Selected quad for the lemma: honour_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A89976
|
An exact abridgment of all the trials (not omitting any material passage therein) which have been published since the year 1678 relating to the popish, and pretended Protestant-plots in the reigns of King Charles the 2d, and King James the 2d.
|
P. N.
|
1690
(1690)
|
Wing N64A; ESTC R229644
|
248,177
|
499
|
which the Court adjourned and the Lords sent a Message to the Commons that they had ordered the Prisoner to the Bar again on Monday morning at 10 a Clock The sixth Day MOnday December 6. 1680. about 11 the Court being sat and the Prisoner at the Bar his Petition was read which was for leave to offer a few things more to clear himself and which the Ld. H. Steward told him the Lords had granted He then said that seeing he had received their Order that his Counsel should not be heard touching the continuance of Impeachments from Parliament to Parliament he desired that he might offer them his own Conceptions concerning that urging that they had not yet declared their own Judgments either as to that or whether they did acquiesce in the Judges Opinions praying that his Counsel might be heard as to the other points protesting his own Innocency and Abhorrency of Treason reading then his Case and repeating his Defence c. After which the Lords adjourned into the Parliament Chamber and the Commons returned to their House and received a Message from the Lords that they had ordered the Prisoner to the Bar to receive Judgment to morrow at 10. The seventh Day TUesday December 7 1680. About 11 the Court being sat the Ld. H. Steward took the Votes of the Peers upon the Evidence beginning at the Puisne Baron and so upwards in order the Lord Stafford being as the Law required absent The Ld. H. Steward began then saying My Lord Butler of VVeston Is VVilliam Lord Viscount Stafford Guilty of the Treason whereof he stands impeached or not Guilty Lord Butler Not Guilty upon my Honour The same Question was put to the rest whose Names and Votes follow Ld. Arundel of Trerice Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Crewe Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Cornwallis Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Holles Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. VVootton Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Rockingham Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Lucas Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Astley Guilty upon my Honour Ld. VVard Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Byron Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Hatton Not Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Leigh Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Herbert of Cherbury Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Howard of Escrick Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Maynard Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Lovelace Guilty upon my Honour Ld. Deincourt Not guilty upon my Honour Ld. Grey of Wark Guilty upon my honour Ld. Brook Guilty upon my honour Ld. Norreys Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Chandos Guilty upon my honour Ld. North and Grey Guilty upon my honour Ld. Paget Guilty upon my honour Ld. Wharton Guilty upon my honour Ld. Eure Guilty upon my honour Ld. Cromwel Guilty upon my honour Ld. VVindsor Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Conyers Guilty upon my honour Ld. Ferrers Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Morley Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Mowbray Not guilty upon my honour Ld. Viscount Newport Guilty upon my honour Ld. Visc Faulconberg Guilty upon my honour Earl of Conway Guilty upon my honour E. of Berkley Not guilty upon my honour E. of Maclesfield Guilty upon my honour E. of Hallifax Not guilty upon my honour E. of Feversham Not guilty upon my honour E. of Sussex Guilty upon my honour E. of Guilford Guilty upon my honour E. of Shaftesbury Guilty upon my honour E. of Burlington Guilty upon my honour E. of Ailesbury Not guilty upon my honour E. of Craven Not guilty upon my honour E. of Carlisle Guilty upon my honour E. of Bath Not guilty upon my honour E. of Essex Guilty upon my honour E. of Clarendon Not guilty upon my honour E. of St. Albans Not guilty upon my honour E. of Scarsdale Guilty upon my honour E. of Sunderland Guilty upon my honour E. of Thanet Not guilty upon my honour E. of Chesterfield Not guilty upon my honour E. of Carnarvan Not guilty upon my honour E. of Winchelsea Guilty upon my honour E. of Stamford Guilty upon my honour E. of Peterborough Not guilty upon my honour E. of Rivers Guilty upon my honour E. of Mulgrave Guilty upon my honour E. of Barkshire Guilty upon my honour E. of Manchester Guilty upon my honour E. of Westmoreland Guilty upon my honour E. of Clare Guilty upon my honour Earl of Bristol Guilty upon my honour E. of Denbeigh Not guilty upon my honour E. of Northampton Guilty upon my honour E. of Leicester Guilty upon my honour E. of Bridgwater Guilty upon my honour E. of Salisbury Guilty upon my honour E. of Suffolk Guilty upon my honour E. of Bedford Guilty upon my honour E. of Huntington Guilty upon my honour E. of Rutland Not guilty upon my honour E. of Kent Guilty upon my honour E. of Oxford Guilty upon my honour Ld. Chamberlain Not guilty upon my honour Marquess of Worcester Not guilty upon my honour D. of Newcastle Not guilty upon my honour D. of Monmouth Guilty upon my honour D. of Albemarle Guilty upon my honour D. of Buckingham Guilty upon my honour Ld. Privy-Seal Guilty upon my honour Ld. President Guilty upon my honour Ld. H. Steward Guilty upon my Honour Prince Rupert Duke of Cumberland Guilty upon my Honour The Ld. H. Steward then declared that upon telling the Votes he found there were 31 that think the Prisoner Not Guilty and 55 that have found him Guilty Whereupon the Prisoner was brought to the Bar and the Ld. High Steward informing him the Lords had found him Guilty He said God's Holy Name be praised for it confessing it surpriz'd him for he did not expect it and that he had only this to say for suspending of Judgment That he did not hold up his Hand at the Bar which he conceived he ought to have done and that though he was tried upon the Act of 25. Edw. 3. yet there being nothing more in that Act than what is included in the Act of the 13th of this King he ought only to lose his Seat in Parliament which was the Punishment there put down for a Peer submitting to their Lordships and desiring their Judgments in these Points Then the Lords Adjourned into the Parliament-Chamber and the Committee of Commons returned to their own House and the Speaker having re-assumed the Chair the whole Body of the House went with their Speaker to the Bar of the House of Lords to demand Judgment of High-Treason against William Viscount Stafford upon the Impeachment of the Commons of England in Parliament in the Name of the Commons in Parliament and of all the Commons of England Then the Commons with their Speaker went back to their House Then the Lords took into Consideration what Judgment was to be given and it was moved that he might be beheaded After some Debate the Judges were asked Whether if any other Judgment than the usual Judgment for High-Treason were given upon him it would attaint his Blood The Judges were of Opinion that the Judgment for High-Treason appointed by Law is to
Majesty's gracious Government So shall your Petitioner ever pray c. This being read the Bishop return'd and the Chancellor told him they were not concerned in it and asked him If he desired his Answer should be read The Bishop said Yes saying that what he did therein was by Advice of Counsel and therefore hoped would not be interpreted to be done maliciously or obstinately And that in effect he did what the King commanded to be done having advised Doctor Sharp to forbear Preaching till his Majesty had received Satisfaction concerning him and accordingly that he had forborn in his Diocess Then the Bishop's Paper was read which contain'd the King's Letter and Bishop's Answer thereto The King's Letter Dated Monday July 14. 1686. Delivered at Fulham on Thursday June 17. in the Afternoon by Mr. Atterbury the Messenger JAMES R. RIght Reverend Father in God We greet you well Whereas We have been informed and are fully satisfied that Dr. John Sharp Rector of the Parish Church of St. Giles in the Fields in the County of Middlesex and in your Diocess notwithstanding Our late Letter to the most Reverend Fathers in God the Arch-Bishops of Canterbury and York and Our Directions concerning Preachers given at Our Court at White-hall March 15. 1685. in the Second Year of Our Reign yet he the said Dr. John Sharp in contempt of the said Orders hath in some of the Sermons he hath since preached presumed to make unbecoming Reflections and to utter such Expressions as were not fit or proper for him endeavouring thereby to beget k the Minds of his Hearers an evil Opinion of Us and Our Government by insinuating Fears and Jealousies to dispose them to Discontent and to lead them into Disobedience and Rebellion These are therefore to require and command you immediately upon receit hereof forthwith to suspend him from further Preaching in any Parish Church or Chappel in your Diocess until he has given Us Satisfaction and Our further Pleasure be known herein And for so doing this shall be your Warrant And so We bid you heartily farewel Given at our Court at Windsor June 14. 1686. in the Second Year of Our Reign By His Majesty's Command SVNDERLAND The Bishop of London's Answer sent by Dr. Sharp to the Earl of Sunderland then at Hampton-Court on Friday June 18. Who could have no Answer To the Right Honour able the Earl of Sunderland Lord President c. My Lord I Always have and shall count it my Duty to obey the King in what-ever Commands he lays upon me that I can perform with a safe Conscience But in this I humbly conceive I am obliged to proceed according to Law and therefore it is impossible for me to comply because though his Majesty commands me only to execute his Pleasure yet in the Capacity I am to do it I must act as a Judg and your Lordship knows no Judg condemns any Man before he has knowledg of the Cause and has cited the Party However I sent to Mr. Dean and acquainted him with his Majesty's Displeasure whom I find so ready to give all reasonable Satisfaction that I have thought fit to make him the Bearer of this Answer From him that will never be unfaithfull to the King nor otherwise than My Lord Your Lordships most humble Servant H. LONDON After this the Chancellor ask'd the Bishop if he had any more to say Who then desired his Counsel might be heard by whom they would have more clear and full Satisfaction concerning what he had said Whereupon the Bishop was desired to withdraw and after half an hour he and his Counsel were called in who were Dr. Oldish Hodges Prince and Newton Dr. Oldish pleaded That the King's Letter did not take cognizance of the Cause so that it could not be an absolute Suspension because that supposeth a Proof of the Crime charged upon him That there was no such word in their Laws as suspend from Preaching which therefore must be meant silencing and this the Bishop did and in such a Method as is observed in their Courts Dr. Hodges then pleaded That the Bishop had done what the King commanded and that he could not Suspend which is a Judicial Act without first a Citation and Hearing which is the Method of proving before all Courts and appeared to be so in this otherwise the Bishop needed not to have been cited before them And that in returning the King an Answer why he did not do what he commanded him he did but what was his Duty and what was Law Dr. Price pleaded that a Citation was Jure Gentium and could never be taken away by any Positive Command or Law whatsoever that therefore the Bishop had obeyed the King so far as he could in that he had silenced the Doctor the Advice of a Bishop being in some sense an Admonition which is a Judicial Act and was given by the Bishop and obeyed by the Doctor Dr. Newton pleaded that the Bishop had obeyed the King for as in Nature no Man can be desired to do what is impossible so no man can be obliged to do an unlawful Act which Suspension without Citation and Hearing is That the Bishops are Custodes Canonum and therefore must not break them themselves That he had done what was in his Power to do and it was in effect what the King commanded to be done For where he did Rescribere and heard not the further Pleasure of the King returned he ought to conclude the King was satisfied with what he had written according to his Duty and the King had altered his Commands Then the Bishop of London said If he had erred in any Circumstance he was very ready to beg his Majesties Pardon and would be ready to make any reparation he was capable After which the Bishop withdrew for half an Hour and then being called in was desired to attend the Court again on Sept. 6. So the Bishop desiring that care might be took concerning the Minutes taken by the Clerks of what passed that he might not be misrepresented to the King by the Mistake of the Pen-man he went away While the Counsellors were pleading Dr. Pinfold the King's Advocate stood at the Chancellor's Elbow and took Notes by which it was expected that he should make a Reply but he said nothing and 't is supposed that he staid with the Council when the Bishop withdrew and gave them Reasons for his silence On Monday Sept. 6. 1686. There being present in Council the same as before and the Bishop appearing he was desired to sit down and hear his Sentence which to prevent Mistake they had ordered to be put in Writing The Bishop then would have spoke but was not suffered And then Mr. Bridgman their Register read the Instrument whereby the Bishop of London was suspended from the Execution of his Episcopal Office upon pain of Deprivation during his Majesties Pleasure sealed with their Seal but signed by no Body at all And some day after one of the