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	writ_n	4,414	5	9.5649	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30974	Discourse of the peerage & jurisdiction of the Lords spirituall in Parliament proving from the fundamental laws of the land, the testimony of the most renowned authors, and the practice of all ages : that have no right in claiming any jurisdiction in capital matters.	Barlow, Thomas, 1607-1691.	1679 (1679)	Wing B829; ESTC R4830	45,447	34

Kingdom hath and in all times ever had by the Common Law Jurisdiction over every Subject in the same Degree of Nobility that was resident within the Verge and local extent of his Jurisdiction This Power and Authority of his being Universal he was never bound to take notice of the Priviledges and Immunities of any particular Orders and Societies of Men if they themselves would not take advantage of it so that this same Previlegium Clericale was no absolute exemption from Secular Authority so as to make all Proceedings before a Secular Judge to be Coram non Judice but the end and design of it was that when any Clergy-man was Arraigned as a Malefactor before a Secular Judge then in some Cases before he suffered the punishment that was due by Law he was delivered to his Ordinary to make his Purgation if he could then his Ordinary discharged him but if he could not then he was Degraded and sent back to the Temporal Magistrate to suffer punishment according to his Demerits That the Proceedings of a Secular Judge upon one within Holy Orders are not Coram non Judice might be proved both out of Civilians and Canonists but that would not be much to the purpose if I should and therefore I shall forbear only shall take notice of a Passage in Dr. Ridley's View of the Civil and Ecclesiastical Law pag. 86. If a Clerk says he be first Arrested by his Spiritual Judge and found guilty he shall be Degraded and delivered over to the Temporal power but if he be first Arrested by the Secular Magistrate and Tryed and found Guilty he shall be delivered to the Bishop to be deprived and then delivered back to punishment The same in effect he saith p. 158. whereby he doth allow that according to the Ecclesiastical Law the Temporal Judges were allowed to have Jurisdiction over men within Holy Orders But let him or any of the Civilians or Canonists say what they will it 's no great matter we must consider what the Law of England saith in this case for the Canons never were in force in England any further than they were voluntarily received and so transmitted as a common Usage or Custom to Posterity by Tradition and so became part of the Common Law or else were confirmed by Act of Parliament and so became part of our Statute-Law of which more hereafter And that by the Law of England the Proceedings against Ecclesiastical Persons before a Secular Judge are not coram non Judice I prove by these Cases An Appeal of Robbery was brought against a Monk who was tryed and acquitted upon this the Abbot and the Monk brought a Writ of Conspiracy against divers who procured and abetted the said Appeal whereupon the Defendants appear and go to Tryal but the Abbot and Monk get a Verdict and Judgment to recover 1000 Marks damages Co. 2. Inst. 638. But it is certain that a Writ of Conspiracy cannot lye except the Plaintiff had been Legitimo modo acquietatus and that he could not be if the whole Proceedings upon the Appeal had been Coram non Judice So if at the Common Law a Clergy-man had been Indicted of Felony and had confessed the Fact in Court he could not have had the benefit of his Clergy because the end of granting it was that he might make his Purgation before the Spiritual Judge but that he could not after he had confessed the Fact in Court Co. ubi supra Stamford 124. And yet no Confession coram non Judice is conclusive All which doth evidently prove That the allowance of those Canons which gave the first birth to this Immunity did not trench to the prejudice of Temporal Judges so as to bar them of that Jurisdiction which they have over every Subject by the Common Law And the Nature of it will further appear if we take into consideration the Third Particular which is this III. In what Cases the benefit of Clergy was allowable and in what not This Immunity was allowed in England long before any Statute was made for its confirmation it was allowed onely in such cases as were judged reasonable but never in full satisfaction to the demands of the Clergy Kellaway 7 H. 8. 181. b. But the Clergy as their Custom then was were willing to improve any Concession to their best advantage according to the common Proverb When they had got an Inch they would take an Ell. And to that end did with a great deal of fervency and zeal no doubt insist upon their Priviledge as an absolute Exemption from all Temporal Jurisdiction to all intents and purposes extending to all Crimes and Offences whatsoever and thundring out Excommunications and such like Maledictions forced some people for quietness sake to comply with them as appears by Bracton lib. fol. 123. to the great incouragement of all sorts of Villanies and Outrages and consequently to the grievous oppression and vexation of the Subject for this assurance or at least hopes of Impunity let loose the Reigns of Rapine and Violence and was the most effectual course that could be taken for the dissolution of any Government and the utter desolation and ruine of any Country whatsoever To give a check to this exorbitant Licentiousness strict care is taken by the Judges and Magistrates that Justice be duly executed and Offenders legally punished and therefore the Privilegium Clericale not to be allowed in any Case otherwise then according to the ancient Custom Hence were the seeds of Envy and of a very lasting Discord between Church and State sown nothing but Animosities Rancour Revenge and Hatred is the Subject of the History of those times especially the time of Thomas Beckett Bulls Citations Excommunications on the one side and seising of Temporalities Imprisonment and Banishment on the other side were the Complements that people were entertained with in those days These Differences grew to such a height that although through a formal Reconciliation both Parties seemed to be pacified yet the Root of the Matter remaining untouched the Fewds break forth and the Matter must be decided by Act of Parliament And so I shall by the construction of these old Statutes and other Precedents give a direct Answer to the Question 1. It is undeniable that Privilegium Clericale was never allowed to any that were Guilty of Crimen laesae Majestatis The first Statute that we find among the Printed Statutes which doth directly speak of it is Westm. 1. c. 2. which is declarative of the Common Law by the express words of the Statute Solonque le Custom avant ces heures use but faith not one word of Treason only allows the Priviledge in Cases of Felony Si Clearke soit prise pur rette de Felony Wherefore this Statute being in the Affirmative determines nothing concerning Treason but leaves that as it was before at the Common Law Not long after the Clergy renewed their Complaints and among the rest complain that Secular Judges have passed Judgment