whereupon he demanded Judgment whether the Plaintiffe ought to maintain that Appeal he had brought To which the Plaintiffe demurred in Law And in this Case three points were adjudged by Sir Christopher Wray Sir Thomas Gawdy and the whole Court First That the matter of the Bar had been a good Bar of the Appeal by the Common Law as well as if the Clergy had been Allowed For that the Defendant upon his Confession of the Indictment had prayed his Clergy which the Court ought to have granted and the deferring of the Court to be advised ought not to prejudice the Party Desendant albeit the Appeal was Commenced before the Allowance of it The second point adjudged was that this Case was out of the Statute of 3 Hen. 7. For that the words of that Act are If it fortune that the same Felons and Murderers and Accessaries so Arraigned or any of them to be Acquitted or the Principal of the said Felony or any of them to be Attainted the Wife or next Heir of him so slain c. may have their Appeal of the same Death and Murder against the Person so Acquitted or against the said Principals so Attainted if they be alive and that THE BENEFIT OF HIS CLERGY THEREOF before be not had And in this the Defendant Holcroft was neither Acquitted nor Attainted but Convicted by Confession and the Benefit of the Clergy only prayed as is aforesaid so as the Statute being penal concerning the Life of Man and made in Restraint of the Common Law was not to be taken by Equity but is Casus Omissus a Case Omitted and left to the Common Law As to the Third is was objected that every Plea ought to have an apt Conclusion and that the Conclusion in this Case ought to have been Et petit judicium si praediit Thomas Holcroft Iterum de eadem morte de qua semel Convictus fuit Respondere compelli debeat And he does ask judgment if the above mentione Thomas Holcroft shall be obliged to answer againe for the same death he was once Convicted of But it was adjudged that either of both Conclusions was sufficient in Law And therefore that exception was disallowed by the Rule of the Court. Note the ancient Law was that when a Man had judgment to be hanged in an Appeal of Death that the Wife and all the Blood of the Party slain should draw the Defendant to Execution and Gascoigne said Issint fuit in diebus nostris so it was done in our Days And thus much occasionally about Appeals which we the rather inserted because the practice thereof through I know not whose negligence has been almost lost or forgot till some few Years ago a Woman in Southwark revived it against one that killed her Husband and got a pardon for it but she Prosecuted him on Appeal had judgment against him and he was Executed since which time the same Course has been frequently talkt of and brought but for the most part to the shame I think of those Women or Children who make such Compositions for their Husbands or Fathers Blood they have been by some secret Bargains or Compensations husht up and seldom effectually followed Two other Statutes of King Edw. 3. Anno 4. Edw. 3. cap. 14. A Parliament shall be holden once every year ITem It is accorded that a Parliament shall be holden every year once and more often if need be Anno 36. Edw. 3. cap. 10. A Parliament shall be holden once in the year ITem for maintenance of the said Articles and Statutes and Redress of dibers MISCHIEFS and GRIEVANCES which daily happen a Parliament shall be holden every year as another time was ordained by Statute The Comment BEfore the Conquest as the Victory of Duke William of Normandy over Harold the Usurper is commonly though very improperly called Parliaments were to be held twice every year as appears by the Laws of King Edgar cap. 5. and the Testimony of the Mirrour of Justices cap. 1. sect 3. For the Estates of the Realm King Alfred caused the Committees some English Translations of that ancient Book read Earls but the word seems rather to signifie Commissioners Trustees or Representatives to meet and ordained for a PERPETUAL USAGE that twice in the year or ostner if need were in time of Peace they should Assemble at London to speak their Minds for the guiding of the People of God how they should keep themselves from Offences live in quiet and have right done them by certain Vsages and sound Judgments King Edward the first says Cook 4. Instit fol. 97. kept a Parliament once every two years for the most part And now in this King Edward the Thirds time one of the wisest and most glorious of all our Kings It was thought fit to Enact by these two several Statutes That a Parliament should be held once at least every year which two Statutes are to this day in full Force For they are not Repealed but rather Confirmed by the Statute made in the 16th of our present Soveraign King Charles the Second Cap. 1. Intituled An Act for the Assembling and holding of Parliaments once in three years at the least The words of which are as follow Because by the ancient Laws and Statutes of this Realm made in the Reign of King Edward the third Parliaments are to be held very often your Majesties Humble and Loyal Subjects the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons in this present Parliament Assembled most Humbly do beseech your most Excellent Majesty that it may be declared and Enacted 2 And be it declared and Enacted by the Authority aforesaid that hereafter the sitting and holding of Parliaments shall not be intermitted or discontinued above Three Years at the most but that within three years from and after the Determination of this present Parliament so from time to time within three years after the Determination of and other Parliament or Parliaments or if there be occasion more or oftner Your Majesty your Heirs and Successors do Issue out your Writs for calling Assembling and holding of another Parliament to the end there may be a frequent calling Assembling and holding of Parliaments once in three years at the least Agreeable to these good and wholsome Laws are those gracious Expressions and Promises in His Majesties Proclamation touching the Causes and Reasons of Dissolving the two last Parliaments Dated April 8. 1681. Irregularities in Parliament shall NEVER make us out of love with Parliaments which we look upon as the best Method for healing the distempers of the Kingdom and the only means to preserve the Monarchy in that due Credit and Respect which it ought to have both at home and abroad And for this Cause we are resolved by the blessing of God to have frequent Parliaments And both in and out of Parliament to use OUR UTMOST ENDEAVOURS TO EXTIRPATE POPERY and to Redress all the Grievances of our good Subjects and in all things to Govern according to the
not be such a Discretion as confounds all Discretion but they must weigh the Circumstances and go according to Law and Judgment and certainly the law intended such Bail if any be accepted should be bound Body for Body for otherwise it seems no security And therefore many wise men wondered the other day when Count Conning smark was Acquitted on the Indictment for the Barbarous Murder of Esquire Thynn that he was suffered to go so soon abroad for being a Stranger he was never like to come again into Enggland and being so rich what values he to discharge the Forfeitures of his Sureties Recognizances which likewise may be easily Compounded At most the Forfeieure is to the King and what is it that to the next Heir or Kinsman He is by this means Outed of his Legal Remedy to Revenge the Blood of his near and dear Relation Sed haec Obiter The form of an Appeal of Murder I C. Hic Instanter Appellat W. E. c. In English thus I here instantly Appeals W. F. of the death of his Brother H. C. For that whereas the aforesaid H. was in the Peace of God and the King at Tonbridge in the County of Rent the twenty eighth day of March in the thirty fourth year of the Reign of our Lord Charles the Second c. at seven a Clock in the Evening of the same Day cama the said W. F. as a Felon of our Lord the King in a premeditated Assault with Force and Arms c. And upon him the said H. C. then and there felonionsly an Assault did make and with a certain Sword of the price of twelve pence Which he then and there in his Right Hand did hold the aforesaid H. upon his Head did strike and one mortal wound of two Inches long in forepart of his Head even unto the Brain to the said H. did then and there Feloniously give of which said wound the said H for three days then next following did Languish and then viz. the such a day of such a month he there died or if the case be so Instantly died And so the said W. H. as a Felon of our Lord the King the aforesaid H. Feloniously did Kill and Murder against the Peace of our said Lord the King his Crown and Dignity And that this he did wickedly and as a Felon against the Peace of God and our Lord the King the aforesaid osters that the same be detained as the Court of our Lord the King shall think meet Diversity of Courts and Jurisdictions Written in the time of King Hen. 8. 1. Note That a women cannot now bring an Appeal for the death of any other Ancestors being baried there from by Magna Charta Cap. 34. whereas as you have heard it is provided that none shall be taken or Imprisoned upon the Appeal of any woman for the death of any Person but only of her Husband But she may at this day bring an Appeal of Robbery c. For wherein she is not by that Statute restrained Coke 2d Instit fol. 68. 2. The women that brings an Appeal for the death of her Husband must be his Wife not only de Facto but de Jure not only called and reputed or cohabiting with him but actually and legally Married to him and of such a Wife the Antient-Law-Books speaks de morte viri Inter Brachia sua Interfecti the Husband is killed within her Arms. that is whilst he was legally in her possession but that the Appellant and the person killed were not ever lawfully coupled in Matrimony is a good Plea in an Appeal 3. This Right of Appeal for the death of her Husband is annexed to her Widdow-hood as her Quarentine is and therefore if the Wife of the Dead Marry again her Appeal is gone even altho the second Husband should die within the year day after the Murder of the first For she must all the while before the Appeal be brought continue Faemini viri sui his Widdow upon whose death the Appeal is brought furthermore if she bring the Appeal during her Widdow-hood and take a Husband whilst it is depending the Appeal shall Abate that is be out of doors for ever Nay if on her Appeal she hath Judgment against the Defendant if afterwards she take an Husband before the Defendant be Hanged she can never have Execution of death against him 4. By the Statute of Glocest. made in the sixth year of King Edw. 1. Cap. 9. It is Enacted that if an Appeal set forth the Deed the year the day the hour the Reign of the King and the Town where the Deed was done and with what Weapon the Party was slain the Appeal shall stand in effect and shall not be abated for default of fresh Suit if the party shall Sue within the year and the day after the Deed done 5. As for the year and day here mentioned it is to be acconnted for the whole year according to the Calendar and not for twelve Months at twenty eight days to the Month. So likewise the day intended is a Natural day And this year and day must be accounted after the Felony and Murder Committed Now if a man be Mortally Wounded on the first day of May and thereof Languishes to the first day of June and then dies the Question here arises whether the year and the day allowed for bringing the Appeal is to be reckoned from the giving the Wound or the time of Death Some have held the former For that the Death ensuing hath Relation to it and that is the Cause of the Death and the Offender did nothing the day of the Death But the truth is the year and day shall be accounted only from the first of June the day of the Death for before that time no Felony was Committed and thus it hath often been resolved and Adjudged and the reason abovesaid grounded upon Relation which is a Fiction in Law holdeth not in this Case Coke 2. Ingit fol. 320. 6. If an Appeal of Murder be brought and depending the Suit and after the Year and Day is elapsed one become accessary to the Murder the Plaintiff shall have an Appeal against him after the Year and Day past after the Death but it must be brought within the Year and Day after this new Felony as accessary 7. If a Man be Indicted for Murder and Convicted only of Man-slaughter and have the Benefit of his Clergy it seems the Wife and Heir cannot afterwards bring their Appeal Touching which the Lord Cook 3 Instit Fo. 131. cites a Case in these words Thomas Burghe Brother and Heir of Henry Burghe brought an Appeal of Murder against Thomas Holcroft of the Death of the said Henry The Defendant pleaded that before the Coroner he was Indicted of Man-slaughter and before Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer he was upon that Indictment Arraigned and confessed the Indictment and prayed his Clergy and thereupon was Entred Curia advisare vult the Court will consider
shall be tryed for any Offence against this Act by his Peers but if Convicted shall be disabled to sit in Parliament during Life And thus much for what is Treason at this day By the Statute of 1 and 2 Phil. and Mar. cap 10. All Trials for Treason shall be only according to the Course of the Common Law And though the greater part of that Statute being Temporary be expired yet this Clause is still in Force The Judgment in all Cases of High Treason except for Counterfeiting Coin for a man is That he shall be drawn on an Hurdle or Sledge to the place of Execution and there be Hanged by the Neck to be cut down being yet alive his Privy Members cut off his Bowels ript up taken out and burnt before his face his Headsevered from his Body his Body divided into four Quarters which are to be disposed of as the King shall order But for Counterfeiting Coin only Drawn and Hanged And in both Cases for a Woman for Modesty sake it is only that she shall be Burnt The reasons or signification of this horrid Judgment on a man for Treason are thus by some rendred and Interpreted 1. He is drawn on a Sledg or Hurdle on the ground in the Dirt to shew that his Pride is brought down for Treason commonly springs from Ambition 2. On this Hurdle he is drawn backward to shew that his Actings have been contrary to Order unnatural and Preposterous 3. He is Hanged between Heaven and Earth as unworthy of either 4. He is cut down yet alive and his Privities cut off to shew that he was unfit to Propagate any Posterity 5. His Head is severed from his Body because his mischevious Brain contrived the Treason 6. His Body is divided to shew that all his Machinations and Devices are torn to pieces and brought to nought and into four parts that they may be scattered towards the four Quarters of the World Heading being part of the judgment in Treason the King commonly to persons of Quality Pardons all the rest of the Sentence and so they are only Beheaded But if a person be Attainted of Murder or any other Felony if he be Beheaded 't is no Execution of the Judgment because there the Judgment always is that he be Hanged till he be dead which cannot be altered So that had Count Conning smark lately been Convicted and Condemned for the Murder of Esquire Thynn all his Guinies or his Friends could not have preserved him from the Gallows unless they could have got an intire Pardon Any person being Indicted for Treason may Challenge that is except against or refuse Five and Thirty Jurors peremptorily that is for his pleasure or for reasons best known to himself and without assigning any Cause to the Court But if he Challenge more that is above three full Juries he Forseits his Goods and Judgment of Peinfort dure that is of being pressed to Death shall pass upon him as one that refuseth the Trial of the Law In Cases of Murder and Felony a man cannot Challenge peremptorily above the number of Twenty But with Cause he may except against more And this is by the Stat. of 22. H. 8. cap. 14. And certainly since the Law of England which is a Law of Mercy does in Favour of Life not only order a man to be Tryed by a Jury of his Country and Equals but also allows him to refuse and have Liberty of excepting against so many of those as shall be Impanelled for that purpose It cannot be supposed that the same Law ever intended that the Prisoner should be denyed a Copy of the Pannel of his Jury that so by the Information of his Friends or otherwise he may know their Qualities Circumstances and Inchnations for how else shall he know whom to Challenge peremptorily and whom to Challenge with Cause to allow a man such Liberty of Challenge and give him no opportunity of such Inquiry is but to mock the Prisoner to whom possibly the whole Jury by face and name may be utter Strangers and sure the wisdom of our Laws never thought every Prisoner so skilled in Metoposcopy that meerly by looking on a parcel of men he could tell which of them were indifferent and which biassed against him Another Statute of King Edward the third Anno 2. Edw. 3. cap. 2. In what Cases only Pardon of Felony shall be granted c. ITem Whereas Offendors have been greatly encouraged because the Charters of Pardon have been so easily granted in times past of Man-slaughters Roberies Felonies and other Trespasses against the Peace 2 It is ordained and Enacted that such Charters shall not be granted but only where the King may do it by his Oath that is to say where a man slayeth another in his own Defence or by Misfortune 3 And also they have been encouraged because that the Justices of the Goal-Delivery and of Oyer and Terminer have been procured by great men against the Form of the Statute made in the 27th year of the Reign of King Edward Grandfather to our Lord the King that now is wherein is Contained that Justices Assigned to take Assizes if they be Lay-Men shall make deliverance and if the one be a Clerk and the other a Lay-man that the Lay-Judge with another of the Countrey associate to him shall deliver the Goals 4 Wherefore it is Enacted that Justices shall not be made against the Form of the said Statute 5 And that the Assizes Attaints and Certifications be taken before the Justices commonly Assigned which should be good men and Lawful having knowledg of the Law and none other after the Form if another Statute made in the time of the said King Edward the first 6 And that the Oyers and Terminers shall not be granted but before the Justices of the one Bench or the other or the Justices Errants and that great hurt or horrible Trespasses and of the Kings special Grace after the Form of the Sâ—atute thereof ordained in time of the said Grandfather and none otherwise The Comment Touching this Statute and several others to the same purpose as 14. Edw. 3. cap. 14. and 10. Edw. 3. cap. 2. and 13. R. 2. cap. 1. and 16. R. cap. 6. c. We shall only give you the words of Cook in the third part of his Instit fo 236. What things the King may pardon and in what manner and what he cannot pardon falleth now to be treated of IN case of death of man Robberies and Felonies against the Peace divers Acts of Parliament have Restrained the power of granting Charters of pardons first that no such Charters shall be granted but in case where the King may do it by his Oath Secondly That no man shall obtain Charters out of Parliament Stat. 4. Edw 3. cap 13. And accordingly in a Parliament Roll it is said for the Peace of the Land it would much help if good Justices were appointed in every County if such as be let to mainprize do put
in good Sureties as Esquires or Gentlemen And that no pardon were granted but by Parliament Thirdly For that the King hath granted Pardons of Felonies upon false Suggestions it is provided that every Charter of Felony which shall be granted at the Suggestion of any the name of him that maketh the Suggestion shall be comprised in the Charter and if the Suggestion be found untrue the Charter shall be disallowed And the like provision is made by the Statute of 5. H. 4. Cap 2. for the Pardon of an Approver Fourthly It is provided that no Charter of Pardon for Murder Treason or Rape shall be allowed c. If they be not specified in the same Charter Statute 13. R 2. Before this Statute of 13. R 2. by the Pardon of all Felonies Treason was Pardoned and so was Murder c. At this day by the Pardon of all Felonies the death of man is not Pardoned These be excellent Laws for direction and for the Peace of the Realm But it hath been conceived which we will not question that the King may dispence with these Laws by a Non Obstante notwithstanding be it General or Special albeit we find not any such Clauses of non Obstante notwithstanding to dispense with any of these Statutes but of late times These Statutes are excellent Instructions for a Religious and Prudent King to follow for in these Cases Vt summae potestatis Regiae est posse quantum velit sic Magnitudinis est velle quantum possit As it is the highest Kingly power to be able to Act what he Wills so it is his Greatness and Nobleness to Will only what he lawfully can Hereof you may Read more in Justice Standford Lib. 2. Cap. 35. in diverse places of that Chapter of his grave Advice in that behalf Most certain it is that the Word of God has set down this undisputable General Rule Quia non profetur Cito Contra malos sententia filii hominum sine timore ullo perpetrant because Sentence against evil men is not speedily Executed therefore the hearts of the Children of men are set in them to do evil And thereupon the Rule of Law is grounded Spes Impunitatis Continuum Affectum tribuit delinquendi the hope of Impunity encourageth Offenders Et veniae facilitas Incentivum est Delinquendi and the facility of obtaining Pardon is an Incentive to Commit Offences This is to be Added that the Intention of the said Act of 13. R. 2. Was not that the King should grant a Pardon of Murder by express Name in the Charter but because the whole Parliament conceived that he would neuer Pardon Murder by special Name for the Causes aforesaid therefore that provision made which was as in other Cases I have observed grounded upon the Law of God Quicunque effuderit humanum sanguinem fundetur sanguis illius ad imaginem quippe Dei creatus est homo nec aliter Expiati potest nisi per ejus sanguinem qui alterius sanguinem effuderit whosoever shall shed mans blood by man also shall his blood be shed because man was Created after the Image of God neither can it be expiated otherwise then by his blood who spilt the blood of another And the words of every Pardon is after the Recital of the offence nos pietate moti c. we being moved with Piety c. But it can be no Piety to violate an express Law of God by letting Murder scape unpunisht Thus Coke whereby we see what opinion he had of such Pardons A brief digression concerning the Nature of APPEALS THis Discourse of Pardons puts us in mind of another kind of Legal Prosecution called an Appeal of which it may be very convenient to give the Reader some brief account You must know then for several Offences for which a man deserveth death and particularly for Murder there are two ways to bring him to Answer for the same one by Indictment which is at the Kings Suit and the other by Appeal which is at the Suit of a Party which is wronged or injured by the Murder as a Woman whose Husband or a Child or Brother whose Father or Brother is Killed Now upon an Indictment if the Offender be found Guilty because it s to be at the Suit of the King it has been said by some may be and too often a Pardon has been obtained tho even That too be against Law as appears by the Premisses But in an Appeal all agree the King can grant no Pardon Nay if a person be tryed by Indictment and Acquitted or Convicted and get a Pardon yet an Appeal may be brought and if he be thereupon Convicted notwithstanding such his former Acquital or Pardon he must be Hanged The word Appeal is derived from the French Verb Appeller to Call because he or she that brings it Calls the Defendant to Judgment but the meaning thereof is all one with An Accusation And is peculiarly in Legal signification applyed to Appeals of Three sorts First an Appeal brought by an Heir Male for some wrong done to his Ancestor whose Heir he is Secondly Of wrong done to an Husband and is by the Wife only if it be for the death of her Husband to be Prosecuted The third is of wrongs done to the Appellants themselvess as for Robbery Rape or Maim Coke 1. Instit Sect. 500. Note that this Appeal must be brought within a year and a day after the Murder is committed For afterwards it cannot be brought at all And antiently it was customary not to bring an Indictment for the King till after the year and the day waiting in the mean time for the Prosecution of the Party but this was found very inconvenient for the Party was frequently compounded with and at the years end the business was forgot and so Offenders escaped Justice And therefore the same was altered by the Statute 3. Hen. 7. Cap. 1. Whereby it is Enacted That the Coroner shall do his Office and the Offenders may be Arraigned at any time within the year at the Kings Suit but if Acquitted yet the party within the year and day should have liberty to bring an Appeal against such person either Acquitted or Attainted if the benefit of the Clergy be not before thereof had And in order thereunto that when any person happened to be Acquitted for the death of a man within the year the Justices before whom he is Acquitted shall not suffer him to go at large but either to remit him again to the Prison or else to let him to Bail after their discretion till that the day and the year be passed that so he may be forth coming to Answer an Appeal if it shall happen to be brought Thus that Statute as to the latter Clause whereof you see the Judges have power in Case of Acquittal to keep the Party in Prison still till the day and year be over Or else to admit him to Bail and tho this be left to their Discretion yet it must
Diem forfeited by the School-master and Recusant that keeps him 1 Jac. 4. All Goods and Lands during Life for Breach of Confinement forfeited 23 Eliz. 2. 3 Jac. 5. The like forfeiture for going or sending Children beyond the Seas to be Bred in Popery 3 Car. 2. For Residing within ten Miles of London an hundred Pounds forfeited 3 Jac. 5. For Practising any Function expressed in the Statute of 3 Jac. 5 an hundred Pounds forfeited 3 Jac. 5. Disabled to Reverse Indictment for want of Form or other Defect 3 Jac. 4. Disabled from the Practise of several Functions whereby to gain their Livings viz. from practising Common Law Civil Law or being a Steward Attorney Solicitor or Officer in any Court from Practising Physick or being Apothecary and from Bearing any Office in Camp Troop or Band of Soldiers or in any Ship Castle or Fortress c. 3 Jac. 5. By the Wifes Recusancy the Husband Disabled from Publick Office or Charge in the Common-Wealth 3 Jac. 5. By Marrying otherwise than the Church of England alloweth the Husband disabled to be Tenant by Courtesie the Wife disabled to have Dower Jointure Free Banks or any part or Portion of her Husbands Goods 3 Jac. 5. Disabled to Sue or Prosecute Actions to present to a Benefice to be Executor Administrator or Guardian 3 Jac 5. Children sent beyond the Seas without License are disabled to take Benefit of Gift Conveyance Descent or Devise 1 Jac. 4. 3 Jac. 5. Notwithstanding these Forfeitures Recusants are no less Subject to Ecclesiastical Sentences 23 Eliz. 1. 3 Jac. 45. But Quaere Whether one Papist was quâ Talis ever Excommunicated since the Kings happy Restauration though many thousand Protestants have been Refusal to Receive the Sacrament and take the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance Ipso facto disables from any publick Trust 25 Car. 2. ca. 2. Peers and Members of Parliament disabled to Sit untill taking of Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy and declaring against Transubstantiation and the Idolatry of Rome 30 Car. 2. Stat. 2. Having thus Collected together divers of the most remarkable and advantagious of our Laws whereby the Liberties of English-men are Guarded and Secured since the best of Laws are but insignificant Cyphers if not Honestly put in Execution and since in the Execution of our Laws JVRIES are mainly concern'd who if Ignorant of their Duty or Corrupt or Over-awed and not daring to make use of that just power wherewith the Law hath invested and intrusted them may give up all those precious Priviledges and subject us to the worst kind of slavery under pretence of Law therefore here in the last place for the Information of my honest Country-men the Freeholders of England and others who in Corporations are daily call'd to this important Service I shall subjoin a brief discourse of Juries SECT I. Of the Advantages Englishmen enjoy by this Trial by Juries above any other Nation under Heaven 'T IS one of the miserable Follies of depraved humane Nature that it commonly sleights present Enjoyments and rarely rates the good things it possesses at their true value till 't is deprived of them This grand Priviledge of Trials per pais by our Countrey that is by JVRIES as it seems to have been as Ancient as the Government or first form of Policy in this Island for it was not unknown to the ancient Brittains as appears by their Books and Monuments of Antiquity Practised by the Saxons see King Ethelreds Laws in Lambert p. 218. and Coke 1. part Instit fo 155. and Confirmed since the Invasion of the Normans by Magna Charta as you have heard and continual Usage so it is a thing of the highest Moment and an essential Felicity to all English Subjects For look abroad in France Spain Italy or indeed almost where you will and observe the miserable Condition of the Inhabitants either intirely subjected to the Arbitrary Lusts of Tyrants who plunder dismember or slay them according as the humour takes them and many times without the least provocation meerly for sport and to Gratifie a savage Cruelty Or at best you will behold them under such Laws as render their Lives Liberties and Estates liable to be disposed of at the discretion of Strangers appointed their Judges most times mercenary and Creatures of Prerogative sometimes malicious and oppressive and too often partial and corrupt Or suppose them never so just and upright yet still has the Subject no security against subornations and the attacques of malicious false and unconscionable Witnesses yea when there is no sufficient Evidence upon meer suspicions they are obnoxious to the Tortures of the Rack which often make an Innocent man Confess himself Guilty meerly to get out of present pain Or if he do with invincible Courage endure the Question as they call those Torments he is many times so spoiled in his Limbs as he scarce ever is his own man again Whereas such has been the goodness of God and the prudent care of our Ancestors that to our inestimable Happiness we are born and live under a mild and Righteous Constitution where all these mischiefs may be prevented where none can be Legally condemned either by the power of Superior Enemies or the rashness or Ill will of any Judge nor by the bold Affirmations of profligate Evidence For by a fundamental Law in our Government No mans Life unless it be in Parliaement which is a Supream Court and 't is supposed will never do any man wrong shall be touched for any Crime whatsoever but upon being found Guilty on two several Trials for so may that of the Grand and Petty Jury be called and the Judgment of twice Twelve men at least all of his own Condition and Neighbourhood and upon their Oaths Coke 3. part of Instit p. 40. That is to say Twelve or more to find the Bill of Indictment against him and Twelve others to give Judgment upon the General Issue of Not Guilty All which Jurors must be honest substantial Impartial men and being Neighbours of the party accused or place where the supposed Fact was committed cannot be presumed to be unacquainted either with the matters charged the Prisoners course of Life or the Credit of the Evidence And all these must first be fully satisfied in their Consciences that he is Guilty and so unanimously pronounce him upon their Oaths or else he cannot be condemned For the Office and Power of these Juries is Judicial They only are the Judges from whose sentence the Indicted are to expect Life or Death upon their Integrity and Understanding the Lives of all that are brought into Judgment do ultimately depend From their Verdict there lies no Appeal By finding Guilty or Not Guilty they do complicately resolve both Law and Fact Judges are made by Prerogative and many times heretofore they have been preferred by Corrupt Ministers of State and may be so again in Time to come and such advanced as would serve a present Turn not
what they Swear or if we do not find as the Judge directs we may come into trouble the Judge may Fine us c. I Answer this is a vain fear No Judge dare offer any such thing you are the proper Judges of the matters before you and your Souls are at stake you ought to Act freely and are not bound though the Court demand it to give the Reasons why you bring it in thus or thus for you of the Grand-Jury are sworn to the Contrary viz. To keep secret your fellows Counsel and your own and you of the Petty Jury are no way obliged to declare your motives it may not be convenient T is a notable Case before the Chief Justice Anderson in Q. Eliz. daves A Man was Arraigned for murder the Evidence was so strong that 11. of the Jury were presently for finding him Guilty the 12th man refused and kept them so long that they were ready to starve and at last made them comply with him and bring in the Prisoner not Guilty The Judge who had several times admonisht this Jury-man to join with his Fellows being surprized sent for him discoursed him privately to whom upon promise of Indempnity he at last own'd that he himself was the man that did the Murder and the Prisoner was Innocent and that he was resolv'd not to adde Perjury and a second Murder to the first But to satisfie you that a Jury is no way punishable for going according to their Conscience though against seeming Evidence and the Reasons why they are and ought not to be question'd for the same I shall here Recite an Adjudged Case that of Bushel in the two and twentieth year of His Majesty Reported by the Learned Sir John Vaughan whose Book is Licensed by the present Lord Chancellor the Lord Chief Justice North and all the Judges then in England the said Case begins fol. 135. and continues 150. The whole well worth Reading but I shall only Select Certain Passages The Case was this BUshel and others of a Jury having at a Sessions not found Pen and Mead Two Quakers Guilty of a Trespass Contempt Vnlawful Assembly and Tumult whereof they had been Indicted were fined forty pound a man and Committed till they should pay it Bushel brings his Habeas Corpus and upon the Return it appeared he was Committed For that contrary to Law and against full and Clear Evidence openly given in Court and against the Directions of the Court in matter of Law they had Acquitted the said W. P. and W. M. to the great Obstruction of Justice c. Which upon solemn Argument was by the Judges Resolved to be an Insufficient Cause of fining and committing them and they were discharged and afterwards brought Actions for their Dammage The Reasons of which Judgment are reported by Judge Vaughan and amongst them he Useth these that follow which I shall give you in his own words Fol. 140. One fault in the Return is That the Jurors are not said to have Acquitted the persons Indicted against full and manifest Evidence Corruptly and Knowing the said Evidence to be full and manifest against the Persons Indicted For how manifest soever the Evidence was if it were not manifest to them and that they Believed it such it was not a Finable fault nor Deserving Imprisonment Vpon which Difference the Law of punishing Jurors for false Verdicts principally Depends And Fol. 141. I would know whether any thing be more Common than for two men Students Barristers or Judges to deduce Contrary and opposite Conclusions out of the same Case in Law And is there any Difference that two men should Infer distinct Conclusions from the same Testimony is any thing more known than that the same Author and place in that Author is forceably urg'd to maintain contrary Conclusions and the Decision hard which is in the Right is any thing more frequent in the controversies of Religion than to press the same Texts for Opposite Tenets How then comes it to pass that two persons may not apprehend with Reason and Honesty what a Witness or many say to prove in the Vnderstanding of one plainly one thing but in the Apprehension of the other clearly the contrary thing must therefore one of these Merit Fine and Imprisonment because he doth that which he cannot otherwise do preserving his Oath and Integrity And this is often the Case of the Judge and the Jury And Fol. 142. I conclude therefore That this Return charging the Prisoners to have Acquitted P. and M. against full and manifest Evidence first and next without saying that they did know and Believe that Evidence to be full and Manifest against the Indicted persons is no Cause of Fine and Imprisonment In the Margent of that Fol. 142. it is thus Noted Of this Mind were ten Judges of Eleven the Chief Baron Turner gave no Opinion because not at the Argument And in the same fol. 142. he saith The Verdict of a Jury and Evidence of a Witness are very Different things in the Truth and Falshood of them a Witness swears but to what he hath heard or seen generally or more largely to what hath fallen under his Senses But a Jury-man swears to what he can Inferr and conclude from the Testimony of such Witnesses by the Act and force of his Understanding to be the Fact Inquired after which differs nothing in Reason though much in the Punishment from what a Judge out of Various Cases consider'd by him Infers to be the Law in the question before him If the meaning of these Words finding against the Direction of the Court in matter of Law be That if the Judge having heard the Evidence given in Court for he knows no other shall tell the Jury upon this Evidence the Law is for the Plaintiff or for the Defendant and you are under the pain of Fine and Imprisonment to find accordingly and the Jury ought of duty so to do then every man sees that the Jury is but a troublesome delay great Charge and no use in determining Right and Wrong and therefore the Tryals by them may be better Abolished than continued which were a strange new found Conclusion after a Tryal so Celebrated for many hundred Years It is true if the Jury were to have no other Evidence for the Fact but what is Deposed in Court the Judge might know their Evidence and the Fact from it equally as they and so direct what the Law were in the Case though even then the Judge and Jury might honestly differ in the Result from the Evidence as well as two Judges may which often happens but the Evidence which the Jury have of the Fact is much otherwise than that For 1. Being Returned of the Vicinage where the Cause of Action ariseth the Law supposeth them thence to have sufficient Knowledge to Try the matter in Issue and so they must though no Evidence were given on either side in Court but to this Evidence the Judge is a stranger 2. They may have Evidence from their own Personal Knowledge by which they may be assured and sometimes are that what is deposed in Court is absolutely false but to this the Judge is a stranger and he knows no more of the Fact than he hath Learned in Court and perhaps by false Depositions and consequently knows nothing 3. The Jury may know the Witnesses to be Stigmatized and Infamous which may be unknown to the parties and consequently to the Court. Fol. 148. To what end is the Jury to be Returned out of the Vicinage where the Cause of Action ariseth to what end must Hundredors be of the Jury whom the Law supposeth to have nearer knowledge of the Fact than those of the Vicinage in General to what end are they Challenged so scrupulously to the Array and Poll to what end must they have such a certain Free-hold and be Probi Legales homines and not of Affinity with the party concern'd to what end must they have in many Cases the View for Exacter Information chiefly to what end must they undergo the Punishment of the Villanous Judgment if after all this they Implicitly must give a Verdict by the Dictates and Authority of another Man under Pains of Fines and Imprisonment when Sworn to do it according to the best of their own Knowledge A man cannot see by anothers Eye nor hear by anothers Ear no more can a man conclude or Infer the thing to be Resolved by anothers Vnderstanding or Reasoning and though the Verdict be right the Jury give yet they being not assured that it is so from their own Vnderstanding are Forsworn at least in foro Conscientiae Fol. 149. And it is Absurd to Fine a Jury for finding against their Evidence when the Judge knows but part of it for the better and greater part of the Evidence may be wholly unknown to him and this may happen in most Cases and often doth Thus far Judge Vaughan whose words I have faithfully Recited and with it shall conclude this Subject Recommending those that would be further satisfied in the Law touching the Power and Duty of Juries to those two Excellent Learned Treatises lately published the one Intituled A Guide to English Juries c. to be Sold by Mr. Cockeril at the Three Legs over against the Stocks-Market the other The Security of English-mens Lives or the Trust Power and Duty of the Grand Juries of England Printed for Benj. Alsop in the Poultrey both which are extreamly well worthy of every English mans Perusal that is liable to be call'd to that Office And now I shall take Leave of the Reader who I hope will join with me and all English Protestants in this Prayer THat Almighty God would preserve our Religion put a stop to the Growth of Popery Confound all their Plots Protect our present Gracious King Defend us both from a Forreign Yoak and Domestick Slavery but continue to us the Enjoyment of our good old Laws Liberties and Priviledges and bring all those to exemplary Justice that have or shall dare attempt to Subvert Diminish or Vndermine them Amen FINIS 1 See Book of Oaths p. 1. 3. 2 Bakers Cron. sol 741. 3 Book of Oaths p. 216. ☞