House nor any Speaker of their Houâ—e that we find in History or Record till 51 E. 3. Therefore doubtlesse they had no judicial power or jurisdiction 4ly When they became a House and had a Speaker they could neither chuse their Speaker in any Parliament without a command to and license first granted them by the King Lord Chancellor or the person implyed by the King to shew the causes of summoning the Parliament who gave them a command to elect their Speaker and then to present him to the King and Lords for their approbation of him at the time prescribed them who had then power to allow or disallow their Speaker and to order them to elect another then or afterwards incase of unfitness sickness imprisonment or any other just ground or excuse as our Parl. Rolls and others attest If then the Commons can neither elect their own Speakers nor approve nor remove them but by the Kings and Lords approbation who may discharge them upon just grounds and order rhem to elect others in their places and that against their wills as in the case of Thorpe hereafter cited Then certainly the judicature in all other cases as well as this of their very Speakers and Members too resided still in the King and Lords and was not communicated to the Commons House 5ly The Commons House inability to administer an Oath to any person in any case which the Lords alone have power to doe in Parliament 6ly Their Petitions Articles of complaint and Impeachments in all Parliaments delivered and sent up to the Lords against Delinquents in Criminal causes as well of Commons as Peers Clergy men as secular persons and their praying the Lord to judge and give sentence against them 7ly Their prosecuting and giving in evidence against all sorts of Deliquents at the Lords Bar as accusers 8ly Their standing always in such cases and that bare headed in the Lords House as Prosecutors Informers Grand-Jurymen whiles the Lords alone fit and that covered and only give pronounce the iudgement and that in the Comons absence for the most part not presence 9ly Their having no voice or share at all in the hearing examining debating reversing erronious Judgements in other Courts upon Writs of Error brought in Parliament but the Lords alone 10ly The Kings Judges not sitting amongst them but only in the House of Peers to authorize and assist them in their judgements are all infallible arguments and clear irrefragable demonstrations that the Judicatory or judicial power of Parliaments was never communicated to the Commons House upon their first admittance into Parliament nor since but remained intirely fully in the King and Lords alone as it did before That this is so in truth I have the express acknowledgement and confession of the whole House of Commons themselves long since in the Parliament of 1 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 79. remaining on record to all Posterity with the Kings and Lords concurrent resolution both from the time of the Commons first admission and for all succeeding ages The Commons in this Parliament November 3. made their Protestation in the same manner they had done in the beginning of the Parliament and more over shewed to the King Come les Ioggementz du Parlement apperteignent soulement au Roy et Seignieur et nient as Communes c. That the Judgements of Parliament appertained only to the King and to the Lords and not unto the Commons And thereupon they praâ—ed the King out of his special grace to shew unto them the said Iudgements and the cause of them that so no Record migâ—t be made in Pâ—rliamenâ— against the said Commons which are or shall be parties to any judgement given or hereafter to be given in Parliament without that privity Whereunto the Archbishop of Canterbury gave them this answer by the Kings commandment That the Commons themselves are Petitioners and demanders Et que le Roy et les seigniours de tout temps ont eues et averont de droit les juggement in Parliament en manere come mesmes les Communes sont monstrez and that the King and Lords from all times have had for times past and shall have for time to come of right the Iudgements in Parliament in manner as the Commons themselves have shewed Saving that in Statutes to be made â—or in Grants and Subsidies or in such things as are to be doâ—e for the common profit of the REALM the KING will have especially their advice and assent By this memorable Record in Parliament it is apparent by the Commons own confession First That the Judgments in Parliament even in cases of Commoners themselves and Members of the Commons House as well as Peers appertain only to the King and to the Lords in the Affirmative Secondly That they appertain not to the Commons in the Negative Thirdly A Confession both of the Commons King and Lords That they have from all times in all ages before that Parliament appertained to the King and Lords and that of right not by usurpation or connivence Fourthly An express order and resolution that the King and Lord shall alwayes kéep and hold this their Right of Iudicature in all times to come without admitting the Commons to share therein upon this their Petition as not fit to be granted them Fifthly That if the Commons should be admitted at any time to be parties or privies to the Judgements in Parliaments as they then desired it would be meerly out of the Kings special Grace Sixthly That the special reasons ends of the Kings summoning the Commons to Parliaments at the first and ever since were only these especially 1. to have their advice in Statutes to be made 2. in Grants or Subsidies 3. in such things as are to be done for the common profit of the Realm not to give them the least share right or interest in the Judicature or Judgements of Parliament as it is the supremest Court of Justice The Judicial Power and the Judgements in Parliament being never transferred in part or whole by the King and Lords to the Commons House but intirely reserved to themselves as before their admission inâ—o our Parliaments as I have proved it follows inevitably from thence 1. That all Judgements given by the Commons House alone or by any of their Committees of Sequestrations Examinations plundered Ministers c. without the Lords are meerly void and null in Law being Coram non judice and may be justly questioned and vacated by the Lords upon appeal or complaint as Nullities 2. That the House of Commons have no more right or power to judge or vote down the Lords House or question or null their Judgements upon appeals to the Commons from them as Lilburn and Overton pretend they may than the Grand or Petty Jury have to Vote down the Judges and Justices of Assize or Sessions from the Bench or to reverse or repeal their Judgements and Orders Or the Common Council of London to
Lords only sit upon the Bench and that covered and in their Parliamentary Robes the badges of Judicature but the Commons stand and that bare at the Bar without any robes at all the Lords only swear examine the witnesses and judge of their testimony the Commons only produce the witnesses presse and manage the evidence and when the buâ—nesse is fully heard the Lords only debate the cause among themselves and give the final Sentence Judgement without the Commons though sometimes in their presence and that both in cases of Commoners and Peers Therefore the Lords and House of Peers are sole Judges in Parliament not the Commons 9ly The Commons themselves in all ages since admitted into our Parliaments have always presented their Petitions in Parliament to the King and Lords alone for redress of all Grievances wrongs misdemeanours abuses whatsoever publike or private criminal or civil ecclesiastical marine or military And the Lords House alone have in all antient Parlaments appointed particular persons of their House to receive al Petitions Triers of them to hear and answer them by their advice and the kings assent when necessary which Triers of Petitions had power given to call the Lord Chancellor Treasurer Chamberlain Judges kings Servants and others to this assistance prescribing where when their Petitions should be presented examined redressed at all our Parliament Rolls aâ—est and Sir Edward Cook himself relates There being few or no Petitions at all presented by any to the Commons before â—â— H. 7. c. 19. 4 H. 7. c. 6. These Petitions then presented to them and all ever since with all in this present Parliament being only to this end that they upon the examination of the truth matters complaints grievances mentioned in them might transmit and represent them in the name of the Commons House to the Lords House for to give full redress relief and judgement on them to the Petitioners not for the Commons themselves to judge finally determine them or give relief upon them without the Lords as all the transmissions of private and publike Petitions by the Commons to the Lords heretofore and in this Parliment in the cases of Dr. Layton Dr. Bastwick Mr. Burton Mr. Walker my self and of Lilburns own Petition against his censure attest Therefore the Judicature of our Parliaments must wholy rest and intirely reside in the Lords House as well in all Criminal as civil cases both of Commoners and Lords 10ly The surest badge and highest evidence of the right and exercise of Juridical and Judicial Authority in Parliament is the examination affirmation control repeal nulling adjudging and finall determining all Errors in Judgements Decrees Proceedings all Misprisions Abuses Corruptions grievances whatsoever of Judges Justices in all other Courts of Justice Civil Ecclesiastical Marine or military Now the Lords-alone in Parliament upon Wtits of Error Appeals Complaints Petitions c examine confirm repeal null redresse and finally determine all Errors misprisions in Judgements Decrees Proceedings and all Abuses Corruptions Grievances whatsoever in all other Courts of Justice whether Civil as the Kings Bench Chancery Exchequer Chamber Common Pleas Exchequer Court of Wards Courts of Requests Stanneries c. or Ecclesiastical as the High Commission Archbishops Consistories the Convocation and the Admiralty Court Marshal Council Table Star-chamber and in former Parliaments as is evident by sundry presidents in former ages and in this present Parliament of King CHARLS in the cases of Dr. Layton Dr. Bastwick Mr. Burton Lilburn himself Mr. Grafton Alderman Chambers Mr. Rolls Sir Rob Howard Alderman Langham and Limry Mr. Johns and le Gay with sundry others But more especially in cases of Writs of Error brought in Parliament by Peers or Commoners upon any Erronious judgements touching their real or personal estates lives limbs liberties persons upon Indictments or Attainders In all which writs the King and Lords only are sole judges without the Commoners and the returns of the proceedings upon such Writs are only before the Lords in the Vpper House secundum legem et consuetudinem Parliaments So Sir Edward Cook himself expresly resolves in direct terms in his 4 Institutes p. 21 22 23. And 22 E. 3.3 Fitz Error 8 Br. 3.1 H. 7.20 21 22. Br. Error 137. Old Book of Entries p. 302.16 E. 3. Fitz. Brev. 651.21 E. 3.46 Br. Error 65.29 E. 3.24.39 Ass 18.42 Ass 22.7 H. 6.28 8 H. 5. Fitz. Error 88.19 H. 6.12.35 H. 6.19.37 H. 6.16.11 H. 4.65.9 E. 4.3.2 R. 3.22.37 H. 8.14 15 25. Dyer f. 62.196 201 315 375. intimate as much This is most clear by the Writs of Error Judgements and Proceedings on them in the Parliament House before and by the Lords alone mentioned in the Parliament Rolls themselves as 14 E. 1. roâ— Parl. 1.4 E. 3. n. 13 14.21 E. 3. n. 65 66.28 E. 3. n. 8. to 14.50 E. 3. n. 38.1 R. 2. n. 28 29 105.2 R. 2. n. 31 32 33 37 38. Parl. 2. and Parl. 1. n. 21. to 27.3 R. 2. n. 19.20 21 22.6 R. 2. n. 17.7 R. 2. n. 20 21.8 R. 2. n. 13 14 15 16.13 R. 2. n. 16 17 15 R. 2. n. 22 23 24.16 R. 2. n. 17 18.17 R. 2. n. 17.19 â—8 R. 2. n. 11 12 13.20 R. 2. n. â—6 21 R. 2. n. 25 55. to 66 71.1 H. 4. n. 91 92.2 H. 4. n. 38 39 40.4 H. 4. n. 26.5 H. 4. n. 40.6 H. 4. n. 31.1 H. 5. n. 19.2 H. 5. n. 13 14.3 H. 5. n. 19. with sundry Writs of Error in succeeding Parliaments and this now sitting adjudged determined by the King and Lords alone without the privity or interposition of the Commons A truth so clear that Lilburn himself in his Argument against the Lords jurisdiction confesseth iâ— If then the Lords House be the soâ—e Judges in all Writs of Error and Appeals from all other Courts of Justice concerning the Lands Tenements Goods Estates Liberties Members Lines Attainders of all English Freeholders and Commoners whatsoever notwithstanding the Statute of Magna Charta ch 29. No Freeman shall be â—aken or imprisoned c. neither will we pass upon him nor condemn him but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers c. the grand and principal objection against the Lords Judicature in Cases of Commoners then by the self same reason they are their lawfull Judges and may regally proceed against them in all other criminal or Civil causes especially in cases of breach of their own Privileges wherein they are the sole and only Judges since no other Court can judge of nor yet punish them as Sir Ed. Cook resolves being properly triable only in Paâ—liament as contempt against all other Courts are punishable and triable by themselves alone the present cases of Lilburne and Overton Now that they are and alwayes have been so de facto unless by way of Bill of Attainder or in such extraordinary cases when their concurrence hath been desired even in criminal cases misdemeanors and offences of Commons as well as Peers I
upon him nor condemn him but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers or by the Law of the Land Whence thus they argue The Lords in Parliament are not Commoners Peers but the Commons only therefore they cannot be judged in Parliament by the Lords but by the Commons alone and if Peers there judge Commoners it is a tyranny and usurpation even against Magna Charta it self though it be in case of privilege To take away this grand seeming Objection and give it a satisfactory answer I say First in general that there is scarce one Parliament ever since Magna Charta was first confirmed but the Lords have sentenced and given Judgement against some Commoners capitally or penally in body purse or both without the Commons and did so doubtlesse before Magna Charta was made as I have already manifested yet never did the Commons in any one of those Parliaments till this present complain of it as a violation of Magna Charta or a tyrannical usurpation as Lilburn and Overton stile it but acknowledged ir as a just right in the Lords even in 3 Caroli it self when the Petition of Right was passed in the Lords Judgement and Sentence against Dr Manwaring a Commoner impeached by the Commons in Parliament And therfore for this Ignoramus alone against the judgment of the Commons in Parl. in all ages to averr this a breach of Magna Charta for imprisoning and sining him for the highest affront and breach of privilege ever offered to any Parl. is the extremity of ignorance malice singularity Secondly I answer That the Statute of Magna Charta extendeth not to nor was ever intended of the high Court of Parliaments Judgements Proceedings but only to and of the Proceedings Judgements in the Kings great Courts of Justice at Westminster Hall the Exchequer his Privy Council and other inferior Courts held before Judges Justices of Assise and other Officers as is evident by comparing this objected Chapter with c. 11 12 13 14 18 28 30 34 37. by the Statutes of 25 E. 3. Stat. 5. c. 4. 28 E. 3. c. 3. 37 E. 3. c. 18. 38 E. 3. c. 9. 42 E. 3. c. 2. 17 R. 2. c. 6. and the Petition of Right it self 3. Caroli which so expound it there being never any complaint against the Parliament it self or House of Peers in any age for breach of Magna Charta in censuring or imprisoning Commoners till now Therefore this misapplying of this Law to the Parl. and House of Peers is a gross oversight Thirdly the very literal sence of this Law is much mistaken by the Objectors The main scope whereof is this That no man should be deprived of his Freehold Liberties Limbs life or outlawed exiled or otherwise destroyed without legal process in due form of Law in Courts of Justice not by meer force violence injustice arbitrary and tyrannical power or martial Law nor being brought to his legal trial or answer And that none should pass upon them in any trials for freehold or life but only English Freemen Now in respect of Freedom any every Freeman of England is a Peer to another Freeman quatenus such a one within this Law though of an higher degree in point of honour dignity office estate as Knights Esquires Gentlemen Yeomen Citizens Merchants these as Freemen are all Peers one to another and may pass upon each other in Juries both in civil and criminal causes and this clause No Freemâ—n shall be imprisoned c. but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers extends only to villains and those who are not Freeholders from being Iudges of Freemen and Freeholders in trials by Jury whence the Writs to the Sherifs to summon Jurors require them alwayes to return Liberos Legales homines not to exclude Lords or Peers who are Freemen in the highest degree to be Judges of Commoners who are Freemen So as the Argument from the true meaning of this Law can be but this in respect of the persons quality who are to give judgement Villains and those who are no Freemen are not to be Judges of or impannelled in Juries to condemn Freemen because they are not their Peers nor Freemen as well as they Therefore Lords who are Freemen of the highest degree may not give judgement against Commoners who are Freemen Very learned nonsence We all know that the Lord Chancellor of England Lord Keeper Lord Treasurer Master of the Court of Wards and some of the Judges of the Kings Courts in Westminster Hall in former times with the Chief Justiciar and Justices in Eyre were antiently and of late too as the Earl of Holland and others Peers of the Realm not Commoners and that all the Peers of the Realm are in Commissions of Oyer and Terminer and of the Peace yet did we never hear of any Commoner demurring or pleading thus to any of their Jurisdictions in Chancery Kings Bench the Exchequer Chamber Eyres Assises or Sessions Sir I am a Commoner and you are a Peer of the Realm but no Commoner as I am besides you sit here only in the Kings right doing all in his name and representing his person who is not my Peer but Sovereign Therefore you ought not to judge my cause condemn my person nor give any sentence for or against me it being contrary to Magna Charta which enacts That no freeman should be judged or passed upon or condemned but by the lawfull judgement of his Peers Certainly no person was ever yet so mad or sottish to make such a Plea before Ignoramus Lilburn And if Lords Peers may judge the persons causes of Commoners in the Chancery Kings Bench Exchequer Court of Wards Eyres and at Assises Sessions without any violation of this clause in Magna Charta though they are exempted to be impannelled or serve in Juries in cases of Commoners as Commoners in Juries to try them much more may the House of Peers in Parliament doe it who are certainly Peers to Commoners as Freemen though Commoners be not Peers to them as Lords within the meaning of Magna Charta chap. 29. Fourthly If the Lords in Parliament cannot meddle with or give judgement in Commoners causes without breach of this clause in Magna Charta then why did Lilburn himself sue and petition to the Lords as the only competent Judges to reverse his sentence in Star Chamber and give him damages because it was against this very Chapter of Magna Charta If Lords cannot give judgement in the case of Commoners as now he holds without express violation of this Law then himself in petitioning the Lords to relieve him against the Star-Chamber sentence because contrary to this very Law and Chapter of Magna Charta was a great a violator of it as his Star-Chamber censurers and his sentence in Star-chamber remains still unreversed because the Lords examining reversing of it they being no Commoners as he is but Peers was Coram non judice and meerly void by the Statute of 25 E.
3. Stat. 5. c. 4. because contrary to Magna Charta it self as he now expounds it Let him therefore unriddle assoyl this his own Dilemma or for ever hold his tongue and pen from publishing such absurdities to seduce poor people as he hath done to exasperate them to clamour against the Lords for being more favourable in their censure of him than his transcendent Libels and contempts against them deserved Fifthly This Statute is in the disjunctive by the Lawfull Judgement of his Peers OR BY THE LAW OF THE LAND which this Ignoramus observes not Now by the Law of the Land every inferiour Court of Justice may fine and imprison men for contempts or misdemeanors against them and their authority therefore the Lords in Parliament being the highest Tribunal may much more do it and have ever done it even by this express clause of Magna Charta and the Law and Custom of Parliament as well as they may give judgements in writs of Error against or for Commons without the Commons consent as himself doth grant yea and by the Kings concurrent assent declare what is Treason and what not within the Statute of 25 E. 3. c. 20. in the cases of Commoners as well as Lords without the Commons as they did in the forecited cases of William de Weston and Lord of Gomines 1 R. 2. n. 38 39 40. Of William Thorp 25 E. 3. n. 10. Of Thomas Haxey 20 R. 2. n. 15 16.23 Of Sir Thomas Talbot 13 R. 2. n. 20 21. Of Sir Robert Plesington and Henry Bowhert 22 R. 2. Plac. Coronae in Parliamento n. 27 28. Of John Hall 1 H. 4. Plac. Coronae in Parl. n. 11. to 17. Of Sir Ralph Lumley and others 4 H. 4. n. 15. 19 20 21. Of Sir John Oldcastle 5 H. 5. n. 11. and of Sir John Mortymer 2 H. 6. n. 18. as the Commons and Judges in all those Parliaments agreed without contradiction against the erronious opinion of Sir Edward Cooke to the contrary in his 3. Institutes p. 22. Sixthly It is granted by Lilburn that by this express Law No Freeman of England ought to be judged or censured but only by his Peers and that Commoners are no Peers to Nobles nor Noblemen Peers to Commoners Then by what Law or reason dared he to publish to the world That the House of Commons are the Supreme Power within this Realm and THAT BY RIGHT THEY ARE THE LORDS JUDGES certainly this is a Note beyond Ela a direct contradiction to Magna Charta in this very clause wherein he placeth his strength and subverts his very ground-work against the Lords Jurisdiction in their censure of him For if the House of Commons be by right the Lords Iudges then by Magna Charta c. 29. they are and ought to be their Peers and if the Commons be the Lords Peers then the Lords must be the Commons Peers too and if so then they may lawfully be his Judges even by Magna Charta because here he grants them to be no other than his Peers Lo the head of this great Goliah of the Philistin Levellers cut off with his own sword and Magna Charta for ever vindicated from his ignorant and sottish contradictory Glosses on it Now to convict him of his Errour in affirming the House of Commons to be by right the Lords Judges I might inform him as I have formerly proved at large that Magna Charta it self c. 14. 29. and Sir Edward Cook his chief Author in his commentary on them are express against him that in the Parliament of 15 E. 3. ch 2. in print it was enacted That whereas before this time the Peers of the Land have been arrested and imprisoned and their Temporalties Lands and Tenements Goods and Chattels seised into the Kings hands and some put to death without Iudgement of their Péers that no Peer of the Land Officer or other by reason of his office nor of things touching his office nor by other cause shall be brought in judgement to lose his Temporalties Lands Tenements Goods Chattels nor to be arrested or imprisoned outlawed exiled nor forejudged nor put to answer nor to be judged but by award of the said Péers in Parliament which privilege of theirs was both enjoyed and claimed in Parliament 4 E. 3. n. 14 15 E. 3. n. 6 8 44 49 51. 17 E. 3. n. 22. 18 E. 3. n. 7. to 16. 10 R. 2. n. 7 8. 11 R. 2. n. 7 c. and sundry other Parliament Rolls See Cook 4. Instit p. 15. 17 E. 3. 19. Cromptons Jurisdiction of Courts f. 4. 12 13. Stamford f. 151 152. This Paradox therefore of his is against all Statutes Law-Books Presidents whatsoever and Magna Charta it self And as false an assertion as that the Subjects are the Judges of their Soveraign the Servants of their Masters the children of their Parents the Wiâ—es of their Husbands the Soldiers of their General and the feet and lower members of the Head The second only Objection more of moment is this If the House of Peers may without the Commons fine and imprison Commoners then if their fine and imprisonment be unjust and illegal they shall be remediless there being no superior Court to appeal unto which will be an intollerable slavery and grievance not to be indured among free-born people I answer first That no injustice shall or ought to be presumed in the highest Court of Justice till it be apparently manifested Secondly If any such censure be given the party as in Chancery upon just grounds shewed may Petition the House of Peers for a review and new hearing of the cause which they in justice neither will nor can deny and if they do then the party grieved may petition the house of Commons to intercede in his behalf to the Peers for a rehearing but for them to discharge free any Commoner judicially censured by the Lords I have hitherto met with no president in former Parliaments nor power in the house of Commons to doe it who cannot reverse Erronious judgements in any inferiour Courts by writ of Error but the Lords alone much less then the judgements of the Higher House of Peers which is paramount them Thirdly I conceive the House of Peers being the Superior Authority and only Judicatory in Parliament may relieve or release any Commoners unjustly imprisoned or censured by the Commons house or any of their Committees and ought in justice to doe it or else there will be the same mischief or a greater in admitting the house of Commons to be Judges of Commoners if there be no appeal from them to the Lords in case their sentences be illegal or unjust Thirdly This mischief is but rare and you may object the same against a sentence given or Law made in Parliament by the King and both Houses because there is no appeal from it but only to the next or some other Parliament that shall be summoned by petition in the nature of a Writ of
A Plea for the LORDS AND HOUSE of PEERS OR A full necessary seasonable enlarged Vindication of the just antient hereditary Right of the Earls Lords Peers and Barons of this Realm to sit vote judge in all the PARLIAMENTS of ENGLAND Wherein their Right of Session and Sole Power of Judicature without the Commons House in Criminal Civil Ecclesiastical causes as well of Commons as Peers Yea in cases of Elections Breach of Privilege misdemeanors of the Commons themselves are irrefragably evidenced by solid reasons punctual Authorities memorable Presidents out of Histories and Records in all ages most of them not extant in any Writers of our Parliaments Whose Errors are here rectified the Seditious Anti-Parliamentary Pamphlets Libels of Lilbourn Overton and other Levellers against the Lords House and Right of judging Commoners fully refuted and larger Discoveries made of the Proceedings Iudgements of the Lords in Parliament in Criminal Civil causes Elections Breaches of Privilege of their Gallantry in gaining maintaining preserving the Great Charters Laws Liberties Properties of the Nation and oppugning all Regal Papal Vsurpations Exactions Oppressions illegal Ayds Taxes required or imposed and of the Commons first summons to and just Power in Parliaments than in any former Publications whatsoever By William Prynne Esquire a Bencher of Lincolnes Inne Prov. 22.28 Remove not the antient Land-mark which thy Fathers have set LONDON Printed for Henry Brome at the sign of the Gun in Ivie Lane and Edward Thomas at the Adam and Eve in Little Britain 1659. To all the truly Honourable Heroick Lords and Peers of the Realm of England who are real Patriots of Religion their Countries Fundamental Liberties Properties Great Charters Laws against all arbitrary Tyranny Encroachments illegal unnecessary Taxes and Oppressions Right Honourable THough true Nobility alwayes founded in vertue and real piety needs no other tutelar Deity or Apologie but it self amongst those ingenious Spirits who are able to discern or estimate its worth yet the iniquity of our degenerated Age and the frenzie of the intoxicated ignorant vulgar is such that it now requires the assistance of the ablest Advocates to plead its cause and vindicate the just Rights Privileges of the House of Peers against the licentious Quills Tongues of lawlesse sordid Sectaries and Mechanick Levellers who having got the Sword and reines into their hands plant all their batteries and force against them crying out like those Babylonian Levellers of old against the House of Lords Rase it Rase it even to the foundation thereof and lay it for ever â—ver with the very dust beholding all true Honor worth and Nobleness shining forth in your Honors heroick Spirits with a malignant aspect because they despair of ever enjoying the least spark therof in themselves and prosecuting you with a deadly hatred because better greater than ever they have hopes to be unless they can through Treachery and violence make themselves the onely Grandees by debasing your highest Dignity to the lowest Peasantry and making the meanest Commoners your Compears This dangerous seditious Design hath ingaged me the unablest of many out of my great affection to Royalty and real Nobility and a deep sence of the present kid tottering condition of our Kingdom Parliament the very pillars and foundations whereof are now not only shaken but almost quite subverted voluntarily without any Fee at all to become your Honors Advocate to plead your Cause and vindicate your undoubted hereditary right of sitting voting judging in our Parliaments of which they strenuously endeavour to plunder both your Lordships and your posterities and to publish these subitane Collections to the world now enlarged with many pertinent Additions to still the madness of the seduced vulgar whom Ignoramus Lilburn Overton Walwin and their Confederates have laboured to mutinie against your Parliamentary Jurisdiction treading upon Princes as upon mortar and as the Potter treadeth the clay in their illiterate seditious Pamphlets whose Arguments Pretences Presidents Objections Allegations I have here refuted by Scripture Histories Antiquities and Parliament-Rolls the ignorance whereof joyned with their malice is the principal occasion of their error in this kind And truly were all our Parliament Rolls Pleas Iournals faithfully transcribed and published in print to the eyes of the world as most of our Statutes are by authority of both Houses of Parliament a work as worthy their undertaking and as beneficial for the publike as any I can recommend unto their care it would not only preserve them from imbezelling and the hazards of fire and warr to which they are now subject but likewise eternally silence refute the Sectaries Levellers ignorant false Allegations against your Honors Parliamentary Jurisdiction and Judicatur resolve clear all or most doubts that can arise concerning the tower jurisdiction privileges of both or either Houses keep both of them within their due bounds the exceeding whereof is dangerous grievous to the people except in cases of absolute real present urgent not pretended necessity for the saving of a Kingdom whiles that necessity continues and no longer chalk oâ—â— the â—miâ—ent regular way of proceeding in all kinds of Parliamentary affairs whatsoever whether of warr or peace Trade or Government Privileges or Taxes and in all civil or criminal causes and all matters whatsoever concerning King or Subject Natives or Foreiners over-rule reconcile most of the present differences between the King and Parliament House and House Members and Members clear many doubts rectifie some gross mistakes in our printed Statutes Law-Books and ordinary Historians add much light lustre ornament to our English Annals the Common Statute Laws and make all Lawyers all Members of both Houses far more able than now they are to manage and carry on all businesses in Parliament when they shall upon every occasion almost have former presidents ready at hand to direct them there being now very few Members in either House Lords Lawyers or others well read or versed in antient Parliament Rollâ— Pleas Iournals or Histories relating to them the ignorance whereof is a great Remora to their proceedings yea oft times a cause of dangerous incroachments of new Iurisdictions over the Subjects persons estates not usual in former Parliaments of some great mistakes and deviations from the antient methodical Rules and Tracts of parliament now almost quite forgotten and laid aside by new unexperienced ignorant Parliament Members who think they may do what they please to the publike prejudice injury of posterity and subversion of our Fundamental Laws Rights Liberties in the highest degree by new erected arbitrary Committees exercising an absolute tyrannical power over the Persons Liberties Estates Freeholds both of Lords themselves and all English Freemen Your Lordships helping hand to the speedy furthering of such a necessary publike work and your industrious magnanimous unanimous imitation of the memorable heroick presidents of your Noble progenitors in gaining regaining enlarging confirming perpetuating to posterity the successive Grand Charters of our Liberties when
And if so then questionless such who hold not by an intire Barony and are not Majores Barones by Patent or Inheritance now cannot be created such by a meer general writ of summons neither can the King by his general writ create or make them such against this antient Law and usage ever since And the Earls Lords and Great honorary Barons who excluded all such from sitting in Parliament with them as Barons and their Peers then may much more exclude and refuse to admit such into their house or to sit with them if summoned now because their dignity honor power would suffer much diminution thereby and the King might by writ at any time call so many to their House as might overtop overâ—ote and alter their very Constitution as an House of Peers I shall close up this point of the Lords sole right to sit in Parliament with one or two memorable presidents In the 7. year of King Edward 2. as Walsingham stories in quindena Paschae per Regis brevia citatae sunt generaliter omnes Parliamentales personae pro Parliamento teuendo Londoniis Sed multis Proceribus praetendentes impedimenti causas nihil hâ—c vice factum suâ—t So Anno 1316. King Edward in the 9th year of his reign celebravit Concilium apud Clarindon sed Magnates noluerunt interesse Whereupon nothing was there effected The Lords presence being held then so necessary that by reason of the absence of divers of them upon some real or pretended impediments though all legally summoned by the Kings writs nothing was done or concluded by those who met who held themselves no compleat or legal Parliament without them Whereas in the Parliament of 5 E. 2. some of the Judges and Assistants departing from the Lords and divers Knights Citizens and Burgesses from the Commons house without license yet the Lords continuing all together and making Ordinances for regulating the Kings house and Revenues the Parliament still continued and these special writs were sent to recall the Judges and Lords Assistants quod redeant exinde et sine licentia nostra speciali durante Parliamento praedicto non recedatis Et hoc sicut indignationem nostram vitare volueritis nullo modo omittaris Teste Rege apud Haddely 12 Septemb. PER CONSILIUM And this general writ was sent to the Sheriff of Yorkeshire and all other Sheriffs of England to summon all the Knights Citizens and Burgesses in their several Counties to return thither or else to elect other fit persons in their places Praecipimus tibi firmiter injungentes quod illos Milites Cives Burgenses de Balliva tua quos nuper ad praesens Parliamentum nostrum apud London inchoatum de mandato nostro venire fecisti et qui ab eodem Parliamento certis de causis recesserunt quod redeant exinde c. vel alios ad hoc idoneos loco ipsorum SI AD HOC VACARE NON POSSUNT usque ad Westmonasterium ad dictum Parliamentum quod ibidem duximus continuandum c. proxime futur ad ultimum cum sufficienti potestate Comitatus tui Civitatum Burgorum praedictororum ad consentiendum hiis quae tunc ibidem contigerint ordinari c. Teste Rege apud London xi die Octobris This Parliament being thus continued Claus 5 E. 2. m. 25. Special license was granted to some LORDS to goe home who made Proxies to other Lords to supply their places by these words Deputamus in loco nostro in Parliamento and this in the Writ of Prorogation This I hope will suffice to convince all Levellers and Gainsayers of the LORDS undoubted antient Hereditary just Right and Title to sit vote in all ENGLISH PARLIAMENTS though not elected by the people SECTION II. Wherein the Lords House sole Right of Judicature in Parliament without the Commons is fully cleared by Presidents Histories Records in all ages and undeniable Reasons and that both in Criminal Civil Ecclesiastical Causes of all sorts as well in cases of Commoners and Clergymen as Temporal Peers persons of the highest degree proper for Parliament IT is the General confession resolution assertion both of Lawyers Law-books the Parliament and Statute of 31 H. 8. c. 10. and all who have written of our Parliaments That the Parliament of England is the antientest honourablest highest Court and Supremest Judicature in the Realm to whose Judicature all other Courts Persons Subjects of the Realm are subject accountable for all Injuries Oppressions Crimes Wrongs Corruptions Errors Abuses Grievances Misdemeanors Treasons Contempts Frauds false Judgments and matters of publike or privat concernment not properly triable remediable or punishable in other inferior Courts of Justice and that Court to whom all Appeals concerning Misproceedings Errors or Injustice in other Courts or places ought to be made and from whose Injustice and Sentence there is no appeal but only to another Parliament as in the case of General Councils as Divines assert there is no appeal but to another general Council in Ecclesiastical affairs concerning the Universal Church or matters of Faith This being an unquestionable Principle and Truth the sole Question will be in what House or Persons in Parliament this Supreme Judicatory or judicial power resides Whether in the King alonâ— or Lords alone or King and Lords jointly or in the House of Commons alone never made a question â—il now by Lilburn and Overton or in the King and House of Peers not separate from but joyntly with the Commons House And for my part I conceive it resides wholly and solely in the King and House of Lords not in the House of Commons which hath no part nor share therein singly considered in it self nor yet joyntly with the King and Lords but only in some special cases and proceedings as when and where the King and Lords voluntarily require their concurrence or where the judgement and proceedings in Parliament are by way of Bill or Act of Parliament or when a judgement passed or confirmed by Bill or Act to which the Commons consent was requisite is to be altered or reversed but in no cases else that I can find To make this ouâ— beyond contradiction it must be necessarily granted by all and cannot be gainsaid or disproved by any that this Supreme power of Judicature hath been vested in our Great Councils and Parliaments even from their beginning and original institution it being the antientest as well as highest and honourablest of all other Courts That it had this Soveraign Jurisdiction vested in and exercised by it both under our British Saxon Danish and Norman Kings I have elsewhere evidenced and shall anon make good by undeniable presidents Now the Great Parliamentary Councils under them consisted only of the King the Ecclesiastical and Temporal Lords Earls Barons Nobles without any Commons House or Knights of Shires Citizens or Burgesses elected by the people as I have already touched and manifested more fully in other Treatises yea
praesenti supersit His horumque similibus regali facundia editis praefaâ—us Petrus assensum praebere utile judicavit annuit Quapropter larga regis munificentia magnifice honoratus nullo modo se quicquam antiquae dignitatis derogaturum immo ut dignitatis ipsius gloria undecunque augmentaretur spoâ—pondit plena fide elaboraturum Pax itaque firma inter eos firmata est qui Legati officio fungi in tota Britannia venerat immunis ab omni officio tali cum ingenti pompa via qua venerat extra Angliam a Rege missus est At Canterbury he perused the antient privileges granted to the Prelates by the See of Rome touching their superiority over York Quibus ille perspectis atque perpensis testatus etiam ipse est Ecclesiam Cantuariensem grave nimis immoderatum praejudicium esse perpessam quatenus hoc velocius corrigeretur â—e modis omnibus opem adhibiturum pollicitus est Post haec Angliam egreditur By all these Parliamentary Councils and Proceedings in them and the Kings answer to this Legate it is most apparent from the testimony of Eadmorus present at most of them and then antient Hiâ—orians 1. That they all consisted during all the reign of King Henry the 1. of the King Bishops Abbots Earls Lords and Barons without any Knights Citizens Burgesses or Commons elected by the people 2ly That not only the legislative but judicial power or judicature of Parliament in all civil ecclesiastical and criminal causes debated or judged in them resided wholly in the King Prelates Earls Barons and Nobles which they joyntly and severally exercised by mutual consent as there was occasion 3ly That our Kings Prelates Nobles were then all very vigilant and zealous in opposing the Popes usurpations upon the antient Liberties Privileges Customs of the king kingdom and Church of England 4ly That those Antiquaries and others are much mistaken who affirm the Commons were called to the Parliament of 16 H. 1. as well as the Peers and Nobles and that since that time the authority of this Court hath stood setled and the COMMONALTY had their voice therein which the said H. 1. GRANTED TO THEM in love to the English Nation being a natural Englishman himself when as the Normans were upon terms of revolt from him to his Brother Robert Duke of Normandie it being clear by these Histories and all the Parliamentary Councils under King Henry the 1. and under Hen. the 2. King Ric. the 1. King John and Henry the 3. forecited and here ensuing that there were no Knights Citizens Burgesses or Commons elected by the people summoned to our Parliaments in their reigns succeeding Henry the 1. therefore not in his 5ly That the Opinion of Mr. Cambden Judge Dodridge Jo. Holland Sir Ro. Cotton Mr. Selden and others is true that the first Writ of Summons of any Knights Citizens Burgesses or Commons to Parliament now extant is no antienter than 49 H. 3. dors 10.11 That King Henry the 3. after the ending of the Barons wars appointed and ordained That all those Earls and Barons of the Realm to whom the King himself should vouchsafe to send his Writ of Summons should come to his Parliament and none else but such as should be chosen by the voice of the Burgesses and Freemen by other Writs of the king directed to them And that this being begun about the end of Hen. the 3. was perfected and continued by Edward the 1. and his Successors Which Holinshed Speed do likewise intimate in general terms So that upon due consideration of all Histories Records and judicious Antiquaries it is most apparent that the Commons had no place nor votes by election in our Parliaments in Hen. 1. his reign noâ— before the latter end of King H. 3. and Ed. 1. who perfected what his Father newly before him began in summoning them to Parliaments This being an irrefragable truth as I conceive the next thing to be considered of is this whether the Commons when thus called and admitted by H. 3. and E. 1. into our Parliaments had any share right or interest in the judicature of Parliaments then granted to them either as severed from or joyntly with the King and Lords And if any share or right at all therein at what time and in what cases was it granted or indulged to them With submission to better judgements I am clear of opinion that the King and Lords when they first called the Knights Citizens and Burgesses to Parliament never admitted them to any share or copartnership with them in the antient ordinary Judicial power of Parl. in civil or criminal causes brought before them by Writ Impeachment Petition or Articles of complaint as they were the supreme judicature and Court of Justice but reserved the judicial power and right of giving and pronouncing all Judgements in Parliament in such cases and ways of proceeding wholly to themselves admitting them only to share with them in their consultative Legislative and Tax imposing power as the Common Council of the Realm thereby in cases of Attainder by Act Bill or Ordinance a part of the Legislative not ordinary judicial authority of Parliament allowed them a voice and partnership with themselves and a share in reversing such Aâ—tainders by Act Bill or Ordinance by another Bill or Sentence but in no cases else except such alone wherein the King or Lords should voluntarily at their own pleasures not of meer right requite their concurrence with them The Arguments reasons inducing me to this opinion and irrefragably evincing it are these 1. The Form of the Writs for electing Knights Citizens Burgesses of Parliament with the retorns and Indentures annexed to them which are only ad faciendum consentiendum his quae tunc ibidem de Communi Concilio dicti regni contigerint ordinari Which gives them no judicial power in civil or criminal causes there adjudged as the Writs to the Lords doe give to them by these clauses Ibidem cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus regni colloquium habere tractatum vobiscum c. colloquium habere tractare Personaliter intersitis Nobiscum ac cum Praelatis Magnatibus Proceribus super dictis negotiis tractaturi vestrumque consilium impensuri and usage custom time out of mind 2. Because when first summoned to our Parliaments they were never called nor admitted thereunto as Members of the Lords house or as persons equal to them in power nor admitted to sit in the same Chamber as Peers with them but as Members of an inferiour degree sitting in a distinct Chamber from them by themselves at first as they have done ever since which I have elsewhere proved against Sir Edward Cooks and others mistakes as Modus tenendi Parliamentum it self resolves if it be of any credit 3ly Because after their call to our Parliaments in 49 H. 3. they had scarce the Name nor Form of an House of Commons or Lower
ut rex ipsis omnibus qui in eorum comitiva arma moverant literas patentes indemnitatis concederet ne pro transgressionibus transactis vel praesentibus a rege seu quovis alio futuris temâ—oribus punireâ—ur Ad haec dominus rex respondit quod Hugo le Spencer pater in suo negotio mare transierat Hugo junior in mari ad custodiendum quinque Portus prout ex officio renebatur qui de jure vel consuetudine exulare non debent ante responsa data per eosdem Adâ—câ— praeâ—ereâ— quod eorum petitio juris rationis fundamento carebat eo maxime quod dicti Hugo senior Hugo junior parati semper fuerant omnibus de se conquerentibus in forma juris respondere si probare possent eos in aliquo statuta terrae laesisse parati semper suerant legibus regni parere Postremo cum juramento addidit quod noluerit sacramentum violare ad quod astrictus fuerat in Coronatione sua concedendo literas pacis et indulgentiae tam notorie delinquentibus in suae personae contemptum et totius regni perturbationem et majestatis regiae laesionem Hiis auditis Proceres acti in â—uâ—iam confesâ—im ad arma rosiliunt milites quidam super armatura cotiâ—cas induerunt vocatas quarteloys Armigeri vero indumenta bendas habuerunâ— quibus indumentis expost induti tracti sunt suspensi plurimide procerum Comitiva Cum fastu igitur pompa nimia Barones Londonias adierunt hospitatique in suburbia civitatis manebant pacifice donec licentiam ingredi civitatem obtinuissent obtento a rege civitatis ingressu Magnates sicut prius in petitione sua fortiter perstiterunt Tandem interveniente regina praefatis episcopis laudabiliter mediantibus rex inductus est propter werrae periculum evitandum ut condescenderet votis petitionibus Procerum praedictorum Edictoque super hiis per comitem Herefordiae in aula Westmonasterii publicato Hugo senior in exilium actus est Sed Hugo junior in diversis locis latitans in Anglia in mari permansit The Clause Roll of 14 E. 2. m. 17. Schedula records the proceedings with this addition that King Edward the 2. having summoned the Lords to come to a Parliament with the rest of the Council at Glocester Humfry de Boun Roger de Mortimer and their confederates refused to come upon the Summons for fear of Hugh Spencer who was made Chamberlain in pleno Parliamento 12 E. 2. at York desiring that he might be committed and kept in safe custody till the Parliament for they weâ—e unwilling to come to him so long as he was with the King The King said he much wondred at this their carriage in regard Spencer was never questioned in any other Parliament since he was made Chamberlain for any misdemeanour ignorare non debetis nec potestis quod mandata nostra omnibus singulis ad Nos ad hujusmodi mandata nostra convenientibus protectâ—o desensio sunt debent secundum legem et consuetudinem Regni nostri As for removing Spencer from him which they desired he said it were unjust and of ill example aliis Ministris nostris sâ—ipsum amoveremas à Nobis totaliter sine causâ— Praefâ— uâ— vero Hugonem sive quemaâ—is alium Custodiae sine causa committere non possumus nec debemus cum hoc esset conira tenorem Magnae Chartae de libertatibus Angliae et contra Communem Legem Regni nostri ac contra Ordinationes made by himself and the Lords in Parliament Idem enim Hugo se protulit plane ac publice coram Nobis ad respondendum in Parliamento nostro alibi prout debuit querelis nostri siâ—gulorum aâ— ipso conqueretium volentium ad standum inde recto c. And thereupon he commands them to come and treat cum caeteris de Concilio at Oxford whereas it appears by the Dorse of this Roll he had formerly summoned them and the rest of the Council to Glocester whether these Earls refused to come Claus 15 E. 2. dorso 32. The whole proceedings against the Spencers in Parliamen are at large recorded but cancelled by order of the Parliament at York They were sent to every Court to be inrolled and the writ recites thar their judgement was per pares in praesentia Regis Soon after the same year the King summoned a Parliament at York on the 3. of September where this judgement against the Spencers was questioned as erronious and being referred to the consideration of the Provincial Council of Canterbury they conceived it to be erronice factum because the Spiritual Lords never assented to it neither could they doe it because it was Jndicium sanguinis for if they submitted not to the exile they were to be proceeded against as Enemies to the King and Realm After which the King and some of the Lords had the sentence read to them and they said It was erroniâ—ous The Earls of Richmond Pembroke and Arundel said They gave their voyces for fear of the other Noble mens power and the Judges said Consideratio praedicta fuit contra Legem consuetudinom regni The King writes down all this and then sends to some of the Bishops that were absent from the Council to know their minds 4 Januarii who concurring in judgement with the rest thereupon the Process Judgement and Act against the Spencers was nulled and made void before the King Lords and Commons who were consenting to it before 1. Because they were not called to it to make their defence 2ly Because the Lords Spiritual who were Peers assented not to it 3ly Because against MAGNA CHARTA the franchises of England Nullus liber homo utlagetur c. 4ly Because the Faults were not sufficiently proved 5ly Because the Lords in the Kings absence of their proper authority usurping to themselves royal power had given the judgement of his royal assent with the assent of the Lorâ—s and Commons without his privity and against his will The judgement and process of this repeal and nulling their sentence were sent by Writ into every County to proclaim and to null and cancel the first judgement A little before which Parliament Thomas Earl of Lancaster and sundry other Lords Knights and Gentlemen for adhering to him and levying war against the king were arraigned impeached before the Lords and commanded to be hanged drawn quartered and beheaded Comitum et Baronum Consilio as Walsingham relates without the Commons peculiar assent and accordingly executed Anno 1326. Hugh Spencer the younger notwithstanding the repeal of his exile being taken by the Kings forces was brought to Hereford and there arraigned publiquely before William Trussel a Judge His inditement is at large recorded in the Chronicle of Leicester and in Henry de Knyghton de Eventibus Angliae l. 3. c. 15. col 2547. c. beginning thus Hugo de Dispencere En Parlement nostre
of Attainders in cases of high Treason did not institute them Judges of these persons nor give them any share in the judicial right and power of Parliaments 1. Because most of these persons thus attainted by Bill were Queens Dukes Earls Lords Barons and Peers of the Realm who were triable to be judged only by their Peers none else by the Common Law of England Magna Charta c. 29. and sundry other Acts not by the Commons who are not their Peers 2ly Because most of these parties thus attainted by those Bills were first attainted tried judged condemned in Parliament by the Lords alone as their proper Judges upon the complaints or impeachments of the Lords Appellants or of the Commons themselves or else before some other Judges upon indictments and legal tryals and those Acts did only confirm and ratifie their precedent attainders recited in them 3ly Because in many of these Acts the Commons did only petition that their Attainders might be ratified by Bill and the King and Lords assents thereto which was done at their request as Petioners not Judges 4ly Because their Judgements and Attainders passed formerly by the Lords and Judges were good in Law though thus ratified afterwards by Bill for the greater terror certainty and satisfaction and these Bills did pass no new Judgements and Attainders upon the parties but only ratifie the old and in cases where there was no precedent Attainder they attaint them only by vertue of their Legislative power without any indictment tryal or hearing of the parties themselves as Judges of them some of them being dead when attainted taking all the charges in the Bills pro confesso and notoriously true and proved such by some other precedent legal convictions and evidences 2ly There is a formal proper Judgement given in our Parliaments both in criminal and civil causes upon complaints Articles Petitions Impeachments Inditements Informations Writs Appeals Reports References and that either against or concerning Peers themselves or against or concerning Commoners and other Laicks or Clergy-men And in all such cases proceedings the King and Lords alone have a proper judiciary power or right of Judicature without the Commons vested in and executed by them which I shall abundantly evidence and make good by sundry memorable Presidents out of our Histories and Records in all ages not vulgarly known and for the most part never yet remembred by any who have wriâ—ten of our Parliaments and the proceedings in them whose Treatises are very slight unsatisfactory and in many things of this nature erronious I shall begin first with presidents concerning Ecclesiastical Temporal Lords alone proceeded against impeached judged censured in our Parliaments for sundry criminal causes Offences Treasons wherin the House of Commons can challenge no share or voice in the Judicature especially in the case of Temporal Lords who are such in their own right and sit in Parliament ratione Nobilitatis but the Lords alone and that by the express Letter and Resolution of the Great Chariers of King John and of King Henry 3. and Ed. 1. c. 14.29.15 E. 3. c. 2 3 4. and roâ— Parl. n. 6.8.11 R. 2. rot Parl. n. 6 7.5 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 12.28 H. 6. ror Parl. n. 51 52 53. 20 H. 6. c. 9.26 H. 8. c. 13.28 H. 8. c. 7.18.31 H. 8. c. 12.32 H. 8. c. 4.33 H. 8. c. 12 20 23.35 H. 8. c. 2.1 Ed. 6. cap. 12. 1 Mar. c. 6.1 2 Phil. Mar. c. 3.4 5 Phil. Mar. c. 4.1 Eliz. c. 1.5.5 Eliz. c. 11.13 Eliz. c. 1.14 Eliz. c. 1 2 3. 18 El. c. 1.23 El. c. 1 2.27 El. c. 2.3 E. 3.19 Fit Corone 16â— 1 H. 4.1.10 E. 4.6 Brooke Trial 142. Stamford l. 3. c. 1. f. 152.33 H. 8. Brookâ— Trial 142.34 H. 8. Bro Corone 172.13 H. 8.11 Br. Treasons 29.38 H. 8. Br. Treasons 2.33 Dyer 99.107.208.360 Cook 6 Rep. f. 52.9 Rep. f. 30.87 and Cooks 2 Instit f. 28 29 48 49 50. and his 3 Instit c. 1. 2. p. 27 28 29.30 31. All which declare enact resolve That the Peers of this Realm shall not be tried or proceeded against but only by the lawfull judgement and verdict of their Peers The Lords and Barons of Parliaments trial by Peers alone of their own rank being so essential that they cannot waive nor put themselves upon the trial of the Country by 12. ordinary Freeholders as was resolved in the Lord Dacres case Pa. 26 H. 8. Cooks 3 Institutes f. 30. much less then can they waive their Peerage it self and sit as Commoners in the Commons house as I have formerly proved The first president I meet with in our Histories of this nature is in the reign of Cassibelan the British King who having repulsed Julius Caesar upon his first landing in this Island and forced him to return into France Edictum fecit ut omnes Proceres Britanniae convenirent to the City of â—roynovant now London where Evelin nephew to Androgens Duke of Troynovant slaying Heralgas nephew to Cassibelan upon a sudden quarrel as they were playing together Cassibelan thereupon commanded Evelin to be brought before him talem sententiam quam Proceres regni judicarent subire which Androgeus opposing â—aying sese suam Curiam habere in illa diffiniri debere quicquid aliquis in homines suos clamaret thereupon Cassibelan threatned to waste his Country with fire and sword if he refused to deliver up his Nephew to justice to undergo the sentencâ— quam Proceres dictarent which he accordingly executed for refusing to put his Nephew upon the Trial and Judgement of the Nobles for this murder The next president I find is that of Wilfrid Archbishop of York who for refusing to divide his Bishoprick into two Bishopricks more and for endeavouring to perswade Queen Emburga to become a Nun and desert her husband Egfrid King of Northumberland was through that Queens malice and prosecution in two several Parliamentary Councils Anno 678. 692. twice deprived of his Archbishoprick and banished the Realm by King Egfrid Theodor Archbishop of Canterbury and the rest oâ— the Bishops and Nobles of the Realm assembled in these Councils and at last restored to his Archbishoprick again in another Council An. 705. by King Osred his will and consent About the year of our Lord 924. Elfred a Nobleman who opposed Aethelstans title and election to the Crown though in vain intended to seise upon him at Winchester and put out his eyes but his Treason being discovered he was apprehended and sent to Rome to purge himself thereof by Oath where he abjuring the fact before the Altar of St. Peter in the presence of Pope John the 10th fell down suddenly to the ground as dead and being thereupon carried away thence to the English School he there expired within 3 dayes after The Pope acquainting the King therewith and craving his advice what to do with him and whether he should have Christian burial the King thereupon
son serement Auxint pur lour malveis covetise et par poiar roial a eux acroche ne susterent nostre seignor le roy doier ne droit fair ' as grandes de la terre sur la demonstrance que ilz fesoient a luy pur luy et pur eux de la disheritance de la corone et de eux touchant les terres que furent as templers Et issint par yoiar roial a eux accroche ont ils mesne nostre seignour le roy son counseil et ses prelatz que des choses touchant eux ou lour alies ount emprise et embrace par eux que droit ne poet estre fait forsquea lour volunte et a dammage et a dishonour de nostre dit seigneur et peryl de son serement et dishinheritaunce et destruction de plusours autres grandes du people de son royalme Et auxint de eslues as evesque abbes et priours que devoient de droit estre resceux de nostre seignour le roy lou ils sont en due maner estues ne poient approcher a nostre seignour le roy ne one luy parler de querer sa grace tanque ils avoient fait sine et fret Sir Hugh le fitz a sa volunte Ne nul que eust grant aquere de nostre seignour le roy ne poet a nul grant atteinder avantque ilz avoient faitfine a luy Estre ceo lou John de Lacchelegh et autres fuerent agardes a la prisone pur un trespas que ils avoient fait a la dame de Merk a damag ' de la dist dame de M. Centz marcz dont ils furent atteintz devant mon Sir Robert de Middyngle er ses compaignons Justices assignes a oier et terminer cel temps cel trespas et le dit John feust en la prison de Colcestre par la gard suisdit Sir Hugh le fitz accrochantz a luy roial poiar amesna le diâ— Iohn hors de la prison contre leye de la teâ—re eius que il avoir fait gree a la dit dame des damages avantditz et luy fist vender sa terre a luy et â—ever sur ceo un fine Claus 16 E. 2. m. 5. There is this memorable case recorded The King being at Bishops Thorpe near York held a Council with his Lords divers of which are there named concerning the Truce with Scotland inter quâ—s Nobiles Hen. de Bellamont Baro de Magno et secreto Concillo ipsi Domino Regi juratus vocatus fuit ibidem venit Being there preâ—ed by the King to give his advice herein quodam motu excessius animo quasi irreverents dicto Domino Regi saepe respondit quod sibi consulere noluit in hac parte Whereupon the King commanded him thence Upon which he went out of the Council and said He had rather be absent than there Upon which contemptuous carriage and words consideration being had by the Lords and Council by all the Iudges Barons of the Exchequer being there amongst others to wit as assistants in regard he was sworn and had taken the Oath of a privy Counsellor to the King being called in again Committitur Scalae Prisonae pro contemptu inobedientia praedictis After which he was let to mainprise and a truce being there concluded with the Scots thereupon the writs ad arma c. were revoked that were formerly iâ—sued to the Tenants by Escuage and Knights service In the Parliament held at Winchester Ann. 2 E. 3. Edmund Earl of Kent the Kings Uncle by the instigation and power of Roger Mortimer Earl of March was arrested impeached condemned and executâ—d for conspiring and attempting to rescue his Brother King Edward the 2. and saying he was alive after the time he was murdered which Treason was said to be manifestly proved by Letters found about him and by his own voluntary confession before the Coroner recorded in Walsingham and the Clause Roll of 4 E. 3. which Letters and confession were openly read in Parliament pur que oue le assent des Countz Barons et autres Grantz et Nobles â—n mesme le Parliament par agard dicelle estoiet le dit Count come Nostre Trayture et Traiture de Royalm adjudge a la mort as the King himself recites in his Writs and Letters to all Sherifs Claus 4 E. 3. m. 16. dorso Demorte Edmundi nuper Comitis Cantii publicanda commanding them to publish this as the cause and manner of his death and to arrest all those that said King Edward the 2. was alive or that the said Earl of Kent was otherwise put to death So that by this record being a Peer he was adjudged to death only by the Earls Barons Great men and Nobles in Parliament without the Commons not named in this record And therefore the Kings Letter to the Pope in 4 E. 3. relating the proceedings and judgement against the Earl in these words if truly recited Comitibus Magnatibus Baronibus aliis de COMMUNITATE dicti regni ad PARLIAMENTUM illud congregatis injunximus ut super hiis DISCERNERENT ET JUDICARENT quid rationi justitiae conveni et habentes prae oculis solum deum qui eum CONCORDI ET UNANIMI SENTENTIA tanquam reum criminis laesae Majestatis ADJUDICARENT ejus sententiae c. Objected by Sir Robert Cotton to prove the Commons to have a share and voice in judicatures in Parliament and that not in the case of a Commoner but this great Peer must needs be understood of an Attainder by Bill to confirm the judgement formerly given against him by the Earls Barons and Lords alone in this Parliament as in the case of the two Spencers not long before not of his original sentence given only by the Lords Barons and other Great men and Nobles as the Clause Roll and all Writs to the Sheriffs record Which the Parliament Roll in 4 E. 3. n. 11 12. doth likewise intimate where Earl Edmonds eldest Son and Margaret Countesse of this Earl of Kent by their Petitions prayed that THE RECORD or Bill against the said Earl might be reversed for errors therein appearing and he to be restored to blood and lands of his Father and she to her Dower which was granted and ordered by Parliament saying to the King the wardship of the same during his minority and thereupon it was further enacted That no Peer of the land nor other persons should be impeached for the death of the Earl of Kent but only the said Mortimer and 3 more then impeached and condemned of High Treason for his murder as well of the deposed Kings and that his Countess should have her Dower as Claus 5 E. 3. part 1. m. 24. assures us In the Parliament of 4 E. 3. rot Parl. n. 14. Edward the eldest Son of Edward Earl of Arundel condemned and beheaded without any legal trial by his
de la foy le roy en cellez paâ— Pâ—r la ou le roy devoit pluis ost par reson avoyre vengee loure mort de pardonee contre fourme de parlement Ensy le dit Roger compassa devoyre destrut lez noryes le roy et lez secrettez le roy de queuz il se pluis aâ—ya Et susmyt al roy en presence la reyne sa miere et dez eveskes de Nichole et de Salusberye et autres de counsaile le roy qe lez avanditez secretez le roye luy exciterent destre la covygne dez enmys par de lay en destruccion de sa miere et del avant dite Roger La quela chose il affirma tant sour le Roy que le parole le Roye ne poet creu Et cele vendurdi deinz la nute qils estoient prisez a la myt nyt suant donke pur lez caulez susescriptes et molt dez autrez choses que ne sont pas ore a dyre touz si fist le dit roy prendre en la manere par eide et avisement dez priveez et nuriicz come il vous ad souent monstres Tunc propter causas subscriptas et multas alias quae jam non sunt recitandae ad praesens Rex praecepit Comitibus Baronibus et caeteris Magnatibus regui justum judicium ferre super praedicto Rogero Mortymere Qui omnes adinvicem consulentes venerunt dicentes quod omnes et singuli articuli superius de dicto Rogero attestati veri sunt et notorii et omni populo terrae cogniti et praecipuè articulus tangens mortem regis apud Berkeleye unde respiciatum est et adjudicatum quod praedictus Rogerus ut proditor et inimicus regis et regni distrastus sit et suspensus tertio kalend Septembris apud Londonias Cujus corpus duobus diebus et duabus noctibus nudum pendebat super furcas By these Articles it is evident 1. that it was adjudged high Treason in him to murther King Edward the 2. after his resignation of and deposition from the Crown by his own and a Parliaments consent How much more then to destroy murther him when an actual lawfull King when never deposed without and against his Parliaments consents and contrary to their resolutions protestations Covenants Oaths 2ly That to come with armed forces to any Parliament to over-awe force menace terrifie thereby and drive away any of the Members thereof from it and compel the rest to comply with or not to oppose what this armed party propounds or to put any Nobleman to death is a high and treasonable offence That Lords and other Members may justly depart from Parliament without doing any thing when there is any such force upon them Let Lilburn and others guilty of such Treasons sadly consider them and take timely warning by this president In the Parliament of 28 E. 3. n. 7. to 14. Roger Mortimer of Wigorn Cosin and heir to this executed Roger required by his Petition that the Act of his Attainder in the Parliament of 4 E. 3. n. 1. might be examined and for manifest Errors therein reversed whereupon the record was brought into Parliament and all the Articles Proceedings and Circumstances of his Judgement at large recited Which being read it was alleged that the judgment was defective erronious in all points not for the substance of his Charge for that the said Earl was put to death and disinherited by the Lords as Judges oâ— Parliament by the Kings command Sans nulle accusement et sans estre mesne au juggement au en respons without any accusation and without being brought to Judgement or to answer for which causes it was prayed That the said Statute and Judgement might be reversed and annulled For which causes Nostre Seignour le Roy et les dits Prelates Prince Duks Countz et Barons per accord des Chivalers des Counts et des ditz Comunes reâ—ellent et anientissent et pur erroigne et irrâ—t ajudgent les Records et Iuggements suis dits This Judgement whose reversal is also recited in Claus 28 E. 3. m. 7. 29 E. 3. rot Parl. n. 29. though given in Parliament being erronious and void in Law because given without any lawful accusation trial answer and arraignment of the party against the Great Charter and Law of the Laud which ought to be observed not violated by the Lords or Parliament it self in their Judicial proceedings In this Parliament of 28 E. 3. â— 13. Richard Earl of Arundel by Petition shewed that in the Parliament of 1 E. 3. touching the attaindâ— of Edmund Earl oâ— Arundel his Father a Statute was made without forfeiture albeit he was put to death and prayed that he may now be taken as heir of his Father and that Act reversed as erronious which being read and duly considered 〈◊〉 suâ—ceâ— oue bon deliberation et auys a graunt 〈◊〉 nostre Seigniour le Roy Prelates Prince Duk◠〈◊〉 Barons 〈…〉 il apiert clerement que le dit Edmund fuist non 〈…〉 a la mert et que parols recites eu le dit Statute touchant la mort et destruction de dit Edmund sont voydes erroignes et nulles Pur quoi nostre Seignior le Roy et les ditz Prelates Prince Dukes Countz eâ— Barons per accord des Chivalars des Counteâ— et des dites Commune ajuggent et agardent que la recitation et quelque est en le dit Statute touchant la mort et destruction du dit Edmund sont Voides erroignes et nulles c. et soint anientez et pur nul toutz a toutz jours The said Edmund being put to death without due proces or trial by his PEERS according to the Law of the Land and the Great Charter Therfore the Act confirming this erronious attainder was thus reversed repealed and nulled In these two last Records it is observable First that the King and Lords debated adjudged these Judgements and attainders to be erronious but because they were confirmed by Act of Parliament the assent of the Knights of Shires and Commons was required and had to their reversal as well as to the nulling and repealing of other publike Acts. In the Parliament of 50 E. 3. rot Parl. n. 21. to 31. William Lâ—d Latymer was accused by the Commons for divers oppressions by him done to the Kings people both during his command in Britain and also in the time that he was Chamberlain to the King and of his Council in levying divers sums of money for victuate and ransoms amounting to many thousand pounds for which he never accounted For the loss of sundry Foâ—s and Towns in Normandy and Brittain to the Enemy of which he had the command and partaking with Richard Lions in those illegal Impositions and misdemeanours whereof he was then impeached by them Whereunto the Lord Latymer saving the tryal of his Peers offered to answer any particular
Vice-Chamberlain before the King and Lords of divers offences against the King who taking the accusation to be good because of the Bishops order and that he was of the kingâ— linage pardoned the said Bishop all his misprisions done against his person and reconciled the Bishop and Sir Thomas one to another And n. 30 31. all the Lords Temporal whose names are there recorded being 25. in number by assent of the King declared and ADJUDGED Thomas Holland late Earl of Kent John Holland late Earl of Huntingdon John Mountague late Earl of Salisbury Thomas le Despencer Sir Ralph Lumley Knight and divers others who were for their Rebellions and Treasons in levying war against the King taken slain or beheaded by certain of the Kings Subjects to be Traytors and that they should forfeit all such Lands as they had in fee the 5. of January the first year of the King or at any time after with all their goods and chattels The Record is Toutz les Seigneurs temporelz esteantz en Parlement per ussent du Roy declarerent et adjuggerent les ditz Thomas c. pur Trayteurs pur la leve de Guerre encountre lour Seignior le Roy nient obstant qils furent mortz sur le dâ—t leve de guerre sanz process de ley Lo here the Lords alone by the Kings assent declare and adjudge what is Treason both in the case of Lords and Commoners too and â—taint and give Judgement against them both without the Commons after their deaths without legal trial In the Parliament of 5 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 11 12 13 14. On Friday the 18 of February the Earl of Northumberland came before the King Lords and Commons in Parliament and by his Petition to the King acknowledged that he had done against his Lawes and allegeance and especially for gathering power giving of Liveries for which he put himself upon the Kings grace and prayed pardon the rather for that upon the Kings Letters he yielded himself and came to the King at York whereas he might have kept himself away Which Petition by the Kings command was delivered to the Justices to be examined and to have their counsel and advice therein Whereupon the LORDS made a Protestation que le Juggement appentient a â—ux tout soulement THAT THE JUDGEMENT APPERTAINED ONLY TO THEM And after the said Petition being read and considered before the King and the said Lords as Peers of Parliament aus queux teils juggemeâ—t apperteignent de deoit to whom such Iudgements appertained of right having had by the Kings command competent deliberation thereupon and having also heard and considered as well the Statute made in the 25. year of King Edward the Kings Grand father that now is concerning the Declaration of Treason as the Statutes of Liveries made in this Kings reign ADJUDGED That that which was done by the said Earl contained within his Petition was neither Treason nor Felony but Trespas for which the said Earl ought to make fine and ransom at the will of the King Whereupon the said Earl most humbly thanked our Lord the King and the said Lords his Peers of Parliament for their rightfull judgement and the Commoners for their good affections and dâ—ligence used and shewen in this behalf And the said Earl further prayed the King that in assurance of these matters to remove all jealousies and evil suspitions that he might be sworn a new in the presence of the King and of the Lords and Commons in Parliament and the said Earl took an Oath upon the Crosier of the Archbishop of Canterbury to be a faithfull and loyal liege to our Lord the King the Prince his Son and to the heirs of his body inheritable to the Crown according to the Laws of England Whereupon the king out of his grace pardoned him his fine and ransom for the trespass aforesaid After which num 17. the Lords Spiritual and Temporal humbly thanked the King sitting in his royal Throne in the white Chamber for his grace and pardon to the said Earl of his fine and ransom and likewise the Commons thankâ— the Lords Spiritual and Temporal for the good and just Iudgement they had given as Peers of Parliament to the said Earl From this memorable Record I shall observe First that though this Declaration of this Earls case was made by his Petition in the presence of the King Lords and Commons in Parliament according to the Statute of 25 E. 3. yet the Lords only by Protestation in presence of the King and Commons claimed to be the sole Iudges of it as Peers of Parliament and belonging to them OF RIGHT Secondly That this claim of theirs in this case was acknowledged and submitted to both by the King and Commons and thereupon the Lords only after serious consideration of the case and Statutes whereon it depended gave the definitive sentence and judgement in this case that it was neither Treason nor Felony but Trespass only c. Thirdly That the Earl thanked the King only for his grace the Lords for their just Iudgement and the Commons only for their good hearts and diligence having no share in the judgement though given by the Lords both in the Kings and their presence and that the Commons themselves returned special thanks to the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament for their good and just judgement Fourthly That this judgement of the Lordr only was final and conclusive both to the King and Commons who acquiesced in it In the Parliament of 2 H. 5. rot Parl. num 13 14. Thomas Mountague Earl of Salisbury son and heir of John Mountague Earl of Salisbury exhibited his petition in Parliament to reverse a judgement given against his said father in the Parliament at Westminster in the second year of King Henry the fourth rot Parl. n. 30 31. forecited wherein amongst others he was attainted of Treason by judgement of all the Temporal Lords in Parliament and thereupon he exhibited certain reversals of Judgements given in Parliament as making on his behalf to the Lords consideration reversed for some errors assigned in those judgements to wit one judgement given against Thomas heretofore Earl of Lancaster before King Edward the second at Pomfract the Monday before the feast of the Annunciation in the fifteenth year of his reign and another Judgement against Roger de Mortymer late Earl of March in the Parliament of King Edward the third the Monday after the feast of St. Katherine in the fourth year of his reign at Westminster Which Judgements being distinctly and openly readâ— and fully understood It seemed to the King and Lords that the case of the death and execution of the said John late Earl of Sarum and of the judgement aforesaid against him given is not nor was like to the case of the executing of the said Th. heretofore Earl of Lancaster nor to the case of the putting to death of Roger Earl of March nor to any judgement given against
the said Thomas and Roger as aforesaid but that the judgement and declaration had and given against the said John late Earl of Sarum were a good just and legal Declaration and Iudgement Per quod consideratum suit in praesenti Parliamento per praedictos Dominos tunc ibidem existentes de assensu diâ— Domini nostri Regis quod praefatus nunc Comes Sarum nihil capiat per petitionem aut prosecutionem suam praedictam Et ulterius tam Domini spirituales quam temporales supradicti judicium et Declarationem pradicta versus dictum Joannem quondam Comitem Sarum ut praemittitur habita sive reddita de assensu ipsius Domini Regis affirmarunt fore et esse bona justa et legalia et ea pro hujusmodi ex abundanti decreverunt et adjudicarunt tuuc ibidem This is all that is mentioned in that Parliament Roll concerning this businesse Sir Edw. Cook who hath an excellent faculty above all others I have yet met with in mistaking mis-reciting and perversing Records and Law-books too oft times which he had no leisure to peruse which I desire all Lawyers and others to take notice of who deem all he writes to be Oracle lest they be seduced by him in his 4 Institutes p. 23. affirms with confidence That in this Rot. Parl. 2. H. 5. n. 13. Error was assigned to reverse this judgement that the Lords gave judgement without Petition or assent of the COMMONS citing it to prove that the COMMONS have a power of judicature together with the LORDS But under his favour I can assure ye Reader 1. That there is no such error at all either mentioned or intended in this Record nor any one syllable tending to that purpose 2ly The Petition mentions no error at all in this judgement but only remembers two presidents of judgement formerly reversed the first in the case of Thomas Earl of Lancaster in 15 E. 2. which judgement was given against him at Pomfret Castle which was afterwards reversed as Sir Edward Cooke himself informs us in his 3 Institutes c. 7. p. 52 53. in Pas 39 E. 3. Coram rege rot 92. for this only reason Qua contra Chartam de libertatibus cum dictus Thomas fuit unus PARIVM MAGNATUM Regni non imprisonetur c. nec dictus Rex super eum ibit nec super eum mittet nisi per legale judicium PARIUM SUORVM c. tamen tempore pacis absque juramento seu responsione seu legale judicio PARIUM SUORUM c. adjudicatus est morti The other was the judgement given against Roger Mortymer in the Parliament of 4 E. 3. reversed for the like reason in the Parliament of 28 E. 3. n. 10 11 12. forecited being condemned and executed by the Lords without any arraignment hearing trial or answer against the Great Charter Now these two Presidents are pointblank against this pretended error alleged by Sir Edward Cook That the Lords gave judgement without the assent of the Commons and it had been very improper for them to allege the reversal of them for want of a legal tryal by their Peers to prove that the Commons who are no Peers should have assented to the Earl of Salisburies judgement and because they did it not it was Error and reversible These presidents therefore might have minded him of his gross mistake 3ly The King and Lords upon consideration declared and adjudged these two cases and judgements upon perusal of them not to be like the case of the Earl of Salisbury who being slain in rebellion and actual war against the king could not be personally arraigned and condemned as the other two might and ought to have been and therefore the judgement given against him in this case by the King and Lords in Parliament who were his Peers was a good just and legal judgement and no ways against the great Charter 4ly The Commons themselves in the Parliament o 13 H. 4. rot Parl. n. 19. acknowledged this judgement to be good without their assents by their Petition to the Kâ—ng that John Lumly whose Father was attainted of Treason by it together with the Earl of Salisbury might be restored to blood and lands by Act of Parliament and the Kings grace notwithstanding this judgement of Treason against them Which the King by assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal consented unto 5 ly In the Parliament of 3 E. 4. n. 31 32. this judgement was made void and repealed out of the Kings Grace by a special act of Parliament and the heir restored but the judgement not reversed for any Error 6ly Had there been any such Error assigned as is alleged yet the King and Lords upon solemn debate and deliberation over-ruled and adjudged it to be no Error at all as he pretends it and thereupon abated the Petition and adjudged the Judgement and Declaration given by the Lords alone with the Kings assent in 2 H. 4. without the Commons Petition or assent to be GOOD JUST AND LEGAL reconfirming it a new on Record as such Therfore it was a gross oversight in him to assign and print it as an Error and a President of the Commons House or both Houses power of judicatures together when as it is a most undeniable double Parliamentary resolution of the Kings and Lords sole right of judicature of their declaring and judging in Parliament what is Treason and what not within the Statute of 25 E. 1. without the Commons assent or privity and an unanswerable refutation of his sole opinion to the contrary in his 3 Institutes c. 2. p. 22. which he opposeth against not only these two Parliamentary resolutions but likewise against 5 H. 4. n. 11 12.15 and 17 R. 2. rot Parl. n. 20. there quoted by him By this you may judge how little credit is to be given to Sir Edwards quotations and authority in matters concerning Parliamentary Judgements and Records In the Parliament of 28 H. 6. rot Parl. n. 14. to 53. The Commons generally accusing William de la Pool Duke of Suffolk to the King and Lords he thereupon required of the king that he might be specially accused and heard to answer to that which many men reported of him to be an untrue man making therewith a protestation of his manifold good services in the wars and as a Privy Counsellor for sundry years and so asking God mercy as he had been true to the King and his Realm required his purgation The 26 of January the Commons required that for this his Confession he might be committed to ward The Lords and Judges upon consultation thought there was no good cause for that unlesse some special matter were objected against him The 28 day of January the Speaker declared that the said Duke as it was said had sold the Realm to the French who had prepared to come hither and for his own defence had furnished Wallingford Castle with all warlike necessaries upon whose request the said Duke was then
committed to the Tower of London The 7 day of February the Commons by William Trussel their Speaker brought up and presented to the King and Lords in the Lords House a Bill against the said Duke containing an impeachment of several High Treasons committed by him against the King requiring of the Lords all their Articles therein to be enacted with prosecution therein The 9. of March they exhibited new articles of complaint against the Duke comprising sundry misdemeanors against the king and other persons which they require might be enrolled and that the Duke might answer to them The 9. of March the Duke was brought by the kings writ from the Tower into the Parliament Chamber before the King and Lords where the Articles were rehearsed to him who desired Copies of them which was granted And he for more ready answer was committed to certain Esquires to be kept in the Tower within the kings palace The 14 of March the Duke appeared before the K. Lords where on his knees he denied as untrue the 8 Articles of Treason and the same offered to prove as the King shall appoint The Chief Justice thereupon by the kings command asked this Question of the Lords what advise they would give the King what is to do further in this matter which advise was deferred till Monday then next following whereon nothing was done in that matter On Tuesday the 17 of March the king sent for all the Lords Spiritual and Temporal then being in Town being 24 in all into his Inner Chamber within his Palace of Westminster where when they were all assembled he then sent for the Duke thither who coming into the Kings presence kneeled down and continued kneeling till the Chancellor of England had delivered the kings command to him and demanded of him what he said to the Commons Articles not having put himself upon his Peerage Whereupon the Duke denied all the Articles touching the kings Person and state of the Realm as false and scandalous And so not departing from his said Answers submitted himself to the kings Rule and Governance without putting himself upon his Peerage Where thus the Chancellor told him That as touching the great and horrible crimes contained in the first Bill the king holdeth him neither declared nor charged And as touching the second Bill containing misprisions which are not criminal the king by force of his submission by his own advice and not reporting him to the advice of the Lords nor by way of judgement for he is not in place of judgement putteth you to his Rule and Governance that before the first of May next coming he should absent himself out of the kingdom of England and all other his Dominions in France or elsewhere and that he nor no man for him should shew or wait any malice nor hate to any person of what degree soever of the Commons in the Parliament in no manner of wise for any thing done to him in this Parliament or elsewhere And forthwith Viscount Beaumont in behalf of the said LORDS both spiritual and Temporal and by their advice assent and desire said and declared to the Kings Highness That this that so was decreed and done by his Excellency concerning the person of the said Duke proceeded not by their advice and Counsels but was done by the Kings own demeanoir and rule Wherefore they besought the King that this their saying might be enacted in the Parliament Roll for their more declaration hereafter with this protestation that it should not be nor turn in prejudice nor derogation of them their heirs ne of their successors in time coming but that they may have and enjoy their liberty as they or any of their Ancestors and Predecessors had and enjoyed before this time This is the sum of this large Record which makes nothing to the purpose for which Sir Edward Cook cites it in his 4 Institutes p. 25. That it is ERROR when both Houses joyn not in the Judgement For first here is nothing but an impeachment only by the Commons of a Peer who ought to be tryed judged only by his Peers not by Commoners Secondly there was no judgement given in Parliament in this case but only a private Award made by the King out of the Parliament House in his own Chamber in presence of the Lords Thirdly the Lords entred a special protestation against it as not made by their advice or consent Fourthly they enter a special claim in the Parliament Roll for the preservation of their Right and Freedom of Peerage for hereafter both of being tried and judged only by their Peers in Parliament and so an express resolution that the Peers in Parliament are and ought to be Judges especially of Peers not the Commons These Records of these cited at large lest Sir Edward Cooks brief quotation and mis-recital of them should deceive the credulous or ignorant Readers In the Parliament of 31 H. 6. rot Parl. n. 28. Thomas Earl of Devonshire was accused of Treason tried for and acquitted thereof by his Peers before Humfrey Duke of Buckingham Steward of England for the time being And for that the Duke of York thought the loyalty of the said Earl to be touched thereupon the said Earl protesting his Loyalty referred himself to further Trial as a Knight should doe upon which declaration THE LORDS in Parliament acquitted him as a loyal Subject Edward Duke of York with the Earls of March Warwick Salisbury Rutland John Lord Clinton and others were impeached and attainted by Judgement of the Lords in Parliament of High Treason for raising forces and levying war against King Henry the 6. and afterwards attainted by Bill in the Parliament of 38 H. 6. n. 7. to 26. In the Paâ—liamenr of 1 E. 4. n. 17. to 71. The Duke of Exeter Viscount Beamont the Earls of Pembroke Wilts and Devonshire the Lords Nevil Roos Gray Dacre Hungerford and others were first attainted and condemned of High Treason by THE LORDS and after by Bill for levying warr against King Edward the fourth The Duke of Somerset and others in the Parliament of 4 E. 4. n. 28. to 39. and John Vere Earl of Oxford with others in the Parliament of 14 E. 4. n. 34. to 41. were in the same manner for the same offence attainted of High Treason and their Lands forfeited To pretermit all other Attainders of this Nature in cases of High Treason in the reigns of Henry the 8. Edward the 6. Queen Mary Queen Elizabeth and King James both in our English and Irish Parliaments formerly touched p. 196 197 198 199. In the Parliaments of 18 21 Jacobi Sir Francis Bacon Viscount St. Alban Lord Chancellor of England and the Earl of Middlesex Lord Treasurer of England were impeached accused convicted of Bribery Corruption and other misdemeanors removed from their places fined Middlesex 50000 l. imprisoned made uncapable of any Office and thus censured by Iudgement of the Lords house as the Journals of those Parliaments
against Judge Thorp should be brought into the Parliament and there read openly BEFORE THE LORDS to have every of their advice concerning it whether this Iudgement were legal or not et nullo contradicente all the Lords affirmed the judgement to be legal and good considering that he against his Oath received Bribes And therefore it was agreed by all the Lords that if the like case should hereafter happen the King might take to him such Nobles as he should think meet and therein do according to his pleasure Provided this judgement should not be drawn into example against any other Officers who should break their Oaths but only against those qui praedictum Sacramentum fecerunt of Justices et fregerunt et habent leges Regales Angl. ad custod Here the Lords were sole Judges of the Judge who was a Commoner and gave judgement against him without the Commons yea declare the Law in this new case both in and out of Parliament In the Parliament of 21 E. 3. n. 68. The Commons by divers Bills complained to the Lords of divers extortions grievances prejudices done to the King and Commons by John Wattenham and Walter de Cheriton Merchants who desired the King would command them to come before THE COUNCIL LORDS in Parliament to answer what should be objected and clear themselves In the Parliament of 50 E. 3. n. 17 18 19 20. The Commons accused Richard Lyons Merchant of London of divers deceits extortions and misdemeanors whiles he was farmer of the Customs and last subsidy for transporting wools and staple Commodities procuring new Impositions on staple ware for buying debts from the Kings Creditors at under rates and making the King to pay the whole for taking of bribes and defrauding the King To some of which charges he answered and to the rest submitted himself to the King touching Body Lands and Goods Whereupon THE LORDS adjudged him to prison during the Kings will that his lands tenements and goods should be seised to the Kings use that Commissions should issue throughout all England to inquire of his Extortions whiles farmer of the subsidies and that he should be disfranchised Upon this Judgement in the Fine Roll of 50 E. 3. m. 19 21 22. there issued out writs for the arresting and selling the goods of Richard Lyons to the Kings use which were his on the 19 of March certis de causis coram Nobis et Concilio nostro in praesenti Parliamento nostro propositis c. per Concilium in Parliamento The same Parliament 50 E. 3. n. 31 32. William Ellis of great Yarmouth was accused by the Commons of sundry extortions whiles he was Deputy Farmer of the kings subsidie to Richard Lyons To which he seemed sufficiently to answet yet was BY THE LORDS adjudged to prison and to make a fine at the Kings pleasure Ibidem Num. 33. Iohn Peach of London was impeached by the Commons for procuring a license under the Great Seal that he only might sell sweet wines in London by colour whereof he took 4 s. 4 d. of every man for every Tun thereof sold which he justified he lawfully might doe Notwithstanding JUDGEMENT was given against him by THE LORDS that he should be committed during the Kings pleasure and make recompense to all parties grieved Num 37. Adam de Bury was accused of divers deceits and wrongs done by him whiles Mayor of Callice and Captain of Bellingham Being sent for to come to the Parliament he came not nor could he be found Thereupon the Lords agreed that all his goods and chattels should be arrested and so they were All these Commons were first impeached by the Commons and thus judged and censured by THE LORDS in this GOOD PARLIAMENT as Historians and others stile it And in the Commons petitions therein there are divers Petitions of Grievances from sundry Counties Towns persons complaining of wrongs and grievances presented to the King and Lords for redresse of oppressions extortions Monolies c. In the Parliament of 1 R. 2. n. 41 42 43. Dame Alice Pâ—etrees was brought before THE LORDS by Sir Richard Scroop Knight and there charged for pursuing matters at the Court contrary to an Order made in the Parliament of 50 E. 3. n. 35. and procuring King Edward to restore Richard Lyons to his lands and goods c. she denied she pursued any such thing for singular gain against that Ordinance whereupon diverse Officers Counsellers and Secretaries of king Edward 3. were examined against her who proved she made such pursutes and that for private gain in their conceits Whereupon the Lords alone without the Commons gave Iudgement against her that she should be banished according to the order aforesaid and forfeit all her Lands Goods and Tenements to the King The same Parliament 1 R 2. n. 32 33. The Lords committed William Fitz-Hugh Goldfiner and Citizen of London to the Tower for refusing to averr a Petition exhibited by him in the name of the poor Commonalty of that mystery complaining against John Chichester and John Bolcham of the same mystery of divers oppressions done by them to the said Commonalty In this very Parliament of 1 R. 2. n. 38 39 40. The Commons prayed that all those Captains who had rendred or lost Castles or Towns through default might be put to answer it in this Parliament and severely punished according to their deserts BY AWARD or Judgement OF THE LORDS and BARONS to eschew the evil examples they had given to other Governors of Towns and Castles Whereupon Sir Alexander de Buxton Constable of the Tower was commanded to bring BEFORE THE LORDS IN PARLIAMENT William de Weston and Lord of Gomynes both of them Commoners on Friday the 27 of November to answer such Articles as should be surmised against them on the Kings behalf Being brought BEFORE THE LORDS in full Parliament they were severally articled against at the command of THE LORDS by Sir Richard le Scrop Knight Steward of the Kings House and their several Articles and answers to them in writing read before THE LORDS Which done the Constable was commanded to bring them again before THE LORDS on Saturday next ensuing being the 20 of November on which day it was shewed unto them severally by the said Steward by THE LORDS COMMAND That THE LORDS OF THE PARLIAMENT whose names are particularly mentioned in the Roll had met together and considered of their respective answers and that IT SEEMED TO THE LORDS AFORESAID that the said William had delivered up the Castle of Onâ—herwycke to the Kings enemies without any duress or want of victuals contrary to his allegiance and undertaking safely to keep it and therefore the Lords above-named sitting in full Parliament adjudge you to death that you shall be drawn hanged But because our Lord the King is not informed of the manner of the Judgement the execution of it shall be respited till the king be thereof informed After which Judgement given
but by Bill The 8th President that may be objected is this Adam de Arleton or Tarlton Bishop of Hereford in a Parliament held at London Anno 1322. was apprehended by the Kings Officers and brought to the Bar to be arraigned for Treason and Rebellion in aiding the Mortimers and others in their wars with men and arms where having nothing to say for himself in defence of the crimes objected and standing mute for a space at last he flatly told the King That he was a Minister and Member of the Church of Christ and a consecrated Bishop though unworthy therefore I neither can nor ought to answer to such high matters without the consent of my Lord Archbishop of Canterbury my direct Judge next after the Pope and of the other Fathers the Bishops my PEERS At which saying the Archbishops and Bishops there present rose up and interceded to the King for their Colleague and when the King would not be intreated they all challenged the Bishop as a Member of the Church exempt from the Kings Justice and all secular judicature The King forced thereunto by their claimors delivered him to the Archbishops custody to answer elsewhere for these crimes Within few days after being apprehended again and brought to answer before the Kings royal Tribunal in the Kings Bench at Westminster for his Treasons the Archbishops of Canterbury York and Dublin hearing of Tarltons arraignment came with their Crosier staves carried before them accompanied with 10 Bishops more and a great company of men entred into the Court and by open violence rescued and took away the Bishop from the Bar before any answer made to his charge chasing away the Kings Officers and proclaiming openly That no man should lay violent hands on this Trayterly Bishop upon pain of excommunication and so departed The King exceedingly incensed at this High affront to Justice and himself commanded an Inquest to be impanelled and a lawfull inquiry to be made of the Treasons committed by the Bishop in his absence being thus rescued from Justice The Jury without fear of the King or any hatred of the Bishop found the Bishop guilty of all the Articles of Treason and Rebellion whereof he was indicted Whereupon the King banished the Bishop seised all his temporalties lands and goods But yet notwithstanding the Bishop by consent of all the Prelates was by strong hand kept in the Archbishops custody till he had reconciled him to the King After which by way of revenge he was a principal instrument of the Kings deposing and murther which having effected in the Parliament of 1 E. 3. 6. this Bishop petitions that the Indictment and Iudgement against him and the proceedings therein might be brought into Parliament and there nulled as erronious which was done accordingly Et quia recitatis et examinatis coram nobis et consilio nosâ—ro recordo et processu praedictis Et etiam coram Praelatis Comitibus Baronibus Magnatibus tota communitate regni nostri praesenti Parliamento nostro praesentibus compertum fuit quod in eisdem recordo et processu errores manifesti intervenerunt per assensum totius Parliamenti adnullatur and so he had restitution I answer that as this rescue of proceeding and judgement against this trayterous Bishop were singular So is this repeal and reversal of it as erronious before and by all the Commons and whole Parliament as well as King Prelates and Nobles and that no doubt at the special instance of this and all the other Bishops highly concerned in this cause Wherefore this one Swallow makes no Summer and proves no judicial authority joyntly with the King and Lords since they never joyned with them before nor since in reversing of any such error upon Judgement in the Kings Bench but only where an erronious Attainder by Bill in one Parliament was reversed by Bill in another The 9th is the Clause of King Edward the thirds Letter to the Pope in the 4th year of his reign already answered p. 274. The 10th is Sir John at Lees case 42 E. 3. n. 20. said to be ADJVDGED by the Lords and COMMONS I answer this Case is somewhat mâ—staken For the Record only mentions That the 21 day of May the King gave thanks to the Lords and Commons for their coming and aid granted on which day all the Lords and sundry of the Commons dined with the King After which dinner Sir Iohn at Lee was brought before the King LORDS COMMONS next aforesaid who dined with the King to answer certain objections made against him by William Latymer about the wardship of Robert Latymer that Sir John being of power had sent for him to London where by duresse of Imprisonment he inforced the said William to surrender his estate unto him which done some other Articles were objected against the said Sir John of which for that he could not sufficiently purge himself HE was committed to the Tower of London there to remain til he had made fine and ransom at the Kings pleasure and command given to the Constable of the Tower to keep him accordingly And then the said Lords and Commons departed After which he was brought before the Kings Councel at Westminster which COUNCEL ORDERED the said ward to be reseised into the Kings hands So as this record proves not that this judgment was given in the Parliament house nor that the Lords and Commons adjudged Sir Iohn but rather the King and his Councel in the presence of the Lords and Commons after the Parliament ended The 11 12 13. Are the cases of the Lord Latymer Lord Nevil and Richard Lyons forecited Here p. 283 284 350. which are nothing to purpose the Lords alone giving judgement in them without the Commons who did only impeach them and the King removing the Lord Latymer from his Council at their further request So that these 3. cases refute their opinions who object them The 14. is the Case of Weston and Gomines 1 R. 2. n. 38 39. In which the Lords alone gave the Judgement as I have proved p. 332 333 Therefore pointblank against the Objectors The 15. president is that of Iohn Kirby and Iohn Algar two Citizens of London in the Parliament of 3 R. 2. n. 18. who conceiving malice against John Imperial an Ambassador sent hither from the State of Genoa who had procured a Monopoly to furnish England with all such wares as come from the Levant keeping his staple at Southampton killed him in London upon a sudden quarrel picked with him for which they being committed this being a new and difficult case and the Judges being in doubt whether it were Treason or no it was thereupon propounded in Parliament according to the Statute of 25 E. 3. c. 2. like that of 25 E. 3. Parl. 2. of those who are born beyond the Seas 14 E. 3. c. 5. 13 E. 1. c. 24.32 E. 1. rot 17. 22. Claus 46 H. 3. n. 3. Claus 14
Error There is a greater grievance in all ill publique Acts which concern many than in ill judgements which concern but one or two particular persons which yet cannot be repealed but by another Parliament as the Errours and decrees of one General Council cannot be rectified or reversed but by and till another General Council meets to do it The same mischief was and is in Errours Judgements and Decrees given in the Kings Bench Chancery in illegal commitments by them for which there is no relief out of Parliament but to wait till a new Parliament be called For this I shall cite one memorable Record besides the forecited cases of the two Spencers Roger Mortimer Matravers Earls of Arundel Salisbury and others relating to the Parliaments of Ireland Claus 46 E. 3. m. 25. Pro Hominibus de Hybernia de Custumae oneribus revocandis Roberto de Ashton Iustic Hyberniae A complaint was made from some of Ireland to the King that Willielmus de Windsore being Lieutenant of Ireland at the first Parliament held there after his coming desired diversa Custumae et onera quae antea alique tempore concessa non fuerunt viz. de quolibet lasto halicium 3 s. with divers impositions more on most commodities there expressed Et licet Praelati Magnates et alii ligei nostri PRO MAJORI PARTE in dicto Parliamento nostro existentes concessionem levationem et solutionem Custumae et onerum supradictorum ABSQUE ASSENSU MINORIS PARTIS DICTI PARLIAMENTI CONCESSERVNT per tres annos tantum et non ultra concesserunt praefatus tamen Willielmus et alii de Consilio suo â— rotulo Cancellariae nostrae ejusdem terrae irrotulari et registrari fecerunt quod dictae Custumae et onera per OMMES in dicto Parliamento praesentes perpetuis temporibus percipienda concessa fuerunt in ipsorum nostrorum ligeorum terrae nostrae praedict destructionem et depauperationem manifestam Unde Nobis supplicarunt c. Et ideo Vobis mandamus quod praemissa omnia et singula ejusdem modo et forma quibus gesta et act a fuerunt IN PROXIMO PARLIAMENTO NOSTRO in terra praedicta tenendo coram Praelatis Magnatibus eâ— Communitate dicti Parliamento recitari ac decâ—arari facias Etsi per expositionem et examinationem Vobis constare poterit praemissa veritatem continere tunc irrotulationem ac recordum concessionâ—s custumae et onerum praedict DE ASSENSV DICTI PARLIAMENTI cancellari et damnari et levationem et exactionem Custumae praedict ratione concessionis antedictae post dictum triennium supersederi facias omnino Teste c. 28 Maii. It appears likewise by Claus 47. E. 3. m. 3. De quodam subsidio in Hybernia levando that they likewise complained by Petition to the King that the said William de Windsor whiles he was Lieutenant of Ireland had imposed on them a subsidy of 5000 l. in the two last Parliaments there held at Kilkenny and Balydoill against their wills and their free grants whereupon the King had sent a Writ that it should not be levied pro eo tamen that we are since informed by the GREAT MEN and other credible persons of Ireland that the 5000 l. was FREELY GIVEN AND GRANTED by the Lords Greatmen and Commons in these Parliaments ET NON PER VIAM IMPOSITIONIS EXACT as was suggested Volumus de avisamento Concilii nostri quod omnes denarios de dicta summa 5000. librarum qui a retro existunt nondum levati de hominibus et ligeis nostris terrae nostrae praedictae juxta formam concessionis eorundem leventur c. Teste apud Westmonasterium 20 Decembris Finally He that suffers by and under an unjust censure will have the comfort of a good Conscience to support him till he be relieved and therefore he must possess his Soul with Patience and rejoyce under his cross and not rail murmur and play the Bedlam as Lilburn his Companions Overton Larnar and other Sectaries doe against our Saviours own precept and example and then God in his due season will relieve and right them in a legal way whereas their impatience raving and libellous railing Pamphlets and Petitions not savouring of a Christian meek and humble spirit will but create them new troubles expose them unto just and heavy censures and rob them both of the comfort and glory of al their former suffrings against Law and Reason Having answered these Objections I shall now earnestly desire all Lilburns and Overtons seduced Disciples whether Members or others seriously to weigh and consider the premises that so they may see how grossely they have been deluded abused and misled by these two Ignes fatui or New-lights of the Law and Circumscribers of the Lords and Parliaments Jurisdictions which God knows they no more know nor understand than Balams Asse as the premises demonstrate and I shall seriously adjure them if they have any grace shame or remainder of ingenuity left in them ingeniously to recant and publiquely to retract all their seditious railing Libels and Scurrilous Invectives against the Lords undoubted Privileges Jurisdiction and Judicature which I have here unanswerably made good by undeniable Testimonies Histories Records and the grounds of policy and right reason which they are unable to gainsay to undeceive the many ignorant over-credulous poor Souls they have corrupted and misled to the publique disturbance of our Kingdoms Peace and let all their followers consider well of our Saviours caution Mat. 15.14 If the blind lead the blind as these blind-guids doe them both of them shall fall into the Ditch and there perish together O consider therefore what I have here written to undeceive your judgements and reform your practice consider that Dominion Principality Regality Magistracy and Nobility are founded in the very Law of Nature and Gods own institution who subjected not only all beasts and living Creatures to the soveraign Lordship of man to whom he gave Dominion over them Gen. 1.28 29. c. 9.2 3 5· Psal 8.6 7 8. by vertue whereof men still enjoy Dominion over the Beasts but likewise one man unto another as Children to their Parents Wives to their Husbands Servants to their Masters Subjects to their Kings Princes Magistrates Souldiers to their Captains Mariners to their Ship-Masters Scholtars to their Tutors People to their Ministers which order if denied or disturbed will bring absolute and speedy confusion in all Families Corporations States Kingdoms Armies Garrisons Schools Churches and dissolve all humane Societies which subsist by order and subordination only to one another and seeing God himself and Jesus Christ are frequently stiled in Scripture not only King Lord the Head of all Principalities Powers Thrones Dominions but also KING OF KINGS and LORD OF LORDS Deut. 10.17 Ps 136.3 1 Tim. 6.15 Rev. 1.5 c. 17.14 c. 10.6 which glorious Titles they must lose if all Kings and Lords be totally abolished And since