Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	according_a	law_n	matter_n	1,595	5	5.4763	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A59002	The second part of the Peoples antient and just liberties asserted in the proceedings against, and tryals of Tho. Rudyard, Francis Moor, Rich. Mew, Rich. Mayfeild, Rich. Knowlman, Gilbert Hutton, Job Boulton, Rich. Thornton, Charles Banister, John Boulton, and William Bayly : at the sessions begun and held at the Old-Bailey in London the last day of the 6th moneth, and there continued till the 7th day of the 7th moneth next following, in the year 1670, against the arbitrary procedure of that court, and justices there : wherein their oppression and injustice are manifested, their wickedness and corruption detected, and the jury-mans duty laid open.	Rudyard, Thomas, d. 1692, defendant.; Moor, Francis, defendant.; Mew, Richard, defendant.; Penn, William, 1644-1718. People's antient and just liberties asserted, in the tryal of William Penn.; England and Wales. Court of Quarter Sessions of the Peace (London)	1670 (1670)	Wing S2312; ESTC R21970	50,633	70

Questions which often of late I have had upon my thoughts to propound to you or some Practitioner of the Law that would be plain with me Stud. Offer what you think meet and I will endeavour to give you that satisfaction you desire Cit. Since Jurors are thus of late Menaced Threatned Fined and Imprisoned by our Recorder at the Old-Baily pray wherein lies their Priviledge or Safety What say the Fundamental Laws of England to such Practices Stud. The Jurors Priviledges and every English-mans by them as they are very Considerable so the Laws have very well Guarded them against Usurpation as I shall shew you Cit. But pray first let me know their Antiquity I have heard it said That Tryals by Juries have been of long standing in this Nation Stud. Their Antiquity no one knows but all Authors agree that they have been very ancient Cook the Oracle of our English Laws writes That long before the Conquest it was ordered That in every Century there should be twelve good and honest men to judge c. And Cambden in his Britania correcteth Pollidor Virgill for saying William the Conquerer first brought in this way of Tryal affirming that it was most certain and apparent by the Laws of Etheldred that such Tryals were in use many years before Which Horn in his Mirror of Justice written in the time of E. 1. doth well confirm and assure us Cit. But what say the Law-Books of later date and our Predecessors in later years about them Stud. When the great Charter of our English Liberties in the 9th year of H. 3. was made and put under the great Seal of England then were these Tryals by Juries confirmed down to us and therein it was stablished That no Amercments should be assessed upon any man but by the Oaths of good and lawful men of the Vicinage And also that no Free-man of England should be imprisoned in his Person or destroyed in his Estate and Liberties without the Lawful Judgment of his Equals which Charter has been confimed by thirty two Parliaments and now stands firm to justifie and maintain the freedom of this sort of Tryals which Cook calls the Subjects Birthright And which I must say is the only Preserver of our Lives Freedom and Property as you may read the Book of the Tryal of W. P. and W. M. last Sessions Cit. I am very well Satisfied in this point but pray what sayes the Law about menacing threatning fining and imprisoning of Jurors as before I mentioned to you Stud. As to the menacing and threatning language which that Bench gave the Jurors it only evidenced and manifested to the world their Envy and Malice against the Prisoners that the Jury had in charge and so may be said also of their fining and imprisoning of the Jury afterwards Cit. Hath a Court then no power by the Law to fine and imprison a Jury Sutd We find in our Law Books or Books of Cases that Jurors have been fined by a Court for these following matters 1. If a Jury man take money from the party to be tryed before or after he be sworn 2. If they receive any Writings from the persons they have in trial 3. If a Jury man appear and then depart before he be sworn is a contempt of the Court. 4. If a Juror after he shall be sworn depart from his Fellows before they deliver in their Verdict 5. If Eleven Jurors shall give in their Verdict without or against the consent of the Twelfth 6. If a Jury eat or drink after they are gone from the Bar and before they bring in their Verdict This I suppose is meant where the Court will accept of the Verdict when the Jurors tender it And for such like Misdemenors as these they have been Fined and Imprisoned but how Warrantable is a Query Cit. As for these Miscarriages you have instanced it seems reasonable they should be punished which no honest man will be found guilty of neither do I fear to suffer for such like misdemeanors But what say you to the fining a Jury for giving in a Verdict according to their Consciences yet pretended by the Court to be contrary to Evidence Stud. To fine them at all is an abuse though it has been long practised but to fine them for giving their Verdict according to their Conscience such practices are very much against Law and Reason too For a Jury of twelve men are by the Laws the only proper Judges of matter in issue before them as for instance 1 That Evidence which is delivered to induce a Jury to believe or not to believe the matter of Fact in issue it s called Evidence because the Jury may out of many matters of Fact evidere veritatem that is so clearly the truth of which they are proper Judges 2d When any Matter is sworn Deed read or offered whether it shall be believed or not or whether it be true or false in point of Fact the Jurors are the proper Judges 3d Whether such men met together intentionally to do such an Act or not the Jurors are Judges for the Court is not Judge of these matters which are Evidence to prove or disprove the thing in issue Cit. What then is the Court to take con●sance of in the Tryals of mens Liberties and Properties Stud. The Court as their duty is are to do equal Justice and Right so they in such Tryals do direct whether such matter shall be admitted to be given in Evidence or not such a Writing read or not or such a man to be admitted a Witness or not and this belongs to the Judgment of the Court as they are upon their Oaths to see Justice done twixt party and party Therefore has the Common Law ordained That matters of Fact which are drawn to an issue shall be tryed by Jurors and matters of Law upon a Dem●rr●r special Verdict c. by the Justices according to that Rule or Maxime of Sr. Ewd. Cook Ad Questionem facti non respondent Judices it a ad questionem leg is non respondent Juratores The Justices meddle not with matter of Fact nor Jurors with matter of Law So it s the Jurors Office to find veritatem Facti the truth of the Fact in issue and the Court to give Judgment accordingly By which we may see the Wisdom of the Law in referring things to persons in which they have conusance and are most expert according to that Maxime Quod quisque norit in hoc se exerceat Cit. According to this Account you have given me of the Duty and Office as well of the Court as the Jurors the Law seems to have dealt justly and equally betwixt them both But one Question further pray Whence is it that Jurors are summoned of their Neighbourhood where the Fact is supposed to be done or acted Stud. As the Common Law of this Land is nothing else then Common Right pure and tryed reason so it never

the People of England Cit. But it s pretended That one of the Crimes charged upon the Jurors by the Recorder was for finding their Verdict against Law How can the Jury justifie such an Action Sure they are not as it is said Judges of Law but Fact Stud. Admitting they are so which will not he granted yet That a Jury can find against Law is to me a Paradox for as we say Where there is no Law there is no Transgression so where there is no Transgression there is no place for Law the Law being made for the Transgressor And said Learned Cook Exfacto jus oritur upon stating the Fact or transgression Law doth arise yea the Law doth grow out of the Root of the Fact Therefore it s one of their adjudged Cases That if a Jury find a matter of Fact but conclude against the Law the conclusion is void and the Court ought to give Judgment according to Law Now the Iury being the sole Iudges of Fact and matter in issue before them not finding the Fact on which the Law should arise cannot be said to find against the Law which is no other then a superstructure of Fact Then to say they have found against the Law when no fact is found is most impossible Cit. You have given me very good satisfaction as to the unreasonableness and illegallity of that Courts procedure and since I see the Law has made so good provision for our safety I purpose to appear upon the Jury according to my Summons but desire withal a little of your Direction about my Office of a Jury-man Stud. I am very confident that you would not willingly violate an Oath which you take but that there are such who as frequently break them as take them is too too much apparent through their careless custom on the one hand or slavish fear on the other against which I would fully caution you that you may defend your self against those Enemies of your Countries Peace and keep a good Conscience towards God and man First The Oath that 's administred to you at the Sessions is That you shall well and truly try and true deliverance make between our Soveraign Lord the King and the Prisoners at the Bar according to your Evidence Then is the Indictment read against the Prisoner either for his Life or Liberties which probably takes up a large time in debate and in examining Witnesses on both sides according as the Case may be And when the Iurors are commanded to withdraw that they may consult of their Verdict they soon forget that solemn Oath they took or that great charge of the Life and Liberty of men whereof they are made Judges and without one serious thought or consulted reason offered pro or con presently go to holding up of hands or some other way voting whether to find for Prosecutor or Prisoner so the Major votes of such shall dispose of mens Lives Liberties and Properties which the Law counts so dear to every man This practice is too customary among Iurors as I 'm credibly informed which occasions their dispatch of that business in a quarter of an hour which held the Court full six hours debate witness that second Iury that were sworn on the Prisoners last Sessions and tryed T. R. F. M. c. Therefore have a care of such Fellow-Iurors Secondly Such a slavish Fear attends many Iurors that let the Court direct to find Guilty or not Guilty accordingly they bring in their Verdict and therefore many of them never regard what the Evidence was more or less to prove the Indictment but as the Court sums it up they bring in as if Iurors were appointed for no other purpose but to eccho back to the Court as one observed what the Bench would have most Illegally and Arbitrarily acted upon such persons against whom they themselves Prosecute and Inform Now against those Companions I caution you to beware of Cit. I am very well satisfied that these Practices are too frequent amongst Jurors of which I have been Witness But pray what is the Reason that the Mayor turns Informer and forceth his Officers and Servant to prosecute Stud. You Citizens should best know the reason of your Magistrates Actions But it s most probable that your Mayor turns Informer to get Money into the Sheriffs Pockets who have purchased all the fines from the King which the last Sessions amounted to no less then 500 l. Cit. It s too apparent they are Confederated I have heard a muttering that they together have licked their Fingers of 500 l. and more of Cripple-Gate Ward Money I can give no certain account of the business but the Hugh and Cry is gone out and its like in a little time the Malefactors may be apprehonded And since London was incorporated I believe it never had such a pack of Knights to govern is But to our business Let me have some further direction Stud. My Advice to you is That those things in issue whereof you are proper Judges you still remember as I instanced before Ad questionem facti non respondent Judices If any injustice he done by the Court to a Prisoner by reason of their negligence or carelesness that injustice will lie at your door Qui non malum prohibet cum potest facit He that prevents not an Evil when it is in his power does it Therefore remember as you of the Iury are Iudges of the matters of Fact in issue that is Whether a thing sworn is to be believed or not Whether any thing offered be true or false Whether men met together to do such an Act against the Law or not in Manner and Form as the person is Indicted You are conscientiously to 〈◊〉 to Therefore First Observe well the Indictment that is read and the several Parts thereof both as to the Matter Manner and Form Secondly Take due notice and regard to the Evidence offered for Proof of the Indictment and each part of it as well to manner and form as matter which endeavour to write down or so much thereof as you are able and weighing them seriously together you may give a Verdict upon that joyned issue according to truth which is called by Cook veritatis dictum The Saying of Truth And observe That as you are sworn to try and deliver according to Evidence so also you deliver in your Verdict That the person you have had in Tryal it guilty in Manner and Form as the party stands indicted which thing you should very well weigh and though a person be proved to be guilty of some Fact or Misdemeanour yet if it be not also proved to be done in such Manner and Form as the party stands indicted he is not Guilty and ought to be acquitted by you Cit. But is not there both Law and Fact in an Indictment as those against W. P. and W. M. and the rest of the Quakers last Sessions And how shall a Jury deal in such Cases Stud. If matter

abused and tortured their bodies without the least colour of Warrant or Authority from the Civil Magistrate We cannot but stand in admiration of this Court of Iudicature Let us a little see the Judgments of our Sages of the Law touching the matter of Riots in former and latter times not only Statute Law but also the Opinion of the Learned First see the Statute of 17 R. 2. chap. 8. 1393. It was Enacted That the Sheriffs and all other the Kings Officers should suppress Rioters and Imprison them 13 H. 4. chap. 7. An. 1411 If any Assembly or Rout of people against the Law be made that three or two Justices of the Peace and Sheriff or under Sheriffs shall come with the Power of the County if need be to arrest them and shall record what is done against the Law and that the persons by that Record shall be convict in manner as inforceable Entries 2 H. 5. 8. The Kings Liege People that were Travellers should be assistant to the Justices c. when warned to ride with them in aide to resist Riots Routs c. upon pain of Imprisonment The Riotors and Routers mentioned in these Statutes were certainly such persons who did really meet with Force and Arms else what need was there of the Power of the Country as is directed to quiet appease and arrest them or else what need of engaging Travellers to resist them notwithstanding they may have the Power of the Country to apprehend them 2. Read the Judgment of the Oracle of our Laws Cook in his 3. In. c. 79. tittle Riots Routs unlawful Assemblies Forces c. saith thus Riotum cometh of the French Word Rioter i. e. Rixari And in the Common Law signifieth When three or more do any unlawful Act as to beat any man or hunt in his Park Chase or Warren or to enter or take possession of another mans Land or to cut or destroy his Corn Grass or other profit c. Routa is derived of the French Word Rout and properly in Law signifieth When three or more do any unlawful Act for their own or the common quarrel c. As when Commoners break down Hedges or Pales or cast down Ditches or Inhabitants for a way claimed by them or the like An unlawful Assembly is when three or more assemble themselves together to commit a Riot or Rout and do it not So that its most plain and evident That a Quiet Religious and Peaceable Assembly of people were never intended by our Predecessors to be punished as Rioters Routers and unlawful Assemblies as our Law-Executioners now a dayes would have it The Lord Cook said Interest regi habere subditos pacatos That the Kings Interest was to have his Subjects peaceable And what must it be the inferior Officers Interest to have them accounted otherwise and that for filthy Lucre sake A new Contrivance to advance the Sheriffs perquisists which our Fore-fathers were ignorant of viz. The Sheriffs to ride to an Assembly of People whom they or their Confederates against all Law had forceably kept out of their House and Freehold and because upon Proclamation by them made for which they have no Ground or Authority by the Law the people presently departing not from their own Ground and before the Door of their own House they shall be committed to Goal as Rioters condemned as such and the Sheriffs shall have 400. or 500 l. for their dayes work out of these Innocent persons Fines This new construction of Religious Assemblies seems the more strange by reason there cannot be one President produced to back this upstart Opinion that Religious Meetings deserve of late years that ignominious term of Riots or Routs So that this seemly piece of Law or Wit must be owned to have had its Rice Spring and Original from the prerogative brain of S. S. Mayor of London and confirmed by the City Recorder who doubtless will not be the last that may repent of his dayes work The next whom the Court called to their Tryal was Ezekiel Archer and Margery Fann who being indicted for Rioters the Sessions before and the Evidence being deficient the Court coveting to come off with credit in all such Indictments as were of the new stamp ordered an Indictment for Fellony to be read against them which they had forged and framed for that purpose and piece of Iniquity which well deserves the search and condign Punishment for the Contrivers so these two were found Not guilty The same day this Bench called T. Rudyard into Court when the Clark had read over the first Indictment which the Mayor the former Sessions declared was not drawn up according to Instructions and Evidence and also the second which the Mayor said he would stand by and prosecute The Informers Witnesses were sworn viz. N. Grove and I. Tillot Grove being first to give in his Testimony declared That there was an Indictment drawn against S. Allingbridge for saying The first man that disturbed Mr. Vincent should never go out of the House alive and that he saw T. R. take it out of Mr. Lees hand and told him that it was lost and T. R. would go with him to Mr. Tanner and drink a pint of Wine with him and draw up a slight Bill that might not be found So said the Mayor here 's both the Indictment proved already which Evidence Grove delivered as being one entire Action and Discourse and being asked what time this Discourse was whether when T. R. took the Bill he answered He did not well know and T. R. asking him some further Questions the Mayor interrupted him saying He was not to examine the Kings Witnesses I. Tillot was next called who swore that T. R. acknowledged to him that he had the Indictment T. R. acquainted the Court that he owned that he was at the Sessions at Guildhall where S. Allingbridge attending requested him to enquire and know from the Clark whether his Adversaries had drawn any Bill of Indictment against him and what the Indictment might be Thereupon T. R. enquired of the Clark whether he had drawn such a Bill Jo. Forman an Officer standing by him with several Bills in his hand gave this Bill into T. R's hand to read which when he had done in open Court returned the Bill to Forman and immediatly went out of Court ordering S. A. to send for his Witness to try the Indictment in case the grand inquest should find it Billavera The Evidence as it was much contrary to Truth so it was as far short of proving the Indictments as by the ensuing Exceptions may appear But what was deficient in that respect the Recorder made up in his charge to the Jury Exceptions to the Indictment First It appears not by the Indictment that the Bill of Indictment against S. Allenbridg was Conusable to the Court it being against the Justices Oath to take notice of it before the Grand Inquest had found it Secondly It appears not that the words charged against

the Inherirauce of any So that by the Law of the Land these pretended Offenders are still rightfully possessed of their own Houses and Places of publique Assemblies and their cruel Adversaries have no more Property Right Interest or due Claim therein or thereto then a Pirate has to the peaceable Merchant-mans Ship a Robber has to the innocent Travellers Purse or the Wolf to the Blood of the harmless Lamb And in case such Laws as these will not preserve that interest which those people have to their Inheritances and Properties we can none of us expect to have our Rights or Liberties Wives or Children yea or our lives secured unto us longer then pleaseth or liketh the Will and Pleasure of cruel and ravenous Adversaries It s worthy taking notice of that after the Jury had on so slight ground brought in T. R. amongst others guilty in manner and form how palpably the Court manifested their envy and malice in the Fines imposed upon him And though as is declared by the Statut● of 20 E. 3. cap. 1. That Justices shall do even Right to all people without shewing favour more to one then to another According to that just Law Lev. 19. 15. Ye shall do no Unrighteousness in Judgment thou shalt not respect the person of the Poor nor honour the person of the Mighty but in Righteousness shalt thou judge thy Neighbour Yet for a piece of written Parchment the value whereof was not 1 d. a thing whereof a Court of Justice could not take recognizance according to the Just Laws of this Land or dammages in case it had been taken away or profit to any man that could have it not appearing to be any neither indeed could there be to any person living No course of Law obstructed admitting all to be true of that Fact which the Mayor gave in or his Witnesses swore falsly to the Jury the cause of Justice against an Offendor not a moment prevented these painted Sepulchres or partial Inquisitors finded or censured him an hundred pounds although they had before convicted S. Allenbridge and finded him but five Mark for being principal yet too much for such an offence and T. Rudyard being as an accessary must be a hundred pounds whether this be just equal let the World be judge and to proceed from a person I mean the Recorder who has had for many years the Reputation of honesty and justice which its feared he carried about with him only as that aspiring Clergy-man did his Fishing Net which he caused to be laid aside so soon as he had procured a Cardinals Cap saying The Fish is caught And truly so may the City of London say of its Recorder who has not since he came to be Recorder manifest that candid and equal justice towards this City or Citizens in their publick concerns as was expected yea little but what first passes the stamp of our Sword Aldermen and Classis of the City Lievtenancy and since he by experience has found that sowing and dedicating his Law and Endeavours to their Designs is that which procures him the best and most fruitful Harvest he ever has been sedulous to plead and studdy that causr whose Actions may be the more clearer manifested to this City and Nation if weighed in the Ballance of Justice and Righ-teousness As Gods indignation rested on the Children of Israel till one Achans Thieft was discovered and punished so this City suffers sore Judgments till it has puged it self of these many Achan's that lodge in her Bosom not only Robbing her Inhabitans of Rights their Liberties and Properties but also her Chamber of her Treasure the poor Orphants Security Our Predecessors out of their prudence and care that equal Justice and Right should be done to all men by a Statute in the 18 E. 3. 3. appoint Judges an Oath wherein is this Charge And that you take not by your self or any other privily nor apertly gift nor reward of Gold nor Silver nor of any other thing that may turn to your profit unless it be Meat or Drink and of small value of any man that shall have any Plea or Process hanging before you as long as the Process shall be so hanging nor after the same Cause If the City Recorder hath forgotten this Oath his Crimes not the less in breaking it the Justice of it remains and all persons in Judicature are to do Justice to all and sell or deny it none and Bribery is such a Crime that its punishable where ever it s found and its hoped Justice may reach this Recorder if it appear that his Fingers have touched this forbidden Babulonish Garment But in order to Discourse of this so foul a Crime First See the Mark which such an Action leaves behind it Fortescue cap. 51 Bribery saith he is a great Misprission when any man in Judicial place takes any Fee or Pension Role or Livery Gift Reward or Brocage of any Person that hath to do before him any way for doing his Office or by Colour of his Office but of the King only unless it be of Meat and Drink and that of small value upon divers and grievous Punishments Saith Cook This Word Bribery cometh of the French word Briber which signifieth to Devour or Eat greedily applyed to the devouring of a Corrupt Judge of whom the Psalmist speaking in the Person of God saith Qui devorat plebem meam sicut escam panis Qui cognoscit faciem in judicia non bene facit iste pro buecella panis deserit veritatem In the 23th year of E. 3. Sr. William Thorpe chief Justice of the Kings Bench for taking of four Persons 50 l. against his Oath was tryed and judged upon his acknowledging the Fact to be Hanged c. Cook further sets forth That this Offence of Bribery may be committed by any that hath any Juditial Place or Ministerial Office either Ecclesiastical or Temporal Non accipies personam nec munera and the reason is exprest by the holy Ghost quia munera excaecant occulos sapientium et mutant verba justorum If Bribery hath so great force as to blind the Eyes of the wise Judg and to change the words of the Just Beatus ille qui excuit manus suas ab omni nerae Judex debet habere duos Sales salem sapientiae ne sit insipidus et salem conscientiae ne sit diabolus Though the Bribe be small yet the Fault is great and this appeareth by a Record in the reign of E. 3. Quia diversi justiciarij ad audiendum terminandum assignat ceperant de Johan is Berners qui indictatus fuit 4 l. pro favore habendo die deliberationes suae finem fecerant domino regi per IV. M. Marcas So as they paid for every pound a Thousand Marks See before Sr. Wil. Thorps Case Rot. Par. 7. R. 2. The Chancellor was accused of a Bribe of ten Pounds and his man four Pounds and certain Fish

failes to render a Reason of its own Actions a Jury is therefore summoned of the Vicinage because it s alwayes presumed that the Neighbourhood are best acquained with the persons inhabiting or the Actions and Facts done or acted within their own Limits and Jurisdiction And that they themselves may know something of the matter in controversie being de Vicineto of the Vicinage where such matter was in action Therefore the Jury must be returned de vicineto of the place where the Fact was done and of men per quos rei veritas melius scire poterit by whom the truth of the matter may be better known so the Jury having some self-knowledge of the matters afore-hand besides hearing the Evidence may the better pronounce veritatis dictum or a just Verdict of the Fact Cit. But Wherein do you conceive a Jury-man may have self-knowledge of matter that may not as fully be evidenced by Witness Stud. It s probable First That they may know the Witness on the one side or the other to be persons of no Credit or Secondly They may know the Party accused to be a man otherwise qualified or principl'd then to do such an act or thing that is charged against him as for instance They may know a man to be 1. A Quiet Peaceable Quaker therefore no Fighter or Rioter or Routous Person 2. A Protestant of the Episcopal Church of England therefore no House-Preacher 3. An honest sober man amongst his Neighbours therefore probably no Thief or Robber And many other Instances might be offered to this purpose Cit. To fine a iury then for things which probably they may know of their own knowledge to be true or false seems very hard and surely our Jurors of London have met with hard usage to be fined and imprisoned for doing their duty in what the Laws of this Land have made them sole and proper Judges Stud. Their hard usage and severity to the Jurors is not so much as the ill-consequence that such practices will be to every English-man and their Posterity if not timely Remedied Cit. Truly the Citizens of London in general have much dreaded the late procedure at the Old-Baily and fear its a Fore-runner of much Mischief that may be acted in the Country who generally take London for a President in their Courts of Justice But pray what 's your Thoughts about these things Stud. The consequence of such Practices the Parliament have very well set forth in Chief Justice Keeling's Case 11 Dec. 1667. when they Voted That fining Juries were not only Innovations in the Tryals of men for their Lives and Liberties but that it was of Dangerous Consequence to the Lives and Liberties of the People of England and tended to the introducing of an Arbitrary Government And their reason was very good for the King sits not in Judgment upon his Subjects but by his Justices in his Courts and if the Iustices who are commanded to be guided by the Law shall contrary unto the Law fine and imprison Iuries for giving Verdicts in such matters which the Laws allow and appoint them to be proper Judges of Where then is the English-man tryed by his Peers and by the Law of the Land To deny us this free Tryal is to Rifle us of our Birth-right and most Arbitrarily and Tyrannically to deny us Equal Law Iustice and Right Cit. Surely when the Parliament meets again they will call these illegal Proceedings of that Bench to Question before them as well as they did Keeling ' s Stud. It as much concerns them in behalf of themselves and Posterity as any of us to curb these subordinate Iudges who have broken both their Oaths and the Law to run into those Arbitrary and Illegal Practices the consequence of which if suffered in a short time will be Sic volo sic jubeo stat pro ratione voluntas And it will necessarily follow That 1st Every Iustice of Peace Mayor Bailiffs of Corporations Stewards of Letts c. what ever matters are tried before them shall have Verdicts to their minds or Fine and Imprison the Iurors till they have so that such must be either pleased humored or gratified else no Iustice or Right to be had before them in their Courts 2d A further ill-consequence will be That although a person may challenge a Iury-man or Shereffs if they be of Kin to this Adversary yet he cannot challenge a Iustice Mayor c. who will have a Verdict for their Kinsman or Fine and Imprison them till they have so that by this means our Lives Liberties and Properties shall be solely tryed and wholly at the Will and in the power of every mercenary or corrupted Iustice Mayor Recorder Bailiff c. Cit. But has it been practicable in former times to fine and imprison Juries for finding contrary to Evidence as the Recorder pretends our Jurors have done Stud. No surely we find not one President in all our Books till Keeling's and he scaping that condign Punishment which the Parliament promised him your Recorder and Mayor has trod his Steps And pray see how such Iudgments on Iurors leave them remediless of relief which is sufficient ground to conclude such practices to be against the Law First It can never be tryed whether they found with or against their Evidence by reason no Writ of Error lies in the Case Secondly They are in worse condition then the Criminals that are tryed by them for in all civil Actions Informations Indictments Appeals and Writs of Error do lie into superior Courts to try their regular proceedings of the Inferior but here can be none Thirdly In the way of an Attaint the Truth or Falshood of a Iurors Verdict in matters of Fact may be tryed by another Iury but in this case the Iurors are concluded by reason that whether they have found with or against their Evidence can never be tryed Litt. Sect. 108. And further Reason which is Law tells us That as the Kings Iustices of the Law have given out that they ought not to have any Action brought against them if they shall in any thing err or mistake the Law So much the more twelve Jurors who are Judges of all matters in issue before them agreeing together in one ought not to be fined where they find a Verdict according to their Consciences albeit the Evidence may seem strong and clear to another person to the contrary of which the Jury have found For they may being de Vicineto where the Fact was done know something of their own knowledge of the matter of Fact before them which the Judge or Standers by are probably Strangers unto and ignorant of it Therefore the Knowledge of twelve men agreeing together ought to be preferred before the single Apprehension of any one Person whatsoever All which does manifest not only the Illegal and Arbitrary Proceedings of your Mayor and Recorder against those twelve men but the Ill and Dangerous Consequence of such Practices to all

Allenbridg were punishable by Law for the House mentioned in the Indictment might be Vincent's dwelling House so Burglary to break into it without lawfull Warrant Then as to the Evidence to the first Indictment 1. No proof that Grove ever read the Indictment which indeed he could not against S. A. so he swore peremtorily upon the Clarks information which was a false Oath 2. That T. R. took the Bill out of Lee's hand could not be for the Officer keeps the Bills of Indictments when the Witnesses are sworn and not the Clark of the Peace 3. Improbable that Grove should know that Bill amongst so many more but impossible that he should see the Bill taken away knowing it and not mention one word of it all that day no not when the Bill was pretended to be wanting 4. Not sworn he took it out of Court 5. Not sworn that Justice or that any course of Law was hindred against S. A. 6. As to the acknowledging the Indictment to Tillot it was not three hours before the Trial who asking T. R. whether he ever read the Indictment T. R. answered he did and left it in Forman's hand why that 's enough said Tillot the Mayor sent for me to swear it which I could not do before 7. If T. R. had taken the Bill it could not benefit S. A. or hinder the Prosecutor 8. That T. R. should hazard his reputation in a thing of no value wherein he could neither advantage his Friend nor prejudice his Enemy could not stop the proceedings half an hour yea in a quarter another might have been written and preferred is very improbable 9. It s most apparent that if Grove did not perjure himself in swearing such a Bill was drawn against S. A. he having neither read it or had copy of it he or the Mayor or some of the Confederates must themselves have concealed the Bill and kept it in their own custody else N. Grove could not swear to it one of which must necessarily be As to the 2d Indictment the words there pretended to be spoken 1. If true were not advising Grove to do an Action but telling him that we would go c. so nothing being done in prosecution of the words it was only discourse 2. Not sworn that the advise was taken 3. Improbable that T. R. should thus discourse to a Stranger whom before he had never seen 4. That he should undertake to go to Tanner that was as much a Stranger to him 5. T. R. never came afterward to Grove nor spoke with Tanner but S. Allingbridge was tryed and convicted the very same Week in an Adjournment of the same Sessions Now whether there was either sufficient Cause for an Indictment or apparent Proofs to Evidence the Truth of these upon which T. R. was tryed or whether all these pretented Crimes and Misdemeanours were not the product of the Mayors malicious envious and inveterate spirit causlesly carryed on against him who not only appears to be the first Informer but the Maintainer and Prosecutor of the Quarrel as also Evidence and Judge upon let every unprejudiced person seriously considering give his Judgment The Jury was commanded to withdraw which for the formalities sake they did and not longer staying then about a quarter of an hour returned again and brought in the nine persons that were tryed guilty in manner and form as they stood indicted which some of these Jurors had over their Cups sworn they would do if ever they come to try the Quakers John Boulten and William Bayly were the last called to their Trial who were indicted several For that they such a day and year and place with Force and Arms c. with Two hundred more Persons were assembled together to disturb the Kings Peace and being so assembled they unlawfully took upon themselves to Preach and Teach to the People then and there assembled and congregated by reason whereof a great concourse of People did remain together in contempt of the King and his Laws to the disturbance of his Peace to the terror and disturbance of his Subjects unto the evil example of others and against the Kings Crown and Dignity c. Not guilty being pleaded the Informers Evidence being produced swore That they saw or heard them speak or preach to the People which was sufficient for the Court to make out the whole Indictments for the Recorder said the Jury were only Judges of matter of Fact so that if the Jury have Evidence they Spoke or Preached the Court sayes that must be with Force and Arms unlawfully and tumulruously to disturb the Kings Peace and that Tumults of People were occasioned thereby and continued together in contempt of the King and his Laws to the disturbance of his Peace terror of his People evil Example of others and against the Kings Crown and Dignity A ready way to perjure Jurors and oppress the Innocent These are the Concomitants of Speaking in the Name of the Living God and worshipping him in the Wayes of his own appointments And although the Prisoners desired to see the Law that their Adversaries pretend they have broken they shall have neither that nor reason produced that might give satisfaction either to the Prisoners or Spectators the Lord Cook gave this as a Rule viz. Incivile est parte una perspecta tota re non cognita de ca Judicare That it was uncivil seeing only one part to give Judgment on the whole matter Yet how little regarded these Jury men or the Court to know the whole matter before they gave Judgment upon the whole Charge Surely this Jury was packed to be cut-throats to their own Liberties and Reputations also or else they would have better regarded what they undertook to find guilty every one in manner and sorm and yet not the tenth part of any Indictment proved to be sworn truely to try according to Evidence and yet to find that for which no Evidence was given Is it possible that they should commit this horrid perjury out of a slavish fear debaucht principle and horrid partiallity and yet be quiet from the terrors of Conscience nay for which we are sure they cannot free themselves without serious repentance At the close of the Sessions all the Prisoners who had been found guilty by this Jury of the Benches were called down to the Sessions-House where all day they expected to be called into Court to receive Judgment being prepared also to give in their Exceptions in Arrest of Judgment purposed to be delivered to the Recorder in writing but of this expected Defence they were all prevented the Bench giving their Judgments or Censures without calling any of the Prisoners to hear them the Tenor of which as appears by the Newgate Book are in this manner John Bonlton fined forty Mark William Bayly fined thirty one pound thirteen shillings four pence William Penn forty Mark Francis Moor fined twenty Mark Richard Mew Richard Mayfeild Rich. Knowlman Gilbert Hutton Ric. Thornton Charles

him it is a Trespass and the Goaler shall be answerable for it So that we may undeniably conclude That there is no Fee at all due to any Goaler or Guardian of a Prison from the Prisoner but what is due unto him by special Act of Parliament And if a Goaler or Guardian of a Prisoner shall take any thing as a Fee of his Prisoner he may and ought to be Indicted of Extortion and upon conviction to be removed from his Office and if his Prisoner by Constraint Menace or Dures be enforced to give him Money he may recover that Money against the Goaler again in an Action of the Case at Common Law Item The King Considering the great Perjury Extortion and Oppression which be and have been in this Realm by his Sheriffs Under-Sheriffs and their Clarks Bailiffs and Keepers of Prisons c. hath ordained by Authority aforesaid in eschewing all such Extortion Perjury and Oppression that no Sheriff shall let to Farm in any manner his County nor any of his Bailiwicks Nor that any of the said Officers and Ministers by occasion or under colour of their Office shall take any other thing by them nor by any other Person to their use profit or avail if any person by them or any of them to be arrested or attatched for the omitting of any Arrest or attachment to be made by their Body or of any person by them or any of them by force or colour of their Office arrested or attatched for Fine Fee Suit of Prison Mainprise letting to Bail or snewing any Ease or favour to any such person so arrested or to be attatched for their Reward or Profit but such as follow that is to say For the Sheriff 20 d. The Bailiff which maketh the Arrest or Attachment 4 d. And the Goaler of the Prison if he be committed to ward 4 d. And that all Sheriffs Bailiffs Goalers or any other Officer or Ministers which do contrary to this Ordinance in any point of the same shall lose to the party in this behalf indammaged or grieved his trebble Dammages and shall forfeit the sum of 40 l. for every such Offence the one moiety to the King the other to the Prosecutor to be Recovered at Common Law in either of the Courts of Kings-Bench or Common-Pleas at Westminster This is a perfect Account of the Goalers Fees in all Cases where persons are laid in Prison upon Civil Matters and Causes which Fee of 4 d. is more then any other Statute or Law allows them to take from their Prisoners But in such Cases where the King is party it s stablished That the Prisoners in all the Kings Prisons should be maintained at the Kings Charge and out of the Kings Revenues according to the old Law of the Land much less to have Money extorted from him by the Goaler But look into the Prisons in and about the City of London what horrible Oppressions Extortions and Cruelties are Exercised upon the Free-born People of England yea in most Prisons throughout this Kingdom Which excessive Amercements and Fines after all their other Partial Dealings Lawless Proceedings and Arbitrary Carriages towards the Prisoners from first to last do manifest and evidence to the World their Malice and Envy against an Innocent Upright Quiet and Peaceable People What proportion is there here betwixt the pretended Fault and the assessed Fine provides not the fourteenth Chapter of the Great Charter against such uniust Judgments and partial Censures which declares A Freeman shall not be Amerced for a small Fault but after the quantity of the Fault for a great Fault after the manner thereof and the Amercement shall be assessed by the Oath of Honests Men of the Vicinage H●●e's Justice and Equity Righteousness in Judgment which affords every man Common Right declares That all Offenders ought to be Amerced by their Neighbourhood according to the quantity of the Trespass Wherein have these Judges who are commanded by the Statute of 25 E. 1. Confirmed by Pet. Right 3 Car. 1. allowed the Charter before them in Judgment in all its Points c. It may truly be said that our ancient just and fundamental Laws which Cook on the 14th chapter of Magna Charta calls a Law of Mercy are as the same Author there writes now turned into a Shaddow for by the Wisdom of the Law these Amercements were instituted to deter both Demandants and Plaintiffs from unjust Suits and Tenants and Defendants from unjust Defences which was the Cause in ancient time of fewer suits but now we have but a Shaddow of them Habemus quidem senatus consultum sed in tabulis reconditum tanquam gladium invagina repositum Yea our antient Charters are as a Sword in its Sheath which if drawn are and will be sufficient to defend us against all Injustice Tyranny or Oppression whatsoever But it s often objected by many of their Aversaries That the Publick Meeting Houses wherein the People called Quakers are and have been of late accustomed to meet in and assemble themselves together and out of which the Military Forces do from time to time hale and expel them and by force keep and restrain them from entrance are by Orders of the King and Council invested and stablished in the now King and that he has right to dispose of them as his own Inheritance yea to pull them down sell and burn the material of them as his inferiour Officers have lately dove by some about London and thereupon such who come there to assemble together are Trespasser● Rioters Routers and unlawfull Assemblies and as such are rig●●ly and duely punished according to the Laws To which is answered That by the Ancient and Fundamental Laws which have been already recited as the 29th of Magna Charta There is no mans Right Property or Free-hold shall be taken away from him but by trial of a Jury and the Law of the Land Read Stat. 2 E. 3. 8. 5 E. 3 9. 14 E. 3. 14. 28 E. 3. 3. Regist sol 186. Cook pla sol 4. 56. Cook 2 Inst 45. 3 Inst 136. And set a Statute of latter date 17 Car. 1. cap. 10. Entituled An Act for Regulating the Privy-Council c. which speaks in this wise Be it likewise declared and enacted by the Authority of this present Parliament That neither his Majesty nor his Privy Councel have or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power or Authority by English Bill Petition Articles Libel or any other Arbitrary way whatsoever to examined or draw into question determine or dispose of the Lands Tenements Hereditaments Goods or Chattels of any the Subjects of this Kingdom but that the same ought to be tried and determined in the Courts of Justice and by the ordinary course of Law Also Learned Cook in his 2 Inst sol 36. saith The Common Law of which the great Charter is Declaratory hath so admeasured the preragative of a King as he cannot take or prejudice