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	writ_n	2,416	5	9.3359	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90251	Vox plebis, or, The peoples out-cry against oppression, injustice, and tyranny. Wherein the liberty of the subject is asserted, Magna Charta briefly but pithily expounded. Lieutenant Colonell Lilburne's sentence published and refuted. Committees arraigned, goalers condemned, and remedies provided.	Overton, Richard, fl. 1646.	1646 (1646)	Wing O636A; Thomason E362_20; ESTC R201218	54,600	73

protection of the law a●d not to be permitted to sue for a mans right or to bee staied by injunction or pronibition so that a man cannot proceed All which causes are illegall and contrary to this clause of the great Charter For every man ought to bee permitted to goe to triall judgement and execution in his cause according to the course of the law of the land And if he faile in his suit he shall pay costs and be amerced pro falso clamore Which amencement ought to bee reasonable salvo contenemento that he be not destroyed as is before declared Which payment of destruction is the fourth particular and now comes to be handled The words of the great Charter are That no man shall be any way destroyed but by judgement of his equals or according to the law of the land This word destruere amongst the Grammarians est idem quod penitus evertere diruere to destroy is all one as utterly to overthrow and demolish To destroy a man is to forejudge a man of life limb or liberty to dis-herit to put to torture or death any man without lawfull tryall due preparation to his defence or by SURREPTITIOUS IUDGEMENT All which are contrary to the law of the land It is the Genus of all the former particulars it is the most pernicious extent of all arbitrary power there have been to many examples of it Thomas Earl of Lancaster in the 14. E. 2. was destroyed that is adjudged to dye as a Traytor without lawfull try all of his Peers And afterwards Henry Earl of Lancaster his brother was restored First because that he was not arraigned and put to answer Secondly because that contrary to this Charter of Liberties the said Thomas being one of the Peers of the Realm without answer or lawfull judgment of his Peers he was put to death Such like proceedings were had in the case of John of Gaunt as appears P. 39. Coram Rege and in the E. of Aruudels case Rot. Par. 4. E. 3. Nu. 13. and in Sir John Alees case 4. E. 3. Nu. 2. Such was the destruction committed upon the Lord Hastings in the Tower of London by K. Richard the 3. who sware he would not dye before he saw his head off and thereupon caused him to be executed without tryall answer or lawfull conviction such was the destruction of the Lord Rivers and many other of sad remembrance but above all that Attainder of Thomas Cromwell Earl of Essen who was attainted of high Treason as appears Rot. Part. 32. H. 8. being committed to the Tower of London and forth-coming to be heard and yet never called to answer in any of the Houses of Parliament they sitting which we hope shal never be more drawn into president but wish with a clearned sage in the Law Quod auferat oblivio si potest si non utcunque silentium tegat which is let oblivion take away the memory of so foul a fact if it can if it cannot let silence cover it For the more high and honourable the Court is the more just and honourable it ought to be in the proceeding and to give example of Justice to inferiour Courts for these destructores subditorum dom Regis the destroyers of the free-born people of the Kingdom were ever-odious and hatefull to the subject and severe pains appointed for them as appears by the Statute of Kenelworth Par. 16. and by the old Statute of Rag-man and that this kind of destroying the Kings people is utterly against the Law of the Land is most evident not only by the great Charter but also by the Statute of 5. c. 3. c. 9. and 28. E. 3. c. 3. afore-mentioned and by the ancient Lawes of the Land as appears by Horn in his Mirrour of Justice c 2. sect 3. We proceed now to Exile which is the fifth particular The great Charter runs thus No man shall be exiled but by the Law of the Land Exile or banishment is of two sorts The one a voluntary which is at the Common-Law and that is when a man would abjure the Realm for a Fellony committed by him having taken sanctuary to avoid the punishment of death chusing rather perpetuall banishment then to put himself to the hazard of his life by a legall tryall for his offence as Stamf. Pl. Cor. p. 117. The other is when a man is inforced to banishment which is only legally done by Act of Parliament as appeares by the Statute of Westrn 1. cap. 20 35. El. c. 1. and 39. El. c. 4. and by that Judgment or Statute of banishment made of the two Spencers 15. E. 2. called Exilium Hugonis le-Despencer patris filii for though there was an Order or Ordinance made in the Lords house Anno 6. E. 3. Nu. 6. That such learned men in the Law as should be sent as Justices or otherwise to serue in Ireland should have no excuse yet saith Sir Edw. Cooke 2. part Instit p. 48. That Order or Ordinance being no Act of Parliament it did not bind the subject so that we that are the free-born subjects of England cannot at this day be enforced or compelled to depart the Realme or be exiled or banished from our native Country but by Act of Parliament And from this we passe to examine what is to be esteemed a lawfull Judgment of our Peers and what is here in this Charter meant by the Law of the Land This Great Charter was penned in Latine the words are thus Nec super eum ibimus nec super eummittemus nisi per legale judicium Parium suorum which are more emphatically in the Latine then in our English Translations of this Charter for the Translations render it We will not passe upon nor condemn any man but by the lawfull judgment of his Peers or by the Law of the Land whereas the words in the Latine import That the King shall not in his own person when he is personally present in his high Court of Parliament or any other of his Courts of Justice cause any man to be otherwise tryed or condemned then by lawfull judgment of his Peers or the law of the Land nec super eum mittemus that is That no Judges Commissioners or Justices of the King shall by force of any Writ or Commission from the King under the Great Seal in his absence arraign try or condemn any man but by the lawfull judgment of his Peers or by the law of the Land Now this legale judicium parium suorum or lawfull judgment of a mans Peers is and hath alwayes had a two-fold construction in law the one is When a Lord of the Parliament hath committed treason or felony or other capitall offence whereby he is indictable at the Kings Suite there he by vertue of this Charter ought to be tryed by his Peers that is such as are Lords of Parliament that sit there by reason of their Nobility for no Noble-man that is not a Lord of

the Parliament or any other that sits in the Lords house by Writ Et non ratione nobiliatis can be a tryer of a Lord of the Parliament or challenge this priviledge of tryall in case of Treason Fellony or other capitall offence But a Noble-man of the Parliament shall not have this priviledge either upon an Indictment of Praemunire or upon an Appeale of Fellony at the suit of the party or in any Civill-Action either concerning the right of Lands or of other Possessions or in any personall Action brought by a Common-person against a Lord of the Parliament as appeares unto us by the Bookes of 1. H. 4. f. 1 13. H. 8. f. 12. 10. E. 4. fol. 6. This tryall of Noble-men by their Peers at the Kings Suit is not upon Oath as in the case of common persons for the Peers are not sworn before the Lord Steward before whom this tryall must bee had but they are to be charged by the Lord Steward super fidelitatibus ligeantiis Dom. Regi debitis that is upon their faith and allegeance due to the King and if they acquit the Peer or Noble-man upon whom they passe the Entry is Willelmus Comes E. cateri Antedicti pares inst●nter super fidelitatibus ligeantiis dicto D●m Regi debitis per praefarū Senescallū ab inferiori usque ad supremum separatim examinati dicunt quod Wil. Dom. Dacre nox est Culp and so was the Entry in the case of the Lord Dacres 26. H. 8. Spilmans Reports and Cookes Instit 3. part p. 30. If a Noble-man be indicted of Treason Felony or Murder and cannot be found he shall be outlawed by the Coroners of the County and in case of Clergy no Noble-man shall have more priviledge then a common-person where it is not specially provided for them by Act of Parliament as by Stamford pl. Cor. p. 130. is made manifest out of all which we gather that a Nobleman hath this priviledge of tryal as well per lege terra as by this Charter and that anciently legale judicium parium or lawfull tryall of Peers for all manner of persons aswell Noblemen as Commons was vere-dictum duodecim proborum legalium hominum de vicineto a verdict of 12. good and lawfull men of the Neighbour-hood that is of the Commons of England so still remains saving only in this excepted case by the Great Charter which shewes that there can be no legale judicium or lawfull judgment but it must be per legem terrae or according to the Law of the Land which is the other branch of this judgment as to the Commons of England Now to prove that legale judicium parium or lawfull judgment of a mans Peers or Equals is by verdict of 12. men and not otherwise for the word Peers vinvocally signifies both Let us consult both the judgment of Parliaments in this point and the fundamentall lawes of the Land And first for the opinions of Parliaments in this point we finde that by the statute of 25. E. 3. c. 4. None shall be taken by petition or suggestion made to our Lord the King or to his Councell unlesse it be by indictment or presentment of his good and lawfull people of the same neighbour-hood 42. E. 3. c. 3. It is assented and accorded for the good governance of the Commons that no man be put to answer without presentment before Justices or matter of Record or by due processe and Writ originall according to the old law of the Land and if any thing be done frō henceforth contrary it shall be void in law and holden for errour and to say one word for all there are above 50 statutes now in print and in force that warrant this tryall or legale judicium parium suorum or tryall by a mans Equals or Peers made since the Great Charter in severall cases the citing of which statutes for prolixity we avoid And that this manner of tryall was the old law of the Land wee are here to make it appear that this manner of tryall is according to the law of the Land and that there is none other wherein we are to observe this distinction that this legale judicium or lawfull judgment is two-fold The one is of the matter of Fact The other is of matter of Law That which is of matter of Fact is to be tryed per legale indicium parium or a lawfull tryall of a mans Peers That which is of matter of Law is to be tryed by the Judges or Justices of the Land authorized thereunto by the Kings lawfull Commissions To prove that there is no other lawfull Judgment of our Peeres or Equals As touchiug the matter of Fact we are to examine the foundation of this Common-wealth and the originall constitutions thereof We find that King Alfred having reduced this Kingdome of England into an Entire-Monarchy divided it into 38. Counties and each County into severall Hundred and Mannors The Counties were put under the government of Earles who substituted under them Viscounts or Sheriffes for the quiet government of the people the Hundreds and Mannors subordinately under the severall Lords of them The Sheriffes had two Courts to wit the Sheriffes-Tourn and the County-Court The first for offences against the peace of the Land The latter for entry and determination of civill-causes between party and party In the first indictment or presentment of offences was made per-Enquest that is by Juries In the second the Free-suiters that is men of the neighbor-hood The like was done in the leets or viewes of Frankepledge and hundred-Hundred-Courts in the Hundreds The like proceedings was in the Leets and Court-Barons of Mannors in those Courts There was no condemnation or judgment given but by the Enquirie of good and lawfull men of the neighbor-hood This every book of the Law tells us for more particular satisfaction read Horn f. 8. and fore-ward These Courts were formed after the modell of the greater Courts of the Realme the Kings-Bench and Common-pleas where greater jurisdiction was as to the matter to be enquired of but no variation originally in the manner of proceeding only the jurisdiction of the Court of Kings-Bench and Common-Pleas in tryals of actions ad dampnum 40. s. flowed over the whole Kingdome The other Courts were confined to their severall limits and might not exceed 40. s. damages these were the originall Courts of the Kingdome and the legale judicium parium or lawfull judgment of Peers was only tryall by Jury of Equals before this great Charter From which tryals this clause is inserted into it and by an inviolable right of law continues in force even to this day as every free subject of England by experience knowes and as every book of our law proves into us the verdict of the Jury in criminall causes being the judgment of Attainder and in civill causes a condemnation as Stamford pl. Cor. p 44. and ali other bookes prove And to leave every man without

him in safe custody accordingly And that he doth take care that the said Lilburn do neither contriue publish or spread any seditious or libellous Pamphlets against both or either of the Houses of Parliament To the Lieutenant of the Tower of London his Deputy or Deputies And because this Sentence was conceived not to be severe enough by the Lieutenant of the Tower hee did procure an Order dated Die Mercurii 15. Julii 1646. which followes in these words Die Mercurii 15. Iulii 1646. ORdered by the Lords in Parliament assembled That none shall speak with John Lilburn now a prisoner in the Tower of London but in the presence and hearing of his Keeper And that when he shall desire to take the Ayre within the Tower his Keeper shall constantly goe with him forth and back and stay with him till he return to his Lodging and that if his wife desire to come to him she shall reside with him and not go in and out during his imprisonment in the said Tower And lastly it is Ordered That this restraint of speaking with the said Lilburn shall be taken off when he shall give good Bayle to this House not to contrive write or publish any scandalous or libellous Pamphlets or Papers against both or either of the Houses of Parliament Die Mercurii 16. Septem 1646. IT is this day Ordered by the Lords in Parliament assembled That the Lieutenaut of the Tower of London his Deputy and all others imployed him shall permit and suffer the wife of Lieutenant-Colonell Iohn Lilburn to come to him and reside with him when and as often as he shall desire any former Order of this House notwithstanding Iohn Brown Cler. Parliamentorum We will not say their Lordships are unjust in this Sentence yet we hope it shall not be accounted scandall to them if we say and make it appear that they have erred therein both in manner of proceeding and in substance of matter or point of jurisdiction both of the person and cause for we do presume that their Lordships will not presume an infallibility of Judgment it being a quality incompatible to or with any sublunary creatures and wee finde by our bookes of 21. E. 3. f 46. that a Parliament may and hath erred And first we shall declare their Lordships errour in their manner of proceeding against this worthy Patriot wherein we shall observe That the 10. of Iune he was summoned to attend their Lordships in their house The 11. of Iune he appeared and was then committed by their Lordships to Newgate The 16. of the same moneth he appealed to the Right Honourable House of Commons The 22. their Lordships sent to the Keeper of Newgate to bring him to their Bar And thereupon the 43 day he was committed close prisoner to Newgate being brought by the Keeper of Newgate where he remained close prisoner till the 16 of Iuly At which time his Charge was brought into the Lords House and not before Wherein we are first to note that he was summoned and committed a moneth before his Charge brought in and after his appeal and for that cause made close prisoner 18. dayes before any Charge recorded against him All which proceedings are erroneous and principally in these two points First because he was summoned before his Charge was recorded for regularly both in Law and Equity the Declaration or Bill ought to be filed or recorded before any Writ or Processe ought to issue against the Defendant or Party accused either in civill or criminall causes and the Writor Processe ought to contain the matter of the Declaration or Bill as in a Writ of Right These words Quid clamat tenere import a Count or Declaration recorded so a Writ of Warrantia Diei contains the substance of the Count in a Monstraverunt the Plaintiffs title is set forth by the Writ Nay in every Writ at Common-Law the Writ doth by these words ut dicitur or by some other Emphaticall word contained in the body of the Writ import that a Declaration or Count is filed registred or recorded before the Writ doth issue and this appears clearly in every Writ set forth by the Register and Fitzherberts Natura brevium Nay every English Bill either in Chancery Exchequer or Star-Chamber doth pray that Processe of Sub-paena be awarded against the Defendant which proves that processe ought not to be awarded against any man out of any Court till his charge bee recorded against him in the same Court If this was so in the Justice of the Star-Chamber in criminal causes we hope their Lordships will not condemne it as an Injustice in themselves to follow the same Rules of Right Reason Law and Equity Secondly their Lordships proceedings against him after his Appeal made to the honourable house of Commons were void in Law for by the Appeal to the proper jurisdiction the Lords were outed of their jurisdiction or Connusans of the Plea sublata causa tollitur effectus the Cause being removed by the Appeale their judgment thereby was determined or at least suspended being but the effect of the cause before them till such time as the Appeal is determined the Appeal being a supersedas to their Lordships further legall proceedings in the same cause and wherein they ought not to have proceeded without the privity licence and direction of the house of Commons and therefore all their proceedings since Mr. Lilburns Ap. peal presented to and accepted by the house of Commons are Coram non judice and therefore void and erroneous We shall not deny the Lords house to be a Court of Justice and that of Record too and of the highest degree in the Kingdom co-operating with the honourablt House of Commons but when they are distinct and apart in their severall operations and judgments we do conceive that they neither have a legislative nor unlimitted power of judicature in themselves neither can they proceed to determine any thing out of the way of the known Lawes by any arbitrary or discretionary Rules where there is a known Law in the case Sir Edw Cook doth well set forth the distinct powers of Judicatures of both houses in his 4. part of Institutes p. 23. It is to be known saith he that the Lords in their house have power of Judicature and both Houses together have power of Iudicature which is thus to be understood That the Lords have power of Iudicature over their Members alone viz. their Peers the Nobility of England that sit in the Lords House The Commons have power of Iudicature over all the Commons of England by themselves alone and the Lords and Commons joyning have power of Iudicature over both Peers Lords and Commons That this is true is manifest by the Lord Dacres case p. 26 H. 8. reported by Iustice Spilman where it was resolved that a Noble-man of Parliament cannot wave his tryall by his Peers and put himselfe upon the tryall of the Country for by the Statute of Magna Charta c. 29 every