Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	defendant_n	plaintiff_n	plea_n	3,291	5	10.0361	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A66678	Vindiciæ medio-Saxonicæ, or, Tithes totally routed by Magna charta in a reply to an answer of Middlesex letter and petition, in the latter end of a tract, called, A treatise of tubes, wherein the invalidity of the said treatisers arguments are fully manifested, and the said letter and petition clearly vindicated from error and mistake / by Aug. Wingfield ...	Wingfield, Augustus.	1653 (1653)	Wing W3029; ESTC R11813	4,523	8

Selden whom he quoteth p. 146. declareth not so much as in opinion established whereby it is evident not onely by Selden and his own confession but also in the judgment of Cook that at the confirmation of Magna Charta Tithes were not at all comprehended in the Rights of the Church Which will yet more fully appear if we consult Mr. Seldens book of Tithes and the Roll of Winton In the first whereof pag. 137. It is delivered for a clear truth that there never was any Canon of any General Council as yet found that purposely commanded payment of Tithes nor any that expresly supposed them a duty of Common right before the Council of Lateran under Pope Innocent the 3d. 1615 So that at the Council of Lateran which was in the latter end of K. John and but 12 years or thereabouts before the confirmation of Magna Charta by H. the 3d. Tithes were not due by common right that is by Common Law and so consequently no rights of the Church And if not then due by Common Law then certainly not at the confirming of Magna Charta since in the judgment of all both Canonists and Common Lawyers 12 years is not a competency of time either for custom or prescription the one allowing 40 years at least the other time out of mind And yet to proceed this Respondent doth further acknowledge p. 14. that there was no Parochial Right of Tithes till after the Council of Lateran aforesaid 1615. and that after the Decretal Epistle of Innocent the 3d sent to the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury in the year aforesaid the right of Tithes was allowed but you must know by whom viz. the Pope and his Clergy not the People and so became Lex Terrae a Law of the Land which are likewise the words and judgement of Cook Now of what force and validity a Right of Tithes grounded upon a Canon of the Pope and diametrically repugnant to Magna Charta can be let all men judge since Cook their Oracle hath declared in his Chapter of Tithes that all Canons which are against the Common Law or Custom of the Land are of no force Now as to the Roll of Winton called by some Doomsday Book which was a survey of all the Lands Revenues both of Clergy Laity exactly taken by Commiss in every County throughout the Nation and returned into the Exchequer about the latter end of the Conquerours Reign It is there Recorded in particular what the Revenues and dues of every Presbyter and Church were but yet notwithstanding very rarely if at all are any Tithes found among the Church Revenues So that hence it is most cleer First that in William the Conquerors time Tiths were no Revenus nor rights of the Church nor yet Secondly in H. 2. his time fee the Letter and Petition p. 5. And lastly by the Authors own confession they became due onely but from the latter end of K. Johns Reign and that grounded meerly upon a Popish Canon contrary to Magna Charta which is acknowledged by the Learned to be the Common Law of England both before and after the Conquest The second and last objection which the Author of the said Treatise maketh is upon our exposition of the Statute of 1 R. 2. cap. 14. which wee shall here make good to be most genuine and true notwithstanding his false calumniation and that his Anti-exposition is most absurd and false and such as had not Custom wrought another Nature in him to speak and write untruly could never have fell from him Now the question between us is whether the Averment there spoken of be Lay Averment and so to be made by the Plaintiff according to his exposition or Church Averment and so to be made by the Defendant according to our exposition whether of which is most true we shall leave to every one to judge by opening unto you the Nature of Averment out of the judgment of the Learned and by holding forth such reasons as shall in brief be produced And first Cowells Interpreter saith That Averment signifieth according to the Author of Terms of the Law an offer of the Defendant to make good or to justifie an exception pleaded in abatement or bar of the Plaintiffs Act. And Sir Hen. Smith in his book of Law fo 359 also saith That Averments must be offered to be proved true in Barrs 1. Answers Replications Rejoinders c. but not in Counts and Declarations And of the same judgement is Sir Edw. Cook in his first part of Institutes fo 362. So that it is evident Averments are properly to be made by Defendants in their answears or in after pleadings and not by Plaintiffs in their Declarations unlesse in some few particular cases of which this is none as is evident not only by the Grammatical and Logical Construction of the said Statute but even in the judgement of Learned Rastal a Iustice of the common-Common-pleas in Q. Maries days who to out the question out of doubt hath set it down in the margent of his Abridgement of the Statutes to be Church Averment which we conceive to be a final determination of the question And as 〈◊〉 your Ordinance of Nov. 1644. for the payment of Tithes we … y conceive it to be the judgement of all the learned that it is of no longer validity than during Parliamentary Session which is now dissolv'd upon sure grounds of Piety Publique ●●●dome right reason and honestie and that notwithout the Generall consent of the major part either precedent or subsequent of the Supreme Authority the People Now by what hath been said it will easily appear who doth most abuse and mislead the People and whether exposition of Magna Charta and the other Statute of R. 2. is most true That of the Letter and Petition back'd with right reason and the Authorities of great Lawyers and learned Iudges or that of the Author of the Treatise being a fancy of his own brain and raised out of implicite Terms which he that believs had need of of a Popish and implicite faith FINIS