18. Edward 3. he was returned and brought before them as Committed onely by the Writt wherein noe Cause is expressed and the Leivetenant the Constable of the Tower that brought him into the Court saies that he had no other warrant to detain him Nisi breve predictum wherein there was no mention of any Cause the Court thereupon adjudged that breve predictum for that speciall command was not sufficient causa to detain him in prison and thereupon he is by judgment of the Court in Easter term let to Mainprize But that part of the Record wherein it appears that he had indeed been committed for suspicion of Treason is of Trinity term following when the King after the letting of him to Mainprize sent to the Judges that they should discharge his Mainprize because no man prosecuted him And at that time it appears but not before that he had been in for suspicion of Treason so that he was returned to stand committed by the Kings special command onely without Cause shewed in Easter term And then by judgment of the Court let to Mainprize which to this purpose is but the same with bail though otherwise it differ And in the term following upon another occasion the Court knew that he had been committed for suspicion of Treason which hath no relation at all to the letting of him to Mainprize nor to the judgement of the Court then given when they did not nor could possible know any Cause for which the King had committed him And it was said in behalf of the house of Commons that they had not indeed in the Argument expresly used this latter part of Bildstones Case because it being onely of Trinity term following could not concern the reason of an Award given by the Court in Easter term next before yet notwithstanding that they had most faithfully at the time of their Argument delivered into the Lords as indeed they had a perfect coppy at large of the whole Record of this Case as they had done also of all other presidents whatsoever cited by them in so much as in truth there was not one president of Record of either side the coppy whereof they had not delivered in likewise nor did M r. Attorney mention any one besides those that were so delivered in by them And as touching those 3. kinds of Records the remembrance Roll the return and file of the Writt and the Scruets it was answered by the gentlemen imployed by the house of Commons that it was true that the Scruect and return of this Case of Bildstone was not to be found but that did not lessen the weight of the president because always in the Award or Judgment drawn up in the remembrance Roll the Cause whatsoever it be when any is shewed upon the return is always expressed as it appears clearly by the constant Entries of the Kings-Bench Court so that if any Cause had appeared plainly in that part of the Roll which belongs to Easter term wherein the Judgment was given but the return of the commitment by the Kings command without Cause shewed and the Judgment of the Court that the Prisoner was to be let to Mainprize appears therein onely and so notwithstanding any Objection made by M r. Attorney the Cause was maintained to be a clear proof among many others touching the resolution of the house of Commons To the second of these 12. which is Parkers Case in the 22. H. 8. Rot. 37. his Objections were two First that it is true that he was returned to be committed Per mandatum domini Regis but it appeared that this command was certified to the Shreiffs of London by one Robert Peck gentleman and that in regard that the command came no otherwise the return was held insufficient and that therefore he was bailed Secondly that it appears also in the Record that he was committed pro suspicione felloniae ac per mandatum domini Regis so that in regard that the command that in the expression of the causes of his commitment suspicion of fellony preceeds the command of the King therefore it must be intended that the Court tooke the Cause why the King committed him to be of less moment then fellony and therefore bailed him For he Objected that even the house of Commons themselves in some Arguments used by them touching the interpretation of the statute of Westminster the first cap. 15. about this point had affirmed that in enumeration of particulars those of greatest nature were first mentioned and that it was supposed that such as followed were usually of less nature or moment But the reply was to the first Objection that the addition of the certefying of the Kings command by Robert Peck altered not the Case First because the Sheriffs in their Return took notice of the command as what they were assured of and then howsoever it came to them it was of equal force as if it had been mantioned without reference to Peck Secondly as divers Patents pass the great Seal by writ of privy Seal and are subscribed Per breve de privato sigillo so diverse per ipsum Regem are so subscribed and oftentimes in the Roll of former times to the words per ipsum Regem are added nunciante A. B. So that the Kings command generally and the Kings command related or certified by such a man is to this purpose of like nature Thirdly in the late great Case of Habeas Corpus where the Return of the commitment was Per speciale mandatum Domini Regis mihi significatum per Dominos de privato Consilio the Court of Kings-Bench did agree that it was the same and of like force as if mihi significatum c. had not followed and that those words were void According whereunto here also Per mandatum Dom. Regis nunciatum per Robert Peck had been wholly omitted and void likewise And in truth in that late Case this Case of Parker was cited both at the Barr and Bench and at the Bench it was interpreted by the Judges no otherwise then if it had been onely per mandatum Domini Regis in place of it but the Objection there was made of another kinde as was delivered in the first Argument made out of presidents in the behalf of the house of Commons Therefore to the second Objection touching the course of Enumeration of the Causes in the Return it was said that howsoever in some Acts of Parliament and else where in the solemn expressions used in the Law things of greater nature preceded and the less follow yet in this Case the contrary was most plain for in the Return it appears that there were three Causes for detaining the Prisoners Surety of the peace Suspicion of Fellony and the Kings command and Surety of the peace is first mentioned which is plainly less then Fellony And therefore it is plain if any force of Argument be taken from this enumeration that the contrary to that which M r. Attorney inferred is
and constant use in the Court of Kings Bench as it cannot be doubted but your Lordships will easily know also from the grave and learned my Lords the Judges These two causes the one of the Entrie of Committitur Marescallo postea traditur in ballium and the other Remittitur quousque and Remittitur generally or Remittitur prisonae predict together with the nature of the habeas Corpus being thus stated it will be easier for me to open and your Lordships to observe whatsoever shall occurre to this purpose in the Presidents of Record to which I shall come in particular But before I come to the Presidents I am to let your Lordships know the resolution of the House of Commons touching the enlargement of any man committed by the command of the King or of the Privie Councell or of any other without cause shewed of such commitment It is thus That if a Free-man be committed or detained in prison or otherwise restrained by the Command of the King the Privie Councell or any other and no cause of such commitment detainer or restraint be expressed for which by Law he ought to be committed detained or restrained and the same be returned upon a habeas Corpus granted for the partie that then he ought to be delivered or bailed This resolution as it is grounded upon those Acts of Parliament already shewed and the reason of the Law of the Land which is committed to the charge of another and anone to be opened unto you is strengthened also by many Presidents of Record But the Presidents of Record that concerne this point are of two kinds for the House of Commons hath informed it self of such as concern it either way The first such as shew expresly that persons committed by the Command of the King or of the Privie Councell without any cause shewed have been enlarged upon Baile when they prayed it Whence it appeares cleerly that by Law they were bailable and so by habeas Corpus to be set at liberty For although they ought not to have been committed without cause shewen of their commitment yet it is true that the reverend Judges of this Land in former Ages did give such a respect to such commitment by Command of the King or of the Lords of the Councell as also to the commitments sometimes of inferiour persons that upon the habeas Corpus they rarely used absolutely to discharge the prisoners instantly but to enlarge them only upon Baile which sufficiently secures and preserves the Liberty of the Subject according to the Lawes that your Lordships have already heard Nor in any of these cases is there any difference made between any such commitments by the King and commitments by the Lords of the Councell that are incorporated with him The second kind of Presidents of Record are such as have been pretended to prove the Law to be contrarie and that persons so committed ought not to be set at liberty upon Baile and are in the nature of Objections out of Record I shall deliver them summarily to your Lordships with all faith as also the true Copies of them Out of which it shall appear cleerly to your Lordships that of those of the first kind there are no lesse then twelve most full and directly in the point to prove that persons so committed are to be delivered upon baile and among those of the other kind there is not so much as one that proves at all any thing to the contrary I shall first my Lords go through them of the first kind and so observe them to your Lordships that such scruples as have been made upon them by some that have excepted against them shall be cleered also according as I shall open them severally The first of this first kind is of Edw. 3. time It is in Pasche 18. E. 3. Rot. 33. Rex The case was thus King E. 3. had committed by Writ that under his Great Seal as most of the Kings Commands in that time were one Iohn de Bidleston a Clergie man to the prison of the Tower without any cause shewed of the commitment The Lieutenant of the Tower is commanded to bring him into the Kings Bench where he is committed to the Marshall But the Court asked of the Lieutenant if there were any cause to keep this Bidleston in prison besides that commitment of the King He answered No. Whereupon as the Roll saith Quia videtur Curiae breve predictum that is the Kings Command sufficientem non esse causam predictum Johannem de Bidleston in prisona Marr. Regis hic detinend idem Johannes dimittitur per manucaptionem Will. de Wakefield and some others Where the Judgement of the Court is fully declared in the very point The second of this first kind of Presidents of Record is in the time of H. the 8. One Iohn Parker was committed to the Sheriffs of London prosecuritate pacis at the Suit of one Brinton ac pro suspicione fellonie committed by him at Cow all in Glocester shire ac per mandatum Dni Regis he is committed to the Marshall of the Kings Bench posâ—ea isto eodem Terminâ— traditur in Ballium There were other causes of the commitment but plainly one was a Command of the King signified to the Sheriff of London of which they took notice But some have interpreted this as if the commitment here had been for suspicion of fellony by command of the King in which case it is agreed of all hands that the Prisoner is â—ailable But no man can think so of this President that observes the Contents and understands the Grammar of it wherein most plainly ac per mandatum Regis hath no reference to any other cause whatsoever but is a single cause enumerated in the Return by it self as the Record cleerly shewes It is in the 22. H. 8. Rot. 37. The third is of the same time It is 35. H. 8. Rot. 33. Iohn Bincks case He was committed by the Lords of the Councell pro suspicione fellâ—nie ac pro aliiâ— caâ—sis illos movantibus Qui committitur Marescallo c. et immediate ex gratiâ— curiae special traditur in ballium They commit him for suspicion of fellony and other causes them thereunto moving wherein there might be matter of State or whatsoever else can be supposed and plainly the cause of the commitment is not expressed yet the Court bailed him without having regard to those other unknown causes that moved the Lords of the Councell But it is indeed somewhat different from either of those other two that precede and from the other nine that follow For it is agreed That if a cause be expressed in the return insomuch as the Court can know why he is committed that then he may be bailed but not if they know not the cause Now when a man is committed for a cause expressed pro aliis causis Dominos de Concilio moventibus certainly the Court can no more know in such a case
been committed to the Gate-house by divers Lords of the Privy Councell Qui committitur Marr. posteaisto Termino traditur in ballium To this it hath been said by some that Beckwith was bailed upon a Letter written by the Lords of the Councell to that purpose to the Judges But it appeares not that there was ever any letter written to them to that purpose which though it had been would have proved nothing against the authority of the Record For it was never before heard of that Judges were to be directed in point of Law by letters from the Lords of the Councell although it cannot be doubted but that by such letters sometimes they have been moved to baile men that would not or did not ask their enlargement without such letters as in some examples that I shall shew your Lordships among the Presidents of the second kind The twelfth and last of these is that of S r Thomas Mounson's It is Mich. 14. Iacobi Rot. 147. He was committed to the Tower per warrantum à diversis Dominis de privato Concilio Domini Regis Locum-tenensi directum and was returned by the Lieutenant to be therefore detained in prison Qui committitur Marr. super hoc traditur in ballium To this it hath been answered That every body knew by common fame that this Gentleman was committed for suspicion of the death of S r Thomas Overbury and that he was therefore bailable A most strange interpretation as if the Body of the Return and the Warrant of the Privie Councell should be understood and adjudged out of fame only Was there not as much a fame why the Gentlemen that were remanded in the late Judgement were committed and might not the self-same reason have served to enlarge them their offence if any were being I think much lesse then that for which this Gentleman was suspected And thus I have faithfully opened the number of twelve Presidents most expresse in the very point in question and cleered the Objections that have been made against them And of such Presidents of Record as are of the first kind or prove plainly the practise of former Ages and Judgements of the Court of the Kings Bench in the very point in behalf of the Subjects my Lords hitherto I come next to those of the second kind or such as have been pretended to prove that persons so committed are not to be enlarged by the Judges upon the habeas Corpus but ought to remain in Prison still at the pleasure of the King or of the Privie Councell These are of two natures The first are those wherein some assent of the King or the Privie Councell appeares upon the enlargement of a Prisoner so committed as if that because their assent appeares therefore the enlargement could not have been without such assent The second of this kind are those which have been used as expresse Testimonies of the Judges denying Baile And in such cases I shall open this also to your Lordships which being done it will most cleerly appeare that there is nothing at all in any of these that make any thing against the Resolution of the House of Commons touching this point Nay they are so farre from making any thing against it that some of them adde good weight also to the proof of that Resolution For those of the first nature of this second kind of Presidents they begin in the time of H. 7. Thomas Brugge and divers others were imprisoned in the Kings Bench ad mandatum Domini Regis They never sought remedy by habeas Corpus or otherwise for ought appeares but the Roll sayes Dominus Rex relaxavit mandatum and so they were bailed But can any man think that this is an Argument either in Law or common Reason that therefore they could not have been bailed without such assent It is common in the Cases of common persons that one being in Prison for surety of the peace or the like at the Suit of another is bailed upon the release of the party plaintiff Can it follow that therefore he could not have been bailed without such a release Nothing is more plain then the contrary It were the same thing to say that if it appear that a plaintiffe be non suit therefore unlesse he had been non-suit he could not have been barred in the Suit The Case last cited is M. 7. H. 7. Rot. 6. The very like is in the same year Hill 7. H. 7. Rot. 13. the Case of William Bartholmew Williams Case and divers others And the self-same answer that is given to the other cleeres this So in the same year Pasche 7. H. 7. Rot. 18. Iohn Beaumond's Case is the same in substance with those other two and the self same answer also satisfies that cleeres them The next is Mich. 12. H. 7. Rot. 18. Thomas Yewe's Case He was committed ad securitatem pacis for surety of the Peace at the suit of one Freeman and besides ad mandatum Domini Regis And first Freeman relaxavit securitatem pacis and then S r Iames Hubbard the then Kings Attorney generall relaxavit Domini Regis mandatum and hereupon he is bailed The release of the Kings Attorney no more proves that he could not have been enlarged without such release or assent then that he could not have been bailed without the release of surety of the Peace by Freeman The very like is in Hill 9. H. 7. Rot. 14. the Case of Humphry Batch which proves no more here then the rest of this kind already cited Then for this part also Broome's Case of Queen Elizabeth's time hath been cited The Case is thus Ter. 39. Eliz. Rot. 118. Lawrence Broom was committed to the Gate-house per mandatum Dominorum Concilii Dominae Reginae and being returned so upon the habeas Corpus is first committed to the Marshalsey as the course is and then bailed by the Court. Which indeed is an expresse President that perhaps might well have been added to the first twelve which so plainly shews the practise of enlarging prisoners in this case by Judgement of the Court upon the habeas Corpus But it is true that in the Scrolls of that yeare where the Bailes are entred but not the Record of the habeas Corpus there is a note that this Broom was bailed per mandatum privati Concilii super habeas Corpus But plainly this is no kind of Argument that therefore in Law he ought not to have been otherwise bailed The self same is to be said of another of this kind in Mich. 40. Eliz. Rot. 37. Wenden's Case Thomas Wenden was committed to the Gate-house by the Queen and Lords of the Councell pro certis causis generally he is brought by habeas Corpus into the Kings Bench and bailed by the Court. But it is said that in the Scrolls of that yeare it appeares that this enlargement was per consensum Dominorum privati Concilii And it is true that the Queene's Majesties Attorney did tell the
Court that the Lords of the Councell did assent to it Followes it therefore that this might not have been by Law done if the parties themselves had desired it So in Trinit primo Iacobi Rot. 30. S r Iohn Brocket being committed to the Gate-house is by habeas Corpus returned to stand committed per mandatum privati Concilii And he is enlarged virtute warranti à Concilio praedicto But the same answer that satisfies for the rest before cited serves for this also The last of these is Reyner's Case in Mich. 12. Iacob Rot. 119. He was committed to the Gate-house by the Lords of the Councell being brought into the Kings Bench by habeas Corpus is enlarged upon Baile But this they say was upon a letter written by the Lords of the Councell to the Judges It is true that such a letter was written but the answer to the former Presidents of this nature are sufficient to cleer this also And in all these observe First That it appeares not the party ever desired to be enlarged by the Court or was denyed it Secondly Letters either of the Councell or from the King cannot alter the Law in any case So that hitherto nothing that hath been brought for the contrarie part hath any force or colour of Reason in it We come now my Lords to those Presidents of the other nature cited against this Liberty of the Subject that is such as have been used to justify that persons so committed may not be enlarged by the Court. They are in number eight but there is not one of them all proves any such thing as your Lordships will plainly see upon the opening of them The first foure of them are exactly in the same words saving that the names of the Persons and the Prisons differ I shall therefore cite them all one after another and then cleer them together The first is Richard Everard's Case Hill 7. H. 7. Rot. 18. He and others were committed to the Marshalsey of the Houshold per mandatum Domini Regis and so returned upon an habeas Corpus in the Kings Bench. whereupon the Entrie is only Qui committitur Marescallo c. The second is Hill 8. H. 7. Rot. 12. Richard Cherrye's Case He was committed to the Major of Windsor per mandatum Domini Regis and so returned upon an habeas Corpus and the Entrie is only Qui committitur Maresc c. The third is Hill 9. H. 7. Rot. 14. Christopher Burton's Case who was committed to the Marshalsey of the Houshold per mandatum Domini Regis and so returned upon his habeas Corpus and the Entrie is likewise Qui committitur Marescallo c. The fourth is George Urswick's Caâ—e Pasche 19. H. 7. Rot. 23. He was committed to the Sheriffs of London per mandatum Domini Regis and returned so upon the habeas Corpus Qui committitur Maresc These 4 have been used principally as expresse Presidents to prove that a Prisoner so committed cannot be enlarged And perhaps at the first sight by men that know not or observe not the course and Entries of the Court of Kings Bench they may be apprehended to prove as much But in truth they rather prove the contrarie at least there is no such colour in thâ—m of any such matter as they have been used for To which purpose I beseech your Lordships to call to your memories that which I first observed to you touching the course of that Court where a Prisoner is brought in by habeas Corpus He is if he be not to be remanded first committed to the Marshall of that Court and then bailed as his Case requires that is so certain as it can never be otherwise Now these men being thus committed by the expresse Command of the King are first you see taken from the Prisons where first they were committed Wherein you may observe by the way my Lords that if a generall supposition of matter of State were of force in such a case it might be as needfull for point of State to have the Prisoners remain in prison where the King by such an absolute Command committed them as to have them at all committed When they have taken them from the Prisons where before they were they commit them to the Marshall of their own Court which is but the first step to bailing them Now it appeares not indeed that they were bailed for then traditur in ballium had followed but nothing at all appeares that they were denied it perhaps they never asked it perhaps they could not find such as were sufficient to bail them And in truth whensoever any man is but removed from any Prison in England though it be for debt or trespasse only into that Court the Entrie is but in the self-same syllables as in these 4 Cases And in truth if these Presidents did prove that any of the Prisoners named in them were not bailable or had been thought by the Court to have been not bailable it will necessarily follow that no man living that is ordinarily removed from any other Prison into the Kings Bench or that is there upon an ordinary action of debt or action of trespasse could be bailed For every man that is brought thither and not remanded and every man that is but arrested for debt or trespasse and not returned into that Court is likewise committed to the Marshall of that Court and by the self-same Entry and no otherwise Yet these 4 have been much stood on and have strangely misled the judgement of some that either did not or would seem not to understand the course of the Court. The fifth of this nature is Edward Page's Case It is Trinit 7. H. 8. Rot. 23. This might have been well reckoned with the former 4. had not the mis-entrie only of the Clark made it varie from them Edw. Page was committed to the Marshalsey of the Houshold and that per mandatum Domini Regis and returned to be therefore detained and the Entrie is Qui committitur Marr. hospitii Domini Regis And this word Marr. is written in the Margent of the Roll. This hath been also used to prove that the Judges did remand this Prisoner If they had done so the remanding had been only while they advised and not any such award which is given when they adjudge him not bailable But in truth the word Committitur shewes that it was not any remanding of him Nor doth that Court ever commit any man to the Marshalsey of the Houshold And besides the word Marr. for Marescallo in the margent shewes plainly that he was committed to the Marshall of the Kings Bench and not remanded to the Marshalsey of the Houshold For such Entrie of that word in the Margent is perpetually in cases of that nature when they commit a man to their own prison and so give him the first step to bailment which he may have if he ask it and can find baile And doubtlesse those words of hospitii predict were added
been made and that in this very point only upon the interpretation and apprehension of Presidents But Presidents my Lords are good media or proofs of illustration or confirmation when they agree with the expresse Law but they can never be proof enough to overthrow any one Law much lesse seven severall Acts of Parliament as the number of them is for this point The House of Commons therefore taking into consideration that in this Question being of so high a nature that never any exceeded it in any Court of Justice whatsoever all the severall wayes of just examination of the truth should be used have also most carefully informed themselves of all former Judgements or Presidents concerning this great point either way and have been no lesse carefull of the due preservation of his Majesties just Prerogative then of their own Rights The Presidents here are of two kinds either meerly matter of Record or else the former resolutions of Judges after solemn debate in the point This part that concernes the Presidents the House of Commons have commanded me to present to your Lordships which I shall as briefly as I may so I shall do it also faithfully and perspicuously To that end my Lords before I come to the particulars of any of these Presidents I shall first remember to your Lordships that which serves as a generall key for the opening and true apprehension of all them of Record without which key no man unlesse he be verst in the Entries and Court of the King's Bench can possibly understand them In all cases my Lords where any right or Liberty belongs to the Subject by any positive Law written or unwritten if there were not also a remedy by Law for the enjoying or regaining of this right or Libertie when it is violated or taken from him the positive Law were in vain and to no purpose were it for any man to have right in any land or other Inheritance if there were not a known remedy that is an Action or Writ by which in so me court of ordinary Justice he might recover it And in this case of right of Liberty of the Person if there were not a remedy in the Law for regaining it when it is restrained it were to no purpose to speak of Lawes that ordain it should not be restrained Therefore in this case also I shall first observe the remedy that every Free-man is to use for the regaining of his Liberty when he is against Law imprisoned that so upon the legall course and form to be held in using that remedy the Presidents or Judgements upon it for all Presidents of Record rise out of this Remedy may be easily understood There are in the the Law divers remedies for enlargement of a Freeman imprisoned as the Writs of odio atia and of homine replegiando besides the common and most known Writ of habeas Corpus or Corpus cum causa as it is called also The first two are Writs to be directed to the Sheriff of the Countie and lye only in some particular cases with which it would be untimely for me to trouble your Lordships because they concern not that which is committed to my charge But that Writ of habeas Corpus or Corpus cum causa is the highest remedy in Law for him that is imprisoned by the speciall command of the King or of the Lords of the Councell without shewing cause of the commitment Neither is there any such thing in the Lawes of this Land as a Petition of Right to be used in such cases for the Liberty of the person nor is there any other legall Course to be taken for enlargement in such cases howsoever the contrary hath upon no ground or colour of Law been pretended Now my Lords if any man be so imprisoned by any such command or otherwise in any prison whatsoever through England and desire either by himself or any other in his behalf this Writ of habeas Corpus for the purpose in the Court of King's Bench the Writ is to be granted to him and ought not to be denied him no otherwise then any ordinary originall Writ in the Chauncery or other common processe of Law may be denyed Which amongst other things the House of Commons hath resolved also upon mature deliberation and I was commanded to let your Lordships know so much This Writ is to be directed to the Keeper of the Prison in whose custody the Prisoner remaines commanding him that at a certain day he bring in the body of the Prisoner ad subjiciendum recipiendum juxta quod Curia consider aver it una cum causa captionis detentionis and oftentimes una cum causa detentionis only captionis being omitted The Keeper of the Prison thereupon returnes by what Warrant he detaines the Prisoner and with his Return filed to his Writ brings the Prisoner to the Barre at the time appointed When the Return is thus made the Court judgeth of the sufficiency or insufficiency of it only out of the body of it without having respect to any other thing whatsoever that is they are to suppose the Return to be true whatsoever it be For if it be false the party may have his remedy by action on the case against the Gaoler that brings him Now my Lords when this Prisoner comes thus to the Barre if he desires to be bailed and that the Court upon view of the Return think him in Law to be bailed then he is alwayes first taken from the Keeper of the Prison that brings him and committed to the Marshall of the Kings Bench and afterwards bailed and the Entrie perpetually is Commiâ—titur Marr. postea traditur in ballium For the Court never bailes any man untill he becomes their own Prisoner and be in custodia Marescalli of that Court. But if upon return of the habeas Corpus it appears to the Court that the Prisoner ought not to be bailed nor discharged from the Prison whence he is brought then he is remanded or sent back again there to remain untill by Course of Law he may be delivered And the Entrie in such case is Remittitur quousque secundum legem deliberatus fuerit or Remittitur quousque c. which is all one and is the highest award or Judgement that ever was or can be given upon a habeas Corpus But if the Judges doubt only whether in Law they ought to take him from the prison whence he came or give daie to the Sheriff to amend his Return as often they do then they remand him only during the time of their debate or untill the Sheriff hath amended his Return and the Entrie upon it is Remittitur only or Remittitur prisonae predict without any more And so remittitur generally is of farre lesse moment in the award upon the habeas Corpus then remittitur quousque howsoever vulgar opinions raised out of the fame of the late Judgement be to the contrary All these things are of most known
by the errour of the Clark for want perhaps of distinction in his understanding of the Marshall of the Kings Bench from the Marshall of the Houshold The sixth of these is Thomas Cesar's Case It is in the 8. Iacobi Regis Rot. 99. This Cesar was committed to the Marshalsey of the Houshold per mandatum Domini Regis and returned to be therefore detained and indeed a remittitur is in the Roll but not a remittitur quousque but only that kind of remittitur which is used only whiles the Court adviseth And in truth this is so farre from proving any thing against the Resolution of the House of Commons that it appeares that the opinion of the reverend Judges of that time was That the Return was insufficient and that if it were not amended the Prisoner should be discharged For in the Book of Rules of that Court of Mich. Terme when Cesars Case was in question they did expresly order that if the Steward and Marshall did not amend their Return the Prisoner should be absolutely discharged The words of the Rule are Nisi Scenescalâ—us Marescallus hospitii Domini Regis sufficienter returnaverint breve de habeas Corpus Tho. Cesar die Mercurii proxim post quindenam Sancti Martini defendens exonerabitur And this is all the force of that President but yet there hath been an interpretation used upon this Rule It hath been said that the Judges gave this Rule because the truth was that the Return was false and that it was well known that the Prisoner was committed not by the immediate Command of the King but by the command of the Lord Chamberlain and thence as it was said they made this Rule But this kind of interpretation is the first that ever supposed that Judges should take any notice of the truth or falshood of any Return otherwise then the body of the Return could inform them And the rule it self speakes plainly of the sufficiency only and not of the truth or falshood of it The seventh of these is the Case of Iames Demetrius Edward Emerson and some others that were Brewers and were committed to the Marshalsey of the Houshold per mandatum Domini Regis and so returned upon habeas Corpus And it is true that the Roll shewes they were remanded but the remanding was only upon advisement And indeed the grave and upright Judges of that time were so carefull least upon the entring of the remanding any such mistake might be as might perhaps mislead posterity in so great a point that they would have expresly the word immediate added to remittitur that so all men that should meet with the Roll might see that it was done for the present only and not upon any debate of the question And besides there is no quousque to it which is usually added when the highest award upon debate or resolution of this kind is given by them The eighth of these is the Case of S r Samuel Saltonstall It is Hill 12. Iacob He was committed to the Fleet per mandatum Domini Regis and besides by the Court of Chauncery for disobeying an order of that Court and is returned upon his habeas Corpus to be therefore detained And it is true that a remittitur is entred in the Roll but it is only a remittitur prisonae predict without quousque secundum legem deliberatus fuerit And in truth it appeares in the Record that the Court gave the Warden of the Fleet 3 severall dayes at severall times to amend his Return and in the interim remittitur prisonae predict still Certainly if the Court had thought that the Return had been good they would not have given so many severall dayes to have amended it For if that mandatum Domini Regis had been sufficient in the Case why needed it to have been amended The ninth and last of these is Trinit 13. Iacob Rot. 71. the Case of the said S r Samuel Saltonstall He is returned by the Warden of the Fleet as in the Case before and generally remittitur as in the Roll which proves nothing at all that therefore the Court thought he might not by Law be enlarged and besides in both Cases he stood committed also for disobeying an order in Chauncery These are all that have been pretended to the contrary in this great point and upon the view of them thus opened to your Lordships it is plain that there is not one not so much as one at all that proveth any such thing as that persons committed by the Command of the King or of the Lords of the Councell without cause shewed might not be enlarged but indeed the most of them expresly prove rather the contrary Now my Lords having thus gone through the Presidents of Record that concern this point of either side before I come to the other kind of Presidents which are the solemn resolution of Judges in former times I shall as I am commanded by the House of Commons represent unto your Lordships somewhat else that they have thought very considerable with which they have met while they were in a most carefull enquirie of whatsoever concerned them in this great Question It is my Lords a draught of an Entry of a Judgement in that great Case lately adjudged in the Court of Kings Bench when divers Gentlemen imprisoned per speciale mandat Domini Regis were by the Award and Judgement of the Court after solemn debate sent back to Prison because it was expresly said that they could not in Justice deliver them though they prayed to be bailed The case is famous and well known to your Lordships therefore I need not further mention it And as yet indeed there is no Judgement entred upon the Roll but there is room enough for any kind of Judgement to be entred But my Lords there is a form of a Judgement a most unusuall one such a one as never was in any such Case before used for indeed there was never before any Case so adjudged and this drawn up by a chief Clark of that Court by direction of M r Attorney Generall as the House was informed by the Clark in which the reason of the Judgement and the remanding of those Gentlemen is expressed in such sort as if it should be declared upon Record for ever that the Law were that no man could be enlarged from imprisonment that stood committed by any such absolute command The draught is only in S r Iohn Henningham's Case being one of the Gentlemen that was remanded and it was made for a form for all the rest The words of it are after the usuall Entrie of a Curia advisur vult for a time that visis return predict nec non diversis antiquis Recordis in Curia hic remanent consimiles casus concernentibus maturaque deliber atione inde prius habita eo quod nulla specialis causa captionis sive detentionis predict Johannis exprimitur sed gener aliter quod detentus est in prisona predict
per speciale mandatum Domini Regis ideo predicutus Johannes remittitur prefato Custodi Marr. hospitii predict salvo custodiend quousque c. that is quousque secundum legem deliberatus fuerit And if that Court which is the highest for ordinary Justice cannot deliver him secundum legem what Law is there I beseech you my Lords that can be sought for in any other inferiour Court to deliver him Now my Lords because this draught if it were entred in the Roll as it was prepared for no other purpose would be a great declaration contrary to the many Acts of Parliament already cited contrary to all Presidents of former times and to all reason of Law to the utter subversion of the chiefest Liberty and Right belonging to every Free-man of the Kingdome and for that especially also it supposeth that divers ancient Records had been looked into by the Court in like Cases by which Records their Judgements were directed whereas in truth there is not one Record at all extant that with any colour not so much indeed as with any colour warrants the Judgement therefore the House of Commons thought fit also that I should with the rest that hath been said shew this draught also to your Lordships I come now to the other kind of Presidents that is solemn Resolutions of Judges which being not of Record remain only in authentick Copies But of this kind there is but one in this Case that is a resolution of all the Judges in England in the time of Queen Elizabeth It was in the foure and thirtieth yeare of her reign when divers persons had been committed by absolute command and delivered by the Justices of one Bench or the other whereupon it was desired that the Judges would declare in what Cases persons committed by such Command were to be enlarged by them The resolution hath been variously cited and variously apprehended The House of Commons therefore desiring with all care to enforme themselves as fully of the truth of it as possibly they might got into their hands from a member of their House a book of selected Cases collected by a learned and reverend Chief Justice of the Common Pleas that was one of them that gave the Resolution which is entred at large in that book I mean the Lord Chief Justice Anderson It is written in that book in his own hand as the rest of the book is And however it hath been cited and was cited in that great Judgement given upon the habeas Corpus in the King's Bench as if it had been that upon such commitments the Judges might not baile the prisoners yet it is most plain that in the resolution it self no such thing is contained but rather expresly the contrary I shall better represent it to your Lordships by reading it then by opening it Then it was read If this Resolution doth resolve any thing it doth indeed upon the matter resolve fully the contrary to that which hath been pretended and enough for the maintenance of this ancient and fundamentall point of Liberty of the Person to be regained by habeas Corpus when any man is imprisoned And I the rather thought fit now to read it to your Lordships that it might be at large heard because in the great Judgement in the Kings Bench though it were cited at the Barre as against this point of personall Libertie as also at the Bench yet though every thing else of Record that was used was at large read openly this was not read either at Barre or Bench. For indeed if it had every hearer would easily have known the force of it to have been indeed contrary to the Judgement My Lords having thus gone through the Charge committed to me by the House of Commons and having thus mentioned to your Lordships and opened the many Presidents of Record and that draught of the Judgement in the like Case as also the Resolution I shall now as I had leave and direction given me least your Lordships should be put to too much trouble and expense of time in the finding or getting Copies at large of these things which I have cited offer also to your Lordships authentick Copies of them all and so leave them and whatsoever else I have said to your Lordships further consideration The whole Copies of the Presidents of Record mentioned in one of the Arguments made at the first Conference with the Lords touching the Liberty of the Person of every Free-man INter Recorda Domini Regis Caroli in Thesaurario Receptus Scaccarii sui sub custodia Dom. Thesaurarii Camerarii ibidem remanentia viz. Placita coram Domino Rege apud Westmonasterium de Termino Paschae anno Regis E. 3. post conquestum Angliae 15. inter alia sic continetur ut sequitur Adhuc de Termino Paschae London sc. Dominus Rex mandavit dilecto fideli suo Roberto de Dalton Constabulario Turris suae London vel ejus locum-tenenti breve suum in haec verba Edwardus Deigratia Angliae Franâ—iae Rex Dominus Hiberniae dilecto fideli suo Roberto de Dalton Constabulario Turris suae London vel ejus locum-tenenti salutem Mandamus vobis quod Iohannem de Bildeston Cappellanum quem vicecomites nostri London ad mandatum nostrum apud praedictam Turrim vobis liberabunt ab eisdem recipiatis in prisona nostra Turri praedicta custodiri faciatis quousque aliud vobis super hoc duxerimus de mandato Teste me ip so apud Turrim nostram London trigesimo die Martii anno Regni nostri Angliae sextodecimo Regni vero nostri Franciae tertio Et modo scilicet in Craft Ascension Dom. anno Reg. nunc 18. coram Domino Rege apud Westm. venit Iohannes de Wyndwick locum-tenens praedicti Constabularii adduxit coram Justiciarios hic in Curia praedicta Iohannem de Bildeston quem alias à praefatis vicecomitibus virtute brevis praedicti recipit c. Et dicit quod ipse à Domino Rege habuit in mandatis ducendi liberandi Corpus ipsius Iohannis de Bildeston praefat Justic. hic c. Et quaesitum est à praedicto Iohanne Wyndwick si quam aliam detentionis praefat Iohannis de Bildeston habeat causam Qui dicit quod non nisi breve praedict tantum Et quia videtur Curiae breve praedict sufficientem non esse causam praedict Iohannem de Bildeston in prisona Marescall Reg. hic retinend c. idem Iohannes dimittitur per manucaptionem Willielmi de Wakefield Rectoris Ecclesiae de Willingham Iohannis de Wyndwick de com Lancaster Iohannis de Lakenham Iohannis de Norton de com Norsolciae Nicolai de Wandesford de com Midd. Rogeri de Bromley de com Staff qui eum manuceperunt habendi eum coram Domino Rege in Octabis sanctae Trinitatis ubicunque c. viz. corpora pro corpore Ad quas Octab. sanct Trinit coram Domino Rege apud Westm. venit praedict
in Chambers but publick in Court where every one may hear which causeth Judgement to be given with maturity Your Lordships have heard the particulers delivered by my brethren how that Councel being assigned to those 4. Gentlemen in the latter end of Michaelmass Term their Cause received hearing and upon consideration of the Statutes and Records we found some of them to be according to the good old Law of Magna Charta but we thought that they did not come so close to this Case as that bayl should be thereupon presently granted My Lords the Habeas Corpus consisteth of 3. parts the Writ the Return upon the Writ or schedule and the Entry or rule reciting the Habeas Corpus and the Return together with the opinion of the Court either a remittitur or traditur in ballium In this Case a remittitur was granted which we did that we might take better advisement upon the Case and upon the remittitur my Lords they might have had a new Writ the next day and I wish they had because it may be they had seen more and we had been eased of a great labour And my Lords when the Attorney upon the remittitur pressed an Entry we all straitly charged the Clark that he should make no other Entry then such as our Predecessors had usually made in like Cases for the difference my Lords betwixt remittitur and remittitur quousque I could never yet finde any I have now sat in this Court 15. years and I should know something surely if I had gone in a Mill so long dust would cleave to my cloaths I am old and have one foot in the grave therefore I will look to the better part as near as I can But omnia habere in memoria in nullo errare divinum potiùs est quam humanum THE LORD CHIEF IUSTICE SAith he shall not speak with confidence unless he might stand right in the opinion of the House and protested what he spake the day before was not said by him with any purpose to trench upon the Priviledges of this House but out of that respect which by his place he thought he owed to the King he said concerning the point he was to speak of that he would not trouble the Lords with things formerly repeated wherein he concurred with his brethren He said if it were true the King might not commit they had done wrong in not partly delivering for my Lords saith he these Statutes and good Laws being all in force we meant not to trench upon any of them most of them being Commentaries upon Magna Charta but I know not any Statute that goeth so far that the King may not commit Therefore justly we think we delivered the interpretation thereof to that purpose for my Lords Lex terrae is not to be found in this Statute they gave me no example neither was there any Cause shewed in the Return A President my Lords that hath run in a storm doth not much direct us in point of Law and Records are the best Testimonies These Presidents they brought being read we shewed them wherein they were mistaken if we have erred erramus cum Patribus and they can shew no President but that our Predecessors have done as we have done sometimes bayling sometimes remitting sometimes discharging Yet we do never bayl any committed by the King or his Councel till his pleasure be first known Thus did the Lord Chief Justice Coke in Raynards Case They say this would have been done if the King had not written but why then was the Letter read and published and kept and why was the Town Clark sent carefully to enquire because the Letter so directed whether these men offered for bayl were subsedy men the Letter sheweth also that Beckwith was committed for suspition of being acquaninted with the Gun-Pouder-Treason but no proof being produced the King left him to be bayled The Earle of WARVVICKS speech 21. April 1628. MY Lords I will observe something out of the Law wherein this liberty of the Subjects Person is founded and some things out of Presidents which have been alleadged For the Law of Magna Charta and the rest concerning these points they are acknowledged by all to be of force and that they were to secure the Subjects from wrongfâ—ll imprisonment as well or rather more concerning the King then the Subject why then besides the grand Charter and those 6. other Acts of Parliament in the very point we know that Magna Charta hath been at least 30. times confirmed so that upon the matter we have 6. or 7. and thereby Acts of Parliament to confirm this liberty although it was made a matter of derision the other day in this House One is that of 36. E. 3. N o. 9. and another in the same year N o. 20. not printed but yet as good as those that are and that of 42. E. 3. cap. 3. so express in the point especially the Petition of the Commons that year which was read by M r. Littleton with the Kings answer so full and free from all exception to which I refer your Lordships that I know not have any thing in the World can be more plain and therefore if in Parliament ye should make any doubt of that which is so fully confirmed in Parliament and in case so clear go about by new glosses to alter the old and good Law we shall not onely forsake the steps of our Ancestors who in Cases of small importance would answer nolumus mutare leges Angliâ— but we shall yield up and betray our right in the greatest inheritance the Subjects of England hath and that is the Laws of England and truely I wonder how any man can admit of such a gloss upon the plain Text as should overthrow the force of the Law for whereas the Law of Magna Charta is that no Free-man shall be imprisoned but by lawfull judgement of his Peers or the Law of the Land the King hath power to commit without Cause which is a sence not onely expresly contrary to other Acts of Parliament and those especially formerly cited but against Common sence For M r. Attorney confesseth this Law concerns the King why then where the Law saith the King shall not commit but by the Law of the Land the meaning must be as M r. Attorney would have it that the King must not commit but at his own pleasure and shall we think that our Ancestors were so foolish to hazard their Persons Estates and labour so much to get a Law and to have it 30. times confirmed that the King might not commit his Subjects but at his own pleasure and if he did commit any of his Subjects without a Cause shewen then he must lie during pleasure then which nothing can be imagined more ridiculous and contrary to true reason For the Presidents I observe that there hath been many shewen by which it appears to me evidently that such as have been committed by the Kings Councel
this Bill and rely onely upon a confirmation of the Laws The Objections made against this Opinion are two THe first is that we shall thereby recede from our own resolution The second that by a bare confirmation of the Old Laws without the inserting of our resolution by way of explanation we shall be but in the same case as before For the first that though we desire onely a confirmation without adding of our resolution we do not thereby recede from our resolution I reason thus Our resolution was drawn out of the sence of those Laws which are now desired to be confirmed so that no question can be made by any of us that have thus declared our selves but that our resolution is virtually contained in those Laws if that be so how can our acceptance of a confirmation of these Laws be a departure from our resolution Nay rather we think the contrary is true he that doubts that by confirmation of these Laws our resolution is not hereby confirmed doubts whether we have justly deduced our resolutions out of those Laws and so calls our resolution into question This Argument alone is in my opinion a full answer to that first Objection that in desiring of a bare confirmation of those Laws we depart from our resolutions This Arguments alone is in my opinion a full answer to that first Objection that in desiring of a bare confirmation of these Laws we depart from our resolution The second Objection is that if we have nothing but a confirmation we are in no better case then we were before those late violations of the Law This I deny and do confidently affirm that although we have no more then a confirmation of those Laws which are recited in the Bill that is now before us we shall depart hence in far better case then we came and that in divers respects First some of the Laws recited in this Bill and desired to be confirmed are not printed Laws and are known to few Professors of the Law and much less to others and yet they are Laws of as great consequence for the liberty of the Subject if not of greater then any that are printed as namely 25. E. 3. N o. 1. That loanes against the will of the lender are against reason and the freedom of the Realm 36. E. 3. N o. 9. By which imprisonments by special commandment without due Process are forbidden These two are not printed The excellent Law de tollagio non Concedendo in print hath in a publick Court been by a great Coucellour said to be but a Charter and no Law The Satute 1. Rich. 3. against benevolences is by some opinions in print an absolute Law if we can get all these goods Laws besides those 6. other which are expositions of Magna Charta in the point of the freedom and our Persons to be confirmed and put in one Law to the easie view of all men is not our Case far better then when we came hither Secondly will not the occasion of the making of this Law of confirmation so notoriously known be transmitted to all posterity certainly it will never be forgotten that the occasion thereof was the imprisonment of those worthy Gentlemen for not lending and the resolution in the Kings-bench in denying to bayl them and is not the occasion of the making of a Law a good rule to expound it If so then by giving a confirmation upon this occasion we have bettered our Case very much Thirdly have not the Judges in the Kings-bench in open Parliament upon our complaint disclaimed to have given any Judgement in the point which generally before by the Parliament was otherwise conceived for now they say it was but an Award and no Judgement Will such a Notorious Act upon so important an occasion in so publick a place be quickly forgotten Nay will not the memorie of it for ever remain upon Records is not our Case then much better then when we came hither Fourthly will not the resolution of this House and all our Arguments and reasons against imprisonment without a Cause expressed which no doubt by the course we have taken will be transferred to posterity be a great means to stay any Judge hereafter for declaring any Judgement to the contrary especially if there be likelyhood of a Parliament is not our Case in this very much amended Lastly have we not received Propositions from the Lords wherein amongst other things they declared that they are not out of love with our proceedings is not this a great strenghtning to it but after so long debate amongst them about it they cannot take any just exception to it and doth not this also much amend our Case From all these reasons I conclude that the second Objection that by a confirmation we are in no better case then when we came together is also a weak Objection Now for reasons to move us to proceed in this course of accepting a confirmation First we have his Majesties gracious promise to yield to a confirmation of the old Laws from which we may rest most assured he will not depart If we tender him with all our Proposition to be enacted we have cause to doubt that we shall loose both the one and the other Secondly we are no less assured of the Lords joyning with us for in their Propositions sent to us they have delivered themselves to that purpose This is then a secure way of getting somewhat of great advantage to us as we have great hopes and in manner assurance on this side So on the other side we have great doubts and fears that by offering our resolution to be enacted we shall loose all For first we have had already experience of the Lords that they are not very foreward to joyn with us in a Declaration of our Proposition to be Law If they stumble at a Declaration much more will they in yielding to make Law in the same point And have we not much more cause to doubt that his Majesty will not yield unto it seeing it toucheth him so near Is it not the notice of his pleasure that hath wrought thus with the Lords If we should clog our Bill with our Proposition and it should be rejected by the Lords or by the King is not our resolution much weakned by it And are we not then in far worse case then before we made it Our resolution for the rejecting of our Proposition will tend to a Justification of all that hath been done against us in this great point of our Liberty Let us then like wise-men conform our desire to our hopes and guide our hopes by probabilities other desires and other hopes are but vain This is my poor opinion in this weighty business Secretary COKES Message 1. May 1628. M r. Speaker I Have a very short message to deliver from his Majesty that shews both his Royal care to be rightly understood of this House and no less care to understand us in the best part and
Duke could alter it 4. That when the Ordinance were shipt at S. Martins the Duke caused the Souldiers to go one that they might be destroyed 5. That the Duke said he had an Army of 16000. Foot and 1200. Horse 6. That King Iames his bloud and Marquess Hambletons with others cries out for vengeance to Heaven 7. That he could not expect any thing but ruine of this Kingdom 8. That Prince Henry was poysoned by Sir Thomas Overbury and he himself served with the same sawce and that the Earl of Sommerset could say much to this 9. That he himself had a Cardinal to his Uncle or near Kinsman whereby he had great intelligence A Privy Seal for the transporting of Horses 30 January 3. CAROLâ— CHarles by the grace of God King of England Scotland France and Ireland defendor of the faith c. To the Treasurer and under Treasurer of our Exchequer for the time being greeting We do hereby will and command you out of our Treasury remaining in the receipt of the said Exchequer forthwith to pay or cause to be paid unto Phillip Burlamachi of London Merchant the summ of 30000 l. to be paid by him over by Bill of Exchange unto the Low-Countries and Germany unto our trustie and well be loved Sir William Balfoore Knight and Iohn Dalber Esquire or either of them for levying and providing certain numbers of Horse with Arms for Horse and Foot to be brought over into this Kingdom for our service 〈◊〉 For the levying and transporting of a 1000 Horse 15000 l. for 5000 Muskets 5000 Corslets 5000 Pikes 10500 l. and for 1000 Curasiers compleat 200 Corslets and 200 Carbines 4500 l. Amounting in the whole to the said summ of 30000 l. And this our Letter shall be your sufficient warrant and discharge in this behalf Given under our privy Seal at our Palace of Westminster 30. of Ianuary in the third year of our raign The Commission to the Lords and others of the privy Councel concerning the present raising of money CHARLES by the grace of God King of England Scotland France and Ireland defender of the faith c. To Sir Thomaâ— Coventry Lord Keeper of the great Seal of England Iames Earl of Marlburgh Lord Treasurer Henry Earl of Manchester Lord President of the Councel Edward Earl of Worcester Lord Keeper of the privy Seal George Duke of Buckingham our high Admiral of England William Earl of Pembroke Lord Steward of our Houshould Phillip Earl of Mongommery Lord Chamberlain of our Houshould Theophilus Earl of Suffolk Edward Earl of Dorcet William Earl of Salisbury Thomas Earl of Exceter Iohn Earl of Bridgwater Iames Earl of Carlile Henry Earl of Holland William Earl of D. George Earl of Totnes Sir George Hay Knight Lord Chaunceller of Scotland William Earl of Moâ—ton Thomas Earl of Kelly Thomas Earl of Melros Edward Viscount Conway one of our principall Secritaries of State Edward Viscount Wimbleton Oliver Viscount Grandison Henry Viscount Falkland Lord Deputy of Ireland To the Lord Bishop of Winchester William Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells Fulk Lord Brook Dudly Lord Carleton vice Camberlain of our Houshould Sir Thomas Edmonds Treasurer of our Houshould Sir Iohn Savill Comptroller of our Houshould Sir Robert Nawton Master of our Court of Wards Sir Iohn Cooke one of the principal Secritaries of our State Sir Richard Weston Chancellor and under Treasurer of our Exchequer Sir Iulius Caesar Master of the Roll. Sir Humfry May Knight Chancellor of our Dutchy of Lancaster GREETING WHereas the present Conjuncture of the pressing affairs of Christendom and our own particular interest in giving assistance to our oppressed Allies and for the providing for the defence and safety of our own dominions And people do call upon us to neglect nothing that may conduce to those good ends And because monies the principall sinews of War and one of the first and chiefest in all great preparations and actions necessary to be provided in the first place and we are carefull the same may be raised by such ways as may best stand with the State of our Kingdoms and Subjects and yet may answer the pressing occasions of the present times We therefore out of the experience we have had and for the trust we repose in your wisdoms fidelities and dutifull care of your services and for the experience you have of all great causes concerning us and our State both as they have relation to forraign parts abroad and as to our Common-Wealth and People at home Ye being Persons called by us to be of our privy Councel have thought fit amongst those great and important matters which somuch concern us in the first and chiefest place to recommend this to your â—peciall care and dilligence And we do hereby authorize and appoint and stricktly will and require you speedily and seriously to enter into consideration of all the best and speediest ways and means yee can for raising of money for the most important occasions aforesaid which without extreamest hazard to us our dominions and people and to our friends and Allies can admit of no long delay The same to be done by imposition or otherwise as in your wisdom and best Judgments ye shall finde to be most convenient in a case of this inevitable necessity wherein form and circumstance must be dispensed with rather then the substance be lost or hazarded And herein our will and pleasure is that you or as many of you as from time to time can be spared from attendanc upon our Person or other our necessary services do use all dilligence by your frequent meetings and serious consultations and when you have brought any thing to maturity ye make report thereof unto us and advertise us of those things ye shall either resolve upon or thinck fit to represent unto us for the advancement of this great service which with the greatest affection we can we recommend to your best care and Iudgement Whereof you must not fail as you tender our honour and the honour and safety of our Dominions and People and for the doing hereof these presents shall be to you and every of you a sufficient warrant In witness whereof we have caused these our Letters to be made Letters Patents Witnes our selfe at Westminster the last day of February in the third yeare of our Raigne Per ipsum Regem Articles to be propounded to the Captains and Masters as well English as French touching the service in hand at ROCHEL 4. May 1628. the ships rideing before the Town 1. WHether in your opnion and judgments by the means and strength we have the Floates and Pallizadoes may be forced and the entrance into the Town may be thereby made for the victuallers 2. If you shall think it fit what in your opinions will be the best and readiest way to open the same 3. Whether you hold it fit to send in the victuallers at the same instant together with the fire ships and barks considering that if it should not take