of the fifth and therefore in his 7th pag. he expresly saith That to every good law is required these properties viz. that it be honest rightwise possible in it self and after the custom of the country convenient for the place and time necessary profitable and also manifest that it be not captious by any dark sentence nor mixt with any private wealth but all made for the common good for saith he every mans law must be consonant to the law of God otherwise they are not righteous nor obligatory Secondly such an Act of Parliament as the foresaid Act of Banishment is not onely against common-right common-equity and common-reason but it is absolutely destructive to the very ends of the peoples trust conferred upon the Parliament and so the highest of Treasons that can be committed and that it is destructive to the ends of the peoples Trusts clearly appears by the Statutes of the 4th of Ed. the 3d chap. 14. and 36 Edw. 3. 10. which expresly saith That a Parliament at least shall be holden once every year and that for the maintenance of the Peoples lawes and liberties and the redress of divers mischiefs and grievances that dayly happen and suitable to these things are the ends contained in the Writs that summon them the intentions of those that chuse the Members and send them And suitable to this is the ends of Parl. sitting as the present General and