Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	court_n	justice_n	writ_n	1,630	5	9.1550	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A77472	A brief state of the case and tryal had in the Kings Bench, in the assize brought for the Office of Chief Clerk for inrolling of pleas in the said court; between William Bridgeman, Esq; plantiff; and Rowland Holt, Esq; and Edward Coleman, Gent. defendants	Bridgeman, William, Esq.; Holt, Rowland, Esq.; Coleman, Edward, gent.; England and Wales. Court of King's Bench.	1694 (1694)	Wing B4648A; ESTC R211057	7,199	8

Wightwicke dyed soon after and Sir Robert Henly enjoyed it under that Grant 32 year Note In every one of these Records except the last after the mention of the Surrender to the Chief Justice are these words To whom of Right it doth belong to grant that Office to whomsoever he pleaseth when it shall be void c. It was then insisted by the Defendants and proved that there was three Officers considerable in the Court of Kings Bench all of the nature of Clerks The first and chiefest is the Clerk of the Crown called sometimes Coronator Attornat Domini Regis c. His business is to draw all Indictments Informations c. in Pleas of the Crown and Criminal matters This Officer being the Chief Clerk in this Court is always made by Patent under the Great Seal The second Officer is this Prothonotary or Chief Clerk for enrolling Pleas between party and party in Civil matters He and his Under Clerks enroll all Declarations Pleadings c. in Civil Causes especially where the proceedings are upon Bill This Officer files in his Office all Bills Declarations c. and all the Writs of this Court in Civil matters are made by him and his Under Clerks and tested by the Chief Justice and he hath the custody of all Returns of Elegits Executions Scire fac.'s and the fileing all Bails All which are in the eye and Judgment of the Law in the hands of the Chief Justice whose Clerk in truth this Officer is The third Officer is the Custos Bre. who keeps all the Rolls and Records of Judgments in this Court which are yet said to be in the Custody of the Chief Justice and this Office is in the gift and disposal of the Chief Justice when void It was further shewed by the Defendants that in the Stat. of E. 6. against the Sale of Offices c. there is yet a Salvo to the two Chief Justices and Justices of Assize to dispose of the Offices in their disposition as they used formerly and ever since that Statute these Offices of Chief Clerk to enroll the Pleas c. and the Custos Bre. have without controll been disposed by the Chief Justice of this Court and are in truth the only considerable Offices in his gift It was observed that in the Grant of this Office to Mr. Bridgman the Plaintiff it is recited that Henly and Wightwicke were debit modo admitted to this Office yet they never had any Grant from the Crown nor no other Grant save that of the Chief Justice before-mentioned And then to prove that the Defendants have a good Title to the Office the Grant of the now Chief Justice to them for their lives was produced and proved that they were admitted and sworn in Court To answer all this Evidence The Plaintiffs Council produced the Copy of an Act of Parliament which was made 15 E. 3. to this effect It is consented that if any of the Offices aforesaid which are other great Offices mentioned in the Act or the Controller or Chief Clerk in the Common Bench or Kings Bench by death or other cause be ousted of their Office the King with the consent of the great men e. shall put another fit person in such Office From whence the Plaintiffs Councel would infer that the King had a right to grant this Office and that this Act was declaratory of such his right and that all the Grants by the Chief Justices since were but usurpations on the Crown but no usage of granting it by the Chief Justices how long soever such usage hath been would prevail against the Kings right To this the Defendants answered That this Act was repealed which appears by the Statute of 17 E. 3. Note The reasons of the Repeal are expressed because the said Statute of 15 E. 3. is contray to the Law and Usages of the Realm and the Rights and Prerogatives of the King But for a full and plain answer Stat. 2 H. 4. made against the extortion of this Officer on the Crown side calls him Clerk of the Crown they shewed that the Office in question was not the Office mentioned in that Act for that Act mentions the Chief Clerk in the Kings Bench which is the Clerk of the Crown who is not only called the Chief Clerk but in reallity is the Chief Clerk in that Court and hath the precedency of this Officer both in Court and elsewhere And the Officer whose Office is now in question was never so much as called Chief Clerk in the Kings Bench But it 's true he is the chief of those Clerks that are for the inrolling of Civil Pleas in that Court and therefore is called Chief Clerk for the inrolling of Pleas to distinguish him from the Under Clerks whose business is likewise to inroll Pleas there And the Defendants further insisted that the usage doth demonstrate that this Chief Clerk in the Kings Bench in that Act named and intended was the Clerk of the Crown in that Court for that Office hath ever since been granted when void by the Kings Letters Patents and that it was not this Officer that is named and intended by that Act for that this Office was never enjoyed one day by vertue of any Grant from the Crown And the Defendants further insisted that it was a scandal and unworthy imputation upon all those Chief Justices persons of clear and unspotted reputations to suggest that they would impose upon the Crown and usurp upon it if the right of granting this Office had been in the Crown And Sir Robert Heath that was then the Kings Sollicitor took a grant of the Office in question from the Chief Justice and upon his Admittance the Chief Justices Right of granting is asserted upon Record And all this Evidence on both sides being given and fully heard the Court briefly summed up the same and particularly the Evidence of the Act 15 E. 3. and what was urged from the same by the Plaintiff and the Defendants answer thereunto and left the matter to the Jury upon the whole Evidence And this at the desire of the Plaintiffs Councel The Jury withdrew and after some time of Consideration gave a Verdict for the Defendants Upon this Verdict given the Plaintiffs Councel prayed leave to bring in a Bill of Exceptions and after several days meeting by the Plaintiffs Councel they produced in Court and tendred to the three Judges to be sealed a Parchment writing which they called a Bill of Exceptions formed in such a manner and stuffed with such matter as was never before known and is hoped that for the honour of Justice and for the sake of Property will never again be offered in any case In which after a recital of the Record of the Declaration and Issue in the Cause it is alledged that the Plaintiffs Councel produced in Evidence the Grant of the Office to the Plaintiff and shewed to the Court and Jury that the Office is of the grant of the and Crown