Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	bring_v	error_n	reverse_v	11,494	5	13.3526	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91243	A plea for the Lords: or, A short, yet full and necessary vindication of the judiciary and legislative power of the House of Peeres, and the hereditary just right of the lords and barons of this realme, to sit, vote and judge in the high Court of Parliament. Against the late seditious anti-Parliamentary printed petitions, libells and pamphlets of Anabaptists, Levellers, agitators, Lilburne, Overton, and their dangerous confederates, who endeavour the utter subversion both of parliaments, King and peers, to set up an arbitrary polarchy and anarchy of their own new-modelling. / By William Prynne Esquire, a well-wisher to both Houses of Parliament, and the republike; now exceedingly shaken and indangered in their very foundations.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1648 (1648)	Wing P4032; Thomason E430_8; ESTC R204735	72,921	83

this to the Lords not only against Peers but Commoners of which there are hundreds of presidents this very Parl Therefore the House of Lords hath the proper right of judicatory vested in them not the Commons who are rather informers prosecutors and Grand-Jury men to inform and impeach then Judges to hear censure or determine Seventhly those who are proper Judges in any Court of justice whiles the cause is judging sit in their * 25 E. 3. c. 2. 20 R 2. c. 3. 6 R. 2. c. 5. 14 H. 6. c. 3. ● R. 2. c. 3. 2 R. 2. c. 10. Robes covered on the bench not stand bare at the bar swear examine the witnesses in the cause not produce them or manage the evidence when the cause is fully heard argue and debate the businesse between themselves and give the definitive sentence But in cases that are to be tried judged in Parl the Lords only sit covered and in their Robes upon the Bench but the Comons stand bare at the Bar the Lords only swear and examine the witnesses and judge of their testimony the Commons only u Coke 4. Instit p. 24. produce the witnesses or presse and manage the evidence and when the businesse is fully heard the Lords only debate the businesse among themselves and give the finall Sentence and Judgment without the Cōmons and that both in cases of Comoners and Peers Therefore the Lords or house of Peers are sole Judges in Parl not the Cōmons And that they are and alwaies have been so de facto unlesse by way of Bil of Attainder or in such extraordinary cases when their concurrence hath been desired I shall prove by most clear and infallible evidence To pretermit the * Mr. Seldens Titles of Honor part 7. c. 5 p. 632 633 705 706. judgment of the Earls Barons in Parl in the case of Earl Goodwin for the murther of Alfred in K. Edw. Conf. reign before the Conquest and the judgment of the Barons the Lords in Parl against Tho Becket Arch-b of Can. in K. Hen. 2. raign cited by M. Selden of which you may chuse the same with the punctuall authority of Andr. Horne in his Mirror of Justices c. 1. § 2. forecited First in Pleas of the Crown and other Common Pleas plainly ●●able in Parl as well between Cōmoners as Peers the Pleas have been exhibited heard and judgement given upon them by the King and Lords joyntly or the King alone by which the Lords assent or by the Lords themselves without the Cōmons as is evident by the Parli Rolls and Pleas in Parl in K. Ed. 1. 2. 3. 4. Ric. 2. Hen. 4. 5. 6. where there are hundreds of instances to confirm it some of them printed in Sir Edw. Cokes 3 Instit c. 1 2. and M. St Johns Argument in Law upon the Bill of Attainder against the Earl of Strafford Secondly in all * 18 E. 1. rot Parl. t. 4 E. 3. n. 13. 21 E. 3. n. 65. 28 E. 3. n. 11 12. 50 E. 3. n. 48. 1 R. 2. n. 28 29 104. 2 R. 2. n. 36 37 31 32 33. Parl. 2. n. 21 to 27. 3 R. 2. n. 19 20 21. 7 R. 2. Parl. 2. n. 23 24. 8 R. 2. n. 14 15. 13 R. 2. n. 15 16. 15 R. 2. 22 23. 17 R. 2. n. 13 14 15 19. 18 R. 2. n. 11 10 16. 21 R. 2. n. 25 55 to 66. 1 H. 4. n. 91. 2 H. 4 n. 47 48. 5 H. 4. n. 40. 6 H. 4. n. 31 61 62. 3 H. 5. n. 19. 10 H. 6. n. 51. Writs of Error brought in Parl by Peers or Cōmoners to reverse any erroneous judgements touching their reall or personall Estates lives or attainders The KING LORDS ONLY ARE JUDGES and the proceedings upon such Writs are ONLY BEFORE THE LORDS IN THE UPPER House secundum Legem co●suetudinem Parliamenti So Sr Ed. Coke in direct terms in his 4. Instit p. 21 22 23. where he produceth divers presidents of such writs of Error out of the Parl Rolls and present experience manifests as much in all the the writs of Error brought this Parl adjudged and determined by the King and Lords alone without the privity of interposition of the Cōmons A truth so clear that Lilburne himself in his Argument against the Lords Jurisidiction confesseth it and the Parl Rolls quoted in the Margine with sundry others resolve past all dispute If then the Lords be the sole Judges in all writs of Error concerning the goods estates free-holds inheritances lives and attainders of the Commoners of England notwithstanding the statute of Magna Charta c. 29. No Free-man shall be taken or imprisoned or disseised of his Free-holder Liberties of Free-customes nor outlawed nor exiled neither will we passe upon him nor condemn him but by THE LAWFUL IUDGMENT OF HIS PEERS c. the grand and principall objection against their Iudicature then by the self-same reason they are and may lawfully proceed against them in all other civill or criminall causes especially breaches of ther own priviledges of which themselves are the sole and only Iudges the cases of Lilburne and Overton properly triable in Parliament Thirdly in all Petitions and complaints against Cōmoners for redresse of grievances the King and Lords are the sole and proper Tuns and Judges not the Cōmoners as appears by all the Parl Rolls in former times wherein we find in the beginning of every Parl some Assistants of the Lords house appointed by them to be receivers of the Petitions of England Ireland Wales Scotland others appointed receivers of the Petitions of Gascoyne other parts beyond the Seas and the Isles of Jersy and Gernsey c. And some Lords appointed tryers of those Petitions who had power given them to call the L d Chancellor Treasurer Steward Chamberlain the Judges Kings Serjeants and others to their assistance prescribing also by what day the Petitions should all be exhibited and the place where they should be examined All particular persons usually presenting all their grievances and petitions immediately to the King Lords without any addresse to the Cōmons by Petitions as now of late there being no Petitions of record in the Parl Rolls addressed immediately and originally to the Commons that I can find And towards the end of the Parl Rolls there is this Title usually The Petitions of the Cōmoners containing all Petitions of the Cōmons house for redresse of publick or particular injuries and grievances presented to the King in the Lords house and answered by the King alone with the consent of the Prelats Counts Barons with which answers the Commons rested satisfied whether granted or denied as ofttimes they were Of which you may read somthing in Sr E. Cokes 4. Instit p. 16. more in the Records themselves Fourthly in all criminal causes in Parl by way of accusation impeachment or indictment the King Lords were the proper Judges as is evident by Placita Coronae coram

awarded him to the custody of the Marshall and to make fine and ransome at the Kings pleasure Whereupon the Commons REQUIRED by way of petition that he might lose all his Offices and no longer be of the Kings Councell which the King granted The Commons not joyning at all with the Lords in his judgement neither could they so joyne he being a Peer And for the Lord Nevill in that Parliament num 33. he was only accused not judged by the Commons Sixthly The case of 2. H. 5. rot Parl. num 15. that Error is there assigned that the Lords gave judgement without Petition or assent of the Commons is a grosse mistake For the record only recites That Thomas Mountague Earle of Salisbury Sonne and Heire of Iohn Mountague Earle of Salisbury exhibited his petition in Parliament to reverse a judgement given against his said father in the Parliament at Westminster in the second year of King Henry the fourth Whereupon he exhibited certaine reversals of Judgements given in Parliament as making on his behalfe to the Lords consideration reversed for some errors assigned in those jadgements to wit one judgement given against Thomas heretofore Earle of Lancaster before King Edward the second at Pomfract the monday before the feast of the Annuntiation in the fifteenth yeare of his reigne and another Judgement against Roger de Mortymer late Earle of March in the Parliament of King Edward the third the Monday after the Feast of St. Katherine in the fourth yeare of his reigne at Westminster Which judgements being distinctly and openly read and fully understood Jo seemed TO THE KING and LORDS that the case of the death and execution of the said John late Earle of Sarum and of the judgement aforesaid against him given is not nor was like to the case of the executing of the said Thomas heretofore Earle of Lancaster nor to the case of the killing of Roger Earle of March nor to any judgement given against the said Thomas and Roger as aforesaid but that the judgement and declaration had and given against the said Iohn late Earle of Sarum WERE A GOOD JUST and LEGALL DECLARATION and JUDGEMENT Per quod CONSIDERATUM FUIT in praesenti Parliamento PER PRAEDICTOS DOMINOS tunc ibidem existentes DE ASSINSU dicti Domini nostri Regis quod praefatus nunc COMES Sarum NIHIL CAPIAT PER PETITIONEM aut prosecutionem suam praedictam Et ulterius TAM DOMINI SPIRITUALES QUAM TEMPORALE supradicti JUDICIUMET DECLARATIONEM praedicta versus dictum Ioannem quondam Comitem Sarum ut praem●ttitur habita five reddita DE ASSENSU IPSIUS DOMINI REGIS AFFIRMARUNT FORE ET ESSE BONA JUSTA ET REGALIA et ea pro hujusmodi EX ABUNDANTI DISCREVERUNT ADJUDICARUNT TUNC IBIDEM This is all that is mentioned in this Parliament Roll concerning this businesse It appeares by the Parliament Roll of 2 H. 4. num 30. That Thomas Holland Earl of Kent Iohn Holland Earle of huntingdo● Iohn Mountagne Earle of Sarum Thomas Lord de Dispencer and Ralph omely Knight were impeached of high treason before the King and Lords in Parliament for levying actuall Warre against the King to destroy the King and his Subjects and for this taken and beheade and hereupon ALL ●●E LORDS TEMPORALL BEING IN PARLIAMENT BY ASSENT OF THE KING DECLARED AND ADJVDGED all the said persons TRAITORS for leavying Warre against the King and that as Traytors they should forfeit all the lands they had in fee simple the 5 day of Jannary the first yeare of the raigne of the King or after according to the Law of the Land with all their goods and chattells notwithstanding they were slaine upon the said levying of Warre without processe of Law So this Record To reverse this judgement was this Petition of Thomas Earle o● Sarisbury in 2. H. 5. exhibited without the errour assigned as appeares by the Par●iament roll but if it were that the Lords only gave Judgement without Petition or assent of the Commons as Sir Edward Cooke imagins 〈◊〉 the King and Lords who upon solemned bate over-ruled the errour abuses and Petitions and found this judg●ment and Declaration of 2. H. 4. given by the Lords alone with the Kings assent without the Commons TO BE GOOD JVST and LEGALL as they did ex abund●nti is a most undeniable proofe of the King and Lords sole right of JVDGEING and DECLARING HIGH TREASON in Parliament without the Commons as well in case of Commoners as Lords Ralph Lomely being but a Commoner and Knight though the rest were Peers and yet all joyntly adjudged Traytors and declared such only by the King and Lords without the Commons and the Judgement assured to be good by the Commons who in the Parliament of 13. H. 4. num 19. Petitioned the Iohn Lomley might be restored by act of Parliament and made capable to inherit his fathers lands thus attainted to which the King by ASSENT OF THE LORDS SPIRITVALL and TEMPORALL consented Seventhly the Parliament Roll of 28. H. 6. num 18. c. containes onely an Impeachment of High Treason against the King and other great misdemeanors against the Kingdome and wrongs to particular persons comprised by way of Articles in two distinct Bills brought up by the Commons and presented by William Tresham their Speaker to the King in the Lords House the 7. day of February against William de la Pole Duke of Suffolke to which they desired the Duke might give in his Answer by a certaine day which he did absolutly denying the Treason against the King and denying and excusing himselfe of the rest without putting himselfe upon the Tryall of his Peeres The Chiefe Iustice thereupon the 14. day of March by the Kings command asked this Question of the LORDS WHAT ADVISE THEY WOULD GIVE THE KING what is to doe futrher in this matter which advise was deferred till Monday then next following whereon nothing was done in that matter On Tuesday the 17. of March the King sent for all the Lords Spirituall and Temporall then being in Towne being 42. in all into his Inner Chamber within his Palace of Westminster where when they were all assembled hee then sent for the Duke thither who comming into the Kings presence kneeled downe and continued kneeling till the Chancellour of England had delivered the Kings command to him and demanded of him what he said to the Commons Articles not having put himselfe upon his Peerage Whereupon the Duke denyed all the Articles touching the Kings Person and state of the Realme as false and scandalous And so not departing from his said Answers submitted himselfe wholly to the Kings Rule and Governance without putting himselfe upon his Peerage Where thus the Chancellour told him That as touching the great and horrible things contained in the first Bill the King holdeth him neither declared nor charged And as touching the second Bill containing misprisons which are not criminall the King by force of his submission by his owne advise and

Lords who are Freemen of the higest degree may not give judgement against Commoners who are Freemen very learned nonsence we all know that the Lord Chancellour of England Lord Keeper Lord Treasurer Master of the Court of Wards and some of the Iudges of the Kings Courts in Westminster Hall in former times with the Chiefe Iustic●ar and Iustices in Eyre were anciently and of late too as the Earle of Holland and others Peeres of the Realme not Commoners and that all the Peeres of the Realme are in Commissions of Oyer and Terminer and of the Peace yet did wee never heare of any Commoner demurring or pleading thus to any of their Jurisdictions in Chancery Kings Be●ch the Exchequer Chamber Eyres Assises or Sessions Sir I am a Commoner and you are a Peer of the Realme but no Commoner as I am besides you sit here onely in the Kings right doing all in his name and representing his person who is not any Peer but Soveraigne Therefore you ought not to judge my cause not condemne my person nor give any sentence for or against mee it being contrary to Magna Charta which enacts That no freeman should be judged or pressed upon or condemned but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers Certainly no person was ever yet so mad or sottish to make such a Plea before Ignoramus Lilburne And if Lords and Peers may judge the persons and causes of Commoners in the Cancery Kings Bench Exchequer Court of Wards Eyre and at Assises and S●ssions without any violation of this clause in Magna Charta much more may the House of Peers in Parliament doe it who are certainly Peers to Commoners though Commoners be not Peers to them within the meaning of Magna Charta ch 29. Forthly If the Lords in Parliament cannot meddle with or give judgement in Commoners cause without breach of this clause in Magna Charta then why did b See his Innocency and truth justified Lilburne himselfe sue and petition to the Lords as the onely competent Iudges to reverse his sentence in Star-Chamber and give him dammages because it was against this very Chapter of Magna Charta If Lords cannot give judgement in the case of Commoners as now he holds without expresse violation of this Law then h●mselfe in petitioning the Lords to relieve him against the Starre Chamber Sentence because contrary to this very Law and Chapter of Magna Charta was as great a violation of it as his Starr-Chamber censure and his sentence in Starre-Chamber remaines still unreversed because the Lords examining and reversing of it they being no Commoners as hee is but Peers was Coram non judice and meerly void by the Statute of 25. E. 3. St●t 5. ● 4. because contrary to Magna Charta it selfe as hee now expounds it Let him therefore unriddle and assoyle thi● his owne Dilemma or for ever hold his tongue and pen from publishing such absurdities to seduce poore people as he hath don● and exa●perate them to clamour against the Lords for being more favourable in their censure of him then his transcendent Libels and contempts against them deserved Fifthly This Statute is in the dis-junctive by the Lawfull of his Peers OR BY THE LAW OF THE LAND which this Ignoramus observes not 〈…〉 Now by the● Law of the Land every Inferiour Court of justice may fine and imprison men for contempts and misdemeanors against them and their authority therefore the Lords in Parliament being the highest and supreamed Tribunall may much more doe it and have ever done it even by this expr●●●e clause of Magna Charta the Law and Custome of Parliament as well as they may give c 〈…〉 judgements in writs of Errour againster for Commons without the Commons consent as himselfe ●oth grant Fifthly It is granted by Lilburne that by this expresse Law ●o f●eeman of England ought to be judged or censured but onely by his Peers and that Commoners are no Peers to Nobl●men nor Noblemen Peer● to Commoners Then by what Law of reason dared he to publish to the world d 〈…〉 That the House of Commons are the Su●reme Power within this Realme and THAT BY RIGHT THEY ARE THE LORDS JVDGES certainly this is a Note beyond Ela a direct contradiction to Magna Charta in this very clause wherein hee placeth his strength and subverts his very ground work against the Lords jurisdiction in their censure of him For if the House of Commons be by right the Lords ●udges then by Magna Charta c. 29. they are and ought to bee their Peers and if the Commons bee the Lords Peers then the Lords must bee the Commons Peers too and if so then they may lawfully be his judges even by Magna Charta because here he grants them to bee no other then his Peers Loe the head of this great Goliah of the Philistin Levellers cut off with his owne sword and Magna Charta for ever vindicated from his ignorant and ●●ttish contradictory Glosses on it and to convict him of his Errour in affirming the House of Commons to bee by right the Lords judges I might informe him that Magna Charta it selfe ● 1. 20 and Sir Edward Cooke his chiefe Authour in his commentary on them are expresse against him that in the Parliament of 15. c. 3. ch 2. in print it was enacted That whereas before this time the Peers of the Land have been arrested and imprisoned and their Temporalities Lands and Tenements Goods and 〈◊〉 seised in the Kings hards and some put to death WITHOVT IVDGEMENT OF THEIR PEERS that NO PEER OF THE LAND Officer or other by reason of his office nor of things touching his office nor by other cause shall be brought in judgement to lose his Temporalities Lands Tenements Goods Chattels nor to bee arrested or imprisoned outlawed exiled nor forejudged nor put to answer NOR TO BE IVDGED BVT BY AWARD OF THE SAID PEERS IN PARLIAMENT which Priviledge of theirs was both enjoyed and claimed in Parliament 4. E. 3. n. 14. 15. E. 3. n. 6. 8. 44. 49. 51. 17. E. 3. n. 22. 28. F. 3. n. 7. ●0 16. 10 R. 2. n. 7. 8. c. and sundry other Parliament Rolls e See Cook 4. Instit p. 15. ●7 E. 3. 19. And in 11. R. 2. n. 7. All the Lords in this Parliament as well Spirituall as Temporall claimed this their liberty and franchise that all weighty matters in the same Parliament to be after moved TOVCHING THE PEERS OF THE LAND ought to bee determined and judged and discussed BY THE COVRSE OF THE PARLIAMENT and not by the Civill Law nor BY THE COMMON LAWES used in other inferiour Courts of the Relame The which claime and liberty the King most willingly allowed and granted thereto IN FVLL PARLIAMENT And hereupon in the Parliament of 14. R. 2. n. 13. The King and LORDS without the Commons ADIVDGED the Earledome and Seigniory of Richmond to bee forfeited by reason that Iohn Duke of Br●●tany then

Earle of Richmond adhered to the French against his Allegiance This Paradox therefore of his is against all Statutes Law-Books and Presidents whatsoever and Magna Charta it selfe There is onely one objection more of moment remaining Object 3. which is this If the House of Peers may without the Commons fine and imprison Commoners then if their fine and imprisonment be unjust and illegall they shall bee remedilesse there being no superiour Courr to appeale unto which will bee an intollerable slavery and grievance not to bee indured among free-borne people I answer Answ first that no injustice shall or ought to be presumed in the highest Court of Iustice till it bee apparantly manifested Secondly If any such censure be given the party as in Chancery upon just grounds shewed may Petition the House of Peers for a reveiw and new-hearing of the cause which they in justice neither will nor can deny and if they doe then the party grieved may petition the House ef Commons to interceed in his behal●e to the Peers for a rehearing but to discharge or free any Commoner judicially censured by the Lords I have hitherto met with no President in former Parliaments nor power in the House of Commons to doe it who cannot reverse Euro●ous judgements in any inferiour Courts by writ of Errour but the Lords alone much lesse then the judgements of the Higher House of Peers which is par●mount them Though I conceive the House of Peers being the Superiour Authority and onely Iudicatory in Parliament may relieve or release any Commoners unjustly imprisoned or censured by the Commons house or any of their Committees and ought in justice to doe it or else there will be the same mischiefe or a greater in admitting the House of Commons to bee judges of Commoners if there bee no appeale from them to the Lords in case their sentences bee illegall or unjust Thirdly This mischiefe is but rare Cook 4. instit p. 21 22. 4. ● 3. n. 14. Brook and C●nmptons jurisdiction and all Statutes for repealing former Parliaments Acts Iudgements or Attaindors and you may object the same against a sentence given or Law made in Parliament by the King and both Houses because there is no appeale from it or redresse of it but onely in the next Parliament that shall be summoned by petition And there is a greater greevance in ill publique Acts which concerne many then in ●● judgements which concerne but one or two particular persons which yet cannot be repealed but by another Parliament as the Errours and decrees of one generall Counsell cannot bee rectified or reversed but by and till another Generall Counsell meets to doe it The same mischiefe was and is in Errous Iudgements and Decrees given in the Kings Bench Chancery and illegall commitments there for which there is no reliefe out of Parliament but towait till a Parliament be called Finally Hee that suffers by and under an unjust censure will have the comfort of a good Conscience to support him till he bee relieved and therefore he e Luk. ●1 19. 1 Pet 3. 14. He. ●0 32 33 34. must possesse his soule with Patience and rejoyce under his crosse and not raile murmur and play the Bedlam as Lilburne and his Companions Overton Larner and other Sectaries doe against our f ● Pet. 2. 15. to 21 c. 4. ●6 I●●● 53. Saviours owne precept and example then God in his due season will g Psal 3● 37. 46. relieve right them in a legall way whereas their impatience raving and libellous railing Pamphlets and Petitions not savouring of a Christian meek and humble spirit will but create them new troubles expose them unto just and heavy censures and rob them both of the comfort and glory of all their former suffrings against Law and Right Having answered these Objections I shall now earnestly desire all Lilburnes and Overtons seduced Disciples whether Members or others seriously to weigh and consider the premises that so they may see how grossely they have been deluded abused and misled by these two Ignes fatui or New-lights of the Law and Circumscribers of the Lords and Parliaments Iurisdictions which God knowes they no more know nor understand then Balams Asse as the premises demonstrate and I shall seriously adjure them if they have any grace shame or remainder of ingenuity left in them ingeniously to recant and publiquely to retract all their seditiou● rayling Libels and Scurrilous Invectives against the Lords undoubted Priviledges Iurisdiction and Iudicature which I have here unanswerably made good by undeniable Testimonies Histories Records and the grounds of policy and right reason which they are unable to gaine say to undeceive the many ignorant over-credulous poore soules they have corrupted and misled to the publique destrubance of our Kingdomes Peace Isay 9. 16. and let all their followers consider well of our Saviours caution Mat. 15. 14. If the blinde lead the blinde as these blinde-guides doe you both of them shall fall into the ditch and there perish together O consider therefore what I have here written to undeceive your judgements and reforme your practise consider that Dominion Principality Regality Magistracy and Nobility are founded in the very Law of Nature and Gods owne institution who subjected not onely all beasts and living creatures to the soveraigne Lordship of man to whom hee gave Dominion over them Gen. 1. 28 29. c. 9. 2 3 5. by vertue whereof men enjoy farre greater Priviledges then beasts but likewise one man unto another as i Gen. 3. 16. Exod. 20. 12. Ephes 5. 22. to 30. c. 6. 1. to 10. Rom. 13. 1 2 3. Tit. 3. 1. Col. 3. 20 22. 1 Pet. ● 13 14 18 c. 3. 15. Heb. 13. 17. Iosh 1. 16 17 18. Matth. 8 9. children to their Parents Wives to their Husbands Servants to their Masters Subjects to their Kings Princes Magistrates Souldiers to their Captaines Mariners to their Ship-Masters Schollers to their Tutors People to their Ministers which order if denied or disturbed will bring absolute and speedy confusion in all Families Corporations States Kingdomes Armies Garrisons Schooles Churches and dissolve all humane Societies which subsist by order and subordination onely to one another and seeing Monarchy Royalty Principality Nobility yea Titles of Honour and Nobility as Kings Princes Dukes Lords c. are as ancient almost as the world it selfe universally received approved among all Nations whatsoever under heaven See M●st●r Seldens Titles of honour Dr. Hu●●●●es and others of Nob●l●ty Catane●s C●ologus gloriae mundi and honoured with speciall Priviledges as not only all k● eminent Authours and experience manitest but these ensuing Scripture Texts Gen. 12. 15. c. 14. 1. to 10. c. 17. 6. 16. c. 20. 2. c. 21 22 23. c. 25. 16. c. 26. 1. 8. 26. c. 36. 15 16 17 18 29 30 31 to ●3 c. 9. 1 2. c. 41. 40 to 47. c. 47. 2● 26. Exod. 1. 8. Numb 20. 14 c. c 21 1 1● 21 33. c. 22. 7 10 14 15 40. c. 23. 17. c. 7. 2 3 10. c. 16. 2. c. 27. 2. c. 32. 2. Dent. 17. 14 15 16. Iosh 1. 16 17 18. c. 5. 1. c. 8. 9 10 11 12. Iudg. 9. 6 18. 1 Sam. 8. 5 6. 2 sam 11. 2. 1 Kin. 4. 34. c. 10 15 28 29. c. 20. 16. c. 23. 22. Iob. 3. 14. c. 36. 7. Psal 2. 2. 10. Ps 62. 12 14 29. Ps 72. 10. Ps 102. 15. Ps 136. 17 18. Ps 138. 4. Prov. 8. 15 16. Prov. 30. 31. Eccles 10 16 17. Iudg. 3. 5. c. 16. 8 1 Sam. 5. 11. c. 29. 2 6 7. Dan. 4. 36. c. 5. 9 10 23. c. 6. 27. Mat. 8. 9 Mar. 6. 21. c. 10. 42. 1 Cor. 8. 5. Rom. 61. 1 2 3 4. 1 Tim. 2. 1 2. Tit. 3. 1 2. 1 Pet. 2. 13 14 15. Acts 9. 27. which I wish our Sectaries Lovellers and Lilburnists to consider and study with the others forecited it will be a meer desperate folly and madnesse in any man to prove Antipodes to this instituiion of God Nature Nations to run quite contrary to all meu and to levell the head neck shoulders to the feet the tallect Cedars to the lowest Shru●s the roofe of every building to the foundation stones the Su●ne Moone Starres Heavens to the very Earth and center and even men themselves to the meanest beasts I shall therefore conclude with Saint Pauls serious admonition which these refractory persons have quite forgotten Rom. 13. 1 2 3. Let every soul be subject to the higher Power for there is no po●er but of God the powers that be are ordained of God whosoever therfore resisteth much more oppugneth abolisheth the Power resisteth oppugneth abolisheth THE ORDINANCE OF GOD and t●ey that resist oppugne or endeavour to abolish these powers shall receive to themselves DAMNATION for Rulers are not a terrour to good workes but to the evill and wherefore YE MVST NEEDS BE SVBIECT NOT ONLY FOR WRATH but also FOR CONSCIENCE SAKE And for this cause pay you tribute also for they are Gods Ministers attending continually on this very thing Render therefore to all such higher Powers their dues tribute to whom ribute custome to whom custome feare to whom feare HONOVR to whom HONOVR IS DUE which Saint Peter likewise seconds almost in the selfe-same words which you may doe well to peruse and study 1 Pet. 2. 12. to 20. and then you will never dare to question or dispute any more the Power Iudicatory Priviledges of the Right Honourable House of Peers much lesse to Revile and Libell against their persons as now you doe to the infinite Scandall of your Schismaticall faction and Religion it selfe which you professe onely in shew but deny in deed and practise FINIS

right to award Judgement in these cases without the King or them then which a fuller and clearer proofe cannot be desired In the self-same Parliament 1. R. ● num 41 42 43. Dame Alice Piers was brought before THE LORDS and charged by Sir Richard le Scrope with sundry misdemeanors which she denied hereupon divers Witnesses were examined against her Whereupon JVDGEMENT WAS GIVEN BY THE LORDS AGAINST HER that she should be banished and forfeit all her lands goods and tenements whatsoevèr To this Judgement neither King nor Commons were parties but the Lords only To these I might adde the cases of c See the doom of 〈◊〉 and treachery 〈◊〉 14 15. where the record is transcribed Sir William de Eleuham Sir Thomas Trivet Sir Henry de Ferriers and Sir William Farnden Knights and Robert Fitz Ralph Esquire Rot. Parl. 7. R. 2. num 24. sentenced and condemned by judgement of the Lords in Parliament pronounced by the Chancellour for selling the Castle of Burbugh with the armes and amm●nition in it to the Kings enemies without the Kings license 21. R. 2. Parl. Rot. Plac. Coronae num 27. where Sir Robert Pleasington is adjudged a Traytor after his death by the King by ●SSENT OF THE LORDS and num 15. 16. Sir Thomas Mortimers case num 17. Sir John Cobhams case * 31. H. 6. n. 45. 64. 65. ● 3. n. 16. to ●8 and num 28. Henry Bonoits case condemned in like manner of treason by the Lords with hundreds of Presidents more I shall only cite three more at large which are punctuall In the Parliament of 8. R. 2. n. 12. Walter Sybell of London was arrested and brought into the Parliament before the Lords at the suit of Robert de Veer Earl of Oxford for slandering him to the Duke of Lancaster and other Nobles for maintenance Walter denied not but that he said that certain there named recovered against him the said Walter and that by maintenance of the said Earl as he thought The Earl there present protested himself to be innocent and put himself upon the triall Walter thereupon was committed to Prison by the Lords and the next day he submitted himself and desired the Lords to be a mean for him saying he could not accuse him whereupon THE LORDS CONVICTED and FINED HIM FIVE HVNDRED MARKS TO THE SAID EARL for the which and for his fine and ransome he was committed to prison BY THE LORDS A direct case in point In the second Parliament in 7. R. 2. num 13. to 19. Iohn Cavendish a Fishmonger of London accused Michael de la Pool Knight Lord Cha●cellour of England first before the Commons and afterward before the Lords for bribery and injustice and that he entere●●●nto a Bond of x. l. to Iohn Ottard a Clerk to the said Chancellour which he was to give for his good successe in the businesse in part of payment w●●●eof he br●ught Herring and Sturgeon to Ottard and ye was delayed a●d could have no justice at the Chancellours h●nds and upon hearing he cause and examining wi●● o●fes upon Oath before THE LORDS the Chancellour was cleared The Chancellour thereupon required reparation for so great a slander the Lords being then troubled with other weighty matters let the Fish-monger to Bail and referred the matter to be ordered by the Judges who upon hearing the whole matter condemned Cavendish in three thousand marks for his slanderous complaint against the said Chancellour and adjudged him to prison till he had paid the same to the Chancellour and made fine and ransome to the King also which the Lords confirmed In the Parliament of 15. R. 2. nu 21. Iohn Stradwell of Begsteed in the County of Sussex was committed to the fleet by JVDGEMENT OF THE LORDS there to remain during the Kings pleasure for that he informed the Parliament that the Archbishop of Canterbury had excommunicated him and his neighbours wrongfully for a temporall cause appertaining to the Crown and Common Law wh●ch was ADIVDGED BY THE LORDS upon examination and hearing to BE VNTRVE These three eminent Presidents to which many more might be added of the Lords fining and imprisoning meere Commons only for slandering Peeres of Parliament even by false accusations against them in Parliament by way of complaint will ●●stify the Lords proceedings against Lilburn and Ov●rton for their professed Libells both against their Persons and Jurisdictions too To proceed to latter times in Parliaments of 18. and 21. Jacobi and 3. Car. not only the Lord * Cook 4. Instit p. 23. Chancellour Bacon and the Earl of Middlesex Lord Treasurer upon complaint of the Commons were censured and judged by the Lords alone but likewise Sir Giles Mompesson Sir Iohn Michell and Dr Manwering all Commoners JUDICIALLY SENTENCED Doctor Pocklinton and Doctor Bray even for erroneous Books and Sermons were sentenced this Parliament by the Lords alone since these Master Clement Walker Esquire was imprisoned in the Tower and fined by the Lords for some words pretended to be spoken against the Lord Say and within these few moneths on● Morrice and foure or five more of his confederates were censured fined and impr●soned by the Lords alone for forging an Act of Parliament upon Sir Adam Littletons complaint with all the Commons privity or consents and above one hundred Commoner more have been imprisoned by them or fined this very Session of Parliament for breach of Priviledge contempts or misdemeanours by the Lords alone without the Commons yet no demurrer nor exceptions were taken by them or the Commons to their Iurisdiction who applauded this their Justice in some of these cases From all these cleare confessions of the Commons themselves in Parliament and punctuall presidents in print in former late Parliaments and in this now sitting it is undeniable That the King and Lords joyntly and the Lords severally without the King have an indubitable right of Judicature without the Common● vested in them not only of Peers themselves but likewise of C●mmoners in all extraordinary cases of Treason Felony Trespasse and other Misdemeanors triable only in Parliament which hath been constantly acknowledged practised and submitted to without dispute much more then have they such a just and rightfull power in case of breach of their owne priviledges of d Cooke 4 Instit p. 15. which none are or can be Judges but themselves alone And to deny them such a power is to make the Highest Court of Iudicature in the Realme inferiour to the Kings Bench and all other Courts of Justice who have power to judge and try the persons and causes of Commoners and to commit and fine them for contempts and breaches of Priviledges as our e See Brooke and Ashes Tables Tit. Contempts Fines pur Contempt Imprisonment Law bookes resolve and every mans experience can testifie The Lords right of Judicature being thus fully evicted against the false and ignorant pretences of illiterate Sectaries altogether unacquainted with our Histories and Records of Parliament

Iudicature and this is all which is proved by 15. E. 2. Hugh Spencers case who was judged and banished by an Act of Parliament intituled Exilium Hugonis le Spencer printed in old Magna Chartaes as Sir Edward Cooke himselfe reports in Calvins case 7. Report f. 11. b. and the Lord Audlyes case 12. E. 2. is the same the Commons having no right to judge them being Peers by the very * See Cooke 2. Instit f. 49. 50. 51. Statute of Magna Charta c. 29. but only the Peer except in a Legislative way by Act or Bill Secondly That in all cases of difficultie where the King shall please to demand the advise and opinions of both Houses of Parliament joyntly there both of them may and ought to joyne in delivering their opinions and Judgements of the case or thing propounded and this is all that * Cooke 3. I●q● p 7. where is Case of ●●grave is cited at large Sir Nicholas de Seagraves case proves 31. E. 1. rot 33. Who being charged in Parliament in presence of the King Earles Barons and OTHERS OF THE KINGS COUNCEL not the Commons or Burgesses but the Iudges and Kings learned Councell at Law * See the Free-holders Grand Inquest 2. 39. 40. 41. 42. and Privy Councell who were assistants to the Lords as I conceive and others of his Privy Councell which Sir Edward Cooke would have to expresse the Commons in Parliament then and there present that the King in the wars of Scotland being among his enemies Nicholas Seagrave his leigman who held of the King by Homage and fealty and served him for his ayd in that warre did maliciously move discord and contention without cause with John de Crombewell charging him with many enormous crimes and offered to prove it upon his body To whom the said John answered that hee would answer him in the Kings Court c. and thereupon gave him his faith After which Nicholas withdrew himselfe from the Kings host and ayd leaving the King in danger of his enemies and adjourned the said John to defend himselfe in the Court of the King of France and prefixed him a certaine day and so as much as in him was subjected and submitted the Dominion of the King and Kingdome to the subjection of the King of France and to effect this hee tooke his journey towards Dover to passe over into France All which he confessed and submitted himselfe therein de alto et basso to the Kings pleasure And hereupon the King willing HABERE AVISAMENIUM to have the advise of the EARLES BARONS LORDS magnatum and OTHERS OF HIS COUNCELL enjoyned them upon the Homage fealty and allegiance wherewith they were obliged to him quod ipsi fideliter CONSVLERENT they should faithfully ADVISE HIM what punishment should be inflicted for such a fact thus confessed Qui omnes habito super hoc diligenti tractatu avisamento c. Who all having had thereupon diligent debate and advise having considered and understood all things contained in the said fact DICVNT not by way of Iudgement judicially pronounced but of answer to the Kings question propounded and as their opinion of the cause Said that this fact DESERVES losse of life and members c. So as this offence notes Sir Edward Cooke was then adjudged in Parliament to be High Treason But under his favour First here was no Judgement at all given against the party himselfe but only an opinion and advise touching his case not pending judicially in Parliament by way of Inditement or Impeachment but voluntarily proposed by the King in answer to the Kings question and so it can be no proofe of any actuall proper Judicature vested in both Houses Secondly For ought appeares this question was only propounded to the Earles Lords Barons and the Kings Councell that assisted them and so only to the House of Peers not to the commons and answered resolved only by them * See the Freeholders grand Inquest p. 39. 40. 41. 42. aliorum de Concilio suo not expressing nor including the Commons as I apprehend being never so intitled in any Parliament Records for ought I can find And then it followes that the LORDS ONLY IN THAT AGE were the Judges even of Commoners cases Thirdly Admit the Commons were included yet it proves only a right of advising and delivering their opinions with the Lords when required by the King not of judging or pronouncing sentence Fourthly Sir Edward Cooke citing this president to prove That both Houses together have power of Iudicature must grant that even in 33. E. 1. there were two distinct Houses of Parliament who upon speciall occasions as now at conferences c. met and advised together and therefore the division of the Houses was before Edward the third his raigne and very probable as ancient as this summoning of Knights Citizens and Burgesses of the Parliament which some make no ancienter then King Henry the first or King Henry the third In the 40. yeare of his reigne Father to King Edward the first So as this president makes quite against the Levellers and Lilburnians designes The Freeholders Garnd Inquest p. 13. 14. 15. and opinions Fourthly Sir Iohn at Lees case 42. E. 3. num 20. said to be adjudged by the Lords and Commons is somewhat mistaken For the record only mentions That the 21 day of May the King gave thanks to the Lords and Commons for their coming and ayd granted on which day ALL THE LORDS SVNDRY OF THE COMMONS dined with the ●ing After which dinner Sir Iohn at Lee was brought before the King LORDS COMMONS next aforesaid who dined with the King to answer certaine objections made against him by William Latymer about the wardship of Robert Latymer that Sir John being of power had sent for him to London where by duresse of imprisonment he inforced the said William to surrender his estate unto him which done some other Articles were ob●ected against the said Sir Iohn Of which for that he could not sufficiently purge himselfe HE was committed to the Tower of London there to remaine till he had made fine and ransome at the Kings pleasure and command given to the Constable of the Tower to keep him accordingly And then the said Lords and Commons departed After which he was brought before the Kings Councell at Westminster which COVNSELL ORDERED the said ward to be released into the Kings hands So as this record proves not this judgement was given in the Parliament house nor that the Lords and Commons adjudged Sir Iohn but rather the King and his Councell in the presence of the Lords and Commons Fifthly The judgement given against the Lord Latymer 15. E. 3. Parl. rot num 27. which was for his default in government against the profit of the King and Realm procuring of grants to the destruction of the Staple and Towne of Calayes and levying Impositions upon woolls was given in full Parliament BY THE BISHOPS and LORDS who