Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	action_n	reverse_v	writ_n	3,246	5	9.5106	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61358	State tracts, being a farther collection of several choice treaties relating to the government from the year 1660 to 1689 : now published in a body, to shew the necessity, and clear the legality of the late revolution, and our present happy settlement, under the auspicious reign of their majesties, King William and Queen Mary.	William III, King of England, 1650-1702.; Mary II, Queen of England, 1662-1694.	1692 (1692)	Wing S5331; ESTC R17906	843,426	519

and then dissolved and that several Acts passed this is the plain Judgment of another Parliament 1. Because it says they were continued which shews they had a real being capable of being continued for a Confirmation of a void Grant has no effect and Confirmation shews a Grant only voidable so the continuance there shewed it at most but voidable and when the King came and confirm'd it all was good 2. The dissolving it then shews they had a being for as ex nihilo nihil fit so super nihil nil operatur as out of nothing nothing can be made so upon nothing nothing can operate Again the King Lords and Commons make the great Corporation or Body of the Kingdom and the Commons are legally taken for the Free-holders Inst 4. p. 2. Now the Lords and Commons having Proclaimed the King the defect of this great Corporation is cured and all the Essential parts of this great Body Politique united and made compleat as plainly as when the Mayor of a Corporation dies and another is chosen the Corporation is again perfect and to say that which perfects the great Body Politique should in the same instant destroy it I mean the Parliament is to make contradictions true simul semel the perfection and destruction of this great Body at one instant and by the same Act. Then if necessity of Affairs was a forcible Argument in 1660 a time of great peace not only in England but throughout Europe and almost in all the World certainly 't is of a greater force now when England is scarce delivered from Popery and Slavery when Ireland has a mighty Army of Papists and that Kingdom in hazard of final destruction if not speedily prevented and when France has destroyed most of the Protestants there and threatens the ruine of the Low-Countries from whence God has sent the wonderful Assistance of our Gracious and therefore most Glorious King and England cannot promise safety from that Foreign Power when forty days delay which is the least can be for a new Parliament and considering we can never hope to have one more freely chosen because first it was so free from Court-influence or likelihood of all design that the Letters of Summons issued by him whom the great God in infinite Mercy raised to save us to the hazard of his Life and this done to protect the Protestant Religion and at a time when the people were all concerned for one Common interest of Religion and Liberty it would be vain when we have the best King and Queen the World affords a full house of Lords the most solemnly chosen Commons that ever were in the remembrance of any Man Living to spend Money and lose time I had almost said to despise Providence and take great pains to destroy our selves If any object Acts of Parliament mentioning Writs and Summons c. I answer the Prededent in 1660 is after all those Acts. In private cases as much as has been done in point of necessity a Bishop Provincial dies and sede vacant a Clerk is presented to a Benefice the Presentation to the Dean and Chapter is good in this case of Necessity and if in a Vacancy by the Death of a Bishop a Presentation shall be good to the Dean and Chapter rather than a prejudice should happen by the Church lying void Surely a fortiori Vacancy of the Throne may be supplied without the formality of a Writ and the great Convention turn'd to a Real Parliament A Summons in all points is of the same real force as a Writ for a Summons and a Writ differ no more than in name the thing is the same in all Substantial parts the Writ is Recorded in Chancery so are His Highnesses Letters the proper Officer Endorses the Return so he does here for the Coroner in defect of the Sheriff is the proper Officer the People Choose by Virtue of the Letters c. quae re concordant parum differunt they agree in Reality and then what difference is there between the one and the other Object A Writ must be in Actions at Common Law else all Pleading after will not make it good but Judgment given may be Reversed by a Writ of Error Answ The case differs first because Actions between party and party are Adversary Actions but Summons to Parliament are not so but are Mediums only to have ●n Election 2. In Actions at Law the Defendant may plead to the Writ but there is no plea to a Writ for electing Members to serve in Parliament and for this I have Littleton's Argument there never was such a Plea therefore none lies Object That they have not taken the Test Answ They may take the Test yet and then all which they do will be good for the Test being the distinguishing Mark of a Protestant from a Papist when that is taken the end of the Law is performed Object That the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy ought to be taken and that the new ones are not legal Answ The Convention being the Supream Power have abolish'd the old Oaths and have made new ones and as to the making new Oaths the like was done in Alfreds time when they chose him King vide Mirror of Justice Chap. 1. for the Heptarchy being turn'd to a Monarchy the precedent Oaths of the seven Kings could not be the same King Alfred swore Many Precedents may be cited where Laws have been made in Parliament without the King 's Writ to summon them which for brevity's sake I forbear to mention For a farewel the Objections quarrel at our Happiness fight against our Safety and aim at that which may indanger Destruction The Present Convention a Parliament I. THat the formality of the Kings Writ of Summons is not so essential to an English Parliament but that the Peers of the Realm and the Commons by their Representatives duly Elected may legally act as the great Council and representative Body of the Nation though not summoned by the King especially when the circumstances of the time are such that such Summons cannot be had will I hope appear by these following Observations First The Saxon Government was transplanted hither out of Germany where the meeting of the Saxons in such Assemblies was at certain fixed times viz. at the New and Full Moon But after their Transmigration hither Religion changing other things changed with it and the times for their publick Assemblies in conformity to the great Solemnities celebrated by Christians came to be changed to the Feasts of Easter Pentecost and the Nativity The lower we come down in Story the seldomer we find these General Assemblies to have been held and sometimes even very anciently when upon extraordinary occasions they met out of course a Precept an Edict or Sanction is mentioned to have Issued from the King But the Times and the very place of their ordinary Meeting having been certain and determined in the very first and eldest times that we meet with any mention of

that kind ought to have no place in judicial proceedings against suspected Criminals but truth is only to be regarded and for this reason the Judgments given in Court of humane Institution are in Scripture called the Judgments of God who is the God of truth Yet further If any benefit to the King could be imagined by making the Evidence to the Grand Jury publick it could not come in competition with the Law expressed in their Oath which by constant uninterrupted usage for so many Ages hath obtained the force of Law Bracton and Britton in their several Generations bear witness that it was then practised and greater proof of it needs not be sought than the Disputes that appear by the Law-Books to have been amongst the ancient Lawyers whether it was Treason or Felony for a Grand-Jury to discover either who was indicted or what Evidence was given them The Trust of the Grand Juries was thought so sacred in those Ages and their secrecy of so great concern to the Kingdom that whosoever should break their Oath therein was by all thought worthy to die Co. Instit 3d part p. 107. Rulls Indic 771. only some would have had them suffer as Traytors others as Felons And at this day it is held to be a high Misprision punishable by Fine and Impoverishment The Law then having appointed the Evidence to be given to Grand Juries in secret the King cannot desire to have it made publick He can do no wrong saith the old Maxime that is He can do nothing against the Law nor is any thing to be judged for his benefit that is not warranted by Law His Will Commands and Desires are therein no otherwise to be known He cannot change the legal Method or manner of enquiring by Juries nor vary in any particular case from the customary and general forms of judicial proceedings he can neither abridge nor enlarge the power of Juries no more than he can lessen the legal Power of the Sheriffs or Judges or by special Direction order the one how they shall execute Writs and the other how they shall give Judgments though these made by himself 'T is criminal no doubt for any to say that the King desires a Court of Justice or a Jury to vary from the direction of the Law and they ought not to be believed therein If Letters Writs or other Commands should come to the Judges for that purpose they are bound by their Oaths not to regard them but to hold them for null the Statutes of 2 E. 3.8 and 20 E. 3.1 are express That if any Writs or Commandments come to the Justices in disturbance of the Law or the Execution of the same or of right to the Parties they shall proceed as if no such Letters Writs or Commands were come to them And the substance of these and other Statutes is inserted into the Oath taken by every Judge and if they be under the most solemn and sacred Tye in the Execution of Justice to hold for nothing or none the Commands of the King under the Great Seal surely the Word or Desire of an Attorney-General in the like case ought to be less than nothing Besides they are strangely mistaken who think the King can have an Interest different from or contrary unto that of the Kingdom in the prosecution of Accused Persons His Concernments are involved in those of his People and he can have none distinct from them He is the Head of the Body Politick and the legal Course of doing Justice is like the orderly circulation of the Blood in the Natural Bodies by which both Head and Body are equally preserved and both perish by the interruption of it The King is obliged to the utmost of his Power to maintain the Law and Justice in its due course by his Coronation Oath and the Trust thereby reposed in him In former Ages he was conjured not to take the Crown unless he resolved punctually to observe it Brom. p. 1159. Mat. Paris p. 153. Bromton and others speaking of the Coronation of Richard the first delivered it thus That having first taken the Oath Deinde indutus Mantello ductus est ad Altare conjuratus ab Archiepiscopo prohibitus ex parte Dei ne hunc Honorem sibi assumat nisi in mente habeat tenere Sacramenta Vota quae superius fecit Et Ipse respondit se per Dei auxilium omnia supradicta observaturum bona fide Deinde cepit Cor●nam de Altari tradidit eam Archiepiscopo qui posuit eam super caput Regis sic Coronatus Rex ductus est ad sedem suam Afterward cloathed with the Royal Robe he is led to the Altar and conjured by the Archbishop and forbid in the Name of God not to assume that Honour unless he intended to keep the Oaths and Vows he had before made and he answered By God's help he would faithfully observe all the Premises and then he took the Crown from off the Altar and delivered it to the Archbishop who put it upon the King's Head and the King thus Crowned is led unto His Seat The violation of which Trust cannot but be as well a wound unto their Consciences as bring great Prejudice upon their Persons and Affairs The Common-Law that exacts this doth so far provide for Princes That having their minds free from cares of preserving themselves they may rest assured that no Acts Words or Designs that may bring them into danger can be concealed from the many Hundreds of Men who by the Law are appointed in all parts of the Kingdom watchfully to take care of the King and are so far concerned in His safety that they can hope no longer to enjoy their own Lives and Fortunes in Peace than they can preserve him and the good Order which according to the Laws he is to uphold It is the joynt Interest of King and People that the ancient Rules of doing Justice be held sacred and inviolable and they are equally concerned in causing strict enquiries to be made into all Evidences given against suspected or accused Persons that the Truth may be discovered and such as dare to disturb the Publick Peace by breaking the Laws may be brought to punishment And the whole course of Judicial Proceedings in Criminal Causes shews that the People is therein equally concerned with the King whose name is used This is the ground of that distinction which Sir Ed. Coke makes between the Proceedings in Pleas of the Crown and Actions for wrongs done to the King himself In Pleas of the Crown or other common offences nusances c. Co. 3d. Inst pag. 136. principally concerning others or the Publick there the King by Law must be apprised by Indictment Presentment or other matter of Record but the King may have an Action for such wrong as is done is himself and whereof none other can have an Action but the King without being apprised by Indictment Presentment or other matter of Record