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	king_n	plea_n	2,093	5	10.1113	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A38203	Articles of accusation, exhibited by the Commons House of Parliament now assembled, against Sr. John Bramston Knight, Sr. Robert Berkley Knight, justices of His Majesties Bench, Sr. Francis Crawley Knight, one of the justices of the Common-Pleas, Sr. Humphrey Davenport Knight, Sr. Richard Weston Knight, and Sr. Thomas Trevor Knight, barons of His Majesties Exchequer	England and Wales. Parliament. House of Commons.; Bramston, John, Sir, 1577-1654.; Berkeley, Robert, Sir, 1584-1656.; Crawley, Francis, Sir, 1573 or 4-1649.; Davenport, Humphrey, Sir, 1566-1645.; Weston, Richard, Sir, 1579?-1652.; Trevor, Thomas, Sir, 1586-1656.	1641 (1641)	Wing E2521; ESTC R6725	30,776	51

such case your Majestie is the sole Iudge both of the danger and when and how the same is to bee prevented and avoyded Iohn Brampston Iohn Finch Humphrey Davenport Iohn Denham Richard Hutton William Iones George Crooke Thomas Trevor George Vernon Robert Berkley Francis Crawley Richard Weston 3 That he then being one of the Iustices of the said Court of common-Common-pleas delivered an opinion in the Exchequer Chamber against Iohn Hampden Esquire in case of Ship-money that hee the said Iohn Hampden upon the matter and substance of the case was chargeable with the money then in question a Copie of which proceedings and judgement the Commons of this present Parliament have already delivered to your Lordships 4 That hee then being one of the Justices of the said Court of common-Common-pleas declared and published in the Exchequer Chamber and Westminster Circuits where he went Judge That the Kings Right to Ship-money was so inherent a Right in the Crown as an Act of Parliament could not take it away And with divers malitious speeches enveighed against threatned and discountenanced such as refused to pay Ship-money All which opinions and judgements contained in the first second and third Articles are destructive to the fundamentall Lawes of this Realme the Subjects right of propertie and contrary to former resolutions in Parliament and to the Petition of Right which said resolutions and Petition of Right were well known to him And the said Commons by protestation saving to themselves only the Liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Francis Crawley and also of replying to the answer that he the said Sir Francis Crawley shall make unto the said Articles or any of them or of offering proofe of the premisses or of any of their impeachments or accusations that shall be exhibited by them as the Case shall according to the course of Parliaments require Doe pray that the said Sir Francis Crawley one of the Justices of the said Court of Common-pleas may bee put to answer to all and every the premisses and that such proceedings examinations trialls and judgements may bee upon every of them had and used as is agreeable to Law and Justice Articles of the House of Commons in the name of themselves and of all the Commons of England against Sir Humphrey Davenport Knight Lord chiefe Baron of his Majesties Court of Exchequer impeaching him as followeth THat whereas in the moneth of October in the fourth yeare of his Majesties Reigne the Farmours and Officers of the Custome-house having seized great quantities of Currants being the goods of Samuel Vassall Merchant and having conveyed them into certaine Store-houses at the Custome-house and detained them because the said Samuel Vassall refused to pay an imposition of five shillings six pence upon every hundred weight of the said Currants pretended to be due and demanded by the said Farmours and Officers on his Majesties behalfe for the said Currants whereas no such imposition was due or payable for the same but the said imposition was and is against the Lawes of this Realme And whereas also in Michaelmas Terme in the said fourth yeare of his Majesties Reigne his Majesties then Attorney generall exhibited an information by English Bill in the Exchequer against the said Samuel Vassall setting forth that King James by his Letters Patents dated tertio Novem. in the second yeare of his Reigne did command the said imposition of 5. s. 6. d. upon every hundred weight of Currants should bee demanded and received And that his Majestie that now is by his Letters Patents dated the six and twentieth day of July in the second yeare of his Reigne did by advise of his Privie Councell declare his will and pleasure be that Subsidies Customes and Impost should be levied in such manner as they were in the time of King James and the same and the Farmes thereof to continue untill it might receive a setling by Parliament and commanded the levying and receiving the same accordingly and that the said Samuel Vassall before the said first day of October then last before the said Information exhibited did bring into the port of London in ships foure thousand six hundred thirty eight hundred weight of Currants and that Richard Carmarthen Surveyour in the said port of London the said first day of October demanded of the said Samuel Vassall the said Imposition of five shillings six pence for every hundred weight of the said Currants and that the said Samuel Vassall refused to pay the said imposition and unjustly detained it from the King To which Information the said Samuel Vassall appeared and pleaded the Statute of Magna Charta and the Statute of De Tallagio non concedendo and that he was a Subject borne under the Kings Allegiance and a Merchant of London using that trade and that the said summe of five shillings six pence upon every hundred weight of Currants was and is malum taluetum and not antiqua seu recta consuetudo and that it was imposed without assent of Parliament to which Plea the said Attourney Generall demurred in Law and the said Samuel Vassall joyned in demurer with him and when the said cause came to bee argued viz. in Trinity Terme in the sixth yeare of his Majesties Reigne the said Sir Humphrey Davenport being then Lord chiefe Baron of his Majesties said Court of Exchequer did contrary to his oath and contrary to the Lawes of this Realme and to the great impoverishment of the said Samuel Vassall publickly deny to heare the Counsell of the said Samuel Vassall to argue for him and said that the Case of the said Samuel Vassall would fall under the same rule with the case of one Bates and therefore was already judged and when the Councell of the said Samuel Vassall answering that they had nothing to doe with Bates his Case but desired to argue for M. Vassall the said Sir Humphrey Davenport replied that they knew the opinion of the Court and should be heard no further and said that the King was in possession and that they meaning the said Court of Exchequer would keep him in possession And the said Sir Humphrey Davenport shortly after did together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court of Exchequer imprison the said Samuel Vassall for not paying such summes of money as were pretended by the said Officers of the Custome-house to bee due to his Majestie and did delay the said Samuel Vassall from time to time from having restitution of his said goods being often in Court moved thereto with intention to force the said Samuel Vassall to pay the said unlawfull imposition and did also give his opinion and judgement upon the said Information for the King and against the said Samuel Vassall and by severall orders for that purpose made did continue the possession of the said goods in the King and the said Samuel Vassall could never obtaine any restitution at all of his said goods whereas it

ARTICLES OF ACCUSATION EXHIBITED By the Commons House of Parliament now assembled AGAINST Sr. John Bramston Knight Justice of his Majesties Bench Sr. Robert Berkley Knight Justice of his Majesties Bench Sr. Francis Crawley Knight one of the Justices of the Common-pleas Sr. Humphrey Davenport Knight Baron of his Majesties Exchequer Sr. Richard Weston Knight Baron of his Majesties Exchequer and Sr. Thomas Trevor Knight Baron of his Majesties Exchequer 2 CHRON. 19.6 7. Jehosophat said to the Judges Take heed what ye do for ye judge not for man but for the Lord wherefore let the feare of the Lord be upon you for there is no iniquitie with the Lord our God nor taking of gifts Printed for I. H. 1641. The Articles of impeachment of Sir Robert Berkley Knight one of the Justices of the Court of the Kings Bench by the Commons in this present Parliament assembled in their owne name and in the name of all the Commons of England in maintenance of their accusation whereby he standeth charged with high treason and other great misdemeanors INprimis that the said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Justices of the said Court of Kings Bench hath traiterously and wickedly endevoured to subvert the fundamentall Lawes and established government of the Realme of England and instead thereof to introduce an Arbitrarie and Tyrannicall government against Law which he hath declared by traiterous and wicked words opinions judgements practises and actions appearing in the severall Articles ensuing 2 Whereas by the Statute made in the five twentieth year of the raigne of the late King Henry the eighth prices of Victualls are appointed to be rated in such manner as in the said Statute is declared But it is manifest by the said Statute Corne is none of the victuals thereby intended Neverthelesse some ill-affected persons endevouring to bring a charge upon the subjects contrary to Law did surmise that the prices of Corne might be rated and set according to the direction of that Statute and thereupon great gaine might be raised to his Majestie by licences and dispensations for selling Corne at other prices And a command from his Majestie being procured to the Judges and sent to them by William Noye Esquire his Majesties then Attorney generall to deliver their opinions touching the question whether Corne was such victuals as was intended to have the price rated within the said Statute In answer to which demand the said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of his Majesties Justices of the Court of Kings Bench in furtherance of the said unlawfull charge endevoured to be imposed as aforesaid the 30. day of November in the 8. year of his now Majesties Raigne did deliver his opinion that Corne was such victuall as was intended to have the price rated within the said Statute which said opinion was contrary to Law and to the plaine sence and meaning of the said Statute and contrary to his owne knowledge and was given and delivered by him with a purpose and intention that the said unlawfull charge might be imposed upon the Subject 3 That an information being preferred in the Court of Star-chamber by they said William Noy his Majesties then Attorney generall against John Overman and fifteen other Soape makers Defendants charging them with severall pretended offences contrary to divers Letters Patents and Proclamations touching the making and uttering Soape and using the trade of Soape-makers and other offences in the said Information mentioned whereunto the Defendants did plead and demurre as to part and answer to other part of the said Information And the said Plea and demurter being over-ruled for that the particulars therein insisted upon would appeare more fully after answer and proofe therefore the Defendants were ordered to answer without prejudice and were to be admitted to such exceptions to the said Information and advantages of the matter of the Plea and demurrer upon the hearing as shall be materiall and accordingly the Defendants did put in their answers and set forth severall Acts of Parliament Letters Patents Charters Customes and Acts of Common-councell of the Citie of London and other matters materially conducing to their defence and in conclusion pleaded not guiltie The said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench upon the 30. day of March in the eighth yeare of his Majesties now raigne upon an Order of Reference to him and others by the said Court of Star-chamber to consider of the impertinencie of the said answers did certifie the said Court of Star-chamber that the whole answers excepting the foure words and ten last lines should bee expunged leaving thereby no more in substance of the said answers then the Plea of not guiltie And after upon a Reference to him and others by order of the said Court of the impertinencie of the Interrogatories and depositions of witnesses taken on the Defendants part in the same case the said Sir Robert Berkley upon the second day of May in the eighth yeare of his now Majesties raigne certified that nine and thirtie of the said Interrogatories and the depositions upon them taken should be suppressed with answers except as aforesaid and depositions although the same did containe the said Defendants most materiall defence Yet were expounged and suppressed according to the said Certificates both which said Certificates were contrary to Law and Justice and contrary to his the said Sir Robert Berkley's owne knowledge and contrary to the said former order whereby the advantages were saved to the Defendants as aforesaid And by reason thereof the said John Overman and the said other fifteene Defendants were sentenced in the said Court of Star-chamber to be committed prisoners to the Fleete and disabled from using their trade of Soape-makers And one of them fined in a thousand five hundred pounds two of them in a thousand pound a peece foure of them in a thousand Marke a peece the rest five hundred pounds a peece which fines were estreated into the Exchequer without any mitigation And the said Defendants according to the said sentence were imprisoned and deprived of their trade and livelihood tending to the utter ruine of the said Defendants and to the overthrow of free trade and contrary to the libertie of Subjects 4 That hee the said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench and having taken an oath for the due administration of Justice according to the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme to his Majesties liege people on or about the last of December subscribed an opinion in haec verba I am of opinion that as where the benefit doth more particularly redound to the good of the Ports or Maritime parts as in case of Pyracie or Depredations upon the Seas there the charge hath beene and may be lawfully imposed upon them according to presidents of former times so where the good and safety of the kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole kingdome in danger of

which his Majestie is the onely Judge there the charge of the defence ought to be borne by all the Realme in generall this I hold agreeable both to Law and reason 5 That he the said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench and duly sworne as aforesaid in February 1636. subscribed an extrajudiciall opinion in answer to questions in a letter from his Majestie in haec verba Charles R. When the good and safetie of the kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole kingdome in danger whether may not the King by writ under the great Seale of England command all the Subjects of this kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Ships with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as hee shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the kingdome from such danger and perill and by Law compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse And whether in such case is not the King the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same is to bee prevented and avoided C. R. May it please your most excellent Majestie We have according to your Majesties command severally every man by himselfe and all of us together taken into serious consideration the Case and Question signed by your Majestie and inclosed in your Royall letter and we are of opinion that when the good and safetie of the kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole kingdome in danger your Majestie may by writ under the great Seale of England command all your Subjects of this your kingdome at their charge to provide and furnish such number of Ships with Men Victuall and Munition and for such time as your Majestie shall thinke fit for the defence and safeguard of the kingdome from such danger and perill And that by Law your Majestie may compell the doing thereof in case of refusall or refractorinesse And we are also of opinion that in such case your Majestie is the sole Judge both of the danger and when and how the same is to bee prevented and avoided John Brampston John Finch Humphrey Davenport John Denham Richard Hutton William Jones George Crooke Thomas Trevor George Vernon Robert Berkley Francis Crawley Richard Weston 6 That he the said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench and duely sworne as aforesaid did on the 〈◊〉 deliver his opinion in the Exchequer Chamber against John Hampden Esquire in the Case of Ship-money That he the said John Hampden upon the matter and substance of the Case was chargeable with the money then in question A copie of which proceeding and judgement the Commons of this present Parliament have delivered to your Lordships 7 That he the said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench and one of the Justices of Assize for the Countie of Yorke did at the Assizes held at Yorke in Lent 1636. deliver in his charge to the grand Jurie that it was a lawfull and inseparable flower of the Crowne for the King to command not only the Maritime Counties but also those that were In-land to finde ships for the defence of the Kingdome And then likewise falsely and malitiously affirmed that it was not his single judgement but the judgement of all his brethren witnessed by their subscriptions And then also said that there was a rumour that some of his Brethren that had subscribed were of a contrary judgement but it was a base and unworthy thing for any to give his hand contrary to his heart and then wished for his owne part that his hand might rot from his arme that was guiltie of any such crime when as he knew that Mr. Justice Hutton and Mr. Justice Crooke who had subscribed were of a contrary opinion and was present when they were perswaded to subscribe and did subscribe for conformitie onely because the major number of the Judges had subscribed And hee the said Sir Robert Berkley then also said that in some Cases the Judges were above an Act of Parliament which said false and malitious words were uttered as aforesaid with intent and purpose to countenance and maintaine the said unjust opinions and to terrifie his Majesties Subjects that should refuse to pay Ship-money or seeke any remedie by Law against the said unjust and illegall taxation 8 That whereas Richard Chambers Merchant having commenced a suit for trespasse and false imprisonment against Sir Edward Bromfield Knight for imprisoning him the said Chambers for refusing to pay Ship-money in the time that the said Sir Edward Bromfield was Lord Maior of the Citie of London in which suit the said Sir Edward Bromfield did make a speciall justification The said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench in Trinitie Terme last then sitting on the Bench in the said Court upon debate of the said Case betweene the said Chambers and Sir Edward Bromfield said openly in the said Court that there was a rule of Law and a rule of government And that many things which might not be done by the rule of Law might be done by the rule of government and would not suffer the point of legality of Ship-money to be argued by the said Chambers his Councell all which opinions declarations words and speeches contained in the third fourth fifth sixth seventh and eighth Articles are destructive to the fundamentall Lawes of this Realme the Subjects right of property and contrary to former resolutions in Parliament and to the petition of right which resolutions in Parliament and petition of right were well knowne to him and resolved and enacted when he was the Kings Sergeant at law and attendant in the Lords house of Parliament 9 That he the said Sir Robert Berkley then being one of the Judges of the Court of Kings Bench and being in commission of the Peace and duly sworne to execute the office of a Justice of Peace in the County of Hertford on or about the seventh of January 1638. at which time the generall Sessions of the Peace for the said Countie were there holden The said Sir Robert Berkley then and there sitting on the Bench did revile and threaten the grand Jurie returned to serve at the said Sessions for presenting the removall of the Communion Table in All Saints Church in Hertford aforesaid out of the place where it anciently and usually stood and setting it Altar-wayes against the Lawes of this Realme in that Case made and provided as an innovation in matters concerning the Church the said grand Jurie having delivered to them in charge at the said Sessions by Master Sergeant Atkins a Justice of Peace of the said County of Hertford that by the oath they had taken they were bound to present all innovations concerning Church matters And he the said Sir Robert Berkley compelled the fore-man of the Jurie to tell him who gave him any such

to compell those who are of able body and of able estates to arme themselves and such as should not be able of bodies but of ability in estate to assesse them according to their estates to contribute towards the charge of arraying and arming others being able of body and not able in estate to arme themselves And such persons as should be contrariant to commit to prison there to remaine untill the King should take further order therein And whereas the Earle of Exeter by vertue of his Majesties Commission to him directed for the arraying and arming of a certaine number of persons in the County of Northampton hath assest William Pargiter being a man unfit of body for that service but being of estate and ability fit to contribute amongst others to pay the summe of five shillings towards the arraying and arming of others of able bodies and wanting ability to array and arme themselves And whereas we have received information from the said Earle that the said William Pargiter hath not onely in a wilfull and disobedient manner refused to pay the said money assessed upon him towards so important a service to the disturbance and hinderance of the necessary defence of this kingdome but also by his ill example hath mis-led many others and as we have just cause to beleeve hath practised to seduce others from that ready obedience which they owe and would otherwise have yeelded to his Majesties just command for the publike defence of his person and kingdom which we purpose with all convenient speed to enquire further of and examine These are therefore to will and require you to take into your custody the persons of the said William Pargiter and Samuel Danvers and them safely to keepe prisoners till further order from this Board or untill by due course of Law they shall be delivered Yet he the said Sir Robert Berkley being desired to baile the said Pargiter and Danvers remitted them where they remained prisoners till the ninth of November last or thereabouts although the said Jennings Pargiter and Danvers on all and every the said returnes were cleerly baileable by Law and the Councell of the said Jennings Pargiter and Danvers offered in Court very sufficient baile And he the said Sir Robert Berkley being one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench denied to grant his Majesties Writs of Habeas Corpus to very many others his Majesties subjects and when he had granted the said Writs of Habeas Corpus to very many others his Majesties subjects and on the returne no cause appeared or such onely as was clearly baileable by Law yet he remanded them where they remained prisoners very long which said deferring to grant the said Writs of Habeas Corpus and refusals and delayes to discharge prisoners or suffer them to be bailed contained in this Article are destructive to the fundamentall Lawes of this Realme and contrary to former resolutions in Parliament and to the petition of Right which said resolutions and petition of Right were well knowne to him the said Sir Robert Berkley and were resolved on and enacted when he was the Kings Serjeant at Law and Attendant in the Lords House in Parliament 11 That wheras there was a cause depending in the Court Christian at Norwich betweene Samuel Booty Clerke and 〈◊〉 Collard for 2 s in the l. for tithes for rents and houses in Norwich and the said Collard moved by his Councell in the Court of Kings Bench for a prohibition to stay proceedings in the Court Christian at Norwich and delivered into the said Court of Kings Bench his suggestions that the said cause in the said Court Christian was onely for tythes for rents of houses in Norwich which was determinable by the Common Law onely yet hee the said Sir Robert Berkley being one of the Justices of the said Court of Kings Bench and sitting in the said Court deferred to grant a Prohibition to the said Court Christian in the said cause although the Councell did move in the said Court many severall times and severall termes for a Prohibition And he the said Sir Bobert Berkley deferred to grant his Majesties writ of Prohibition to severall other Courts on the motions of divers others of his Majesties subjects where the same by the Lawes of this Realme ought to have been granted contrary to the Laws of this Realme and his owne knowledge All which words opinions and actions were so spoken and done by him the said Sir Robert Berkley traiterously and wickedly to alienate the hearts of his Majesties liege people from his Majestie and to set a division betwixt them and to subvert the fundamentall Lawes and established government of his Majesties Realme of England For which they doe impeach him the said Sir Robert Berkley one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench of high treason against our Soveraigne Lord the King his Crowne and Dignity and of the misdemeanours above-mentioned And the said Commons by protestation saving to themselves onely the liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Robert Berkley and also of replying to the answer that he the said Sir Robert Berkley shal make to the said Articles or any of them or of offering proofe of the premisses or any other impeachments or accusations that shall be exhibited by them as the Case shall according to the course of Parliaments require Doe pray that the said Sir Robert Berkley one of the Justices of the Court of Kings Bench may be put to answer to all and every the premisses and that such proceedings examinations trialls judgements and executions may be upon every of them had and used as is agreeable to Law and Justice Articles of the House of Commons in the name of themselves and all the Commons of England against Sir Iohn Brampston Knight Lord chiefe Iustice of the Court of Kings Bench impeaching him as followeth 1. THat the said Sir Iohn Brampston then being Lord Chiefe Iustice of the Court of Kings Bench and having taken an oath for the due administration of justice to his Majesties liege people according to the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme did on or about the last of November 1635. subscribe his name to an opinion in haec verba I am of opinion that as where the benefit doth more peculiarly redound to the good of the Ports or Maritime ports as in case of Pyracie or Depredations upon the Seas there the charge hath beene and may be lawfully imposed upon them according to presidents of former times so where the good and safety of the kingdome in generall is concerned and the whole kingdome in danger of which his Majestie is the onely Iudge there the charge of the defence ought to be borne by all the realme in generall this I hold agreeable both to Law and reason 2 That hee the said Sir Iohn Brampston then being Lord cheife Iustice of the Court of Kings Bench about the Moneth of February

demurrer yet remains not over-ruled but the said Sir Humphrey Davenport with the said other Barons without over-ruling the demurrer ordered because Warner had put in a demurrer and not answered to the said Information that he should not proceede upon the action of Trover The Proprietor being thus prevented of his remedy by Action at Law sued forth a Replevin and upon pretence of viewing the said goods caused them to be brought forth of a Cellar hired by a deputie to the Farmours to that use and being brought forth they were taken by the Sheriffes of London by vertue of the said Replevin and upon oath made of the manner of the taking as aforesaid before the Barons and upon view of the President inrolls his case the said Sir Humphrey Davenport with the said other Barons adjudged that the said goods were not Replevisable and granted an Injunction to maintaine possession of them as they were before And the said house of Commons by protestations saving to themselves onely the liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Humphrey Davenport and also of replying to the answer that hee the said Sir Humphrey Davenport shall make unto the said Articles or any of them or of offering proofe of the premisses or any of their impeachments or accusations that shall be exhibited by them as the Case shall according to the course of Parliaments require doe pray that the said Sir Humphrey Davenport Lord chiefe Baron of his Majesties Court of Exchequer may be put to answer to all and every the premisses and that such proceedings examinations trials and judgements may be upon every of them had and used as is agreeable to Law and Justice Articles of the House of Commons in the name of themselves and all the Commons of England against Sir Richard Weston Knight one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer impeaching him as followeth 1 THat the said Sir Richard Weston about the moneth of November Anno Domini 1635. then being one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer and having taken an oath for the due Administration of Justice to his Majesties liege people according to the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme subscribed his name to an opinion in haec verba I am of opinion c. ut suprà in Sir Robert Berkley's Charge pag. 4. 2 That in or about the moneth of February Anno Domini 1636. the said Sir Richard Weston being then one of the Barons of the said Court of Exchequer subscribed an extrajudiciall opinion in answer to questions in a Letter from his Majestie in haec verba Charles R. When the good and safety of the Kingdome in generall is concerned c. ut suprà pag. 4. 3 That the said Sir Richard Weston being then one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer did deliver his opinion and judgement in the Exchequer Chamber against John Hampden Esquire in the Case of Ship-money That he the said John Hampden c. as in Judge Crawley's Charge pag. 23. 4 That whereas in the moneth of Aprill 16. Caroli the Officers of the Custome-house having seized a ship of one Samuel Warner's laden with Tobacco being the goods of the said Warner the bulke of the said ship not being broken and no information exhibited for the King according to the course the Exchequer for any duty the Barons were moved that the said ship might bee restored to the proprietors giving security to pay such duties as did belong to the King But upon the allegation of the Kings Attorney that there needed no information because there was no penalty the said Sir Richard Weston being then one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court did contrary to his oath and contrary to the Lawes of this Realme deny the restitution of the said ship unlesse all the duties demanded by the Farmours of the Custome-house were first paid Hereupon the said Warner brought an action of Trover upon the case in the Office of Pleas in the Exchequer against the said Officers that seized his ship and goods Whereupon the Kings Attorney Generall exhibited an information by English Bill in the Exchequer Chamber against the said Warner setting forth that Customes and Subsidies upon Merchandize were a great part of the Kings revennue and payable to him and that the said ship was seized for non-payment of the aforesaid duties notwithstanding the said Warner the proprietor prosecuted the Officers upon a Suit at Law and prayes that he may answer the said Information before any further proceedings be had at Law Thereupon the said Sir Richard Weston together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court of Exchequer ordered that the proprietor moving for delivery of his said goods should first answer to the Information after which the said Warner demurred to the said Information in regard no title for any certaine duty was set forth by the Information Which demurrer yet remaines not over-ruled but the said Sir Richard Weston with the said other Barons without over-ruling the demurrer ordered because Warner had put in a demurrer and not answered to the said Information that he should not proceed upon the action of Trover The proprietor being thus prevented of his remedy by Action at Law sued forth a Replevin and upon pretence of viewing the said goods caused them to be brought forth of a cellar hired by a Deputy to the Farmers to that use and being brought forth they were taken by the Sheriffs of London by vertue of the said Replevin and upon oath made of the manner of the taking as aforesaid before the Barons and upon view of the president inrolls his case the said Sir Richard Weston with the said other Barons adjudged that the said goods were not replevisable and granted an Injunction to maintaine the possession of them as they were before And the said house of Commons by Protestation saving to themselves onely the liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Richard Weston and also of replying to the answer that he the said Sir Richard Weston shall make unto the said Articles or any of them or of offering proofe of the premisses or any of their impeachments or accusations that shall be exhibited by them as the case shall according to the course of Parliaments require do pray that the said Sir Richard Weston one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer may be put to answer c. Articles of the House of Commons in the name of themselves and of all the Commons of England against Sir Thomas Trevor Knight one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer impeaching him as followeth 1. THat in or about November 4. Car. divers goods and merchandizes whereof John Rolls George Moore and other Merchants of London were Proprietors being seized and conveyed into

advise of his Privie Councell declare his will and pleasure to be that Subsidies Customes and Imposts should be levied in such manner as they were levied in the time of King James and the same and the Farmers thereof to continue untill it might receive a setling by Parliament and commanded the levying and receiving the same accordingly and that the said Samuel Vassall before the first day of October then last past before the said Information exhibited did bring into the port of London in ships foure thousand six hundred thirty eight hundred weight of Currants and that Richard Carmarthon Surveyour in the said port of London the said first day of October demanded of the said Samuel Vassall the said imposition of five shillings six pence for every hundred weight of the said Currants and that the said Samuel Vassall refused to pay the said imposition and unjustly detained it from the King To which Information the said Samuell Vassall appeared and pleaded the Statute of Magna Charta and the Statute of De Tallagio non concedendo and that he was a Subject borne under the Kings Allegeance and a Merchant of London using that trade and that the said summe of five shillings six pence upon every hundred weight of Currants was and is malum talnetum and not antiqua seu recta consuetudo and that it was imposed without assent of Parliament to which Plea the said Atturney Generall demurred in Law and the said Samuel Vassall joyned in demurrer with him That the said Sir Thomas Trevor being then and yet one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court knowing the said Currants to be unlawfully seized and detained for the pretended duty of five shillings six pence imposition upon every hundred weight of the said Currants whereas no such imposition was paiable by Law did from time to time delay the said Samuel Vassall from having restitution of his said goods being often in Court moved therein with intention thereby to force the said Samuel Vassall by wanting the said goods and the use thereof to pay all such summes as the said Officers of the Customes pretended to be due to his Majestie and imprisoned the said Samuel Vassall because he refused to pay such summes of money as were demanded of him for the said unlawfull imposition and that in Trinity Terme in the sixth yeere of his Majesties reigne the said case comming to be argued in open Court upon the demurrer the said Sir Thomas Trevor contrary to his oath and contrary to the Lawes of this Realme and to the great impoverishment of the said Samuel Vassall did together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court of Exchequer give his opinion and judgement upon the said Information for the King and against the said Samuel Vassall and by severall Orders for that purpose did continue the possession of the said goods in the King and the said Samuel Vassall could never obtaine any restitution at all of the said Currants 4 Whereas it was commanded to the Sheriffe of the Countie of Yorke by Writ under the Seale of his Majesties Court of Exchequer dated the sixteenth day of May in the seventh yeere of his Majesties Reigne that now is That he should distraine James Maleverer Esquire to appeare before the Barons of his Majesties said Court of Exchequer in the Octaves of the holy Trinity then next following to make fine to the King for his trespasse and contempt in not comming to the presence of the King before the 31. day of January in the first yeare of his said Majesties Reigne to take upon him the order of Knighthood according to the forme of a Proclamation in that behalfe formerly made at which day of the said Octaves of the holy Trinity the said J. Maleverer did appeare and pleaded to the said Writ that although his said Majesty the said 31. day of January and for three days next before the said 31. day of January was resident and remaining at his Palace at White-hall in the County of Middlesex and that the said James Maleverer the said one and thirtieth day of January and three dayes next before the said one and thirtieth day of January was resident and remaining at Ancliffe in the said County of Yorke which is distant from the said Palace of White-hall the space of one hundred and fourescore miles and that the said James Maleverer the said one and thirtieth day of January aforesaid or at any time before had no lands or rents in his owne hands or in the hands of Feoffees to his uses out of the said County of Yorke and that that part of the said County of Yorke which is neerest to the said Palace of White-hall the space of one hundred and thirty miles and that no Proclamation by vertue of any Writ of Proclamation for the appearance of any persons whatsoever to take the said order of Knighthood was made in any part of the said County of Yorke before the thirtieth day of January in the said first yeere of his Majesties reigne by reason whereof the said James Maleverer could not personally come to the presence of his said Majestie to take the said order of Knighthood before the said one and thirtieth day of January in the said first yeere of his said Majesties reigne yet the said James Maleverer for his fine in the premisses did humbly submit himselfe to the said Court and demanded to be discharged of the said issues returned and imposed upon him by reason of the premisses yet notwithstanding the said Plea and submission of the said James Maleverer and after the same was made as aforesaid and entred upon Record in his Majesties said Court of Exchequer the said Sir Thomas Trevor being then one of the Barons of his Majesties said Court of Exchequer contrary to his oath and contrary to the Lawes of this Realme and to the great impoverishing of the said James Maleverer did together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court refuse to impose any fine whatsoever upon the said James Maleverer and told him that the said Court had no power to fine him but that hee might compound with certaine Commissioners for that purpose appointed And did farther order and direct severall other writs of Distringas to issue forth of his Majesties said Court of Exchequer under the Seale of the said Court directed to the severall high Sheriffes of the said Countie of Yorke whereby the said Sheriffes were commanded further to distraine the said James Maleverer to appeare as aforesaid upon which said writs of Distringas severall great and excessive issues were returned upon the lands of the said James Maleverer amounting to the summe of two thousand pounds or there abouts a great part whereof the said James Maleverer was inforced to pay and in like manner the said Sir Thomas Trevor together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court of Exchequer did

order and direct such and the like proceedings and the said proceedings were had and made accordingly against Thomas Moyser Esquire and against severall other persons his Majesties subjects in severall parts of this Kingdome to the utter undoing of many of them 5 That he the said Sir Thomas Trevor about the moneth of November Anno Domini 1635. then being one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer and having taken an oath for the due administration of Justice to his Majesties liege people according to the Lawes and Statutes of this Realme subscribed his name to an opinion in haec verba I am of opinion c. ut suprà in Baron Davenports Charge pag. 30. 6 That in or about the moneth of February Anno Dom. 1636. then being one of the Barons of the said Court of Exchequer he subscribed an extrajudicial opinion in answer to questions in a letter from his Majesty in haec verba Charles R. When the good and safety of the kingdome in generall is concerned c. ut suprà loco citato and subscribed ut priùs 7 That the said Sir Thomas Trevor being then one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer did deliver his opinion and judgement in the Exchequer chamber against John Hampden Esquire in the Case of Ship-money That he the said John Hampden upon the matter and substance of the Case was chargeable with the money then in question a copie of which proceedings and judgement the Commons in this present Parliament have already delivered to your Lordships 8 That whereas in the moneth of April 16. Car. the Officers of the Custome-house having seized a Ship of one Samuel Warner's laden with Tobacco being the goods of the said Warner the Bulke of the said Ship not being broken and no information exhibited for the King according to the course of the Exchequer for any duty the Barons were moved that the said Ship might be restored to the Proprietor giving security to pay such duties as did belong to the King But upon the allegation of the Kings Attorney that there needed no information because there was no penaltie the said Sir Thomas Trevor being then one of the Barons of his Majesties said Court of Exchequer together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court did contrary to his oath and contrary to the Laws of this Realme deny the restitution of the said Ship unlesse all the duties demanded by the Farmours of the Custome-house were first paid Hereupon the said Warner brought an action of Trover in the office of Pleas in the Exchequer against the said Officers that seized his Ship and goods whereupon the Kings Attorney generall exhibited an information by English Bill in the Exchequer chamber against the said Warner setting forth that Customes and Subsidies upon Merchandize were a great part of the Kings revennue and payable to him and that the said Ship was seized for non-payment of the aforesaid duties notwithstanding the said Warner then Proprietor prosecuted the Officers upon a suit at Law and prayes that hee may answer the said Information before any further proceedings be had at Law Thereupon the said Sir Thomas Trevor together with the rest of the then Barons of the said Court of Exchequer ordered that the Proprietor moving for delivery of the said goods should first answer to the said Information after which the said Warner demurred to the said Information in regard no title for any certaine dutie was set forth by the Information which demurrer yet remains not over-ruled but the said Sir Thomas Trevor with the said other Barons without over-ruling the demurrer ordered because Warner had put in a demurrer and not answered to the said Information that hee should not proceede upon the action of Trover The Proprietor being thus prevented of his remedie by action at Law sued forth a Replevin and upon pretence of viewing the said goods caused them to be brought forth of a Cellar hired by a deputie of the Farmours to that use and being brought forth they were taken by the Sheriffe of London by vertue of the said Replevin and upon oath made of the manner of the taking as aforesaid before the Barons and upon view of the President inrolls his case the said Sir Thomas Trevor with the said other Barons adjudged that the said goods were not Replevisable and granted an Injunction to maintain the possession of them as they were before And the said house of Commons by protestation saving to themselves only the liberties of exhibiting at any time hereafter any other accusation or impeachment against the said Sir Thomas Trevor and also of replying to the answer that he the said Sir Thomas Trevor shall make unto the said Articles or any of them or of offering proof of the premisses or any of their impeachments or accusations that shall be exhibited by them as the Case shall according to the course of Parliaments require doe pray that the said Sir Thomas Trevor one of the Barons of his Majesties Court of Exchequer may be put to answer to all and every the premisses and that such proceedings examinations trialls and judgements may be upon every of them had and used as is agreeable to Law and Justice FINIS